tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-140940902024-03-13T01:17:02.859-07:00The Lone Patriot"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people...They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."
—Thomas JeffersonUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1021125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-91238085331016604072014-12-29T10:23:00.001-08:002014-12-29T10:23:16.309-08:00The Growing Misconception of Good and Evil in AmericaAs were many, I was sickened by the news of Eric Garner's incidental homicide at the hands of an NYPD patrolman.<br />
<br />
While everyone wants to equate this with racism, the problem is bigger than that, much bigger.<br />
<br />
Since the Branch Dividian raid in Waco and Elian Gonzalez, we have seen an ever-growing atmosphere of the police-state. While I, like most Americans want to feel safe in our cities and towns, it seems that more and more the idea of what is "safe" is being lost on sociopaths who are increasingly making it to public office.<br />
<br />
Eric Garner was killed in New York City, a city run by a disciple of the Sandinistas and therefore, no stranger to the idea of "might makes right". Mr. Garner's crime was selling loose cigarettes to people who either couldn't or didn't want to pay the confiscatory taxes demanded by "the state" for a full pack of smokes. Never mind the question of whether or not anyone deserves to die for this "crime", is this really the best use of NYPD resources which we are told are very limited in capacity? Does anyone really feel safer now that this "crime" has been stopped?<br />
<br />
Even before the current Mayor was elected to office, the city was run by an even more menacing sociopath named Michael Bloomberg who saw it necessary to enact laws about soft drink cup sizes, salt content in food and trans fats (which were a creation that came about because of the now-disproven theory that eating too much natural fat was making us obese) to make the city "safer".<br />
<br />
And of course, since he I'm sure he knew that that stepping on a few toes for the "greater good" would result in some potential push back, the Mayor also became a strong advocate of making sure that only criminals and the State (and his own private security detail) could own guns.<br />
<br />
Hopefully we can start to wake up to the fact that Eric Garners death had little to do with his race as far as the police officer was concerned and more about the fact that the officer felt compelled to arrest a man (white or black) for selling loose cigarettes and not collecting the city's tax. We need to really start examining the purpose for any law, whether it will make us safe and whether it is even enforceable on a broad scale or will it only be used as a method of entrapment.<br />
<br />
If not, than we will soon be living under the same conditions the citizens of Eastern Europe faced before the fall of the U.S.S.R. where laws are no longer written to protect the citizens, but to keep them under control.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://thecrux.com/must-read-this-common-misconception-is-behind-the-biggest-problems-in-america-today/" target="_blank">The Common Misconception of Good and Evil</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-45394614443446215712014-07-18T12:22:00.001-07:002014-07-18T12:22:34.890-07:00Elizabeth Warren Backs Corporate Welfare Bank<a href="http://townhall.com/tipsheet/conncarroll/2014/07/18/elizabeth-warren-backs-corporate-welfare-bank-n1863643?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm" target="_blank">http://townhall.com/tipsheet/conncarroll/2014/07/18/elizabeth-warren-backs-corporate-welfare-bank-n1863643?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm</a><br />
<br />
It's about time this fraud started to get exposed. She is all about a Soviet-style Oligarchy. <br />
<br />
She supports Dodd-Frank, which does nothing but crush small and medium size banks with mountains of regulations that the large, Mega-banks who contribute to her can absorb and charge to their customers.<br />
<br />
She supports raising the minimum wage which crushes small and medium-sized businesses while the large, Mega-corporations who contribute to her already pay above minimum wage.<br />
<br />
The Ex/IM Bank is corporate welfare again for large, mega corporations who launder some of that welfare back to her campaign.<br />
<br />
She is just another lying socialist Elitist proclaiming to care for the masses while every move she makes creates greater dependency and greater rates of poverty. She will not be happy until there is a 2-class, caste system where she and her enlightened colleagues can drink champagne and this piss all over the hoi polloi from their guarded balconies.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-46136532315904497062013-10-30T07:09:00.001-07:002013-10-30T07:09:19.893-07:00Hope and Change in ActionIf one good thing comes from the shut down, I would hope that it is the realization of how little we really need the big federal government in our daily lives, obviously the budget could be cut by 20% with no impact at all provided that the President (any President) didn't throw a fit and deliberately cut off services with the intent of punishing people like, oh I don't know, little kids battling Cancer!<br />
<br />
If one good thing comes out of the ObamaCare debacle, I hope it's the realization that the best advances in products and services come from the private sector and come best when unencumbered by an incompetent and corrupt bureacracy...<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.theprojecttorestoreamerica.com/Essay/408/hope-and-change-in-action">Hope and Change in Action</a><br />
<br />
<these about="" accuracy="" accurate="" advisor="" agrees="" all="" allabouttrends.net="" alone="" an="" and="" any="" anyone="" anytime="" appearing="" are="" assumes="" at="" be="" bears="" been="" believed="" body="" buy="" by="" cannot="" comments="" complete="" completeness="" contained="" damage="" decisions.="" deemed="" does="" educational="" endorse="" experienced="" financial="" for="" from="" guaranteed.="" has="" he="" hence="" her="" herein="" his="" however="" identification="" in="" information.="" information="" informational="" injury="" investment="" investments.="" investors="" is="" it="" its="" liable="" likewise="" loss="" losses="" make="" marks="" material="" materials="" may="" member="" names="" no="" not="" obtained="" of="" offer="" on="" only.="" opinions="" or="" other="" our="" own="" owners="" part="" property="" purchase="" purposes="" re="" reason.="" recommend="" recommendation="" recommendations="" refuse="" reliable="" report="" reserves="" respect="" respective="" responsibility="" resulting="" right="" risk="" sale="" securities.="" securities="" service="" shall="" she="" solicitation="" sources="" strictly="" subscriber="" suitable="" technical="" that="" the="" their="" this="" to="" trade="" trademarks="" trading="" trends="" use="" used="" uses="" whatsoever="" who="" with="" you=""></these>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-20191669178206909862013-05-31T05:21:00.001-07:002013-05-31T05:21:07.137-07:00You Get What You Pay For: Lessons From the IRS Scandal | The Exchange - Yahoo! FinanceGee didn't see "we need more tax dollars for them" coming.....this is how our government works, write laws and create bureaucracies to bollucks up the works then offer up more laws and even bigger, more powerful bureaucracies to fix the first screw-up. <br />
<br />
Look, command and control economies do not work, they only lead to more command and control and less real proprosperity. Have we already forgotten that these people leaked personal financial information about the administrations enemies to Pro Publica? Do you really trust that they'll be better behaved with more money, more power and simple slap on the wrist and now access to all your medical information? The amount of coercive intimidation that's coming will make this recent activity look like a civil disagreement. People are too corrupt to be trusted with that much power...period. There is nothing "progressive" about these activities, this is the stuff of the Tudor dynasty.<br />
<br />
<br />
How about this instead, eliminate the IRS and reorganize the Treasury to collect and disperse , eliminate corporate taxes, charge a flat 15% tax on EVERY dollar EVERYONE makes after the first $40K without any deductions (that's essentially what the first $40K is)?<br />
<br />
And then send everyone with their fingerprints on this to jail with loss of pension and healthcare benefits. We have come so far from "Government of the People" to Banana Republic that only major restructuring will stop this run away train..... <br />
<a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/pay-lessons-irs-scandal-234428300.html">You Get What You Pay For: Lessons From the IRS Scandal | The Exchange - Yahoo! Finance</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-27271414551395840802013-05-27T06:51:00.001-07:002013-05-27T06:51:58.908-07:00Memorial Day Speech Delivered by Sen. Robert A. TaftSen. Taft's <a href="http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?e=001GqrUzQv4F9-RLTjCvFh4JluLu8-d81NuLEZZvhvRHHfI54dw8snY9gCkyuSN62X_E_vej4ddZDZTX5QrhDY7heSurmaAP9c90x2if5zrE9fNOOCSjLmPq33MHCmEZcmLtTsUROFuyyndUqwiQytW4A==" rel="nofollow" shape="rect" style="color: black; text-decoration: underline;" target="_blank">online biography</a> notes that "he was the eldest son of William Howard Taft, the 27th President of the United States and tenth Chief Justice of the United States. This speech was delivered at Gettysburg National Cemetery on May 30, 1945.<br />
<br />
<em><strong>" Fellow citizens of the United States of America, I am greatly honored to be invited to come here today to the Gettysburg National Cemetery and express, inadequately I know, the obligation which we feel to those who fell on the greatest battlefield of the Civil War, and the reverence which their service to us still inspires 82 years later. I know that I cannot express that obligation and that reverence as effectively as it has been many times expressed before upon this occasion. I can only relate the sacrifices of our soldiers to the more immediate problems which we face today.</strong></em><br />
<em><strong></strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>The soldiers of 1863 gave their lives to preserve the Union and make permanent the Government which had proved to the world that a Nation, founded for the purpose of securing freedom, and governed by its own people, could survive through a great war without being destroyed from within by the very forces of freedom developed in a free country. Many other American boys have fought since then to preserve our people and their freedom. Our hearts are full today with our gratitude and devotion to those who are fighting now and who have fought in this war, those who have given and those who have risked their lives that our Nation may be preserved and may preserve its freedom.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>In these wars with Germany and Japan, we are now approaching the great sacrifices of the Civil War-we have suffered a million casualties among our boys in the Army, Navy, and Air Force. About 300,000 have been killed, or missing and probably killed. That means that there are 300,000 families who mourn a beloved son, 300,000 wives and mothers to whom this war has brought tragedy and grief. Too many newspapers and too many individuals have come to accept the military attitude that American boys are only pawns in the game, that we can properly sacrifice so many impersonal lives for this goal. But every life is a boy with a father and mother, or a wife or sweetheart. We should never forget the awful catastrophe that war is, that it means the destruction of all the hopes and purposes which have formed the ideals of hundreds of thousands of American individuals and families. Let us remember today that very few purposes can justify the sacrifices which we are calling upon our boys to make. Let us remind ourselves that neither foreign conquest, nor hate, nor revenge, can justify such a loss, that the only purpose of this war that can justify its continuance is to insure the future peace and freedom of the American people. Let us not gloat because we burn or destroy the city of an enemy, and remember that such destruction can only be justified as a means of bringing this war to a quicker end. The moment that we can achieve a peace which will guarantee the prevention of future aggression on the part of Japan, it is our duty to all those whom we honor here today to see that peace is brought about, whether by arms or by negotiation.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>But we have a further duty to the men who are suffering in this war when peace has been brought about. There can be little doubt now that the defeat of our enemies will prevent attacks upon this country from without for many years to come. We are all agreed that that result may be strengthened and assured by the creation of an international organization to preserve peace. We hope that such an organization can insure peace, not only in the immediate future, but for generations to come. The San Francisco Conference, under the most severe handicaps of political and economic differences will at least establish an international forum constantly working to prevent the recurrence of war.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>But we must constantly remind ourselves that the only purpose of this war, the only purpose of the battle fought here at Gettysburg in 1863, the only purpose of any war in which this country has been engaged is to maintain here at home the freedom which was won in 1776, the freedom to work out here the destiny of the American Republic. American foreign policy and international organizations are only a means to that end. And so we should be equally concerned here today that we retain in Washington the policies necessary to assure that freedom. It is useless to destroy totalitarianism in Germany and Japan and then establish it in the United States.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>There is real danger of just that result for the whole thought of the world has moved steadily toward the totalitarian philosophy, toward the subjection of the individual to the state instead of a government by the people. Government controls such as peacetime military conscription which would have been indignantly rejected in the nineteenth century, are given serious consideration, even in this country-Totalitarian thought has spread over the world. When Mussolini established a dictatorship in Italy, many of our citizens thought that a little benevolent despotism was a good thing for the Italian people. Hitler brought it to Germany, the military caste brought it to Japan, largely because so many people lost faith in the efficacy of democratic government. We see it also on our side, in the great Russian Soviet, in Chiang Kai-shek's China, in Brazil, in Argentina and to many other Latin-American countries. It has made progress because so many people have been persuaded that it is perhaps desirable to surrender individual freedom and let someone dictate their lives better than they themselves can arrange them. In this country many people who would indignantly deny any soft feeling for State control are advocates of measures which lead inevitably in that direction because they are dissatisfied with the necessary slow progress involved in a government where all the people are given a voice.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>I believe that freedom can only be preserved if we retain government by the people all the time. I heard a United States Senator argue that we could have freedom and democracy even though Congress delegated all its powers to the President during the war and adjourned, because, he said, we could meet again and take those powers away. There are two fallacies in that view. While that form of government lasts, there is no freedom and it is not government by the people. Secondly, if it lasts too long, the powers granted by the people are never returned to them. That has been the history of popular government from the days of Greece and Rome through the Middle Ages to Germany and Japan today.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>The best protection of freedom is to maintain continuous rule by the people. It cannot be done without constant vigilance against the turning over of power to governments and to men who are in effect beyond the reach of the people. The very size of the Republic today leads to a delegation of power. The machinery by which 135,000,000 people govern themselves is necessarily so complicated that it is hard to devise a system in which the real voice of the people is heard. Hundreds of bureaus have been created, and even here in Washington we don't know how many bureaus there are or what it is that they are doing. Each one is a little kingdom in itself. When the ordinary man comes to Washington, he has a hard enough time to find out which is the bureau which is bossing him, and an even harder time to get consideration for his views. More than a hundred Government corporations have been created, even less accountable to Congress than the bureaus. Washington is a vast rabbit warren of bureaucrats, all issuing regulations having the force and effect of law and building up a control to which the people gradually come to conform their lives.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>The war has required a suspension of many freedoms, and the people have become so used to regulations that they almost forget what freedom is. The danger of totalitarian government is that the people do get used to it, as to a narcotic. The time has come to remember that many of these restrictions on freedom were only created to preserve freedom and should be abandoned when freedom is assured. The size of the Republic, the complexity of modern problems in the economic field, all lead the people to the easy course of turning over the problems to someone else, to some expert, perhaps, to solve the whole business. Instead of thinking out problems for themselves, inhabitants of a totalitarian world would accept the advice of supposedly expert columnists or radio commentators, who are also too busy to think out their problems, and who accept what is handed to them by the Government. A people unconcerned with their own liberty want every problem to be handled by a czar. They are impatient with Congress if Congress takes time to argue a case on its merits. A frame of mind in dealing with public questions which moves on waves of emotion, engulfing editors, writers, and broadcasters alike, and demands solutions today for every complex problem, is a frame of mind leading to totalitarian government.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>While we talk constantly of democracy and free enterprise, I see too many of the very people who use that language advocating measures which deny it. Too many businessmen believe in controls of the NRA code variety, quotas, cartels, division of production, the fixing of minimum coal prices, and other measures to protect business from excessive competition. Labor unions, which ought to be the very core of democracy, are ruled by perpetual leaders almost without the formality of reelection.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>At this very moment demands are being made that Congress give up its power to fix tariffs and to provide for the reorganization of the Government departments, on the ground that democratic processes are too slow and ineffective. Arbitrary power must be granted to carry through the currently popular theories.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>Every bill proposes that Congress delegate its power to make law to some board, and the Supreme Court itself is dominated by the thought that the people themselves and their representatives are incompetent even to prescribe standards, but must give power to make law to administrative agencies. Nearly every bill introduced proposes increased Federal power, and the reduction of the power of States and local governments where the people's voice can be heard. In education, in health, and in unemployment compensation, Federal bureaus seek wide and arbitrary power to affect the lives of millions of individuals.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>People who think themselves sincere believers in democratic government want everything desirable at once, and the more attractive the goal, the less they care about the method. If this frame of mind were carried to its logical conclusion, it would lead to the turning over of all power to a benevolent dictator to carry out the good things which he promises and which he presents in a sufficiently attractive package.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>Of course, this general attitude makes the ground fertile for Government propaganda. A desirable end such as peace or extended foreign trade is linked with certain particular methods and panaceas proposed and highly recommended by the Government, or accompanied by a demand for broad power to solve the problem without further interference from Congress. Anyone who is opposed to this particular panacea is at once labeled as opposed to peace or foreign trade, and probably pictured as a reactionary, a Fascist, or even a Republican. All the arguments for the favored remedy are blared over the radio and broadcast in pamphlets, and no argument is admitted against it. The first Dumbarton Oaks proposal was pictured as so letter perfect, that I am still getting attacks on Senator Vandenberg's amendments by people who don't know that the State Department has accepted them. Bretton Woods and the revised reciprocal trade treaties are pictured as the only cures for all foreign-trade difficulties. The question is not the desirability of these various delegations of people's power, it is the frame of mind which seems to be willing to abandon that power without question, It is the frame of mind which avoids the discussion of the merits of a problem and accepts the voice of the state as the voice of God.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>Nothing is so dangerous to democracy as a vast machine of propaganda, for it strikes at the very root of democratic government. Government by the people can only endure if it is founded on intelligent decision based on accurate knowledge.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>This afternoon I wish to speak particularly about one step now proposed, supported by Government propaganda, which seems to me to strike at the very basis of freedom, for which our boys are fighting. It is the proposal that we establish at once compulsory conscription for military training in time of peace. The proposal is that we establish in this country a continuous 12 months' military training for every boy, the same military set-up which we have gone to war to abolish in Germany and Japan. Whether we become a militaristic and totalitarian country depends more on this measure than any other. It does not relate to any limited class or group. It reaches every family and every boy. It subjects them completely to the domination of the Government for a year during their most formative period. It keeps them under constant supervision as reserves for years thereafter. The power to take a boy from his home and subject him to complete Government discipline is the most serious limitation on freedom that can be imagined. Many who have accepted the idea favor a similar Government-controlled training for all girls.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>There is no doubt that the Government, and particularly the War and Navy Departments, are straining every nerve to secure the enactment of this legislation before the war ends. Secret meetings are being held in the Pentagon Building and elsewhere. On April 26 the chief executive officers of some 40 or more women's organizations were invited there, and it is said they were addressed by the Secretary of War, the Secretary of the Navy, the Under Secretary of State, General Marshall, Admiral King, and other high-ranking officers. The ladies were requested not to disclose the substance of the speeches made or identify the War Department or its officials with the sponsorship of the plan. One newspaper stated that the ministers of various churches were invited to a similar meeting and attended, and that Negro organizations have been approached. Invitations went out from a citizens committee in New York to hear Secretary Forrestal, Under Secretary Grew, and General Weible at an off-the-record luncheon on May 25. Government propaganda is bad enough when it is open, but it is inexcusable when secret. We may expect a flood of open propaganda after the ground has been prepared, and everyone who is opposed to the plan will be pictured as for war and for unpreparedness.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>We have fought this war to preserve our institutions, not to change them. We have fought it to permit us to work out our problems here at home on a peaceful foundation, not on a foundation dominated by military preparations for another war. The question of the best form of military organization should not be an emotional problem. It should be dealt with by argument and not by propaganda. But the methods being used threaten the freedom of this country, for if they are successful they can be used to fasten upon us every kind of regulation, price control for business, wage control for labor, production control for farmers.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>If we approach this problem logically and not emotionally, the first question should be how large an Army we need to insure our freedom. Why not discuss what the right size is so that we can determine the best method of providing it? How can we tell how large an Army we do need until the peace is made and the organization of the world effected? It seems to me impossible to pass intelligently on the need for conscription at this time. Must we not see first what kind of a world is established at San Francisco and at the peace table?</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>There are approximately 1,250,000 American boys in every age group. Is it necessary to train them all for a full year at a cost of at least two and a half billion dollars a year? This would provide reserves of about twelve and a half million men between the ages of 18 to 27. Is any such reserve necessary? Certainly, it is not needed in a hurry, for the armies we now have will be the best possible reserve for the next 3 or 4 years. The Selective Service Act expressly provides that all drafted men at the end of the war shall be transferred to the reserve and remain there for 10 years. Apparently, the argument for doing this job now is that the people might not be willing to do it later. That is certainly a typical totalitarian argument. It is an attempt to base a great permanent national policy on war emotion, because the proponents are afraid of government by the people when they have time to think it over.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>It seems improbable to me that the training of a million and a quarter boys a year would ever be necessary. The vast reserve provided could only be needed for a great overseas expedition like that in which we are now engaged. For such an expedition, it would take several years to organize ships, planes, and munitions, just as it did in this war. We would surely have to have new modern equipment in many fields, and it would take longer to build it than it would to train the men, as we found in this war. It would seem that for sudden attack, or for attack from the air or from attack by rockets the great mass of millions of reserves would be of little value. I should think we rather need an expert Army with the most modern weapons. In the event of a sudden attack, our main reliance would have to be a Regular Army of highly trained and technically trained men, and during such an attack they would not be much aided by 10,000,000 reserves. The argument that we can save in the size of a professional army by having many millions of reserves bears all the earmarks of a propaganda argument instead of one based on common sense.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>Having determined that we need an Army of a certain size, with certain reserves, we could then decide whether we could get it by voluntary means in the American tradition. Suppose we need a million men in the armed forces. We expect to have at least 50,000,000 people working at civilian jobs in this country. Surely we can make the Army sufficiently attractive as an occupation for 2 percent of these to be willing to volunteer. With good pay, reasonable treatment for men and their families, and provision for retraining and retirement when a man is too old to stay in the Army, I don't see why Army life cannot be made just as attractive as working daily on a machine, mining coal, or engaging in hundreds of other occupations. Many jobs in the Army should give highly technical training with interesting knowledge which makes the trainees capable of advancement in other activities in life.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>To provide the necessary Reserves, it could be made worth the while of many boys to take the necessary training. Many alternative plans have been suggested to a year's conscription. For instance, adequate reserves might be provided by training 200,000 boys in each age group. It should be possible to obtain volunteers in that number for a 3-month course and basic training during one summer, courses in school and a later 3-month summer course in the field. The boys could be paid a sum which would assist them in their regular education during the winter. Additional courses could be provided for those who wish to become Reserve officers. What I have suggested is only one idea and there may be many others. The Army will immediately criticize any plan, because they are determined to have conscription. They want the boys for 12 months consecutively because they want to change their habits of thought, to make them soldiers, if you please, for the rest of their lives. Nothing less will do. We are indeed bankrupt of ideas if we cannot provide a method by which necessary military forces and Reserves are provided by an American voluntary system.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>The other arguments for conscription seem to me almost too trivial to discuss. It is said it will teach the boys discipline and that they need it. My own opinion is that we need more initiative and original thinking and less discipline rather than more. Our present Army is not the most disciplined Army in the world, but there isn't any better Army for the simple reason that the boys do some thinking for themselves.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>It is said the Army will improve their health, and that they need it because so many failed to pass the strict health requirements of the Army. As a matter of fact, the great bulk of defects were those relating to teeth, eyes, mental, nerves, and heart conditions, all of which had arisen long before the age of conscription. There is nothing to show that the Army would conscript any of these boys. To improve their health, we must reach them at a much younger age.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>The argument that it would improve the morals of our boys has almost been dropped because of its foolishness. If there is one place where morals will not be improved, it is in the vicinity of Army camps.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>It is true that there are some boys who are benefited by Army control, but to improve a few, let us not change the whole character of the American life which I believe has been the cause of success in this war.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>It is said that we are going to teach the boys citizenship in the camps. This argument makes clear a real danger in the whole system. By handing boys over for 12 months to the arbitrary and complete domination of the Government, we put it in the power of the Government to indoctrinate them with the political doctrines then popular with the Government. It has all the dangers of Federal education and none of its advantages. Attempts along this line have been made with the present Army, and a large amount of propaganda sent out to be taught to the soldiers. In wartime it is bad enough; in peacetime, it would be intolerable.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>Some have supported this project on the ground that the training is only to be part military and a considerable amount of it is to be character training along other lines. We have already a complete school system in this country. If it isn't adequate and does not give education in citizenship, we can well spend our time and money in trying to improve that system. As a matter of fact, it is already the finest system of education the world has ever seen.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>Military conscription is essentially totalitarian. It has been established for the most part in totalitarian countries and their dictators led by Napoleon and Bismark. It has heretofore been established by aggressor countries. It is said it would insure peace by emphasizing the tremendous military potential of this country. Surely we have emphasized that enough in this war. No one can doubt it. On the contrary, if we establish conscription every other nation in the world will feel obliged to do the same. It would set up militarism on a high pedestal throughout the world as the goal of all the world. Militarism has always led to war and not peace. Conscription was no insurance of victory in France, in Germany, or in Italy. The countries with military conscription found that it was only an incident and not the determining factor in defense or in victory.</strong></em><br />
<em><br /><strong></strong></em>
<em><strong>Military training by conscription means the complete regimentation of the individual at his most formative period for a period of 12 months. If we admit that in peacetime we can deprive a man of all liberty and voice and freedom of action, if we can take him from his family and his home, then we can do the same with labor, we can order the farmer to produce and we can take over any business. If we can draft men, it is difficult to find an argument against drafting capital. Those who enthusiastically orate of returning to free enterprise and at the same time advocate peacetime conscription are blind to the implications of this policy. They are utterly inconsistent in their position. Because of its psychological effect on every citizen, because it is the most extreme form of compulsion, military conscription will be more the test of our whole philosophy than any other policy. Some say it is unconstitutional. It makes very little difference whether it actually violates the terms of the Constitution. It is against the fundamental policy of America and the American Nation. If adopted, it will color our whole future. We shall have fought to abolish totalitarianism in the world, only to set it up in the United States.</strong></em><br />
<br />
<em><strong>Government by the people can only exist if the people are individuals who think. It can only exist if the individual is free to rule the state and if he is not ruled by the state. We must be constantly vigilant to keep alive the thinking of freemen, and there is no such threat to that thinking as the course which would impose on the Nation compulsory military training. We have no greater obligation to the men who fought at Gettysburg, we have no greater obligation to the men who fought in Europe and who are fighting in the Pacific, than to preserve here in America a state in which the individual shall be free to think and be master of his own soul, and where the people shall be free to govern their own Government."</strong></em><br />
<br />
<br />
I dedicate this Memorial Day post to my father Wally who served during WWII and passed away this past October still dedicated to the idea of America and saddened by what we are becoming.....<br />
<br />
RIP<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-86337155353188182502013-05-21T09:18:00.001-07:002013-05-21T09:18:18.386-07:00IRS officials tell Congress they were unaware of targeting - Yahoo! FinanceThis is truly disgusting when you recall that the Pilgrims came to this country to escape persecution from their ruling class.<br />
<br />
IRS audits have morphed into a 21st century version of the Salem Witch Hunt. <br />
<br />
If the President was truly outraged he would issue an Executive Order immediately halting all IRS audit activity while the congress writes up a new law making it unlawful for the IRS to perform any audit on anyone unless they are convicted of embezzelment, trafficking of illegal substances or money laundering. <br />
<br />
<br />
Furthermore, it should be a penalty of 10 years in prison and loss of all accrued benefits for any IRS employee or the management of an office or department caught leaking confidential information to any outside parties. No law-abiding citizen should have to live in fear of government persecution for their belief's..... <a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/news/white-house-counsel-kept-irs-012344810.html">IRS officials tell Congress they were unaware of targeting - Yahoo! Finance</a><br />
<br />
<these about="" accuracy="" accurate="" advisor="" agrees="" all="" allabouttrends.net="" alone="" an="" and="" any="" anyone="" anytime="" appearing="" are="" assumes="" at="" be="" bears="" been="" believed="" body="" buy="" by="" cannot="" comments="" complete="" completeness="" contained="" damage="" decisions.="" deemed="" does="" educational="" endorse="" experienced="" financial="" for="" from="" guaranteed.="" has="" he="" hence="" her="" herein="" his="" however="" identification="" in="" information.="" information="" informational="" injury="" investment="" investments.="" investors="" is="" it="" its="" liable="" likewise="" loss="" losses="" make="" marks="" material="" materials="" may="" member="" names="" no="" not="" obtained="" of="" offer="" on="" only.="" opinions="" or="" other="" our="" own="" owners="" part="" property="" purchase="" purposes="" re="" reason.="" recommend="" recommendation="" recommendations="" refuse="" reliable="" report="" reserves="" respect="" respective="" responsibility="" resulting="" right="" risk="" sale="" securities.="" securities="" service="" shall="" she="" solicitation="" sources="" strictly="" subscriber="" suitable="" technical="" that="" the="" their="" this="" to="" trade="" trademarks="" trading="" trends="" use="" used="" uses="" whatsoever="" who="" with="" you=""></these>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-25701191344132459422013-04-20T13:02:00.001-07:002013-04-20T13:02:28.359-07:00But at Least I'm Trying!!!So I'm in the locker room with retired teacher talking about the foot of snow they got up in Minnesota and how the people who originally settled up there must've shown up in the summertime because there's nobody who would go to Minnesota in the wintertime and want to live there. I mentioned same thing about California. I've been to California several times for the Rose Bowl and it's a very, very beautiful place. But when you start paying attention to the traffic jams, the cost of living, the taxes and other nonsense around there, you quickly realize it's a nice place to visit but not a great place to live, unless of course you're a multi-millionaire or in the government (same thing?).<br />
<br />
My friend then explained to me that the the people in California are trying to create a Utopia and then blurted out "that's why I love Obama because at least he's trying".<br />
<br />
So in response to that I smiled and said "let me ask you something.... suppose five years ago you hired me to manage your investments and every year not only did I lose money, but I convinced you to borrow more money against your credit cards, your home equity, etc. and put it in the trading account, promising you that this year we would turn it all around. Now after five years not only have I not turned it around, but you are now so deep in debt that based on your current level of income there's no way you're ever going to be able to pay that debt back and you will eventually face bankruptcy. Would you still keep me as your investment advisor?"<br />
<br />
He replied to me of course not. He would have likely not let it go on that long. To which I replied..."but what if I told you that I really cared about your money and <strong><em><u>at least I was trying</u></em></strong>?" <br />
<br />
He paused for a moment, smiled shook his head and said "have a nice weekend!"<br />
<br />
We've had five years of "a bold new plan to jumpstart the economy" and after five years we now have 90 million able-bodied people that have left the workforce, we have 48 million people on food stamps and we've now accumulated so much that if we taxed every working American 100%, we still couldn't pay it all off, and; the President just handed us a budget telling us we need to borrow more so that he continues doing what he's been doing for five years. <br />
<br />
It's amazing to me how people won't put up with poor performance in their everyday lives, demand their money back for poor service are shoddy products and yet they don't understand that our tax dollars like our investment dollars should not be managed so incompetently that it risks not only ruining the lives of our children and grandchildren who are going to have to someday inherit that debt, but has now reached a crisis point where we ourselves may no longer be able to enjoy the kind of growth and prosperity that we got used to back when we had a little more common sense........Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-4375510853996483292013-04-02T13:40:00.002-07:002013-04-02T13:40:59.696-07:00Defending the Wrong ArgumentSaturday night I attended the wedding of my child's teacher. The wedding was held in a small church and attended by many friends and family including several families of his students. This was the first wedding that my child ever attended and it was also the first wedding held at that church involving members of the same sex. <br />
<br />
<br />
Sitting there watching the ceremony; listening to the Scripture readings and the vows proclaimed, I had a much more settled feeling than I did after a week of news broadcasts, opinion pieces and arguments concerning the two cases taken up by the Supreme Court this past week. It appears that once again Americans are being drawn into an unnecessary conflict by the same useless bureaucrats who seem to constantly draw us into all the useless wars we seem to be endlessly fighting.<br />
<br />
<br />
While not friends, I have become very familiar with my child's teacher (J) and I can state without hesitation that he is a good man. He is a passionate teacher, a caring individual and I would not hesitate for a second to trust him with my child's care and education. However when it comes to the issue of his marriage, I do not agree with the premise that shapes his perceived solution to the problem. J wants the government to allow he and his partner to obtain a marriage license just like I did, those in opposition to J’s desire seek to have the government refuse his request and maintain a “legal” marriage as between a man and a woman. <br />
<br />
<br />
In my opinion, this debate is nothing but a distraction from a more practical question which is (and pardon my language), who the f*$%k is any bureaucrat to tell me or anyone else that we need a license to get married? No matter what side of the argument you fall on, it is simply wrong-headed to bestow upon any bureaucrat the authority and control over something they should have nothing to do with.<br />
<br />
<br />
The idea of marriage transcends the United States Government, it transcends all governments legitimate or otherwise, it transcends dictators and empires and has for thousands of years and will for thousand more. Marriage has historically been a religious institution and while it may be treated differently by different religions, the First Amendment ensures that so long as they are not infringing on the rights of others, any church or religious organization is free to define marriage as they see fit for the benefit of their constituents. It also ensures that we as Americans have the right to follow the religion of our choosing or to choose to not follow any religion at all, but ….. we do not have the right to dictate the principles that a church or religious institution must adhere to. In the case of the wedding Saturday night, the church and its ministry had decided that based on the intentions of the two individuals involved, they would sanctify the ceremony is a marriage between these two very, very fine people. <br />
<br />
<br />
The only dominion any government in the United States has is the legal system, broadly characterized as either contract law or the criminal code. In that regard the only aspect of marriage that would fall under either of these categories is the civil union, that which is dissolved in court during divorce proceedings. Now in the spirit of equal protection under the law, a civil union is a civil union and should therefore be recognized uniformly across the country regardless of who it is entering into one. Any attempt to qualify, categorize or distinguish one type of civil union over another is discrimination pure and simple and violates the idea of equal protection. In fact to a great extent, the DOMA case is exactly about this kind of discrimination. <br />
<br />
<br />
The DOMA case before SCOTUS concerns the IRS claim that a woman who had been married to another woman, owed back taxes on her partner's estate she was left everything in the estate after her partner’s passing. So to my point, while the argument before the Supreme Court is in regard to the “legal” recognition of a same-sex marriage, I believe the real issue is the legitimacy of the estate tax. The estate tax is an affront to everything that once made America great. At one time, the idea of America was that no matter what economic class you were born into or came from, if you worked hard, saved and invested wisely in a legal endeavor you could attain great financial success, and; eventually pass the reward of your life's work to whomever you saw fit giving you the opportunity to then carry on the legacy in which other people's lives. <br />
<br />
<br />
Unfortunately today at the hour of your death the government rushes him like Pilate’s Roman soldiers, casting lots for your belongings and dividing them up among themselves. Oh sure, the government will let you keep some of what you made but we are constantly reminded that it is their decision as to what they will allow us to keep and that our property is not really our own. <br />
<br />
<br />
Take away the abomination that is the Estate Tax, along with the ridiculous notion that any government has the right and authority to grant you a license to marry and neither Prop 8 nor the Defense of Marriage Act even happens, and; all American citizens are treated equally and fairly under civil law regardless of race, color, religious or sexual orientation. This is the battle I would like to see, not how a governing body decides to define marriage, but denial of their perceived authority to have anything to do with marriage at all.<br />
<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-15449295506430409702013-03-12T15:04:00.001-07:002013-03-12T15:04:45.133-07:00It Is Always The Tactic Of Governments That Seek To Abuse Power To Select The Most Marginalized And Easily Demonized Targets In The First Instance | Washington's BlogGreat update on the poem - <em>"First They Came"...</em><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/03/it-is-always-the-tactic-of-governments-that-seek-to-abuse-power-to-select-the-most-marginalized-and-easily-demonized-targets-in-the-first-instance.html">It Is Always The Tactic Of Governments That Seek To Abuse Power To Select The Most Marginalized And Easily Demonized Targets In The First Instance | Washington's Blog</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-76070241849220242322013-03-09T15:13:00.001-08:002013-03-09T15:13:14.743-08:00Death by Droning...All over America, Special Interest groups that support Democrats are rallying support to aabolish the Death Penalty <a href="http://sojo.net/magazine/2013/01/its-time-end-death-penalty">http://sojo.net/magazine/2013/01/its-time-end-death-penalty</a> and many believe that with the current administration in place, it might be accomplished nationwide. Yet where were these people this week when Rand Paul was filibustering the Senate confirmation of John Brennan to lead the CIA to bring to light the administrations apparent opinion that it had the Constitutional right to kill Americans "suspected of terrorism" even on American soil?<br />
<br />
Everyone knows that prisoners on death row go through a full jury trial first, then can remain on death row for over a decade before all appeals for overturning both the conviction as well as sentencing run through the court system. However, to justify killing an American the memo released in February to the House and senate stated - <br />
<br />
“The condition that an operational leader present an ‘imminent’ threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future,” according to UPI. Citizens who present such “imminent threats” were defined as those who participated in violent acts — and maintained the views that led to their violent acts, according to UPI.<br />
<br />
<br />
And as we have seen already in 2009, the party in power will move quick to establish their criteria for "views" and "violent acts" remember the furor in Missouri where a leaked secret report distributed by the federal Missouri Information Analysis Center lists Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, people who display bumper stickers, people who own gold, or even people who fly a U.S. flag and equates them with radical race hate groups and terrorists?<br />
<br />
<br />
The MIAC report specifically describes supporters of presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, and Bob Barr as “militia” influenced terrorists and instructs the Missouri police to be on the lookout for supporters displaying bumper stickers and other paraphernalia associated with the Constitutional, Campaign for Liberty, and Libertarian parties.<br />
<br />
The MIAC report (PDF) does not concentrate on Muslim terrorists, but rather on the so-called “militia movement” and conflates it with supporters of Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr, the so-called patriot movement and other political activist organizations opposed to the North American Union and the New World Order.<br />
<br />
It is a sad day in this country when any citizen must think twice before placing a Tea Party bumper sticker on the car or participate in an Occupy "___ " protest for fear of being arrested or even killed as an "imminent threat" in the eyes of the ruling class. It is even sadder when those who will hold candlelight vigils for someone who raped and murdered and innocent victim will stand so silent in defense of their neighbors.<br />
<br />
The notion of Government By the People died a long time ago and all who use this now bumper-sticker argument for defending what's happening are either naive or complicit in the destruction of our civil society...<br />
<br />
<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-59976983803922600842013-03-08T13:33:00.001-08:002013-03-08T13:33:58.302-08:00Why Central Planning FailsCentral Planning requires pureness of heart and competent execution (pun intended) in order to succeed. If you can't find these characteristics in a $30 Million company, how the hell do you expect them to exist in a $3.8 Trillion Government Bureaucracy?<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.billbonnersdiary.com/articles/bonner-central-planning-economy.html">Why central planning fails</a><br />
<br />
<these about="" accuracy="" accurate="" advisor="" agrees="" all="" allabouttrends.net="" alone="" an="" and="" any="" anyone="" anytime="" appearing="" are="" assumes="" at="" be="" bears="" been="" believed="" body="" buy="" by="" cannot="" comments="" complete="" completeness="" contained="" damage="" decisions.="" deemed="" does="" educational="" endorse="" experienced="" financial="" for="" from="" guaranteed.="" has="" he="" hence="" her="" herein="" his="" however="" identification="" in="" information.="" information="" informational="" injury="" investment="" investments.="" investors="" is="" it="" its="" liable="" likewise="" loss="" losses="" make="" marks="" material="" materials="" may="" member="" names="" no="" not="" obtained="" of="" offer="" on="" only.="" opinions="" or="" other="" our="" own="" owners="" part="" property="" purchase="" purposes="" re="" reason.="" recommend="" recommendation="" recommendations="" refuse="" reliable="" report="" reserves="" respect="" respective="" responsibility="" resulting="" right="" risk="" sale="" securities.="" securities="" service="" shall="" she="" solicitation="" sources="" strictly="" subscriber="" suitable="" technical="" that="" the="" their="" this="" to="" trade="" trademarks="" trading="" trends="" use="" used="" uses="" whatsoever="" who="" with="" you=""></these>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-7195854090607620082013-02-14T05:50:00.001-08:002013-02-14T05:50:48.671-08:00Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis: Reflections on Rand Paul's Response to Obama's State of the Union AddressIf you have not taken the time to view Rand Paul's rebuttal to the SOTU address, here is a chance. While I am very quickly approaching the belief that DC is broken beyond repair and we need to revert back to complete State Sovereignty with trade and defense treaties between the States, I support Dr. Paul's ideas....<br />
<br />
<a href="http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/02/reflections-on-rand-pauls-response-to.html">Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis: Reflections on Rand Paul's Response to Obama's State of the Union Address</a><br />
<br />
<these about="" accuracy="" accurate="" advisor="" agrees="" all="" allabouttrends.net="" alone="" an="" and="" any="" anyone="" anytime="" appearing="" are="" assumes="" at="" be="" bears="" been="" believed="" body="" buy="" by="" cannot="" comments="" complete="" completeness="" contained="" damage="" decisions.="" deemed="" does="" educational="" endorse="" experienced="" financial="" for="" from="" guaranteed.="" has="" he="" hence="" her="" herein="" his="" however="" identification="" in="" information.="" information="" informational="" injury="" investment="" investments.="" investors="" is="" it="" its="" liable="" likewise="" loss="" losses="" make="" marks="" material="" materials="" may="" member="" names="" no="" not="" obtained="" of="" offer="" on="" only.="" opinions="" or="" other="" our="" own="" owners="" part="" property="" purchase="" purposes="" re="" reason.="" recommend="" recommendation="" recommendations="" refuse="" reliable="" report="" reserves="" respect="" respective="" responsibility="" resulting="" right="" risk="" sale="" securities.="" securities="" service="" shall="" she="" solicitation="" sources="" strictly="" subscriber="" suitable="" technical="" that="" the="" their="" this="" to="" trade="" trademarks="" trading="" trends="" use="" used="" uses="" whatsoever="" who="" with="" you=""></these>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-11493102902671277872012-11-30T07:26:00.001-08:002012-11-30T07:26:21.235-08:00Time for Congressional Republicans To Expose Obama's Agenda - David Limbaugh - [page]I could not agree more! It is time to change the rhetoric and use the same name-game as the left. <br />
<br />
The 2012 election should never be mentioned without "that was won by a slim majority using the highest rate of voter fraud in the last 100 years" in the same sentence.<br />
<br />
Every policy should be referred to as "more of the same tax and spend ideas that got us in this mess". The words "obession with class warfare" and "punishing success" should always be used when discussing the President's ideology. <br />
<br />
It's time to take the gloves off, these are not nice people who are simply "misguided". These are people who want to tranform the middle class into a permanent dependent class so that they can be forever threatened with having their government benefits taken away if anyone but Democrats are in power.....<br />
<br />
<a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/2012/11/30/time_for_congressional_republicans_to_expose_obamas_agenda/page/full/">Time for Congressional Republicans To Expose Obama's Agenda - David Limbaugh - [page]</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-70042541290090368412012-11-24T06:05:00.001-08:002012-11-24T06:05:01.709-08:00Let's Tax Matt Damon - John Ransom - Townhall Finance Conservative Columnists and Financial Commentary - Page 2How did Matt Damon become so wealthy? By not paying his fair share.<br />
How did Ben Affleck become so wealthy? By not paying his fair share!<br />
How did George Clooney become so wealthy? By not paying his fair share!!<br />
How did Oprah become so uber wealthy? By not paying her fair share!!!<br />
<br />
Let them drink the same poison they want to shove down our throats!!!!<br />
<br />
Tax all net worth over $10 Million at 50%<br />
Tax all personal income over $1,000,000 at 75% like our "enlightened French brethren"<br />
Direct all those taxes into Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.<br />
<br />
Then lets see how they vote.....<br />
<br />
<a href="http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/johnransom/2012/11/23/lets_tax_matt_damon/page/2">Let's Tax Matt Damon - John Ransom - Townhall Finance Conservative Columnists and Financial Commentary - Page 2</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-61668973071279850892012-11-23T06:34:00.001-08:002012-11-23T06:34:03.065-08:00Egypt Protesters Rally in Cairo After Mursi Expands Powers - BloombergMeet the New Boss. Same as the Old Boss!<br />
Apparently lying about who you really are and what you really stand for is a universal trait among politicians....<br />
<br />
Yup, you got fooled again!<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-23/egyptian-protesters-rally-in-cairo-after-mursi-expands-powers.html">Egypt Protesters Rally in Cairo After Mursi Expands Powers - Bloomberg</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-9441114142884979692012-11-22T06:18:00.001-08:002012-11-22T06:18:08.572-08:00Jeb Bush Jr. Hopes His Dad Runs for PresidentThis would essentially lock in a 3rd Presidential Term for the Democrats. The worst thing that ever happened to the Republican party was the Bush family. Papa Bush was a liberal, Washington insider who couldn't wait to coddle up to the big government tax and spend crowd and reverse all of the progress we had gained over the 8 years of Reagan not to mention opening the door for Bill Clinton.<br />
<br />
Bush 43 expanded the role of government in our education system and created a new Medicare Entitlement program before blowing up our budgets on two occupations of Middle East countries in the name of national security. National security starts with a strong economy, not some idiotic overseas venture in the name of "spreading democracy" to people who really weren't asking for it.<br />
<br />
A move to Jeb Bush would signal to the world that Republicans are just another wing of the party of big government. The Tea Party/Ron Paul/Libertarian faction of the Republican party needs to continue to take over the party away from these inbred elitists just the same way that the Marxists took over the Democrat party. Only then will Americans have a real choice worthy of voting for.....<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.newsmax.com/newswidget/jeb-bush-president-2016/2012/11/20/id/464897?promo_code=F492-1&utm_source=Test_Newsmax_Feed&utm_medium=nmwidget&utm_campaign=widgetphase1">Jeb Bush Jr. Hopes His Dad Runs for President</a><br />
<br />
<these about="about" accuracy="accuracy" accurate="accurate" advisor="advisor" agrees="agrees" all="all" allabouttrends.net="allabouttrends.net" alone="alone" an="an" and="and" any="any" anyone="anyone" anytime="anytime" appearing="appearing" are="are" assumes="assumes" at="at" be="be" bears="bears" been="been" believed="believed" body="body" buy="buy" by="by" cannot="cannot" comments="comments" complete="complete" completeness="completeness" contained="contained" damage="damage" decisions.="decisions." deemed="deemed" does="does" educational="educational" endorse="endorse" experienced="experienced" financial="financial" for="for" from="from" guaranteed.="guaranteed." has="has" he="he" hence="hence" her="her" herein="herein" his="his" however="however" identification="identification" in="in" information.="information." information="information" informational="informational" injury="injury" investment="investment" investments.="investments." investors="investors" is="is" it="it" its="its" liable="liable" likewise="likewise" loss="loss" losses="losses" make="make" marks="marks" material="material" materials="materials" may="may" member="member" names="names" no="no" not="not" obtained="obtained" of="of" offer="offer" on="on" only.="only." opinions="opinions" or="or" other="other" our="our" own="own" owners="owners" part="part" property="property" purchase="purchase" purposes="purposes" re="re" reason.="reason." recommend="recommend" recommendation="recommendation" recommendations="recommendations" refuse="refuse" reliable="reliable" report="report" reserves="reserves" respect="respect" respective="respective" responsibility="responsibility" resulting="resulting" right="right" risk="risk" sale="sale" securities.="securities." securities="securities" service="service" shall="shall" she="she" solicitation="solicitation" sources="sources" strictly="strictly" subscriber="subscriber" suitable="suitable" technical="technical" that="that" the="the" their="their" this="this" to="to" trade="trade" trademarks="trademarks" trading="trading" trends="trends" use="use" used="used" uses="uses" whatsoever="whatsoever" who="who" with="with" you="you"></these>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-6584356028540921422012-11-16T05:59:00.001-08:002012-11-16T05:59:42.249-08:00Facing the Fiscal Cliff Solves 77% of the Deficit Problem in One Move – Money Morning - Only the News You Can Profit FromIf the Republicrats were smart (and by and large they are not), they would give the President the Tax increases on high income earners that he wants in exchange for FREEZING (not cutting, freezing) all Federal Spending at the 2012 levels for the next 4 YEARS. The freeze would include delay of any further implementation of ObamaCare until 2017. <br />
<br />
<br />
The rationale is simple; tax hikes will stall the economy and we cannot risk hammering the taxpayers with another 2500 pages of more taxes, regulation and spending until it recovers from this next shock and until the debt curve starts to at least flatten.<br />
<br />
Citizens will then see first hand whether or not "taxing the rich" really helps or hurts (or neither) and the Republicans could not be accused of making drastic cuts in the middle of a fragile recovery as 2012 spending levels are way above pre-crisis spending.<br />
<br />
Most importantly, they give the President his precious tax increase which he would then own.<br />
<br />
As I said, they are not smart enough to do this as I really believe that they'd rather be political punching bags for another 4 years.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://moneymorning.com/2012/11/15/facing-the-fiscal-cliff-solves-77-of-the-deficit-problem-in-one-move/">Facing the Fiscal Cliff Solves 77% of the Deficit Problem in One Move – Money Morning - Only the News You Can Profit From</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-27148928985419987682012-11-12T04:36:00.001-08:002012-11-12T04:36:55.211-08:00How Republicans Can Find Themselves - Katie Kieffer - [page]These are excellent points in this article. The only choice we had was to replace a Left-wing, Totalitarian Marxist with a Right-wing Totalitarian Fascist. In the end, a frustrated country chose to kick the can down the road and "hope" for better choices in 2016. There is mounting evidence that the Ron Paul wing of the party did in fact stay home last Tuesday in order to show the establishment that they will not win a national election without a strong, grass-roots movement. <br />
<br />
The fact that most of the State-wide measures (other than California) went conservative (see Wisconsin and Michigan) tells you that the country is moving away from DC and want things controlled more and more locally. republicans will either become less DC establishment or they will become less relevant at the National level.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/katiekieffer/2012/11/12/how_republicans_can_find_themselves/page/full/">How Republicans Can Find Themselves - Katie Kieffer - [page]</a><br />
<br />
<these about="about" accuracy="accuracy" accurate="accurate" advisor="advisor" agrees="agrees" all="all" allabouttrends.net="allabouttrends.net" alone="alone" an="an" and="and" any="any" anyone="anyone" anytime="anytime" appearing="appearing" are="are" assumes="assumes" at="at" be="be" bears="bears" been="been" believed="believed" body="body" buy="buy" by="by" cannot="cannot" comments="comments" complete="complete" completeness="completeness" contained="contained" damage="damage" decisions.="decisions." deemed="deemed" does="does" educational="educational" endorse="endorse" experienced="experienced" financial="financial" for="for" from="from" guaranteed.="guaranteed." has="has" he="he" hence="hence" her="her" herein="herein" his="his" however="however" identification="identification" in="in" information.="information." information="information" informational="informational" injury="injury" investment="investment" investments.="investments." investors="investors" is="is" it="it" its="its" liable="liable" likewise="likewise" loss="loss" losses="losses" make="make" marks="marks" material="material" materials="materials" may="may" member="member" names="names" no="no" not="not" obtained="obtained" of="of" offer="offer" on="on" only.="only." opinions="opinions" or="or" other="other" our="our" own="own" owners="owners" part="part" property="property" purchase="purchase" purposes="purposes" re="re" reason.="reason." recommend="recommend" recommendation="recommendation" recommendations="recommendations" refuse="refuse" reliable="reliable" report="report" reserves="reserves" respect="respect" respective="respective" responsibility="responsibility" resulting="resulting" right="right" risk="risk" sale="sale" securities.="securities." securities="securities" service="service" shall="shall" she="she" solicitation="solicitation" sources="sources" strictly="strictly" subscriber="subscriber" suitable="suitable" technical="technical" that="that" the="the" their="their" this="this" to="to" trade="trade" trademarks="trademarks" trading="trading" trends="trends" use="use" used="used" uses="uses" whatsoever="whatsoever" who="who" with="with" you="you"></these>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-63924152241737915052012-08-21T05:53:00.001-07:002012-08-21T05:53:24.419-07:00Charles Hugh Smith: A Sustainable National Healthcare System: Prevention OnlyA great piece detailing not only the lie that is our current system but the only realistic form that actually could or should be "nationalized" (I still prefer that all of this be done at the State level). <br />
<br />
The only "yeah but" I would make is what I have now, which is a catastrophic policy with a high deductible as an optional add-on. For people that want it and can afford it (and it is ridiculously cheap), it would provide coverage for those rare but known occurences like child birth and major-recoverable injury as well as treatment of disease if it is deemed to be curable AND the patient is willing to endure the treatment.<br />
<br />
So if you add this together, you end up with a Health Savings Account as many have today, with a base of subsidization for preventive care for lower income individuals and families....what a concept!<br />
<br />
<a href="http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2012/08/a-sustainable-national-healthcare.html">oftwominds-Charles Hugh Smith: A Sustainable National Healthcare System: Prevention Only</a><br />
<br />
<these about="about" accuracy="accuracy" accurate="accurate" advisor="advisor" agrees="agrees" all="all" allabouttrends.net="allabouttrends.net" alone="alone" an="an" and="and" any="any" anyone="anyone" anytime="anytime" appearing="appearing" are="are" assumes="assumes" at="at" be="be" bears="bears" been="been" believed="believed" body="body" buy="buy" by="by" cannot="cannot" comments="comments" complete="complete" completeness="completeness" contained="contained" damage="damage" decisions.="decisions." deemed="deemed" does="does" educational="educational" endorse="endorse" experienced="experienced" financial="financial" for="for" from="from" guaranteed.="guaranteed." has="has" he="he" hence="hence" her="her" herein="herein" his="his" however="however" identification="identification" in="in" information.="information." information="information" informational="informational" injury="injury" investment="investment" investments.="investments." investors="investors" is="is" it="it" its="its" liable="liable" likewise="likewise" loss="loss" losses="losses" make="make" marks="marks" material="material" materials="materials" may="may" member="member" names="names" no="no" not="not" obtained="obtained" of="of" offer="offer" on="on" only.="only." opinions="opinions" or="or" other="other" our="our" own="own" owners="owners" part="part" property="property" purchase="purchase" purposes="purposes" re="re" reason.="reason." recommend="recommend" recommendation="recommendation" recommendations="recommendations" refuse="refuse" reliable="reliable" report="report" reserves="reserves" respect="respect" respective="respective" responsibility="responsibility" resulting="resulting" right="right" risk="risk" sale="sale" securities.="securities." securities="securities" service="service" shall="shall" she="she" solicitation="solicitation" sources="sources" strictly="strictly" subscriber="subscriber" suitable="suitable" technical="technical" that="that" the="the" their="their" this="this" to="to" trade="trade" trademarks="trademarks" trading="trading" trends="trends" use="use" used="used" uses="uses" whatsoever="whatsoever" who="who" with="with" you="you"></these>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-71919133199121088722012-07-17T03:40:00.001-07:002012-07-17T03:40:45.541-07:00The Keynesian Rope of Sand: Why World War II Did NOT End the Great DepressionBy Tom DiLorenzo<br />
<br />
<br />
Tuesday, July 10, 2012<br />
<br />
So-called Keynesian economics is based on numerous myths and superstitions about the economic world. For example, John Maynard Keynes himself blamed the lack of private business investment spending during the Great Depression on "animal spirits" that supposedly spooked investors. The two biggest myths, however, upon which the whole edifice of the Keynesian "Government Can Spend Us into Prosperity" philosophy is based are: 1) the myth that government spending under President Franklin D. Roosevelt ended the Great Depression; and 2) If the Depression was not totally ended by New Deal spending, then government spending on World War II certainly must have done the trick. Exactly the opposite is true: New Deal and World War II spending made the U.S. economy worse off by siphoning off billions of dollars from the pockets and bank accounts of private consumers and investors. Government bureaucracy ballooned while the private sector starved. Only when the war was over, government spending was cut dramatically, and FDR was dead, did the private economy in the U.S. recover from the Great Depression.<br />
<br />
Despite a doubling of federal government expenditures from 1933 to 1940, the creation of dozens of new federal government bureaucracies, and the direct employment of some ten million people in "public works" jobs, the official unemployment rate in 1939 was still 17.2 percent, nearly six times higher than it was in 1929 (2.9 percent) on the eve of the Depression. Per capita GDP was lower in 1939 ($847) than in 1929 ($857), as were personal consumption expenditures -- $67.6 billion vs. $78.9 billion (U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Historical Statistics of the United States). <br />
<br />
One reason for the abject failure of the New Deal "stimulus spending" to reduce unemployment is that the diversion of billions of dollars out of private-sector pockets to finance government make-work jobs created additional unemployment in the private sector. More temporary, make-work government jobs were created at the expense of destroying a much larger number of private-sector jobs since bureaucracy and red tape typically accounts for several times the amount of money that is spent on salaries alone. It is not unusual to read today that it costs several hundred thousand dollars to "create" a single $30,000/year government job.<br />
<br />
World War II did end unemployment in America, but only because more than 11.5 million men were drafted into the military whereas the total number of Americans unemployed as of 1940, on the eve of the war, was 5.3 million. In addition, millions more volunteered for the military to "beat the draft" because they knew that draftees were most likely to serve on the front lines than volunteers were. <br />
<br />
The average American consumer was worse off during World War II because of the massive diversion of economic resources from the consumer economy to the war economy and the dramatic increase in taxes. By 1945 the top income tax bracket was 94 percent on an annual income of $200,000. The lowest income tax bracket was 23 percent on an annual income of $2000. There was nothing to buy, and even basic food and clothing items were rationed by the government. So despite an explosion of total federal government spending during the war years, the average American at home was still living in a depression economy worse than 1939/1940. <br />
<br />
At the end of the war every Keynesian economist predicted an even worse economic depression because of the demobilization of the military and the accompanying radical reductions in government spending. The reductions in government spending were indeed dramatic: According to the Commerce Department's Historical Statistics of the United States, federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948, about a two-thirds reduction. Far from creating a depression, prying all of that money from the hands of politicians and bureaucrats and returning it to its owners – working Americans – created the largest increase in private sector economic growth in all of American history in 1946. According to statistics found in the 1995 Annual Report of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisors, based on Commerce Department data, real inflation-adjusted private sector GDP increased by 29.5 percent in that year. In no other year has the U.S. economy ever grown even half that fast. Private investment skyrocketed and stock prices soared, in complete and total contradiction of what every Keynesian economist in the world had been predicting. Yet thanks to the power of government propaganda, and the state's academic mouthpieces (Paul Krugman comes to mind), the myth persists that government spending during World War II is "proof" that government can spend us into prosperity.<br />
<br />
Thomas DiLorenzo is professor of economics at Loyola University Maryland and a member of the senior faculty of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Among his books are How Capitalism Saved America; Hamilton's Curse; and his forthcoming Organized Crime: The Unvarnished Truth About Government.<br />
To receive daily news from the Project to Restore America as well as a free copy of the one book Ron Paul suggested all Americans should read, click the Link<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
The Project To Restore AmericaUnknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-6859276643634711302012-07-16T04:26:00.000-07:002012-07-16T04:26:36.354-07:00The Corruption of PoliticsThis is a very powerful piece by Porter Stansberry. If you agree with what he is saying, then I urge you to sign up for the free S&A digest and join us in the project to Restore America...<br />
<br />
The Corruption of Politics <br />
<br />
<br />
By Porter Stansberry<br />
<br />
Let me show you the numbers – the hard facts – behind what's happened to our country…<br />
<br />
I'll start with one of the biggest factors in the decline of our civilization – the link between welfare, education, crime, and politics.<br />
<br />
It is routinely alleged in national political debates that something is fundamentally unfair and un-American about the huge "wealth gap" between the poorest Americans and the wealthiest. Some politicians like to argue that the poor never have a real shot at the American dream… And as a nation, we owe them more and more of our resources to correct this injustice. Most important, it is alleged that only the government has the resources to correct this inequality.<br />
<br />
This is a dangerous notion…<br />
<br />
First, it promotes the idea of entitlement. Entitlement is a fairly new idea in the American political lexicon – perhaps because most of our nation's wealth is still fairly new. The American idea of entitlement argues that because you were born into a rich society, other people owe you something. The idea has become pervasive in our culture. It underlies the basic assumptions behind the idea of a "wealth gap." Implicit is the assumption that successful Americans haven't rightfully earned their wealth… that in one way or another, they've taken advantage of society and have an obligation to give back most of what they've "taken."<br />
<br />
I believe the idea of entitlement lies at the root of many of our most serious cultural problems.<br />
<br />
The more obvious problem is the idea that the government is responsible for fixing the "wealth gap." But the government has proved wholly ineffective at dealing with poverty in America. The data is nearly conclusive that government efforts are far more likely to be the cause of the wealth gap than the solution.<br />
<br />
The simple fact is, the government has to take resources from someone before it can dole them out to others. And this act of taking is economically destructive. It reduces the market's incentives for entrepreneurs. The more you take from the productive members of society, the less productive they become. That's the primary lesson of the history of socialism. Yet… many of our political leaders seem oblivious to this iron law of human nature.<br />
<br />
Consider a simple analysis that compares the unemployment rate with the size of the federal government's spending, as measured against GDP. (We created this chart after reading a similar analysis at Mark Perry's excellent financial blog, Carpe Diem.)<br />
<br />
<img src="http://files.stansberryresearch.com/image/201112PSI_b.gif" /><br />
<br />
As you can see in this chart, the larger the government grows as a percentage of our economy, the higher unemployment rises. The more government, the less opportunity. These figures are similar when studied comparatively across many different countries.<br />
<br />
We also know from decades of experience that little of the government's funding for the poor will ever reach those who are actually in need. Instead, these kinds of socialist policies end up sending billions of dollars into the hands of unions, "community organizers," and other sponsors of the Democratic Party. This tightens their political control of America's inner cities, which have become the source of our country's most intractable social problems.<br />
<br />
Believe me, I have reams of data and decades of case studies for these conclusions. But before we get to my proof, I want you to simply assume that what I'm saying is 100% correct. Assume most of the government's social spending ends up corrupting the politics of the inner city. Assume these efforts actually make the "wealth gap" larger. Assume these policies and the politicians who sponsor them are actually creating a society of complete dependence, where the spread of ignorance has created entire generations of people who aren't educated enough to know they've been enslaved by their own leaders.<br />
<br />
If these things are true, if my conclusions are exactly right, what would America's poorest communities look like today?<br />
<br />
It has now been almost 50 years since the start of the War on Poverty, President Lyndon Johnson's program to radically increase domestic welfare spending. These programs and their various spinoffs have been at the center of Democratic politics ever since. In fact, if you compare speeches about these programs from the mid-1960s until today, you will find the verbiage never changes. Obama is merely echoing the same calls for "social justice" that Robert Kennedy used in his ill-fated 1968 campaign for president.<br />
<br />
But besides the soaring rhetoric – besides the promise of a "chicken in every pot" – what have these programs actually achieved? The wholesale destruction of urban communities across America… communities that are overwhelmingly African American. If the intention of these programs had been to destroy black communities, you could have hardly done more damage than the last 50 years of Democratic policy.<br />
<br />
I don't think most Americans realize how dangerous these communities have become or the toll they take on our country as a whole. That's primarily because talking about this problem is seen as racist. That's complete nonsense. The victims of these policies are primarily black people. Trying to help them restore dignity and independence to their communities isn't a racist goal. It's humanitarian.<br />
<br />
And let me offer a prediction… Sooner or later, the people in these communities are going to finally point their finger at the politicians who've lied and pandered to them for decades, all while stealing from them at every turn. When that moment comes, having a track record of correctly speaking out about the real nature of these problems will be a valuable political asset…<br />
<br />
Let me give you some of the numbers that define the enormous scope of these problems.<br />
<br />
According to the NAACP, Texas taxpayers spent $175 million in 2009 to imprison residents from a small part of Houston – only 10 zip codes out of 75. Thus, people from neighborhoods that are home to only about 10% of the city's population account for more than 33% of the state's entire $500 million annual prison spending. These neighborhoods are overwhelmingly poor and African American.<br />
<br />
In Pennsylvania, taxpayers spent $290 million in 2009 to imprison residents from just 11 of Philadelphia's neighborhoods, representing about 25% of the city's population. On this relatively small urban area, the state spent roughly half its $500 million prison budget. These neighborhoods are overwhelmingly poor and African American.<br />
<br />
In New York, taxpayers spent $539 million to imprison residents from only 24 of New York City's 200 different neighborhoods. Only 16% of the city's population lives in these areas, but they account for nearly half of the state's $1.1 billion prison budget. These neighborhoods are overwhelmingly poor and African American.<br />
<br />
America has many problems… but these neighborhoods represent more than a society in decline. Life in these places reflects a complete collapse of Western civilization. What's happening in these communities? A breakdown of the family and the resulting collapse of the school system. What you have left is crime – violent and political.<br />
<br />
In Detroit, only 27% of the black male students in the school system graduate from high school. This is not a racial problem: Only 19% of the white male students graduate from those same schools. What's causing this problem? A complete breakdown of society. When communities can no longer teach their children the most basic academic skills, such as reading, math, history, literature, and economics… what future can we expect? And what kind of society do you expect after several generations of total ignorance?<br />
<br />
What opportunities are available in America to people without even a basic education? The New York Times reports almost 70% of black males without a high school diploma are unemployed in the United States.<br />
<br />
In many predominantly black, urban communities, the actual unemployment rate is close to 100% for young dropouts. Given these figures, it isn't surprising that many of these people end up in jail.<br />
<br />
According to various studies, black males who dropped out of school by age 16 are four times more likely to end up in jail than those who remained in school. Crime is literally all they know. Likewise, a black youth whose mother was a high school dropout is 88% more likely to end up in jail. These are the two primary reasons nearly one in 11 adult black men are either in jail or on parole.<br />
<br />
How did this all happen? How did we end up with expensive schools that can't teach? How did we end up with young mothers who aren't married? How did we end up with entire generations of people who won't – and probably can't – work in the labor force? How did we end up with a skyrocketing prison population? The prison population in America has soared from less than half a million people in 1980 to more than 2.5 million people today. More than seven million adults are in prison or on parole in the United States. We have an incarceration rate that's seven times higher than any other industrialized nation.<br />
<br />
The land of the free?<br />
<br />
Let's ask the most basic question: What has the gigantic increase in welfare spending and education spending done for the underclass of America? It seems apparent that growth in federal spending has caused far more harm than good. When you study these neighborhoods, what you find is a horrifying story that's been repeated, generation after generation since the early 1960s. It's a story of families who have been destroyed by their dependency on the state.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-10060286567257023722012-06-29T03:59:00.001-07:002012-06-29T03:59:30.749-07:00Americans Are Being Prepared For Full Spectrum TyrannyGreat post. What is scary is the number of people I speak with who are already conditioned. They accept a premise that 30 years ago would have been considered outrageous. We've been in the pot of water for about 100 years, the Democrats get in power and start cranking on the heat, when we squawk, the Republicans come in and turn the heat down a bit. Make no mistake, the only President in my life time who tried to take us out of the pot was Reagan (which is why he was so hated by the DC Republicans). Most of the Republicans since then have only tried to convince us that the pot doesn't exist...and the Democrats....they try to convince us that the heat is global warming and it's our fault.....<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.alt-market.com/articles/878-americans-are-being-prepared-for-full-spectrum-tyranny">Americans Are Being Prepared For Full Spectrum Tyranny</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-72446371158564019672012-06-27T03:31:00.001-07:002012-06-27T03:31:20.804-07:00Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis: You Don’t Need to be a Lefty to Support Krugman (You Just Need to be Economically Illiterate)Great piece by Mike Shedlock. Paul Krugman is like a doctor who misdiagnoses a patient and then doubles down on the treatment when the initial attempt fails. We have never run up so much government spending so fast, the "one-time" stimulus package has been in effect every year since the Democrats controlling the Senate refuse to pass a budget and instead just maintain stimulus-level spending through their on-going resolutions.<br />
<br />
What makes that so maddening is that tax revenue is now back up to pre-crisis levels (<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/19/state-tax-revenues_n_1437986.html?ref=business">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/19/state-tax-revenues_n_1437986.html?ref=business</a>), meaning that the deficit problem is all on the spending side with repsect to where we were before the housing bubble burst.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a href="http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/06/you-dont-need-to-be-lefty-to-support.html">Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis: You Don’t Need to be a Lefty to Support Krugman (You Just Need to be Economically Illiterate)</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-26400082092994960052012-06-18T04:27:00.001-07:002012-06-18T04:27:02.593-07:00Iceland Is Hot - Bill O'Reilly - Townhall Conservative ColumnistsI'm not a big O'Reilly fan, but this article is pretty good. Iceland is probably close to the socialist utopia of the Left and it works because of the incredibly small population that is extremely homogeneous, unlike our vast melting pot of 300 million. Here you can't even expect our citizens to speak proper english without being called a racist and those that do try to learn are labeled as sellouts. America was always proud to be the land of opportunity, if you want to trade your liberty for "social security", there are plenty of other places willing to take you and your money....<br />
<br />
<a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/billoreilly/2012/06/16/iceland_is_hot/page/full/">Iceland Is Hot - Bill O'Reilly - Townhall Conservative Columnists</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14094090.post-18492654011687612142012-06-18T03:42:00.001-07:002012-06-18T03:42:39.241-07:00THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR FRIEND « The Burning PlatformThis is a controversial post as the author sites a violent revolt that occurred in Russia during the 1920's then draws parallels with what has happened in our country over the last 4 years. Anybody who has read my past posts knows that I am not a fan of Republicans nor Democrats and do not think that Obama is much worse than the Bush family. Both sides have been building a mote around DC and concentrating more power within the centralized ruling class in Washington and it must be stopped. However, unlike the author, I tend to focus on the solutions written into the Constitution that have been largely forgotten or ignored by the populace.<br />
<br />
The key in every election is to take control of the State governments. In doing so, we can move to nullify DC in moves similar to what we are seeing in Texas, Indiana and now Wisconsin. Ohio has already voted to ignore ObamaCare as should the rest of the States involved in the Supreme Court decision. Right now, DC simply threatens to withhold money from the States if they don't obey, however the States can also withhold money from DC in much the same way. A strong and cohesive band of Governors can move very effectively to start limiting DC's influence on the citizens of this country. Something that would be much more preferable than taking up arms against our neighbors....<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.theburningplatform.com/?p=35599">THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT YOUR FRIEND « The Burning Platform</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0