Your Life, Your Liberty, Your Happiness

Lincoln Was a Traitor, Not a Hero

2010-01-14T04:12:00.003-06:00

Remember how your classroom glorified him as the Great and Almighty Messiah? Some of his most "heroic" accomplishments and features:

Waged war without a declaration from Congress
Created blockades against the South, and sent his Northern Army upon the South thereafter (no wonder the South fired the first shot)
Oversaw the killing of innocent civilians at the hands of the State
Cared less about slavery and more about preserving the Union in the name of an all-powerful central government
Implemented excessively high import taxes, signed an extremely protectionist tariff bill, and explicitly threatened invasion against any state that failed to comply (signed ten more tariff bills thereafter)
Was an ardent supporter of corporate welfare, handing over massive land grants and subsidies to transcontinental railroad corporations
Took the nation off the gold standard and handed over control of the monetary system entirely to central government through the National Currency Acts, nationalizing the banking system
Drafted thousands of individuals into government slavery through coercive military conscription
Jailed over 30,000 civilians who spoke out against him or the war efforts without due process of law
Forced hundreds of newspapers that did not support the war into free speech suppression
Completely ignored the Tenth Amendment (states' rights) and the right of the South to secede from the Union, even though the North was also holding slaves and many other countries found more peaceful solutions to the eventual abolishment of slavery (ex. buying slaves and freeing them)
Preferred dictatorial centralization over state sovereignty

Lincoln was a fraud, a traitor, and a tyrant. In fact, he was probably the worst president ever - and that's a lot considering we had Bush, and now Obama. Socialists, neocons, and big government Progressives use the public's love of Lincoln to manipulate the masses into an imperialistic foreign policy, economic totalitarianism, and centralized government on colossal proportions. Someday, I hope the indoctrinated public wakes up and realizes what Lincoln worship has wrought upon our nation.

The Conservative Case for Noninterventionism

2010-01-04T19:18:00.001-06:00

An aggressive foreign policy wasn't always the staple of the Republican party. In fact, the exact opposite was once true. The rhetoric of prominent Republican president Warren G. Harding reflects this.

My best judgment of America’s needs is to steady down, to get squarely on our feet, to make sure of the right path. Let’s get out of the fevered delirium of war, with the hallucination that all the money in the world is to be made in the madness of war and the wildness of its aftermath. Let us stop to consider that tranquility at home is more precious than peace abroad, and that both our good fortune and our eminence are dependent on the normal forward stride of all the American people.

As I read and hear the words of the Old Right, I ponder as to where the conservative movement went wrong. Even prominent Republican Robert Taft was anti-war. Conservatives didn't want to go into WWI, and some didn't even want to go into WWII - yet today, Republicans cheer on the imperialistic nature of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, completely ignorant of true conservative roots. It was always Democrats who were interventionist. They wanted to regulate industry, expand the size and role of government, and promote "peace" and "democracy" through violent warfare and bureaucratic foreign entanglements. Whether it was Woodrow Wilson's WWI and League of Nations, FDR's aggressive policies in WWII, or Lyndon Johnson's Vietnam, Republicans were never considered the party of war. When Irving Kristol and the Bushes came into the picture, however, that all changed, and the neoconservative movement emerged.

The current Republican party promotes an aggressive foreign policy over diplomatic solutions. The Democratic party, still full of their "peace and democracy around the world" rhetoric, offers no real alternative in terms of foreign policy. Woodrow Wilson's passion for nation-building and the imperialistic imposition of democracy around the world shapes the foreign policy of both parties in Washington today. At the cost of billions of dollars, endless inflation, the unsustainable deterioration of the U.S. dollar, our civil liberties as we know it, and thousands of lives - American and foreign alike - we are pursuing imperialistic wars of aggression in the hopes of strengthening our national security at the risk of our freedoms. What do conservatives believe in anymore? The conservative case for noninterventionism is supported by numerous conservative principles, including, but not limited to:

Fiscal Conservatism - The loss of billions of dollars on two wars that have served no major benefit to our nation or to its people does not represent the "fiscal conservatism" that Republicans still claim to support. Every year, courtesy of the Federal Reserve, we print vast multitudes of worthless dollar bills out of thin air in order to fund two wars the government claims they want to win. The high levels of legislative taxes are not the only financial burden that we face today considering that, as I have stressed again and again in my writings, the policy of monetary inflation is the most burdensome form of taxation there is. Our war budgets are colossal - we have spent over $900 billion and counting on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan alone.

While deficits continue to skyrocket, and more and more of the poor and the middle class are robbed of the fruits of their labor through both legislative taxes and monetary inflation - in large part due to the expenses of our world empire - the Republican party, as ironic as it may be, still promotes "fiscal conservatism." If the Republican party wishes to regain credibility, they must recognize once again the wisdom of the Old Right: war costs money, war causes inflation - war debases currencies. True fiscal conservatives know and acknowledge this fact. War does not save money. It destroys it.

A Strong National Defense - The major goal of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was to fight terrorism in order to strengthen our national security. Policing the world, building an empire, and entangling ourselves in foreign alliances is now deemed the best and most appropriate way to defend America. Conservatives should know better. Terrorist groups have only grown larger since we invaded Iraq. Al Qaeda and the Taliban have become even more radical, even more dangerous, and an even bigger threat to our national security than ever before. Terrorists are radicalizing, and we are the enablers. When our forces grow in size and we take part in aggressive invasions upon their land, terrorists become even more motivated to commit acts of violence and murder, with God the Almighty being used as a mere excuse for their behavior.

Their forces are growing, and our solution is the equivalent of pouring salt on a wound. We attempt to solve the problem by increasing our forces and sending in more troops. This has been tried for the past nine years - eight years under Bush and one year under Obama. The result has been the expansion and radicalization of terrorist groups. It is obvious by now that our current foreign policy is only making things worse. By invading their territory and threatening our enemies with weapons and warfare, we are only motivating the enemy to come after us. When we motivate our enemies to come after us, we weaken our national security. 9/11 was a consequence of the aggressive foreign policy of the Bush and Clinton years - yet we have learned nothing. Another 9/11 might be coming if we don't change our ways.

Instead, we should be focusing on border security and domestic defense. If the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan were instead placed on our borders, our national security would be much stronger than it is now. If we stopped spending on overseas imperialism and instead focused on defense here at home, our citizens would be much safer and better guarded against the threat of terrorism than if we continued building an empire around the world. The hostility aimed towards us would not vanish completely, but it would begin to shrink and fade with time. If we talked with nations and found diplomatic solutions to our problems, the threat of attack on American citizens would be curtailed. If conservatives truly want a strong national defense, they must be willing to bring our troops home and focus on peace here on our own soil.

Small Government - Republicans still claim to support small government - yet, since the election of George W. Bush, the government has experienced expansion by record proportions. This fact further proves that war provides an incentive for government to grow and expand in size. Bush's Patriot Act takes away our freedoms to this very day, all in the name of national security. Our phone records, medical records, business records, telephone calls, and computer conversations are all subject to the eyes and ears of government bureaucrats, and often times without valid reason. Politicians claim that this invasion of privacy is necessary to protect Americans from the threat of terrorism. However, political "radicals" and those of us who hold hostility towards the government for various reasons have been officially labeled by the Department of Homeland Security as a serious threat.

Through the sneaky and deceptive practice of monetary inflation, men and women with fancy labels have obtained a higher claim on our money than we have ourselves. Hardworking Americans have no control over the value of their currency. Bureaucratic hands make sure of that. We are not free to choose whether or not our money goes to wars that serve no benefit to us or our loved ones. We are forced to pay against our will. The tyrannical empire that has formed due to our willingness to accept the expansion of government and the deprivation of civil liberties in the name of security continues to prop up regimes in the Middle East, with oil and power being the ultimate goal of the politicians in Washington.

The only way to fund these imperialistic wars is through the policy of currency elasticity forced upon us by our central bank, the Federal Reserve. While the value of the dollar plummets further and further towards total annihilation, war is used as an excuse to rob the people of massive percentages of the money they earn. The government no longer spends and expands within its limits because it has no incentive to do so. The Federal Reserve can print money out of thin air, regardless of whether the amount of money printed represents anything at all. There is no incentive for government to stay small, so along with its expansion of wartime budgets, it expands its intrusive social programs and its fascist corporate bailouts.

The growth of government at this point in time is perpetually rapid, and only sound economic policy based on free market solutions and the curtailment of government spending both domestically and abroad can destroy the beast that is government expansion. Violent warfare, policing the world, and building a global empire will do nothing of the sort. In fact, it is and will continue to be an enabler of government expansion. True conservatives realize that when you attempt to trade liberty for security, you lose both. Big government means less liberty and less security for all of America's citizens.

National Sovereignty - The phrase "New World Order" is often equated with conspiracy theory, but it is becoming more and more evident that a world government is in the works. War does nothing to prevent this from happening. In fact, violence and destruction is the tool of globalists. The only way to bring about the planetary regime that they wish to set up is by government force. Instead of focusing on the rule of law outlined in the U.S. Constitution, we are focusing on the rule of law outlined in the structure maintained by the United Nations. "America First" is no longer a principle followed by our nation's leaders. American citizens are forced to take care of people in other nations instead of being given the space and freedom to take responsibility for their own lives first and foremost.

We are ordered by the United Nations to police the world, yet it has no benefit to the citizens of our country or to the countries we wish to defend. It's only beneficiary is the world empire. It took millions of lives and billions of dollars to kill Saddam Hussein and bring democracy to Iraq. We continued with the policy of bankrupting American citizens in order to achieve the goals of warfare. Osama bin Laden has expressed his admiration for the perpetuation of our current foreign policy. His wish is to bankrupt us further, and we are falling right into his trap.

We are at the mercy of the United Nations, the G-20 alliance, and the World Bank. The Founders would be ashamed that we are letting our nation be ruled by planetary systems of law instead of the rule of law in the Constitution - the document that recognizes that rights are not given to us by government, but rather given to us by God. If conservatives really care about our national sovereignty, then it is time to remove ourselves from global leadership and place ourselves under self-rule. Aggressive wars in the name of world democracy weaken that opportunity.

If conservatives really believe in fiscal conservatism, a strong national defense, small government, and national sovereignty, they must realize that the wars pursued in Iraq and Afghanistan only offer the negligence and destruction of those principles. They must realize once again that wars debase our currency, weaken our national security, expand the government, and hand over our sovereignty to world rule. Violence is the tool of dictators, the enabler of tyranny, and the destroyer of freedom. Liberty does not come about by force of government. It comes from the grace of God. The Almighty only asks that we take responsibility for our inalienable rights.

If we lose our freedoms, we will have ourselves to blame. Each and everyone of us, conservative or not, must realize that aggressive wars destroy our individual sovereignty. Instead of protecting our freedoms, violent warfare destroys them. The greatest threat to our liberty is not the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the terrorists in Washington and Wall Street. Let us take back our liberties before it's too late. Let your voice be heard, let your heart guide you to spread the truth, and let your spirit forever be determined to ensure your individual salvation. That is something that no one can take away from you.

Free Market Health Care Reform: A Real Alternative to ObamaCare

2009-12-20T17:57:00.002-06:00

Most of us today realize the undoubted necessity of major health care reform. For those of us who do not wish to maintain the status quo, there are two sides to the argument. The Obama administration and the Democratic majority in Congress propose more government. Even Republicans are proposing their own slightly lighter version of ObamaCare. However, the only real solution to our health care problems is not more government, but less. It is the very regulations, subsidies, taxes, and inflationary policies proposed today that have led to our health care problems in the first place.

People are being taxed more than they have ever been before. Forty to seventy percent of each income earned by the middle class and the wealthy is now deemed government property, and taxed accordingly. Property taxes, payroll taxes, and corporate taxes are at an all-time high. All of this combines to kill jobs, drive up costs, and make our nation poorer by taking money from citizens to pay for unaffordable government programs, so-called "investments" in money-losing projects, useless bailouts, excessive government salaries, and, worst of all, imperialistic wars that only weaken our national security. With these expenses, it is no wonder that the cost of premiums, treatments, and medical care is at an all-time high. These costs are becoming unaffordable for thousands of American families.

Businesses continue to suffer from heavy price controls, wage laws, union-appeasing legislation, and pointless regulations. This kills profits by raising expenses, which in effect leads to reduced wages, higher prices on consumer goods and services, and a lower motivation to work, compete, and innovate. Advancements in medicine and opportunities to lower costs in order to compete are stifled by these expenses. When prices are fixed by government bureaucrats instead of the free market, the incentive to make improvements and provide better services is damaged. When doctors and patients have to sign more paperwork in order to meet the demands of time-wasting loopholes and expensive government regulations, the efficiencies produced by doctor-patient negotiations are no longer existent. Businesses can no longer afford to provide adequate wages or employer-provided health insurance for their workers.

Subsidies reward failure at the expense of the taxpayer. Big pharma, various insurance companies, and the medical-industrial complex rake in handouts with no idea of what will truly benefit or satisfy consumers. The transmission of information produced by the price system is distorted by false stimulus dollars that provide no calculation of profit and loss. Knowing what consumers want - and how much consumers are willing to pay - becomes much harder when funds are acquired by force rather than by the voluntary actions of consumers themselves.

Last, but not least, if we are to bring about real changes to our health care system, a problem we must be willing to face is the problem of monetary inflation produced by escalating wartime budgets, corporate welfare, cheap handouts, and the very central banking system we adopted under the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. Credit expansion leads to distorted interest rates and high levels of monetary inflation, causing endless boom-bust cycles and dollar degradation. Inflation is the biggest and sneakiest tax of all. It robs people of the value of their hard-earned money, which, in turn, brings down their actual wages and raises the prices of consumer goods and services. Hiring workers becomes more expensive, and businesses suffer as a result. Doctors, patients, hospitals, and companies are hurt in the process. Medical care only becomes more unaffordable.

From these facts, we can deduce that ObamaCare is simply more of the same. The overall economic costs of this expensive overhaul will only make things worse for consumers, workers, and employers alike. High taxes, excessive regulations, costly subsidies, and rising inflation is going to make everything we buy more expensive and everything we sell more worthless. Doctor-patient relationships, medical innovations, incentives to drive down costs, and quality of care will continue to suffer as a result. This is no way to reform health care. In order to truly reform health care, we must be willing to:

Provide more tax credits and tax cuts
Rollback price controls and medical regulations
Stop favoring unions and the medical-industrial complex over consumers
Eliminate subsides for insurance companies, big pharma, and corporations
Slash our budgets to fight inflation
Reduce the discretionary powers of the Federal Reserve, and...
Take health care out of bureaucratic hands and return it to the powers of the free market

Real health care reform starts not by asking government to solve our problems, but by getting it out of the way. Only then will the individual achievement unleashed by the powerful forces of the free market guide us to improve services, lower costs, and provide high-quality health care for a greater number of people. Freedom does wonders for our personal, economic, and social well-being.

Paul: Bernanke World's Greatest Counterfeiter

2009-12-17T13:55:00.001-06:00

President Obama: Mr. Warmongering Scumbag

2009-12-15T15:38:00.000-06:00

How does a leader who promises peace around the world, yet expands the war in Afghanistan, authorizes the bombings of innocent civilians, continues to send tens of thousands of troops to fight overseas for an unjustified cause, is in bed with multinational corporations that manipulate the law to suit their needs, further deprives us of our liberties by extending the Patriot Act, uses taxpayer money to give aid to powerful dictatorships, puts us further at the mercy of China through excessive borrowing, builds up the debt through escalating budgets and regulations, authorizes more power for the Federal Reserve, signs away our national sovereignty with unprecedented ease, supports policies that cause more people to starve and die in third-world countries, and acts as if he could care less that the dollar is on the road to destruction - win and accept the Nobel Peace Prize?

Keep making your excuses, liberals.

Green Fascism: The Truth Behind Climategate and the Summit at Copenhagen

2009-12-10T14:45:00.005-06:00

The climate change summit in Copenhagen is not something that many people want to pay attention to. Perhaps a gathering of environmentalists and world leaders to discuss "climate change" doesn't seem like such a big deal. The agreements made at this summit will affect each and everyone of us, yet we brush it off as just another pointless environmental propaganda fest that will have nothing to do with our personal or economic well-being. Do the words "one-world government" worry anyone? If so, then this event is something that needs to be paid attention to. The globalists would prefer global warming skeptics to stay out of this debate, but we must not give into their desires. I can assure you that our freedom and prosperity will be further damaged once President Obama gets involved in this meeting of totalitarian dictators bent on forcing their ideology upon the masses.

What exactly are these people planning? They seem to be setting up some type of treaty or agreement setting up worldwide laws that, if broken, will result in catastrophic punishments to millions of innocent people. The agreements themselves are punishment alone - punishment for driving certain cars, eating certain foods, working certain jobs, and living certain lifestyles. If any nation dare refuse to abide by these worldwide rules on how many carbon emissions can be produced, all Hell will break loose, and the U.N. will see that the disobedient will pay for their refusal to submit to the power-hungry global overlords that seek to grab control of everything in sight.

Third-world countries are being hurt the most. Food prices are already skyrocketing. Millions will be forced to starve and die because these new worldwide regulations and global taxes are far too burdensome on agriculture, energy companies, the auto industry, and citizens themselves. The very air we breathe is now considered a pollutant by the EPA. No one is safe from the wrath of the totalitarian dictators that seek to control every aspect of our lives. They will be telling us what kind of cars we can drive, what kind of foods we can eat, what kind of jobs we can work, and how we are supposed to live our lives. Liberty is being traded for "global security," and, in doing so, we are giving up the very heart and soul of our existence to those who seek to deprive of us of everything we have so that they can be known to the citizens of the world as the "saviors of mankind."

In the climate change agreements that will be confirmed at Copenhagen, we see some pretty scary things. Lord Christopher Monckton, one of the very few prominent figures speaking out against the New World Order, has somehow obtained secretive papers from Copenhagen coordinators outlining the plans for devastating global regulations. Believe it or not, there is actually going to be a massive global tax imposed on the citizens of the world, the revenue going to the World Bank to pay for whatever programs the globalists wish to force upon the masses. Global regulations regarding the emission of carbon into the atmosphere will also be set in the form of - courtesy of Smiley-Faced Fascism Incorporated - "environmental agreements." I can assure you that prices will rise, wages will go down in many industries, and the unemployment rate will continue to skyrocket within the coming months. Leading us into a global depression is exactly what the globalists intend to do, even if some naïve members of Congress insist otherwise. Our dollar is on the path to full-blown destruction.

Fortunately, a recent scandal has awakened many people to the scientific hoax that we call "global warming." Hackers gained access to the databases of many university computers, discovering shocking emails that revealed scientists discussing distortion, exaggeration, and elimination of their own scientific data to make global warming look like a valid and catastrophic epidemic. In their own words, they were trying to "hide the decline." Have you noticed how cold it's been lately? Here in Wisconsin, our summer was chilly, our fall was cold, and our winter is freezing. You literally feel like an iceberg as soon as you step out of the door. Temperatures have been declining, and we are supposed to believe that "global warming" is still a valid theory. Despite what the Al Gore propagandists want you to believe, we have been experiencing environmental extremes since life on earth took its first breath. Sun cycles account for the majority of what we call climate change, and there isn't much we can do to change sun cycles.

In the fifties, Progressives were screaming about how polar bears would drown and cities would sink beneath the seas if we didn't do "something." By the seventies, the tune of the Progressives was changed to "global cooling," and we were going to see another Ice Age if we didn't change our lifestyles - and quick. By the turn of the millenium, "global warming" came back to haunt us, and prominent figures, including Al Gore himself, profited off of environmental alarmism. Due to recent declining temperatures, the phrase is now "climate change," and we are supposed to believe that the evils of humanity have caused every single environmental problem that we face today. Even if you have spent but a year on this earth, politicians and scientists point their fingers at you to say, "It's all your fault." They don't want to accept that perhaps the majority of the temperature changes we see today are caused naturally rather than by the so-called "evils" of humanity.

Don't get me wrong. There are many legitimate environmental issues that we face today - the biggest being pollution. However, excessive taxes and regulations aren't going to make our environmental problems any better, and, even if they did, we'd do so at the expense of our freedoms. Instead, we must find ways of solving our problems without resorting to deprivation of Constitutional liberties. For one thing, we need to respect property rights more than we do now. We need to eliminate the loopholes that allow various corporations and individuals the right to pollute on property that isn't theirs. We also need to attack massive budgets and burdensome regulations that lead to credit expansion and high inflation rates. If we don't attack the problem of monetary inflation, the motivation and innovation needed to discover new and cleaner technological advancements will only be stifled by costly expenses. Believe it or not, I am a great admirer of nature, and I personally believe that everything on this earth has a life, a spirit, and a name. The environment is definitely an important issue for me, but the whole environmental movement has been infiltrated by big government Progressives, activists expressing anti-business sentiment, pinko commies, and self-loathing econazis. I, for one, have a hard time associating with those people.

Unfortunately, those who speak out against the New World Order have politicians, scientists, professors, television personalities, prominent celebrities, and brainwashed simpletons to deal with. When Lord Christopher Monckton tried to speak to anti-globalists at the climate change summit in Copenhagen, many brownshirted activists stormed in to seize property, act in a violent manner, and trash the place entirely. Police have also been taking into custody those who would even dare speak out against global leaders attending the summit. Free speech is dying a horrible death, and we need to do everything we can to utilize what is left of it.

I urge each and everyone of you to protect the environment, but do so without demanding personal or economic liberties to be taken away from us. Speak out against those who would like to see our rights deprived of us for their own personal gain. Expose the globalist agenda for what it truly is, even if it means losing a few friends and colleagues in the process. If we lose our freedoms, we will have ourselves to blame. Don't let it slip away. I know that I have used this quote many times before, but, in the words of Patrick Henry:

"Give me liberty or give me death!"

Fight the establishment with all you've got. Follow your heart, and march to the drums of liberty and freedom. God bless you, my friends, and have a wonderful day.

We're All Abortionists Now

2009-12-09T18:44:00.001-06:00

As if passing a law legalizing the murder of millions of unborn infants wasn't enough for the babykillers, we are now being asked to do our patriotic duty to pay for other peoples' abortions against our will.

I haven't the faintest idea why they call abortionists pro-choicers! Does the baby get a choice? Does anyone related to the baby - besides the carrier - get a choice? If that wasn't enough, not even taxpayers are given the choice on whether their money is going to pay for murder or not. We pay for Iraq, we pay for Afghanistan, and now we're going to pay for the murders of millions of innocent children who are stripped of their right to live in the name of "choice."

For those of you who haven't heard, the Senate defeated the amendment in the health care bill that would have prevented taxpayer funds from going to abortions. Now, we have no choice. I urge each and everyone of you to pray for our country. If this bill doesn't die a horrible, horrible death, then let's hope that another pro-life amendment is passed.

You know, there are so many things confusing me at the moment. Democrats kept saying, "How could you accuse us of wanting to cover abortion in the health care bill? That's sick!" Now their tune has changed.

"A woman has a right to choose, and she shouldn't be stripped of that right just because she can't afford it."

Unfortunately, health care reform supporters are also making excuses for this horrible part of the legislation. As if it wasn't enough that they support a bill that will raise taxes on everyone rich and poor, put hundreds of people out of business, nearly eliminate any kind of competition in the medical market, slow the development of groundbreaking new innovations in medicine, destroy doctor-patient relationships, drive up premiums, increase the rate of inflation, use more money from China to fund it, create frightening death panels, send our deficits skyrocketing through the roof, and contribute to the rapid destruction of the dollar - now we're going to be forced to do the work of Satan himself. Murder, no matter what the fascists in Washington want to call it, is never justified for reasons other than self-defense. We cannot let this stand.

We cannot defend liberty without defending life. There is no reason for us to declare that some lives are more valuable than others in the name of "choice." Liberty begins at life. The seed of disrespect for life at any stage in development is one that grows rapidly once it is planted. Congressman Ron Paul said it best:

Today, we are seeing a piecemeal destruction of individual freedom. And in abortion, the statists have found a most effective method of obliterating freedom: obliterating the individual. Abortion on demand is the ultimate State tyranny; the State simply declares that certain classes of human beings are not persons, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the law. The State protects the "right" of some people to kill others, just as the courts protected the "property rights" of slave masters in their slaves. Moreover, by this method the State achieves a goal common to all totalitarian regimes: it sets us against each other, so that our energies are spent in the struggle between State-created classes, rather than in freeing all individuals from the State. Unlike Nazi Germany, which forcibly sent millions to the gas chambers (as well as forcing abortion and sterilization upon many more), the new regime has enlisted the assistance of millions of people to act as its agents in carrying out a program of mass murder.

It is our God-given duty to protect the lives of everyone rich and poor, black and white, male and female, elderly and youthful. The unborn are no exception.

Life is the greatest liberty of all.

The Leading Cause of Poverty Today? The Abandonment of Freedom!

2009-12-08T11:17:00.008-06:00

We continuously hear over and over again that the leading cause of poverty in America today is a lack of regulations, inadequate taxation, underfunded budgets, "privatized" health care, and the free market system itself. Capitalism is blamed for the over-concentration of power and wealth into hands that belong to the richest of the rich. All of our troubles are claimed to have been caused by the system that brought us more freedom and prosperity than any other nation on earth. My friends, the leading cause of poverty in America today is not capitalism - it is our departure from that system and our inability to preserve the principles upon which our nation was founded.

At the root of the problem is the central banking system that we adopted in 1913 under President Theodore Roosevelt and then advanced further under President Woodrow Wilson. Both of these men were power-hungry globalists whose policies triggered a "need" for an elastic currency. When government bureaucrats propose budgets that are too expensive, taxes that are too high, or regulations that are too burdensome, the Federal Reserve is given the encouragement to expand credit and print money endlessly without a care in the world that the creation of the money itself is entirely artificial. It is created out of thin air.

Before the Federal Reserve, the government had to spend within its means. However, if we continue with a centralized monetary policy, the government will continue to spend and expand without limit. Poverty becomes a very difficult issue to deal with. Politicians, in turn, propose massive taxpayer-funded welfare programs that only drive up inflation, which is not only an increase in the money supply, but also a way of taxing the poor more than any legislative tax could do. When an inflationary policy is endlessly continued in infinite cycles, prices rise, wages go down, and it becomes more expensive for employers to hire people. The dollar is depreciated, and we get less bang for our buck. Poverty programs only make poverty worse.

Never has America been more riddled with useless wars and foreign entanglements than in the past several decades. If it wasn't for the Federal Reserve, the government would not be able to declare wars on other nations without a care in the world what it would do to our national debt and the economic well-being of our citizens. Recently, President Obama confirmed a troop surge of 30,000 men and women into Afghanistan. It's as if he is taking a page right out of the Bush playbook. This was the man who was supposed to be anti-war, the man who everyone thought believed in peace and nonaggression. His supporters continue to make excuses for him, but there is no excuse for sending tens of thousands of troops into a country that should have been left by Americans a long time ago. If you are anti-war, there is no excuse for the actions that were taken by President Obama, so stop making excuses for him. Does anyone else regret that we did not elect Congressman Ron Paul for president?

These wars pose a threat to our security, our economic well-being, and our civil liberties. It gives the totalitarian dictators in Washington the ability to take away our right to privacy and free speech in the name of what they determine is our "national security." When you give up liberty for security, you lose both. The real threat to our security today is the imperialistic power structure that consists of the U.S. government, the corporations preferred by bureaucrats, and the dictatorial Federal Reserve that controls almost every aspect of our economy. We are sinking deeper and deeper into the realms of fascism, and that is not something our Founding Fathers would have been proud of. We must do everything we can to fight for our lives and for our freedoms. We need to return to limited government, low budgets, low taxes, a noninterventionist foreign policy, and sound money.

The cause of all of our troubles, including poverty as we've never seen it before, is the inability to preserve the foundation upon which our great and prosperous nation was founded.

The Philosophy of Liberty

2009-12-01T23:08:00.001-06:00

What Really Caused the Great Depression?

2009-12-01T04:58:00.001-06:00

The Government Can

2009-11-23T16:10:00.003-06:00

Audit the Fed!

2009-11-23T05:02:00.003-06:00

As you may have heard, a House panel has voted to audit the fed. The move, led by Congressman Ron Paul, would give Congress more authority and oversight over actions taken by the Federal Reserve. I'm no economic expert, but H.R. 1207 is one of the most important pieces of legislation ever proposed in Congress.

The Federal Reserve, as everyone should know, is a central banking system that controls our monetary policy. It used to be called a "private" entity, but evidence shows us otherwise. The Fed is a public-private partnership having total control over a monetary policy that the Founders would be ashamed of. We no longer base our currency off of a sound, valid commodity. Our current fiat standard bases our monetary policy on almost nothing. It's a complete illusion.

We are supposed to believe that printing money based on the opinions of a few elitist aristocrats is superior to basing our money supply over something that actually exists. We've never had a full-blown gold standard, but we did have something that was more toward such. Gold, as many people know, generally increases in value over time. The value and supply of gold used to be the basis for how much money we could print. Before the Federal Reserve, there was a natural cap on spending formed by the forces of the free market. The government had to spend within its means. With the Federal Reserve however, the government can spend and expand without limit because the Federal Reserve controls monetary policy by whim. Instead of monetary policy being controlled by sound commodity and the natural forces of the free market, monetary policy is changed based on the decisions of a bureaucratic panel of wealthy bankers. Somehow, this is supposed to be superior to the gold standard.

The endless printing of money causes much damage to our national and global economy. The value of the dollar, unfortunately, is becoming worthless because the Federal Reserve prints money endlessly to fund the government's massive budgets, spending programs, and debts both foreign and domestic. If our monetary policy doesn't change, we will see hyperinflation post-recession, the inevitable destruction of the dollar, and mass poverty worldwide. There will, in effect, be a financial meltdown. We won't ever be able to pay off our debts if we keep spending money that isn't there. Things won't get better if we continue to pump illusionary wealth into the system.

I highly recommend Ron Paul's End the Fed, a book that explains our situation in detail. Since I am very tired, I will leave it here today and perhaps express my emotions on a deeper level in a few days. For now, God bless you, God bless America, and have a fabulous day.

The Necessity of the Men's Movement: Defeating Modern Feminism One Step at a Time

2009-11-15T23:21:00.005-06:00

There was a time when feminism actually stood for something. Women fought for their right to vote, fought for their right to work as a man could, and fought for their right to have their voices heard. They were sick and tired of having all of their concerns ignored as if they were just expendable objects to use for the advancement of the male power structure. Women just couldn't take it anymore. They were going to show the world that they were equals who had just as much potential and deserved just as much freedom as any man did. It didn't matter if society said they were supposed to cook, clean, and simply take care of the children. They knew in their hearts that they had the potential to lead the lives they wanted to lead.

With the help of a select few male voices that supported them, the feminist movement grew into something that benefited women of all ages, colors, and backgrounds. Women gained the right to vote, they gained the right to work as a man could, and they gained the right to have their voices heard. The pioneers of classic feminism paved the way for gender egalitarianism for generations to come. But as time passed, things started to go wrong.

The feminist movement was twisted into something that went against everything that the classic feminists stood for: instead of gender equality, these modern feminists began to fight for gender superiority. Instead of targeting sexism, modern feminists started targeting men themselves. Men were twisted into something evil and wicked. Men who emphasize strict gender codes and stereotypes have also perpetuated the problem. We have grown into a society that thinks women deserve our protection the most, but men and children deserve the same kind of treatment.

I see the effects of this new mentality as I hear stories that break my heart. I've read a few stories of men getting raped or beaten. and I have to tell you that they are some of the most horrible stories that I have ever heard. After calling the police, they were often laughed at or disregarded. There are sometimes comments to these stories. Yes, you do get your sympathetic and compassionate reactions, but there are a lot of people saying, "Men can't be raped," "Men aren't victims," "He deserved it," "A real man wouldn't get raped," "A real man wouldn't get beaten," "He was lying." Often, the only support these men could get were from a counselor or a few male or female friends that cared for them when nobody else would.

After all of these years of women fighting for their rights, something unexpected has happened: Men have now been pinned as aggressors and women as victims. Modern feminists aren't the only ones to blame. Men who emphasize strict gender codes and stereotypes have also perpetuated the problem. When did we get to the point where we started to believe that women deserve our protection more than men and children? As a protector and a nurturer, I feel as if it is my duty to protect all of God's children regardless of their differences. I will defend and protect women, men, children, and the unborn to the death. We all deal with things differently, but we're all human beings with feelings.

Now, where do these modern feminist influences come from? You absolutely need to take a look some quotes for yourself. Click on the link, and you'll be amazed.

I mean, come on. Men are supposed to respect women, but women don't need to respect men? Men aren't allowed to earn a higher salary, but it's okay for courts to have a bias towards women in custodial cases? Forced sex upon a woman is rape, but forced sex upon a man isn't to be taken seriously? A man who abuses a woman is evil, but a woman who abuses a man is nothing to worry about? Most feminists would say, "Of course not," to all of these questions, but their ideology has greatly contributed to these subconscious mentalities. No wonder we need a men's movement.

God bless you, and have a fabulous day.

The Problem With the Welfare State

2009-11-11T04:29:00.005-06:00

Pardon me, but I need to vent my anger about the current culture of entitlements that has been arising in our youth and our adults. It seems that, nowadays, people are asking for more government programs and benefits than ever before. These welfare queens seem to think that, since they are citizens, they should be entitled to free health care, free education, free housing, free energy, free transportation, free TV, free internet, and even free cash. Why have we allowed ourselves to create an atmosphere in which everything we have been taught to work for in the past is now being considered a "basic public necessity?" We need to set our priorities straight or we'll grow into a nation of government-run people.

The government can give you what you think you deserve, but not without stealing from somebody else. Maybe you think it's okay that they take from the "rich" guy to take care of you, but the government is stealing from your pockets as well. It's called redistribution of wealth, and it's a socialist principle that does not work in our society. If anything, it increases the size and role of government at rates unforeseeable by our Founding Fathers. It makes people into slaves and servants rather than individuals and masters of their own lives. When the people become dependent on the government, the government can convince people into believing that it is trustworthy enough to expand in size and power.

You may think that the expansion of government is not such a bad thing. In fact, you may like it because you get more "free" stuff, and you feel more secure with a bureaucratic elite than with the forces of the free market. However, what you get is something worse than you could ever imagine: the government starts telling you what you can and can't do with your own life. Maybe it tells you that you're not allowed to drive a certain car or own a certain gun or marry a certain person. Maybe it tells you that you're not allowed to eat a certain food or set up your own business or sign up with a certain insurance company. Maybe it will even start dictating how much you can earn, how much medical care you can get, and what kind of lifestyle that you're allowed to pursue. It already happens in Canada and Britain.

When you ask the government for more and more "free" services, you're asking for it to grow in size, power, and tyranny. At the rate we're going, we'll no longer be individual citizens with the right to live life the way we see fit. We'll be a truly powerless people, owned and managed by the dictatorial U.S.S.A. Have we learned nothing from the nursery rhymes that we all knew and loved as kids?

Rock-a-bye baby in the tree top

When the wind blows, the cradle will rock

When the branch breaks, the cradle will fall

And down will come baby, cradle and all

You see, my friends, we're the babies being cradled by that branch, which is - you guessed it - the U.S. government. We are becoming increasingly dependent on that branch to live our lives. That branch will grow stronger and stronger, but the wind will grow stronger and stronger as well. No matter how strong that branch gets, the winds of deficit, taxation, warfare, inflation, dollar depreciation, burden, wickedness, totalitarianism, and evil will grow stronger right along with it. Eventually, the wind will grow so strong, that the branch will break, and the system will collapse upon itself. The government will fail its people, and the people won't know what to do because they haven't learned how to take care of themselves. The branch will break, and the people will fall.

It's never too late for preservation or restoration or a Second American Revolution. Thomas Jefferson once said that the blood of patriots and tyrants must once again be shed one day in order to restore the tree of liberty that has been planted in our great and prosperous nation. We need to stop letting ourselves become servants of an all-powerful master that promises to take care of us until death do us part. Instead, we must release our individual strength and tell the government that we serve ourselves and whoever we want to serve. We are the masters of our lives and of the government. They don't own us. They can't tell us what to do. They can't push us around anymore!

We are a strong and courageous people. We will rise again to relinquish the demonic forces that have infiltrated this all-mighty power structure that we call "leadership." We must not let them grow so large that they will bury us all. Protect your right to keep and bear arms. Protect your right to make your own choices regarding your life, liberty, and property. Protect your right to pursue happiness as you see fit. It's your life, and the government can't tell you what to do.

We're not going to take it anymore. Not in America. After all, we know better than to give up our freedoms in the name of some Progressive utopia where an elite group of aristocrats makes the decisions for us. Don't let them ever take away your liberty. It is more precious than any one of us take for granted.

Freedom is a treasure that must always be preserved.

The Health Care Bill: Passed in the House of Representatives

2009-11-08T18:04:00.006-06:00

We all knew this was coming. Even as we frantically tried to call Congress to put a stop to this horrific piece of legislation, we knew in our hearts that it would amount to nothing. Our leaders don't listen, and we've known that for a very long time. One of the worst bills in history is about to become reality. Kiss your freedoms goodbye, America.

Progressives thought about what "free" or subsidized health care would do for millions of those who cannot afford health care. Without considering the economic consequences of such a disastrous idea, the social benefits of such a proposal seemed to outweigh any negatives whatsoever.

No one really took enough time to factor in the Federal Reserve: This team of global elites has been printing money like madmen since the very beginning, resulting in recession after recession. The value of our dollar has been plummeting, and yet, we want to continue with failed Keynesian policies that create nothing but illusionary wealth. Our politicians keep begging for inflation and dollar depreciation in order to fund their massive budgets. Without the Federal Reserve, our politicians would be forced to live within their means instead of spending and expanding without limit. Unfortunately, people now think that big government is the answer to all of our problems, and therefore want to sustain the Federal Reserve so that the government can keep gaining more control.

When this bill is passed in the Senate and signed by our president, many things will happen. Small businesses will inevitably see tax hikes. Prices will go up, wages will be cut, and quality of service will plummet. We'll have to beg China for money again, increasing our debt dramatically. Competition will suffer, and with it, innovation will also suffer. With all of the new regulations on the insurance industry, and the lax oversight of the government option, the government will inevitably have the upper hand. They'll be able to seize their funds by force, whether people like it or not. Since everyone will be required by law to have insurance, those who do not have it will be forced into the government option, sending premiums even further through the roof. There will no longer be an incentive to provide better care. Government-run health care will take control.

Worst of all, money will print at rapid speed, increasing inflation and making our dollar worthless. Everyone invested in our dollar will suffer, leading to mass poverty worldwide. At the mercy of tyrannical governments and wealthy bankers, we will beg to be saved. We will no longer own ourselves.

Enjoy your freedom while it lasts, for it could be worse. At least we're not living in Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union - yet.

The Idiots at FreePress.Net: Part II

2009-11-06T15:26:00.004-06:00

In case you haven't read Part I, please click here to do so. Today, I'm going to continue my analysis of this ridiculous and idiotic organization that thinks it can save the media by destroying the economy in the process.

While media technology has advanced in the 42 years since public broadcasting was created, the need has only grown for noncommercial, not-for-profit media, available free to the public with a mission to inform, educate, inspire and engage.

I want my readers to take a very close look at the language this organization is using. As you can see, it has radically Progressive undertones. It is now evil to make a profit in order to sustain business. When did we get to the point where we started to hold disdain for the very mention of profit? Profits buy the things businesses need to thrive. Without them, you inevitably fail in the marketplace - unless the government steps in to turn your bankruptcy into bureaucracy. These people at FreePress.Net have no clue what kind of impact their actions will have on the economy if they get their way. On top of that, their plan for government-controlled media has a specific agenda; a Progressive agenda, might I say. The information, education, inspiration, and engagement received is far from unbiased: its purpose is to indoctrinate the masses with socialist propaganda in order to manipulate society into succumbing to Progressive ideals. After all, these taxpayer-funded outlets have a "mission," do they not?

Despite their value, public media are under constant threat. They are chronically underfunded and under assault by lawmakers who would silence critical voices and cripple alternatives to the commercial media.

The words in bold are clearly methods of making people believe that massive spending bills, high taxation, and big government is the answer to our problems. If you expand the government's role in the media, won't you just silence critical voices and cripple alternatives even more? After all, that's what the government does and will continue to do. Why give them more power to do so?

The headlines are bleak. Tens of thousands of journalists have lost their jobs in just the past few years. Major dailies throughout the country have been shuttered or gone bankrupt, and it seems only a matter of time before a major American city wakes up without a newspaper on anyone’s doorstep.

Maybe these outlets would be able to thrive if they were allowed to make a profit? Just a thought. I know, sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?

The erosion of American journalism hinders the public’s right to know: Without quality journalism that holds our government and corporate leaders accountable, our democracy suffers. But the state of journalism isn’t natural, inevitable or acceptable.

More Progressive nonsense! First of all, it isn't groups of people who have rights; it is individuals who have rights. To say that the public has a right is like saying that everyone is one in the same, something our Founders regarded as a complete fallacy when they wrote our Constitution. It is the individual who has the right to pursue knowledge by any means possible, but that doesn't mean he or she entitled to free TV, free radio, and free internet. Although that would be nice, the economic consequences are disastrous. We can't afford all of these entitlements anymore, even if taxation was at a one-hundred percent level across the board. Giving people things for free isn't really "free" if you're stealing from someone else. As for the talk of accountability, what these people are saying is that government should interrogate and silence people who do not meet the government's idea of what is acceptable and what is not. All these people want is more bureaucracy. Someone has to tell these people that we are a Constitutional republic, not a democracy.

Our media system was shaped by political and public policy decisions made by Congress and the Federal Communications Commission in Washington. Lawmakers and regulators at these agencies rubber-stamped the bad deals that led to the unchecked consolidation and crushing debt that now threaten the health of our press.

For once, I actually agree with these idiots, but I don't have the same solution in mind. More government is not the answer to our problems if big government was the problem in the first place. That's just common sense.

The search for solutions to the crisis in journalism calls for a national journalism strategy premised on the idea that newsgathering is a public service – not just another commodity.

Do you like socialized journalism the likes of the Soviet Union and China? If so, then you're in for a wonderful surprise. If not, enjoy the ride while it lasts. Thank you, and have a fabulous day! Leave your comments below.

Urgent: Major Advancement in New World Order Agenda

2009-11-02T10:55:00.003-06:00

No comment.

The Idiots at FreePress.Net: Part I

2009-10-30T04:29:00.002-05:00

I never thought I'd actually be calling people idiots for their political beliefs, but the folks at FreePress.Net are absolutely out of their minds. What I read literally made me want to throw up. I don't understand these people in the least. What they're calling for almost seems like a government takeover of the media for the sake of getting it out of the hands of the "greedy" corporations. I want to briefly present some of the idiotic remarks I found on the site - and trust me, they are idiotic - and then explain why their idea of a solution only perpetuates the problem they claim they want to prevent.

Media owners influence how women and people of color are portrayed in the media.

I know this may seem like a small statement the organization is making - and it is true - but it already shows you the scope these people are looking through. Notice that they choose to victimize two groups that are continuously victimized by the government: women and minorities. I am appalled at how women are exposed as objects on television, but this statement leaves out another problem in our media: the portrayal of men and white people. I'm sure there are many sincere, wonderful males out there who compare themselves to the males on television and don't see themselves as "manly" enough for the rest of society, even though it doesn't really matter how masculine or feminine you are. The organization is clearly trying to use "diversity" to push its agenda so that it can use women and minorities as pawns for their own gain.

But these massive conglomerates – like General Electric, Time Warner and News Corp. – only care about the bottom line, not serving the public interest. And allowing these few firms too much control over the flow of news and information is dangerous for our democracy.

Again, notice the language. The agenda seems reasonable on the surface, but if you look at the language closer, you will definitely notice some collectivist and Progressive rhetoric that has been used for years by politicians who are shredding our Constitution without an ounce of shame. The phrase "public interest" is often used to justify collectivist ideas, principles, and policies that define the interests of every individual despite the fact that individuals have a relative viewpoint on what is truly in their best interest.

High-speed Internet access is fast becoming a basic public necessity, just like water or electricity.

This was the idiotic rhetoric I was speaking of. Can anyone explain to me how high-speed internet is just as important as water? I guess if we don't drink enough internet, we'll suffer from dehydration. Uh-oh! Although I am using a high-speed internet connection at this moment, I can honestly tell you that I survived without high-speed internet for years, and I didn't even come close to dying. Really? Yeah, really! I'm serious. Nothing happened to me. In fact, I've even lived without the electricity that these collectivists claim is a "basic public necessity" for long periods of time through some of the most horrible blizzards we've experienced in years (so much for global warming). To claim the internet as a necessity is one thing, but to call it a basic public necessity is even worse. Anyone with half a brain knows that no one "needs" the internet.

We need to keep the Internet free, open and neutral. Network Neutrality is vital to ensuring that everyone can connect and share content freely, that we can access the information, visit the Web sites and say what we want online, free from discrimination or interference.

And that is why, supposedly, putting it in the hands of the government is an even better solution. In fact, the government already partially controls the internet through special interests, the Patriot Act, and the FCC for crying out loud! This solution would just give them more control. If you honestly think that the government is going to be more fair and balanced, you have no idea who controls our government: bureaucrats, special interests, global corporations, and the Federal Reserve. The solution advocated by FreePress.Net would give the government the ability to silence and interrogate opposition, peek in on personal conversations and networking sites, and give the president the executive power to shut down the internet at will. We already have this so-called "network neutrality," but the solutions advocated by this organization, and by members of the Obama administration, would go far beyond that. In fact, Obama's FCC "Diversity" Czar has said that the widely unpopular Fairness Doctrine doesn't go far enough. Although repealed a few years back, elements of the Fairness Doctrine still exist today, and if we let the government have more control over the media, who knows what will happen? Oh, maybe I'm worrying too much. The government already has massive influence over the media. A complete takeover would just be a few steps away.

The way to stop the slide and improve broadband access, service and choice is to pass a comprehensive national broadband plan that is focused on putting our digital future back on track. A national broadband plan would protect Internet freedom and foster competition by bringing new providers into the marketplace, driving economic growth and innovation, and bringing universal, affordable broadband access to all Americans.

In a nutshell, that pretty much means socialized internet. Supposedly, the internet should be "free" for everyone by making all citizens pay into the system, regardless of how often they use the internet or whether or not they use it all. What these idiots don't realize is that setting up a "comprehensive national broadband plan" would require trillions of dollars funded by taxpayers, borrowing, and increased printing of money, leading to hyperinflation, bigger debts, and the very destruction of the U.S. dollar. That's not exactly "free," now is it?

Well that's all I really have time for today. This is just scratching the surface. I know you're in shock, but please leave your comments below. Thank you, God bless you, and have a fabulous day!

Obama's Enemy List

2009-10-27T19:49:00.003-05:00

I read this excellent article by blogger Eddie Howell, the author of Something You Might Like, and I thought I'd share it with everyone:

Obama's Enemy List
by Eddie Howell

President Barack Obama, in a very un-presidential manner, is going about promoting his political agenda in large measure by criticizing, trying to marginalize, and ultimately bring down those whom he perceives to be his political enemies (rather than “opponents”). Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) has cautioned the President that his actions are beginning to look like those of Richard Nixon, who, seemingly in a paranoia mode, made a list of “enemies” he wanted his administration to go after, and some of whom he did actually attack, using the resources of government. This pursuit of “enemies” led to the eventual downfall of his presidency.

“‘An “enemies list” only denigrates the Presidency and the Republic itself,’ Alexander said on the Senate floor. ‘These are unusually difficult times, with plenty of forces encouraging us to disagree. Let’s not start calling people out and compiling an enemies list. Let’s push the street-brawling out of the White House and work together on the truly presidential issues: creating jobs, reducing health care costs, reducing the debt, creating clean energy.’” [1]

Sorry, Senator. You are correct, but you may be too late. The enemies-list operation is in full swing already. Any people or groups of people who have criticized (to any significant effect) some part of the Obama agenda may very well find themselves to be his target, if they aren’t already.

A partial listing of Obama’s “enemies”:

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce – This is yet another example of Obama trying to marginalize and take down a traditionally very influential group. Obama is against any effective lobbying group that tries to benefit the private sector or the American economy. A prosperous people don’t look to government for everything. An impoverished people may.

Fox News – Anita Dunn, David Axelrod and others have been sent out to try to discredit Fox News and even get “mainstream” news outlets to deny that Fox is a legitimate news organization. This will have some effect, perhaps, but Fox News’ ratings are up substantially since this “war on Fox News” broke out.

Rush Limbaugh and conservative talk radio – The administration will probably try some back-door version of the Fairness Doctrine to silence conservative talk radio (and Fox New as well). Mark Lloyd, the “diversity czar” of the FCC has no respect for freedom of speech or freedom of the press. Rush’s ratings are up.

Health insurance companies – Democrats in Congress are currently working to deny health insurers the exemption from anti-trust laws that they currently enjoy. The objective is to strip the states of their power to regulate insurance and at the same time put the insurance companies either out of business or directly under the thumb of the federal government, and further obfuscate the costs of their health care plan.

Big oil – All energy-related industries, as well as consumers, are likely to suffer as a result of cap and trade, if it is enacted. This will punish our entire country by bringing on another depression. States that are already suffering the most will likely be hardest hit, but all will be hurt. Are you ready?

Auto manufacturers – Current CAFE standards and the GM and Chrysler takeovers should be punishment enough, if any were needed (which it isn’t), but Obama is going to tighten CAFE standards further and dictate what kind of cars can be made. Many vehicles currently available will be gone.

Fast food – Federal and some local laws will more strenuously regulate fast food providers as to location, nutritional information disclosure, and allowable menus. This is an area where endless harassment of citizens can and will take place.

Conservatives on the internet – Obama is already pushing for authority to take over private networks on the pretext of “cyber-security” concerns. Proposed “net neutrality” rules will further restrict internet freedom. People have remarked on how the internet has not brought about “Big Brother” controls as some have feared, but we haven’t seen the outcome yet. The technology is there for massive abuse and government control. The FCC “diversity czar” is going after internet conservatives also.

According to Investors’ Business Daily, even though “net neutrality” is advertised as creating more opportunities for internet access, “[t]he issue is not access, but control. In February 2008, FCC diversity czar Mark Lloyd, an admirer of what Hugo Chavez did to silence Venezuela's media, wrote about net neutrality in an article titled ‘Net Neutrality Is A Civil Rights Issue’ and published by CommonDreams.org.

“‘Unfortunately, the powerful cable and telecom industry doesn't value the Internet for its public interest benefits,’ Lloyd wrote. ‘Instead, these companies too often believe that to safeguard their profits, they must control what content you see and how you get it.’ Lloyd feels government should be the voice controlling what you see and hear.” [2]

The Republican Party – The Obama White House is trying to marginalize the Republican Party as a non-factor. The main obstacle to this is the fact that the American people, by a majority, support none of Obama’s main initiatives. Republicans could capitalize on this a lot more than they have been doing. But if they’re afraid of appearing too combative, they will instead appear to have rolled over and capitulated. New candidates will be needed if the GOP is to be revived in 2010, even though most voters want that to happen.

Etc., Etc. – Look for more enemies-list activity in upcoming days. They’re just getting started, and they’ve got to move fast.

Then there are those the Administration and Congress are going after a little less directly, without trying to publicly discredit them specifically. They’re not enemies so much as targets to be dealt with in clearing the way for and financing the Obama program:

Doctors who oppose Obamacare – Doctors are going to find their government reimbursements decreased (to lower “costs”), which will lead to more doctors dropping out of government-reimbursed programs, or out of medical practice entirely. But that’s OK with Obama if he gets his government-dominated program going. However, the attempt to cut reimbursements may well prove politically impossible.

The private sector in general – How many more businesses and industries must be taken over by the government? Apparently many more, will be, not necessarily by ownership, but by numerous new taxes and regulations and zealous enforcement from the growing government sector. Corporate profits are the liberals’ piggy bank, they think. They’ll worry about the economy and jobs (along with Afghanistan) later, time permitting.

The “rich” who aren’t part of his support team – Hollywood liberal elites, professional athletes, union leaders, rich trial lawyers and other liberal donors can hope to fare well in Obama’s fascist crackdowns. Some large companies are said to be cutting deals to try to gain a favorable position. But the rich taxpayers in general are considered ripe for the picking. Obama does not care about unemployment or the bad economy. It’s all about getting his great fascist program in place before the bottom falls out of his popularity.

American Taxpayers in general (investors, professionals and other workers) – These will do well to be able to keep their jobs or the better part of their investments in the Obama-depressed economy that we’ll see if Obama’s big agenda items are enacted. Forget about green jobs. A few thousand of those will do little to help the 15-million-plus who are unemployed, not counting those who have given up looking for work, or have taken part-time jobs.

The Obama Administration is probably the most activist freedom-destroying and takeover-minded (i.e., “progressive”) administration in our history. Woodrow Wilson and FDR might come close, but at least they could point to World War I and the Great Depression and World War II as excuses for their activism. Obama still tries to blame George W. Bush long after it’s too late to do so. This is not the change most people thought we were going to get. Soon only the most hardcore leftists and Obama fans (and some others bought off or severely arm-twisted) will be able to willingly support the Obama program.

Isn't that incredible, people? Eddie is such a good writer. Please visit his blog, and be sure to comment! God bless you, and have a fabulous day!

A Constitutional Lawyer's Analysis of H.R. 3200

2009-10-25T11:32:00.004-05:00

I was looking through some blogs today, and I came across something very interesting. The author of Just Another Conservative Girl posted a critique of H.R. 3200, the health care bill, by Michael Connelly of Carlton, Texas, a retired Constitutional lawyer. I decided to post it on my blog, and I encourage others to do so as well.

The Truth About the Health Care Bills

Well, I have done it! I have read the entire text of proposed House Bill 3200: The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. I studied it with particular emphasis from my area of expertise, constitutional law. I was frankly concerned that parts of the proposed law that were being discussed might be unconstitutional. What I found was far worse than what I had heard or expected.

To begin with, much of what has been said about the law and its implications is in fact true, despite what the Democrats and the media are saying. The law does provide for rationing of health care, particularly where senior citizens and other classes of citizens are involved, free health care for illegal immigrants, free abortion services, and probably forced participation in abortions by members of the medical profession.

The Bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. All decisions about personal health care will ultimately be made by federal bureaucrats and most of them will not be health care professionals. Hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.

However, as scary as all of that it, it just scratches the surface. In fact, I have concluded that this legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.

The first thing to go will be the masterfully crafted balance of power between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of the U.S. Government. The Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is that the Congress doesn’t have any authority to legislate in most of those areas to begin with. I defy anyone to read the text of the U.S. Constitution and find any authority granted to the members of Congress to regulate health care.

This legislation also provides for access by the appointees of the Obama administration of all of your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician, and hospital. All of this is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the [Fourth] Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can also forget about the right to privacy. That will have been legislated into oblivion regardless of what the [Third] and [Fourth] Amendments may provide.

If you decide not to have [health care] insurance or if you have private insurance that is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by Obama there will be a tax imposed on you. It is called a “tax” instead of a fine because of the intent to avoid application of the due process clause of the [Fifth] Amendment. However, that doesn’t work because since there is nothing in the law that allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of the tax, it is definitely depriving someone of property without the “due process of law.

So, there are three of those pesky amendments that the far left hate so much out the original ten in the Bill of Rights that are effectively nullified by this law. It doesn’t stop there though. The [Ninth] Amendment that provides: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people;” The [Tenth] Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under the provisions of this piece of Congressional handiwork neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

I could write many more pages about this legislation, but I think you get the idea. This is not about health care; it is about seizing power and limiting rights. Article [VI] of the Constitution requires the members of both houses of Congress to “be bound by oath or affirmation” to support the Constitution. If I was a member of Congress I would not be able to vote for this legislation or anything like it without feeling I was violating that sacred oath or affirmation. If I voted for it anyway I would hope the American people would hold me accountable.

For those who might doubt the nature of this threat I suggest they consult the source. Here is a link to the Constitution: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

And another to the Bill of Rights: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

There you can see exactly what we are about to have taken from us.

Michael Connelly
Retired [Attorney],
Constitutional Law Instructor
Carrollton, Texas
mrobertc@hotmail.com

Now wasn't that interesting, folks? I sure though it was. Leave your comments below. God bless you, and have a fabulous day.

"The Pay Dictator"

2009-10-24T01:58:00.005-05:00

I was watching the news this morning, and the conversation I witnessed was very interesting. The reporter was interviewing Stephen Moore, one of the authors of a book called The End of Prosperity, which I haven't happened to read yet. They were discussing "Pay Czar" Kenneth Feinberg's decision to cut the salaries of executives at several bailed-out firms. Stephen Moore made sure to correct the reporter on calling Feinberg the pay czar.

"He's not the pay czar. He's the pay dictator."

I couldn't have put it better myself. Now don't get me wrong - I can assure you that these executives were paying themselves more than they deserved, all the while cheating out their employees and shareholders with jack for dough. The salaries the executives paid themselves were over-the-top and outright ridiculous. However, there is a deep message in all of this. Let's take a look at what happened.

These firms, which were on the edge of declaring bankruptcy, were bailed out with taxpayer money. Hooray for government intervention, right? What happens when executive salaries, wages, and the means of production are paid for by your tax dollars is that an alliance forms. Government gets to call more shots in the market, and the giant corporations get to call more shots in the laws. Since the corporations are now dependent upon public funds, the government, who controls those funds, also gets to control the aspects of production that are dependent on those funds. As far as I'm concerned, once an institution is bailed out, it provides an incentive for the government to gain an impressive amount of control over the market, especially since many of these bailed-out institutions are largely responsible for what happens in our economy.

What can the government now control in terms of that bailed-out institution? Almost anything - salaries, wages, prices, methods of production, distributive measures, shareholder payouts, what is produced, how it's produced, when it's produced, where it's produced - pretty much everything. Even if you don't agree with what the methods of production are, you're forced to pay for it anyway through the tax dollars that you rightfully earned. A large part of the market is now controlled not by the people, but by the ruling elite. When an institution is largely free of regulation, the institution has a responsibility to employees, shareholders, and consumers. If these people are not properly satisfied, it hurts business. The institution is then held accountable and must choose to make the proper decisions in order to satisfy the people they are responsible to. If they do not make the proper decisions, they can lose their employees, shareholders, and consumers through the system of natural selection that is the free market. Sales, profits, and overall stability decreases. Since institutions want to avoid this, they are motivated to make the right decisions. That is the magic of the free market.

Let's pretend you're a business owner.

Employees earn their pay by the wages you provide. The lower the profits, the lower the wages. You can't earn a decent profit if you pay yourself too much and don't leave enough for the means of production and the people who are expecting to be paid. If people find out that your wages aren't too great, less people will want to work there. You need workers to do the jobs that you don't have time to do because of your other responsibilities. I won't waste too much time explaining why workers are needed. It's obvious.

Shareholders are invested in your profits, since they themselves own a portion of your business. This means that they are dependent upon your profits. The lower the profits, the lower the payouts. If the payouts are too low, less people will invest in your business, and you might just dissatisfy your shareholders.

Consumers buy your product. They're the main source of your profit. If they buy your product, you bring in money. If they don't buy your product, you don't bring in anything. Thus, you must satisfy them. You also need enough profits to set good prices and make a high-quality product. If the price is bad, and the quality is bad, less people will buy your product, which will give your competitors an advantage.

See how much responsibility you have as a business owner? You dissatisfy people, and they just might take a hike. You get less profits. You don't want this to happen. You are motivated to avoid the worst in order to keep profits, stay ahead of the competition, and thrive. Simple as that.

When the government starts to stick it's nose in everything, however, force can be used to bring in revenue (which isn't profitable if you're spending more money than you take in). Money can be squeezed out of taxpayers whether they like it or not because paying taxes is the law. It's not voluntary. You can be jailed or even threatened for not paying your taxes. Therefore, most people will want to pay them. What you have is coercion. If you spend more money than you take in, which is usually the case with government due to reduced profit motive, then you add on debt. This means higher taxes, more inflation, currency degradation, and more. It's horrible for the economy. We're on the edge of destroying the dollar right now.

Excessive government intervention leads to waste and inefficiency. I mean, look what happened. The health industry was relatively unregulated - and then came the government with price controls, subsidies, regulations, tort reforms, and programs like Medicare. Is it any coincidence that our system got worse as intervention got heavier? Social Security's broke, Amtrak is broke, Medicare is broke, Medicaid is broke, every government program on the book is broke. If the government was a business, they would have failed decades ago!

The worst thing about this whole ordeal is that the pay dictator is letting executives of government-owned corporations keep their massive salaries - think GM and General Electric - in addition to thinking about regulating the salaries of private businesses that aren't even propped up by taxpayer dollars. This means that the big guys are going to literally squish the little ones into tiny little pieces. Oh, President Obama sure loves those small businesses, doesn't he? Unless they have money, that is. Then he stabs them in the back and accuses the millions of small businesses that belong to the Chamber of Commerce of having too much profit.

Since when can one man - the pay dictator - determine executive salaries? I mean, I could understand if Congress was involved. These are taxpayer funds, and Congress is supposed to have control over those funds. But since when can one man say, "Your salaries need to be cut," and be automatically fulfilled of his wish? This is dangerous, people! One man having so much control is not a good thing. Powerful corporations have been given even more ability to call the shots in the very laws we must abide. You'd better believe it.

On top of that, the Federal Reserve, a supposed "private" entity that is supposedly "separate" from the government has been given the power to monitor the activities and actions of other businesses. If you don't think these guys are power-hungry, string-pulling puppeteers whose ultimate goal is one-world government, you've got to be out of your mind. The proof is everywhere, people! This banking elite is the most powerful entity in the world. They must be destroyed.

God help us all.

Much Ado About Nothing

2009-10-21T06:03:00.005-05:00

The opinions I express today are going to be extremely controversial. Neither liberals or conservatives are going to be very happy with me after I say what I'm going to say next. As my ideas are often shaped by my own experiences, I don't expect everybody - or even most people - to agree with me.

Keith Bardwell, a justice of the peace in Louisiana, denied a couple their marriage license based on the fact that it was an interracial relationship. I, for one, think there is too much brouhaha over this story. You're probably thinking, "But, Michelle, he's a racist!" It is my personal belief that Bardwell is not a hateful man, or even a complete and utter racist for that matter.

Bardwell says that he has not denied marriage to people based on their race alone. In fact, he has married numerous black couples. He is friends with people of multiple races, and he has discussed this issue with them. He is opposed to interracial marriage because, from his personal experience as well as the experiences of others, interracial marriages have not lasted long or have had a good impact on children.

Do I agree with him? No, I don't. In fact, I am the product of an interracial relationship, and I am in one myself. So is my sister. So is my brother. So is my aunt. Obviously, I am not opposed to interracial relationships or interracial marriage. However, I was raised and still live in a place where jokes about white girls and their black boyfriends run rampant, a place where jokes about blacks and Native Americans are very, very, very frequent, and a place where people often refer to President Obama's race in many of their jokes. I can honestly tell you that most of these people are not racist.

I mean, everyone's a little bit racist. I'll admit it myself. To a certain extent, I like black jokes. To an even greater extent, I like jokes about my own race. Native Americans have a great sense of humor about themselves. A major portion of their jokes are about Native American culture. Everyone makes judgments based on race. It's in our blood. Does that mean that statements, like, "Black people are the scum of the earth and should be murdered," are acceptable? Hell no! But that doesn't mean we should be policing political correctness and accusing everyone left and right of bigotry for a few racially-fueled jokes.

I realize that this is a different topic. However, I can also tell you that many of the people I am surrounded by are a little uncomfortable with interracial relationships. A black guy with a white girlfriend comes to mind. People often are weary when it comes to these types of things. Couples like that are often joked about or even criticized. To me, it's not right or fair, but those kinds of attitudes don't make a person a complete and utter racist.

I mean, look at the percentage of Americans who either are not sure they agree with interracial relationships or oppose them altogether: 32 percent. Does that mean that 32 percent of Americans are racist? Of course not! In fact, many black people actually share Bardwell's opinion. People need to open up their minds and realize that some people live in a completely different atmosphere with completely different values, especially the elderly who have grown up in a different time and place entirely.

In further defense of Bardwell, let's take a look at what this man has to say:

To me, this man seems nothing but well-intentioned and goodhearted. I am seeing constant hate for him. "What a bigoted racist. He should just die. I hope he burns in Hell." If you ask me, those with open minds should at least be more considerate. You don't have to agree with Bardwell. I sure as hell don't! The point I'm trying to make is that, in America, we can't force people to think like we do.

In the private industry, priests, rabbis, imams, and other issuers of marriage can deny pretty much anyone marriage. As a government worker, however, it is against the law for Bardwell to deny people marriage if they can pay up front. He misunderstood this, and it was a very honest misunderstanding. He thought that the law was that you could not prevent people from getting married. In fact, he offered them his advice and referred them to someone who would marry them. Does that really make him such an awful man? I think not!

Call me a racist, call me a bigot, call me whatever the hell you want, but I don't care. I stand by my statements. Leave your comments below. Thank you, God bless you, and have a fabulous day!

Attack of the Second Stimulus!

2009-10-19T06:05:00.005-05:00

Everyone knows that the first stimulus was a complete and utter failure. Even President Obama himself admitted it. In fact, Vice President Joe Biden took it a step further and said that the administration and Congress underestimated the economic crisis. Although some politicians seem to be in denial, most of America knows that the first stimulus hasn't really done anything. It hasn't even been fully spent yet. Once put into full throttle, the Fed's gonna be printing money like there's no tomorrow. They already are. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has three main principles that he implies openly:

1. Inflation is good.
2. Urgency calls for more spending.
3. Don't worry about deficits.

Of course, he has ulterior motives, and anyone who knows the true agenda of the banking elites knows that economic recovery is not a top priority. Bernanke has extremely flawed principles. Keynesian economics - I'm sorry to say - just doesn't work. Bernanke is a smart guy. He knows the dollar is being obliterated. Unfortunately, that's the goal. It will open the gates for an open-borders North American Union with a continental currency. In fact, it will bring the world that much closer to a one-world government. With the dollar destroyed, mass poverty will ensue worldwide. Do you know how many people are invested in our debt? No one wants to buy our debt anymore because the American dollar is nearly worthless now. You could burn it, and no one would care. With massive budgets and exceedingly flawed monetary policy, this series of events will come quickly, so be prepared.

Some Democrats proposed a second stimulus bill. President Obama, however, says it isn't necessary - and he's right. I want the American citizens to know, though, that this is just a game. We now know why Obama doesn't want a second stimulus bill. It's because a second stimulus is already being spent away in the form of countless "recovery" programs. Republicans will point to Democrats, saying that this is all their fault, but the plans that Republicans have aren't any better, and they have shown that for the past eight years. They want to throw tax refunds at failing corporations! Yeah, it'll give the corporations an unfair advantage over the little guy, but Republicans don't care. It's all in the plan, folks. Washington is just one big party.

Not only is Washington spending away our futures, but they're spending away the futures of the next generation. We're going to see tax hikes, hyperinflation, massive job loss, poverty like we've never seen before, and the complete and utter destruction of the dollar. I know it may sound apocalyptic, but the New World Order is coming. My late grandfather knew about it, my mother knows about it, and I know about it. The truth is being passed down through each generation. Milton Friedman and all of the other great free market economists predicted every single thing that is happening now. If we don't put a stop to this insanity, their startling revelations will be fulfilled.

But there's hope.

There is a revolution brewing in our people. We are going to fight a long and glorious war - not a war of guns and bullets and bombs, but a war of words and ideas and principles. I feel the spirit of the American people, and it is a strong one. We have defeated socialism, communism, fascism, and every other totalitarian system in the book. We can and will defeat the New World Order.

Viva la revolution!

Have a fabulous day. God bless you, and God bless America.

The Matthew Shepard Act: A Paleoconservative Lesbian's Perspective

2009-10-14T08:30:00.006-05:00

The Matthew Shepard Act, a bill recently passed by the Senate, is now awaiting the approval and signature of President Obama. The bill extends federal hate crimes laws to include crimes inflicted on victims due to his or her gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. Its origins lie in a 1998 crime in which Matthew Shepard, a teenage boy, was supposedly tortured and murdered for being gay.

Many people would expect me to support this bill. After all, I am a lesbian. However, I don't support this bill at all. In fact, I vehemently oppose it. Now before you accuse me of suffering from Stockholm syndrome, as Janeane Garofalo would do, please hear me out. As much compassion as I have for Matthew Shepard and his family - as well as for other gays and transgender people killed because of the way they are - I have plenty of reasons for opposing this bill.

First of all, let me say this: I believe in equal protection of all individuals, regardless of immutable differences such as race, gender, nationality, background, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity. What hate crimes legislation seeks to do is enact a form of collectivist thought process - that rights should be given to groups rather than individuals. While this type of legislation seeks to combat discrimination, it does the exact opposite. Giving special rights to one group over another is discrimination by the government. If someone murders another person because they are gay, shouldn't they receive the same sentence as a drug dealer who murders a customer for not getting their drug payments in on time?

Collectivism is the enemy of the individual. By thinking of everybody in terms of groups, you start to give preferences. While our U.S. Constitution gives the individual the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, our government officials want to go the collectivist route instead and victimize those who have been oppressed in the name of "social justice."

I have something to say to those who want to use minorities as pawns for their own political gain: As a Native American lesbian girl, I don't want your pity! While other gays will be tricked into thinking that this is something they should support, I, for one, will not buy into this little scheme. I am much stronger than that. If you don't think I have as much potential as a straight, white male, you're wrong. I am more than my skin color, I am more than my gender, and I am more than my sexual orientation. Those are things I was born with, and I shouldn't be receiving any pity treatment just because I'm a minority. It feels demeaning when I am judged for what is on the outside rather than the content of my character.

You can try to lure me in all you want by saying, "You poor thing. You need special protection under the law." Just know that it won't work! It never will. I am much more than some little chess piece for your stupid political gain. I am an individual, and there is no other person like me on the face of the earth. That goes for the rest of you, too. Don't think that all you are is the person you appear to be. You are much more than that. You may be of a certain race, but that doesn't compromise your entire character. You may be of a certain gender, but you're more than that boy or girl those magazines and television shows make you out to be. You may even suffer from a disorder, but you're more than that. You are an individual, and no one on earth is like you. You have your own separate talents and gifts to offer to the world. Your individual pursuit is the greatest pursuit of all. Don't ever forget that.

The politicians up on the hill are going to try to get people locked up for saying things like, "God hates fags." Honestly, though, I don't need to be babied by Big Mommy Government. Free speech, no matter how stupid or offensive, is a First Amendment right and a personal freedom. I'm sick and tired of hearing all these so-called "hate speech" accusations coming out of people who want to ban speech they simply don't like. If someone calls me a fag, I can just fire back and say, "And I'm not ashamed of it either! Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."

Let people have a right to oppose homosexuality. Not everything people have to say is hateful, and even if it is, that's their right. We have the power as individuals to voice our opinions as well, and we can't let some oppressive power structure take that away from us. Free speech and the pursuit of the individual are the greatest threats to the government there is. We the people need to stand up and protect our rights, preserve our principles, and fight for liberty no matter what sacrifices we have to make. We are Americans, and it is time for us to say, "Give me liberty or give me death!"

Have a fabulous day. God bless you, and God bless America.

Long Time, No See, Folks!

2009-10-13T07:58:00.007-05:00

You're probably wondering where I've been. Let's just say that I've been quite busy and stressed out lately. I'm having some issues with our police and government. It's pretty much why I've become so passionate about politics in the last few months. There has been a lot that has been happening in the world recently, and you're probably wondering what I have to say about it. President Obama has won the Nobel Peace Prize, a decision on Afghanistan is yet to be made, the Supreme Court has refused to take up a case on a student who was harassed for not reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, gay rights activists marched on the hill on Saturday to demand that Obama keep his pledges, the White House is waging a war of words against Fox News, the health care bill inches closer and closer to being passed, and Columbus Day is being phased out. So where do I stand on these important issues? You're about to find out!

President Obama Wins the Nobel Peace Prize

Congratulations, Mr. President! I have to say I'm quite shocked. You really haven't accomplished anything good so far, and I have no idea why they decided to give you such a prestigious award. Perhaps the award has become a sort of punch line, seeing as Jimmy Carter and Al Gore are other winners of this decade. The thing is, even they actually accomplished something. I will spare the hate, and realize that there is still a lot of time left. However, you have shown so far that you can't be trusted.

You went back against everything that you promised in your campaign. We found out that you don't really hate the Patriot Act. You just want to use it to your advantage. You don't really want to cut spending. You want to raise it to fund your own plans for the nation. You don't really want to keep the middle class from getting a tax hike. You want to tax them to death so that you have revenue to fund your health care plan, and even that won't be enough to do so. You're going to have to get the Federal Reserve to print more money, risk hyperinflation post-recession, and destroy the dollar as we know it. You're not really anti-war. Apparently, Afghanistan is a "good war" that must be fought. You don't really hate the lobbyists. One of your number one priorities is appeasing SEIU. You're a shill for lobbyists. You weren't really going to avoid an individual mandate for health care coverage. You want to demand it. You're not really listening to the "other side" of the debate. You're closing the door on it. The list just never ends.

On MarioKartWii.com, I wrote the following:

President Obama will gain my trust if he at least does these things:

1. Attempts to repeal the Patriot Act
2. Ends the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
3. Criticizes the Federal Reserve on tremendous levels, then at least attempts to influence Congress to audit or abolish it
4. Says that we should re-institute a gold standard
5. Frequently criticizes his own administration and his own party
6. Frequently criticizes himself for his past mistakes
7. Attempts to cut taxes for at least the middle class
8. Attempts to cut spending drastically
9. Denounces Chavez, Castro, and other dictators
10. Attempts to minimize, decrease expansion, or lower the expansion rate of the size and scope of government
11. Denounces every Marxist in his life
12. Denounces the last three administrations
13. Attempts to reduce lobbying
14. Embraces the Constitution as America's sacred document
15. Stops apologizing to the world and becomes a proud American who doesn't care what other people think of us

As I monitor the president carefully, and look at this list often, I also encourage my readers to do so. If President Obama fulfills any of these promises, please email me immediately. Near the end of his term, we'll see how he did.

The War in Afghanistan

President Obama can't seem to come to a decision, and I can honestly say this would be a very hard one to make. If I were in his position right now, I'd fear being persecuted for ending the war right on the spot. Just like Obama, I don't have much political experience. However, I can say this: ending the war and focusing on domestic defense is a good idea. I just don't see this happening, as Obama seems to think that Afghanistan is a "good war."

Those on the Left want Obama to keep things the way they are right now, and those on the Right side with military leaders by wanting to send more troops. I, however, disagree with both sides. We don't need any troops in Afghanistan. What we need is for our borders to be secured, increased domestic defense, militarization of space, and an effective missile defense system. Engaging in American imperialism is not something our Founders would be proud of. We're only weakening our national security by provoking violence and hostility abroad. For more on my opinion of this issue, read my blog entry - Afghanistan: The "Good" War? - from a few weeks ago. It explains my positioning and reasoning quite clearly.

Student Harassed for Not Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance

Up until a few weeks ago, I was not aware that some states mandated that students and schools recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Don't get me wrong: I think patriotism is one of the most admirable and necessary qualities that a person should have in this great nation. I love reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. I think it's great that students do. However, when you give the state power to force patriotism on people, you're doing the opposite of what you're intending to do. Patriotism enforced by the establishment is just going to make anti-patriots even angrier. Not only will it make anti-patriots angrier, but it will also make those who love this country angry as well. In what way does that encourage patriotism? It goes beyond that, unfortunately. Coercion by the state is only needed when someone violates another person's right to life, liberty, and property, and when you try to use it otherwise, you're committing an act of aggression. This creates hostility in the population, spreads violence throughout, and makes people much more fearful of the government.

That being said, I should move on to the actual story. Cameron Frazier, a high school student in Florida, was ridiculed, cursed at, and accused of being unpatriotic by his teacher when he refused to stand up for the Pledge of Allegiance. Some people think that's the appropriate thing to do, but I, for one, think otherwise. Frazier points out that it takes more than imitating the crowd and saluting a flag to be patriotic. According to him, patriotism also includes supporting our troops and victims of natural disasters. He thinks the flag is a powerful symbol of our nation's core principles, but the government's recent policies don't reflect those principles. I am in total agreement with him. Any proud American should be.

Honestly, his teacher is a bitch for doing what she did to him. If she did that to me, I'd totally wanna sue her. I mean, who wouldn't? I really can't blame the kid. I feel deep pride in my heart that this student stands up for he believes in, respects the core values of our nation, and stays strong and brave through all of it. This is the kind of role model that we need for America. Someone who speaks out against the establishment regardless of what anyone else thinks and respects old traditions and values that have made this country great.

This kid obviously took the self-initiative to develop himself beyond the confines of government education. My fellow conservatives should be voicing out on this issue. If they think our educational system is flawed, admire patriotism in our youth, and really stand for the core principles of our nation, why aren't they expressing their outrage? Seriously, it makes me angry that they would rather continue to ramble on about some birth certificate than help distinguish the difference between enforced patriotism and real patriotism. They should be expressing their pride in this kid!

Liberals, where are you? Say something!

Gay Rights Advocates Pressure Obama to Keep to His Promises

On Saturday, in case you haven't heard, some super-duper gay rights activists headed up to Washington on pink ponies and multi-colored rainbows to demand that President Obama keep the pledges he made to the gay community during his campaign. As many of you know, I'm a lesbian myself, and I do fully support the rights of the LGBT community. Although I'm not a bleeding-hard liberal who will expose every inch of her body at each opportunity she gets - or a promiscuous girl who thinks sleeping around is the perfect way to live - I would also like Obama to keep to his word on this. However, it's not on my top priorities list.

We have more urgent issues at hand, and we need to focus on those more than we need to focus on things like gay marriage. The solution I have in mind is making everything a civil union under law and leaving individual churches to decide on the issue of marriage. I believe that a church has a right to deny anyone marriage and speak out against homosexuality. When I marry my sweetheart, I'll just go to a church that is willing to hitch the two of us. This process of allowing any kind of marriage whatsoever - gay, straight, monogamous, or polygamous - is a long and tiring path. I realize that my views are a bit radical and not representative of the mainstream. As I don't see this solution being implemented anytime soon, gay marriage is not on my top priorities list.

However, Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a policy that needs to be dealt with as soon as possible. President Obama said he would address this, but he hasn't really said or done anything about it so far. Gays have every right to serve in the military. If someone wants to risk their life for the country that they love, who are we to tell them that they can't just because they're gay? I can see how homosexual activity can be disruptive in the military, but so can heterosexual activity. Who are we restrict rights to anyone on the basis of their sexual orientation? That's discrimination. DADT is a flawed policy that needs to be dealt with.

The White House vs. Fox News

I have a few things to say, and I will sum it up quickly.

1. FOX News is biased, but...
2. They will cover crucial stories that other networks won't.
3. With two wars going on in Iraq and Afghanistan, a news station is not the enemy.
4. The White House is openly watching Glenn Beck now. I hope he gets it through their heads.
5. Anti-FOX News stories are a great way for the MSM to bring in more viewers. Clever idea.

Health Care

With a vast majority of Democrats in Congress, something tells me that H.R. 3200 has the potential to be passed soon, and those of us who oppose the bill - not those who would rather see no reform whatsoever - should continue to fight against it. On MarioKartWii.com, I wrote the following:

Here is how we will pay for H.R. 3200:

1) Request that the Fed print more money
2) Raise taxes not only on the rich, but also the middle class
3) Increase inflation
4) Spend debt
5) Devalue and eventually destroy the dollar

If we continue to tax and spend like a bunch of crazy lunatics, inevitable consequences will ensue, and we'll all regret it. We can't trust the government with Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and many other programs that have sent this country into a downward spiral. How can we trust them with HR 3200? More people are denied under Medicare than private insurers! In this country, it has led to rationing. We may get short-term social benefits, but we will ultimately see a rise in poverty.

As you can see, the price of H.R. 3200 is not a price worth paying. Its economic effects will greatly outweigh the social benefits it seeks to provide. I've written about this subject several times before, and you can check under the archives for my entries.

Columbus Day

Although Christopher Columbus was a murderer who slaughtered several of my Native American ancestors, I respect that some people think that he should be revered through a national holiday. Evidently, a Native American group is protesting this holiday. I can't blame them, really, for feeling resentment towards this man for what he did. I know I do. However, when they start accusing people of being racist bigots and trying to ruin everything for them, that's where I draw the line. To some people, criticizing members of your own race represents self-hatred, but I don't hate myself. They're people just like everybody else. I don't know how important Columbus Day is to everyone, but calling it "Fall Day" or "Native American Day" is a bit over the top. Can't we just have another day reserved for Native Americans? How about a holiday reserved for white people? That would be nice.

Well, folks, it's time to wrap things up. I hope this much-needed update satisfied any curiosities you may have had about my opinions on current events. With that, I bid you farewell.

Have a fabulous day. God bless you, and God bless America!

A Growing Disdain for Capitalism

2009-10-03T09:40:00.013-05:00

I want my country back!

It seems as if a growing number of youth are outwardly embracing socialism and crediting capitalism as nothing but an evil system that exploits workers and ignores what Progressives like to call "the common good." With the release of Michael Moore's new movie - Capitalism: A Love Story - I believe that anti-capitalist sentiments will increasingly infest our culture. I have yet to watch the film, but I should in order to gain an understanding of where Michael Moore is coming from. It seems to me as if he cites corporate fraud and deceitful bankers as reasons for anti-capitalist sentiments. However, fraud, theft, and corporatism are anything but capitalist. It's mild fascism.

Progressives think of corporate welfare, corporate preference, fraud, theft, bailouts, and other corporatist policies and behaviors as purely capitalist principles. This, however, is a fallacy. In a capitalist system, corporations and banks are left to fail and succeed in a system of natural selection. In a corporatist system, however, financial aid is given to corporations and banks through taxpayer-funded subsidies. Taking money from one group and giving it to another is anything but a capitalist principle. Redistribution of wealth is, more than often, a socialist principle.

In a capitalist economic system, the market primarily regulates itself, giving individuals and businesses private property rights and private ownership over the means of production. When the government intervenes in large ways, however, we start to stray from the principles of laissez-faire economics. When we implement things like the minimum wage, corporate welfare, federal welfare, social programs like Medicare and Social Security, and subsidies, we are no doubt paving the way for what some Progressives call "a little socialism." A little socialism may not seem like a bad thing, but once we realize that we still have problems, some people like to say, "Well a little more socialism wouldn't hurt." We head into a slippery slope of more and more socialism.

Socialism creates a system of dependency that leads to feelings of individual entitlement that are not earned through work or labor. When an individual is free to pursue his or her own self-interest without a governing power providing for his or her every need, he or she has the motivation to work and produce. When a governing power, however, starts to provide for citizens instead of having them earn it through work or labor, it begins to create feelings of entitlement that lead to citizens asking for more and more and more and more. The only way the government can provide for its citizens without setting up a voluntary tax system is by forcing people to give to others. The reason for giving no longer becomes human kindness and generosity, but rather coercion.

The problem with government providing charity is that the method of collection is force. Unfortunately, the money often does not get to the people who need it most. Two thirds of taxes allocated for federal welfare do not get to its appropriate place, but instead the government, who spends it on other things. On top of that, it often goes to people who refuse to work, but could actually do so. Private charity, however, uses two thirds of its collections - on average - for the people who truly need it. In the history of our nation, private charity has proven to be a better means of helping the poor and needy than federal welfare. Unfortunately, our national charitable contributions are only a third of what they used to be. It is because federal welfare stifles the work of private charities by setting up a competitive system that cannot truly be competed against. Federal welfare has a significant competitive advantage in that its money always gets there by force, whether it goes to those who need it or is spent on other things instead. Private charities, however, depend on human kindness and generosity. People are more hostile and less generous than ever before because the government forces households to give anywhere from 40%-70% of their income.

Socialism claims to be a better means of promoting "social justice" and ensuring workers' rights and well-being. For example, socialists often advocate a higher minimum wage in order to pave the way for higher household incomes. However, it is often not taken into consideration that businesses will have to pay more for production and labor, which ultimately results in higher prices. Higher prices mean that people have to pay more for their goods. Businesses suffer lower profits, and they must often raise prices and lay off workers in order to stay stable in the market. The price is passed onto the consumer, and workers are the largest consumers of all. If it hurts consumers, it hurts workers. The more businesses have to pay for production and labor, the less people they can hire. This stifles job growth and opportunities, not only because it provides less jobs, but because it also takes jobs away from the poor, the young, the elderly, and the disabled.

When businesses can hire only so many workers, they must hire the most qualified and the most skilled people in order to be efficient and productive in the market. The poor and the young often do not meet either the educational requirements or the necessary skill requirements to be hired for the job when a minimum wage is implemented. The elderly and the disabled often do not have the physical capabilities for the job, unless, of course, it is a job that relies on other talents that do not require certain physical capabilities of people. If businesses could dole out a wage lower than the current minimum standard, they would be able to provide more jobs to less qualified people. However, the minimum wage stifles their ability to do so.

On top of all that, the minimum wage has lead to increased outsourcing and layoffs. With less money to pay for production, businesses often have to turn to workers in other countries in order to produce cheaper goods and pay less for labor. This needs to be done in order to be efficient and productive in the market. Socialism collapses in on itself.

Free market capitalism is a better means of sparking innovation. When one is free to pursue his or her self-interests, and one is free to compete with others in the market, the result is, more than often, innovation. For example, if a business owner who sells tools notices that a competing tool business is attracting an increasing amount of customers, he will ponder upon why this is happening. This competing business would be taking away potential customers, so he would naturally want to find out how to best his competitor. He would want to create better tools at a higher quality and higher value in relations with costs. This, my friends, is the magic of the free market. What has resulted is innovation, and innovation leads to more consumers, more investment, more profits, new inventions, improvements that result in more efficiency and quality, and an overall boost for the economy.

With socialism, however, working is encouraged as a means of providing primarily for the common good. When one is forced to work beyond self-interest and is forced to share the fruits of his or her labor with those he or she does not choose to share it with, he or she is less motivated to work. Selfishness is human nature. Milton Friedman, the late, great free market economist - whose unfortunate predictions for our generation have been fulfilled - puts it better than I do.

There are so many other aspects of capitalism and socialism that would take much of my time to discuss. In order to leave you with as much information as possible without overdoing myself, I would like to share with you some incredible animated short films that discuss the core principles of laissez-faire economics in a very simple manner. These cartoons touch me on deep emotional levels, combining both of my passions, cartoons and politics, into one amazing package. The best short film is going to be the last one, so stay tuned.

The first short film I would like to share with you is a brief, excellent explanation of competition and innovation in relation to free market economics, primarily focused on profit motive.

If you liked that one, prepare for a more detailed explanation of free market economics that is still extremely comprehensible. This next short film takes my breath away.

Isn't that wonderful? It really made my day to watch these. They make me so cheerful and warm. I love my country so dearly, and the principles of free market economics touch me emotionally. I have always been a conservative at heart, even when I started to think I was a liberal in my early adolescence. Even with all of the complicated arguments I have seen in defense of capitalism, these classic animated short films make the most astounding case for a free market system.

The next short film you are about to see relates to wages and prices in relation with productivity. It pretty much outlines what I discussed here, but in a cute, fun, simple way. I hope you enjoy it.

I know that cartoon was probably a lot more controversial. Most people, even conservatives, advocate some sort of minimum wage in one way or another. The cartoon I just showed, however, made a great case against it. In my opinion, they did it in the best way possible. I love it, love it, love it!

The next cartoon I'm going to share with you attempts to explain the basics of the stock market, something which I've been trying to understand for a very long time. This short film really helped me learn a lot about it, and I hope you do, too.

I know there are some socialists, nationalists, and liberals who read my blog, and they are probably feeling sick to their stomachs, but I can assure you that I do not mean to offend. I simply would like to share my viewpoints with my readers and share something that I enjoy with them. I love it when I am free to choose who I can share with, instead of being forced to share. It feels so much better, and I feel so much warmer inside.

The last cartoon is my absolute favorite out of all the ones I have shown today. It left a lasting impression on me, even sending me to tears with its powerful message of liberty and patriotism. Our Founding Fathers would be proud that there are still values like this in America. I hope it touches at least a few people. I know it made me warm. Without further ado, I present to you the 1948 classic - Make Mine Freedom:

What an incredible masterpiece. It will always be in my heart. A special thanks to Industrial Com for posting these wonderful short films on YouTube.

Viva la revolution!

Have a fabulous day. God bless you, and God bless America.

Government Education: Taking Away Your Kids with Smiley-Faced Fascism!

2009-10-01T00:56:00.007-05:00

What the hell happened, America? There used to be a time when both mother and father would pay attention to their children, a time when family was an important cornerstone of everyday life. Family, country, and God always came first, even if sacrifices had to be made. People were hardworking and took responsibility for their actions. They relied on strong morals that guided them to be kind to one other, to accept personal responsibility, and to always respect others. People had manners, people had faith, and people were almost always fundamentally good. People were generous and peaceful. People were loving and caring.

With the rising popularity of the Progressive movement, however, that all started to change. Family started to crumble as an institution when careers were put over loved ones. When people were coerced into giving, generosity and human kindness no longer became the main reasons to give, and those things started to fade away as decades passed. Secularism spread rapidly as leaders denounced religion, faith, and God as unnecessary and unreasonable. Patriotism began to be regarded as nothing but foolish pride rooted in bigotry and hatred. Believing in personal responsibility, self-virtue, and hard work began to be represented as cold and cruel. Staying at home to spend time with children began to be dismissed as socially unacceptable and backward.

Instead of communicating with their children, providing them with care, and making sure that time was spent in order to instill strong moral values, parents simply gave their kid a computer, a television, and a video game system to occupy them with as they went off and either worked, shopped, went out, or did who knows what with whom. Marriage began to be regarded as not a sacred institution that created a virtuous structure, but rather a legal benefits system which would financially support people. People began to manipulate the system, often divorcing their partner in order to take money that wasn't theirs, depriving children of one parent or another, or simply as a means of revenge rather than a personal necessity to be used only when the marriage had no way of being rekindled.

And now President Obama wants to take away your children completely. Take a look at this:

What you have just seen and heard is real. President Obama wants to eliminate summer vacation and keep you away from your kids for a longer amount of time by forcing schools to extend the school day. Damn straight that isn't going to be a popular idea, and for the right reasons! In this day in age, what kids need is more time with their parents, but instead, we're furthering the problem by adding on to it. Does it make any sense that politicians seem to think that destroying the very foundations of our society is the only means of advancing it? In fact, that is the very idea behind the Progressive movement, no matter what anyone tries to tell you.

I surely hope that President Obama doesn't get his way. I hope people wake up and stand up for themselves. I hope that if he does get away with this, parents take the initiative to pull their children out of school and either home school them or send them to a private institution that will allow for more time to spend with parents. I know damn well that America isn't stupid, and so do the rest of you.

Unfortunately, another problem arises. Public schools are now indoctrinating students with socialist propaganda. No wonder President Obama wants shorter summers and longer school days! He knows that these actions will further the totalitarian New World Order agenda. Are we really going to stand for this?

Some people say I have a way with blowing things way out of proportion, but you just wait and see what happens with this country! We're destroying ourselves from the inside, and we will be the ones to blame for the obliteration of our Republic. Look what the schools are doing to our children:

I feel so sorry for the kids who are being deceived and lied to by our leaders and teachers. I look into the eyes of that adorable little Muslim girl, and I see innocence and youth. It pains me that she is unaware of the things that are happening around her in this country. We are a far cry from being free at last. Our freedoms are being taken away, our property is being stripped from us, and the imperialistic American empire is gaining control over our lives and our minds.

These kids seem so kind and gentle. It breaks my heart to see them manipulated this way. I remember the magic of childhood, but I don't remember any of this. I feel like my spirit is being crushed as I watch our nation fall under the trance of a great and powerful dictatorship.

This made me cry:

With the indoctrination of our youth and the crumbling of our nation, horrible things are happening all over America and the rest of the world. Endless wars are being waged, family is no longer considered sacred, values are being thrown right out the window, and people are needlessly dying due to the loose moral structure our society has succumbed to. If you need proof of this, you only need to look around you. Observe what is happening. America used to be a very different place. It was rare for this type of thing to happen:

This event sends tears to my eyes. What has our society come to? This isn't the America that former generations grew up with. It's a new and scary America that doesn't at all reflect the principles of our Founding Fathers. Not a single witness intervened to help this poor, defenseless honor student. The kids just stood there, laughing and unaffected. There were a few people fleeing the scene, but no one was crying or screaming or showing any kind of sorrow whatsoever. This is despicable, people!

I was talking to my mother the other day, and she discussed how her late father predicted everything that is happening now. He predicted that socialism would infest our culture, that our government would become more and more corrupt with each passing year, that we would run into an inevitable economic recession, that our children would be indoctrinated in our schools, that our system would work off inflationary deficit spending rather than sound economic policy, and that a charismatic and influential leader would rise to power and make Marxist ideology look wonderful to the masses.

Only we can make sure that our youth are prevented from falling into these socialist traps. Parents, teachers, priests, leaders, adults: We need to stand up and protect those that are too defenseless to help themselves. We can't let this happen any longer. Let us shout from our heart and let the spirit of God guide us into making our country the place it used to be once again. It's time for us to take back America.

Viva la revolution!

Have a fabulous day. God bless you, and God bless America.

Afghanistan: The "Good" War?

2009-09-30T08:48:00.007-05:00

I'm not entirely sure how popular this is going to make me amongst both Obama supporters and conservatives, but I do not in any way endorse our pursuit of offensive military interventionism in Afghanistan. We've weakened our national security by provoking hostility and violence in people that are inherently evil. The more troops we send, the larger the backlash against us. On top of that, we are getting other countries involved in our mess. We continue to spend billions of dollars on overseas warfare when we have so many domestic issues to deal with on our own land. I believe in a strong military and a strong national defense, but I seek a primarily noninterventionist foreign policy with the exception of diplomacy and measures against direct threats and attacks.

Instead of securing our borders, implementing a tighter immigration policy, creating a strong missile defense system, increasing domestic defense funding, and militarizing space, we are spending far too much money that is provided by taxpayers, money that is printed by the Federal Reserve, or money that isn't there on overseas ventures. This is increasing our debt in addition to weakening our national security. The backlash against us becomes stronger and stronger each day. We freed the Iraqis from an evil dictator, yet thousands of our troops died, our spending was out of control, and we've brought ourselves into an economic disaster. Of course, there were so many other contributing factors to our crisis: the bad government-mandated banking loans, the inflationary deficit spending by the government and Federal Reserve system, the overtaxation, the wildly socialist spending bills, and the continued printing of money that is devaluing our dollar and will eventually lead to a currency crash. We're increasing all of these things along with our expansion of war in Afghanistan.

Politicians will assure you that their overseas affairs are for a good purpose. The unfortunate thing is that people believe them. The difference between a warmonger and a proponent of a strong national defense is that warmongers pursue war even if the goal isn't for peace or defense. They might fight for oil, money, power, indoctrination, political reasons, or anything else that they attempt to hide behind the backs of their citizens. Proponents of a strong national defense believe that we should keep ourselves protected for security without giving up essential liberties and that we should only use offensive measures when we are attacked or when there is an imminent threat to our national security.

President Obama calls Afghanistan a "good" war. What reason does he have to justify this? He uses "security" and "peacekeeping" as the basis for his position, but we all know that Obama is a pathological liar. He completely turned around on repealing the Patriot Act, he went against his supposed anti-war principles, he raised spending to higher levels than Bush did, his "no new taxes" claim is an obvious myth, he wants to continue with warantless wiretaps and searches, he wants to mandate that people buy health coverage even though he went against it in his campaign, his policies are hurting the poor rather than helping them, he is stifling the individual achievement that he preaches about, and his broken promises keep piling up on each other.

How can we trust a pathological liar to fight a "good" and "just" war? We can't! This is classic Chicago politics, and President Obama is a product of a crooked and criminal system of government.

Congressman Ron Paul used this analogy to describe our situation in Afghanistan: If China was building bases over here, our backlash would grow as their troops expanded. Many of us would become hostile, there would be people shooting at each other, and the extremists that live on our soil would want to invade or attack China. It's like pouring salt on a wound. One of Ron Paul's greatest speeches is artistically glorified in this stunning video:

I apologize, but I just can't top that. By and far, that is the greatest speech Ron Paul has ever given. I know it makes me less popular among mainstream conservatives to support this oddball Republican, but his words, actions, and principles reflect that of the Founding Fathers, who would be outraged if they found out what was happening today. They wouldn't support American imperialism. They would vehemently oppose it, considering the powerful monarchic structure that they sought independence and freedom from.

Our politicians keep lying to us, yet we support the very same wars in hopes that things will somehow be different and that we will be fighting for the cause of liberty and security rather than greed, reputation, and imperialism. Our courageous troops are strong in their convictions, yet the government is stabbing them right in the back. Former President Bush and President Obama do not truly support the troops. They betrayed the cause, and they betrayed America.

After sending thousands upon thousands of troops into Afghanistan, Obama has actually delayed the recent surge. However, the worst is yet to come. He may pull a few troops out of Iraq and delay the Afghanistan surge in order to deceive the people in the anti-war movement as well as noninterventionists, but his goals are to expand military force in order to gain power, money, reputation, oil, and control. This man is a dangerous warmonger. Warmongers weaken our national defense by provoking hostility and violence within our enemies.

On top of everything, Obama is giving comfort and financial aid to those who would rather do harm to us, and the Founding Fathers concluded that to be unconstitutional. Therefore, Obama is, again, violating Constitutional law, which is perfect ground for impeachment. We could have done it to Bush, but we didn't. We can't let Obama get away with what Bush did, considering the fact that Obama is only expanding the agenda of a corrupt administration.

How can we allow this corruption to prosper so greatly in a country that was founded on the principles of freedom, morality, equal protection, and accountibility? We can't let Obama expand the executive powers farther than Bush did, for if we let this happen, there is no turning back. It is great that - in our country - the government is Constitutionally accountable to its citizens, and we must take advantage of that great power that the Founding Fathers gave to us. We must elect representatives that reflect true American principles, we must seek to hold accountable those who violate our precious U.S. Constitution, and we must stand up for the rights that were endowed by our Creator from the very beginning.

Speak out in whatever way you can, for only we can truly change our destiny for the better. Let's return to true American principles that have stayed in the minds of hearts of countless generations. It's time to take back America.

Viva la revolution!

Have a fabulous day. God bless you, and God bless America.

The Indoctrination of a Young Generation

2009-09-25T01:23:00.010-05:00

Oh, dear God! Yesterday, I showed a scary worksheet that students had to finish, but today is even scarier. Let's roll the clip, shall we?

Song One:

Mm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama!

He said that all must lend a hand
To make this country strong again

Mm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama!

He said we must be fair today
Equal work means equal pay

Mm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama!

He said that we must take a stand
To make sure everyone gets a chance

Mm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama!

He said red, yellow, black or white
All are equal in his sight

Mm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama!

Yes!

Mm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama!

Song Two:

Hello, Mr. President! We honor you today!
For all your great accomplishments, we all doth say, "Hooray!"

Hello, Mr. President! You're number one!
The first black president to lead this great nation!

Hello, Mr. President! We honor your great plans
To make this country's economy number one again!

Hooray, Mr. President! We're really proud of you!
And we stand for all Americans under the great red, white, and blue!

So continue, Mr. President! We know you'll do the trick
So here's a hearty hip-hooray ...

Hip, hip, hooray!
Hip, hip, hooray!
Hip hip, hooray!

I'm sorry, but the teacher that forced these kids to praise President Obama through song should receive a long lecture and some kind of punishment by the principal. This, for one, cannot stand. How dare a school push its own political agenda on its students? That's preposterous! We don't live in Imperial Japan or Nazi Germany. This is the United States of America, and we're supposed to be letting kids believe what they want to about President Obama. We need to be executing a balanced educational curriculum, not an agenda of political indoctrination.These schools are funded by your tax dollars, people!

Never in my lifetime have I seen a president so scarily worshipped by people across the country. Is he Jesus or something? People kiss the very ground he walks upon. He's taking away our freedoms, sending our children to Afghanistan, and pushing for both mandatory community and military service. On top of that, people are being locked up based on mere suspicion and free speech. Why are we letting this happen?

Have we lost all sanity, people? We need to be aware of these types of things. President Obama is a greedy, power-hungry dictator just like the last president, yet people just ignore it. Those who heavily criticized the Bush administration for the Patriot Act - and rightfully so - are now staying silent. Those who protested the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are now pretending that President Obama isn't expanding violence abroad. Obama is simply a black Bush, but no one cares because he calls himself a liberal.

Unfortunately, this isn't the sole example of explicit political indoctrination in our schools and in our children. Just look at these kids:

Ever heard of a little thing called brainwashing? That's exactly what you just saw. It makes me so sad that these kids don't even know what they're singing about. How did we get to this point? I had my doubts about President Obama being a beloved dictator, but now some of the very things that happened during totalitarian regimes are happening now. This isn't Nazi Germany yet. It's far from that, my friends. Unfortunately, we're beginning to see elements of it show up right in front of our faces. We have to stand up and put a stop to these things before it becomes too late.

Oh, there's more clips, my friends. The proof is everywhere. If you thought those last two videos were creepy, you haven't seen anything yet. Take a look at this clip:

Call me paranoid, but a youth brigade praising Obama as if he is the Messiah? That's absolutely terrifying. The people indoctrinating their children seem like geniunely good people, but they know exactly what they're doing.

I don't want my children to be indoctrinated like this. If it was a Republican president that were being worshipped like this, I would be just as terrified. In fact, this just might happen in the future, so I might have to inform my readers of a little thing called neoconservative indoctrination. It's possible, people.

Other forms of indoctrination include kids placing their hearts on their chests and facing toward Obama instead of the American flag; numerous choruses about how great he is; worksheets and curriculums that enforce the administration's political agenda; and kids chanting, "I pledge allegiance to the Earth," instead of, "I pledge allegiance to the flag." The list could go on and on.

Folks, it doesn't stop there. All over the world, kids are being taught to worship the leader of the free world. I may sound like an extremist lunatic, but this is just plain scary:

Just when I began to wonder if this madness would stop, I was proven wrong. I expect more of this to come, and I'm going to continue to inform people of these outrageous situations. There are already schools and roads and buildings named after President Obama. You see his face everywhere! His voice can be heard all over the airwaves. His "teachings" are being put forth to students everywhere.

I want to believe that none of this is happening, but the truth is right in front of us. If we don't take action now, even we will be indoctrinated. These people who are brainwashing our kids are goodhearted people, but they know exactly what they are doing. They know that they are shoving their political agenda down young throats in order to establish a generation that will believe and promote the very same things they are. This brainwashing doesn't just affect our children. It affects us, too. This is by and far one of the creepiest videos I've ever seen in my life:

I'm sorry, but this resembles dictatorial propaganda. This wasn't just shown on television and YouTube. No, no, no. It was also presented to school children. Do you get what I'm trying to say now? If you don't think any of this is creepy, you must be completely and utterly brainwashed. Our president is supposed to serve us, but instead we're being told to serve him. I don't know about you, but I serve no one but me, my partner, my family, my country, and my God. I don't serve any political idol.

What you have just seen, heard, and read is real. I urge you to stop denying it to yourself. I had to. This is just so much to absorb. It's difficult to believe that something like this is happening in our very own country. Our Founding Fathers are rolling around in their graves. Please take the chance to tell everyone you know about this mass indoctrination of our youth and our country. Do it now. Talk to your friends, your families, and your partners. We need to take back America before it's too late.

Viva la revolution!

Hooray for Liberal Health Care Propaganda!

2009-09-24T02:09:00.006-05:00

Try not to get too worked up about this folks, but I recently stumbled upon this worksheet as I was surfing the internet:

If you need to, click on the image to get a closer look. I am in so much shock, that I haven't a word to say. I'm going to leave it up to the readers. Leave your comments below.

Extending the Patriot Act: It's Not Just a Bush Thing Anymore

2009-09-22T23:20:00.010-05:00

People are angry with the Obama administration for one of the many reasons they were angry with the Bush administration. Apparently, President Obama changed his mind about the Patriot Act, one of the most unconstitutional violations of civil liberties ever to be conceived - and he wants to extend it. So what exactly does the Patriot Act do? Let's review:

1) Terrorism laws include "domestic terrorists," which in the case of the government, might include protesters and organizations that do not fit within the administration's ideology.

2) Law enforcement is given more power to conduct secret searches, including warantless wiretaps and access to medical, business, library, and phone records. Basically, your right to privacy is completely stripped if the government, police, or other body of law enforcement says it is, even if you have not been proven guilty or evident of committing crimes.

3) The FBI can investigate people without any valid reason whatsoever. If it's for "intelligence purposes," you're forced to cooperate against your will.

>4) Non-citizens can be jailed upon mere suspicion, without being proven guilty of any crime. They can be held in six-month increments, and may even be deported and denied re-admission to the United States for engaging in free speech.

There is no way that these policies can be sustained under our Constitution without violating it, which is done anyway. So how does the government justify it? One word:

Security.

Tell me how this is not scary. It's sickening how the government uses "security" to justify its pursuit of power. This is all it's about, folks: power. The Patriot Act is supported by both Democrats and Republicans, despite the public outrage that has stemmed from it. Sure it takes away necessary freedoms in the name of security, but hey, it's "protecting the people." Instead of ceasing all warfare to reduce hostility and violence abroad, let's just throw the Constitution right out the window and pretend that we still care about our Founding principles.

The American people aren't that stupid, are they?

Liberty is at the heart of our very existence. If we throw it away, what do we get? Well, folks, we get an ever-expanding government that will just keep taking away our freedoms until they own our bodies, property, and lives. Without freedom, the people will be powerless and ultimately unhappy. Without our happiness and our livelihood, we won't have anything. Our society will crumble before our very eyes. It will become unproductive and stricken with poverty, and we will only have a global elite to help us get out of it.

People need space. People need to be left alone. People need air to breathe, they need to be content within the safety of their homes, and they need the freedom to do the things that make them happy without harming anyone else. Is it so much to ask the power-hungry leaders of the world to get off our backs and let us be? Must we resort to becoming slaves of a powerful force of greed and totalitarianism that wants nothing but the complete and utter destruction of our Founding principles?

You lied, President Obama. This isn't the change that we sought. We thought you'd be different, but we were wrong. Not only did you betray the very people that supported you, but you betrayed the rest of America as well.

Freedom is a precious gift. When we are free, we can prosper and live the way that we want to. I know damn well that I'm much more productive, much friendlier, and much, much, much happier when I'm given space to do as I please. I know that sounds selfish, but I thrive on my personal happiness and the love that I share with my family and with my wonderful girlfriend. Without that, I'd have nothing. I am grateful everyday that I get to keep those things, and so should the rest of you.

It's time for both liberals and conservatives to stand together to oppose this horrid violation of freedom. If not for others, do it for yourself, your family, and the ones you love. This affects all of us, and we can shape our destiny if we just give it our all.

Don't let them take your livelihood and happiness away from you, for if you do, you will soon regret it. Remember these words, and your spirit will march forward to the drums of freedom:

"Give me liberty, or give me death!"

Evidently, Protests Could Lead to Violence!

2009-09-22T22:24:00.006-05:00

This has probably been posted by hundreds of other bloggers, but Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi choked up as she talked about how the language that us terrible Nazis are using will lead to violence:

"Balance of liberty and security?" I'm not even gonna say anything. Comments?

Two Little Jackasses

2009-09-20T02:43:00.005-05:00

Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, a scary woman to say the least, acted like a complete and utter bitch at a recent press conference. Apparently, someone sneezed the wrong way.

As you can see, Sebelius isn't the only one who made herself look like an arrogant, elitist snob. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, who has showed us time and time again that he is completely and utterly full of himself, wouldn't stop with the insults. If I could, I'd slap those two really, really, really hard.

Wouldn't you?

Are Conservatives Racist?

2009-09-17T07:36:00.019-05:00

While conservatives have names like socialist, commie, pinko, hippy, tree-hugger, econazi, and beatnik for liberals, liberals have their own share of stereotypical names for conservatives, including fascist, capitalist pig, redneck, hillbilly, and Bible-thumper. Increasingly, though, I've seen the term "racist" pop up more and more each and everyday. When President Barack Obama came into office, the term was flung around endlessly. It reminds me of how conservatives often called liberals "sexist" for things they said about Sarah Palin during the election.

In fact, conservatives are being accused of being KKK sympathizers and members of the Klan. Some people might even call us the "RepubliKlan." A lot of liberals don't endorse this kind of name-calling at all, but the accusation that we're racist is starting to come from prominent celebrities.

Not only does Garofalo accuse us of being racist rednecks, but she also accuses us of being cerebrally-challenged anti-intellectuals. On top of that, she accuses conservative women and minorities of suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. I guess that means I suffer from Triple Stockholm Syndrome then, being a girl, a Native American, and a lesbian. Boy, do I hate myself!

If she actually took a step outside of her Hollywood bubble, she would realize that the tea party protesters aren't such bad people. In fact, there are hardly any sentiments against race expressed at the tea parties. I will admit that some conservatives are racist, but there are just as many liberal racists as there are conservative ones. Racists come in all colors, nationalities, backgrounds, and political affiliations.

These people are just making a case against an out-of-control government that is spending away the futures of their kin, taking away their Constitutional liberties, and destroying the value of the dollar at a rapidly growing pace. These tea parties are making a case not only against so-called liberal Congressional leaders, but also against so-called conservative Congressional leaders.

This isn't just about Obama. It's about the entire establishment.

Did it ever occur to these people calling us racist that perhaps it's the fact that President Obama is one of the most radically pro-government, pro-tax, pro-abortion, pro-socialist presidents ever that has people flocking to tea party protests? We disagree with his political policies more than any other president before him. There are bloggers like me who write entire articles supported with facts and opinions that have nothing to do with race.

I have friends from across the political spectrum, so I'm not saying that all liberals are quick to draw the race card. I would like to bring up the fact, again, that conservatives played the sex card during the election. It's just that I've recently noticed this growing trend of accusations that we are bigots and racists and Klan members. I know liberals have damn well been accused of that, too, because of the history of the Democratic Party, but it seems that the race card is being played more and more everyday now that we have a black president.

We even have former presidents accusing us of racism. Jimmy Carter had this to say:

Even if you do approve of Carter, you have to admit that this was not one his best moments. His argument had little basis in reality. If he had said, "Some of the opposition is because the president is black, but most of it is not," that would have been acceptable, but he stated that the basis of the opposition was race-based.

Maybe it's just hard for some Progressives to grasp why some people would not support policies that seem humanitarian at the surface, so they jump to the conclusion that, "Hey, the only way they could oppose such a charming, eloquent, good-looking, black man is if they were racist."

A few positions that make people think we're racist:

Most conservatives oppose race-based Affirmative Action. We understand the basis behind it: Minorities and women faced oppression in the past, and some people think they might need policies that level out the playing field. However, those of us who oppose Affirmative Action in one way or another believe that giving an unfair advantage to any group, whether it be a majority or a minority, is unjustified. True equality means equal opportunity, and people should be hired and accepted into institutions based on qualifications, not upon immutable differences.

Most conservatives do not believe in slavery reparations. People are often clouded with the guilt of their ancestors and want to make it up to those whose ancestors were slaves. However, those of us who oppose slavery reparations want to make it up to minorities by leaving the past behind and appreciate them for their gifts and not their skin color. As a Native American, I would rather be acknowledged for my character than be pitied by society.

Most conservatives oppose hate crimes legislation. This type of thing is a very controversial type of legislation to oppose. Since it seems like something that should be a given in our society, people will wonder why anyone would oppose it. The answer is simple: Those of us who oppose hate crimes legislation believe in equal protection, not special protection. Everyone should be protected equally, regardless of immutable differences. Someone who kills a white man for not getting drugs in on time should receive the same sentence as someone who kills a black man for being black. Of course, we'd factor in how much the victim suffered and whatnot, but equal crimes deserve equal prosecution. Hate crimes legislation is supposed to promote equality, but it does not truly achieve this. The alternative solution is the true promotion of equality.

Most conservatives advocate limited federal welfare. A significant amount of the poor are minorities, and I know this because of my own relatives in the reservation. Those who are strong supporters of federal welfare wonder why people would not want to financially aid the poor, but those of us who advocate limited federal welfare have legitimate concerns. These are not limited to economic concerns - we are also concerned about society and the well-being of the poor. We believe that forcefully taking from one person to give to another is an act of aggression that promotes hostility. It also lowers income levels across the board, making the poor poorer because of the limited job opportunities. What we want to do is promote welfare through private charity and voluntary public donations. There are two social concerns that need to be addressed: If you allow people to give out of generosity and kindness, then they will be more giving, less hostile, and more respectful to humanity. Even if they do end up buying material goods for themselves instead of aiding the less fortunate, it will benefit the economy, which will make our country wealthier. Logic and history indicates that the poor do better in a wealthy society. When you force people to give, it is no longer generosity or kindness that gives - it's merely force. We also happen to believe in an old Chinese proverb that says, "If you give a man a fish, you can feed him for a day. If you teach a man to fish, you can feed him for a lifetime." What we want to do is motivate people to work so that we won't have to forcefully take from anyone else.

As you can see, those are some of many reasons people think we're racist. People also stereotype based on small groups of people that are actually racist, such as conservative KKK members. However, one must also note that there are liberal KKK members as well. As pointed out earlier, racists come in all shapes and sizes. In this video, these people obviously took a few stereotypes and misinterpretations, and made a generalization about it:

Not only did they make some pretty broad generalizations about conservatives, but they also come to the conclusion that the very idea of conservatism is racist in and of itself. I, as a conservative, do seek change, but the change I seek is a change in Washington, not in the fundamental principles upon which America was founded upon. I want our government to revert back to policies that worked and not ignore our social and economic freedoms that were guaranteed by our Founders. That is the kind of change I seek.

Must we really resort to the lowest common denominator in order to promote our political ideals? Liberals and conservatives are both guilty of doing so. We forget that maybe we just have differing viewpoints that we need to educate ourselves on. We get so lost in our political disagreements that we forget that we are all human.

And we're not victims either.

I am proud to be who I am. I may be a mildly autistic Native American lesbian girl, but that does not make me a victim. I am sick and tired of being pitied for who I am. I am a survivor who takes responsibility for her own actions, and I am not going to let people tell me that I need to change my lifestyle or beliefs because of that. Some people think it's pretty sick that I'm on the far-right, but I stand by my beliefs, and I am not ashamed of them.

Is it so wrong to disagree with a president that is amazingly well-known and well-liked the world over? Some of us just don't see things the way the rest of the world does, and that's okay because our political differences are only one part of us. Instead of judging each other based on stereotypes and generalizations, we should educate ourselves to learn the true meaning behind opposing beliefs.

I admire liberals who defend conservatives from accusations of racism and bigotry because of misinterpreted political positions, words, and ideas. I admire conservatives who do the very same for liberals whose ideas are wildly twisted out of proportion.

If we step out of our own political bubble once and awhile, we can learn to understand why people think and feel the way that they do. Even if we disagree with them, we can at least try to understand where they're coming from. Political discussions are constructive and educational if done so in a civil manner, and we all need to do a better job of that.

With that, I would like to wish you all a fabulous day. God bless you, and God bless America.

"You Lie!"

2009-09-17T02:17:00.008-05:00

Remember this?

That was awesome! Again, again!

One more time, baby!

The brave man who shouted this during President Obama's ridiculous speech was none other than South Carolina Representative Joe Wilson. Of course, you probably already know that. As you might also know, people got all up in his junk, so he apologized.

He apologizes, right? Apology accepted.

Unfortunately, there were still people demanding another apology. Why? Who knows! Here's what Joe had to say:

Now even though the bill insists that illegal immigrants cannot receive federal benefits, Joe insists otherwise.

House Democrats voted to "discipline" Joe Wilson for the outburst he had already apologized for. This is really starting to get ridiculous. This is the perfect event to distract people from the real health care debate. If Ron Paul were president right now, and someone did that to him, I would try to put my focus back on the health care debate instead of focusing all my energy over some person who accused him of lying. It's not like Joe Wilson got up and shouted the "N" word, now is it?

We have far more serious and negative issues to deal with than some Congressman who accused the president of lying in the heat of the moment, especially if he apologized for it, and the White House accepted his apology. If I were Joe, I would bend down, turn towards House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and say, "Spank me. I'm a bad little boy." Then she'd give me a few firm spanks with her hand for awhile, and they'd leave me alone. If they didn't, I would allow everyone in Congress to give me one free spanking. Boy, would that be fun!

Forget this already, and let's move on.

Illegal Immigrants Will Not Recieve Federal Payments for Health Care, Says the Bill

2009-09-17T00:58:00.004-05:00

I really would like to take more time to read H.R. 3200, as I did not see this part of the bill:

H.R. 3200: Sec 246 — NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS
Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.

Read Sec 246 here.

The health care bill is far from being plain language, but this part of the bill is very clear. Although I oppose H.R. 3200, I have to admit that I was mistaken on illegal immigrants - so far. Will they still receive federal payments for health care? Only time can tell, but one thing is for certain: The health care bill says otherwise.

Obviously, bills can be modified after being passed, but it would be pretty sneaky of anyone to change this even in the slightest manner. Fellow conservatives: At least admit that illegal immigrants aren't said to receive federal benefits under this bill as of now, even if actions prove otherwise later on.

Another point people make, however, is that our immigration policy is very confusing, and people have been known to manipulate the system. Readers, please comment.

Even though illegal immigrants are barred from federal benefits in the bill, will they still receive benefits?

9/11: Unforgettable

2009-09-13T22:45:00.022-05:00

I remember it like it was yesterday.

I was in second grade, and I was informed of the event at school. The principal gathered the students together to give us the terrible news. Tears were pouring out of her eyes as she spoke to us.

"Students, I want you to stay strong. Two planes - just crashed into the Twin Towers in New York. We were attacked."

Everyone in the room was confused and shocked. It stayed dead silent as she continued to speak.

"But I want you to know that everything is going to be okay. It's being taken care of. You're all safe."

That's all she said before we were let back to our classrooms. Some of the kids and teachers were crying, some of them were talking about how scared they were, and some of us just were simply in a quiet state of awe.

I was one of the silent ones.

I had no idea what to feel or think. I didn't cry, but I felt as if I should be. I suddenly lost all of my emotions as I tried to sort out the thoughts in my mind. Everyone went home on buses, cars, or foot like they normally would, but we didn't feel the same.

We weren't the same.

I got home, threw down my backpack, and looked at the television screen. They wouldn't stop showing it. Over and over again, I saw two planes crash into the towers, fire blazing from the exterior, people running and screaming for their lives. It broke my heart. Smoke flew all the way to Lady Liberty, the symbol of freedom and happiness. You could almost imagine her weeping for her nation.>

We all weeped for our nation.

None of us were the same after 9/11. For an entire year, and beyond for some, we were the peaceful, kind, and giving people we once were. We pushed aside our politics, our disagreements, and our differences, and we got together to share our patriotism, faith, and brotherly love.

We gave blood, we donated food, we gave gifts to people we didn't even know, and we all helped one another out. America's sense of unity was restored.

But then we lost it.

We fought endless wars. We gave up our liberties in the name of "security." We spent money we didn't have because we thought it would go to a good cause. We let the Constitution shred right before us. The government manipulated our broken minds, hearts, and spirits into believing we could trust them.

The war, the liberties that got taken away, the endless government spending sprees, and the Constitution being thrown right out the window - 9/11 was an excuse for all of it, and we drank it up like a bunch of sheep.

Our government betrayed us by taking a terrible event and using it against us for their own sick pleasures. We let them do it, and in doing that, we betrayed ourselves.

It is time again to become the Americans we were on 9/12. It's possible for us to come together once again. We need to give all that we can to pick up the broken pieces of our nation and put them back together.

We thought we could trust the new president, but we were wrong. He's just like the old one.

We're letting him get away with violent warfare. We're letting him take away our freedoms. We're letting him spend, spend, spend until the dollar is obliterated. We're letting him rip up the Constitution and enjoy himself while he's at it.

It's time for us to stand up to the self-centered, incompetent government bureacrats, the greedy, corrupted corporate scumbags, and the Federal Reserve totalitarians that want America to give up everything she has so that they can advance their own sick globalized goals.

There is a movement called the 9/12 Project. I want everyone to check it out.

Glenn Beck's Common Sense - an outstanding book that I highly recommend regardless of your political affiliation - outlines 9 principles and 12 values that everyone should try to live by.

The 9 Principles:
1. America is good.
2. I believe in God, and He is the center of my life.
3. I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government.
5. If you break the law, you pay the penalty. Justice is blind, and no one is above it.
6. I have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results.
7. I work hard for what I have, and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable.
8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.
9. The government works for me. I do not answer to them; they answer to me.

The 12 Values:
Honesty
Reverence
Hope
Thrift
Humility
Charity
Sincerity
Moderation
Hard Work
Courage
Personal Responsibility
Gratitude

Please send this to your state senators and district representative:

To Congress: The 5 Pledges
1. I believe in a balanced budget and therefore will vote for a freeze in government spending until that goal is realized.
2. I believe government should not increase the financial burden on its citizenry during difficult economic times. Therefore, I will oppose all tax increases until our economy has rebounded.
3. I believe more than four decades of US dependence on foreign oil is a travesty, therefore I will support an energy plan that calls for immediately increasing usage of all domestic resources including nuclear energy, natural gas, and coal as necessary.
4. I believe in the sovereignty and security of our country and therefore will support measures to close our borders except for designated immigration points so we will know who is entering and why. I will vehemently oppose any measure giving another country, the United Nations, or any other entity power over US citizens.
5. I believe the United States of America is the greatest country on earth and therefore will not apologize for policies or actions which have served to free more and feed more people around the world than any other nation on the planet.

Please contact your state senators here and your district representative here. I did it, and you should, too.

God bless you, and have a fabulous day!

Presidential Address to Congress on Health Care Reform: More Lies from the Leader of the Free World

2009-09-11T14:22:00.015-05:00

Shortly after writing my previous entry – which you should definitely read – I made my way to the television. What I saw absolutely disgusted me. My eyes glared angrily at the screen, my fists clenched in rage, and my mind blowing a fuse as I listened to the lying, deceptive scumbag give his little speech.

President Obama – you make me SICK!

I completely lost control. All of a sudden, I was throwing objects at the screen, muttering insane utterances to myself, and clenching my teeth as that phony leader of the free world pretended that he was all innocent and sweet.

I wanted to punch him right in the face!

A brave Congressman screamed exactly what I had been shouting at the screen the whole time.

“You lie!”

And lie that scumbag did. He just wouldn’t stop. How the hell does he get away with this?

"We are the only democracy, the only advanced democracy on Earth, the only wealthy nation that allows such hardship for millions of its people."

We’re not a Democracy, Mr. President. We’re a Democratic Republic. Even Benjamin Franklin admitted that. The reason we are not a Democracy is because we did not want to give a “majority” the ability to take God-given rights away from other people. We wanted everyone to have the same rights as everyone else, and that’s why the Founders wrote our beautiful U.S. Constitution. They wanted people to have the ability to elect representatives that actually represented them, representatives to protect the rights that were guaranteed by the Constitution, to make sure that no power big or small, minority or majority, government or citizenship would take away rights from anyone else.

There are so many people in “advanced” nations that experience hardships everyday. What are you trying to say, Mr. President? That we’re stuck in the past? Well, sir, I love the principles of our Founding Fathers, and you can’t change me no matter what you say or do.

"Well, the time for bickering is over. The time for games has passed."

Do you think we forgot about this, Mr. President?

You tell opposition to shut up and get out of the way. You refuse offers to have meetings with the Republicans, and you have done so since April. Other Democratic leaders do the exact same thing. I’m not saying Republicans aren't just as bad. They are. It’s just that you’re pretending to be all bipartisan, but your actions don’t reflect that. You say one thing, but you do another. Do you really expect us to believe you, sir?

"First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or the V.A., nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have."

"Let me – let me repeat this: nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have."=

I wonder how you got away with that one. Even most on the Left know that’s not true. You continually leave out that if an employer was to switch to the government’s alternative plan, people will be changing their coverage and doctors. Is it so much to ask to at least admit that?

"And insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies. Because there's no reason we shouldn't be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse.

It does make sense, and it does save lives, but in no way does it save money. These things have a cost to them, sir, and most people who take these tests are not discovered to have the diseases, so it does end up costing a few extra bucks. It doesn’t save money at all. Again, these tests are great, but you at least need to be honest and upfront with the American people.

"Now, even if we provide these affordable options, there may be those, and especially the young and the healthy, who still want to take the risk and go without coverage. There may still be companies that refuse to do right by their workers by giving them coverage.

The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money. If there are affordable options and people still don't sign up for health insurance, it means we pay for these people's expensive emergency room visits.

If some businesses don't provide workers health care, it forces the rest of us to pick up the tab when their workers get sick, and gives those businesses an unfair advantage over their competitors.

And unless everybody does their part, many of the insurance reforms we seek, especially requiring insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions, just can't be achieved.

That's why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance – just as most states require you to carry auto insurance."

Slow down there, buddy. If health care is truly a right, then people should have the right not to have it or to pay for it as they please. If they want to pay for it directly, then they have a right to do it. You can offer alternatives and you can give people the opportunity to have health care or insurance, but you have no Constitutional authority to force anyone to have health care or insurance.

You blame individuals and businesses for people having to pay for the financial expenses of others, but you forget the laws the government makes – or you just don’t want to admit them. The government forces us to pay for expenses other than ours all the time. Under that logic, taxes should be lower, federal welfare should be reformed or abolished, and you should not be advocating a public option, you filthy hypocrite.

I think the health care system would be much better if money was provided on a local level by private charities, but that’s a whole different topic entirely. As you can see, I do advocate free health care. I do advocate health care for all. It’s just that the Congressional plan being proposed right now is neither affordable nor reasonable, and I sure as hell don't trust our government.

Do I advocate states requiring people to have auto insurance? Hell no! I use the exact same logic as I use here. Readers, I urge you to read my previous entry as soon as possible. It’s very important that you do.

"Now, there are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false. The reforms – the reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally."

The thing is that it’s not exactly clear. Nothing in the bill will stop illegal immigrants from being insured by any alternative plan. Illegal immigrants can also obtain private insurance from some insurers already (although they do have a right to do so). If the bill does pass, with or without the public option, we cannot be certain that illegal immigrants will be covered because the bill as proposed can’t currently stop it. To be fair, it doesn’t say anything about insuring illegal immigrants either. Regardless of your political position, facts are facts.

"And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up: under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place."

As of now, that’s a lie. Abortions are considered “health care” under federal law and also, more specifically, “reproductive health care.” How can we trust you after you this speech?

"And – and I will make sure that no government bureaucrat or insurance company bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need."

It does and will happen. As of now, it’s inevitable.

"Now, here's what you need to know. First, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits, either now or in the future."

Are you sure, sir?

"I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit now or in the future – period."

The reality, Mr. President, is that every time you open your mouth, more than $10 thousand are added to our national debt. You can even check the U.S. National Debt Clock in real time. Logic indicates that this plan will not amount to a surplus. As soon as you spend federal money that isn’t there, debt is added. It’s just that simple. You and your Federal Reserve masters praise inflationary deficit spending right in front of the public. Let’s take a look at this clip first:

No matter what you or McCain said, it was clear that you both embraced and still do embrace inflationary deficit spending by your actions. McCain’s part in this was supporting the majority of pork-infested, deficit-thriving spending bills proposed by President Bush. Since this is an article about you, let’s focus on your part in this. You claim that you will pay back taxpayers, which would require first to take money from them. This indicates that your spending plans are going to be expensive. Taxpayers can’t pay for all of it. If they do, they will eventually see the most dramatic tax increase in years. What you do is you get your Federal Reserve friends to print more money, which results in hyperinflation. It doesn’t stop there. You still don’t have enough money to fund the plan, so you spend money that isn’t there and claim that you will somehow pay it back later. That is inflationary deficit spending by definition!

You love Ben Bernanke, right? You shower him with praise every time you get the chance, and you appointed him to a second term. You adore the things he has done. Let’s take a look at what he has had to say:

Basically, he admits that his plans involve printing more money and increasing inflation. He says that he is doing this to get back to a stable economic situation, then tread back from inflationary deficit spending, which was the problem in the first place. It’s called pouring salt on a wound. One theory is that Ben Bernanke knows exactly what he’s doing and that he’s not stupid. He knows that these policies will lead to a larger debt and the destruction of the dollar, which will lead to global poverty.

Why would any person be so sick as to want this?

If everyone is poor and starving, the people of Earth will look to a global elite to make everything better. Through the ages, government officials and their Federal Reserve masters have been talking about a New World Order in which a planetary system of laws should be implemented. This can be summarized in one word: globalization. The policies implemented right now will effectively lead up to that goal.

Your claim that you will not sign the bill if one dime is added to the deficit is completely bogus because you already support the plan that will do exactly that, and even with major modifications, it will still happen. Every time you say that your plans will not add to the deficit, it ends up happening anyway, so how the hell can we trust you?

"I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit now or in the future. Period. And to prove that I'm serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promise don't materialize."

I still don’t believe you. You and your friends can make your promises, but you don’t keep them. We’re still in Iraq, you’re expanding the war in Afghanistan, you never really wanted to repeal the Patriot Act, you want to force people to have insurance despite what you said in the election, you didn’t cut spending (you're spending more), and your Bush-like “no new taxes” claim is going to be completely and utterly shattered by the time cap-and-trade passes.

"...I know that the Bush administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these ideas. I think it's a good idea, and I'm directing my secretary of health and human services to move forward on this initiative today."

I’m not noting this because this is another lie. I’m noting it because it is more Bush pandering. You don’t really dislike the guy’s policies. You just want to expand them. This statement is nothing compared to the fact that you kept Bush’s defense secretary and you kept the same exact foreign policy that you’re expanding each and everyday.

"Now, this is the plan I'm proposing. It's a plan that incorporates ideas from many of the people in this room tonight – Democrats and Republicans. And I will continue to seek common ground in the weeks ahead. If you come to me with a serious set of proposals, I will be there to listen. My door is always open."

That statement was proven wrong a long time ago. Readers, if you look at what I stated earlier, you will know why this is a lie.

"In 1935, when over half of our seniors could not support themselves and millions had seen their savings wiped away, there were those who argued that Social Security would lead to socialism. But the men and women of Congress stood fast, and we are all the better for it."

No, we’re not. The government spends our Social Security funds, then issues IOUs. They must be repaid by taxes, more printed money, and inflationary deficit spending. From the Congressional Research Center in 1998:

When the government issues a bond to one of its own accounts, it hasn't purchased anything or established a claim against another entity or person. It is simply creating a form of IOU from one of its accounts to another.

From the Office of Management and Budget under the Clinton administration in 1999:

These [trust fund] balances are available to finance future benefit payments and other trust fund expenditures – but only in a bookkeeping sense. These funds are not set up to be pension funds, like the funds of private pension plans. They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they are claims on the Treasury, that, when redeemed, will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures.

These facts are startling, people! Click here for more information. The only way Social Security would work is if we could trust the government with our money, which we can’t because they spend it on other things.

And another thing...

Our government has become filled with socialists, communists, facists, statists, and totalitarians, sir. They're called Progressives, and they're in both parties. They don't always admit what they are, but their policies reflect their true nature. You are one, Mr. President!

Back to President Obama:

"You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom.

But they also understood that the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little; that without the leavening hand of wise policy, markets can crash, monopolies can stifle competition, the vulnerable can be exploited.

And they knew that when any government measure, no matter how carefully crafted or beneficial, is subject to scorn; when any efforts to help people in need are attacked as un-American; when facts and reason are thrown overboard and only timidity passes for wisdom, and we can no longer even engage in a civil conversation with each other over the things that truly matter – that at that point we don't merely lose our capacity to solve big challenges. We lose something essential about ourselves.

That was true then. It remains true today."

Translation: “I like big government.”

Oh, Obama, baby, you're so dreamy.

And there you have it, folks. Our Liar in Chief at his best. I included the video and the FOXNews.com transcript link below.

Try not to get too angry, but if you do, it's understandable.

Thank you, and have a fabulous day. God bless you, and God bless America.

Transcript

Forced Health Care Coverage

2009-09-09T17:42:00.014-05:00

Some Democrats are pushing for a law that would require the majority of American families to sign up for either a health care insurance plan or whatever else the government will offer depending on what is passed by Congress. To Progressives, this just seems like another warm, fuzzy, feel-good policy to soothe the socialist conscience.

No matter how the politicians up in Washington say it, the meaning is still a push for more government control over your personal life. They may use a lighthearted word to push their agenda, but the translation is this, plain and simple: “Require” means force.

The punishment?

A MASSIVE FINE.

If you refuse health care coverage for whatever reason, you will have to pay for it – even if you have enough money to pay for your health care services directly or you are a perfectly healthy person with a family that will not need health care coverage anytime soon.

The Senate bill will push for a $1000 fine at the least. It seems hypocritical that the Democrats are always preaching that health care is a right – and you may or may not believe that – yet they would strip away your right not to have it. When they do that, it’s no longer a right.

It’s a mandate.

Political history shows us that mandates lead to more government control over personal and economic liberties guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. When you give out of the kindness of your heart, it is generosity, but when you are forced to give, the purpose is defeated. The reason for giving is no longer generosity or human kindness, but rather force. People are less giving now than they were ever before, and this is because they think that since they are forced to provide for the government’s idea of charity, that there is no reason to provide for causes that they believe in.

Republicans will pretend to be on your side, but remember what happened during the last eight years. Don’t forget that. Like the Democrats, they stabbed you right in the back.

Democrats and Republicans may pretend to have a strong position on issues like abortion, gay marriage, and drugs, but really, they use those issues to divide us.

Both sides ultimately have the same agenda: Higher taxes, bigger wars, more inflationary deficit spending, more government control over the free market and over personal lives, and the abandonment of America’s foundational principles for what they think benefits the “greater good.”

Remember that you don’t answer to anyone but yourself, your family, and your God. Don’t let these politicians trick you with their warm, fuzzy, feel-good policies that will only lead to tyranny in the long run.

Don’t let them take away your freedoms. It’s up to you to keep them within your grasp. Once we let the state own our property, our bodies, and our lives, the Progressives, both Democrats and Republicans, will have succeeded in what will only be the beginning of their ultimate goal.

Are you willing to let that happen?