By an American Citizen
“Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them.”--- Judge Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, CONSTITUTION OF THE U. STATES, Book III, CHAPTER XLV. CONCLUDING REMARKS, 1833
I estimate that the political mindset of today’s American voter population is typically divided into about 40% moderate to conservative Republicans, 30% who call themselves Progressive/Democrats of which 10% are actually hard core Marxist/socialist operatives and the remaining 30% do not have a clue as to what is going-on outside of their own little world. Ostensibly, it is the 30% of this uninformed voter population that decides elections. Our dear republic is in decline because of the malignant tendencies of democracy as most voters now tend to focus on unreasonable wishes while not questioning and demanding that their government demonstrate proper common sense, fairness, transparency and accountability in resolving public issues.
“Men will not look at things as they really are, but as they wish them to be--and are ruined.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
This treatise reveals the common sense realities of political, economic and social issues that every American voter should consider before exercising his/her right to vote.
THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY --- The great prosperity of the United States is dependent upon a vibrant, free market system of commerce.
Good economic policy is simply the application of good common sense. America's Founding Fathers understood that their new Constitution must promote a healthy system of commerce if their new nation was to thrive. Commerce best thrives when governments actively respect and protect private property and abide by fundamental principles of limited government. The concepts that limiting government, promoting commerce and protecting private property have transformed the United States of America into the most prosperous and powerful nation in history.
Promoting a less encumbered system of American commerce is the cornerstone of the United States Constitution. "The prosperity of commerce is now perceived and acknowledged by all enlightened statesmen to be the most useful as well as the most productive source of national wealth, and has accordingly become a primary object of their political cares… By multiplying the means of gratification, by promoting the introduction and circulation of the precious metals, those darling objects of human avarice and enterprise, it serves to vivify and invigorate the channels of industry, and to make them flow with greater activity and copiousness.” --- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Papers Number 12
Gradually over the last century and more precipitously within the most recent decade, the United States government has instituted blundering economic strategies that have been harmful to American’s system of commerce and will likely result in a decline in America’s prosperity for generations to come unless common sense remedies are soon applied.
We will focus first on: employment, taxes, government spending and government regulations. These are arguably the prime American political concerns of the 21st century. The United States economy has barely recovered from a prolonged economic recession only to become mired in economic stagnation. The economy’s economic doldrums are being perpetuated by four major dynamics: .
a. A very high unemployment rate that is stuck above 5% along with
b. Excessive income tax rates,
c. Excessive government spending and
d. Excessive government regulation.
The four conditions listed above continue to influence each other in perpetuating a vicious circle of economic paralysis. It is simply common sense to understand that a healthy economic recovery for the United States is dependent upon in-concert corrections to all four conditions. The causes, effects and solutions concerning all four of these conditions are discussed in the following:
HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT --- Is the Result of Excessive Tax Rates, Excessive Government Spending and Excessive Government Regulations
A high unemployment rate always results in lower production rates, causing in a reduced supply of goods and services available or Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The consequence of a decrease in the GDP is a decreased general standard of living for all. Only when growth in the real GDP exceeds the combined growth rates of the labor force and productivity (potential output), will the unemployment rate continue to fall. A well-established economic axiom explains that to achieve a one-percentage point decline in the unemployment rate in the course of a year, real GDP must grow approximately two-percentage points faster than the rate of growth of potential GDP over that period.
A high unemployment rate lowers the tax base, which prompts governments to increase income tax rates on those who have income in order to overcome revenue shortfalls. Excessively high tax rates in turn cause businesses to reduce their numbers of employees, thus reducing the production of goods and services, thus decreasing the total GDP and the total number of employees who would pay taxes.
A recent Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on United States Unemployment reported that the rate of unemployment in the United States has been stuck about or above 5 percent since February 2009 - this making the past six years as the longest stretch of high unemployment in this country since the Great Depression. Moreover, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that the unemployment rate will remain about 6 percent for years to come unless government economic policies are mended.What is even more revealing about the poor health of the United States economy is the Labor Force Participation Rate that is now only about 62%, the lowest it has been since 1978 and has been dropping rapidly since 2008.
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000
The official unemployment rate excludes those individuals who would like to work but have not searched for a job in the past four weeks as well as those who are working part-time but would prefer full-time work; if those people were counted among the unemployed, the unemployment rate in would be about 15 percent. More and more people of working age are simply giving-up their quest for gainful employment. Too many are resigning themselves to receiving their livelihood from the government as their best option. The Cato Institute released a study showing that welfare benefits pay more than a minimum wage job in 33 states and the District of Columbia. Even worse, welfare pays more than $15 per hour in 13 states. According to the study, welfare benefits have increased faster than minimum wage. It’s now more profitable to sit at home than it is to earn an honest day’s pay. Hawaii is the biggest offender, where welfare recipients earn $29.13 per hour, or a $60,590 yearly salary, all for doing nothing.
http://www.cato.org/publications/white-paper/work-versus-welfare-trade
Compounding the problem of high unemployment, the share of unemployed people looking for work for more than six months—referred to as the long-term unemployed—topped 40 percent in December 2009 for the first time since 1948, when such data began to be collected; it has remained near that level ever since.
EXCESSIVE INCOME TAX RATES --- Promote Economic Uncertainty Which Leads To Stifled Economic Growth
The most pressing obstacle to full and sustained economic recovery, that which perpetuates our sluggish economy, is that the United States' individual graduated income tax rates are too high along with corporate income tax rates. The United States has by far the highest, most punishing, corporate tax rates in the world. Our high corporate tax rates are a drag on the US economy, encouraging companies to shift investments and jobs abroad to where there are lower-tax jurisdictions. The high-rate US corporate tax system makes the current slow economy even more punishing to the average American than it seems. Most Americans don't consider the negative effects an uncompetitive corporate tax code has on the middle class. The U.S. corporate tax code does not discriminate against rich and poor. It robs everyone of potential prosperity. By setting excessive corporate tax rates on domestic companies, the pressure for companies to move their business off-shore will only increase, and the incentives dwindle for businesses to incorporate in the U.S. Corporations will respond to higher taxes by paying workers less, charging customers more and paying stockholders less –which drives down retirement savings.common sense.
The proven solution for promoting prosperity and at the same time increasing government tax revenue during times of economic stagnation and for any time for that matter, is to promote measures that expand commerce. Economic history and common sense reveals to us that private money invested in the economy, not government taxing and spending will grow the economy and new jobs. President Roosevelt prolonged the Great Depression with massive government spending along with increased taxes on the wealthy in order to finance his make work projects such as the CCC and WPA.
http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/fdrs-folly-how-roosevelt-and-his-new-deal-prolonged-the-great-depression
Long-term economic prosperity and job growth happens when government disengages from the private sector and encourages the wealthiest of Americans to invest their wealth without fear of excessive new taxes and regulations.
“We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.” – Sir Winston Churchill
History and common sense reveals to us that practical solutions for increasing government tax revenues should ostensibly not always include increased income tax rates. Former President Calvin Coolidge advocated cutting taxes in order to increase tax revenues through what he termed as “scientific taxation”. President Coolidge's administration decreased income tax rates and government revenues increased substantially. This has also been demonstrated during the Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton administrations. In most cases, government revenues increased with decreased income tax rates. There were, however, periods of higher federal spending, primarily defense spending in some of the aforementioned administrations but it is obvious that increased tax revenues generated as a result of decreased tax rates, increased revenues offset these deficits. Conversely, when income tax rates are excessively increased, as was done in the Franklin D. Roosevelt's administration, the economy continues to retract resulting in further net decreases of government tax revenues. When taxpayers are taxed less, they spend more. Healthy commerce is perpetuated when money is circulating in the economy and businesses benefit with increasing sales and profits. Expanding sales and profits motivate businesses to expand their operations and hire more workers. Increased business profits and more workers who pay income taxes put more money into the federal revenue system. President Kennedy understood all of this and proposed tax rate cuts to ensure a prosperous America. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEdXrfIMdiU
Increased tax rates, especially on corporations and the wealthy, beyond what they are now becomes counterproductive in increasing government tax revenues. Arthur Betz Laffer, the American economist and member of President Ronald Reagan’s Economic Policy Advisory Board, has convincingly demonstrated the relationship between tax rates and revenue collected illustrating how a condition of diminishing tax revenue return is created by over taxation. The Federal Treasury’s tax collection is now on the backside of the Laffer Curve as a result of excessively high corporate tax rates.
Understanding the Laffer Curve:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIqyCpCPrvU
Those who still believes that government deficits can be decreased by increasing tax rates alone is either a Marxist or one of their useful idiots. Yet, President Obama and liberal politicians in Congress will still maintain that we must increase income taxes, especially for the so-called wealthy who liberals portray as not paying their “fair share”. We also hear more and more propaganda from progressive/liberal thinking Americans who argue that too many of the wealthy pay too little or no taxes at all. The real fact is that those who could advance economic activity the most are the ones most punished by paying much more than their “fair share” of taxes. Roughly 50% of all Americans do not pay income taxes at all while roughly the tops 3% of the wealthiest Americans contribute the majority of tax revenues collected by the government.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnEe4oaSC88
Progressive/liberal Democrats, however, will still maintain that the wealthy are paying historically low amounts in income taxes and some even advocate taxing not just incomes but accumulated wealth as well. The sluggish economy is affecting lower profits and capital gains that in turn produce less taxable income. Individuals are not and should never be taxed on their accumulated wealth itself, but on their earned income and income produced by investments. In fear of high taxes and excessive government regulations, the wealthiest of Americans are simply not investing in new capital thus not producing income that could be taxed.
The recent recession has hit small businesses the hardest. Small businesses produce 80% of all new jobs in our economy and have proven time and again to be the engine of both economic recovery and job recovery in hard economic times. Raising income taxes on anyone now would lead to a further retraction in economic activity and higher unemployment. The Federal budget is not in deficit because of decreased income tax rates, it is bloated government spending that has increased the huge government deficits which threatens our economic way of life in America
“You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it... You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom... What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving… The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation." --- DR. Adrian Pierce Rogers
Anyone who is familiar the full spectrum of economic and political theory knows that Chapter 2 of the “Communist Manifesto” written in 1848 by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels demands economic equality through government forced wealth re-distribution. The first three tenets of Marxist wealth re-distribution are:
• Take control of and redistribute assets
• A heavy progressive or graduated Income Tax
• Abolition of all rights of inheritance
President Obama’s original theme of “Hope and Change” has made traction with the political mindset of a majority of Americans. “Hope and Change” essentially promotes the idea that less than wealthy Americans should be reliant for subsistence as coming from wealth redistributed by the state. Even though we cannot prove that any of our political leaders are card-carrying communists, our system of taxation certainly approaches the Marxist philosophy. Given the current rhetoric from the Democratic Party, is this not right on the Money? Nancy Pelosi and President Obama often use; Death tax”, “Redistribution of Wealth”, “tax the wealthy” as their exact words.
Progressive Democrats make many believers in their cause by touting examples of supposedly big greedy corporations that are not "paying their fair share in taxes". True, there are indeed some tax loopholes needing correction through carefully thought-out tax reforms. However, the reality is that the vast majority of those who pay little or no income taxes simply fall only into only one or more of the following four categories:
a. Criminal income tax evaders or
b. Those who did not make enough money to be taxed,
c. Those who have deferred paying income taxes by re-investing profits or capital gains,
d. Those who have shown a net loss of income.
It is important to understand that small businesses and large orporations often defer paying large parts of their income taxes by re-investing profits or capital gains and this people is how more jobs are created in a capitalist system. An excellent example of this is the Boeing Company when it paid nothing in taxes for the 2014 tax year. Boeing reported an $82 million tax refund last year, but made $5.9 billion in U.S. pre-tax profits during the same period. This means that Boeing paid a federal tax rate of a minus 1.4 percent. This may appear to some as just one more example of a big greedy corporations not "paying their fair share in taxes", however, this ignores a crucial part of the company's tax expense. When Boeing decides to embark on the extremely risky business of developing new aircraft and products, its taxes are often deferred to encourage investment that could take decades to materialize profits. But once the company actually delivers their products, at a profit, then those deferred taxes turn into current ones.
EXCESSIVE GOVERNMENT DEFICIT SPENDING --- Will fosters the Illusion of Economic Growth With little Sustained Productivity in the Private Sector
Our United States has a severe spending problem. When the federal government spends more than it collects, it runs a deficit. To fill this gap, the Treasury Department must incur debt. As debt grows, interest payments on the debt will grow as well. If the government does not change this course, servicing the debt will end up as being the government's largest budget item. Given current policies, the Congressional Budget Office projects that the cost of the debt as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) will explode from a mere 1.8 percent of GDP in 2012 to 46 percent of GDP in 2084.Then the rest of the steps would quickly fall into place towards Marxism as America’s means of production and distribution would fall under government control.
What the American people desperately need now is a White house and Congress that can say “NO” to irresponsible spending. The national Debt is currently more than $18 Trillion and growing. A study by University of California-San Diego economics professor James Hamilton finds that the United States actually has over $70 trillion in off-balance sheet liabilities--an amount nearly six times the official on-balance-sheet debt figure. Hamilton’s study specifically examines the federal government’s support for housing, other loan guarantees, deposit insurance, actions taken by the Federal Reserve, and government trust funds. Not surprisingly, Hamilton found that Medicare and Social Security represent the bulk of future U.S. debt obligations, coming in at $27.6 trillion and $26.5 trillion respectively.
The Obama Administration economic policymakers are stuck on stupid with their voodoo socialist Keynesian theory of government economic intervention in the economy. Keynesians argue that the prime problem with today’s economy is insufficient government spending. If the health of the future economy is irrelevant, then the Keynesian theory makes sense. If artificially jacking-up demand in the short term yields relief today, that's all that matters if no one cares about the future. The faulty Keynesian macroeconomic theory model advocates high government deficit spending in order to stimulate the economy in order to increase the real Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This has produced some temporary positive trends, especially in the stock market, but in the long run this will only succeed in creating consumer inflation, the worst type of inflation. The desired effect of an overall long-term positive trend as a result of excessive government spending is clearly not working as the American economy continues to stagnate. Instead, the federal government should focus on reforms that promote free market long-term economic growth. Cutting corporate tax rates and excessive government regulations is an overdue reform that would stimulate America's long-run productivity, reduce unemployment and world market competitiveness.
The United States federal government has in place a long-term projected divergence between the amount of money that the federal government spends and the amount of money that it collects in tax revenue. This has adverse implications for deficits, debt, employment and economic growth.
The long-term budget projection for the Obama’s administration economic plan shows a course of accelerated spending producing increased federal debt. Future tax revenues will flat-line if current and proposed tax rates along with excessive government regulations stifle the essential economic activity that produces increased tax revenues.
EXCESSIVE GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS ON BUSINESS ---“The rule is always better when the ruled are better… happiness consists in the excellent exercise of our rational capacities” --- Aristotle
Should the individual become subordinate to the state? Should promoting private enterprise trump government intervention? Which economic system can best promote the prosperity of a nation? Is a nation better off under a principally free market capitalistic system, a socialistic one, or feasibly a heavily regulated mix of the two?
The answer is already be given to us in our United States Constitution.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.” ― Patrick Henry
The capitalist free market system of commerce has proven itself to work best and tends to benefit the general public when excessive government intervention ceases to stifle the rewards of capitalism. Decisive political battles of the twentieth century are now being fought to regain individual rights already established in United States Constitution as a balance to increased federal powers.
"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government." -- Thomas Jefferson
“…the simple voice of nature and of reason will say, it is right… I draw my idea of the form of government from a principle in nature, which no art can overturn, viz. that the more simple any thing is, the less liable it is to be disordered; and the easier repaired when disordered… Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first a patron, the last a punisher.” --- Thomas Paine 1776
“Economic power is exercised by means of a positive, by offering men a reward, an incentive, a payment, a value; political power is exercised by means of a negative, by the threat of punishment, injury, imprisonment, destruction. The businessman's tool is values; the bureaucrat's tool is fear.” --- Ayn Rand
The government of the United States would serve its citizens better with a “Laissez-faire” business climate where commerce is allowed to thrive and the private sector is enabled to pursue free business practices that all contribute most successfully to society as a whole. The state should be limited to those functions that maintain order but should avoid, as much as possible, interfering with individual initiatives. When it is appropriate, some government regulation is needed to promote a healthy economy. Too much regulation, however, tends to stifle healthy economic activity.
The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom. For in all the states of created beings capable of law, where there is no law, there is no freedom. --- John Locke
Democrats are too often quick to criticize Republicans for not promoting stricter regulation over business but then quash business regulations that would tend to hinder their progressive agendas. George Bush and Republicans tried to warn Congress starting in 2001 that an economic crisis was looming if something was not done. Democrats in The Congress refused to listen along with the arrogant Congressman Barney Frank and Senator Christopher Dodd, that a crises was comming which eventually led to the sub-prime loan debacle that brought-on the worst economic recession since the Great Depression. Today the Obama administration and the Democratic Party, even after seven years into the Obama administration, continue to blame former President George W. Bush for the economic crash of 2008. We seem to never hear, however, from Democrats as to what the real root cause was that brought down the economy at the end of Bush’s second term of office. In the late 1990s liberal Democrats in Congress pressured senior executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make loans in massive numbers to people who were unqualified for home loans in the late 1990s. The Bush administration in the beginning had long cautioned the then Democratic Party controlled Congress concerning the looming problems with the under-regulated home loan industry but Democrats in Congress continued to ignore President Bush’s warnings. The Democrats were actually promoting a sub-prime home loan scheme, orchestrated by then Congressman Barney Frank (D) and Senator Christopher Dodd (D). These radical left wing Democrats covertly orchestrated schemes where the federal government force regulated the sub-prime mortgage market causing our financial systems to become overburden with home mortgage foreclosures to the point of failure. The result was a financial meltdown, calculated by the efforts of extreme left wing socialists who seek to destroy the United States as the last bastion of capitalism. A new study from the widely respected National Bureau of Economic Research released this week has confirmed beyond question that the left's race-baiting attacks on the housing market (the Community Reinvestment Act--enacted under Carter, made shockingly more aggressive under Clinton) is directly responsible for imploding the housing market and destroying the economy. http://www.examiner.com/article/new-study-confirms-economy-was-destroyed-by-democrat-policies
Regulatory Accumulation Hurts the Economy. http://mercatus.org/publication/accumulation-regulatory-restrictions-across-presidential-administrations?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=macro&utm_campaign=fbpage
In June of 2013, John Dawson and John Seater, economists at Appalachian State University and North Carolina State University, published a potentially important study in the Journal of Economic Growth that shows the effects of regulatory accumulation on the US economy. Several others have already summarized the study’s results (two examples here and here) with respect to how the accumulation of federal regulation caused substantial reductions in the growth rate of GDP. So, while the results are important, I won’t dwell on them here. The short summary is this: using a new measure of federal regulation in an endogenous growth model, Dawson and Seater find that, on average, federal regulation reduced economic growth in the US by about 2% annually in the period from 1949 to 2005. Considering that economic growth is an exponential process, an average reduction of 2% over 57 years makes a big difference.
Excessive government regulation over business operations has always suppressed healthy economic growth. Businesses tend to avoid risking their capital in new growth investments if they are uncertain about future government business regulations. The Democratic Party’s standard line is that Republicans favor fewer regulations over business practices in order to create unfair advantages for those who are already wealthy. Unfortunately, the Democrat’s solution for economic justice has always been to advocate increased government regulation over private enterprise.
The cost of evasive government regulations is not limited to business. Perversely, this burden falls disproportionately on low-income families through lower wages and higher prices to consumers. If policymakers really want to help the poor, they should seek to reduce the barriers to job creation, instead of adding obstacles like hiking-up the minimum wage. Job creators are already tangled in a forest of red tape: over 170,000 pages of regulations from the federal government alone. Complying with these regulations is disproportionately burdensome for the small businesses that create the majority of new jobs. Regulatory agencies often fail to consider the possible impact they may have on labor markets, even though they have been, since 1971, increasingly subject to requirements that they consider the effect of regulatory change on the economy. Unfortunately, the failure to focus effectively on the employment impact of regulation means that the analysis misses several important aspects of regulation First, agencies ignore the economic cost of job loss in the regulated industry, despite strong evidence that job displacement of any type is very costly for individuals, families, and communities. Second, agencies ignore the economic cost of indirect job loss in other industries resulting from higher priced regulated goods or services. For example, the Environmental Protection Agency found that its proposed Toxins Rule would raise the price of electricity by nearly four percent and, as a result, higher energy prices would raise prices and reduce sales in 19 associated industries. If they had carried their analysis further, they would have found that for every job lost in the electrical industry, eleven jobs would have been lost in other industries. And each of these additional jobs lost would be very costly for individuals, families, and communities. Finally, there is evidence that high levels of regulation can affect the economy dynamically and at the macro level. With respect to labor markets, this means that regulations can affect job creation, wage growth, and workforce skill mismatching with available jobs. The latter can result in lower labor force participation and higher unemployment rates in the long run.
Now with ever increasing-intrusive banking regulations, banks have ostensibly lost the motivation to act sensibly. Consequently, regulations such as the Equal Credit Opportunity, which prevents banks to ask questions about marital status or source of revenues, the Community Reinvestment Act, forcing banks to make loans to poorer people, Fannie Mae, which increased mortgage loans to lower-income people, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which ensures that most deposits under $250,000 are safe from banking failures, have all fostered banks to act for their better interest, i.e. carelessly. When the interest rates were (artificially) low, as they were under George W Bush and as they are right now, control can be maintained. However, as soon as the interest rates increase, defaults increase, and the Ponzi scheme (in this case, the bank claiming to have more money than it really has) collapses, as it did in 2008.
FOREIGN POLICY --- Is Currently an International Disasters In The Making
A consistently strong and forceful American foreign policy, not appeasement, is essential to the maintenance of America’s security, domestic prosperity and tranquility.
“Speak softly and carry a big stick" --- foreign policy theme of American President Theodore Roosevelt.
The only demonstrated dynamic that has been proven to promote world peace and prosperity is the presence of an effective worldwide American foreign policy. This is achieved through a consistent and aggressive chief executive along with a skilled diplomatic corps backed with a strong military force. What is most essential in projecting a sound foreign policy, is that the United States must never negotiate from a position of real or perceived weakness nor appease those who could do us harm. Strong American leadership in foreign policy has in the past proven to be successful in preserving peace, prosperity, and freedom in the far corners of the world, especially in Asia. The successes in American foreign policy leadership in the past have brought about the most peaceful, prosperous and free world in the history of mankind. American troops, planes, and ships stationed abroad, occasional armed intervention and sometimes all out wars, are necessary parts of what enables world peace and prosperity.
A forceful American foreign policy along with a strong military preempts world problems. The former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, however, recently remarked that she wants the United States to find ways to “empathize” with its enemies. She says: “This is what we call smart power… Trying to understand and in so far as psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view.” History, unfortunately, has proven her idea to be irresponsible. Throughout recorded history mankind has demonstrated an innate propensity toward waging war. Appeasement toward one’s enemies never seems to be effective in preserving peace.
The Obama administration’s current "Nuclear Deal" with Iran may have ostensibly lit the fuse that will eventually ignite World War III. Obama’s "Nuclear Deal" with Iran has stirred worsening fears among the Arab world where apprehensions are pervasive that any easing of Iran’s international isolation will tip the already bloody contest for supremacy in the region toward Shiite-led Tehran. Arab countries have deep dreads of Iran’s gaining nuclear weapons and they are now even more certain that the Obama’s administration "Nuclear Deal" with Iran will allow this to happen albeit supposedly delayed for ten years. Nine nations — the United States, Russia, United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, North Korea and even Israel all have nuclear weapons. Iran, however, is the only nation that has stated it would use nuclear weapons. Iran has stated publicly, repeatedly and very emphatically that it intends to use nuclear weapons to destroy both Israel and the United States. Equally important, however, is that the key Sunni-dominated Gulf allies of the United States are all very worried that this nuclear deal gives Iran the means — through an economic windfall — an implicit green light to further its push influence throughout the region. This fear of Iran’s growing power in the region will assuredly, and very soon, lead to a nuclear arms race throughout the Middle East which could lead to an all-out war in the region which in turn could likely trigger the envelopment of all the world’s superpowers. The short term solution to this dire problem is that the U.S Congress must now override President Obama’s "Nuclear Deal" with Iran but it may be up to our allies (Israel) to take the immediate decisive military action necessary to destroy Iran's nuclear capability before an inevitable Middle East nuclear arms race can take shape. The only long term solution is evolving into a military one. It is a foregone conclusion that Iran will cheat on Obama’s “Nuclear Deal” at which time the U.S. must be prepared to respond immediately with decisive military action. The U.S. Air Force has developed a new, lighter, bunker-buster bomb that can be launched from the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to attack Iran’s nuclear sites, particularly the Fordow fuel enrichment plant, which is buried deep inside mountains in Iran.
http://nationalinterest.org/.../the-f-35s-new-bunker…
We must learn from history that great nations endured by remaining forceful in dealing with their foreign affairs. Let us not repeat the gravest mistakes of history by ignoring the great historical philosophies concerning the affairs of state revealed to us by Ronald Reagan, Winston Churchill , Abraham Lincoln, Napoleon Bonaparte, George Washington and Julius Caesar. The current world situation begs to echo the advice given by one great philosopher of statecraft who's advice remains consistent throughout the ages. “There is no avoiding war; it can only be postponed to the advantage of others…The first way to lose a state is to neglect the art of war…The cost of deterring future problems of world conflict is much less than the causalities and economic impact of actual war. The Romans recognized potential difficulties in advance and always remedied them in time. They never let problems develop just so they could escape a war...for when you are on the spot, disorders are detected in their beginnings and remedies can be readily applied; but when you are at a distance, they are not heard of until they have gathered strength and the case is past cure…” --- Nicolai Machiavelli
Those who do not understand history are condemned to repeat it. If peace is your goal, it could be argued that deterrence is the most necessary tactic. America should arm itself to the extent that wars will be prevented and won if deterrence should fail. Like it or not, the United States is the dominant power in this world and as a result has the indisputable responsibility of policing world affairs. President Franklin D. Roosevelt learned this fact the hard way. On American foreign policy Roosevelt said: “Great power involves great responsibility.” It is conceivable that if, in the 1930s, the United States had a stronger military presence in Asia this would have prevented Japan from invading China and this would have avoided the massive human tragedy of war in the Pacific. Had the American military remained in Germany after World War I to enforce the Treaty of Versailles, World War II may have never happened.
A successful foreign policy was demonstrated after the carnage of World War II. The United States remained in occupation of both Germany and Japan, while the Marshall Plan checked the spread of Communism in Europe. The Unite States didn’t force the nations it defeated to become its concurred servants. Instead the United States actively helped re-build the economies of Germany and Japan. Through encouraging the development of free markets in the defeated nations, it created an open trading system that would maximize benefits for all nations. The result was the economic miracles of Japan, West Germany, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan.
When an influential nation withdraws from the world, either by imposing trade barriers or drawing down military commitments, it loses its ability to influence events. When it comes to promoting political freedom, without liberty as part of the conversation with American allies, millions in Asia would not be free today. It is no accident that democracy has developed most thoroughly in the countries where the United States maintains a visible presence such as Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. If the Obama administration continues to strip the military of the resources to carry out its missions, those missions will shrink—even as you claim to support some of the most critical ones.
The Premier of the defunct Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev, ostensibly perceived that President John F. Kennedy was weak and indecisive after the Bay of Pigs debacle in Cuba along with his botched Vienna summit. As a result, Khrushchev proceeded to test Kennedy from Cuba to Berlin. Today the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin, and Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, are all certain that they are dealing with a hesitating and indecisive American President Obama and are adjusting their foreign policy actions accordingly. Khrushchev was proven wrong about Kennedy, but President Obama's enemies will likely continue to take advantage of his weak, indecisive leadership in regards to foreign affairs.
The Soviet Union under Marxist-Leninist doctrine predicted that capitalism would collapse on the “ash heap of history” as global communism triumphed as an economic system. Thanks to the foreign policy of President Ronald W. Reagan it was instead the vanguard of the international communist movement, the Soviet Union that disintegrated into the “trash heap”. When the Soviet Union dissolved, it led to a domino effect of communist nations collapsing.
President George W. Bush’s most glaring foreign policy blunder was not the issue of Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction” existing or not but Bush’s failure to have a well thought out pre-invasion plan for the occupation of Iraq, a plan that would contend with the resulting vacuum of power after the defeat of Saddam Hussein’s military government establishment. Bush won the war in Iraq but almost lost the peace there. The peace in Iraq and Afghanistan will most surely be lost at the hand of President Obama foreign policy because Obama has no plan to sustain the hard fought for peace.
President Obama has failed to achieve any of his major foreign policy objectives he laid out as a Presidential candidate. Voters should have quickly seen his naiveté as a candidate, with no experience on the world stage other than giving political speeches, being a community organizer and making promises that simply obviously cannot be kept.
“Minds are of three kinds: one is capable of thinking for itself; another is able to understand the thinking of others; and a third can neither think for itself nor understand the thinking of others. The first is of the highest excellence, the second is excellent, and the third is worthless.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
The foreign policy of the Obama administration has ostensibly failed in that President Obama has proven himself to be inconsistent and thus appears to be weak in the eyes of the world. Most foreigners view President Obama as clumsy and ineffectual as he strains to project himself as an innovative world leader in resolving international security issues. Some of Obama’s foreign policy rhetoric sounds plausible, however, the major trouble spots in the world remain unresolved. The ugly reality is that the Russia, China, al-Qaeda and now ISIS is emerging as a threat to international security. Iran appears be on the verge of becoming a nuclear power and is controlling negotiations concerning security in the Middle East. Russia as well as China has been allowed to become obstructionists in solving world security issues.
Attempts to force democracy upon the Muslim world have proven to be a fantasy leading to over a half century of ill-advised foreign policy. The Muslim world has always ostensibly viewed democracy as an institution of weakness. The Obama administration’s naive policy of trying to adopt an innovative conciliatory tone showing more respect for the Muslim world is proving counter-productive. Jihadists typically size-up their enemies, looking for the weakest areas in which they can gain the advantage. Muslim extremist yield only to strength and have interpreted Obama’s appeasing rhetoric as clear signals of weakness. If Jihadists now believe they can attack American installations and kill an ambassador on the anniversary of Sept. 11, without consequence, then America’s deterrent power has declined considerably. Drawing red lines in the sand and moving back when they are crossed won't rebuild confidence in American foreign Policy. Obama’s foreign policy failures will likely create additional dangerous world security predicaments. For a world superpower, it is not adequate just to want to be liked; you have to frighten the bad guys to keep them in check.
President Obama’s broad strategic vision that guides his foreign policy appears to be failing. Congressman Nunes hazarded to say that, "The worst part of his legacy will not be the economy, but what he has done internationally. President Obama needs to speak consistently with force and at least appear to be as realistic as President Reagan’s dealings with the Soviet Union. Congressman Rooney stated, "Neither our allies nor our enemies can predict when this administration will want to intervene, when they'll stand firm, when they'll back down. Foreign policy under president Obama is ad hoc, contradictory, and unpredictable." What is evident is that President Obama’s Middle East foreign policy has hinged on his notion that moderate Islamist political influences in the region would have the political maturity and aptitude to run democratic governments responsibly without the influences of the United States.
These are the most pressing present-day issues that will fester out of control if the direction of American foreign policy is not amended:
ISIS - The Islamic State of Iran and Syria (ISIS or ISIL) will be competing with the Iranian regime in taking the lead to export worldwide terrorism in order to become the ruler of their vision of an Islamic world. The Iranian mullahs ruling in Tehran have already achieved their own Islamic fundamentalist state and are on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons. Iran, however, sees the rise of ISIS as a threat to their own position as the leader of a world controlled by an Islamic state. Iran already has control of the Iraqi government in Baghdad and therefore Iran has a keen interest in fighting ISIS for control of Iraq, a key strategic area of the Middle East. ISIS and Iran will both slaughter and suppress populations at will, in order to control the exportation of terrorism to all corners of the world.
Russia - will continue to sabotage issues vital to world security. Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, has designs in mind to revive the former Soviet Union that will again threaten the world with another cold war.
China - will demonstrate increasing disrespect towards the United States as evidenced by their recent actions in the South China Sea and the Hainan Island.
Iran - will continue to take advantage of the United States, as they perceive the Obama administration to consistently negotiate from a position weakness. Thus, Iran will continue to advance their nuclear program. This is because the Obama administration did not tighten sanctions, and appeared desperate to broker a United Nations agreement.
The War on Terror - is far from over. President Obama did not decimate al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or Islamist extremists. Fundamental Islamists like the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) will make more of an impact in the future. Islamic extremist will expand, controlling, dominating, shaping, and creating events as they choose without United States intercession.
The Unites States military must become re-strengthened and returned to 1990 levels when the evil Soviet Union empire literally collapsed, without a shot fired, under the shadow of American military might. The Obama administration must recognize and take seriously international threats when they emerge on the horizon and come to the government’s attention — and not in a reactive and after-the-fact manner. Such a reactive approach has been all-too-frequent from Syria to Iran to North Korea.
In 2012, when Gov. Mitt Romney stated that Putin’s Russia remained America’s most formidable geopolitical adversary, the president dismissed his concerns with a snarky rejoinder that “the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back.” Now the Obama administration seems have been caught off guard and appears to be especially naïve in light of Russia’s recent aggression and events in the Ukraine and Crimea. Russia’s Putin is serious about expanding Russia’s power in dangerous and destabilizing ways and this administration must not underestimate him again.
Russia is now assembling its largest nuclear weapons arsenal since the Cold War and intends on spending another $55 billion on its missile and air defense systems in the next six years. Given Russia’s recent willingness to use force in altering its national boundaries, the U.S. should aggressively expand its ballistic missile defense systems to counter Russia’s aggressive behavior and protect itself and its allies. This should include advancing the United States’ European Ballistic Missile Defense complex based in Poland.
THE WEALTHIEST AMERICANS ---“Entrepreneurs are simply those who understand that there is little difference between obstacle and opportunity and are able to turn both to their advantage.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
I would ask; are the problems of society owing mostly to man's decreased nature, to bad social organizations and management, or to something other, and by what criteria can a society be judged as being just; is it by the way in which it promotes affluence, by the way in which society helps its neediest members or simply by promoting the opulence of its art and culture? Are we "our brothers' keeper" and should society, as a whole be accountable to those less fortunate? These questions can be answered only if one first understands that wealth, value and prosperity are not static quantities - not to be seized, taxed, begged, inherited, shared, looted or obtained as a favor. Real wealth, value and prosperity must be created, not by governments but by free people who are allowed to reap the rewards of a free market system. America's unprecedented abundance of wealth and prosperity has been created by the hard work and the productive geniuses of free men who are motivated to pursue their own personal interests in the making of their own private fortunes. We, as Americans, should thank God it is the top 1% of America's wealthiest entrepreneurs who control most of the capital value in the United States and not the government. Excessively managed economies by government institutions are always inept and wasteful. Politicians tend to grow government programs at the expense of the private enterprises who are the actual wealth producers. “The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the law of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If “Thou shall not covet,” and “Thou shall not steal,” are not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free.” --- John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of Government (1787)
Great philosophers throughout history dating back to Aristotle all support the idea that private property is essential to preserving a free society. The Obama administration, however, has publicly advocated policies that would take private capital property and redistribute it to others by means of unfair and discriminatory taxes biased toward one “class” of citizen over another “class”.
The graduated income tax system is fundamentally unfair, possibly unconstitutional and destructive to the American commerce system. One citizen of the United States should not have a government imposed higher income tax liability over that of another. The graduated income tax system contradicts the principle of due process and equal protection guaranteed by Amendment V and XIV to the Constitution of the United States.
Increasing tax rates on the people who produce wealth, value and prosperity for the purpose of providing income to non-productive people is like bashing one’s head against a brick wall to cure one’s headache. Redistribution of wealth may seem like a great idea to the foolish and uninformed, but eventually, one’s headache becomes worse. The brick wall maintained its composition, but your head and your ability to reason decrease in an in direct proportion to the time spent pounding your brains to obliteration.
The current United States graduated federal income tax system is the most onerous obstacle to Americans remaining prosperous. All Americans need a return to our original federal taxing system, one that does not punish and remove incentives for individuals and businesses to become prosperous. When commerce thrives, all people benefit with an increase in the general standard of living. The passage of the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in 1913 has become the most damaging of blows to Americans prosperity. The Sixteenth Amendment gave the federal government nearly unlimited taxing power by allowing the Federal government to directly tax individuals according to their income. If a government wanted to self-destruct its economy, that government would come up with a system not too different from the one we now have in America. The only fair and healthy federal tax system is a tax system that was originally envisioned by our Founding Fathers, one that would be an indirect tax, user fees, a “flat tax” or a federal consumer sales tax where everyone is taxed at a rate based upon consumption rather than income.
The Occupy movement only shows how ignorant some people can become when it comes to understanding economics. Progressives want corporate America to more, a lot more, in taxes but the U.S. already has the highest statutory corporate tax rate in the industrialized world at 38 percent. Not only do U.S. businesses pay the most, but also corporations are not the same as individuals. Corporations are made up of employees, and they are not millionaires. So who bears the weight of a high corporate tax rate? It's not just corporations; it is the “99 percent" as well. Through our capitalist system, the remaining 99% of Americans are able to share in the general opportunity for increased prosperity that is generally created by the wealthiest Americans. This is not happening now because government is becoming more and more intrusive into private enterprise through high tax rates and over-regulation. The movers and shakers who put together plans, take personal risks and are successful at making things work create wealth, economic value and prosperity. Government on the other hand is inefficient and wasteful. The private sector produces goods and services of value, something that government has never been able to successfully accomplish. Government can only re-distribute wealth, an example of this is in six of the 10 wealthiest counties in the United States which are suburbs of Washington, D.C., a city that produces almost nothing of real economic value. Common sense should tell us that if government were to control most of America’s wealth, then 100% of us Americans would really be in trouble.
High taxation imposed upon the wealthy for no other reason but to redistribute wealth violates common sense and one of the most important established principles of our Founding Fathers. Over-taxation of the wealthy in order to provide for those less wealthy is Un-American and contradicts the principles that made America the most prosperous nation in history. The United States Federal Government’s role economic policy has always been to promote the general welfare but not provide for the general welfare of its people. Taxing the wealthy as a means for an equal distribution of wealth is a basic tenet of Marxism. The agenda of the American Socialist and Communist parties is to first over tax the rich that is essential to paving the way for an ultimate American socialist state.
It is a falsehood and is an idea contra to common sense to believe that capitalists create wealth at the expense of others. The reality is that real growth of private capital creates more and better jobs, higher wages, less expensive goods and services. Private capital grows with innovation, business ventures, with new machines, with scientific discoveries and technological advancements. Governments never produce capital, value and prosperity as efficiently as is achieved by private enterprise. The whole country will movie forward and enjoy a higher standard of living when free market capitalism is allowed to flourish. Promoting wealth, not providing charity should be the function of government. Wealthy people are much more efficient in helping the poor through private charitable organizations.
Common sense tells us that politicians who promote a healthy capitalist economic system will insure the general prosperity of Americans, yet it is the poor who habitually elect Democrats, presumably anticipating that elected Democrats will tax the wealthy in order to provide for the poor, yet we still have the POOR!
"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves."
--- Said to be the words of Abraham Lincoln
If the United States does not reverse its trend towards higher oppressive taxes on the wealthy it will soon become just another declining economic power like those of Europe. France's day of reckoning has already arrived: Its wealthy, best and brightest are saying goodbye to a nation they believe doesn't want them to succeed or become affluent.
http://www.cbn.com/tv/3255110732001
MONETARY POLICY --- Borrowing Temporary Prosperity at the Expense of Future Generations
The United States Dollar has no value except in its name only; it is no longer backed- up by anything of intrinsic value like gold or silver. The basis of value in today’s dollar is in the anticipation that the strength of the economy of the United States will continue to thrive. If confidence in the United States Dollar fails our entire economy may collapse. The supply of money, however, must in turn, keep pace with a growing economy; if there is not enough money to circulate in exchange for goods and services produced, then the economy tends to retract. Conversely, too much money in circulation tends to reduce the value of the dollar which is called inflation. Too much inflation reduces confidence in the dollar which results in a stagnating economy.
The United States Federal Reserve Bank (Fed) has been aggressively manipulating the money U.S. supply by dumping unprecedented amounts of cheap money on to the U.S. economy in hopes of stimulating economic activity. This has produced some temporary positive trends, especially in the stock market, however, in the long-run this will only succeed in creating consumer inflation, the worst type of inflation, inflation that is driven by monetary policy distortions instead of by booming economic demand — inflation combined with stagnate business activity.
The United States’ monetary policy has recently relied largely on “quantitative easing” which seeks to lower longer-term interest rates. “Quantitative easing” (QE) runs the risk of rising inflation, a process that already has started. Not only are the Fed’s actions unlikely to stimulate domestic economic activity as seen with the dollar weakness. The unfolding of "inflation creation" will likely will exacerbate the current downturn in U.S. business activity, where liquidity-strapped consumers likely will be forced to ration other consumption in order to pay for necesssities.
There’s no real evidence that QE has helped the economy significantly. Providing liquidity during the crisis in 2008 was one thing, but the ongoing attempts to expand reserves and the money supply have mostly served to bailout banks from their bad mortgages and other assets that are being bought up.
Thinking that we needed more monetary easing in the first place misdiagnosed the problem. Some argue that our slow recovery is the result of a lack of aggregate demand. But the bad investments leading up to the financial crisis and the recession take time to unwind. It also takes time for entrepreneurs to reallocate those resources to new, better uses. Misguided policies that subsidize the mistakes leading up to the crisis have slowed the readjustment process even further. Every time we try to prop up housing prices or bail out failed industries, we slow economic recovery.
The rest of the World is protesting the monetary policy of the United States by heavy selling of the U.S. dollar against most major currencies and heavy buying of gold and silver followed the Fed’s action, clearly signaling that the global investment community believed that the Fed would succeed in debasing the U.S. dollar and creating U.S. inflation. Irrespective of near-term swings, however, including central bank intervention, precious metals and the stronger major currencies should continue to do well, over the long haul, against the U.S. dollar, preserving the purchasing power that otherwise will be lost in a debased U.S. currency.
SOCIAL SECURITY -- The Greatest of all Ponzi Schemes
Democrats often accuse Republicans of desiring to dismantle Social Security and Medicare. Historically, however, it has been Republicans who have made the only credible attempts to save Social Security for future generations. There has never been a bill seriously considered by Republicans in Congress that was intended to eliminate Social Security altogether. Democrats, however, conceal the hard reality that Social Security will indeed destroy itself unless drastic fiscal changes dealing with Social Security are made.
The United States must make some reductions in entitlement spending lest we suffer the similar economic and political chaos that now plagues many countries in Europe like the Greeks, Italy, Portugal and Ireland . Our largest entitlement programs are Social Security and Medicare that if these popular programs continue, as we know it now, they will become bankrupt within 20 years. A painful but almost inevitable common sense solution may be to gradually transform the Social Security system into strictly a disability insurance program that pays benefits to only those who are disabled and unable to work.
Everyone with common sense should understand that if one plans to someday comfortably retire from working they should not count on Social Security alone for their retirement but also include something like a 401K plan. No one should depend on a government run ponzi scheme to finance something as important as ones retirement future. Remember, not only do individuals contribute to Social Security but employers do also, 15% of income before taxes. If you averaged only 30K over your working life, that's close to $220,500. If you calculate the future value of $4,500 per year (yours & your employer's contribution) at a simple 5% (less than what the govt. pays on the money that it borrows), after 49 years of working (me) you'd have $892,919.98. If you took out only 3% per year, you receive $26,787.60 per year and it would last better than 30 years, and that's with no interest paid on that final amount on deposit! If you bought an annuity and it paid 4% per year, you'd have a lifetime income of $2,976.40 per month. The politicians in Washington have pulled off a bigger Ponzi scheme than Bernie Madhoff ever had.
http://blog.heritage.org/2014/04/11/washington-post-op-ed-didnt-pay-shes-right/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
Most people believe that their money paid into Social Security is going into their own retirement nest egg, well, this is not true. The money one pays into the Social Security is actually a TAX and the government spends every penny it collects from that Social Security tax. People who now collect Social Security are not receiving benefits paid out of their individual account but are receiving money from people currently working and paying into the system. There will soon be more people collecting Social Security than people paying into the system because the population over age 62 is increasing and are living longer. http://mercatus.org/publication/update-social-security-remains-unsustainable-path?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=link&utm_campaign=fbpage
It is absurd to think that we can perpetuate a system that requires people who are still working to pay a Social Security tax so that other people who are over age 62, that are perfectly able to work for a living, can then take a paid vacation for the rest of their lives at the expense of others. Would not a privatized retirement plan, where individuals own and control their retirement work better?
ECONOMIC JUSTICE --- The Selling of Sugar Coated Fascism
The political liberal elitist have recently been very successful in converting a growing number of American voters into trusting and believing in political, social and economic agendas which are unsound and basically Un-American. Progressive liberal thinking Americans have become in effect fascists who are unable to accept that reality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dg0Axyvlkm0
The left wing’s buzz phrase “income inequality” advances the misleading perception that people with lower income in the United States will always remain trapped within their economic condition. What is abundantly evident to anyone who has traveled extensively to foreign nations is that no one in the United States is condemned to remain within a social or economic class of their birth. There is no better place than in the United States of America where a coal miner's son can become whatever he aspires to be. American’s unique advantage is called income mobility. A recent increase in income differences has not caused a decline in this upward mobility. The Heritage Foundation, Rea Hederman and David Azerrad provide an in-depth study of this issue that debunks the progressive politician's “income inequality” assumptions. The facts remain that the standard of living opportunities in America still continues to increase for everyone in spite of an increasingly adverse business climate. One fact is clear, how much the top 1 percent of America’s population earns has little or no relevance on whether the bottom 20 percent can move up.
Corporate America is not the source of America’s income inequality problem. A freer system of commerce, one that allows corporations to thrive, is the best solution to resume the path toward prosperity for lower income Americans. Don’t blame big business if you are finding life so difficult, blame yourself, get-up off of your lazy butt and improve your situation through hard work. Start making sound plans and decisions for your own future. Most of all, do not fall into the entitlement trap by believing that another persons wealth must be shared. No one should be entitled to another person's prosperity. "…no one ought to harm another in his health, liberty, or possessions." --- John Locke
The real American Dream is first and foremost about hard work and the opportunities created by a free economy. Stemming from our founding principles, it can be summed up by a simple equation:
Economic Freedom + Culture of Work = Prosperity and Opportunity
Like or hate the capitalist system, capitalism is the apparatus that has provided Americans with the highest general standard of living throughout the history of the world. Progressive liberals would abandon this in favor of a system where personal initiative and rewards for achievement is punished.
“Wherefore, laying aside all national pride and prejudice in favor of modes and forms, the plain truth is, that it is wholly owing to the constitution of the people, and not to the constitution of the government… Oppression is often the consequence, but seldom or never the means of riches; and though avarice will preserve a man from being necessitously poor, it generally makes him too timorous to be wealthy.” --- Thomas Paine 1776
“A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.” --- Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address (1801)
“Worldwide, the data indicate that when economic freedom increases, so do life expectancy, employment, literacy and the protection of civil rights. The poor become well off, the environment becomes cleaner, and people report higher levels of happiness. The same holds true within the United States, where states that pursue economic freedom deliver greater prosperity and opportunity. A 2008 study showed, for example, that when a state increases its economic freedom, the poor gain in income. And the data show similar results across the world: When a country makes freedom-based reforms, people rise of out poverty at remarkable rates, choosing entrepreneurship, jobs and a better life… The U.S. has dropped from third place to 16th in the Economic Freedom of the World Index. And the average income of low-income households is now declining. Since 2000, when our economic freedom score began to decline, income for the poorest in our country has fallen 15 percent, according to Census Bureau data. Government debt, cronyism and rampant regulatory burdens are eroding our freedom and our future.” --- Allison Kasic
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/08/08/2930184/allison-kasic-freedom-key-to-well.html#storylink=cpy” --- By Allison Kasic, of Arlington, Va., who manages academic research programs at the Charles Koch Foundation.
Citizens of the United States of America can continue to enjoy individual economic opportunity only if government can reverse its gradual transformation towards a welfare state. All Americans should be able to look at their future not as having economic security through government but through unrestrained individual economic opportunity. Ironically it is the popular vote of the American people that is compromising America's future. A future golden age of American prosperity is certain to be lost forever if drastic steps are not taken and very soon.
What is the perfect form of regime? Is it aristocracy, monarchy, theocracy, democracy, some blend of the different systems, or totally no government at all (anarchy)? This much we know, that history demonstrates that democratic forms of government endure until voters discover that they can vote themselves endless handouts out of their public treasuries. Democracies degenerate into tyranny when undisciplined societies surrender individual liberties to politicians who promise government provided welfare. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the time of the ancient Greeks has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, pure democracies progress through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependence back into bondage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdS6fyUIklI#t=310
The malignant tendencies of democracy tends to allow liberal political idealists to promote public policy that exacerbates economic growth and prosperity. The uneducated masses tend to dictate public policy for the sake of personal gain rather than the good of the nation. Liberal politicians strive to utilize this fickle nature of the masses to create an incessant dependency of the people on the government as it expands its power under the guise of utility and economic justice, finally reducing people into being nothing more than a herd of timid and industrious animals of which the government is the shepherd. Too much democracy tends to not only to create a people that are dependent and needy, but also a government that little by little extinguishes peoples spirits and enervates their souls by giving them all they want, so that they will be naively content without hopes, dreams, or a will of their own. Unrestrained democracy unleashes a sort of despotism that is unlike any other. Unrestrained taxation on the makers of free-market goods and services for the purpose of supporting an entitlement society results in an erosion of that society's general prosperity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsTbkB9hOuw
Democracy cannot be successfully inaugurated without virtuous citizens and since the masses are by nature basically corrupt a democratic republic is therefore the most feasible form of government. Therefore the United States of America is not a pure Democracy. Fearing the inherent dangers of a Democracy, the Founding Fathers wisely established the United States government as a Republic.
“Nothing is more fickle and inconstant than the masses” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
The government of the United States is limited in that what is not expressly written into the Constitution (i.e., do not have to be enumerated) must still be retained by the people. All delegated powers of the federal government are only authorized to be performed so long as such delegated powers are expressly delegated to the federal government specifically by the Constitution.
The government may not redistribute wealth, as that is a violation of one of the most important established principles of our Founding Fathers. The principles of limited government are written into the Constitution of the United States guaranteeing that a pure democracy, tending to foster a welfare state, would never intervene to stifle individualism by forced equality and opportunity through regulation of property and wealth redistribution.
The Founding Fathers were very clear as to their definitions and intentions of the words promote and provide, America was not to become a welfare state. The Federal Government of the United States has no business in providing welfare in the form of income to its citizens, the United States Constitution does not provide such a function and therefore is likely unconstitutional.
To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it. - Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
Deficit spending for national defense is justifiable but deficit spending for social welfare programs must always be carefully questioned. The role of our federal government is to promote welfare not provide welfare. The Preamble to United States Constitution establishes the basic charter role of the United States Federal Government. The Preamble, in dealing with the welfare of the nation, simply charges the federal government to “promote the general welfare” and to “provide for the common defense”. Preamble to the US Constitution:
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
The definitions of promote and provide:
Promote - “support or encourage something, to encourage the growth and development of something”
Provide - “to supply somebody with something, or be a source of something needed or wanted by somebody”.
Common sense demands dramatic corrections to decrease government spending, reduce government over-regulating and decreased income tax rates. If we do not act soon, we are bound to see an America like we had under Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s, double-digit inflation, double-digit unemployment, and double-digit mortgage interest rates. The political pendulum will swing again back to the right and hopefully, after the four years of the “Obomination”, someone like Ronald Reagan will reverse the damage done.
INCREASING THE MINIMUM WAGE --- Robbing Peter to Pay Paul
Governments should allow labor markets to set wages naturally and not legislate a mandated minimum wage. Laborers deserve the ability to earn a livable wage, however, wage earners should understand that livable wages are only possible through gaining a marketable education or trade skill and not counting on the government to artificially bump-up low wages. When the government artificially increases the mandatory minimum wage, everyone is harmed. The reality is that the majority of inexperienced, unskilled workers in the United States are not even worth the current federal Minimum Wage. The U.S. Dollar is simply a medium of exchange for goods and services rendered. When workers are compensated for their labor at an inflated rate, more than the actual value of their labor, the result is a devaluation of the overall dollar’s worth. Inflation hurts everyone especially the lower wage earner because even though a worker may have more money to spend, the dollars will not buy as much. Under inflation a higher per hour minimum wage can become worth no more than the previous minimum wage. Monies that would pay for a higher minimum wage come out of either the pockets of skilled and experienced co-workers, by passing on the higher costs of labor onto consumers, from company profits or a combination of all three. Companies will continue to produce their goods and services only if there is a reasonable expectation of an acceptable profit. Companies deal with excessive labor costs by cutting worker benefits or shipping positions overseas where labor is less expensive or companies will simply go out of business.
A common justification for higher minimum wages is the “labor theory of value”, as described by Marxists, which tries to explain that the price of something produced is dependent upon how much human labor goes into producing goods and services and that laborers alone, on the job, will established the value of an item. In other words labor alone is the creator of wealth. Reality demonstrates that the value of goods and services produced do not depend upon how much labor or how hard one labors to produce something. Some things take more human labor to produce but can only be sold at a fraction of the cost in labor that it took to produce it and sometimes it cannot be sold at any price at all. Prior to producing goods and services of value, it most always takes risky investments and accumulated wealth to put forth the capital needed to build new production capacity. Those who invest in new ventures or are simply seeking to expand existing businesses are taking risks and sacrifice their wealth with the anticipation that their investments will produce a reasonable return on their investments. Therefore, investors and managers who are responsible for producing something of value should be rewarded with the lion’s share of profits. The laborer’s share of profits should be in line with the market value of their labor rendered.
President Roosevelt prolonged the Great Depression by inflating the wages of workers, which caused inflation and that stiffed economic growth for the entire nation. http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409
A government-regulated minimum wage does little to help the poor. A unsupportable higher minimum wage is more likely to hurt the people it is supposed to help by making entry level jobs harder to find jobs and higher level jobs pay less. Minimum wage workers tend be young and unskilled. Less than half of workers under the age of 25 are currently employed and many rely on low paying job opportunities to get their first break, to prove themselves as having marketable employee qualities that can earn them higher paying jobs. It is only fair that the hardest working, most efficient new employee should be given the early raise over the less productive employee. The new employees may lack the experience and skills to compete for higher paying jobs, the best employees must not be forced to work in an absolute minimum wage system that forces equal compensation regardless of being a better employee. Raising the minimum wage makes it harder for these first time inexperienced workers to find a job, because businesses will either eliminate positions or choose to hire someone with more experience at the higher mandated wage. Minimum wage jobs could also be a pathway to retraining for workers facing a mismatch between their skills and available openings. An excessively high minimum wage would limit such opportunities, and that's particularly dangerous during this historically slow recovery.
CAPITALISM vs. SOCIALISM --- Reality vs. Deception
"There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism—by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide." --- Ayn Rand. Socialism always fails because it is a fundamental trait of human behavior; that people respond best when they anticipate being rewarded and not punished for their efforts.
“If socialists understood economics, they wouldn’t be socialists.” --- Friedrich Von Hayek, Nobel Prize Economics.
Conundrum - Free people are not equal, equal people are not free. Six Conundrums for those who would believe that socialism would be better for Americans:
1. America is capitalist and greedy - yet half of the population is subsidized.
2. Half of the population is subsidized - yet they think they are victims.
3. They think they are victims - yet their representatives run the government.
4. Their representatives run the government - yet the poor keep getting poorer.
5. The poor keep getting poorer - yet they have things that people in other countries only dream about.
6. They have things that people in other countries only dream about - yet they want America to be more like those other countries.
“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” --- Alexis de Tocqueville a French political thinker and historian best known for his works "Democracy in America" and "The Old Regime and the Revolution".
Our nation was founded on the principles of economic liberty and opportunity, not forced economic equality. The Founding Fathers recognized the importance of private ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods and services as the key to healthy commerce and overall economic prosperity. Capitalism is a natural and moral phenomenon, central to conceptions of freedom and liberty. The Public ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods and services, however, tends to infringe on economic liberty and prosperity of the public in general.
“…The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.”—Winston Churchill
“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have.” ---Thomas Jefferson
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."-- Thomas Jefferson
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." -- Thomas Jefferson
"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."-- Thomas Jefferson
I have lived in four different foreign countries that have socialism and have seen firsthand the misery that socialism imposes on people. It does not work and history has proven that. Those who want, socialism should please get out of our great country and move to some Socialist State.
The famous author Ayn Rand experienced firsthand the fallacies of Marxism and the magic free market Capitalism; she sums it all in one of Ayn Rand’s famous quotes:
“If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans … the fact that they were the people who created the phrase ‘to make money’. No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity- to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created… America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices to the common good, but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America's industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages, and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance- and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way.” --- Ayn Rand
THE LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE AGENDA IN AMERICA --- Where Is Joe McCarthy Now When We Really Need Him?
“Immediate necessity makes many things convenient, which if continued would grow into oppressions. Expedience and right are different things… The property of no man is secure in the present unbraced system of things. The mind of the multitude is left at random, and seeing no fixed object before them, they pursue such as fancy or opinion starts.” --- Thomas Paine 1776
I believe that capitalism can survive in the United States in spite of its obvious vulnerabilities, however; every loyal American must understand that behind the scene there has been long term planning by shrewd extreme left wing radicals who are now close to hitting pay dirt. The major players include acolytes of the communist Saul Alinski and his radical disciples who conspire to install a socialist government in the United States by taking over the country from within.
Supporters of liberal progressive political causes are essentially advancing the agendas of the Socialist Party USA (SPUSA) and the COMMUNIST PARTY USA (CPUSA) . There is little difference between the agendas of the Democratic Party, Socialist Party and the Communist Parties. American Democrats are either hard-core Marxists or “useful idiots” who have succumbed to the influences of international Marxism and have no idea to whom they are selling their souls. As recently as 2009, the "Democratic Socialists of America" claimed in its official newsletter that more than 70 of its members were serving in the United States Congress. President Obama has always denied that he is a committed socialist, however, his track record indicate otherwise and the socialist "New Party" in Chicago claimed him as a member in their official 1996 newsletter.
The following are official agendas for the Socialist, Communist and Democratic parties of the United States:
http://www.cpusa.org/party-program/
http://socialistparty-usa.net/platform.html
https://www.democrats.org/party-platform
Compare the Liberal Progressive Agenda plan with literature from the manifestos and writings of the Community Party USA (CPUSA) and the Socialist Party USA (SPUSA):
• Progressive Agenda: “Raise the federal minimum wage, so that it reaches $15/hour, while indexing it to inflation.”
SPUSA: “We call for a minimum wage of $15 per hour, indexed to the cost of living.”
CPUSA: Calls for “struggles for peace, equality for the racially and nationally oppressed, equality for women job creation programs, increased minimum wage. … Even with ultra-right control of the Federal government, peoples legislative victories, such as increasing the minimum wage, can be won on an issue-by-issue basis locally, statewide, and even nationally.”
• Progressive Agenda: “Reform the National Labor Relations Act, to enhance workers’ right to organize and rebuild the middle class.”
SPUSA: “The Socialist Party stands for the right of all workers to organize, for worker control of industry through the democratic organization of the workplace.”
CPUSA: “One of the most crucial ways of increasing the strength and unity of the working class as a whole is organizing the unorganized. Working-class unity depends on uniting all the diverse sectors of the multiracial, multinational working class in the U.S. … Speeding up the organization of unorganized workers is one of the most important challenges to labor and all progressive forces.”
• Progressive Agenda: “Pass comprehensive immigration reform to grow the economy and protect against exploitation of low-wage workers.”
SPUSA: “We defend the rights of all immigrants to education, health care, and full civil and legal rights and call for an unconditional amnesty program for all undocumented people. We oppose the imposition of any fees on those receiving amnesty. We call for full citizenship rights upon demonstrating residency for six months.”
CPUSA: Declares the “struggle for immigrant rights is a key component of the struggle for working class unity in our country today.”
• Progressive Agenda: Pass national paid sick leave. Pass national paid family leave.
CPUSA: In October 2014, hails that “women are fighting back to defend their jobs and their families against candidates who want to destroy women’s reproductive rights, health care, family leave and paid sick days. Women’s voices and votes can make the difference in this election in the U.S. Senate and House, for Governors and State Legislatures, and in the movement going forward for full equality.”
• Progressive Agenda: “Make Pre-K, after-school programs and childcare universal.”
SPUSA: “We support public child care starting from infancy, and public education starting at age three, with caregivers and teachers of young children receiving training, wages, and benefits comparable to that of teachers at every other level of the educational system.”
• Progressive Agenda: “Earned Income Tax Credit.” “Implement the ‘Buffett Rule’ so millionaires pay their fair share.”
SPUSA: “We call for a steeply graduated income tax and a steeply graduated estate tax. …”
CPUSA: “No taxes for workers and low and middle income people; progressive taxation of the wealthy and private corporations. …”
Communists/Marxist/socialists wannabes, do-gooders and pseudo-intellectual liberals are nothing but useful idiots to the one world Marxism. If and when the hard-core Marxists elite do come to power, the moderate liberal activists will have a rude awakening, as the power elites of Marxism will surely liquidate them as expendable garbage.
Anyone with common sense should see the indications that the American economic system is about to undergo a profound shift. “Never allow a crisis to go to waste,” President Obama’s former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel famously stated. “Never waste a good crisis,” former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Americans, said Obama, should discover great opportunity in great crisis.” What kind of opportunity? “Capitalism,” former Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner said, “will be different.” Emanuel, the former White House chief of staff, told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that the financial meltdown provides an opportunity “to do things that Americans have pushed off for years.” It is basic choices between opposing principles that Obama is telling us are "stale" and "no longer apply." And if you think that ideas and principles still matter, you're a cynic!
We now have an extreme left wing President. Duped citizens of the United States are allowing this conversion to a welfare state to develop. A perfect storm of Marxism is developing and the Marxists are now salivating at their mouths with anticipation at the next step, which is nationalizing the banks. The Obama is already planning to seize private 401(k) and Individual Retirement Account (IRA) plans to more “fairly” distribute taxpayer-funded pensions to everyone advocating a government forced “Guaranteed Retirement Account” (GRA).
http://www.infowars.com/government-lays-groundwork-to-confiscate-your-401k-and-ira-this-is-happening/#sthash.8VdXFZsi.dpuf
Covert Marxist ideology has been pumped into the soft heads of our impressionable young Americans to make them believe, for example, that immoral behavior, including homosexual behavior is an acceptable norm. Half-baked intellectuals have been occupying positions of power in our government, civil service, business, mass media, and educational systems now for over forty years. We are stuck with them; we can't get rid of to them. Pseudo-intellectuals have contaminated the minds of our precious youth with ideas that support their goals of establishing a Marxist society in America. Three generations of American youth have now been programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern. Now you can't change their minds even if you expose them to authentic information. Even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you still cannot change the basic perception and the logic of their concept of what is right or wrong behavior.
Joseph Stalin, the former leader of the Soviet Union once said: "America is like a healthy body and it's resistance is threefold: It's patriotism, It's morality, and It's spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within."
The period from the 1920s until the 1990s, the Marxist Soviet Union amassed a concentrated effort to infiltrate American society with the purpose of overthrowing the United States and its capitalism through systematic programs of ideological subversion and indoctrination. Today the Soviet Union no longer exists but it is obvious that Marxist ideologues along with their useful idiots are still actively working to destabilize America's morals, values, destabilize the American economy and provoke crises through ideological subversion in order to convert the free world into a one world Marxist state.
Ideological subversion employs four steps through which a nation destroys itself from within, they are:
1. Demoralization --- This occurs in a society lacking in moral standards. This is achieved through a process of using American Constitutional rights to nurture conditions where morals and truth no longer matter. A person who is demoralized is unable to process correct information and facts mean nothing. This is accomplished by:
a. Weakening America's basic patriotic American institutions
b. Eliminating laws governing obscenity by calling them censorship and a violation of free speech and free press.
c. Breaking down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in the public media, presenting homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as normal and natural.
d. Promoting the legalization of recreational drugs.
e. Breaking down traditional marriage and the family value structure.
f. Promoting the separation of church and state and idea that the practice of religion perpetuates ignorance.
g. Degrading higher education where the world of academia promotes indoctrination rather than quality education. Where the art of critical thinking and the Socratic dialogue are corrupted by dialectic subversion.
2. Destabilization --- This is occurs with a disruption of the economy along with foreign relations and national defense systems, when people surrender their individual liberties to politicians who have promised lavish government provided welfare programs. This occurs when the principal of free-market competition is eliminated and replaced by a strong, overpowering central government.
3. Crisis --- A violent change in a nation’s power structure and economy occurs.
4. Normalization --- Socialism, Marxism and Communism become the new norm.
Please take time to view this shocking video transcription that exposes the former Soviet Union's subversive tactics against western society. See link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA
The Congressional Record, Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963, when Congressman Albert S. Herlong Jr. of Florida listed 45 goals of the Communist party in the United States, uncovered the goals of the American Communist Party. They include:
15) Capture one or both of the political parties of the United States.
16) Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming activities violate civil rights.
24) Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them censorship and a violation of free speech and free press.
25) Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26) Present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as "Normal, natural”.
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
The Communists have now achieved all of their goals listed above.
RACISM - Democrats vs. Republicans on the subject of Racism
The United States has moved-on from the dark period in our history when racism was pervasive and accepted as the norm. No one can say that racism has been completely eradicated as there are still a few people who sadly practice bigotry against other humans for no other reason but for their ethnicity. Do racists tend to identify themselves with one political party over another? The following are a few basic historical facts that every American should know.
From: “Back to Basics for the Republican Party” --- by Michael Zak
Fact: The Republican Party was founded primarily to oppose slavery, and Republicans eventually abolished slavery. The Democratic Party fought them and tried to maintain and expand slavery. The 13th Amendment, abolishing slavery, passed in 1865 with 100% Republican support but only 23% Democrat support in congress.
Why is this indisputable fact so rarely mentioned? PBS documentaries about slavery and the Civil War barely mention it, for example. One can certainly argue that the parties have changed in 150 years (more about that below), but that does not change the historical fact that it was the Democrats who supported slavery and the Republicans who opposed it. And that indisputable fact should not be airbrushed out for fear that it will tarnish the modern Democratic Party.
Had the positions of the parties been the opposite, and the Democrats had fought the Republicans to end slavery, the historical party roles would no doubt be repeated incessantly in these documentaries. Funny how that works.
Fact: During the Civil War era, the "Radical Republicans" were given that name because they wanted to not only end slavery but also to endow the freed slaves with full citizenship, equality, and rights.
Yes, that was indeed a radical idea at the time!
Fact: Lincoln's Vice President, Andrew Johnson, was a strongly pro-Union (but also pro-slavery) Democrat who had been chosen by Lincoln as a compromise running mate to attract Democrats. After Lincoln was assassinated, Johnson thwarted Republican efforts in Congress to recognize the civil rights of the freed slaves, and Southern Democrats continued to thwart any such efforts for close to a century.
Fact: The 14th Amendment, giving full citizenship to freed slaves, passed in 1868 with 94% Republican support and 0% Democrat support in congress. The 15th Amendment, giving freed slaves the right to vote, passed in 1870 with 100% Republican support and 0% Democrat support in congress.
Regardless of what has happened since then, shouldn't we be grateful to the Republicans for these Amendments to the Constitution? And shouldn't we remember which party stood for freedom and which party fiercely opposed it?
Fact: The Ku Klux Klan was originally and primarily an arm of the Southern Democratic Party. Its mission was to terrorize freed slaves and "ni**er-loving" (their words) Republicans who sympathized with them.
Why is this fact conveniently omitted in so many popular histories and depictions of the KKK, including PBS documentaries? Had the KKK been founded by Republicans, that fact would no doubt be repeated constantly on those shows.
Fact: In the 1950s, President Eisenhower, a Republican, integrated the US military and promoted civil rights for minorities. Eisenhower pushed through the Civil Rights Act of 1957. One of Eisenhower's primary political opponents on civil rights prior to 1957 was none other than Lyndon Johnson, then the Democratic Senate Majority Leader. LBJ had voted the straight segregationist line until he changed his position and supported the 1957 Act.
Fact: The historic Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supported by a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats in both houses of Congress. In the House, 80 percent of the Republicans and 63 percent of the Democrats voted in favor. In the Senate, 82 percent of the Republicans and 69 percent of the Democrats voted for it.
Fact: Contrary to popular misconception, the parties never "switched" on racism. The Democrats just switched from overt racism to a subversive strategy of getting blacks as dependent as possible on government to secure their votes. At the same time, they began a cynical smear campaign to label anyone who opposes their devious strategy as greedy racists.
Following the epic civil rights struggles of the 1960s, the South began a major demographic shift from Democratic to Republican dominance. Many believe that this shift was motivated by racism. While it is certainly true that many Southern racists abandoned the Democratic Party over its new support for racial equality and integration, the notion that they would flock to the Republican Party -- which was a century ahead of the Democrats on those issues -- makes no sense whatsoever.
Yet virtually every liberal, when pressed on the matter, will inevitably claim that the parties "switched," and most racist Democrats became Republicans! In their minds, this historical ju jitsu maneuver apparently transfers all the past sins of the Democrats (slavery, the KKK, Jim Crow laws, etc.) onto the Republicans and all the past virtues of the Republicans (e.g., ending slavery) onto the Democrats! That's quite a feat!
It is true that Barry Goldwater's opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 probably attracted some racist Democrats to the Republican Party. However, Goldwater was not a racist -- at least not an overt racist like so many Southern Democrats of the time, such as George Wallace and Bull Connor. He publicly professed racial equality, and his opposition to the 1964 Act was based on principled grounds of states rights. In any case, his libertarian views were out of step with the mainstream, and he lost the 1964 Presidential election to LBJ in a landslide.
Senator Barry Goldwater's opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act provided liberals an opening to target the Republican Party as racist, and they have tenaciously repeated that label so often over the years that it is now the conventional wisdom among liberals. But it is really nothing more than an unsubstantiated myth -- a convenient political lie. If the Republican Party was any more racist than the Democratic Party even in 1964, why did a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats in both houses of Congress vote for the 1964 Civil Rights Act? The idea that Goldwater's vote on the 1964 Civil Rights Act trumps a century of history of the Republican Party is ridiculous, to say the least.
Every political party has its racists, but the notion that Republicans are more racist than Democrats or any other party is based on nothing more than a constant drumbeat of unsubstantiated innuendo and assertions by Leftists, constantly echoed by the liberal media. It is a classic example of a Big Lie that becomes "true" simply by virtue of being repeated so many times.
A more likely explanation for the long-term shift from Democratic to Republican dominance in the South was the perception, fair or not, that the Democratic Party had rejected traditional Christian religious values and embraced radical secularism. That includes its hardline support for abortion, its rejection of prayer in public schools, its promotion of the gay agenda, and many other issues.
In the 1960s the Democratic Party changed its strategy for dealing with African Americans. Thanks to earlier Republican initiatives on civil rights, blatant racial oppression was no longer a viable political option. Whereas before that time Southern Democrats had overtly and proudly segregated and terrorized blacks, the national Democratic Party decided instead to be more subtle and get them as dependent on government as possible. As LBJ so elegantly put it (in a famous moment of candor that was recorded for posterity), "I'll have those niggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years." At the same time, the Democrats started a persistent campaign of lies and innuendo, falsely equating any opposition to their welfare state with racism.
From a purely cynical political perspective, the Democratic strategy of black dependence has been extremely effective. LBJ knew exactly what he was doing. African Americans routinely vote well over 90 percent Democratic for fear that Republicans will cut their government benefits and welfare programs. And what is the result? Before LBJ's Great Society welfare programs, the black illegitimacy rate was as low as 23 percent, but now it has more than tripled to 72 percent.
Most major American city governments have been run by liberal Democrats for decades, and most of those cities have large black sections that are essentially dysfunctional anarchists. Cities like Detroit are overrun by gangs and drug dealers, with burned out homes on every block in some areas. The land values are so low due to crime, blight, and lack of economic opportunity that condemned homes are not even worth rebuilding. Who wants to build a home in an urban war zone? Yet they keep electing liberal Democrats -- and blaming "racist" Republicans for their problems!
Washington DC is another city that has been dominated by liberal Democrats for decades. It spends more per capita on students than almost any other city in the world, yet it has some of the worst academic achievement anywhere and is a drug-infested hellhole. Barack Obama would not dream of sending his own precious daughters to the DC public schools, of course -- but he assures us that those schools are good enough for everyone else. In fact, Obama was instrumental in killing a popular and effective school voucher program in DC, effectively killing hopes for many poor black families trapped in those dysfunctional public schools. His allegiance to the teachers unions apparently trumps his concern for poor black families.
A strong argument could also be made that Democratic support for perpetual affirmative action is racist. It is, after all, the antithesis of Martin Luther King's dream of a color-blind society. Not only is it "reverse racism," but it is based on the premise that African Americans are incapable of competing in the free market on a level playing field. In other words, it is based on the notion of white supremacy, albeit "benevolent" white supremacy rather than the openly hostile white supremacy of the pre-1960s Democratic Party.
The next time someone claims that Republicans are racist and Democrats are not, don't fall for it.
OBAMACARE ---If you believe that our health care system is expensive now, just wait until you experience what it will cost if healthcare is to become "free", life is not a free ride.
Quality health care should remain within the private sector if it is to become to truly become affordable. A government that would force health care upon citizens would be doing a disservice to hard working American citizens. “Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured but not everyone must prove they are a citizen. And now, any of those who refuse or are unable to prove they are citizens will receive free insurance paid for by those who are forced to buy insurance because they are citizens.” ---Ben Stein
The Affordable Healthcare Act known as “Obamacare” is proving to be the most expensive and ill-conceived piece of legislation ever to be enacted by the United States Federal Government.
http://mercatus.org/Medicaid/EconomicsofMedicaid.html?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=research&utm_campaign=MercatusTweets
The prime architect of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Jonathan Gruber, promoted a deliberate lack of transparency in selling Obamacare to the Congress and the American people. Gruber admits, it was the ‘Stupidity Of The American Voter’ that was key in suckering people into supporting this bill that would have otherwise been killed had the true be known.
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/223578-obamacare-architect-lack-of-transparency-helped-law-pass
Here are the 10,535 pages of Obamacare condensed to 4 sentences:
1. In order to insure the uninsured, we first have to un-insure the insured.
2. Next, we require the newly un-insured to be re-insured.
3. To re-insure the newly uninsured, they are required to pay extra charges to be re-insured.
4. The extra charges are required so that the original in-sured, who became un-insured, and then became re-insured, can pay enough extra so that the original un-insured can be insured, which will be free of charge to them.
The big insurance companies have quickly applied measures to take advantage of the poorly written Obamacare law and are now making even larger profits at the expense of Obamacare beneficiaries by passing increased costs on to consumers. http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/29/surprise-large-insurance-companies-are-raking-in-cash-thanks-to-obamacare/
All along, from the very beginning, “Obamacare” has been fabricated by liberal Democrats as a monstrous “Bate and Switch” scheme on the American public. Each day that we come closer to full implementation of Obamacare, it becomes obvious that the plan, as Congress passed it, is destined to failure. Even Democrats are now conceding that the plan will cost much more than was original planned. The people who need affordable healthcare coverage the most will be left with something that is not what they had expected. Liberals are already talking about fixing the plan by replacing it with a universal, government single payer system or outright socialized medicine. This was the original plan all along. Obamacare, in the minds and agendas of liberal Democrats has always been just a stepping-stone for outright socialized medicine and President Obama has admitted that himself. Obama wants socialized medicine and his socialist hoodlums in Congress lied when they said that their healthcare reform bill would not evolve not into a “single payer” or socialized medicine system.
The most pressing but overlooked problem with our American health care system is in its decreasing capacity to provide quality healthcare to all who would demand it, regardless of how much money is paid into the system. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0QT1kn12Es&feature=youtu.be
http://mercatus.org/video/exploring-affordable-care-act-what-impact-and-what-necessary-successful-reform
We will never be able to pay for a healthcare system when the cost for that system will continue to balloon out of control, which it will. The diminishing capacity of our system to provide health care for everyone will cause both a degradation of health care quality as well as unacceptable increases in costs as more and more people put demands on a health care system that does not have the capacity to treat everyone who requests its benefits.
The Federal government will certainly fail if it attempts to become the single payer provider of health care to all citizens. Affordable healthcare for all can only be realized if the Federal Government would concentrate on promoting programs that would increase the capacity and accessibility of our private healthcare system. There are currently not enough health care providers to provide for all who would demand health care under a government-mandated system like Obamacare.
More and more present and future health care providers are changing their career plans as the compensation for healthcare providers is becoming unacceptably low. Under Obamacare the capacity problem will get even worse as the Obamscare care plan reduces medical payments in order to afford an increasing tidal wave increased demand on a healthcare system that will not provide adequate incentives for those who are the providers in the system.
Most of what Republicans have said about Obamacare and its implications are 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.
Obamacare will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. Federal bureaucrats will ultimately make all decisions about personal health care 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. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/10/gans-obamacares-latest-casualty-rehabilitative-hos/
However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. 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. There is no provision in the U.S. Constitution that grants Congress the authority to regulate health care.
The employer mandate to provide insurance coverage to all employees if a business has over 50 full-time workers is being delayed from 2014 until 2015. The shift to after the mid-term elections is obviously intentional. Of course, they don't want business to experience the economic backlash of ObamaCare before these midterms. However, the individual mandate that all individuals have health insurance or face a fine from this tyrannical government remains in effect to begin in 2014. The obvious reason for this being done is to push the single-payer, socialized medical care system onto the people.
Anyone who thinks socialized medicine will work is nothing more than an ostrich. Look at Canada, England and pretty much anywhere else that has it. Yes, it works well for people who are fairly healthy and just get allergies and colds. Have you taken a look at how fat Americans are becoming? Does anyone realize how much it is going to cost to keep him or her alive for twenty-five years or longer with very chronic health problems?
The Republican Party must now articulate a highly visible plan to the American people, a plan that will truly make health care affordable by promoting free market principles within the healthcare industry.
WHO IS BARRACK OBAMA? --- Do we really know the real Barrack Husain Obama?
“Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations.” --- James Madison, Speech at the Virginia Convention to ratify the Federal Constitution
The true identity of the man currently occupying the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue is seriously in question. The person we know today as Barack Hussein Obama, the 44th President of the United States, has multiple identities in terms of possessing numerous social security numbers. Credible investigations have proven that the Social Security Number that The President of the United States, Barrack Hussein Obama, currently uses is fraudulent, official records show this. Obama has been tracked as using several names including: Barry Sorrento and Harrison J. Bounel. Why has Barrack Obama tried to cover-up his true identity and academic records? http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/the-mystery-of-barack-obama-continues/
People who knew Barack Obama as a teenager allege to remember him as a lying, homosexual crack cocaine user.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy2K5SIuK2E#t=1238
President Obama will never admit to ever being a “card carrying” Communist however his history indicates that he is at least a socialist. Obama, however, would never admit to even being a socialist either but the correlation applies; if it sounds and acts just like a duck, it is most likely a duck.
Obama himself has admitted as having spent most of his entire life in the company of people who promote Marxist ideology. These are serious ideologues, ranging from Marxist mentors, college professors and preachers of "black liberation theology." Having learned so many valid ideological lessons from the disasters of the 20th century, it would be a crime to have to learn them all over again, however, Barrack Obama’s entire life shows a close association with people who advocate the overthrow of the United States capitalist system. One such individual was Frank Marshall Davis, an admitted card-carrying member of the Communist Party U.S.A and who by all accounts indicate was Barack Obama’s closest role model and mentor as a teenager. Some have even suggested that Frank Marshall Davis may have been the real father of Barrack Obama.
http://obamasrealfather.com
Obama had an extensive and politically lucrative 12-year relationship with William Ayers, a man that led a terrorist organization which declared war against the United States, killed law enforcement officers, bombed public government buildings, and plotted the most massive terrorist strike in the first 194 years of our nation’s history should be the dominate story screaming from every network newscast, 24-hour cable news channel, newspaper headline, and opinion page. Barrack Obama and William Ayers conspired together to funnel $16 million dollars of Chicago Annenberg Challenge grant money and matching funds into programs designed for Marxist indoctrination of young students instead of education — in effect, stealing the future from an entire generation of Chicago school children.
http://www.jeffhead.com/obamacircle.htm
“The first method for estimating the intelligence of a ruler is to look at the men he has around him.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
Barrack Obama cut his political teeth as a “Community Organizer” with ACORN. Barrack Obama was a lead Community Organizer for ACORN’s Project Vote. Obama trained the ACORN trainers, putting into action ACORN’s version of the Cloward-Piven Strategy using Saul Allinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” tactics. Barrack Obama conspired with ACORN in their nefarious scheme of advancing Marxism in the United States through ACORN's Mafia like extortion activities directed against Chicago banking system. ACORN has been one of the largest and most radical of the Marxist organizations operating in the United States. ACORN has been indicted by several states for voter registration fraud during past elections. ACORN’s constitution follows perfectly the outline for a covert Marxist revolution, as written by the founder of modern "Community Organizing", Saul Alinsky. ACORN’s mode of operation is based upon the Alinsky Method - Rules for Radicals. Essential to the ACORN strategy of ACORN strategy to establish Marxism in the United States is to coerce banks into extending home loans to unqualified borrowers. The resultant cascade of mortgage defaults would lead to the bankruptcy of banks and the federal government under the pretense of preempting a collapse of the economy would bail out the banks.
The true Barrack Obama has the reprehensible ultimate goal of advancing socialism by means of a continued orchestrated crisis and he is in the perfect position to continue just that as President of the United States. Barrack Obama’s obvious basic political scheme is to meltdown the American capitalism, a system that has made the United States the most prosperous nation in world history. President Obama has no intention of preventing the United States from “going over the fiscal cliff”. When Barrack Obama was a student at Columbia University, among his mentors were a pair of radical Marxists Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. Cloward and Piven develop the "Cloward Piven strategy" of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The "Cloward-Piven Strategy" would seek to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the capitalist system with increased tax rates on the wealthy, massive debt and government bureaucracy. The flood of impossible government demands from over spending, over taxing and over regulating would push the capitalist system into crisis and economic collapse, only to re-rebuild the economic system under a Marxist society.
“…he who seeks to deceive will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
President Obama has increasingly taken-on dictatorial behavior reminiscent of Adolph Hitler in 1933, after he was elected as Chancellor of Germany. Charles Krauthammer pointed to a double standard in Washington and asserted that if the President were a Republican, “the people would be up in arms and would be impeaching.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQwfPu1E3rk
"A nation can survive its fools and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly against the city. But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely, his sly whispers rustling through all alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears no traitor; he speaks in the accents familiar to his victim, and he wears their face and their garments and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation; he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city; he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared. The traitor is the plague."--- Marcus Tullius Cicero speech to the Roman Senate regarding the danger of internal subversion.
FUTURE ELECTIONS --- Is There Light At The End of The Tunnel?
The political pendulum will hopefully swing again back to the political right and after the last year of the “Obomination”, someone like Ronald Reagan will hopefully step up and undo the damage done to the Unites States. Americans must regain the principles and the basic plan of government that has led to the success of our nation. America is now on a road to tyranny by re-trying the same mistakes that caused the failure other nations.
“Interested men, who are not to be trusted; weak men, who CANNOT see; prejudiced men, who WILL NOT see; and a certain set of moderate men, who think better of the European world than it deserves; and this last class, by an ill-judged deliberation, will be the cause of more calamities to this continent, than all the other three.” --- Thomas Paine 1776
“It is not chance that rules the world. Ask the Romans, who had a continuous sequence of successes when they were guided by a certain plan, and an uninterrupted sequence of reverses when they followed another. There are general causes, moral and physical, which act in every monarchy, elevating it, maintaining it, or hurling it to the ground. All accidents are controlled by these causes. And if the chance of one battle—that is, a particular cause—has brought a state to ruin, some general cause made it necessary for that state to perish from a single battle. In a word, the main trend draws with it all particular accidents.” --- “The-Spirit-of-The-Laws” by Baron de Montesquieu
We are drawing near the end of President Obama’s second term and will now likely see liberal Democrats and President Obama administration step-up tactics such as the “class warfare” rhetoric to again blame the wealthiest of Americans for the Democratic party’s obviously failed economic policies. The Obama administration views Hillary Clinton as the best follow-on to continue the march towards their goal of an American socialist state. President will also ask for yet more increased spending to try and prop-up the economy, making it appear that the economy is improving. President Obama knows full well, however, that substantial increased government spending in the short run will cause a wider economic collapse in the long run. In the remaining year of the Obama administration we will likely see him rigorously pursue his socialist agenda unabated. If conservative Republicans do not vigorously undo the damage done by the past Democratically controlled Senate during Obama's first six years in office, Obama’s second term of office will likely end progressing to an economic climate to much like we experienced under Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s; that is double digit inflation, double digit unemployment and double digit mortgage interest rates.
“But if you have, and still can shake hands with the murderers, then are you unworthy of the name of husband, father, friend, or lover, and whatever may be your rank or title in life, you have the heart of a coward, and the spirit of a sycophant… This is not inflaming or exaggerating matters, but trying them by those feelings and affections which nature justifies, and without which, we should be incapable of discharging the social duties of life, or enjoying the felicities of it. I mean not to exhibit horror for the purpose of provoking revenge, but to awaken us from fatal and unmanly slumbers, that we may pursue determinately some fixed object.” --- Thomas Paine 1776
HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE --- Government Sanctioned Abomination
Truly informed American citizens are disgusted with the recent United States Supreme Court ruling and Federal Judges who ignore the majority will of voters and decree that any ban on same sex marriage is Un-Constitutional. Common sense, all legitimate religions, history, tradition but not the United States Constitution defines marriage as being between one man and one woman. When the courts rule in contradiction to the "laws of nature and of nature's God", then that ruling becomes null and void. "Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged." --- Ronald Reagan “No enactment of man can be considered law unless it conforms to the law of God.” --- William Blackstone.
Most intelligent people understand that it is not Christianity alone that rebukes homosexuals from marrying; it is just plain common sense and common law that regards homosexual marriage to be detrimental to society. Individual States have rightfully denied the marriage of same sex-couples and should be free to do so by established local statutes and by amendments to state constitutions approved by voters. The Federal Courts are simply acting outside their authority in ruling that homosexuals have a right to marry. United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia believes that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized which legalized same-sex marriage is a “threat to American democracy”. The equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment does not require the government to include same-sex couplings in its definition of marriage. Scalia stated argued that: “When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, every State limited marriage to one man and one woman, and no one doubted the constitutionality of doing so. That resolves these cases. When it comes to determining the meaning of a vague constitutional provision—such as ‘due process of law’ or ‘equal protection of the laws’—it is unquestionable that the People who ratified that provision did not understand it to prohibit a practice that remained both universal and uncontroversial in the years after ratification.” Thus, Scalia argues that if the country wishes to legalize same-sex marriage, it must do so through democratically enacted legislation, or through the ratification of a new constitutional amendment, and not through five unelected justices substituting their “reasoned judgment” of the 14th amendment for the will of those who ratified it.
The courts are also incorrect for scientific reasons in ruling that homosexuals have equal protection extended them as a class of individuals. According to the American Psychiatric Association, there are no replicated scientific studies supporting any specific biological etiology for homosexuality. Homosexuality is still a behavior even if it could be proven that homosexuality is genetically predisposed, which I doubt can ever be proven. Some behaviors could be argued to have some genetic basis but any conscious behavior or act is a choice. Race, gender or age, on the other hand, cannot be modified therefore they are represented as true classes of individuals. To allow equal protection to include behaviors regardless of proven genetic per-disposition would open a bucket of worms, so convoluted with chaotic social consequences as to be disastrous. If homosexuality were to be considered a class of individuals protected under the equal protection clause, then this would then have to be extended also to other individuals including pedophiles, polygamists, incest, bestiality, and on and on. If this were to happen, then any person could claim spousal benefits for any conceivable reason.
The sanctity of the traditional marriage, the union between one man and one woman must be preserved if the traditional family structure is to survive, an institution that has served civilized humanity very well.
Traditional marriage is about promoting the pro-creation of the human species. When it comes to homosexuals conjugally living together, this is only about unnatural sex, not marriage. Permitting same-sex marriage could lead to a decline in heterosexual marriage rates, more children raised by single parents and even more abortions. It is the innocent children that we should worry about the most. If homosexuals continue trying to make inroads into same sex marriages, homosexuals raising children and brainwashing children in public schools, then more and more children will be molested and indoctrinated into the world of homosexuality. Many of them will be harmed in that world. University of Texas sociologist Mark Regnerus conducted the most methodologically, sound research on the subject ever done, using a large and representative population-based sample—which showed children whose parents had a homosexual relationship suffered numerous disadvantages compared with children raised by their married, biological mother and father.
http://www.frc.org/issuebrief/new-study-on-homosexual-parents-tops-all-previous-research
Legitimate marriage is all about the civilized family unit that consists, and always has consisted, of a "father, mother and their children, [and] immediate kindred, constituting [the] fundamental social unit in civilized society." Black's Law Dictionary 604 (6th ed. 1990). To reward persons who step outside that traditional family unit by committing a "crime against nature" would represent a reprehensible affront to the laws of family government that the State must preserve. The best interests of the traditional family unit and a child is not promoted by such a subversion of fundamental law, the very foundation of the family and of civilized society itself. The State may not -- must not ever -- encourage the destruction of the family.
Instead of trashing the traditional institution of marriage where one man and one woman are bonded together as one, why not establish a workable compromise that protects the interests of homosexual couples as well? The sanctity of the traditional institution of marriage can be preserved for heterosexual couples while other couples could enjoy the same benefits that married couples now enjoy. Why not simply establish something which I will call an “Interstate Domestic Partnership”, where individuals are legally bound with the same benefits that those in a meretricious relationship currently enjoy. The “Interstate Domestic Partnership” would be recognized and protected at both the state and federal level. Just omit the term “marriage’ from all language of the legal agreement. Individuals entering into an “Interstate Domestic Partnership” could, for example, file joint tax returns, share Social Security and life insurance benefits including health insurance plans. Individuals entering into such an agreement would incur responsibilities of mutual commitment and responsibility towards each other that has the force of law behind it and recognized among all fifty states and territories of the United States of America.
We will always have homosexuals among us. Common sense says as long as homosexuals practice their lifestyle in private and not as “in your face public” displays of perversion, they should be assured tolerance. Most people, however, are becoming increasingly disgusted with the “gay agenda” of trying to desensitize Americans into tolerating homosexuals with their public displays of perversion. Most people detest being bombarded with homosexual perversion on TV and in the movies. Concerned parents are becoming more active in preventing their children from being brainwashed in schools that being queer is an ok lifestyle.
Homosexual behavior is a very sad but not very “gay” lifestyle. The latest credible psychoanalysis studies support the connection between homosexuality and narcissism. The most credible scientific research into the cause of homosexuality deals with narcissism. According to orthodox psychoanalytical theory, narcissism and homosexuality are strongly associated. The homosexuals’ preoccupation with their body and sex classifies them as somatic narcissists, who use their body to satisfy their narcissistic needs.
Gender narcissism develops in reaction to feelings of inferiority about one's gender and might be defined as excessive love or concern for one's gender, one's genitals, or one's gender identity, and an aversion to the opposite sex. It involves the formation of gender-narcissistic alliances rather than normal heterosexual unions, and it is primarily rooted in the anal-rapprochement phase, during which time an individual's sexual orientation and identity are shaped. It is typical for narcissists to separate their sexual and emotional feelings. They tend to hook up with no strings attached. Likewise, homosexuals, especially males ones are prone to having too many sexual partners without developing emotional attachments at all. This sexual promiscuity devoid of emotional attachment makes homosexuality and narcissism kind of synonymous.
The false arguments that homosexuality is normal human behavior infuses social science today and is brainwashing millions of people into accepting explanations of the world that have no scientific consistency. The liberal mind has a great tendency to confuse wish with reality. Fallacious arguments dominate American universities and infuse their textbooks. Gay Studies and Feminists science groups promote the unsupportable theory that homosexuals are born with a genetic predisposition to become homosexuals. Many professors know the assumptions of Gay Studies and Feminists Science are flawed, but they defend them as serving some sort of higher politically correct purpose.
Further Reading: Gender Narcissism and its Manifestations --Gerald Schoenewolf, Ph.D.
http://www.narth.com/docs/1996papers/schoenwolf.html
Common Sense: MARRIAGE = 1 MAN + 1 WOMAN… GET IT? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuoljDaoqO4&sns=em
HOMOSEXUALS IN THE MILITARY -- Marks the decline of our once strong and proud United States Military
Homosexuality is a behavior problem that must not be allowed to destabilize and degrade the combat effectiveness of our armed forces. Social experiments have no place in the discipline and structure of military service. Homosexuality is a socially destructive behavior, destructive to the cohesion that must be maintained in order for combat units to remain effective during the stresses of military operations.
The repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the US Military is the result of least three generations of Americans being brainwashed into not being challenged or counterbalanced by basic morals, values and Un-American ideas.
One old war hardened United States Gunnery Sergeant said it best:
"When I joined the military it was illegal to be homosexual, then it became optional. I’m getting out before Obama makes it mandatory."----GySgt Harry Berres, USMC
The Defense Department predicts that the repeal of DADT will result in a loss of one in ten, approximately, 228,600 people. That means the total strength equal to that of the active-duty Marine Corps would refuse to enlist or re-enlist solely because they believe that being forced to serve in military combat units where open homosexuality is allowed is unconscionable.
THE EDUCATION OF YOUNG AMERICANS --- The Dumbing-Down of the American Citizenry
The United States has sadly slipped from being first in educating its children to place 17th in the developed world for education. Finland and South Korea, not surprisingly, top the list of 40 developed countries with the best education systems. Hong Kong, Japan and Singapore follow. This according to a global report by education firm Pearson.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXMCoVy151A
Students in the high school class of 2015 turned in the lowest critical reading score on the SAT college entrance exam in more than 40 years. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-03/students-bombed-the-sat-this-year-in-four-charts
The single most important outcome of an adequate public education system would be one that produces graduates who are well equipped with the necessary skills that would enable them to compete and thrive on their own in the real world. Teachers who promote ill-conceived notions that society has the responsibility of providing for one’s welfare becomes detrimental to the health of that society in which that education system is supposed to support.
The American public education system is currently failing its students in two major fronts. Educators are producing graduates who are deficient in oral/written communications, professionalism/work ethic and critical thinking/problem solving. More importantly, today’s education system is producing citizens who lack a simple foundation of American’s great heritage along with an ability to understand, apply and correlate political ideas compatible with social common sense. Consequently, American citizens have become handicapped in dealing with the real world because the typical graduate of our public education system has been indoctrinated with a distorted picture of American history. Students have been taught to perceive the Founding Fathers as being little more than greedy, wealthy landholders and slaveholders. We are not educating the current generation on true American history and the reasons why American exceptionalism is important to all Americans.
http://www.prageruniversity.com/Political-Science/What-Makes-America-Different.html#.VbJ9EkW6n7k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSQn5o2ZEIc
There is now in place a systematic “drumming down” of students in America. The failure of the public American education system can be blamed on the policies of organizations such as the National Education Association (NEA) that have agendas which strive to destroy America from within using the public education system as their primary tool. “Education is crucial...” stated professor George Mosse in his book Nazi Culture, “…for if an ideology can be institutionalized through the education establishment, it has won a major battle.” The Nazis realized this only too well. .
When the Progressives/Socialists/Marxists speak of "It Takes a Village to Raise a Child", they are actually referring to the state having more control over children than parents. “Our Children Belong to the Collective” is a phrase that brings back nightmares for survivors of communist regimes. Now, however, we are seeing, here in the United States, a similar collective scheme through Common Core that communists once used. Common Core is endeavoring to nationalize and control our kindergarten through education system. The socialist “collectivist” mentality has prevailed for decades at the university level and now Hillary Clinton touts the secular village as the best way to raise all American children. Hillary Clinton’s ghost written book; “It Takes A Village comes straight out of the Communist Manifesto. Communist leaders indoctrinate their citizens to become dumb and dutiful so they may remain in control of the masses. It takes family with a Mom and Dad, not a village trumping the family unit. An important segment of the Marxist agenda is the destruction of the family unit and replacing it with dependency upon the State. The "it takes a village" mentality follows the course of the Obama regime and its “primrose path” for loyal Democrats. Democrats are becoming more and more like dedicated socialists or useful idiots for the communist party by unwittingly following the communist party line. History has proven the traditional family unit to be better than government in providing oversight and stability where the parents are the primary nurturers, the correctors and guilders in creating fully functioning, responsible adults. When the family unit is allowed to thrive properly, children have a better chance and greater opportunity to function in a civilized society. When children are not reared with an emphasis on the family unit, we end up with arrogant, self-centered adults who are dependent upon government, which is where we are mostly as a nation today.
The National Education Association (NEA) is the largest union in the U.S. and is arguably the most powerful political force in the America today. The organization challenges any hint of education reform that would increase teacher accountability or allow for charter schools or other forms of school choice. Statistics reveal that school districts that spend the most per pupil on education do not produce the highest average ACT test scores or highest average graduation rates. The total national annual spending on education in the year 2010, exceeded $809 billion dollars. This aggregate is the highest of any other industrialized nation, more than the combined spending of France, Germany, Japan, Brazil, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. Through the years 1970 through 2012, the total average per pupil outlays for education in the U.S. has more than doubled. Why then is there this disparity between money spent on education and the results that education is supposed to achieve? This is because we have in most states dysfunctional systems for distributing money intended to educate students. We see in most every election cycle, in most every school district across our nation, desperate pleas for more funding on education. One might conclude that most American school districts suffer from a permanent fiscal crisis, every year hanging perilously on the threshold of financial collapse, never knowing whether there will be adequate funds to continue functioning. Rarely do voters reject requests for higher taxes for education, education bond initiatives or state lotteries intended to supplement funds for such things like new school books and classroom repairs. The reality, however, is that too often most new taxes and initiatives for new education monies intended for pupils end-up not going to the classrooms but to fund increased teacher and administrator salaries, faculty sabbaticals and bloated educator pensions.
The public school system has been evolving in recent years to a system of indoctrination rather than education. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fj6Qamu0JY
Socialism and Humanism have become the predominant philosophies of the NEA for which its stated position has never wavered: "We stand for socializing the individual…the major function of the school is the social orientation of the individual . . . Education must operate according to a well-formulated social policy." Chester M. Pierce, M.D., Professor of Education and Psychiatry at Harvard, had this to say: "Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our Founding Fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It's up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well - by creating the international child of the future." Peter Hoagland, a Democrat from Nebraska representing Nebraska in the U.S House of Representatives said: "…parents have no right to indoctrinate their children in their beliefs. We are preparing their children for the year 2000 and life in a global one-world society and those children will not fit in." Multi-culturalism has become the innocent sounding buzzword that is in reality the propaganda machine intended to prepare young minds for a one world Marxist system.
The root of most problems in our public education system deal with individuals those who may have achieved higher education but their education has been unfortunately tainted with progressive liberal biases. The deficits in our educational system are producing an entire generation of citizens and educators who are unable to fully gain a capacity for applying political and social common sense. Otherwise brilliant scholars have been programed to distrust, to be afraid of the real world of commerce and as a result, college graduates who dare to venture outside the world of academia only to fail have then resorted to becoming teachers. Those lacking in political common sense are now teaching our precious youth, mixing what should be productive education with distorted ideas of political and social nonsense. Thus there has been a dumbing-down of the U.S. population with a growing number of people whose minds have been contaminated with progressive liberal biases. “Men are so simple, and governed so absolutely by their present needs, that he who wishes to deceive will never fail in finding willing dupes.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli .
The art of free political debate, the Socratic dialogue and critical thinking have been perverted in the university lecture halls by good intentioned but lacking in commonsense liberal progressive professors. Students who decline to swallow and accept without question their biased, pervasive liberal political propaganda are cast out from political debate and discussion as being non-critical thinkers and are likely to receive inferior grades. Fallacious liberal political propaganda dominates American media, public schools and universities with ideas that trump political and economic idealism over political accountability, reality and common sense. Textbooks promote unsupportable political theories and distort history and natural truths through systematic programs of dialectic subversion. Unfortunately it is the government, the wealthy university trustees and the academic elitists who, under the aegis of "economic justice, tolerance and diversity," seek to eradicate political and economic common sense from the academy. Professors in our most prestigious universities have digressed from advancing academic excellence in their fields of expertise to preaching a dialectic subversion of political and economic theory. Liberal Progressive indoctrination must not replaces legitimate academic pursuits.
There were thousands of college commencement speeches around the country this year for the Class of 2015. But there was one missing -- one very truthful, funny and witty speech that graduates should've heard, but didn't. Well, here it is, spoken by George Will, Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist at the Washington Post. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vfl4BGbMxoQ#t=189
“Nothing is more dangerous than a dogmatic worldview - nothing more constraining, more blinding to innovation, more destructive of openness to novelty.” ― Stephen Jay Gould
The best education systems can be found in programs of instruction that are DE-centralized, that are tailored by individual teachers who instill a deep understanding of all subject matter in their students and strive for quality individualized learning at all levels. Schools that have supportive parents and active Parent Teacher Organizations (PTO) tend to produce successful students.
A dramatic shift in how we educate our children today has been brought about by technology and that in too many schools it matters not what or how students study but only that they simply attend school. Computerized programmed learning, comparable to the industrial assembly line is marvelously efficient in stamping-out products on a massive scale but this model of education can only produce dull, clone like high school graduates. Highly automated education systems fail to instill individualized deep and rich learning experiences essential for a quality education. Students from kindergarten through high school should be groomed as apprentice learners through teachers who seek to instill a passion for learning within every student at every level. Profoundly now lacking in the public school system are curricula that promote ideas that education is vitally important to an individual’s pursuit of happiness. Students must not just simply learn but learn how to learn and become exposed to programs that develop a passion for learning that produces lifelong learners. The solution for meaningful education involves not just knowledge but learning how to solve problems effectively. This can only be gained through quality, individualized relationships with educators who have a passion for teaching.
The latest step intended to control the American citizenry is The Common Core, a system designed to become a Nationalized Federal government takeover of our Education system. The Common Core is in fact against the law, as the Federal Government is prohibited from setting educational curriculum standards – public education is a Constitutional right reserved to the individual States. The Federal Government does not have the authority to create a one-size-fits-all complete take over of America’s education system at all levels. The Federal Government, through The Common Core seeks to standardize education curricula and apply this to all public schools, charter schools, private schools, Christian schools and homeschooling. No one is exempt from this new federal mandate.
The Common Core State Standards Initiative is an education initiative in the United States that details what K-12 students should know in English language arts and mathematics at the end of each grade. The initiative is sponsored by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and seeks to establish consistent education standards across the states as well as ensure that students graduating from high school are prepared to enter credit-bearing courses at two- or four-year college programs or enter the workforce. This all appears to be very desirable at first glance but the problem lies in the reality of the details, that The Common Core is a federal "top-down" takeover of state and local education systems. The Common Core's focus on national standards and will do little to fix deeply ingrained problems and incentive structures within the education system. Nicholas Tampio, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Fordham University, said that: “The standards emphasize rote learning and uniformity over creativity, and fail to recognize differences in learning styles. Common Core diminishes the humanities in the educational curriculum. The Common Core adopts a bottom-line, pragmatic approach to education and the heart of its philosophy is that it is a waste of resources to over-educate people."
This link shows the great reservations that our nations best educators have concerning The Common Core:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coRNJluF2O4#t=129
The comparisons of Hitler’s Nazi Germany and The Common Core are uncanny. Nazi leaders trained “Master Teachers” in the National Socialists Teachers League who continuously supervised individual schools and kept data files on all Teachers. The Obama Administration has funded a 10,000 “Master Teachers” (MT) corps to train Teachers on The Common Core who will then keep data files on all students and teachers. In Nazi Germany students were instructed to spy on parents and teachers. The Common Core will have students as young as kindergarten participating in the evaluation of their Teachers. In Nazi Germany curricula were rewritten to stipulate a Nazi only approved curriculum.
Under The Common Core, data mining methods will be used on student’s computers to scan the child to see how they react to different stimuli.
Proponents of The Common Corps promote their new education system as one that avoids rote memorization of the learning material, however, the central idea of The Common Core system is based upon not wasting time on becoming critical thinkers and problem solvers, but rather memorizing only the desired information required to pass standardized tests. The Common Core "one size fits all" education system does not tackle the unique individuality of each and every student. The Common Core would teach all children the same thing at the same time regardless of their developmental or language differences.
Individualized teaching under Common Core would be minimized. This is Common Core’s greatest shortcoming in that it would exclude a teacher’s first and most important role as an educator, that is in helping students know who they are as individuals and then helping them fulfill their individual potentials. Human happiness is the result of fulfilling ones individual’s unique potentialities, character and personality converting his/her potentialities into actualities.
It has been proposed that under The Common Core, teachers would be retitled as "facilitators", not teachers and that all history, language and literature curricula will be rewritten by centralized Common Core groups. The sole duty of the facilitators would be to simply administer The Common Core standardized programs and tests which are designed with one goal in mind; that is to train children to become good new world order global citizens. Children will be programmed under The Common Corps to navigate through their lives without a moral compass and no allegiance except to the federal or one world government. The Common Core has the despicable goal to destroy rugged individualism that is the very brickwork of our nation. How do you change a society? Vladimir Lenin said, "Give me four years to teach children and the seeds I have sown will never be uprooted." This is what is facing our children if we do not wake this nation up to the dangers of The Common Core.
THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE --- Substituting Religion with Stateism
“In God We Trust" is the antidote to stateism and Socialism. Stateism through atheism is the national religion that socialists seek by pledging allegiance to a state void of God. http://citizenclark.weebly.com/
“One Nation Under God”------The Constitution of the United States of America is amendable, can be altered or abolished. However, our Founding Fathers provided in the Declaration of Independence permanent protection from oppressive governments through the declaration that; “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. Upholding these rights then became the first obligation of the government of the United States and the prerequisite for its continued existence.
“God is not willing to do everything, and thus take away our free will and that share of glory which belongs to us.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
The term “separation of church and state” has fallaciously become synonymous with the First Amendment to our United States Constitution. Nowhere in the United States Constitution or its twenty-seven Amendments is there any mention of the phrase “separation of church and state”. Interestingly enough, the phrase “separation of Church and State”, mandating secularism is in the constitutions of the old Soviet Union and other tyrannical regimes, was used to ensure that the state is establish as the ultimate authority over people.
Today the First Amendment to our United States Constitution is in grave peril as there are organized efforts to promote a myth that the United States Constitution requires a complete, radical and absolute separation between God and governments of the United States. The guise of “separation of church and state” is the ruse that now threatens the tolerant religious heritage that defines our nation’s very foundation.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Anyone who can read and understand the English language and has common sense should understand that the purpose of the First Amendment has always been that The United States Congress alone, not any other entity of government, is prohibited from making a law establishing a national religious denomination. This was intended to mean that The Congress may not require, for example, that all Americans will become Catholics, Anglicans, or members of any other denomination. In other words there shall not be the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial, along with an Official Church branch of government. The second purpose of the First Amendment is the very opposite from what is being made of it by the ACLU today by their promoting the idea that the First Amendment is intended to suppress religion by guaranteeing “freedom from religion”. The First Amendment clearly requires that government should not impede or interfere with the free practice of legitimate religion. The purpose of any so called separation between church and state in American society would not be to exclude the voice of religion from public debate, but provide a context of religious freedom where the insights of each religious tradition can be set forth and tested. Justice Douglas wrote for the majority of the Supreme Court in the United States vs. Ballard case in 1944: The First Amendment has a dual aspect. It not only "forestalls compulsion by law of the acceptance of any creed or the practice of any form of worship" but also "safeguards the free exercise of the chosen form of religion." The First Amendment is a safeguard so that the State can have no jurisdiction over the Church. Its purpose was to protect but not disestablish the Church.
It has been a tradition and is understood that all American citizens should be able, even in a governmental context, to profess “In God We Trust” and pledge an allegiance to our “One Nation Under God”. How any good American citizen does in fact worship or even choose not worship God at all is his or her civil liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. The “great communicator” of the twentieth century best stated the true intentions of our Founding Fathers when Ronald Reagan declared, "We establish no religion in this country, nor will we ever. We command no worship. We mandate no belief. But we poison our society when we remove its theological underpinnings. We court corruption when we leave it bereft of belief. All are free to believe or not believe; all are free to practice a faith or not. But those who believe must be free to speak of and act on their belief.... If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.
“He who takes nature for his guide is not easily beaten out of his argument…The Almighty hath implanted in us these inextinguishable feelings for good and wise purposes. They are the guardians of his image in our hearts. They distinguish us from the herd of common animals. The social compact would dissolve, and justice be extirpated the earth, or have only a casual existence were we callous to the touches of affection.” --- Thomas Paine 1776
THE ACLU --- Marxist Traitors In Disguise
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was founded in 1920. The founder of the ACLU and its main inspiration to this day, Roger Baldwin, who stated in the "Harvard Class Book of 1935; "I am for Socialism, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and sole control by those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal. It all sums up into one single purpose-the abolition of dog-eat-dog under which we live.” Commenting on the public image of the ACLU, he said; “Do steer away from making it look like a Socialist enterprise...We want also to look like patriots in everything we do...” This quote from Baldwin's biography written by Peggy Lampson.
Baldwin wrote in the 1934 Soviet Russia Today, "When that power of the working class is once achieved, as it has been only in the Soviet Union, I am for maintaining it by any means whatever."
The former chairman of the Communist Party, William Z. Foster and ACLU co-founder, said: “The establishment of an American Soviet government will involve the confiscation of large landed estates in town and country, and also, the whole body to forests, mineral deposits, lakes, rivers and so on."
Earl Browder publicly described the importance of the ACLU functioning as "a transmission belt" for the Communist Party. Earl Browder was general secretary of the Communist Party of the United States from 1930 to 1944 and thereafter, when the party was reorganized as the Communist Political Association, he continued as its president.
The Special House Committee to Investigate Communist Activities stated that:
“The American Civil Liberties Union is closely affiliated with the communist movement in the United States, and fully 90 percent of its efforts are on behalf of communists who have come into conflict with the law. It claims to stand for free speech, free press and free assembly, but it is quite apparent that the main function of the ACLU is an attempt to protect the communists.”
When we look at the ACLU’s policies and case history, it is obvious they are today still very much dedicated to Communist and socialist goals. It is obvious then that the ACLU’s original and continued purpose is to promote and defend godless socialism and communism in America, and the right for free speech for the communist agenda (no matter how violent or radical). However, the ACLU opposed the right to express anti-Communist sentiments. The ACLU has an agenda to eventually subvert the civil liberties it claims to defend. Why, because as we know, the ACLU has its roots in Marxist ideals. Those familiar with the ACLU's sordid history know that when the organization speaks of "rights" and the Constitution, it is invariably engaged in dialectical subversion. The ACLU claims to defend civil liberties based on the Bill of Rights. However, it is very selective in what it will defend as rights. For example, the ACLU does not support the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms. You would think that after the distortions and contortions of the First Amendment to drive God out of public life that the ACLU would fight vigorously against restrictions on civilian firearm possession. The ACLU’s selectivity in not protecting gun ownership stems from its basic doctrine in that a totalitarian government must disarm the populace before a Marxist government can takeover.
· The ACLU has a long established strategy to actively mask its true intentions through its policy of occasionally defending a conservative to make the ACLU appear nonpartisan. The ACLU’s founder, Rodger Baldwin stated in "Soviet Russia Today", September 1934, “If I aid the reactionaries to get free speech now and then, if I go outside the class struggle to fight against censorship, it is only because those liberties help to create a more hospitable atmosphere for the working class.” This is clearly the ACLU official policy to this day as per the words of the ACLU’s William Donohue when he commented, “In other words, the occasional defense of right-wing extremists opens up the courts, thereby making it easier for the ACLU to defend its ideological kinfolk on the left.”
· “Do steer away from making it look like a Socialist enterprise...We want also to look like patriots in everything we do... “We want to get a good lot of flags, talk a good deal about the Constitution and what our forefathers wanted to make of this country, and to show that we are really the folks that really stand for the spirit of our institutions.”—Roger Baldwin's advice in 1917 to Louis Lochner of the socialist People's Council in Minnesota.
The ACLU often takes the Constitution out of context so as to champion strange cases that seem to favor an outcome that reinforces authoritarian government control. They more often than not favor the dictatorial concept of appointed Judges creating legislation from the bench.
The ACLU manipulates the legal system to change the original intent of a law through a process they call "building precept on precept". Through this process, they have been successful in changing the original intent or meaning of laws by carefully crafting lawsuits leading to judicial rulings, which reconstructs the law, step by step, towards their own goals. These new laws, created by the judiciary, eventually lead to a deluge of decisions in their favor. The separation of church and state issue is but one example. The ACLU and its allies have reconstructed the Constitution’s First Amendment from which it was intended to be a shield for people of faith into a terrible sword against them. The creative twisting of the Constitution’s Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment to provide constitutional protections to homosexual sodomy has evolved into the legal undermining of marriage, family and the weakening of parental authority.
The ACLU is on a continual reign of terror in the U.S. as though they have been elected to dictate immoral and unethical standards for the entire country. The ACLU is against morality and Christianity. In the past, it has defended the Klu Klux Klan, pornography and pedophilia as freedoms of expression. It considers limitation to obscenity unconstitutional. The ACLU defends homosexual activism, pedophilia and a push for total sexual liberation. The ACLU supports the North American Man-Boy Love Association, an organized band of pedophiles and child rapists, while at the same time attacking the Boy Scouts for not allowing homosexual scout leaders to lead young boys.
The ACLU is creating a climate where valid laws are to be unscrupulously challenged and distorted. The intention of the ACLU is to create social anarchy and a total breakdown morality in our society.
The caustic arrogance of the ACLU is exemplified in the former ACLU Executive Director’s, Ira Glasser, reaction to the news that Alaska voters had overwhelmingly passed a constitutional amendment protecting marriage only between one man and one woman. She commented, “Today’s results prove that certain fundamental issues should not be left to a majority vote.” The ACLU will certainly be behind many future judicial actions to over-turn the majority vote and will of the people by forcing the legalization of same sex marriages everywhere in America through the courts. We can see then that all actions of the ACLU have the ultimate purpose of reinforcing its desired image of intellectual elitism over what it considers the ignorant faith of the masses. This type of thinking is necessary for them to achieve their goal of a totalitarian society in their transition struggle for a socialist state in America.
From its inception, the ACLU has worked to create a new America. To do so, the ACLU found it necessary to achieve two main things: first to abolish Constitutional barriers to governmental power and second, to enervate men's souls to make them weak and dependent on the state. Both of which move America towards a socialist state and, according to Dr. Krannawitter, are advanced by “removing God from the American mind.”
In order for the ACLU to tear down constitutional barriers to governmental power, they must extinguish America’s fundamental trust or belief in God, since such a belief is an essential denial of the supreme power of the state. Our ultimate rights come from God, not the state or man. We must as patriotic Americans prevent the day when God’s presence in the American mindset ceases and people no longer trust in God as the ultimate grantor of rights but to trust only in the state for those rights. The ACLU believes that the more power the state has, the better off the people under it are. If one looks at the history of the Soviet Union and any other Communist country, one will be apt to find Communist leaders who predicated their form of government on atheism and a secular state. This sort of anti-religious atmosphere precludes the existence of any rights beyond that which the state has granted. In addition to the emphasis on the source of rights and governmental power, the ACLU has worked to make people needy and dependent on the state.
Alexis de Tocqueville warned of those like the ACLU who wished to exacerbate the malignant tendencies of democracy. He explained that the government, if people allow it to do so, will create an incessant dependency of the people on the government as it expands its power under the guise of utility, finally reducing “each nation to being nothing more than a herd of timid and industrious animals of which the government is the shepherd.” The ACLU seeks not only to create a people that are dependent and needy, but also a government that “little by little extinguishes their spirits and enervates their souls” by giving them all they want, so that they will be naively content without hopes, dreams, or a will of their own. This is a sort of despotism unlike any other.
Christianity is an antidote to the ACLU’s despotism and poison that is dependency on the state. It goes hand-in-hand with limited government and personal responsibility since it instructs individuals to trust in God for provision and it teaches people a strong work ethic. These are things that are not conducive to the ACLU’s ideal citizen. In short, religion creates a society of people who look not to the state but to the Creator for support.
As the ACLU continues its assault on Christianity and limited government, every patriotic American must understand what is at stake: our liberty and freedom. Our hope as Americans lies in the foundations of America that, though undermined, still exist today. Though seemingly esoteric, the founding and moral principles present a hope to our country. George Washington said, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports." While it is these “pillars of human happiness” that the ACLU has sought to destroy, Americans have the ability stand up to the ACLU and reclaim America.
How can we stop the ACLU?
In 1978, the Supreme Court exempted the ACLU from the "ambulance chasing" prohibitions that apply to nearly every other lawyer in the country. Over the years this has enabled the ACLU's legions of pro bono attorneys to specifically target various organizations they feel are vulnerable to their lawsuits, dredge the ranks of the "offended" until they can find someone who will agree to let the ACLU stick their name at the top of a case, and then attempt to force a group's acquiesce to their demands by threatening a costly legal case they usually cannot afford. Many who have dared to stand up against the ACLU might have won the battle in the court room, but lost the war as their organizations were driven into bankruptcy under crushing legal bills. Federal law, Section 42 USC sec 1988, allows the ACLU to receive reimbursement of attorney fees and court costs when they sue regarding civil liberties issues. Nowhere else in litigation is it so easy to make a claim. In most other areas of the law, you need to have a personal, direct injury. The primary reason they are involved in so many civil law suits, is because they make money doing it. If the ACLU could no longer make such staggering sums from the federal tax dollars, they would be forced to get money from willing other contributors, and there are not enough extreme left wing liberals in the world to keep their cause financed. This is obviously a very stupid law that favors one political group over another. It is time to pull the ACLU’s unfair advantage by repealing Section 42 USC sec 1988. STOP this nonsense of Cart Blanc federally subsidized lawsuits just by alleging that civil rights are involved!
What can you do to stop the ACLU and their insidious destruction of America?
Support the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), which is a counter to the ACLU providing a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth. The ADF was founded for a unique purpose that is to aggressively defend religious liberty. The ADF is succeeding by empowering its allies, recognizing that together they can accomplish far more than anyone can alone. The ADF works to assist in efforts through strategy, training, funding and, where necessary, direct litigation against the ACLU through their own ADF legal team.
Support the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ). The ACLJ is dedicated to protecting our religious and constitutional freedoms. In addition to providing its legal services at no cost to their clients, the ACLJ focuses on the issues of National security, protecting America’s families, and protecting human life.
You learn more about the ACLU by visiting a web site dedicated to revealing the true intentions of the ACLU, Stop the ACLU.
You can write to your elected officials. You can identify and contact your elected officials through Congress.org at their web site.
You can sign a new online petition that asks Congress to change a specific civil-rights statute in hopes of preventing the American Civil Liberties Union from collecting attorney fees from taxpayers of local governments the organization takes to court. Wall Builders
An organization dedicated to presenting America's forgotten history and heroes, with an emphasis on the moral, religious, and constitutional foundation on which America was built-a foundation that, in recent years, has been seriously attacked and undermined.
THE CURSE OF ISLAM --- Winston Churchill: "Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world."
The President of the United States has ostensibly admitted to being a Muslim: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tKMiRxnRN4#t=85
Muslims are reluctant to publicly condemn acts of terror made in in the name of Allah but will usually rationalize terror as having some greater ideological or divine purpose. The Obama administration will not admit that the world has a problem with Islamic terrorism even when given the following facts:
The Shoe Bomber was a Muslim
The Beltway Snipers were Muslims
The Fort Hood Shooter was a Muslim
The underwear Bomber was a Muslim
The USS Cole Bombers were Muslims
The Madrid Train Bombers were Muslims
The Bali Nightclub Bombers were Muslims
The London Subway Bombers were Muslims
The Moscow Theater Attackers were Muslims
The Boston Marathon Bombers were Muslims
The Pan-Am flight #93 Bombers were Muslims
The Air France Entebbe Hijackers were Muslims
The Iranian Embassy Takeover, was by Muslims
The Beirut U.S. Embassy bombers were Muslims
The Libyan U.S. Embassy Attack was by Muslims
The Buenos Aires Suicide Bombers were Muslims
The Israeli Olympic Team Attackers were Muslims
The Kenyan U.S, Embassy Bombers were Muslims
The Saudi, Khobar Towers Bombers were Muslims
The Beirut Marine Barracks bombers were Muslims
The Besian Russian School Attackers were Muslims
The first World Trade Center Bombers were Muslims
The Bombay & Mumbai India Attackers were Muslims
The Achille Lauro Cruise Ship Hijackers were Muslims
The September 11th 2001 Airline Hijackers were Muslims
Think of it:
Buddhists living with Hindus = No Problem
Hindus living with Christians = No Problem
Hindus living with Jews = No Problem
Christians living with Shintos = No Problem
Shintos living with Confucians = No Problem
Confucians living with Baha'is = No Problem
Baha'is living with Jews = No Problem
Jews living with Atheists = No Problem
Atheists living with Buddhists = No Problem
Buddhists living with Sikhs = No Problem
Sikhs living with Hindus = No Problem
Hindus living with Baha'is = No Problem
Baha'is living with Christians = No Problem
Christians living with Jews = No Problem
Jews living with Buddhists = No Problem
Buddhists living with Shintos = No Problem
Shintos living with Atheists = No Problem
Atheists living with Confucians = No Problem
Confusians living with Hindus = No Problem
Muslims living with Hindus = Problem
Muslims living with Buddhists = Problem
Muslims living with Christians = Problem
Muslims living with Jews = Problem
Muslims living with Sikhs = Problem
Muslims living with Baha'is = Problem
Muslims living with Shintos = Problem
Muslims living with Atheists = Problem
MUSLIMS LIVING WITH MUSLIMS = BIG PROBLEM
**********SO THIS LEADS TO *****************
They're not happy in Gaza
They're not happy in Egypt
They're not happy in Libya
They're not happy in Morocco
They're not happy in Iran
They're not happy in Iraq
They're not happy in Yemen
They're not happy in Afghanistan
They're not happy in Pakistan
They're not happy in Syria
They're not happy in Lebanon
They're not happy in Nigeria
They're not happy in Kenya
They're not happy in Sudan
******** So, where are they happy? **********
They're happy in Australia
They're happy in England
They're happy in Belgium
They're happy in France
They're happy in Italy
They're happy in Germany
They're happy in Sweden
They're happy in the USA & Canada
They're happy in Norway & India
Muslims seem to be happy in almost every country that is not Islamic! And who do they blame? Not Islam... Not their leadership... Not themselves, THEY BLAME THE COUNTRIES THEY ARE HAPPY IN!!
Muslims want to change the countries they're happy in, to be like the countries they came from where they were unhappy and finally they will get hammered!
Islamic Jihad: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
ISIS : AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Al-Qaeda: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Taliban: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Hamas: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Hezbollah: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Boko Haram: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Al-Nusra: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Abu Sayyaf: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Al-Badr: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Muslim Brotherhood: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Lashkar-e-Taiba: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Palestine Liberation Front: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Ansaru: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Jemaah Islamiyah: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Abdullah Azzam Brigades: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Still the Obama administration refuses to identify the problem of Islamic terrorism and has not even attempted to develop a comprehensive plan to deal with this problem.
We have freedom of religion in the United States; however, Islam can never be reconciled with the First Amendment to United States Constitution. The very nature of Islam requires: exclusion of free speech, suppression all religions other than Islam, a government that answers only to Islamic law and demands servitude of all under its control. Islam is an institution that advocates violence against non-Muslims, which conspires to deceive non-Muslims and casts oppression onto all human beings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgsrnmzxEUY&feature=youtu.be
“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensual ism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity.
The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities – but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.” ---Sir Winston Churchill
See link: http://www.frontline.org.za/books_videos/sti.htm
Islam Explained in Layman's Terms (Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat.)
Islam is not simply a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total 100% system of life. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.
Islamization of a nation begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges. When so called politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well. As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part being regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase activities that radicalize their own population and spread lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions.
In Belgium and Paris, we are already seeing Muslims pushing for total Sharia law.
http://www.cbn.com/tv/embedplayer.aspx?bcid=1509282970001
Non-Muslim actions that tend to offend Islam result in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam.
Where the Muslim population approaches 100%, the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing the less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons. "Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel." -- Leon Uris, 'The Haj'
Countries with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend Madrasas. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a Crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.
Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this century.
President Obama recently appointed two devout Muslims to Homeland Security posts. Doesn't this make you feel safer already? Obama and Janet Napolitano appointed Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim, as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development. DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim who was born in Damascus, Syria, as ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC).
Why are devout Muslims are now being appointed to critical government positions? Why are left wing American radicals now advocating Sharia Law in the United States? Why are Americans who are concerned about this entire happening labeled as having “Islam phobia”? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiQ-AxJ_m9U#t=96. I fear that through the growing influences of Islam entering into our federal government and the parallel objectives of Marxism and the Islamic Jihads, that the United States is destined to crumble from within.
http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/current-events/video-how-liberals-argue
What is next? Dhimmitude is the Muslim system of controlling non-Muslim populations conquered through jihad (Holy War). Specifically, it is the TAXING of non-Muslims in exchange for tolerating their presence AND as a coercive means of converting conquered remnants to Islam. Obama Care allows the establishment of Dhimmitude and Sharia Muslim diktat in the United States. Muslims are specifically exempted from the government mandate to purchase insurance, and also from the penalty tax for being uninsured. Islam considers insurance to be "gambling", "risk-taking", and "usury" and is thus banned. Muslims are specifically granted exemption based on this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFN8ahYN1b0
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM --- The Oligarchy of Robed Despots Who Issue Decrees Nullifying the Will of The People
The separation of powers between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches has never been so seriously out of balance as it is today. The Founding Fathers never wished for Americans to live under a judicial oligarchy in which robed despots issue decrees like so many inquisitioners.
Recent absurd rulings by our Federal Courts have prompted more and more people to question whether the Federal Courts serve any useful purpose at all in our government. A case in point is the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized which legalized same-sex marriage. United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia believes that the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling amounts to a “threat to American democracy”. The equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment does not require the government to include same-sex couplings in its definition of marriage. Scalia stated argued that: “When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, every State limited marriage to one man and one woman, and no one doubted the constitutionality of doing so. That resolves these cases. When it comes to determining the meaning of a vague constitutional provision—such as ‘due process of law’ or ‘equal protection of the laws’—it is unquestionable that the People who ratified that provision did not understand it to prohibit a practice that remained both universal and uncontroversial in the years after ratification.”Thus, Scalia argues that if the country wishes to legalize same-sex marriage, it must do so through democratically enacted legislation, or through the ratification of a new constitutional amendment, and not through five unelected justices substituting their “reasoned judgment” of the 14th amendment for the will of those who ratified it.
Our Founding Fathers intended the Federal court system to always be an a-political institution and as such in tune with the "laws of nature and of natures God". The Federal courts, however, have now evolved into the most political and secular of the three branches of government. Thomas Jefferson worried that the courts would someday overstep their authority and instead of interpreting the law would begin making law. Today, the great fear of Jefferson is now our nightmare in that our judicial system is becoming an oligarchy, the rule of a Godless few over many. We are at crisis now in the United States because our courts have been corrupted by the influence of liberal progressive judges who are so far out of the main stream of traditional American moral ethical law and justice as to be dangerous to American society.
“RENDER UNTO CAESAR THE THINGS WHICH ARE CAESAR'S is the scripture doctrine of courts…Now three thousand years passed away from the Mosaic account of the creation, till the Jews under a national delusion requested a king. Till then their form of government (except in extraordinary cases, where the Almighty interposed) was a kind of republic administered by a judge and the elders of the tribes. Kings they had none, and it was held sinful to acknowledge any being under that title but the Lord of Hosts. And when a man seriously reflects on the idolatrous homage that is paid to the persons of kings, he need not wonder that the Almighty, ever jealous of his honor, should disapprove of a form of government that so impiously invades the prerogative of heaven. ” --- Thomas Paine 1776
Concerned about the potential for judicial tyranny, Thomas Jefferson warned: "The opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws is constitutional and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch. ... The Constitution on this hypothesis is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please."
Liberal progressive activists that cannot control Congress and the will of the people use liberal judiciary tactics to impose their dangerous agenda through the courts. Americans must act to deal seriously with judicial tyrants who undermine the will of legislatures and the people. The people of the United states must not allow judges who impose their self-serving legal interpretations that promote narrow political ideologies upon the rest of us. Activist judges must be removed by impeachment, attrition or just plain eliminate their positions. Something just has to be done and somehow the system has to be fixed. Band-Aid fixes such as amendments defining marriage in the Constitution so as to preempt activist judges from legislating from the bench is not the long term answer. When the courts rule in contradiction to the United States Constitution, the "laws of nature and of natures God", then the people must take action to make those rulings null and void. “No enactment of man can be considered law unless it conforms to the law of God.” --- Sir William Blackstone
The Supreme Court is not the ultimate authority on interpreting the United States Constitution. Alexander Hamilton said federal judges may be impeached & removed for usurpations (Federalist No. 81, 8th para); the People are “the natural guardians of the Constitution” as against federal judges “embarked in a conspiracy with the legislature”; and the People are to become “enlightened enough to distinguish between a legal exercise and an illegal usurpation of authority.” (Federalist No.16, 10th para). Congress should consider removing justices of the Federal courts for bad behavior, for abusing their judicial power. There is now a mounting case for even amending the United States Constitution to repeal Article III, Sections 1 and 2 which would effectively eliminate the federal courts altogether. Leave law making to the people and legislatures, not to the courts. State, district and local municipal courts are more adept to wisely interpret laws put forth to them as any federal court can manage.
ABORTION --- Legalized Murder
The Hippocratic Oath, an oath historically taken by physicians and other healthcare professionals, requires them to practice medicine honestly and morally. The ancient Greek Hippocratic Oath included the promise of new physicians that: “I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion."
Anyone with moral common sense can only conclude that abortion is immoral. To purposely destroy a human being, with malice aforethought, is murder. To purposely destroy an unborn child in its mother’s womb, with malice aforethought can only be regarded as intentional murder. “Of all the subjects relating to the erosion of the sanctity of human life, abortion is the keystone. It is the first and crucial issue that has been overwhelming in changing attitudes toward the value on life in general.”--- Francis Schaeffer
THE LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA --- The Poisoning of American Society
The United States is loosing too many of its precious younger generation to the slavery of recreational drug use. The legalization of marijuana even for medical purposes is a prank. Why encourage one more way for people to destroy their brain cells. Alcoholism is a bad enough problem. There are proven medications that treat illnesses better than smoking marijuana. THC is a drug that has never and never will be approved by the FDA for treating any illness. The American Lung Association has compiled a considerable amount of evidence that shows that marijuana is harmful to human beings. http://www.lung.org/associations/states/colorado/tobacco/marijuana.html
There is no doubt in my mind that marijuana use destroys lives. I have observed firsthand the devastating effects on people who smoke marijuana. The adverse effects of marijuana have social, academic, economic, and behavioral consequences. I know too many close friends, people I served with in the military and family members whose lives have been irreparably destroyed by their use of cannabis.
Marijuana interferes with an adolescent’s emotional, cognitive and ethical growth. Scientific studies show that people who smoked pot regularly while their brains were still developing, usually before age 25, permanently altered their ability to achieve their full potential in life. People in recovery often note that they stopped maturing when they first started using marijuana. This observation is supported by the facts of their lives and the observations of family, friends and professionals working with them. I have personally observed permanent behavior and personality changes in those who continued to smoke pot past their teenage years. I can spot the chronic pot user by their increased anxiety, panic attacks, depression, social withdrawal, and other mental health problems, particularly in teens.
The psychoactive ingredient of marijuana, THC has been proven to cause deficits in memory; manual dexterity and sustained attention have been shown to persist for days or weeks after the last use of marijuana. Regular pot smoking causes these problems to be continuous. Deficits in memory, manual dexterity and sustained attention have been shown to persist for days or weeks after the last use of marijuana. Marijuana has also been shown to impair perception, speed of motion and accuracy in tasks. High THC levels in the blood are the probable responsibility for many motor vehicle accidents.
Early marijuana use is associated with drug dependence as an adult. The Journal of the American Medical Association reported, based on a study of 300 sets of twins, that marijuana-using twins were four times more likely than their siblings to use cocaine and crack cocaine, and five times more likely to use hallucinogens such as LSD. The younger the age of first use means the higher the likelihood of such dependence as an adult. More teens are in treatment each year for marijuana dependence than for alcohol and all other illegal drugs combined. This is a trend that has been increasing for more than a decade: in 2002, 64 percent of adolescent treatment admissions reported marijuana as their primary substance of abuse, compared to 23 percent in 1992.
Marijuana users are more likely the risk of developing head and neck cancer. Cannabis smoke contains 50% to 70% more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke. These findings speak for themselves: marijuana is not a benign substance. It has real adverse health effects. Marijuana addiction is a reality.
Marijuana is an addictive drug. Short-term effects of marijuana include memory loss, distorted perception, trouble with thinking and problem solving, and loss of motor skills. Long-term adverse impacts include loss in muscle strength, increased heart rate, respiratory problems, loss of appetite, trouble sleeping, impaired ability to fight off infections and risk of cancer (marijuana contains 50-70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than does tobacco smoke).
Marijuana is far more powerful today than it was 30 years ago. THC levels have increased from the 1 percent potency level in the 1970s to more than 13 percent today (on average), with some samples containing THC levels of up to 33 percent.
Even more troubling is that marijuana serves as a gateway to the use of other illegal drugs. Most people who use methamphetamine, heroin or cocaine started their illegal drug use with marijuana. A recent study on addiction and substance abuse showed that teens who use marijuana at least once a month are 13 times more likely than other teens to use other drugs like cocaine, heroin or methamphetamine, and are almost 26 times more likely than those teens who never used marijuana to use another illegal drug. Another study showed that 12- to 17-year-olds who smoked marijuana were 85 times more likely to use cocaine than those who did not. Sixty percent of adolescents who use marijuana before age 15 will later use cocaine.
Last, but certainly not least, there are strong links between marijuana use, violence and other criminal activity. Young people who use marijuana weekly are nearly four times more likely than nonusers to engage in violence. Nationwide, 40 percent of adult males arrested for crimes tested positive for marijuana at the time of their arrest. Marijuana is in fact the cash crop that drives the illegal drug trade. Marijuana use provides a significant part of the demand side of the equation that brings drug dealers onto our street corners and into our schools and neighborhoods -- drug dealers who bring with them other crimes and violence. The connection between marijuana use and gang activity and violence is inescapable. Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak recently commented about middle-class Minnesotans who are buying marijuana "with a wink and a nod, thinking it has nothing to do with anything" when in fact these persons are "literally paying for the bullets that kill people." I agree with Mayor Rybak that "any person who buys marijuana in this region is directly or indirectly giving money to gangs." Recreational users of marijuana may not think of themselves as criminals, but they are in fact the biggest contributors to the illegal drug trade in America.
We would be wise as a society not to underestimate the destructive nature of marijuana. It is a powerful and addictive substance that is a gateway drug to other controlled substance abuse. Marijuana use finances in large part the activities of gangs and drug dealers. It is by far the most frequently used illegal drug in America and its use is directly connected to crime and violence in our communities.
For all of these reasons, in my opinion marijuana is America's most dangerous drug. We need to recognize the threat it represents and continue our efforts to control it, prevent our youth from starting to use it, aggressively enforce our laws against those who illegally cultivate, distribute and possess it, and effectively treat those who have become addicted to it.
THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS --- Tyranny survives when people fear their government. It is only when a government fears it’s own people that the people can remain truly free.
The United States of America has, by far, the highest per capita gun ownership in the world. Progressives will tell you that this is what makes America the Murder Capitol of Planet Earth. But we’re not, the center of “Gun Nut Nation” is in fact one of the safest places in the world.
http://bearingarms.com/number-one-bullet/?utm_source=badaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl
“The main foundations of every state, new states as well as ancient or composite ones, are good laws and good arms - you cannot have good laws without good arms, and where there are good arms, good laws inevitably follow…To govern more securely some Princes have disarmed their subjects...but by disarming, you at once give offense, since you show your subjects that you distrust them, either by doubting their courage, or as doubting their fidelity, each of which imputations begets hatred against you.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.” --- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, (1787)
The Founding Fathers of the United States knew first hand about the tyranny of an oppressive government and it was for that reason they declared that: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.”
The Second amendment to the United States Constitution’s right to rare arms, is intended to re-enforce a peoples’ right, to “alter or abolish” their government if that government should try to infringe upon their individual rights Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” --- Amendment II to The United States Constitution
There is nothing mentioned in here about sporting or hunting firearms but it is statement clearly all about individuals having the absolute right of securing their freedom through the right to possess firearms.
“It is certainly of the last Consequence to a free Country that the Militia, which is its natural Strength, should be kept upon the most advantageous Footing. A standing Army, however necessary it may be at some times, is always dangerous to the Liberties of the People.” --- Samuel Adams
In 2008 and 2010, the United States Supreme Court issued two a landmark decision to officially establish an "individual rights" interpretation of the Second Amendment. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home within many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession listed by the Court as being consistent with the Second Amendment. In McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government.
The right of American citizens to own firearms is a right that shall not be infringed. The ownership of firearms as intended in the Second Amendment is not to limit firearms for purposes of sporting or hunting. Indeed, the Second Amendment is specifically intended to allow individual ownership of weapons that are intended for self-defense.
It makes sense that a hunting rifle is used for shooting deer; a shotgun is used for shooting quail but an assault weapon, for example, is intended by its design to be used for self-defense. An “assault weapon” therefore could aptly be defined as a weapon used for self-defense and any law that would ban such “assault weapons” would be an UN-Constitutional act.
The "assault weapons" ban proposal not only places heavy restrictions on future purchases of weapons by law-abiding citizens, but also as originally proposed, requires weapons already in private hands to be registered under the National Firearms Act. This requirement includes: Background check and registration of owner including photograph and fingerprint ($200); registration of type and serial number of the firearm; certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and additional taxes to fund the ATF for registration implementation. Feinstein still has not released the text of the bill.
"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? It is feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
--Tench Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, 1788
Gun confiscation is the next step after the government requires gun registration. http://www.youtube.com/embed/03XEUPfD0qM
AMERICA'S ENERGY POLICY - An Inexpensive, Stable and Secure Sources of Energy is Vital to the Economy of the United States
American's dependence on foreign oil is a threat to our national security as well as our economy. The United States has the technology but not the will to reduce its dependence on foreign fossil fuels. We must aggressively begin take steps to eliminate our dangerous dependence on foreign oil. The practical wide-scale use of universal green power is many decades if not centuries away and fossil fuels are still by far our most efficient source of energy. Fossil fuels like oil, gas and coal can be effectively managed so that they cause very little or acceptable levels of harm to the environment. Industrialization over the years has actually improved the Earth's environment and at the same time improved the standard of living of people living in industrialized areas. https://www.prageruniversity.com/Political-Science/Why-You-Should-Love-Fossil-Fuel.html#.VT7e52bypoQ
Emerging new fossil energy technologies, if given a chance to develop, may become the catalyst that could spark a sensational increase in American prosperity and security, this along with an acceptable impact on the environment. The energy industry has developed a promising combination of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing or “Fracking” to economically access and produce oil and natural gas. Fracking is where a solution of water and sand is mixed with a small amount of chemicals that is injected into rock to open very thin cracks, allowing trapped oil or natural gas to migrate up to the well. Horizontal drilling allows one well site to recover natural gas instead of requiring expensive multiple well sites to drill vertically into natural gas zones. This technique uses less land at the surface as several wellheads can be located on a single well site. These technologies have been in use for decades but by merging them the United States has seen a turnaround in domestic oil and natural gas production. Now, operators can safely produce affordable, reliable quantities of natural gas from previously untapped resources.
There are also several “unconventional” petroleum sources, materials from which oil can be extracted—at a cost. Resources are abundant and could greatly impact the U.S. oil supply in the future. The three largest are oil shale (rock that releases petroleum-like liquids when heated in a special chemical process); tar sands (heavy, thick, black oil mixed with sand, clay, and water); and heavy crude oil (thicker and slower flowing than conventional oil). A region covering parts of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming contains oil shale totaling about three times the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia.
Private industry is also developing other new technologies that will more efficiently harvest natural gas. Natural gas vehicles (NGV) are efficient, clean and also less costly to drive. There is a growing number natural gas fueling stations and NGV owners can also tap into their homes' natural gas lines. Natural gas burns remarkably clean along with little engine wear and relatively easy and low-cost maintenance over time. Automobiles in the near future may also be powered by hydrogen extracted from coal. Hydrogen is arguably the cleanest form of energy available today, it's efficient, renewable and has zero-emissions. New techniques extract pure hydrogen from gasified coal syngas (synthesis gas). Syngas is a combination of hydrogen, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. A chemical process is used to boost its hydrogen content while removing all other components, resulting in a pure stream of hydrogen. These non-renewable energy sources may solve the immediate and pressing global energy issue of our day, that is the world’s growing epidemic of consuming fossil energy. The ultimate goal is to eliminate altogether our dependence on oil and other fossil fuels that tend to contaminate the Earth’s environment. This, however, is at least one hundred years away but in the meantime industry is taking huge steps to making fossil fuels very much cleaner. https://curiosity.com/rdr/topics/future-fossil-energy-technologies/
Nuclear power plants account for only 20% of U.S. electricity generation and no new reactors have come on line since 1996. Advances in nuclear technology could extend the desirability and future use of nuclear energy. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is pursuing the design of very-high temperature reactor technologies, through its Next Generation Nuclear Plant program and such a facility is scheduled to begin operations by 2021. The DOE has engaged other governments, international and domestic industry, and the research community to develop “Generation IV” systems. The goals of these efforts are to improve the economics, safety, fuel-cycle waste management, and proliferation resistance of nuclear reactors, as well as widen their applications.
CLIMATE CHANGE --- “Global Warming”, is this not just another term for the season of spring?
Paranoid global warming alarmists would have everyone believe that the world’s industrialized nations are belching levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere to the extent that this will result in the extinction of the human race. "Ecology as a social principle . . . condemns cities, culture, industry, technology, the intellect, and advocates men’s return to “nature,” to the state of grunting sub animals digging the soil with their bare hands." --- | Ayn Rand. If you are one who truly believes that reducing CO2 levels in the atmosphere at the expense of protecting the economies of industrialized and developing nations of the world, then I would offer you the chance, now if you can, to purchase of some deserted desert property in Nevada and there live off of only that barren land for the rest of your life.
The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has demonized carbon dioxide emissions with misleading manufactured information:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/06/dr-tim-ball/the-un-demonized-co2/
There are even more credible scientific studies, using solar activity, that predict the earth to be heading toward a mini-ice age within the next fifteen years. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3156594/Is-mini-ICE-AGE-way-Scientists-warn-sun-sleep-2020-cause-temperatures-plummet.html
Most credible scientists agree that global warming/climate change is a preposterous myth. One such scientist is Ian Rutherford Plimer an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide, and the director of multiple mineral exploration and mining companies. He has published 130 scientific papers, six books and edited the Encyclopedia of Geology
Professor Ian Plimer could not have said it better! If you've read his book you will agree, this is a good summary:
Where Does the Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Really Come From?
PLIMER: "Okay, here's the bombshell. The volcanic eruption in Iceland. Since its first spewing of volcanic ash has, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet - all of you.
Of course, you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress - it's that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life.
I know…. it’s very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kids "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of abroad, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cent light bulbs with $10.00 light bulbs…..well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days.
The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in just four days - yes, FOUR DAYS - by that volcano in Iceland has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon.
And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud at any one time - EVERY DAY.
I don't really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.
Yes, folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over One year - think about it.
Of course, I shouldn't spoil this 'touchy-feely tree-hugging' moment and mention the effect of solar and cosmic activity and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which keeps happening despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change.
And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud, but the fact of the matter is that the bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year.
Just remember that your government just tried to impose a whopping carbon tax on you, on the basis of the bogus 'human-caused' climate-change scenario.
Hey, isn't it interesting how "they" don't mention 'Global Warming' anymore, but just 'Climate Change'.
You know why?
It's because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming bull artists got caught with their pants down.
And, just keep in mind that you might yet have an Emissions Trading Scheme - that whopping new tax - imposed on you that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer. It won't stop any volcanoes from erupting, that's for sure.
But, hey, relax...give the world a hug and have a nice day!"
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION --- Surrendering the Sovereignty of The United States of America
The United States is a nation of immigrants. Much of America’s prosperity is attributed to its diversified population. No other nation attracts immigrants like America because nowhere is there greater opportunity for one to prosper and pursue happiness. However, a controlled immigration process is essential to ensure that the dead beats and rejects do not flood the United States with the problems of the world.
The hidden intent for encouraging illegal immigration is to build an enduring Democrat base of future voters who would owe President Obama and his party their unyielding allegiance. "What kind of country is it that lets those who are not citizens decide who governs those who are? If any foreigner can now vote here, is the United States even a country anymore? If Congress doesn't stop it soon, de facto enfranchising of illegals will be our road to ruin." --- Investor's Business Daily. Illegals casting votes will certainly tip elections. Recently, 70 Ohio elections were nearly tied or decided by a single vote and the 2000 presidential election was decided by only 537 votes in Florida. Consider the election results if millions of illegals tend to overwhelming vote Democratic are allowed into voting booth.
The term “undocumented alien” is a contradiction, an oxymoron if you will. Individuals who are within the United States illegally are clearly in violation of Federal Law and are subject to imprisonment or deportation. Presidents in the past have used massive deportation programs to rid the United States of individuals who were in the country illegally. President Hoover, during his four-year presidency, caused roughly 121,000 persons to be deported or induced to leave through threat of deportation. During President Truman’s nearly eight years in office, about 3.4 million were deported or left "voluntarily" under threat of deportation. President Eisenhower deported officially just over 2.1 million people who were recorded as having been deported or having departed under threat of deportation during Eisenhower’s "Operation Wetback”. These are official statistics. However, the number of deportations appears to have declined significantly during President Obama's administration. This is because we have nearly four and a half million visa over stayers in our country and our only five thousand Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers are unable to deal with the increasing numbers of people already in the United States who have overstayed their authorized visit.
The United States can never hope to make a dent in world poverty by allowing poor people to emigrate from poorer nations. The only common sense solution is not achieved by allowing poor people to immigrate into this country but by promoting better economic conditions within the poor nations of the world.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/LPjzfGChGlE
The only immigration policy that has been proven to work is one that strictly controls our national boarders and at the same time reduces incentives for individuals to immigrate illegally and/or overstay their visas in the United States. The United States must end the perception among illegal immigrants that they will be given safe havens from deportation and will be offered programs of amnesty, free medical care and inclusion into the welfare system, this only encourages more immigrants to cross our boarders illegally. We could not build a boarder fence tall enough that could detour illegals from pursuing the handouts that the United States Government provides to illegal aliens. There are now approximately 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States. Deporting all of them is not practical, even though this has been done in the past but what must be done is that our boarders must become totally secure which is the responsibility of the Federal Government along with reducing incentives for individuals to immigrate illegally into the United States.
Here are some statistics on illegal immigrants for just one state – California. from the Los Angeles Times Newspaper:
40% of all workers in Los Angeles County (Los Angeles County has 10.2 million people) are working for cash and not paying taxes. This is because they are predominantly illegal aliens working without a green card.
95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.
75% of people on the most-wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.
Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal, whose births were paid for by taxpayers.
Nearly 35% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally.
Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.
The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border.
Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.
21 radio stations in Los Angeles are Spanish speaking.
In Los Angeles County 5.1 million people speak English, 3.9 million speak Spanish. (There are 10.2 million people in Los Angeles County.) (All 10 of the above statements are from the Los Angeles Times)
Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but 29% are on welfare. Over 70% of the United States' annual population growth (and over 90% of California, Florida, and New York) results from illegal immigration. 29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens.
Illegal aliens are taking advantage of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) loopholes to drain the national treasury of billions of dollars to enrich their pockets without even if they do not earn any income of their own.
The IRS doesn't give a damn. It's not their money; it's taxpayer money. See link:
http://videos2view.net/tax-fraud.htm#.USVd0eQItlQ.email
Our boarders are unsecure, drug cartel wars and drug trafficking is allowed to increase unabated along our boarders along Mexico. Our Federal Government is failing in its responsibility to secure our boarders but President Obama and Democrats in Congress could not care less.
https://youtube.googleapis.com/v/za_8TOQFA8o
Thousands of illegal aliens apprehended along the southern border of the United States aren’t even from Mexico. The U.S. Border Patrol calls them “Other Than Mexicans,” and many are citizens of countries that are sponsors of terrorism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vw3HFpOltpw&app=desktop
Final thought -- Why are we cutting benefits for our veterans, no pay raises for our military and cutting our army to a level lower than before WWII, but we are not stopping the payments or benefits to illegal aliens.
By -- Clark Wilson
“Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them.”--- Judge Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, CONSTITUTION OF THE U. STATES, Book III, CHAPTER XLV. CONCLUDING REMARKS, 1833
I estimate that the political mindset of today’s American voter population is typically divided into about 40% moderate to conservative Republicans, 30% who call themselves Progressive/Democrats of which 10% are actually hard core Marxist/socialist operatives and the remaining 30% do not have a clue as to what is going-on outside of their own little world. Ostensibly, it is the 30% of this uninformed voter population that decides elections. Our dear republic is in decline because of the malignant tendencies of democracy as most voters now tend to focus on unreasonable wishes while not questioning and demanding that their government demonstrate proper common sense, fairness, transparency and accountability in resolving public issues.
“Men will not look at things as they really are, but as they wish them to be--and are ruined.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
This treatise reveals the common sense realities of political, economic and social issues that every American voter should consider before exercising his/her right to vote.
THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY --- The great prosperity of the United States is dependent upon a vibrant, free market system of commerce.
Good economic policy is simply the application of good common sense. America's Founding Fathers understood that their new Constitution must promote a healthy system of commerce if their new nation was to thrive. Commerce best thrives when governments actively respect and protect private property and abide by fundamental principles of limited government. The concepts that limiting government, promoting commerce and protecting private property have transformed the United States of America into the most prosperous and powerful nation in history.
Promoting a less encumbered system of American commerce is the cornerstone of the United States Constitution. "The prosperity of commerce is now perceived and acknowledged by all enlightened statesmen to be the most useful as well as the most productive source of national wealth, and has accordingly become a primary object of their political cares… By multiplying the means of gratification, by promoting the introduction and circulation of the precious metals, those darling objects of human avarice and enterprise, it serves to vivify and invigorate the channels of industry, and to make them flow with greater activity and copiousness.” --- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Papers Number 12
Gradually over the last century and more precipitously within the most recent decade, the United States government has instituted blundering economic strategies that have been harmful to American’s system of commerce and will likely result in a decline in America’s prosperity for generations to come unless common sense remedies are soon applied.
We will focus first on: employment, taxes, government spending and government regulations. These are arguably the prime American political concerns of the 21st century. The United States economy has barely recovered from a prolonged economic recession only to become mired in economic stagnation. The economy’s economic doldrums are being perpetuated by four major dynamics: .
a. A very high unemployment rate that is stuck above 5% along with
b. Excessive income tax rates,
c. Excessive government spending and
d. Excessive government regulation.
The four conditions listed above continue to influence each other in perpetuating a vicious circle of economic paralysis. It is simply common sense to understand that a healthy economic recovery for the United States is dependent upon in-concert corrections to all four conditions. The causes, effects and solutions concerning all four of these conditions are discussed in the following:
HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT --- Is the Result of Excessive Tax Rates, Excessive Government Spending and Excessive Government Regulations
A high unemployment rate always results in lower production rates, causing in a reduced supply of goods and services available or Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The consequence of a decrease in the GDP is a decreased general standard of living for all. Only when growth in the real GDP exceeds the combined growth rates of the labor force and productivity (potential output), will the unemployment rate continue to fall. A well-established economic axiom explains that to achieve a one-percentage point decline in the unemployment rate in the course of a year, real GDP must grow approximately two-percentage points faster than the rate of growth of potential GDP over that period.
A high unemployment rate lowers the tax base, which prompts governments to increase income tax rates on those who have income in order to overcome revenue shortfalls. Excessively high tax rates in turn cause businesses to reduce their numbers of employees, thus reducing the production of goods and services, thus decreasing the total GDP and the total number of employees who would pay taxes.
A recent Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on United States Unemployment reported that the rate of unemployment in the United States has been stuck about or above 5 percent since February 2009 - this making the past six years as the longest stretch of high unemployment in this country since the Great Depression. Moreover, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that the unemployment rate will remain about 6 percent for years to come unless government economic policies are mended.What is even more revealing about the poor health of the United States economy is the Labor Force Participation Rate that is now only about 62%, the lowest it has been since 1978 and has been dropping rapidly since 2008.
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000
The official unemployment rate excludes those individuals who would like to work but have not searched for a job in the past four weeks as well as those who are working part-time but would prefer full-time work; if those people were counted among the unemployed, the unemployment rate in would be about 15 percent. More and more people of working age are simply giving-up their quest for gainful employment. Too many are resigning themselves to receiving their livelihood from the government as their best option. The Cato Institute released a study showing that welfare benefits pay more than a minimum wage job in 33 states and the District of Columbia. Even worse, welfare pays more than $15 per hour in 13 states. According to the study, welfare benefits have increased faster than minimum wage. It’s now more profitable to sit at home than it is to earn an honest day’s pay. Hawaii is the biggest offender, where welfare recipients earn $29.13 per hour, or a $60,590 yearly salary, all for doing nothing.
http://www.cato.org/publications/white-paper/work-versus-welfare-trade
Compounding the problem of high unemployment, the share of unemployed people looking for work for more than six months—referred to as the long-term unemployed—topped 40 percent in December 2009 for the first time since 1948, when such data began to be collected; it has remained near that level ever since.
EXCESSIVE INCOME TAX RATES --- Promote Economic Uncertainty Which Leads To Stifled Economic Growth
The most pressing obstacle to full and sustained economic recovery, that which perpetuates our sluggish economy, is that the United States' individual graduated income tax rates are too high along with corporate income tax rates. The United States has by far the highest, most punishing, corporate tax rates in the world. Our high corporate tax rates are a drag on the US economy, encouraging companies to shift investments and jobs abroad to where there are lower-tax jurisdictions. The high-rate US corporate tax system makes the current slow economy even more punishing to the average American than it seems. Most Americans don't consider the negative effects an uncompetitive corporate tax code has on the middle class. The U.S. corporate tax code does not discriminate against rich and poor. It robs everyone of potential prosperity. By setting excessive corporate tax rates on domestic companies, the pressure for companies to move their business off-shore will only increase, and the incentives dwindle for businesses to incorporate in the U.S. Corporations will respond to higher taxes by paying workers less, charging customers more and paying stockholders less –which drives down retirement savings.common sense.
The proven solution for promoting prosperity and at the same time increasing government tax revenue during times of economic stagnation and for any time for that matter, is to promote measures that expand commerce. Economic history and common sense reveals to us that private money invested in the economy, not government taxing and spending will grow the economy and new jobs. President Roosevelt prolonged the Great Depression with massive government spending along with increased taxes on the wealthy in order to finance his make work projects such as the CCC and WPA.
http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/fdrs-folly-how-roosevelt-and-his-new-deal-prolonged-the-great-depression
Long-term economic prosperity and job growth happens when government disengages from the private sector and encourages the wealthiest of Americans to invest their wealth without fear of excessive new taxes and regulations.
“We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.” – Sir Winston Churchill
History and common sense reveals to us that practical solutions for increasing government tax revenues should ostensibly not always include increased income tax rates. Former President Calvin Coolidge advocated cutting taxes in order to increase tax revenues through what he termed as “scientific taxation”. President Coolidge's administration decreased income tax rates and government revenues increased substantially. This has also been demonstrated during the Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton administrations. In most cases, government revenues increased with decreased income tax rates. There were, however, periods of higher federal spending, primarily defense spending in some of the aforementioned administrations but it is obvious that increased tax revenues generated as a result of decreased tax rates, increased revenues offset these deficits. Conversely, when income tax rates are excessively increased, as was done in the Franklin D. Roosevelt's administration, the economy continues to retract resulting in further net decreases of government tax revenues. When taxpayers are taxed less, they spend more. Healthy commerce is perpetuated when money is circulating in the economy and businesses benefit with increasing sales and profits. Expanding sales and profits motivate businesses to expand their operations and hire more workers. Increased business profits and more workers who pay income taxes put more money into the federal revenue system. President Kennedy understood all of this and proposed tax rate cuts to ensure a prosperous America. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEdXrfIMdiU
Increased tax rates, especially on corporations and the wealthy, beyond what they are now becomes counterproductive in increasing government tax revenues. Arthur Betz Laffer, the American economist and member of President Ronald Reagan’s Economic Policy Advisory Board, has convincingly demonstrated the relationship between tax rates and revenue collected illustrating how a condition of diminishing tax revenue return is created by over taxation. The Federal Treasury’s tax collection is now on the backside of the Laffer Curve as a result of excessively high corporate tax rates.
Understanding the Laffer Curve:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIqyCpCPrvU
Those who still believes that government deficits can be decreased by increasing tax rates alone is either a Marxist or one of their useful idiots. Yet, President Obama and liberal politicians in Congress will still maintain that we must increase income taxes, especially for the so-called wealthy who liberals portray as not paying their “fair share”. We also hear more and more propaganda from progressive/liberal thinking Americans who argue that too many of the wealthy pay too little or no taxes at all. The real fact is that those who could advance economic activity the most are the ones most punished by paying much more than their “fair share” of taxes. Roughly 50% of all Americans do not pay income taxes at all while roughly the tops 3% of the wealthiest Americans contribute the majority of tax revenues collected by the government.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnEe4oaSC88
Progressive/liberal Democrats, however, will still maintain that the wealthy are paying historically low amounts in income taxes and some even advocate taxing not just incomes but accumulated wealth as well. The sluggish economy is affecting lower profits and capital gains that in turn produce less taxable income. Individuals are not and should never be taxed on their accumulated wealth itself, but on their earned income and income produced by investments. In fear of high taxes and excessive government regulations, the wealthiest of Americans are simply not investing in new capital thus not producing income that could be taxed.
The recent recession has hit small businesses the hardest. Small businesses produce 80% of all new jobs in our economy and have proven time and again to be the engine of both economic recovery and job recovery in hard economic times. Raising income taxes on anyone now would lead to a further retraction in economic activity and higher unemployment. The Federal budget is not in deficit because of decreased income tax rates, it is bloated government spending that has increased the huge government deficits which threatens our economic way of life in America
“You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it... You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom... What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving… The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation." --- DR. Adrian Pierce Rogers
Anyone who is familiar the full spectrum of economic and political theory knows that Chapter 2 of the “Communist Manifesto” written in 1848 by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels demands economic equality through government forced wealth re-distribution. The first three tenets of Marxist wealth re-distribution are:
• Take control of and redistribute assets
• A heavy progressive or graduated Income Tax
• Abolition of all rights of inheritance
President Obama’s original theme of “Hope and Change” has made traction with the political mindset of a majority of Americans. “Hope and Change” essentially promotes the idea that less than wealthy Americans should be reliant for subsistence as coming from wealth redistributed by the state. Even though we cannot prove that any of our political leaders are card-carrying communists, our system of taxation certainly approaches the Marxist philosophy. Given the current rhetoric from the Democratic Party, is this not right on the Money? Nancy Pelosi and President Obama often use; Death tax”, “Redistribution of Wealth”, “tax the wealthy” as their exact words.
Progressive Democrats make many believers in their cause by touting examples of supposedly big greedy corporations that are not "paying their fair share in taxes". True, there are indeed some tax loopholes needing correction through carefully thought-out tax reforms. However, the reality is that the vast majority of those who pay little or no income taxes simply fall only into only one or more of the following four categories:
a. Criminal income tax evaders or
b. Those who did not make enough money to be taxed,
c. Those who have deferred paying income taxes by re-investing profits or capital gains,
d. Those who have shown a net loss of income.
It is important to understand that small businesses and large orporations often defer paying large parts of their income taxes by re-investing profits or capital gains and this people is how more jobs are created in a capitalist system. An excellent example of this is the Boeing Company when it paid nothing in taxes for the 2014 tax year. Boeing reported an $82 million tax refund last year, but made $5.9 billion in U.S. pre-tax profits during the same period. This means that Boeing paid a federal tax rate of a minus 1.4 percent. This may appear to some as just one more example of a big greedy corporations not "paying their fair share in taxes", however, this ignores a crucial part of the company's tax expense. When Boeing decides to embark on the extremely risky business of developing new aircraft and products, its taxes are often deferred to encourage investment that could take decades to materialize profits. But once the company actually delivers their products, at a profit, then those deferred taxes turn into current ones.
EXCESSIVE GOVERNMENT DEFICIT SPENDING --- Will fosters the Illusion of Economic Growth With little Sustained Productivity in the Private Sector
Our United States has a severe spending problem. When the federal government spends more than it collects, it runs a deficit. To fill this gap, the Treasury Department must incur debt. As debt grows, interest payments on the debt will grow as well. If the government does not change this course, servicing the debt will end up as being the government's largest budget item. Given current policies, the Congressional Budget Office projects that the cost of the debt as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) will explode from a mere 1.8 percent of GDP in 2012 to 46 percent of GDP in 2084.Then the rest of the steps would quickly fall into place towards Marxism as America’s means of production and distribution would fall under government control.
What the American people desperately need now is a White house and Congress that can say “NO” to irresponsible spending. The national Debt is currently more than $18 Trillion and growing. A study by University of California-San Diego economics professor James Hamilton finds that the United States actually has over $70 trillion in off-balance sheet liabilities--an amount nearly six times the official on-balance-sheet debt figure. Hamilton’s study specifically examines the federal government’s support for housing, other loan guarantees, deposit insurance, actions taken by the Federal Reserve, and government trust funds. Not surprisingly, Hamilton found that Medicare and Social Security represent the bulk of future U.S. debt obligations, coming in at $27.6 trillion and $26.5 trillion respectively.
The Obama Administration economic policymakers are stuck on stupid with their voodoo socialist Keynesian theory of government economic intervention in the economy. Keynesians argue that the prime problem with today’s economy is insufficient government spending. If the health of the future economy is irrelevant, then the Keynesian theory makes sense. If artificially jacking-up demand in the short term yields relief today, that's all that matters if no one cares about the future. The faulty Keynesian macroeconomic theory model advocates high government deficit spending in order to stimulate the economy in order to increase the real Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This has produced some temporary positive trends, especially in the stock market, but in the long run this will only succeed in creating consumer inflation, the worst type of inflation. The desired effect of an overall long-term positive trend as a result of excessive government spending is clearly not working as the American economy continues to stagnate. Instead, the federal government should focus on reforms that promote free market long-term economic growth. Cutting corporate tax rates and excessive government regulations is an overdue reform that would stimulate America's long-run productivity, reduce unemployment and world market competitiveness.
The United States federal government has in place a long-term projected divergence between the amount of money that the federal government spends and the amount of money that it collects in tax revenue. This has adverse implications for deficits, debt, employment and economic growth.
The long-term budget projection for the Obama’s administration economic plan shows a course of accelerated spending producing increased federal debt. Future tax revenues will flat-line if current and proposed tax rates along with excessive government regulations stifle the essential economic activity that produces increased tax revenues.
EXCESSIVE GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS ON BUSINESS ---“The rule is always better when the ruled are better… happiness consists in the excellent exercise of our rational capacities” --- Aristotle
Should the individual become subordinate to the state? Should promoting private enterprise trump government intervention? Which economic system can best promote the prosperity of a nation? Is a nation better off under a principally free market capitalistic system, a socialistic one, or feasibly a heavily regulated mix of the two?
The answer is already be given to us in our United States Constitution.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.” ― Patrick Henry
The capitalist free market system of commerce has proven itself to work best and tends to benefit the general public when excessive government intervention ceases to stifle the rewards of capitalism. Decisive political battles of the twentieth century are now being fought to regain individual rights already established in United States Constitution as a balance to increased federal powers.
"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government." -- Thomas Jefferson
“…the simple voice of nature and of reason will say, it is right… I draw my idea of the form of government from a principle in nature, which no art can overturn, viz. that the more simple any thing is, the less liable it is to be disordered; and the easier repaired when disordered… Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first a patron, the last a punisher.” --- Thomas Paine 1776
“Economic power is exercised by means of a positive, by offering men a reward, an incentive, a payment, a value; political power is exercised by means of a negative, by the threat of punishment, injury, imprisonment, destruction. The businessman's tool is values; the bureaucrat's tool is fear.” --- Ayn Rand
The government of the United States would serve its citizens better with a “Laissez-faire” business climate where commerce is allowed to thrive and the private sector is enabled to pursue free business practices that all contribute most successfully to society as a whole. The state should be limited to those functions that maintain order but should avoid, as much as possible, interfering with individual initiatives. When it is appropriate, some government regulation is needed to promote a healthy economy. Too much regulation, however, tends to stifle healthy economic activity.
The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom. For in all the states of created beings capable of law, where there is no law, there is no freedom. --- John Locke
Democrats are too often quick to criticize Republicans for not promoting stricter regulation over business but then quash business regulations that would tend to hinder their progressive agendas. George Bush and Republicans tried to warn Congress starting in 2001 that an economic crisis was looming if something was not done. Democrats in The Congress refused to listen along with the arrogant Congressman Barney Frank and Senator Christopher Dodd, that a crises was comming which eventually led to the sub-prime loan debacle that brought-on the worst economic recession since the Great Depression. Today the Obama administration and the Democratic Party, even after seven years into the Obama administration, continue to blame former President George W. Bush for the economic crash of 2008. We seem to never hear, however, from Democrats as to what the real root cause was that brought down the economy at the end of Bush’s second term of office. In the late 1990s liberal Democrats in Congress pressured senior executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make loans in massive numbers to people who were unqualified for home loans in the late 1990s. The Bush administration in the beginning had long cautioned the then Democratic Party controlled Congress concerning the looming problems with the under-regulated home loan industry but Democrats in Congress continued to ignore President Bush’s warnings. The Democrats were actually promoting a sub-prime home loan scheme, orchestrated by then Congressman Barney Frank (D) and Senator Christopher Dodd (D). These radical left wing Democrats covertly orchestrated schemes where the federal government force regulated the sub-prime mortgage market causing our financial systems to become overburden with home mortgage foreclosures to the point of failure. The result was a financial meltdown, calculated by the efforts of extreme left wing socialists who seek to destroy the United States as the last bastion of capitalism. A new study from the widely respected National Bureau of Economic Research released this week has confirmed beyond question that the left's race-baiting attacks on the housing market (the Community Reinvestment Act--enacted under Carter, made shockingly more aggressive under Clinton) is directly responsible for imploding the housing market and destroying the economy. http://www.examiner.com/article/new-study-confirms-economy-was-destroyed-by-democrat-policies
Regulatory Accumulation Hurts the Economy. http://mercatus.org/publication/accumulation-regulatory-restrictions-across-presidential-administrations?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=macro&utm_campaign=fbpage
In June of 2013, John Dawson and John Seater, economists at Appalachian State University and North Carolina State University, published a potentially important study in the Journal of Economic Growth that shows the effects of regulatory accumulation on the US economy. Several others have already summarized the study’s results (two examples here and here) with respect to how the accumulation of federal regulation caused substantial reductions in the growth rate of GDP. So, while the results are important, I won’t dwell on them here. The short summary is this: using a new measure of federal regulation in an endogenous growth model, Dawson and Seater find that, on average, federal regulation reduced economic growth in the US by about 2% annually in the period from 1949 to 2005. Considering that economic growth is an exponential process, an average reduction of 2% over 57 years makes a big difference.
Excessive government regulation over business operations has always suppressed healthy economic growth. Businesses tend to avoid risking their capital in new growth investments if they are uncertain about future government business regulations. The Democratic Party’s standard line is that Republicans favor fewer regulations over business practices in order to create unfair advantages for those who are already wealthy. Unfortunately, the Democrat’s solution for economic justice has always been to advocate increased government regulation over private enterprise.
The cost of evasive government regulations is not limited to business. Perversely, this burden falls disproportionately on low-income families through lower wages and higher prices to consumers. If policymakers really want to help the poor, they should seek to reduce the barriers to job creation, instead of adding obstacles like hiking-up the minimum wage. Job creators are already tangled in a forest of red tape: over 170,000 pages of regulations from the federal government alone. Complying with these regulations is disproportionately burdensome for the small businesses that create the majority of new jobs. Regulatory agencies often fail to consider the possible impact they may have on labor markets, even though they have been, since 1971, increasingly subject to requirements that they consider the effect of regulatory change on the economy. Unfortunately, the failure to focus effectively on the employment impact of regulation means that the analysis misses several important aspects of regulation First, agencies ignore the economic cost of job loss in the regulated industry, despite strong evidence that job displacement of any type is very costly for individuals, families, and communities. Second, agencies ignore the economic cost of indirect job loss in other industries resulting from higher priced regulated goods or services. For example, the Environmental Protection Agency found that its proposed Toxins Rule would raise the price of electricity by nearly four percent and, as a result, higher energy prices would raise prices and reduce sales in 19 associated industries. If they had carried their analysis further, they would have found that for every job lost in the electrical industry, eleven jobs would have been lost in other industries. And each of these additional jobs lost would be very costly for individuals, families, and communities. Finally, there is evidence that high levels of regulation can affect the economy dynamically and at the macro level. With respect to labor markets, this means that regulations can affect job creation, wage growth, and workforce skill mismatching with available jobs. The latter can result in lower labor force participation and higher unemployment rates in the long run.
Now with ever increasing-intrusive banking regulations, banks have ostensibly lost the motivation to act sensibly. Consequently, regulations such as the Equal Credit Opportunity, which prevents banks to ask questions about marital status or source of revenues, the Community Reinvestment Act, forcing banks to make loans to poorer people, Fannie Mae, which increased mortgage loans to lower-income people, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which ensures that most deposits under $250,000 are safe from banking failures, have all fostered banks to act for their better interest, i.e. carelessly. When the interest rates were (artificially) low, as they were under George W Bush and as they are right now, control can be maintained. However, as soon as the interest rates increase, defaults increase, and the Ponzi scheme (in this case, the bank claiming to have more money than it really has) collapses, as it did in 2008.
FOREIGN POLICY --- Is Currently an International Disasters In The Making
A consistently strong and forceful American foreign policy, not appeasement, is essential to the maintenance of America’s security, domestic prosperity and tranquility.
“Speak softly and carry a big stick" --- foreign policy theme of American President Theodore Roosevelt.
The only demonstrated dynamic that has been proven to promote world peace and prosperity is the presence of an effective worldwide American foreign policy. This is achieved through a consistent and aggressive chief executive along with a skilled diplomatic corps backed with a strong military force. What is most essential in projecting a sound foreign policy, is that the United States must never negotiate from a position of real or perceived weakness nor appease those who could do us harm. Strong American leadership in foreign policy has in the past proven to be successful in preserving peace, prosperity, and freedom in the far corners of the world, especially in Asia. The successes in American foreign policy leadership in the past have brought about the most peaceful, prosperous and free world in the history of mankind. American troops, planes, and ships stationed abroad, occasional armed intervention and sometimes all out wars, are necessary parts of what enables world peace and prosperity.
A forceful American foreign policy along with a strong military preempts world problems. The former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, however, recently remarked that she wants the United States to find ways to “empathize” with its enemies. She says: “This is what we call smart power… Trying to understand and in so far as psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view.” History, unfortunately, has proven her idea to be irresponsible. Throughout recorded history mankind has demonstrated an innate propensity toward waging war. Appeasement toward one’s enemies never seems to be effective in preserving peace.
The Obama administration’s current "Nuclear Deal" with Iran may have ostensibly lit the fuse that will eventually ignite World War III. Obama’s "Nuclear Deal" with Iran has stirred worsening fears among the Arab world where apprehensions are pervasive that any easing of Iran’s international isolation will tip the already bloody contest for supremacy in the region toward Shiite-led Tehran. Arab countries have deep dreads of Iran’s gaining nuclear weapons and they are now even more certain that the Obama’s administration "Nuclear Deal" with Iran will allow this to happen albeit supposedly delayed for ten years. Nine nations — the United States, Russia, United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, North Korea and even Israel all have nuclear weapons. Iran, however, is the only nation that has stated it would use nuclear weapons. Iran has stated publicly, repeatedly and very emphatically that it intends to use nuclear weapons to destroy both Israel and the United States. Equally important, however, is that the key Sunni-dominated Gulf allies of the United States are all very worried that this nuclear deal gives Iran the means — through an economic windfall — an implicit green light to further its push influence throughout the region. This fear of Iran’s growing power in the region will assuredly, and very soon, lead to a nuclear arms race throughout the Middle East which could lead to an all-out war in the region which in turn could likely trigger the envelopment of all the world’s superpowers. The short term solution to this dire problem is that the U.S Congress must now override President Obama’s "Nuclear Deal" with Iran but it may be up to our allies (Israel) to take the immediate decisive military action necessary to destroy Iran's nuclear capability before an inevitable Middle East nuclear arms race can take shape. The only long term solution is evolving into a military one. It is a foregone conclusion that Iran will cheat on Obama’s “Nuclear Deal” at which time the U.S. must be prepared to respond immediately with decisive military action. The U.S. Air Force has developed a new, lighter, bunker-buster bomb that can be launched from the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to attack Iran’s nuclear sites, particularly the Fordow fuel enrichment plant, which is buried deep inside mountains in Iran.
http://nationalinterest.org/.../the-f-35s-new-bunker…
We must learn from history that great nations endured by remaining forceful in dealing with their foreign affairs. Let us not repeat the gravest mistakes of history by ignoring the great historical philosophies concerning the affairs of state revealed to us by Ronald Reagan, Winston Churchill , Abraham Lincoln, Napoleon Bonaparte, George Washington and Julius Caesar. The current world situation begs to echo the advice given by one great philosopher of statecraft who's advice remains consistent throughout the ages. “There is no avoiding war; it can only be postponed to the advantage of others…The first way to lose a state is to neglect the art of war…The cost of deterring future problems of world conflict is much less than the causalities and economic impact of actual war. The Romans recognized potential difficulties in advance and always remedied them in time. They never let problems develop just so they could escape a war...for when you are on the spot, disorders are detected in their beginnings and remedies can be readily applied; but when you are at a distance, they are not heard of until they have gathered strength and the case is past cure…” --- Nicolai Machiavelli
Those who do not understand history are condemned to repeat it. If peace is your goal, it could be argued that deterrence is the most necessary tactic. America should arm itself to the extent that wars will be prevented and won if deterrence should fail. Like it or not, the United States is the dominant power in this world and as a result has the indisputable responsibility of policing world affairs. President Franklin D. Roosevelt learned this fact the hard way. On American foreign policy Roosevelt said: “Great power involves great responsibility.” It is conceivable that if, in the 1930s, the United States had a stronger military presence in Asia this would have prevented Japan from invading China and this would have avoided the massive human tragedy of war in the Pacific. Had the American military remained in Germany after World War I to enforce the Treaty of Versailles, World War II may have never happened.
A successful foreign policy was demonstrated after the carnage of World War II. The United States remained in occupation of both Germany and Japan, while the Marshall Plan checked the spread of Communism in Europe. The Unite States didn’t force the nations it defeated to become its concurred servants. Instead the United States actively helped re-build the economies of Germany and Japan. Through encouraging the development of free markets in the defeated nations, it created an open trading system that would maximize benefits for all nations. The result was the economic miracles of Japan, West Germany, South Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Taiwan.
When an influential nation withdraws from the world, either by imposing trade barriers or drawing down military commitments, it loses its ability to influence events. When it comes to promoting political freedom, without liberty as part of the conversation with American allies, millions in Asia would not be free today. It is no accident that democracy has developed most thoroughly in the countries where the United States maintains a visible presence such as Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. If the Obama administration continues to strip the military of the resources to carry out its missions, those missions will shrink—even as you claim to support some of the most critical ones.
The Premier of the defunct Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev, ostensibly perceived that President John F. Kennedy was weak and indecisive after the Bay of Pigs debacle in Cuba along with his botched Vienna summit. As a result, Khrushchev proceeded to test Kennedy from Cuba to Berlin. Today the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin, and Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, are all certain that they are dealing with a hesitating and indecisive American President Obama and are adjusting their foreign policy actions accordingly. Khrushchev was proven wrong about Kennedy, but President Obama's enemies will likely continue to take advantage of his weak, indecisive leadership in regards to foreign affairs.
The Soviet Union under Marxist-Leninist doctrine predicted that capitalism would collapse on the “ash heap of history” as global communism triumphed as an economic system. Thanks to the foreign policy of President Ronald W. Reagan it was instead the vanguard of the international communist movement, the Soviet Union that disintegrated into the “trash heap”. When the Soviet Union dissolved, it led to a domino effect of communist nations collapsing.
President George W. Bush’s most glaring foreign policy blunder was not the issue of Iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction” existing or not but Bush’s failure to have a well thought out pre-invasion plan for the occupation of Iraq, a plan that would contend with the resulting vacuum of power after the defeat of Saddam Hussein’s military government establishment. Bush won the war in Iraq but almost lost the peace there. The peace in Iraq and Afghanistan will most surely be lost at the hand of President Obama foreign policy because Obama has no plan to sustain the hard fought for peace.
President Obama has failed to achieve any of his major foreign policy objectives he laid out as a Presidential candidate. Voters should have quickly seen his naiveté as a candidate, with no experience on the world stage other than giving political speeches, being a community organizer and making promises that simply obviously cannot be kept.
“Minds are of three kinds: one is capable of thinking for itself; another is able to understand the thinking of others; and a third can neither think for itself nor understand the thinking of others. The first is of the highest excellence, the second is excellent, and the third is worthless.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
The foreign policy of the Obama administration has ostensibly failed in that President Obama has proven himself to be inconsistent and thus appears to be weak in the eyes of the world. Most foreigners view President Obama as clumsy and ineffectual as he strains to project himself as an innovative world leader in resolving international security issues. Some of Obama’s foreign policy rhetoric sounds plausible, however, the major trouble spots in the world remain unresolved. The ugly reality is that the Russia, China, al-Qaeda and now ISIS is emerging as a threat to international security. Iran appears be on the verge of becoming a nuclear power and is controlling negotiations concerning security in the Middle East. Russia as well as China has been allowed to become obstructionists in solving world security issues.
Attempts to force democracy upon the Muslim world have proven to be a fantasy leading to over a half century of ill-advised foreign policy. The Muslim world has always ostensibly viewed democracy as an institution of weakness. The Obama administration’s naive policy of trying to adopt an innovative conciliatory tone showing more respect for the Muslim world is proving counter-productive. Jihadists typically size-up their enemies, looking for the weakest areas in which they can gain the advantage. Muslim extremist yield only to strength and have interpreted Obama’s appeasing rhetoric as clear signals of weakness. If Jihadists now believe they can attack American installations and kill an ambassador on the anniversary of Sept. 11, without consequence, then America’s deterrent power has declined considerably. Drawing red lines in the sand and moving back when they are crossed won't rebuild confidence in American foreign Policy. Obama’s foreign policy failures will likely create additional dangerous world security predicaments. For a world superpower, it is not adequate just to want to be liked; you have to frighten the bad guys to keep them in check.
President Obama’s broad strategic vision that guides his foreign policy appears to be failing. Congressman Nunes hazarded to say that, "The worst part of his legacy will not be the economy, but what he has done internationally. President Obama needs to speak consistently with force and at least appear to be as realistic as President Reagan’s dealings with the Soviet Union. Congressman Rooney stated, "Neither our allies nor our enemies can predict when this administration will want to intervene, when they'll stand firm, when they'll back down. Foreign policy under president Obama is ad hoc, contradictory, and unpredictable." What is evident is that President Obama’s Middle East foreign policy has hinged on his notion that moderate Islamist political influences in the region would have the political maturity and aptitude to run democratic governments responsibly without the influences of the United States.
These are the most pressing present-day issues that will fester out of control if the direction of American foreign policy is not amended:
ISIS - The Islamic State of Iran and Syria (ISIS or ISIL) will be competing with the Iranian regime in taking the lead to export worldwide terrorism in order to become the ruler of their vision of an Islamic world. The Iranian mullahs ruling in Tehran have already achieved their own Islamic fundamentalist state and are on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons. Iran, however, sees the rise of ISIS as a threat to their own position as the leader of a world controlled by an Islamic state. Iran already has control of the Iraqi government in Baghdad and therefore Iran has a keen interest in fighting ISIS for control of Iraq, a key strategic area of the Middle East. ISIS and Iran will both slaughter and suppress populations at will, in order to control the exportation of terrorism to all corners of the world.
Russia - will continue to sabotage issues vital to world security. Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, has designs in mind to revive the former Soviet Union that will again threaten the world with another cold war.
China - will demonstrate increasing disrespect towards the United States as evidenced by their recent actions in the South China Sea and the Hainan Island.
Iran - will continue to take advantage of the United States, as they perceive the Obama administration to consistently negotiate from a position weakness. Thus, Iran will continue to advance their nuclear program. This is because the Obama administration did not tighten sanctions, and appeared desperate to broker a United Nations agreement.
The War on Terror - is far from over. President Obama did not decimate al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or Islamist extremists. Fundamental Islamists like the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) will make more of an impact in the future. Islamic extremist will expand, controlling, dominating, shaping, and creating events as they choose without United States intercession.
The Unites States military must become re-strengthened and returned to 1990 levels when the evil Soviet Union empire literally collapsed, without a shot fired, under the shadow of American military might. The Obama administration must recognize and take seriously international threats when they emerge on the horizon and come to the government’s attention — and not in a reactive and after-the-fact manner. Such a reactive approach has been all-too-frequent from Syria to Iran to North Korea.
In 2012, when Gov. Mitt Romney stated that Putin’s Russia remained America’s most formidable geopolitical adversary, the president dismissed his concerns with a snarky rejoinder that “the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back.” Now the Obama administration seems have been caught off guard and appears to be especially naïve in light of Russia’s recent aggression and events in the Ukraine and Crimea. Russia’s Putin is serious about expanding Russia’s power in dangerous and destabilizing ways and this administration must not underestimate him again.
Russia is now assembling its largest nuclear weapons arsenal since the Cold War and intends on spending another $55 billion on its missile and air defense systems in the next six years. Given Russia’s recent willingness to use force in altering its national boundaries, the U.S. should aggressively expand its ballistic missile defense systems to counter Russia’s aggressive behavior and protect itself and its allies. This should include advancing the United States’ European Ballistic Missile Defense complex based in Poland.
THE WEALTHIEST AMERICANS ---“Entrepreneurs are simply those who understand that there is little difference between obstacle and opportunity and are able to turn both to their advantage.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
I would ask; are the problems of society owing mostly to man's decreased nature, to bad social organizations and management, or to something other, and by what criteria can a society be judged as being just; is it by the way in which it promotes affluence, by the way in which society helps its neediest members or simply by promoting the opulence of its art and culture? Are we "our brothers' keeper" and should society, as a whole be accountable to those less fortunate? These questions can be answered only if one first understands that wealth, value and prosperity are not static quantities - not to be seized, taxed, begged, inherited, shared, looted or obtained as a favor. Real wealth, value and prosperity must be created, not by governments but by free people who are allowed to reap the rewards of a free market system. America's unprecedented abundance of wealth and prosperity has been created by the hard work and the productive geniuses of free men who are motivated to pursue their own personal interests in the making of their own private fortunes. We, as Americans, should thank God it is the top 1% of America's wealthiest entrepreneurs who control most of the capital value in the United States and not the government. Excessively managed economies by government institutions are always inept and wasteful. Politicians tend to grow government programs at the expense of the private enterprises who are the actual wealth producers. “The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the law of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If “Thou shall not covet,” and “Thou shall not steal,” are not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free.” --- John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of Government (1787)
Great philosophers throughout history dating back to Aristotle all support the idea that private property is essential to preserving a free society. The Obama administration, however, has publicly advocated policies that would take private capital property and redistribute it to others by means of unfair and discriminatory taxes biased toward one “class” of citizen over another “class”.
The graduated income tax system is fundamentally unfair, possibly unconstitutional and destructive to the American commerce system. One citizen of the United States should not have a government imposed higher income tax liability over that of another. The graduated income tax system contradicts the principle of due process and equal protection guaranteed by Amendment V and XIV to the Constitution of the United States.
Increasing tax rates on the people who produce wealth, value and prosperity for the purpose of providing income to non-productive people is like bashing one’s head against a brick wall to cure one’s headache. Redistribution of wealth may seem like a great idea to the foolish and uninformed, but eventually, one’s headache becomes worse. The brick wall maintained its composition, but your head and your ability to reason decrease in an in direct proportion to the time spent pounding your brains to obliteration.
The current United States graduated federal income tax system is the most onerous obstacle to Americans remaining prosperous. All Americans need a return to our original federal taxing system, one that does not punish and remove incentives for individuals and businesses to become prosperous. When commerce thrives, all people benefit with an increase in the general standard of living. The passage of the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in 1913 has become the most damaging of blows to Americans prosperity. The Sixteenth Amendment gave the federal government nearly unlimited taxing power by allowing the Federal government to directly tax individuals according to their income. If a government wanted to self-destruct its economy, that government would come up with a system not too different from the one we now have in America. The only fair and healthy federal tax system is a tax system that was originally envisioned by our Founding Fathers, one that would be an indirect tax, user fees, a “flat tax” or a federal consumer sales tax where everyone is taxed at a rate based upon consumption rather than income.
The Occupy movement only shows how ignorant some people can become when it comes to understanding economics. Progressives want corporate America to more, a lot more, in taxes but the U.S. already has the highest statutory corporate tax rate in the industrialized world at 38 percent. Not only do U.S. businesses pay the most, but also corporations are not the same as individuals. Corporations are made up of employees, and they are not millionaires. So who bears the weight of a high corporate tax rate? It's not just corporations; it is the “99 percent" as well. Through our capitalist system, the remaining 99% of Americans are able to share in the general opportunity for increased prosperity that is generally created by the wealthiest Americans. This is not happening now because government is becoming more and more intrusive into private enterprise through high tax rates and over-regulation. The movers and shakers who put together plans, take personal risks and are successful at making things work create wealth, economic value and prosperity. Government on the other hand is inefficient and wasteful. The private sector produces goods and services of value, something that government has never been able to successfully accomplish. Government can only re-distribute wealth, an example of this is in six of the 10 wealthiest counties in the United States which are suburbs of Washington, D.C., a city that produces almost nothing of real economic value. Common sense should tell us that if government were to control most of America’s wealth, then 100% of us Americans would really be in trouble.
High taxation imposed upon the wealthy for no other reason but to redistribute wealth violates common sense and one of the most important established principles of our Founding Fathers. Over-taxation of the wealthy in order to provide for those less wealthy is Un-American and contradicts the principles that made America the most prosperous nation in history. The United States Federal Government’s role economic policy has always been to promote the general welfare but not provide for the general welfare of its people. Taxing the wealthy as a means for an equal distribution of wealth is a basic tenet of Marxism. The agenda of the American Socialist and Communist parties is to first over tax the rich that is essential to paving the way for an ultimate American socialist state.
It is a falsehood and is an idea contra to common sense to believe that capitalists create wealth at the expense of others. The reality is that real growth of private capital creates more and better jobs, higher wages, less expensive goods and services. Private capital grows with innovation, business ventures, with new machines, with scientific discoveries and technological advancements. Governments never produce capital, value and prosperity as efficiently as is achieved by private enterprise. The whole country will movie forward and enjoy a higher standard of living when free market capitalism is allowed to flourish. Promoting wealth, not providing charity should be the function of government. Wealthy people are much more efficient in helping the poor through private charitable organizations.
Common sense tells us that politicians who promote a healthy capitalist economic system will insure the general prosperity of Americans, yet it is the poor who habitually elect Democrats, presumably anticipating that elected Democrats will tax the wealthy in order to provide for the poor, yet we still have the POOR!
"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence.
You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves."
--- Said to be the words of Abraham Lincoln
If the United States does not reverse its trend towards higher oppressive taxes on the wealthy it will soon become just another declining economic power like those of Europe. France's day of reckoning has already arrived: Its wealthy, best and brightest are saying goodbye to a nation they believe doesn't want them to succeed or become affluent.
http://www.cbn.com/tv/3255110732001
MONETARY POLICY --- Borrowing Temporary Prosperity at the Expense of Future Generations
The United States Dollar has no value except in its name only; it is no longer backed- up by anything of intrinsic value like gold or silver. The basis of value in today’s dollar is in the anticipation that the strength of the economy of the United States will continue to thrive. If confidence in the United States Dollar fails our entire economy may collapse. The supply of money, however, must in turn, keep pace with a growing economy; if there is not enough money to circulate in exchange for goods and services produced, then the economy tends to retract. Conversely, too much money in circulation tends to reduce the value of the dollar which is called inflation. Too much inflation reduces confidence in the dollar which results in a stagnating economy.
The United States Federal Reserve Bank (Fed) has been aggressively manipulating the money U.S. supply by dumping unprecedented amounts of cheap money on to the U.S. economy in hopes of stimulating economic activity. This has produced some temporary positive trends, especially in the stock market, however, in the long-run this will only succeed in creating consumer inflation, the worst type of inflation, inflation that is driven by monetary policy distortions instead of by booming economic demand — inflation combined with stagnate business activity.
The United States’ monetary policy has recently relied largely on “quantitative easing” which seeks to lower longer-term interest rates. “Quantitative easing” (QE) runs the risk of rising inflation, a process that already has started. Not only are the Fed’s actions unlikely to stimulate domestic economic activity as seen with the dollar weakness. The unfolding of "inflation creation" will likely will exacerbate the current downturn in U.S. business activity, where liquidity-strapped consumers likely will be forced to ration other consumption in order to pay for necesssities.
There’s no real evidence that QE has helped the economy significantly. Providing liquidity during the crisis in 2008 was one thing, but the ongoing attempts to expand reserves and the money supply have mostly served to bailout banks from their bad mortgages and other assets that are being bought up.
Thinking that we needed more monetary easing in the first place misdiagnosed the problem. Some argue that our slow recovery is the result of a lack of aggregate demand. But the bad investments leading up to the financial crisis and the recession take time to unwind. It also takes time for entrepreneurs to reallocate those resources to new, better uses. Misguided policies that subsidize the mistakes leading up to the crisis have slowed the readjustment process even further. Every time we try to prop up housing prices or bail out failed industries, we slow economic recovery.
The rest of the World is protesting the monetary policy of the United States by heavy selling of the U.S. dollar against most major currencies and heavy buying of gold and silver followed the Fed’s action, clearly signaling that the global investment community believed that the Fed would succeed in debasing the U.S. dollar and creating U.S. inflation. Irrespective of near-term swings, however, including central bank intervention, precious metals and the stronger major currencies should continue to do well, over the long haul, against the U.S. dollar, preserving the purchasing power that otherwise will be lost in a debased U.S. currency.
SOCIAL SECURITY -- The Greatest of all Ponzi Schemes
Democrats often accuse Republicans of desiring to dismantle Social Security and Medicare. Historically, however, it has been Republicans who have made the only credible attempts to save Social Security for future generations. There has never been a bill seriously considered by Republicans in Congress that was intended to eliminate Social Security altogether. Democrats, however, conceal the hard reality that Social Security will indeed destroy itself unless drastic fiscal changes dealing with Social Security are made.
The United States must make some reductions in entitlement spending lest we suffer the similar economic and political chaos that now plagues many countries in Europe like the Greeks, Italy, Portugal and Ireland . Our largest entitlement programs are Social Security and Medicare that if these popular programs continue, as we know it now, they will become bankrupt within 20 years. A painful but almost inevitable common sense solution may be to gradually transform the Social Security system into strictly a disability insurance program that pays benefits to only those who are disabled and unable to work.
Everyone with common sense should understand that if one plans to someday comfortably retire from working they should not count on Social Security alone for their retirement but also include something like a 401K plan. No one should depend on a government run ponzi scheme to finance something as important as ones retirement future. Remember, not only do individuals contribute to Social Security but employers do also, 15% of income before taxes. If you averaged only 30K over your working life, that's close to $220,500. If you calculate the future value of $4,500 per year (yours & your employer's contribution) at a simple 5% (less than what the govt. pays on the money that it borrows), after 49 years of working (me) you'd have $892,919.98. If you took out only 3% per year, you receive $26,787.60 per year and it would last better than 30 years, and that's with no interest paid on that final amount on deposit! If you bought an annuity and it paid 4% per year, you'd have a lifetime income of $2,976.40 per month. The politicians in Washington have pulled off a bigger Ponzi scheme than Bernie Madhoff ever had.
http://blog.heritage.org/2014/04/11/washington-post-op-ed-didnt-pay-shes-right/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
Most people believe that their money paid into Social Security is going into their own retirement nest egg, well, this is not true. The money one pays into the Social Security is actually a TAX and the government spends every penny it collects from that Social Security tax. People who now collect Social Security are not receiving benefits paid out of their individual account but are receiving money from people currently working and paying into the system. There will soon be more people collecting Social Security than people paying into the system because the population over age 62 is increasing and are living longer. http://mercatus.org/publication/update-social-security-remains-unsustainable-path?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=link&utm_campaign=fbpage
It is absurd to think that we can perpetuate a system that requires people who are still working to pay a Social Security tax so that other people who are over age 62, that are perfectly able to work for a living, can then take a paid vacation for the rest of their lives at the expense of others. Would not a privatized retirement plan, where individuals own and control their retirement work better?
ECONOMIC JUSTICE --- The Selling of Sugar Coated Fascism
The political liberal elitist have recently been very successful in converting a growing number of American voters into trusting and believing in political, social and economic agendas which are unsound and basically Un-American. Progressive liberal thinking Americans have become in effect fascists who are unable to accept that reality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dg0Axyvlkm0
The left wing’s buzz phrase “income inequality” advances the misleading perception that people with lower income in the United States will always remain trapped within their economic condition. What is abundantly evident to anyone who has traveled extensively to foreign nations is that no one in the United States is condemned to remain within a social or economic class of their birth. There is no better place than in the United States of America where a coal miner's son can become whatever he aspires to be. American’s unique advantage is called income mobility. A recent increase in income differences has not caused a decline in this upward mobility. The Heritage Foundation, Rea Hederman and David Azerrad provide an in-depth study of this issue that debunks the progressive politician's “income inequality” assumptions. The facts remain that the standard of living opportunities in America still continues to increase for everyone in spite of an increasingly adverse business climate. One fact is clear, how much the top 1 percent of America’s population earns has little or no relevance on whether the bottom 20 percent can move up.
Corporate America is not the source of America’s income inequality problem. A freer system of commerce, one that allows corporations to thrive, is the best solution to resume the path toward prosperity for lower income Americans. Don’t blame big business if you are finding life so difficult, blame yourself, get-up off of your lazy butt and improve your situation through hard work. Start making sound plans and decisions for your own future. Most of all, do not fall into the entitlement trap by believing that another persons wealth must be shared. No one should be entitled to another person's prosperity. "…no one ought to harm another in his health, liberty, or possessions." --- John Locke
The real American Dream is first and foremost about hard work and the opportunities created by a free economy. Stemming from our founding principles, it can be summed up by a simple equation:
Economic Freedom + Culture of Work = Prosperity and Opportunity
Like or hate the capitalist system, capitalism is the apparatus that has provided Americans with the highest general standard of living throughout the history of the world. Progressive liberals would abandon this in favor of a system where personal initiative and rewards for achievement is punished.
“Wherefore, laying aside all national pride and prejudice in favor of modes and forms, the plain truth is, that it is wholly owing to the constitution of the people, and not to the constitution of the government… Oppression is often the consequence, but seldom or never the means of riches; and though avarice will preserve a man from being necessitously poor, it generally makes him too timorous to be wealthy.” --- Thomas Paine 1776
“A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.” --- Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address (1801)
“Worldwide, the data indicate that when economic freedom increases, so do life expectancy, employment, literacy and the protection of civil rights. The poor become well off, the environment becomes cleaner, and people report higher levels of happiness. The same holds true within the United States, where states that pursue economic freedom deliver greater prosperity and opportunity. A 2008 study showed, for example, that when a state increases its economic freedom, the poor gain in income. And the data show similar results across the world: When a country makes freedom-based reforms, people rise of out poverty at remarkable rates, choosing entrepreneurship, jobs and a better life… The U.S. has dropped from third place to 16th in the Economic Freedom of the World Index. And the average income of low-income households is now declining. Since 2000, when our economic freedom score began to decline, income for the poorest in our country has fallen 15 percent, according to Census Bureau data. Government debt, cronyism and rampant regulatory burdens are eroding our freedom and our future.” --- Allison Kasic
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2013/08/08/2930184/allison-kasic-freedom-key-to-well.html#storylink=cpy” --- By Allison Kasic, of Arlington, Va., who manages academic research programs at the Charles Koch Foundation.
Citizens of the United States of America can continue to enjoy individual economic opportunity only if government can reverse its gradual transformation towards a welfare state. All Americans should be able to look at their future not as having economic security through government but through unrestrained individual economic opportunity. Ironically it is the popular vote of the American people that is compromising America's future. A future golden age of American prosperity is certain to be lost forever if drastic steps are not taken and very soon.
What is the perfect form of regime? Is it aristocracy, monarchy, theocracy, democracy, some blend of the different systems, or totally no government at all (anarchy)? This much we know, that history demonstrates that democratic forms of government endure until voters discover that they can vote themselves endless handouts out of their public treasuries. Democracies degenerate into tyranny when undisciplined societies surrender individual liberties to politicians who promise government provided welfare. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the time of the ancient Greeks has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, pure democracies progress through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependence back into bondage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdS6fyUIklI#t=310
The malignant tendencies of democracy tends to allow liberal political idealists to promote public policy that exacerbates economic growth and prosperity. The uneducated masses tend to dictate public policy for the sake of personal gain rather than the good of the nation. Liberal politicians strive to utilize this fickle nature of the masses to create an incessant dependency of the people on the government as it expands its power under the guise of utility and economic justice, finally reducing people into being nothing more than a herd of timid and industrious animals of which the government is the shepherd. Too much democracy tends to not only to create a people that are dependent and needy, but also a government that little by little extinguishes peoples spirits and enervates their souls by giving them all they want, so that they will be naively content without hopes, dreams, or a will of their own. Unrestrained democracy unleashes a sort of despotism that is unlike any other. Unrestrained taxation on the makers of free-market goods and services for the purpose of supporting an entitlement society results in an erosion of that society's general prosperity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsTbkB9hOuw
Democracy cannot be successfully inaugurated without virtuous citizens and since the masses are by nature basically corrupt a democratic republic is therefore the most feasible form of government. Therefore the United States of America is not a pure Democracy. Fearing the inherent dangers of a Democracy, the Founding Fathers wisely established the United States government as a Republic.
“Nothing is more fickle and inconstant than the masses” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
The government of the United States is limited in that what is not expressly written into the Constitution (i.e., do not have to be enumerated) must still be retained by the people. All delegated powers of the federal government are only authorized to be performed so long as such delegated powers are expressly delegated to the federal government specifically by the Constitution.
The government may not redistribute wealth, as that is a violation of one of the most important established principles of our Founding Fathers. The principles of limited government are written into the Constitution of the United States guaranteeing that a pure democracy, tending to foster a welfare state, would never intervene to stifle individualism by forced equality and opportunity through regulation of property and wealth redistribution.
The Founding Fathers were very clear as to their definitions and intentions of the words promote and provide, America was not to become a welfare state. The Federal Government of the United States has no business in providing welfare in the form of income to its citizens, the United States Constitution does not provide such a function and therefore is likely unconstitutional.
To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it. - Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816
Deficit spending for national defense is justifiable but deficit spending for social welfare programs must always be carefully questioned. The role of our federal government is to promote welfare not provide welfare. The Preamble to United States Constitution establishes the basic charter role of the United States Federal Government. The Preamble, in dealing with the welfare of the nation, simply charges the federal government to “promote the general welfare” and to “provide for the common defense”. Preamble to the US Constitution:
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
The definitions of promote and provide:
Promote - “support or encourage something, to encourage the growth and development of something”
Provide - “to supply somebody with something, or be a source of something needed or wanted by somebody”.
Common sense demands dramatic corrections to decrease government spending, reduce government over-regulating and decreased income tax rates. If we do not act soon, we are bound to see an America like we had under Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s, double-digit inflation, double-digit unemployment, and double-digit mortgage interest rates. The political pendulum will swing again back to the right and hopefully, after the four years of the “Obomination”, someone like Ronald Reagan will reverse the damage done.
INCREASING THE MINIMUM WAGE --- Robbing Peter to Pay Paul
Governments should allow labor markets to set wages naturally and not legislate a mandated minimum wage. Laborers deserve the ability to earn a livable wage, however, wage earners should understand that livable wages are only possible through gaining a marketable education or trade skill and not counting on the government to artificially bump-up low wages. When the government artificially increases the mandatory minimum wage, everyone is harmed. The reality is that the majority of inexperienced, unskilled workers in the United States are not even worth the current federal Minimum Wage. The U.S. Dollar is simply a medium of exchange for goods and services rendered. When workers are compensated for their labor at an inflated rate, more than the actual value of their labor, the result is a devaluation of the overall dollar’s worth. Inflation hurts everyone especially the lower wage earner because even though a worker may have more money to spend, the dollars will not buy as much. Under inflation a higher per hour minimum wage can become worth no more than the previous minimum wage. Monies that would pay for a higher minimum wage come out of either the pockets of skilled and experienced co-workers, by passing on the higher costs of labor onto consumers, from company profits or a combination of all three. Companies will continue to produce their goods and services only if there is a reasonable expectation of an acceptable profit. Companies deal with excessive labor costs by cutting worker benefits or shipping positions overseas where labor is less expensive or companies will simply go out of business.
A common justification for higher minimum wages is the “labor theory of value”, as described by Marxists, which tries to explain that the price of something produced is dependent upon how much human labor goes into producing goods and services and that laborers alone, on the job, will established the value of an item. In other words labor alone is the creator of wealth. Reality demonstrates that the value of goods and services produced do not depend upon how much labor or how hard one labors to produce something. Some things take more human labor to produce but can only be sold at a fraction of the cost in labor that it took to produce it and sometimes it cannot be sold at any price at all. Prior to producing goods and services of value, it most always takes risky investments and accumulated wealth to put forth the capital needed to build new production capacity. Those who invest in new ventures or are simply seeking to expand existing businesses are taking risks and sacrifice their wealth with the anticipation that their investments will produce a reasonable return on their investments. Therefore, investors and managers who are responsible for producing something of value should be rewarded with the lion’s share of profits. The laborer’s share of profits should be in line with the market value of their labor rendered.
President Roosevelt prolonged the Great Depression by inflating the wages of workers, which caused inflation and that stiffed economic growth for the entire nation. http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409
A government-regulated minimum wage does little to help the poor. A unsupportable higher minimum wage is more likely to hurt the people it is supposed to help by making entry level jobs harder to find jobs and higher level jobs pay less. Minimum wage workers tend be young and unskilled. Less than half of workers under the age of 25 are currently employed and many rely on low paying job opportunities to get their first break, to prove themselves as having marketable employee qualities that can earn them higher paying jobs. It is only fair that the hardest working, most efficient new employee should be given the early raise over the less productive employee. The new employees may lack the experience and skills to compete for higher paying jobs, the best employees must not be forced to work in an absolute minimum wage system that forces equal compensation regardless of being a better employee. Raising the minimum wage makes it harder for these first time inexperienced workers to find a job, because businesses will either eliminate positions or choose to hire someone with more experience at the higher mandated wage. Minimum wage jobs could also be a pathway to retraining for workers facing a mismatch between their skills and available openings. An excessively high minimum wage would limit such opportunities, and that's particularly dangerous during this historically slow recovery.
CAPITALISM vs. SOCIALISM --- Reality vs. Deception
"There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism—by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide." --- Ayn Rand. Socialism always fails because it is a fundamental trait of human behavior; that people respond best when they anticipate being rewarded and not punished for their efforts.
“If socialists understood economics, they wouldn’t be socialists.” --- Friedrich Von Hayek, Nobel Prize Economics.
Conundrum - Free people are not equal, equal people are not free. Six Conundrums for those who would believe that socialism would be better for Americans:
1. America is capitalist and greedy - yet half of the population is subsidized.
2. Half of the population is subsidized - yet they think they are victims.
3. They think they are victims - yet their representatives run the government.
4. Their representatives run the government - yet the poor keep getting poorer.
5. The poor keep getting poorer - yet they have things that people in other countries only dream about.
6. They have things that people in other countries only dream about - yet they want America to be more like those other countries.
“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” --- Alexis de Tocqueville a French political thinker and historian best known for his works "Democracy in America" and "The Old Regime and the Revolution".
Our nation was founded on the principles of economic liberty and opportunity, not forced economic equality. The Founding Fathers recognized the importance of private ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods and services as the key to healthy commerce and overall economic prosperity. Capitalism is a natural and moral phenomenon, central to conceptions of freedom and liberty. The Public ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods and services, however, tends to infringe on economic liberty and prosperity of the public in general.
“…The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.”—Winston Churchill
“A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have.” ---Thomas Jefferson
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."-- Thomas Jefferson
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." -- Thomas Jefferson
"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."-- Thomas Jefferson
I have lived in four different foreign countries that have socialism and have seen firsthand the misery that socialism imposes on people. It does not work and history has proven that. Those who want, socialism should please get out of our great country and move to some Socialist State.
The famous author Ayn Rand experienced firsthand the fallacies of Marxism and the magic free market Capitalism; she sums it all in one of Ayn Rand’s famous quotes:
“If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans … the fact that they were the people who created the phrase ‘to make money’. No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity- to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created… America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices to the common good, but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America's industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages, and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance- and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way.” --- Ayn Rand
THE LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE AGENDA IN AMERICA --- Where Is Joe McCarthy Now When We Really Need Him?
“Immediate necessity makes many things convenient, which if continued would grow into oppressions. Expedience and right are different things… The property of no man is secure in the present unbraced system of things. The mind of the multitude is left at random, and seeing no fixed object before them, they pursue such as fancy or opinion starts.” --- Thomas Paine 1776
I believe that capitalism can survive in the United States in spite of its obvious vulnerabilities, however; every loyal American must understand that behind the scene there has been long term planning by shrewd extreme left wing radicals who are now close to hitting pay dirt. The major players include acolytes of the communist Saul Alinski and his radical disciples who conspire to install a socialist government in the United States by taking over the country from within.
Supporters of liberal progressive political causes are essentially advancing the agendas of the Socialist Party USA (SPUSA) and the COMMUNIST PARTY USA (CPUSA) . There is little difference between the agendas of the Democratic Party, Socialist Party and the Communist Parties. American Democrats are either hard-core Marxists or “useful idiots” who have succumbed to the influences of international Marxism and have no idea to whom they are selling their souls. As recently as 2009, the "Democratic Socialists of America" claimed in its official newsletter that more than 70 of its members were serving in the United States Congress. President Obama has always denied that he is a committed socialist, however, his track record indicate otherwise and the socialist "New Party" in Chicago claimed him as a member in their official 1996 newsletter.
The following are official agendas for the Socialist, Communist and Democratic parties of the United States:
http://www.cpusa.org/party-program/
http://socialistparty-usa.net/platform.html
https://www.democrats.org/party-platform
Compare the Liberal Progressive Agenda plan with literature from the manifestos and writings of the Community Party USA (CPUSA) and the Socialist Party USA (SPUSA):
• Progressive Agenda: “Raise the federal minimum wage, so that it reaches $15/hour, while indexing it to inflation.”
SPUSA: “We call for a minimum wage of $15 per hour, indexed to the cost of living.”
CPUSA: Calls for “struggles for peace, equality for the racially and nationally oppressed, equality for women job creation programs, increased minimum wage. … Even with ultra-right control of the Federal government, peoples legislative victories, such as increasing the minimum wage, can be won on an issue-by-issue basis locally, statewide, and even nationally.”
• Progressive Agenda: “Reform the National Labor Relations Act, to enhance workers’ right to organize and rebuild the middle class.”
SPUSA: “The Socialist Party stands for the right of all workers to organize, for worker control of industry through the democratic organization of the workplace.”
CPUSA: “One of the most crucial ways of increasing the strength and unity of the working class as a whole is organizing the unorganized. Working-class unity depends on uniting all the diverse sectors of the multiracial, multinational working class in the U.S. … Speeding up the organization of unorganized workers is one of the most important challenges to labor and all progressive forces.”
• Progressive Agenda: “Pass comprehensive immigration reform to grow the economy and protect against exploitation of low-wage workers.”
SPUSA: “We defend the rights of all immigrants to education, health care, and full civil and legal rights and call for an unconditional amnesty program for all undocumented people. We oppose the imposition of any fees on those receiving amnesty. We call for full citizenship rights upon demonstrating residency for six months.”
CPUSA: Declares the “struggle for immigrant rights is a key component of the struggle for working class unity in our country today.”
• Progressive Agenda: Pass national paid sick leave. Pass national paid family leave.
CPUSA: In October 2014, hails that “women are fighting back to defend their jobs and their families against candidates who want to destroy women’s reproductive rights, health care, family leave and paid sick days. Women’s voices and votes can make the difference in this election in the U.S. Senate and House, for Governors and State Legislatures, and in the movement going forward for full equality.”
• Progressive Agenda: “Make Pre-K, after-school programs and childcare universal.”
SPUSA: “We support public child care starting from infancy, and public education starting at age three, with caregivers and teachers of young children receiving training, wages, and benefits comparable to that of teachers at every other level of the educational system.”
• Progressive Agenda: “Earned Income Tax Credit.” “Implement the ‘Buffett Rule’ so millionaires pay their fair share.”
SPUSA: “We call for a steeply graduated income tax and a steeply graduated estate tax. …”
CPUSA: “No taxes for workers and low and middle income people; progressive taxation of the wealthy and private corporations. …”
Communists/Marxist/socialists wannabes, do-gooders and pseudo-intellectual liberals are nothing but useful idiots to the one world Marxism. If and when the hard-core Marxists elite do come to power, the moderate liberal activists will have a rude awakening, as the power elites of Marxism will surely liquidate them as expendable garbage.
Anyone with common sense should see the indications that the American economic system is about to undergo a profound shift. “Never allow a crisis to go to waste,” President Obama’s former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel famously stated. “Never waste a good crisis,” former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Americans, said Obama, should discover great opportunity in great crisis.” What kind of opportunity? “Capitalism,” former Secretary of the Treasury Tim Geithner said, “will be different.” Emanuel, the former White House chief of staff, told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that the financial meltdown provides an opportunity “to do things that Americans have pushed off for years.” It is basic choices between opposing principles that Obama is telling us are "stale" and "no longer apply." And if you think that ideas and principles still matter, you're a cynic!
We now have an extreme left wing President. Duped citizens of the United States are allowing this conversion to a welfare state to develop. A perfect storm of Marxism is developing and the Marxists are now salivating at their mouths with anticipation at the next step, which is nationalizing the banks. The Obama is already planning to seize private 401(k) and Individual Retirement Account (IRA) plans to more “fairly” distribute taxpayer-funded pensions to everyone advocating a government forced “Guaranteed Retirement Account” (GRA).
http://www.infowars.com/government-lays-groundwork-to-confiscate-your-401k-and-ira-this-is-happening/#sthash.8VdXFZsi.dpuf
Covert Marxist ideology has been pumped into the soft heads of our impressionable young Americans to make them believe, for example, that immoral behavior, including homosexual behavior is an acceptable norm. Half-baked intellectuals have been occupying positions of power in our government, civil service, business, mass media, and educational systems now for over forty years. We are stuck with them; we can't get rid of to them. Pseudo-intellectuals have contaminated the minds of our precious youth with ideas that support their goals of establishing a Marxist society in America. Three generations of American youth have now been programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern. Now you can't change their minds even if you expose them to authentic information. Even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you still cannot change the basic perception and the logic of their concept of what is right or wrong behavior.
Joseph Stalin, the former leader of the Soviet Union once said: "America is like a healthy body and it's resistance is threefold: It's patriotism, It's morality, and It's spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within."
The period from the 1920s until the 1990s, the Marxist Soviet Union amassed a concentrated effort to infiltrate American society with the purpose of overthrowing the United States and its capitalism through systematic programs of ideological subversion and indoctrination. Today the Soviet Union no longer exists but it is obvious that Marxist ideologues along with their useful idiots are still actively working to destabilize America's morals, values, destabilize the American economy and provoke crises through ideological subversion in order to convert the free world into a one world Marxist state.
Ideological subversion employs four steps through which a nation destroys itself from within, they are:
1. Demoralization --- This occurs in a society lacking in moral standards. This is achieved through a process of using American Constitutional rights to nurture conditions where morals and truth no longer matter. A person who is demoralized is unable to process correct information and facts mean nothing. This is accomplished by:
a. Weakening America's basic patriotic American institutions
b. Eliminating laws governing obscenity by calling them censorship and a violation of free speech and free press.
c. Breaking down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in the public media, presenting homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as normal and natural.
d. Promoting the legalization of recreational drugs.
e. Breaking down traditional marriage and the family value structure.
f. Promoting the separation of church and state and idea that the practice of religion perpetuates ignorance.
g. Degrading higher education where the world of academia promotes indoctrination rather than quality education. Where the art of critical thinking and the Socratic dialogue are corrupted by dialectic subversion.
2. Destabilization --- This is occurs with a disruption of the economy along with foreign relations and national defense systems, when people surrender their individual liberties to politicians who have promised lavish government provided welfare programs. This occurs when the principal of free-market competition is eliminated and replaced by a strong, overpowering central government.
3. Crisis --- A violent change in a nation’s power structure and economy occurs.
4. Normalization --- Socialism, Marxism and Communism become the new norm.
Please take time to view this shocking video transcription that exposes the former Soviet Union's subversive tactics against western society. See link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA
The Congressional Record, Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963, when Congressman Albert S. Herlong Jr. of Florida listed 45 goals of the Communist party in the United States, uncovered the goals of the American Communist Party. They include:
15) Capture one or both of the political parties of the United States.
16) Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming activities violate civil rights.
24) Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them censorship and a violation of free speech and free press.
25) Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26) Present homosexuality, degeneracy, and promiscuity as "Normal, natural”.
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
The Communists have now achieved all of their goals listed above.
RACISM - Democrats vs. Republicans on the subject of Racism
The United States has moved-on from the dark period in our history when racism was pervasive and accepted as the norm. No one can say that racism has been completely eradicated as there are still a few people who sadly practice bigotry against other humans for no other reason but for their ethnicity. Do racists tend to identify themselves with one political party over another? The following are a few basic historical facts that every American should know.
From: “Back to Basics for the Republican Party” --- by Michael Zak
Fact: The Republican Party was founded primarily to oppose slavery, and Republicans eventually abolished slavery. The Democratic Party fought them and tried to maintain and expand slavery. The 13th Amendment, abolishing slavery, passed in 1865 with 100% Republican support but only 23% Democrat support in congress.
Why is this indisputable fact so rarely mentioned? PBS documentaries about slavery and the Civil War barely mention it, for example. One can certainly argue that the parties have changed in 150 years (more about that below), but that does not change the historical fact that it was the Democrats who supported slavery and the Republicans who opposed it. And that indisputable fact should not be airbrushed out for fear that it will tarnish the modern Democratic Party.
Had the positions of the parties been the opposite, and the Democrats had fought the Republicans to end slavery, the historical party roles would no doubt be repeated incessantly in these documentaries. Funny how that works.
Fact: During the Civil War era, the "Radical Republicans" were given that name because they wanted to not only end slavery but also to endow the freed slaves with full citizenship, equality, and rights.
Yes, that was indeed a radical idea at the time!
Fact: Lincoln's Vice President, Andrew Johnson, was a strongly pro-Union (but also pro-slavery) Democrat who had been chosen by Lincoln as a compromise running mate to attract Democrats. After Lincoln was assassinated, Johnson thwarted Republican efforts in Congress to recognize the civil rights of the freed slaves, and Southern Democrats continued to thwart any such efforts for close to a century.
Fact: The 14th Amendment, giving full citizenship to freed slaves, passed in 1868 with 94% Republican support and 0% Democrat support in congress. The 15th Amendment, giving freed slaves the right to vote, passed in 1870 with 100% Republican support and 0% Democrat support in congress.
Regardless of what has happened since then, shouldn't we be grateful to the Republicans for these Amendments to the Constitution? And shouldn't we remember which party stood for freedom and which party fiercely opposed it?
Fact: The Ku Klux Klan was originally and primarily an arm of the Southern Democratic Party. Its mission was to terrorize freed slaves and "ni**er-loving" (their words) Republicans who sympathized with them.
Why is this fact conveniently omitted in so many popular histories and depictions of the KKK, including PBS documentaries? Had the KKK been founded by Republicans, that fact would no doubt be repeated constantly on those shows.
Fact: In the 1950s, President Eisenhower, a Republican, integrated the US military and promoted civil rights for minorities. Eisenhower pushed through the Civil Rights Act of 1957. One of Eisenhower's primary political opponents on civil rights prior to 1957 was none other than Lyndon Johnson, then the Democratic Senate Majority Leader. LBJ had voted the straight segregationist line until he changed his position and supported the 1957 Act.
Fact: The historic Civil Rights Act of 1964 was supported by a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats in both houses of Congress. In the House, 80 percent of the Republicans and 63 percent of the Democrats voted in favor. In the Senate, 82 percent of the Republicans and 69 percent of the Democrats voted for it.
Fact: Contrary to popular misconception, the parties never "switched" on racism. The Democrats just switched from overt racism to a subversive strategy of getting blacks as dependent as possible on government to secure their votes. At the same time, they began a cynical smear campaign to label anyone who opposes their devious strategy as greedy racists.
Following the epic civil rights struggles of the 1960s, the South began a major demographic shift from Democratic to Republican dominance. Many believe that this shift was motivated by racism. While it is certainly true that many Southern racists abandoned the Democratic Party over its new support for racial equality and integration, the notion that they would flock to the Republican Party -- which was a century ahead of the Democrats on those issues -- makes no sense whatsoever.
Yet virtually every liberal, when pressed on the matter, will inevitably claim that the parties "switched," and most racist Democrats became Republicans! In their minds, this historical ju jitsu maneuver apparently transfers all the past sins of the Democrats (slavery, the KKK, Jim Crow laws, etc.) onto the Republicans and all the past virtues of the Republicans (e.g., ending slavery) onto the Democrats! That's quite a feat!
It is true that Barry Goldwater's opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 probably attracted some racist Democrats to the Republican Party. However, Goldwater was not a racist -- at least not an overt racist like so many Southern Democrats of the time, such as George Wallace and Bull Connor. He publicly professed racial equality, and his opposition to the 1964 Act was based on principled grounds of states rights. In any case, his libertarian views were out of step with the mainstream, and he lost the 1964 Presidential election to LBJ in a landslide.
Senator Barry Goldwater's opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act provided liberals an opening to target the Republican Party as racist, and they have tenaciously repeated that label so often over the years that it is now the conventional wisdom among liberals. But it is really nothing more than an unsubstantiated myth -- a convenient political lie. If the Republican Party was any more racist than the Democratic Party even in 1964, why did a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats in both houses of Congress vote for the 1964 Civil Rights Act? The idea that Goldwater's vote on the 1964 Civil Rights Act trumps a century of history of the Republican Party is ridiculous, to say the least.
Every political party has its racists, but the notion that Republicans are more racist than Democrats or any other party is based on nothing more than a constant drumbeat of unsubstantiated innuendo and assertions by Leftists, constantly echoed by the liberal media. It is a classic example of a Big Lie that becomes "true" simply by virtue of being repeated so many times.
A more likely explanation for the long-term shift from Democratic to Republican dominance in the South was the perception, fair or not, that the Democratic Party had rejected traditional Christian religious values and embraced radical secularism. That includes its hardline support for abortion, its rejection of prayer in public schools, its promotion of the gay agenda, and many other issues.
In the 1960s the Democratic Party changed its strategy for dealing with African Americans. Thanks to earlier Republican initiatives on civil rights, blatant racial oppression was no longer a viable political option. Whereas before that time Southern Democrats had overtly and proudly segregated and terrorized blacks, the national Democratic Party decided instead to be more subtle and get them as dependent on government as possible. As LBJ so elegantly put it (in a famous moment of candor that was recorded for posterity), "I'll have those niggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years." At the same time, the Democrats started a persistent campaign of lies and innuendo, falsely equating any opposition to their welfare state with racism.
From a purely cynical political perspective, the Democratic strategy of black dependence has been extremely effective. LBJ knew exactly what he was doing. African Americans routinely vote well over 90 percent Democratic for fear that Republicans will cut their government benefits and welfare programs. And what is the result? Before LBJ's Great Society welfare programs, the black illegitimacy rate was as low as 23 percent, but now it has more than tripled to 72 percent.
Most major American city governments have been run by liberal Democrats for decades, and most of those cities have large black sections that are essentially dysfunctional anarchists. Cities like Detroit are overrun by gangs and drug dealers, with burned out homes on every block in some areas. The land values are so low due to crime, blight, and lack of economic opportunity that condemned homes are not even worth rebuilding. Who wants to build a home in an urban war zone? Yet they keep electing liberal Democrats -- and blaming "racist" Republicans for their problems!
Washington DC is another city that has been dominated by liberal Democrats for decades. It spends more per capita on students than almost any other city in the world, yet it has some of the worst academic achievement anywhere and is a drug-infested hellhole. Barack Obama would not dream of sending his own precious daughters to the DC public schools, of course -- but he assures us that those schools are good enough for everyone else. In fact, Obama was instrumental in killing a popular and effective school voucher program in DC, effectively killing hopes for many poor black families trapped in those dysfunctional public schools. His allegiance to the teachers unions apparently trumps his concern for poor black families.
A strong argument could also be made that Democratic support for perpetual affirmative action is racist. It is, after all, the antithesis of Martin Luther King's dream of a color-blind society. Not only is it "reverse racism," but it is based on the premise that African Americans are incapable of competing in the free market on a level playing field. In other words, it is based on the notion of white supremacy, albeit "benevolent" white supremacy rather than the openly hostile white supremacy of the pre-1960s Democratic Party.
The next time someone claims that Republicans are racist and Democrats are not, don't fall for it.
OBAMACARE ---If you believe that our health care system is expensive now, just wait until you experience what it will cost if healthcare is to become "free", life is not a free ride.
Quality health care should remain within the private sector if it is to become to truly become affordable. A government that would force health care upon citizens would be doing a disservice to hard working American citizens. “Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured but not everyone must prove they are a citizen. And now, any of those who refuse or are unable to prove they are citizens will receive free insurance paid for by those who are forced to buy insurance because they are citizens.” ---Ben Stein
The Affordable Healthcare Act known as “Obamacare” is proving to be the most expensive and ill-conceived piece of legislation ever to be enacted by the United States Federal Government.
http://mercatus.org/Medicaid/EconomicsofMedicaid.html?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=research&utm_campaign=MercatusTweets
The prime architect of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Jonathan Gruber, promoted a deliberate lack of transparency in selling Obamacare to the Congress and the American people. Gruber admits, it was the ‘Stupidity Of The American Voter’ that was key in suckering people into supporting this bill that would have otherwise been killed had the true be known.
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/223578-obamacare-architect-lack-of-transparency-helped-law-pass
Here are the 10,535 pages of Obamacare condensed to 4 sentences:
1. In order to insure the uninsured, we first have to un-insure the insured.
2. Next, we require the newly un-insured to be re-insured.
3. To re-insure the newly uninsured, they are required to pay extra charges to be re-insured.
4. The extra charges are required so that the original in-sured, who became un-insured, and then became re-insured, can pay enough extra so that the original un-insured can be insured, which will be free of charge to them.
The big insurance companies have quickly applied measures to take advantage of the poorly written Obamacare law and are now making even larger profits at the expense of Obamacare beneficiaries by passing increased costs on to consumers. http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/29/surprise-large-insurance-companies-are-raking-in-cash-thanks-to-obamacare/
All along, from the very beginning, “Obamacare” has been fabricated by liberal Democrats as a monstrous “Bate and Switch” scheme on the American public. Each day that we come closer to full implementation of Obamacare, it becomes obvious that the plan, as Congress passed it, is destined to failure. Even Democrats are now conceding that the plan will cost much more than was original planned. The people who need affordable healthcare coverage the most will be left with something that is not what they had expected. Liberals are already talking about fixing the plan by replacing it with a universal, government single payer system or outright socialized medicine. This was the original plan all along. Obamacare, in the minds and agendas of liberal Democrats has always been just a stepping-stone for outright socialized medicine and President Obama has admitted that himself. Obama wants socialized medicine and his socialist hoodlums in Congress lied when they said that their healthcare reform bill would not evolve not into a “single payer” or socialized medicine system.
The most pressing but overlooked problem with our American health care system is in its decreasing capacity to provide quality healthcare to all who would demand it, regardless of how much money is paid into the system. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0QT1kn12Es&feature=youtu.be
http://mercatus.org/video/exploring-affordable-care-act-what-impact-and-what-necessary-successful-reform
We will never be able to pay for a healthcare system when the cost for that system will continue to balloon out of control, which it will. The diminishing capacity of our system to provide health care for everyone will cause both a degradation of health care quality as well as unacceptable increases in costs as more and more people put demands on a health care system that does not have the capacity to treat everyone who requests its benefits.
The Federal government will certainly fail if it attempts to become the single payer provider of health care to all citizens. Affordable healthcare for all can only be realized if the Federal Government would concentrate on promoting programs that would increase the capacity and accessibility of our private healthcare system. There are currently not enough health care providers to provide for all who would demand health care under a government-mandated system like Obamacare.
More and more present and future health care providers are changing their career plans as the compensation for healthcare providers is becoming unacceptably low. Under Obamacare the capacity problem will get even worse as the Obamscare care plan reduces medical payments in order to afford an increasing tidal wave increased demand on a healthcare system that will not provide adequate incentives for those who are the providers in the system.
Most of what Republicans have said about Obamacare and its implications are 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.
Obamacare will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government run system. Federal bureaucrats will ultimately make all decisions about personal health care 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. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/10/gans-obamacares-latest-casualty-rehabilitative-hos/
However, as scary as all of that is, it just scratches the surface. 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. There is no provision in the U.S. Constitution that grants Congress the authority to regulate health care.
The employer mandate to provide insurance coverage to all employees if a business has over 50 full-time workers is being delayed from 2014 until 2015. The shift to after the mid-term elections is obviously intentional. Of course, they don't want business to experience the economic backlash of ObamaCare before these midterms. However, the individual mandate that all individuals have health insurance or face a fine from this tyrannical government remains in effect to begin in 2014. The obvious reason for this being done is to push the single-payer, socialized medical care system onto the people.
Anyone who thinks socialized medicine will work is nothing more than an ostrich. Look at Canada, England and pretty much anywhere else that has it. Yes, it works well for people who are fairly healthy and just get allergies and colds. Have you taken a look at how fat Americans are becoming? Does anyone realize how much it is going to cost to keep him or her alive for twenty-five years or longer with very chronic health problems?
The Republican Party must now articulate a highly visible plan to the American people, a plan that will truly make health care affordable by promoting free market principles within the healthcare industry.
WHO IS BARRACK OBAMA? --- Do we really know the real Barrack Husain Obama?
“Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations.” --- James Madison, Speech at the Virginia Convention to ratify the Federal Constitution
The true identity of the man currently occupying the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue is seriously in question. The person we know today as Barack Hussein Obama, the 44th President of the United States, has multiple identities in terms of possessing numerous social security numbers. Credible investigations have proven that the Social Security Number that The President of the United States, Barrack Hussein Obama, currently uses is fraudulent, official records show this. Obama has been tracked as using several names including: Barry Sorrento and Harrison J. Bounel. Why has Barrack Obama tried to cover-up his true identity and academic records? http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/the-mystery-of-barack-obama-continues/
People who knew Barack Obama as a teenager allege to remember him as a lying, homosexual crack cocaine user.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy2K5SIuK2E#t=1238
President Obama will never admit to ever being a “card carrying” Communist however his history indicates that he is at least a socialist. Obama, however, would never admit to even being a socialist either but the correlation applies; if it sounds and acts just like a duck, it is most likely a duck.
Obama himself has admitted as having spent most of his entire life in the company of people who promote Marxist ideology. These are serious ideologues, ranging from Marxist mentors, college professors and preachers of "black liberation theology." Having learned so many valid ideological lessons from the disasters of the 20th century, it would be a crime to have to learn them all over again, however, Barrack Obama’s entire life shows a close association with people who advocate the overthrow of the United States capitalist system. One such individual was Frank Marshall Davis, an admitted card-carrying member of the Communist Party U.S.A and who by all accounts indicate was Barack Obama’s closest role model and mentor as a teenager. Some have even suggested that Frank Marshall Davis may have been the real father of Barrack Obama.
http://obamasrealfather.com
Obama had an extensive and politically lucrative 12-year relationship with William Ayers, a man that led a terrorist organization which declared war against the United States, killed law enforcement officers, bombed public government buildings, and plotted the most massive terrorist strike in the first 194 years of our nation’s history should be the dominate story screaming from every network newscast, 24-hour cable news channel, newspaper headline, and opinion page. Barrack Obama and William Ayers conspired together to funnel $16 million dollars of Chicago Annenberg Challenge grant money and matching funds into programs designed for Marxist indoctrination of young students instead of education — in effect, stealing the future from an entire generation of Chicago school children.
http://www.jeffhead.com/obamacircle.htm
“The first method for estimating the intelligence of a ruler is to look at the men he has around him.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
Barrack Obama cut his political teeth as a “Community Organizer” with ACORN. Barrack Obama was a lead Community Organizer for ACORN’s Project Vote. Obama trained the ACORN trainers, putting into action ACORN’s version of the Cloward-Piven Strategy using Saul Allinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” tactics. Barrack Obama conspired with ACORN in their nefarious scheme of advancing Marxism in the United States through ACORN's Mafia like extortion activities directed against Chicago banking system. ACORN has been one of the largest and most radical of the Marxist organizations operating in the United States. ACORN has been indicted by several states for voter registration fraud during past elections. ACORN’s constitution follows perfectly the outline for a covert Marxist revolution, as written by the founder of modern "Community Organizing", Saul Alinsky. ACORN’s mode of operation is based upon the Alinsky Method - Rules for Radicals. Essential to the ACORN strategy of ACORN strategy to establish Marxism in the United States is to coerce banks into extending home loans to unqualified borrowers. The resultant cascade of mortgage defaults would lead to the bankruptcy of banks and the federal government under the pretense of preempting a collapse of the economy would bail out the banks.
The true Barrack Obama has the reprehensible ultimate goal of advancing socialism by means of a continued orchestrated crisis and he is in the perfect position to continue just that as President of the United States. Barrack Obama’s obvious basic political scheme is to meltdown the American capitalism, a system that has made the United States the most prosperous nation in world history. President Obama has no intention of preventing the United States from “going over the fiscal cliff”. When Barrack Obama was a student at Columbia University, among his mentors were a pair of radical Marxists Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. Cloward and Piven develop the "Cloward Piven strategy" of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The "Cloward-Piven Strategy" would seek to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the capitalist system with increased tax rates on the wealthy, massive debt and government bureaucracy. The flood of impossible government demands from over spending, over taxing and over regulating would push the capitalist system into crisis and economic collapse, only to re-rebuild the economic system under a Marxist society.
“…he who seeks to deceive will always find someone who will allow himself to be deceived.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
President Obama has increasingly taken-on dictatorial behavior reminiscent of Adolph Hitler in 1933, after he was elected as Chancellor of Germany. Charles Krauthammer pointed to a double standard in Washington and asserted that if the President were a Republican, “the people would be up in arms and would be impeaching.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQwfPu1E3rk
"A nation can survive its fools and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly against the city. But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely, his sly whispers rustling through all alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears no traitor; he speaks in the accents familiar to his victim, and he wears their face and their garments and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation; he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city; he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared. The traitor is the plague."--- Marcus Tullius Cicero speech to the Roman Senate regarding the danger of internal subversion.
FUTURE ELECTIONS --- Is There Light At The End of The Tunnel?
The political pendulum will hopefully swing again back to the political right and after the last year of the “Obomination”, someone like Ronald Reagan will hopefully step up and undo the damage done to the Unites States. Americans must regain the principles and the basic plan of government that has led to the success of our nation. America is now on a road to tyranny by re-trying the same mistakes that caused the failure other nations.
“Interested men, who are not to be trusted; weak men, who CANNOT see; prejudiced men, who WILL NOT see; and a certain set of moderate men, who think better of the European world than it deserves; and this last class, by an ill-judged deliberation, will be the cause of more calamities to this continent, than all the other three.” --- Thomas Paine 1776
“It is not chance that rules the world. Ask the Romans, who had a continuous sequence of successes when they were guided by a certain plan, and an uninterrupted sequence of reverses when they followed another. There are general causes, moral and physical, which act in every monarchy, elevating it, maintaining it, or hurling it to the ground. All accidents are controlled by these causes. And if the chance of one battle—that is, a particular cause—has brought a state to ruin, some general cause made it necessary for that state to perish from a single battle. In a word, the main trend draws with it all particular accidents.” --- “The-Spirit-of-The-Laws” by Baron de Montesquieu
We are drawing near the end of President Obama’s second term and will now likely see liberal Democrats and President Obama administration step-up tactics such as the “class warfare” rhetoric to again blame the wealthiest of Americans for the Democratic party’s obviously failed economic policies. The Obama administration views Hillary Clinton as the best follow-on to continue the march towards their goal of an American socialist state. President will also ask for yet more increased spending to try and prop-up the economy, making it appear that the economy is improving. President Obama knows full well, however, that substantial increased government spending in the short run will cause a wider economic collapse in the long run. In the remaining year of the Obama administration we will likely see him rigorously pursue his socialist agenda unabated. If conservative Republicans do not vigorously undo the damage done by the past Democratically controlled Senate during Obama's first six years in office, Obama’s second term of office will likely end progressing to an economic climate to much like we experienced under Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s; that is double digit inflation, double digit unemployment and double digit mortgage interest rates.
“But if you have, and still can shake hands with the murderers, then are you unworthy of the name of husband, father, friend, or lover, and whatever may be your rank or title in life, you have the heart of a coward, and the spirit of a sycophant… This is not inflaming or exaggerating matters, but trying them by those feelings and affections which nature justifies, and without which, we should be incapable of discharging the social duties of life, or enjoying the felicities of it. I mean not to exhibit horror for the purpose of provoking revenge, but to awaken us from fatal and unmanly slumbers, that we may pursue determinately some fixed object.” --- Thomas Paine 1776
HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE --- Government Sanctioned Abomination
Truly informed American citizens are disgusted with the recent United States Supreme Court ruling and Federal Judges who ignore the majority will of voters and decree that any ban on same sex marriage is Un-Constitutional. Common sense, all legitimate religions, history, tradition but not the United States Constitution defines marriage as being between one man and one woman. When the courts rule in contradiction to the "laws of nature and of nature's God", then that ruling becomes null and void. "Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged." --- Ronald Reagan “No enactment of man can be considered law unless it conforms to the law of God.” --- William Blackstone.
Most intelligent people understand that it is not Christianity alone that rebukes homosexuals from marrying; it is just plain common sense and common law that regards homosexual marriage to be detrimental to society. Individual States have rightfully denied the marriage of same sex-couples and should be free to do so by established local statutes and by amendments to state constitutions approved by voters. The Federal Courts are simply acting outside their authority in ruling that homosexuals have a right to marry. United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia believes that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized which legalized same-sex marriage is a “threat to American democracy”. The equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment does not require the government to include same-sex couplings in its definition of marriage. Scalia stated argued that: “When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, every State limited marriage to one man and one woman, and no one doubted the constitutionality of doing so. That resolves these cases. When it comes to determining the meaning of a vague constitutional provision—such as ‘due process of law’ or ‘equal protection of the laws’—it is unquestionable that the People who ratified that provision did not understand it to prohibit a practice that remained both universal and uncontroversial in the years after ratification.” Thus, Scalia argues that if the country wishes to legalize same-sex marriage, it must do so through democratically enacted legislation, or through the ratification of a new constitutional amendment, and not through five unelected justices substituting their “reasoned judgment” of the 14th amendment for the will of those who ratified it.
The courts are also incorrect for scientific reasons in ruling that homosexuals have equal protection extended them as a class of individuals. According to the American Psychiatric Association, there are no replicated scientific studies supporting any specific biological etiology for homosexuality. Homosexuality is still a behavior even if it could be proven that homosexuality is genetically predisposed, which I doubt can ever be proven. Some behaviors could be argued to have some genetic basis but any conscious behavior or act is a choice. Race, gender or age, on the other hand, cannot be modified therefore they are represented as true classes of individuals. To allow equal protection to include behaviors regardless of proven genetic per-disposition would open a bucket of worms, so convoluted with chaotic social consequences as to be disastrous. If homosexuality were to be considered a class of individuals protected under the equal protection clause, then this would then have to be extended also to other individuals including pedophiles, polygamists, incest, bestiality, and on and on. If this were to happen, then any person could claim spousal benefits for any conceivable reason.
The sanctity of the traditional marriage, the union between one man and one woman must be preserved if the traditional family structure is to survive, an institution that has served civilized humanity very well.
Traditional marriage is about promoting the pro-creation of the human species. When it comes to homosexuals conjugally living together, this is only about unnatural sex, not marriage. Permitting same-sex marriage could lead to a decline in heterosexual marriage rates, more children raised by single parents and even more abortions. It is the innocent children that we should worry about the most. If homosexuals continue trying to make inroads into same sex marriages, homosexuals raising children and brainwashing children in public schools, then more and more children will be molested and indoctrinated into the world of homosexuality. Many of them will be harmed in that world. University of Texas sociologist Mark Regnerus conducted the most methodologically, sound research on the subject ever done, using a large and representative population-based sample—which showed children whose parents had a homosexual relationship suffered numerous disadvantages compared with children raised by their married, biological mother and father.
http://www.frc.org/issuebrief/new-study-on-homosexual-parents-tops-all-previous-research
Legitimate marriage is all about the civilized family unit that consists, and always has consisted, of a "father, mother and their children, [and] immediate kindred, constituting [the] fundamental social unit in civilized society." Black's Law Dictionary 604 (6th ed. 1990). To reward persons who step outside that traditional family unit by committing a "crime against nature" would represent a reprehensible affront to the laws of family government that the State must preserve. The best interests of the traditional family unit and a child is not promoted by such a subversion of fundamental law, the very foundation of the family and of civilized society itself. The State may not -- must not ever -- encourage the destruction of the family.
Instead of trashing the traditional institution of marriage where one man and one woman are bonded together as one, why not establish a workable compromise that protects the interests of homosexual couples as well? The sanctity of the traditional institution of marriage can be preserved for heterosexual couples while other couples could enjoy the same benefits that married couples now enjoy. Why not simply establish something which I will call an “Interstate Domestic Partnership”, where individuals are legally bound with the same benefits that those in a meretricious relationship currently enjoy. The “Interstate Domestic Partnership” would be recognized and protected at both the state and federal level. Just omit the term “marriage’ from all language of the legal agreement. Individuals entering into an “Interstate Domestic Partnership” could, for example, file joint tax returns, share Social Security and life insurance benefits including health insurance plans. Individuals entering into such an agreement would incur responsibilities of mutual commitment and responsibility towards each other that has the force of law behind it and recognized among all fifty states and territories of the United States of America.
We will always have homosexuals among us. Common sense says as long as homosexuals practice their lifestyle in private and not as “in your face public” displays of perversion, they should be assured tolerance. Most people, however, are becoming increasingly disgusted with the “gay agenda” of trying to desensitize Americans into tolerating homosexuals with their public displays of perversion. Most people detest being bombarded with homosexual perversion on TV and in the movies. Concerned parents are becoming more active in preventing their children from being brainwashed in schools that being queer is an ok lifestyle.
Homosexual behavior is a very sad but not very “gay” lifestyle. The latest credible psychoanalysis studies support the connection between homosexuality and narcissism. The most credible scientific research into the cause of homosexuality deals with narcissism. According to orthodox psychoanalytical theory, narcissism and homosexuality are strongly associated. The homosexuals’ preoccupation with their body and sex classifies them as somatic narcissists, who use their body to satisfy their narcissistic needs.
Gender narcissism develops in reaction to feelings of inferiority about one's gender and might be defined as excessive love or concern for one's gender, one's genitals, or one's gender identity, and an aversion to the opposite sex. It involves the formation of gender-narcissistic alliances rather than normal heterosexual unions, and it is primarily rooted in the anal-rapprochement phase, during which time an individual's sexual orientation and identity are shaped. It is typical for narcissists to separate their sexual and emotional feelings. They tend to hook up with no strings attached. Likewise, homosexuals, especially males ones are prone to having too many sexual partners without developing emotional attachments at all. This sexual promiscuity devoid of emotional attachment makes homosexuality and narcissism kind of synonymous.
The false arguments that homosexuality is normal human behavior infuses social science today and is brainwashing millions of people into accepting explanations of the world that have no scientific consistency. The liberal mind has a great tendency to confuse wish with reality. Fallacious arguments dominate American universities and infuse their textbooks. Gay Studies and Feminists science groups promote the unsupportable theory that homosexuals are born with a genetic predisposition to become homosexuals. Many professors know the assumptions of Gay Studies and Feminists Science are flawed, but they defend them as serving some sort of higher politically correct purpose.
Further Reading: Gender Narcissism and its Manifestations --Gerald Schoenewolf, Ph.D.
http://www.narth.com/docs/1996papers/schoenwolf.html
Common Sense: MARRIAGE = 1 MAN + 1 WOMAN… GET IT? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuoljDaoqO4&sns=em
HOMOSEXUALS IN THE MILITARY -- Marks the decline of our once strong and proud United States Military
Homosexuality is a behavior problem that must not be allowed to destabilize and degrade the combat effectiveness of our armed forces. Social experiments have no place in the discipline and structure of military service. Homosexuality is a socially destructive behavior, destructive to the cohesion that must be maintained in order for combat units to remain effective during the stresses of military operations.
The repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in the US Military is the result of least three generations of Americans being brainwashed into not being challenged or counterbalanced by basic morals, values and Un-American ideas.
One old war hardened United States Gunnery Sergeant said it best:
"When I joined the military it was illegal to be homosexual, then it became optional. I’m getting out before Obama makes it mandatory."----GySgt Harry Berres, USMC
The Defense Department predicts that the repeal of DADT will result in a loss of one in ten, approximately, 228,600 people. That means the total strength equal to that of the active-duty Marine Corps would refuse to enlist or re-enlist solely because they believe that being forced to serve in military combat units where open homosexuality is allowed is unconscionable.
THE EDUCATION OF YOUNG AMERICANS --- The Dumbing-Down of the American Citizenry
The United States has sadly slipped from being first in educating its children to place 17th in the developed world for education. Finland and South Korea, not surprisingly, top the list of 40 developed countries with the best education systems. Hong Kong, Japan and Singapore follow. This according to a global report by education firm Pearson.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXMCoVy151A
Students in the high school class of 2015 turned in the lowest critical reading score on the SAT college entrance exam in more than 40 years. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-03/students-bombed-the-sat-this-year-in-four-charts
The single most important outcome of an adequate public education system would be one that produces graduates who are well equipped with the necessary skills that would enable them to compete and thrive on their own in the real world. Teachers who promote ill-conceived notions that society has the responsibility of providing for one’s welfare becomes detrimental to the health of that society in which that education system is supposed to support.
The American public education system is currently failing its students in two major fronts. Educators are producing graduates who are deficient in oral/written communications, professionalism/work ethic and critical thinking/problem solving. More importantly, today’s education system is producing citizens who lack a simple foundation of American’s great heritage along with an ability to understand, apply and correlate political ideas compatible with social common sense. Consequently, American citizens have become handicapped in dealing with the real world because the typical graduate of our public education system has been indoctrinated with a distorted picture of American history. Students have been taught to perceive the Founding Fathers as being little more than greedy, wealthy landholders and slaveholders. We are not educating the current generation on true American history and the reasons why American exceptionalism is important to all Americans.
http://www.prageruniversity.com/Political-Science/What-Makes-America-Different.html#.VbJ9EkW6n7k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSQn5o2ZEIc
There is now in place a systematic “drumming down” of students in America. The failure of the public American education system can be blamed on the policies of organizations such as the National Education Association (NEA) that have agendas which strive to destroy America from within using the public education system as their primary tool. “Education is crucial...” stated professor George Mosse in his book Nazi Culture, “…for if an ideology can be institutionalized through the education establishment, it has won a major battle.” The Nazis realized this only too well. .
When the Progressives/Socialists/Marxists speak of "It Takes a Village to Raise a Child", they are actually referring to the state having more control over children than parents. “Our Children Belong to the Collective” is a phrase that brings back nightmares for survivors of communist regimes. Now, however, we are seeing, here in the United States, a similar collective scheme through Common Core that communists once used. Common Core is endeavoring to nationalize and control our kindergarten through education system. The socialist “collectivist” mentality has prevailed for decades at the university level and now Hillary Clinton touts the secular village as the best way to raise all American children. Hillary Clinton’s ghost written book; “It Takes A Village comes straight out of the Communist Manifesto. Communist leaders indoctrinate their citizens to become dumb and dutiful so they may remain in control of the masses. It takes family with a Mom and Dad, not a village trumping the family unit. An important segment of the Marxist agenda is the destruction of the family unit and replacing it with dependency upon the State. The "it takes a village" mentality follows the course of the Obama regime and its “primrose path” for loyal Democrats. Democrats are becoming more and more like dedicated socialists or useful idiots for the communist party by unwittingly following the communist party line. History has proven the traditional family unit to be better than government in providing oversight and stability where the parents are the primary nurturers, the correctors and guilders in creating fully functioning, responsible adults. When the family unit is allowed to thrive properly, children have a better chance and greater opportunity to function in a civilized society. When children are not reared with an emphasis on the family unit, we end up with arrogant, self-centered adults who are dependent upon government, which is where we are mostly as a nation today.
The National Education Association (NEA) is the largest union in the U.S. and is arguably the most powerful political force in the America today. The organization challenges any hint of education reform that would increase teacher accountability or allow for charter schools or other forms of school choice. Statistics reveal that school districts that spend the most per pupil on education do not produce the highest average ACT test scores or highest average graduation rates. The total national annual spending on education in the year 2010, exceeded $809 billion dollars. This aggregate is the highest of any other industrialized nation, more than the combined spending of France, Germany, Japan, Brazil, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. Through the years 1970 through 2012, the total average per pupil outlays for education in the U.S. has more than doubled. Why then is there this disparity between money spent on education and the results that education is supposed to achieve? This is because we have in most states dysfunctional systems for distributing money intended to educate students. We see in most every election cycle, in most every school district across our nation, desperate pleas for more funding on education. One might conclude that most American school districts suffer from a permanent fiscal crisis, every year hanging perilously on the threshold of financial collapse, never knowing whether there will be adequate funds to continue functioning. Rarely do voters reject requests for higher taxes for education, education bond initiatives or state lotteries intended to supplement funds for such things like new school books and classroom repairs. The reality, however, is that too often most new taxes and initiatives for new education monies intended for pupils end-up not going to the classrooms but to fund increased teacher and administrator salaries, faculty sabbaticals and bloated educator pensions.
The public school system has been evolving in recent years to a system of indoctrination rather than education. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fj6Qamu0JY
Socialism and Humanism have become the predominant philosophies of the NEA for which its stated position has never wavered: "We stand for socializing the individual…the major function of the school is the social orientation of the individual . . . Education must operate according to a well-formulated social policy." Chester M. Pierce, M.D., Professor of Education and Psychiatry at Harvard, had this to say: "Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our Founding Fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It's up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well - by creating the international child of the future." Peter Hoagland, a Democrat from Nebraska representing Nebraska in the U.S House of Representatives said: "…parents have no right to indoctrinate their children in their beliefs. We are preparing their children for the year 2000 and life in a global one-world society and those children will not fit in." Multi-culturalism has become the innocent sounding buzzword that is in reality the propaganda machine intended to prepare young minds for a one world Marxist system.
The root of most problems in our public education system deal with individuals those who may have achieved higher education but their education has been unfortunately tainted with progressive liberal biases. The deficits in our educational system are producing an entire generation of citizens and educators who are unable to fully gain a capacity for applying political and social common sense. Otherwise brilliant scholars have been programed to distrust, to be afraid of the real world of commerce and as a result, college graduates who dare to venture outside the world of academia only to fail have then resorted to becoming teachers. Those lacking in political common sense are now teaching our precious youth, mixing what should be productive education with distorted ideas of political and social nonsense. Thus there has been a dumbing-down of the U.S. population with a growing number of people whose minds have been contaminated with progressive liberal biases. “Men are so simple, and governed so absolutely by their present needs, that he who wishes to deceive will never fail in finding willing dupes.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli .
The art of free political debate, the Socratic dialogue and critical thinking have been perverted in the university lecture halls by good intentioned but lacking in commonsense liberal progressive professors. Students who decline to swallow and accept without question their biased, pervasive liberal political propaganda are cast out from political debate and discussion as being non-critical thinkers and are likely to receive inferior grades. Fallacious liberal political propaganda dominates American media, public schools and universities with ideas that trump political and economic idealism over political accountability, reality and common sense. Textbooks promote unsupportable political theories and distort history and natural truths through systematic programs of dialectic subversion. Unfortunately it is the government, the wealthy university trustees and the academic elitists who, under the aegis of "economic justice, tolerance and diversity," seek to eradicate political and economic common sense from the academy. Professors in our most prestigious universities have digressed from advancing academic excellence in their fields of expertise to preaching a dialectic subversion of political and economic theory. Liberal Progressive indoctrination must not replaces legitimate academic pursuits.
There were thousands of college commencement speeches around the country this year for the Class of 2015. But there was one missing -- one very truthful, funny and witty speech that graduates should've heard, but didn't. Well, here it is, spoken by George Will, Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist at the Washington Post. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vfl4BGbMxoQ#t=189
“Nothing is more dangerous than a dogmatic worldview - nothing more constraining, more blinding to innovation, more destructive of openness to novelty.” ― Stephen Jay Gould
The best education systems can be found in programs of instruction that are DE-centralized, that are tailored by individual teachers who instill a deep understanding of all subject matter in their students and strive for quality individualized learning at all levels. Schools that have supportive parents and active Parent Teacher Organizations (PTO) tend to produce successful students.
A dramatic shift in how we educate our children today has been brought about by technology and that in too many schools it matters not what or how students study but only that they simply attend school. Computerized programmed learning, comparable to the industrial assembly line is marvelously efficient in stamping-out products on a massive scale but this model of education can only produce dull, clone like high school graduates. Highly automated education systems fail to instill individualized deep and rich learning experiences essential for a quality education. Students from kindergarten through high school should be groomed as apprentice learners through teachers who seek to instill a passion for learning within every student at every level. Profoundly now lacking in the public school system are curricula that promote ideas that education is vitally important to an individual’s pursuit of happiness. Students must not just simply learn but learn how to learn and become exposed to programs that develop a passion for learning that produces lifelong learners. The solution for meaningful education involves not just knowledge but learning how to solve problems effectively. This can only be gained through quality, individualized relationships with educators who have a passion for teaching.
The latest step intended to control the American citizenry is The Common Core, a system designed to become a Nationalized Federal government takeover of our Education system. The Common Core is in fact against the law, as the Federal Government is prohibited from setting educational curriculum standards – public education is a Constitutional right reserved to the individual States. The Federal Government does not have the authority to create a one-size-fits-all complete take over of America’s education system at all levels. The Federal Government, through The Common Core seeks to standardize education curricula and apply this to all public schools, charter schools, private schools, Christian schools and homeschooling. No one is exempt from this new federal mandate.
The Common Core State Standards Initiative is an education initiative in the United States that details what K-12 students should know in English language arts and mathematics at the end of each grade. The initiative is sponsored by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and seeks to establish consistent education standards across the states as well as ensure that students graduating from high school are prepared to enter credit-bearing courses at two- or four-year college programs or enter the workforce. This all appears to be very desirable at first glance but the problem lies in the reality of the details, that The Common Core is a federal "top-down" takeover of state and local education systems. The Common Core's focus on national standards and will do little to fix deeply ingrained problems and incentive structures within the education system. Nicholas Tampio, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Fordham University, said that: “The standards emphasize rote learning and uniformity over creativity, and fail to recognize differences in learning styles. Common Core diminishes the humanities in the educational curriculum. The Common Core adopts a bottom-line, pragmatic approach to education and the heart of its philosophy is that it is a waste of resources to over-educate people."
This link shows the great reservations that our nations best educators have concerning The Common Core:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coRNJluF2O4#t=129
The comparisons of Hitler’s Nazi Germany and The Common Core are uncanny. Nazi leaders trained “Master Teachers” in the National Socialists Teachers League who continuously supervised individual schools and kept data files on all Teachers. The Obama Administration has funded a 10,000 “Master Teachers” (MT) corps to train Teachers on The Common Core who will then keep data files on all students and teachers. In Nazi Germany students were instructed to spy on parents and teachers. The Common Core will have students as young as kindergarten participating in the evaluation of their Teachers. In Nazi Germany curricula were rewritten to stipulate a Nazi only approved curriculum.
Under The Common Core, data mining methods will be used on student’s computers to scan the child to see how they react to different stimuli.
Proponents of The Common Corps promote their new education system as one that avoids rote memorization of the learning material, however, the central idea of The Common Core system is based upon not wasting time on becoming critical thinkers and problem solvers, but rather memorizing only the desired information required to pass standardized tests. The Common Core "one size fits all" education system does not tackle the unique individuality of each and every student. The Common Core would teach all children the same thing at the same time regardless of their developmental or language differences.
Individualized teaching under Common Core would be minimized. This is Common Core’s greatest shortcoming in that it would exclude a teacher’s first and most important role as an educator, that is in helping students know who they are as individuals and then helping them fulfill their individual potentials. Human happiness is the result of fulfilling ones individual’s unique potentialities, character and personality converting his/her potentialities into actualities.
It has been proposed that under The Common Core, teachers would be retitled as "facilitators", not teachers and that all history, language and literature curricula will be rewritten by centralized Common Core groups. The sole duty of the facilitators would be to simply administer The Common Core standardized programs and tests which are designed with one goal in mind; that is to train children to become good new world order global citizens. Children will be programmed under The Common Corps to navigate through their lives without a moral compass and no allegiance except to the federal or one world government. The Common Core has the despicable goal to destroy rugged individualism that is the very brickwork of our nation. How do you change a society? Vladimir Lenin said, "Give me four years to teach children and the seeds I have sown will never be uprooted." This is what is facing our children if we do not wake this nation up to the dangers of The Common Core.
THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE --- Substituting Religion with Stateism
“In God We Trust" is the antidote to stateism and Socialism. Stateism through atheism is the national religion that socialists seek by pledging allegiance to a state void of God. http://citizenclark.weebly.com/
“One Nation Under God”------The Constitution of the United States of America is amendable, can be altered or abolished. However, our Founding Fathers provided in the Declaration of Independence permanent protection from oppressive governments through the declaration that; “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. Upholding these rights then became the first obligation of the government of the United States and the prerequisite for its continued existence.
“God is not willing to do everything, and thus take away our free will and that share of glory which belongs to us.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
The term “separation of church and state” has fallaciously become synonymous with the First Amendment to our United States Constitution. Nowhere in the United States Constitution or its twenty-seven Amendments is there any mention of the phrase “separation of church and state”. Interestingly enough, the phrase “separation of Church and State”, mandating secularism is in the constitutions of the old Soviet Union and other tyrannical regimes, was used to ensure that the state is establish as the ultimate authority over people.
Today the First Amendment to our United States Constitution is in grave peril as there are organized efforts to promote a myth that the United States Constitution requires a complete, radical and absolute separation between God and governments of the United States. The guise of “separation of church and state” is the ruse that now threatens the tolerant religious heritage that defines our nation’s very foundation.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". Anyone who can read and understand the English language and has common sense should understand that the purpose of the First Amendment has always been that The United States Congress alone, not any other entity of government, is prohibited from making a law establishing a national religious denomination. This was intended to mean that The Congress may not require, for example, that all Americans will become Catholics, Anglicans, or members of any other denomination. In other words there shall not be the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial, along with an Official Church branch of government. The second purpose of the First Amendment is the very opposite from what is being made of it by the ACLU today by their promoting the idea that the First Amendment is intended to suppress religion by guaranteeing “freedom from religion”. The First Amendment clearly requires that government should not impede or interfere with the free practice of legitimate religion. The purpose of any so called separation between church and state in American society would not be to exclude the voice of religion from public debate, but provide a context of religious freedom where the insights of each religious tradition can be set forth and tested. Justice Douglas wrote for the majority of the Supreme Court in the United States vs. Ballard case in 1944: The First Amendment has a dual aspect. It not only "forestalls compulsion by law of the acceptance of any creed or the practice of any form of worship" but also "safeguards the free exercise of the chosen form of religion." The First Amendment is a safeguard so that the State can have no jurisdiction over the Church. Its purpose was to protect but not disestablish the Church.
It has been a tradition and is understood that all American citizens should be able, even in a governmental context, to profess “In God We Trust” and pledge an allegiance to our “One Nation Under God”. How any good American citizen does in fact worship or even choose not worship God at all is his or her civil liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. The “great communicator” of the twentieth century best stated the true intentions of our Founding Fathers when Ronald Reagan declared, "We establish no religion in this country, nor will we ever. We command no worship. We mandate no belief. But we poison our society when we remove its theological underpinnings. We court corruption when we leave it bereft of belief. All are free to believe or not believe; all are free to practice a faith or not. But those who believe must be free to speak of and act on their belief.... If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.
“He who takes nature for his guide is not easily beaten out of his argument…The Almighty hath implanted in us these inextinguishable feelings for good and wise purposes. They are the guardians of his image in our hearts. They distinguish us from the herd of common animals. The social compact would dissolve, and justice be extirpated the earth, or have only a casual existence were we callous to the touches of affection.” --- Thomas Paine 1776
THE ACLU --- Marxist Traitors In Disguise
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was founded in 1920. The founder of the ACLU and its main inspiration to this day, Roger Baldwin, who stated in the "Harvard Class Book of 1935; "I am for Socialism, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the state itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and sole control by those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal. It all sums up into one single purpose-the abolition of dog-eat-dog under which we live.” Commenting on the public image of the ACLU, he said; “Do steer away from making it look like a Socialist enterprise...We want also to look like patriots in everything we do...” This quote from Baldwin's biography written by Peggy Lampson.
Baldwin wrote in the 1934 Soviet Russia Today, "When that power of the working class is once achieved, as it has been only in the Soviet Union, I am for maintaining it by any means whatever."
The former chairman of the Communist Party, William Z. Foster and ACLU co-founder, said: “The establishment of an American Soviet government will involve the confiscation of large landed estates in town and country, and also, the whole body to forests, mineral deposits, lakes, rivers and so on."
Earl Browder publicly described the importance of the ACLU functioning as "a transmission belt" for the Communist Party. Earl Browder was general secretary of the Communist Party of the United States from 1930 to 1944 and thereafter, when the party was reorganized as the Communist Political Association, he continued as its president.
The Special House Committee to Investigate Communist Activities stated that:
“The American Civil Liberties Union is closely affiliated with the communist movement in the United States, and fully 90 percent of its efforts are on behalf of communists who have come into conflict with the law. It claims to stand for free speech, free press and free assembly, but it is quite apparent that the main function of the ACLU is an attempt to protect the communists.”
When we look at the ACLU’s policies and case history, it is obvious they are today still very much dedicated to Communist and socialist goals. It is obvious then that the ACLU’s original and continued purpose is to promote and defend godless socialism and communism in America, and the right for free speech for the communist agenda (no matter how violent or radical). However, the ACLU opposed the right to express anti-Communist sentiments. The ACLU has an agenda to eventually subvert the civil liberties it claims to defend. Why, because as we know, the ACLU has its roots in Marxist ideals. Those familiar with the ACLU's sordid history know that when the organization speaks of "rights" and the Constitution, it is invariably engaged in dialectical subversion. The ACLU claims to defend civil liberties based on the Bill of Rights. However, it is very selective in what it will defend as rights. For example, the ACLU does not support the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms. You would think that after the distortions and contortions of the First Amendment to drive God out of public life that the ACLU would fight vigorously against restrictions on civilian firearm possession. The ACLU’s selectivity in not protecting gun ownership stems from its basic doctrine in that a totalitarian government must disarm the populace before a Marxist government can takeover.
· The ACLU has a long established strategy to actively mask its true intentions through its policy of occasionally defending a conservative to make the ACLU appear nonpartisan. The ACLU’s founder, Rodger Baldwin stated in "Soviet Russia Today", September 1934, “If I aid the reactionaries to get free speech now and then, if I go outside the class struggle to fight against censorship, it is only because those liberties help to create a more hospitable atmosphere for the working class.” This is clearly the ACLU official policy to this day as per the words of the ACLU’s William Donohue when he commented, “In other words, the occasional defense of right-wing extremists opens up the courts, thereby making it easier for the ACLU to defend its ideological kinfolk on the left.”
· “Do steer away from making it look like a Socialist enterprise...We want also to look like patriots in everything we do... “We want to get a good lot of flags, talk a good deal about the Constitution and what our forefathers wanted to make of this country, and to show that we are really the folks that really stand for the spirit of our institutions.”—Roger Baldwin's advice in 1917 to Louis Lochner of the socialist People's Council in Minnesota.
The ACLU often takes the Constitution out of context so as to champion strange cases that seem to favor an outcome that reinforces authoritarian government control. They more often than not favor the dictatorial concept of appointed Judges creating legislation from the bench.
The ACLU manipulates the legal system to change the original intent of a law through a process they call "building precept on precept". Through this process, they have been successful in changing the original intent or meaning of laws by carefully crafting lawsuits leading to judicial rulings, which reconstructs the law, step by step, towards their own goals. These new laws, created by the judiciary, eventually lead to a deluge of decisions in their favor. The separation of church and state issue is but one example. The ACLU and its allies have reconstructed the Constitution’s First Amendment from which it was intended to be a shield for people of faith into a terrible sword against them. The creative twisting of the Constitution’s Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment to provide constitutional protections to homosexual sodomy has evolved into the legal undermining of marriage, family and the weakening of parental authority.
The ACLU is on a continual reign of terror in the U.S. as though they have been elected to dictate immoral and unethical standards for the entire country. The ACLU is against morality and Christianity. In the past, it has defended the Klu Klux Klan, pornography and pedophilia as freedoms of expression. It considers limitation to obscenity unconstitutional. The ACLU defends homosexual activism, pedophilia and a push for total sexual liberation. The ACLU supports the North American Man-Boy Love Association, an organized band of pedophiles and child rapists, while at the same time attacking the Boy Scouts for not allowing homosexual scout leaders to lead young boys.
The ACLU is creating a climate where valid laws are to be unscrupulously challenged and distorted. The intention of the ACLU is to create social anarchy and a total breakdown morality in our society.
The caustic arrogance of the ACLU is exemplified in the former ACLU Executive Director’s, Ira Glasser, reaction to the news that Alaska voters had overwhelmingly passed a constitutional amendment protecting marriage only between one man and one woman. She commented, “Today’s results prove that certain fundamental issues should not be left to a majority vote.” The ACLU will certainly be behind many future judicial actions to over-turn the majority vote and will of the people by forcing the legalization of same sex marriages everywhere in America through the courts. We can see then that all actions of the ACLU have the ultimate purpose of reinforcing its desired image of intellectual elitism over what it considers the ignorant faith of the masses. This type of thinking is necessary for them to achieve their goal of a totalitarian society in their transition struggle for a socialist state in America.
From its inception, the ACLU has worked to create a new America. To do so, the ACLU found it necessary to achieve two main things: first to abolish Constitutional barriers to governmental power and second, to enervate men's souls to make them weak and dependent on the state. Both of which move America towards a socialist state and, according to Dr. Krannawitter, are advanced by “removing God from the American mind.”
In order for the ACLU to tear down constitutional barriers to governmental power, they must extinguish America’s fundamental trust or belief in God, since such a belief is an essential denial of the supreme power of the state. Our ultimate rights come from God, not the state or man. We must as patriotic Americans prevent the day when God’s presence in the American mindset ceases and people no longer trust in God as the ultimate grantor of rights but to trust only in the state for those rights. The ACLU believes that the more power the state has, the better off the people under it are. If one looks at the history of the Soviet Union and any other Communist country, one will be apt to find Communist leaders who predicated their form of government on atheism and a secular state. This sort of anti-religious atmosphere precludes the existence of any rights beyond that which the state has granted. In addition to the emphasis on the source of rights and governmental power, the ACLU has worked to make people needy and dependent on the state.
Alexis de Tocqueville warned of those like the ACLU who wished to exacerbate the malignant tendencies of democracy. He explained that the government, if people allow it to do so, will create an incessant dependency of the people on the government as it expands its power under the guise of utility, finally reducing “each nation to being nothing more than a herd of timid and industrious animals of which the government is the shepherd.” The ACLU seeks not only to create a people that are dependent and needy, but also a government that “little by little extinguishes their spirits and enervates their souls” by giving them all they want, so that they will be naively content without hopes, dreams, or a will of their own. This is a sort of despotism unlike any other.
Christianity is an antidote to the ACLU’s despotism and poison that is dependency on the state. It goes hand-in-hand with limited government and personal responsibility since it instructs individuals to trust in God for provision and it teaches people a strong work ethic. These are things that are not conducive to the ACLU’s ideal citizen. In short, religion creates a society of people who look not to the state but to the Creator for support.
As the ACLU continues its assault on Christianity and limited government, every patriotic American must understand what is at stake: our liberty and freedom. Our hope as Americans lies in the foundations of America that, though undermined, still exist today. Though seemingly esoteric, the founding and moral principles present a hope to our country. George Washington said, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports." While it is these “pillars of human happiness” that the ACLU has sought to destroy, Americans have the ability stand up to the ACLU and reclaim America.
How can we stop the ACLU?
In 1978, the Supreme Court exempted the ACLU from the "ambulance chasing" prohibitions that apply to nearly every other lawyer in the country. Over the years this has enabled the ACLU's legions of pro bono attorneys to specifically target various organizations they feel are vulnerable to their lawsuits, dredge the ranks of the "offended" until they can find someone who will agree to let the ACLU stick their name at the top of a case, and then attempt to force a group's acquiesce to their demands by threatening a costly legal case they usually cannot afford. Many who have dared to stand up against the ACLU might have won the battle in the court room, but lost the war as their organizations were driven into bankruptcy under crushing legal bills. Federal law, Section 42 USC sec 1988, allows the ACLU to receive reimbursement of attorney fees and court costs when they sue regarding civil liberties issues. Nowhere else in litigation is it so easy to make a claim. In most other areas of the law, you need to have a personal, direct injury. The primary reason they are involved in so many civil law suits, is because they make money doing it. If the ACLU could no longer make such staggering sums from the federal tax dollars, they would be forced to get money from willing other contributors, and there are not enough extreme left wing liberals in the world to keep their cause financed. This is obviously a very stupid law that favors one political group over another. It is time to pull the ACLU’s unfair advantage by repealing Section 42 USC sec 1988. STOP this nonsense of Cart Blanc federally subsidized lawsuits just by alleging that civil rights are involved!
What can you do to stop the ACLU and their insidious destruction of America?
Support the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), which is a counter to the ACLU providing a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth. The ADF was founded for a unique purpose that is to aggressively defend religious liberty. The ADF is succeeding by empowering its allies, recognizing that together they can accomplish far more than anyone can alone. The ADF works to assist in efforts through strategy, training, funding and, where necessary, direct litigation against the ACLU through their own ADF legal team.
Support the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ). The ACLJ is dedicated to protecting our religious and constitutional freedoms. In addition to providing its legal services at no cost to their clients, the ACLJ focuses on the issues of National security, protecting America’s families, and protecting human life.
You learn more about the ACLU by visiting a web site dedicated to revealing the true intentions of the ACLU, Stop the ACLU.
You can write to your elected officials. You can identify and contact your elected officials through Congress.org at their web site.
You can sign a new online petition that asks Congress to change a specific civil-rights statute in hopes of preventing the American Civil Liberties Union from collecting attorney fees from taxpayers of local governments the organization takes to court. Wall Builders
An organization dedicated to presenting America's forgotten history and heroes, with an emphasis on the moral, religious, and constitutional foundation on which America was built-a foundation that, in recent years, has been seriously attacked and undermined.
THE CURSE OF ISLAM --- Winston Churchill: "Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world."
The President of the United States has ostensibly admitted to being a Muslim: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tKMiRxnRN4#t=85
Muslims are reluctant to publicly condemn acts of terror made in in the name of Allah but will usually rationalize terror as having some greater ideological or divine purpose. The Obama administration will not admit that the world has a problem with Islamic terrorism even when given the following facts:
The Shoe Bomber was a Muslim
The Beltway Snipers were Muslims
The Fort Hood Shooter was a Muslim
The underwear Bomber was a Muslim
The USS Cole Bombers were Muslims
The Madrid Train Bombers were Muslims
The Bali Nightclub Bombers were Muslims
The London Subway Bombers were Muslims
The Moscow Theater Attackers were Muslims
The Boston Marathon Bombers were Muslims
The Pan-Am flight #93 Bombers were Muslims
The Air France Entebbe Hijackers were Muslims
The Iranian Embassy Takeover, was by Muslims
The Beirut U.S. Embassy bombers were Muslims
The Libyan U.S. Embassy Attack was by Muslims
The Buenos Aires Suicide Bombers were Muslims
The Israeli Olympic Team Attackers were Muslims
The Kenyan U.S, Embassy Bombers were Muslims
The Saudi, Khobar Towers Bombers were Muslims
The Beirut Marine Barracks bombers were Muslims
The Besian Russian School Attackers were Muslims
The first World Trade Center Bombers were Muslims
The Bombay & Mumbai India Attackers were Muslims
The Achille Lauro Cruise Ship Hijackers were Muslims
The September 11th 2001 Airline Hijackers were Muslims
Think of it:
Buddhists living with Hindus = No Problem
Hindus living with Christians = No Problem
Hindus living with Jews = No Problem
Christians living with Shintos = No Problem
Shintos living with Confucians = No Problem
Confucians living with Baha'is = No Problem
Baha'is living with Jews = No Problem
Jews living with Atheists = No Problem
Atheists living with Buddhists = No Problem
Buddhists living with Sikhs = No Problem
Sikhs living with Hindus = No Problem
Hindus living with Baha'is = No Problem
Baha'is living with Christians = No Problem
Christians living with Jews = No Problem
Jews living with Buddhists = No Problem
Buddhists living with Shintos = No Problem
Shintos living with Atheists = No Problem
Atheists living with Confucians = No Problem
Confusians living with Hindus = No Problem
Muslims living with Hindus = Problem
Muslims living with Buddhists = Problem
Muslims living with Christians = Problem
Muslims living with Jews = Problem
Muslims living with Sikhs = Problem
Muslims living with Baha'is = Problem
Muslims living with Shintos = Problem
Muslims living with Atheists = Problem
MUSLIMS LIVING WITH MUSLIMS = BIG PROBLEM
**********SO THIS LEADS TO *****************
They're not happy in Gaza
They're not happy in Egypt
They're not happy in Libya
They're not happy in Morocco
They're not happy in Iran
They're not happy in Iraq
They're not happy in Yemen
They're not happy in Afghanistan
They're not happy in Pakistan
They're not happy in Syria
They're not happy in Lebanon
They're not happy in Nigeria
They're not happy in Kenya
They're not happy in Sudan
******** So, where are they happy? **********
They're happy in Australia
They're happy in England
They're happy in Belgium
They're happy in France
They're happy in Italy
They're happy in Germany
They're happy in Sweden
They're happy in the USA & Canada
They're happy in Norway & India
Muslims seem to be happy in almost every country that is not Islamic! And who do they blame? Not Islam... Not their leadership... Not themselves, THEY BLAME THE COUNTRIES THEY ARE HAPPY IN!!
Muslims want to change the countries they're happy in, to be like the countries they came from where they were unhappy and finally they will get hammered!
Islamic Jihad: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
ISIS : AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Al-Qaeda: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Taliban: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Hamas: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Hezbollah: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Boko Haram: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Al-Nusra: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Abu Sayyaf: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Al-Badr: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Muslim Brotherhood: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Lashkar-e-Taiba: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Palestine Liberation Front: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Ansaru: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Jemaah Islamiyah: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Abdullah Azzam Brigades: AN ISLAMIC TERROR ORGANIZATION
Still the Obama administration refuses to identify the problem of Islamic terrorism and has not even attempted to develop a comprehensive plan to deal with this problem.
We have freedom of religion in the United States; however, Islam can never be reconciled with the First Amendment to United States Constitution. The very nature of Islam requires: exclusion of free speech, suppression all religions other than Islam, a government that answers only to Islamic law and demands servitude of all under its control. Islam is an institution that advocates violence against non-Muslims, which conspires to deceive non-Muslims and casts oppression onto all human beings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgsrnmzxEUY&feature=youtu.be
“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensual ism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity.
The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities – but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.” ---Sir Winston Churchill
See link: http://www.frontline.org.za/books_videos/sti.htm
Islam Explained in Layman's Terms (Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat.)
Islam is not simply a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total 100% system of life. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.
Islamization of a nation begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges. When so called politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well. As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part being regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase activities that radicalize their own population and spread lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions.
In Belgium and Paris, we are already seeing Muslims pushing for total Sharia law.
http://www.cbn.com/tv/embedplayer.aspx?bcid=1509282970001
Non-Muslim actions that tend to offend Islam result in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam.
Where the Muslim population approaches 100%, the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing the less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons. "Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel." -- Leon Uris, 'The Haj'
Countries with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend Madrasas. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a Crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.
Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this century.
President Obama recently appointed two devout Muslims to Homeland Security posts. Doesn't this make you feel safer already? Obama and Janet Napolitano appointed Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim, as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development. DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim who was born in Damascus, Syria, as ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC).
Why are devout Muslims are now being appointed to critical government positions? Why are left wing American radicals now advocating Sharia Law in the United States? Why are Americans who are concerned about this entire happening labeled as having “Islam phobia”? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiQ-AxJ_m9U#t=96. I fear that through the growing influences of Islam entering into our federal government and the parallel objectives of Marxism and the Islamic Jihads, that the United States is destined to crumble from within.
http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/current-events/video-how-liberals-argue
What is next? Dhimmitude is the Muslim system of controlling non-Muslim populations conquered through jihad (Holy War). Specifically, it is the TAXING of non-Muslims in exchange for tolerating their presence AND as a coercive means of converting conquered remnants to Islam. Obama Care allows the establishment of Dhimmitude and Sharia Muslim diktat in the United States. Muslims are specifically exempted from the government mandate to purchase insurance, and also from the penalty tax for being uninsured. Islam considers insurance to be "gambling", "risk-taking", and "usury" and is thus banned. Muslims are specifically granted exemption based on this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFN8ahYN1b0
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM --- The Oligarchy of Robed Despots Who Issue Decrees Nullifying the Will of The People
The separation of powers between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches has never been so seriously out of balance as it is today. The Founding Fathers never wished for Americans to live under a judicial oligarchy in which robed despots issue decrees like so many inquisitioners.
Recent absurd rulings by our Federal Courts have prompted more and more people to question whether the Federal Courts serve any useful purpose at all in our government. A case in point is the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized which legalized same-sex marriage. United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia believes that the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling amounts to a “threat to American democracy”. The equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment does not require the government to include same-sex couplings in its definition of marriage. Scalia stated argued that: “When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, every State limited marriage to one man and one woman, and no one doubted the constitutionality of doing so. That resolves these cases. When it comes to determining the meaning of a vague constitutional provision—such as ‘due process of law’ or ‘equal protection of the laws’—it is unquestionable that the People who ratified that provision did not understand it to prohibit a practice that remained both universal and uncontroversial in the years after ratification.”Thus, Scalia argues that if the country wishes to legalize same-sex marriage, it must do so through democratically enacted legislation, or through the ratification of a new constitutional amendment, and not through five unelected justices substituting their “reasoned judgment” of the 14th amendment for the will of those who ratified it.
Our Founding Fathers intended the Federal court system to always be an a-political institution and as such in tune with the "laws of nature and of natures God". The Federal courts, however, have now evolved into the most political and secular of the three branches of government. Thomas Jefferson worried that the courts would someday overstep their authority and instead of interpreting the law would begin making law. Today, the great fear of Jefferson is now our nightmare in that our judicial system is becoming an oligarchy, the rule of a Godless few over many. We are at crisis now in the United States because our courts have been corrupted by the influence of liberal progressive judges who are so far out of the main stream of traditional American moral ethical law and justice as to be dangerous to American society.
“RENDER UNTO CAESAR THE THINGS WHICH ARE CAESAR'S is the scripture doctrine of courts…Now three thousand years passed away from the Mosaic account of the creation, till the Jews under a national delusion requested a king. Till then their form of government (except in extraordinary cases, where the Almighty interposed) was a kind of republic administered by a judge and the elders of the tribes. Kings they had none, and it was held sinful to acknowledge any being under that title but the Lord of Hosts. And when a man seriously reflects on the idolatrous homage that is paid to the persons of kings, he need not wonder that the Almighty, ever jealous of his honor, should disapprove of a form of government that so impiously invades the prerogative of heaven. ” --- Thomas Paine 1776
Concerned about the potential for judicial tyranny, Thomas Jefferson warned: "The opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws is constitutional and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch. ... The Constitution on this hypothesis is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please."
Liberal progressive activists that cannot control Congress and the will of the people use liberal judiciary tactics to impose their dangerous agenda through the courts. Americans must act to deal seriously with judicial tyrants who undermine the will of legislatures and the people. The people of the United states must not allow judges who impose their self-serving legal interpretations that promote narrow political ideologies upon the rest of us. Activist judges must be removed by impeachment, attrition or just plain eliminate their positions. Something just has to be done and somehow the system has to be fixed. Band-Aid fixes such as amendments defining marriage in the Constitution so as to preempt activist judges from legislating from the bench is not the long term answer. When the courts rule in contradiction to the United States Constitution, the "laws of nature and of natures God", then the people must take action to make those rulings null and void. “No enactment of man can be considered law unless it conforms to the law of God.” --- Sir William Blackstone
The Supreme Court is not the ultimate authority on interpreting the United States Constitution. Alexander Hamilton said federal judges may be impeached & removed for usurpations (Federalist No. 81, 8th para); the People are “the natural guardians of the Constitution” as against federal judges “embarked in a conspiracy with the legislature”; and the People are to become “enlightened enough to distinguish between a legal exercise and an illegal usurpation of authority.” (Federalist No.16, 10th para). Congress should consider removing justices of the Federal courts for bad behavior, for abusing their judicial power. There is now a mounting case for even amending the United States Constitution to repeal Article III, Sections 1 and 2 which would effectively eliminate the federal courts altogether. Leave law making to the people and legislatures, not to the courts. State, district and local municipal courts are more adept to wisely interpret laws put forth to them as any federal court can manage.
ABORTION --- Legalized Murder
The Hippocratic Oath, an oath historically taken by physicians and other healthcare professionals, requires them to practice medicine honestly and morally. The ancient Greek Hippocratic Oath included the promise of new physicians that: “I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion."
Anyone with moral common sense can only conclude that abortion is immoral. To purposely destroy a human being, with malice aforethought, is murder. To purposely destroy an unborn child in its mother’s womb, with malice aforethought can only be regarded as intentional murder. “Of all the subjects relating to the erosion of the sanctity of human life, abortion is the keystone. It is the first and crucial issue that has been overwhelming in changing attitudes toward the value on life in general.”--- Francis Schaeffer
THE LEGALIZATION OF MARIJUANA --- The Poisoning of American Society
The United States is loosing too many of its precious younger generation to the slavery of recreational drug use. The legalization of marijuana even for medical purposes is a prank. Why encourage one more way for people to destroy their brain cells. Alcoholism is a bad enough problem. There are proven medications that treat illnesses better than smoking marijuana. THC is a drug that has never and never will be approved by the FDA for treating any illness. The American Lung Association has compiled a considerable amount of evidence that shows that marijuana is harmful to human beings. http://www.lung.org/associations/states/colorado/tobacco/marijuana.html
There is no doubt in my mind that marijuana use destroys lives. I have observed firsthand the devastating effects on people who smoke marijuana. The adverse effects of marijuana have social, academic, economic, and behavioral consequences. I know too many close friends, people I served with in the military and family members whose lives have been irreparably destroyed by their use of cannabis.
Marijuana interferes with an adolescent’s emotional, cognitive and ethical growth. Scientific studies show that people who smoked pot regularly while their brains were still developing, usually before age 25, permanently altered their ability to achieve their full potential in life. People in recovery often note that they stopped maturing when they first started using marijuana. This observation is supported by the facts of their lives and the observations of family, friends and professionals working with them. I have personally observed permanent behavior and personality changes in those who continued to smoke pot past their teenage years. I can spot the chronic pot user by their increased anxiety, panic attacks, depression, social withdrawal, and other mental health problems, particularly in teens.
The psychoactive ingredient of marijuana, THC has been proven to cause deficits in memory; manual dexterity and sustained attention have been shown to persist for days or weeks after the last use of marijuana. Regular pot smoking causes these problems to be continuous. Deficits in memory, manual dexterity and sustained attention have been shown to persist for days or weeks after the last use of marijuana. Marijuana has also been shown to impair perception, speed of motion and accuracy in tasks. High THC levels in the blood are the probable responsibility for many motor vehicle accidents.
Early marijuana use is associated with drug dependence as an adult. The Journal of the American Medical Association reported, based on a study of 300 sets of twins, that marijuana-using twins were four times more likely than their siblings to use cocaine and crack cocaine, and five times more likely to use hallucinogens such as LSD. The younger the age of first use means the higher the likelihood of such dependence as an adult. More teens are in treatment each year for marijuana dependence than for alcohol and all other illegal drugs combined. This is a trend that has been increasing for more than a decade: in 2002, 64 percent of adolescent treatment admissions reported marijuana as their primary substance of abuse, compared to 23 percent in 1992.
Marijuana users are more likely the risk of developing head and neck cancer. Cannabis smoke contains 50% to 70% more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke. These findings speak for themselves: marijuana is not a benign substance. It has real adverse health effects. Marijuana addiction is a reality.
Marijuana is an addictive drug. Short-term effects of marijuana include memory loss, distorted perception, trouble with thinking and problem solving, and loss of motor skills. Long-term adverse impacts include loss in muscle strength, increased heart rate, respiratory problems, loss of appetite, trouble sleeping, impaired ability to fight off infections and risk of cancer (marijuana contains 50-70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than does tobacco smoke).
Marijuana is far more powerful today than it was 30 years ago. THC levels have increased from the 1 percent potency level in the 1970s to more than 13 percent today (on average), with some samples containing THC levels of up to 33 percent.
Even more troubling is that marijuana serves as a gateway to the use of other illegal drugs. Most people who use methamphetamine, heroin or cocaine started their illegal drug use with marijuana. A recent study on addiction and substance abuse showed that teens who use marijuana at least once a month are 13 times more likely than other teens to use other drugs like cocaine, heroin or methamphetamine, and are almost 26 times more likely than those teens who never used marijuana to use another illegal drug. Another study showed that 12- to 17-year-olds who smoked marijuana were 85 times more likely to use cocaine than those who did not. Sixty percent of adolescents who use marijuana before age 15 will later use cocaine.
Last, but certainly not least, there are strong links between marijuana use, violence and other criminal activity. Young people who use marijuana weekly are nearly four times more likely than nonusers to engage in violence. Nationwide, 40 percent of adult males arrested for crimes tested positive for marijuana at the time of their arrest. Marijuana is in fact the cash crop that drives the illegal drug trade. Marijuana use provides a significant part of the demand side of the equation that brings drug dealers onto our street corners and into our schools and neighborhoods -- drug dealers who bring with them other crimes and violence. The connection between marijuana use and gang activity and violence is inescapable. Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak recently commented about middle-class Minnesotans who are buying marijuana "with a wink and a nod, thinking it has nothing to do with anything" when in fact these persons are "literally paying for the bullets that kill people." I agree with Mayor Rybak that "any person who buys marijuana in this region is directly or indirectly giving money to gangs." Recreational users of marijuana may not think of themselves as criminals, but they are in fact the biggest contributors to the illegal drug trade in America.
We would be wise as a society not to underestimate the destructive nature of marijuana. It is a powerful and addictive substance that is a gateway drug to other controlled substance abuse. Marijuana use finances in large part the activities of gangs and drug dealers. It is by far the most frequently used illegal drug in America and its use is directly connected to crime and violence in our communities.
For all of these reasons, in my opinion marijuana is America's most dangerous drug. We need to recognize the threat it represents and continue our efforts to control it, prevent our youth from starting to use it, aggressively enforce our laws against those who illegally cultivate, distribute and possess it, and effectively treat those who have become addicted to it.
THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS --- Tyranny survives when people fear their government. It is only when a government fears it’s own people that the people can remain truly free.
The United States of America has, by far, the highest per capita gun ownership in the world. Progressives will tell you that this is what makes America the Murder Capitol of Planet Earth. But we’re not, the center of “Gun Nut Nation” is in fact one of the safest places in the world.
http://bearingarms.com/number-one-bullet/?utm_source=badaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl
“The main foundations of every state, new states as well as ancient or composite ones, are good laws and good arms - you cannot have good laws without good arms, and where there are good arms, good laws inevitably follow…To govern more securely some Princes have disarmed their subjects...but by disarming, you at once give offense, since you show your subjects that you distrust them, either by doubting their courage, or as doubting their fidelity, each of which imputations begets hatred against you.” --- Niccolo Machiavelli
“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.” --- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, (1787)
The Founding Fathers of the United States knew first hand about the tyranny of an oppressive government and it was for that reason they declared that: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.”
The Second amendment to the United States Constitution’s right to rare arms, is intended to re-enforce a peoples’ right, to “alter or abolish” their government if that government should try to infringe upon their individual rights Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” --- Amendment II to The United States Constitution
There is nothing mentioned in here about sporting or hunting firearms but it is statement clearly all about individuals having the absolute right of securing their freedom through the right to possess firearms.
“It is certainly of the last Consequence to a free Country that the Militia, which is its natural Strength, should be kept upon the most advantageous Footing. A standing Army, however necessary it may be at some times, is always dangerous to the Liberties of the People.” --- Samuel Adams
In 2008 and 2010, the United States Supreme Court issued two a landmark decision to officially establish an "individual rights" interpretation of the Second Amendment. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home within many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession listed by the Court as being consistent with the Second Amendment. In McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government.
The right of American citizens to own firearms is a right that shall not be infringed. The ownership of firearms as intended in the Second Amendment is not to limit firearms for purposes of sporting or hunting. Indeed, the Second Amendment is specifically intended to allow individual ownership of weapons that are intended for self-defense.
It makes sense that a hunting rifle is used for shooting deer; a shotgun is used for shooting quail but an assault weapon, for example, is intended by its design to be used for self-defense. An “assault weapon” therefore could aptly be defined as a weapon used for self-defense and any law that would ban such “assault weapons” would be an UN-Constitutional act.
The "assault weapons" ban proposal not only places heavy restrictions on future purchases of weapons by law-abiding citizens, but also as originally proposed, requires weapons already in private hands to be registered under the National Firearms Act. This requirement includes: Background check and registration of owner including photograph and fingerprint ($200); registration of type and serial number of the firearm; certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and additional taxes to fund the ATF for registration implementation. Feinstein still has not released the text of the bill.
"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? It is feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
--Tench Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, 1788
Gun confiscation is the next step after the government requires gun registration. http://www.youtube.com/embed/03XEUPfD0qM
AMERICA'S ENERGY POLICY - An Inexpensive, Stable and Secure Sources of Energy is Vital to the Economy of the United States
American's dependence on foreign oil is a threat to our national security as well as our economy. The United States has the technology but not the will to reduce its dependence on foreign fossil fuels. We must aggressively begin take steps to eliminate our dangerous dependence on foreign oil. The practical wide-scale use of universal green power is many decades if not centuries away and fossil fuels are still by far our most efficient source of energy. Fossil fuels like oil, gas and coal can be effectively managed so that they cause very little or acceptable levels of harm to the environment. Industrialization over the years has actually improved the Earth's environment and at the same time improved the standard of living of people living in industrialized areas. https://www.prageruniversity.com/Political-Science/Why-You-Should-Love-Fossil-Fuel.html#.VT7e52bypoQ
Emerging new fossil energy technologies, if given a chance to develop, may become the catalyst that could spark a sensational increase in American prosperity and security, this along with an acceptable impact on the environment. The energy industry has developed a promising combination of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing or “Fracking” to economically access and produce oil and natural gas. Fracking is where a solution of water and sand is mixed with a small amount of chemicals that is injected into rock to open very thin cracks, allowing trapped oil or natural gas to migrate up to the well. Horizontal drilling allows one well site to recover natural gas instead of requiring expensive multiple well sites to drill vertically into natural gas zones. This technique uses less land at the surface as several wellheads can be located on a single well site. These technologies have been in use for decades but by merging them the United States has seen a turnaround in domestic oil and natural gas production. Now, operators can safely produce affordable, reliable quantities of natural gas from previously untapped resources.
There are also several “unconventional” petroleum sources, materials from which oil can be extracted—at a cost. Resources are abundant and could greatly impact the U.S. oil supply in the future. The three largest are oil shale (rock that releases petroleum-like liquids when heated in a special chemical process); tar sands (heavy, thick, black oil mixed with sand, clay, and water); and heavy crude oil (thicker and slower flowing than conventional oil). A region covering parts of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming contains oil shale totaling about three times the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia.
Private industry is also developing other new technologies that will more efficiently harvest natural gas. Natural gas vehicles (NGV) are efficient, clean and also less costly to drive. There is a growing number natural gas fueling stations and NGV owners can also tap into their homes' natural gas lines. Natural gas burns remarkably clean along with little engine wear and relatively easy and low-cost maintenance over time. Automobiles in the near future may also be powered by hydrogen extracted from coal. Hydrogen is arguably the cleanest form of energy available today, it's efficient, renewable and has zero-emissions. New techniques extract pure hydrogen from gasified coal syngas (synthesis gas). Syngas is a combination of hydrogen, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. A chemical process is used to boost its hydrogen content while removing all other components, resulting in a pure stream of hydrogen. These non-renewable energy sources may solve the immediate and pressing global energy issue of our day, that is the world’s growing epidemic of consuming fossil energy. The ultimate goal is to eliminate altogether our dependence on oil and other fossil fuels that tend to contaminate the Earth’s environment. This, however, is at least one hundred years away but in the meantime industry is taking huge steps to making fossil fuels very much cleaner. https://curiosity.com/rdr/topics/future-fossil-energy-technologies/
Nuclear power plants account for only 20% of U.S. electricity generation and no new reactors have come on line since 1996. Advances in nuclear technology could extend the desirability and future use of nuclear energy. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is pursuing the design of very-high temperature reactor technologies, through its Next Generation Nuclear Plant program and such a facility is scheduled to begin operations by 2021. The DOE has engaged other governments, international and domestic industry, and the research community to develop “Generation IV” systems. The goals of these efforts are to improve the economics, safety, fuel-cycle waste management, and proliferation resistance of nuclear reactors, as well as widen their applications.
CLIMATE CHANGE --- “Global Warming”, is this not just another term for the season of spring?
Paranoid global warming alarmists would have everyone believe that the world’s industrialized nations are belching levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere to the extent that this will result in the extinction of the human race. "Ecology as a social principle . . . condemns cities, culture, industry, technology, the intellect, and advocates men’s return to “nature,” to the state of grunting sub animals digging the soil with their bare hands." --- | Ayn Rand. If you are one who truly believes that reducing CO2 levels in the atmosphere at the expense of protecting the economies of industrialized and developing nations of the world, then I would offer you the chance, now if you can, to purchase of some deserted desert property in Nevada and there live off of only that barren land for the rest of your life.
The United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has demonized carbon dioxide emissions with misleading manufactured information:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/06/dr-tim-ball/the-un-demonized-co2/
There are even more credible scientific studies, using solar activity, that predict the earth to be heading toward a mini-ice age within the next fifteen years. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3156594/Is-mini-ICE-AGE-way-Scientists-warn-sun-sleep-2020-cause-temperatures-plummet.html
Most credible scientists agree that global warming/climate change is a preposterous myth. One such scientist is Ian Rutherford Plimer an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide, and the director of multiple mineral exploration and mining companies. He has published 130 scientific papers, six books and edited the Encyclopedia of Geology
Professor Ian Plimer could not have said it better! If you've read his book you will agree, this is a good summary:
Where Does the Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Really Come From?
PLIMER: "Okay, here's the bombshell. The volcanic eruption in Iceland. Since its first spewing of volcanic ash has, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet - all of you.
Of course, you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress - it's that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life.
I know…. it’s very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kids "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of abroad, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cent light bulbs with $10.00 light bulbs…..well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days.
The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in just four days - yes, FOUR DAYS - by that volcano in Iceland has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon.
And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud at any one time - EVERY DAY.
I don't really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.
Yes, folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over One year - think about it.
Of course, I shouldn't spoil this 'touchy-feely tree-hugging' moment and mention the effect of solar and cosmic activity and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which keeps happening despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change.
And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud, but the fact of the matter is that the bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year.
Just remember that your government just tried to impose a whopping carbon tax on you, on the basis of the bogus 'human-caused' climate-change scenario.
Hey, isn't it interesting how "they" don't mention 'Global Warming' anymore, but just 'Climate Change'.
You know why?
It's because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming bull artists got caught with their pants down.
And, just keep in mind that you might yet have an Emissions Trading Scheme - that whopping new tax - imposed on you that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer. It won't stop any volcanoes from erupting, that's for sure.
But, hey, relax...give the world a hug and have a nice day!"
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION --- Surrendering the Sovereignty of The United States of America
The United States is a nation of immigrants. Much of America’s prosperity is attributed to its diversified population. No other nation attracts immigrants like America because nowhere is there greater opportunity for one to prosper and pursue happiness. However, a controlled immigration process is essential to ensure that the dead beats and rejects do not flood the United States with the problems of the world.
The hidden intent for encouraging illegal immigration is to build an enduring Democrat base of future voters who would owe President Obama and his party their unyielding allegiance. "What kind of country is it that lets those who are not citizens decide who governs those who are? If any foreigner can now vote here, is the United States even a country anymore? If Congress doesn't stop it soon, de facto enfranchising of illegals will be our road to ruin." --- Investor's Business Daily. Illegals casting votes will certainly tip elections. Recently, 70 Ohio elections were nearly tied or decided by a single vote and the 2000 presidential election was decided by only 537 votes in Florida. Consider the election results if millions of illegals tend to overwhelming vote Democratic are allowed into voting booth.
The term “undocumented alien” is a contradiction, an oxymoron if you will. Individuals who are within the United States illegally are clearly in violation of Federal Law and are subject to imprisonment or deportation. Presidents in the past have used massive deportation programs to rid the United States of individuals who were in the country illegally. President Hoover, during his four-year presidency, caused roughly 121,000 persons to be deported or induced to leave through threat of deportation. During President Truman’s nearly eight years in office, about 3.4 million were deported or left "voluntarily" under threat of deportation. President Eisenhower deported officially just over 2.1 million people who were recorded as having been deported or having departed under threat of deportation during Eisenhower’s "Operation Wetback”. These are official statistics. However, the number of deportations appears to have declined significantly during President Obama's administration. This is because we have nearly four and a half million visa over stayers in our country and our only five thousand Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers are unable to deal with the increasing numbers of people already in the United States who have overstayed their authorized visit.
The United States can never hope to make a dent in world poverty by allowing poor people to emigrate from poorer nations. The only common sense solution is not achieved by allowing poor people to immigrate into this country but by promoting better economic conditions within the poor nations of the world.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/LPjzfGChGlE
The only immigration policy that has been proven to work is one that strictly controls our national boarders and at the same time reduces incentives for individuals to immigrate illegally and/or overstay their visas in the United States. The United States must end the perception among illegal immigrants that they will be given safe havens from deportation and will be offered programs of amnesty, free medical care and inclusion into the welfare system, this only encourages more immigrants to cross our boarders illegally. We could not build a boarder fence tall enough that could detour illegals from pursuing the handouts that the United States Government provides to illegal aliens. There are now approximately 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States. Deporting all of them is not practical, even though this has been done in the past but what must be done is that our boarders must become totally secure which is the responsibility of the Federal Government along with reducing incentives for individuals to immigrate illegally into the United States.
Here are some statistics on illegal immigrants for just one state – California. from the Los Angeles Times Newspaper:
40% of all workers in Los Angeles County (Los Angeles County has 10.2 million people) are working for cash and not paying taxes. This is because they are predominantly illegal aliens working without a green card.
95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.
75% of people on the most-wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.
Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal, whose births were paid for by taxpayers.
Nearly 35% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals here illegally.
Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.
The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border.
Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.
21 radio stations in Los Angeles are Spanish speaking.
In Los Angeles County 5.1 million people speak English, 3.9 million speak Spanish. (There are 10.2 million people in Los Angeles County.) (All 10 of the above statements are from the Los Angeles Times)
Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but 29% are on welfare. Over 70% of the United States' annual population growth (and over 90% of California, Florida, and New York) results from illegal immigration. 29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens.
Illegal aliens are taking advantage of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) loopholes to drain the national treasury of billions of dollars to enrich their pockets without even if they do not earn any income of their own.
The IRS doesn't give a damn. It's not their money; it's taxpayer money. See link:
http://videos2view.net/tax-fraud.htm#.USVd0eQItlQ.email
Our boarders are unsecure, drug cartel wars and drug trafficking is allowed to increase unabated along our boarders along Mexico. Our Federal Government is failing in its responsibility to secure our boarders but President Obama and Democrats in Congress could not care less.
https://youtube.googleapis.com/v/za_8TOQFA8o
Thousands of illegal aliens apprehended along the southern border of the United States aren’t even from Mexico. The U.S. Border Patrol calls them “Other Than Mexicans,” and many are citizens of countries that are sponsors of terrorism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vw3HFpOltpw&app=desktop
Final thought -- Why are we cutting benefits for our veterans, no pay raises for our military and cutting our army to a level lower than before WWII, but we are not stopping the payments or benefits to illegal aliens.
By -- Clark Wilson