Just My Opinion - The Patrick Cambio Blog

Is Barrack Obama really a Socialist - Some Clarification?

2009-07-16T04:57:00.000-07:00

I felt the need to do an expose on the reality of President Obama’s real intent, and political direction. Many conservative pundits, politicians, and even I have stated that Barrack H. Obama is a socialist or even a communist.

There are many illustrations prior to, during, and even after the campaign and election, by Obama, that would lead one to believe he is indeed a socialist. Issues like his veiled Marxist like denunciation of people of faith when he stated, “…bitter people in small towns cling to religion…” is a good example. Another is his “nationalization” of the nations largest automobile manufacturer General Motors clearly a socialist move. His insistence on having a national healthcare system by the end of this year, is yet another.

However if you speak to socialists and ask that same question you would be surprised at the answer. No Barack Obama is not a TRUE socialist. According to those like F.N. Brill, National Secretary of the World Socialist Party (US): “Obama is as much a socialist as the Pope is an atheist” or editor of the Socialist Party of U.S.A’s magazine Billy Wharton who states that, “…socialists know that Barack Obama is not one of us. Not only is he not a socialist, he may in fact not even be a liberal. Socialists understand him more as a hedge-fund Democrat — one of a generation of neoliberal politicians firmly committed to free-market policies.”

So which is it, which is correct, those “hysterical” right-wingers or the highly offended left wing socialists? ----------------------- BOTH!

That’s right this persons opinion is they are both right. Barrack is promoting socialist policies just as most of his predecessors have done since Woodrow Wilson. Woodrow Wilson’s administration passed the VERY communist progressive income tax, a major plank of Karl Marx Communist Manifesto, but was President Wilson necessarily a socialist or communist, no I think not. Every president Democrat and Republican, except for maybe one or two, since then has promoted some aspect of socialism.

So why all the consternation, why all the concern by the right, and why are the left so offended and or bothered that the right would even make such accusations about someone they claim they see as being a capitalist?

To answer the first part, primarily it is becoming clear to many conservatives in the Republican Party and independents alike that we are no longer just a welfare state, but close to becoming a total socialist nation. There are others that are using this slight awakening as political leverage to gain votes, but not really caring one way or the other.

Summarily the left and their so-called feelings of being insulted by calling this smooth talker one of them is also two fold, on the one hand there are true socialists, those that believe in utopic socialism, that are offended by the reality that Obama is really pro-capitalist. Then there are those that know just what the story is really all about and that is that socialism is just another tool of the super capitalists to gain more power, so they will do all they can to convince the public that this man is not one of them for fear that they might lose the momentum that has been built by the media, and Hollywood elite in implementing the socialist programs he is proposing.

I know that there may be a few cocked heads that read this thinking, this makes no sense, how can a socialist be a capitalist they are opposing philosophies. That is true in a purely philosophical sense, but not in application, and hence the confusion, but let’s look at the history of virtually every socialist government. Hitler was financed by of all people German banking concerns, and supported by the mainstream media of that country all of which felt that they could control this “little man”. The bank known today as just Chase, once known as Chase-Manhattan bank loaned $20,000,000.00 in gold to Marxist insurgent Vladimir Lenin just prior to the Russian Revolution. The communist Federal Income Tax was promoted and passed the same year that the independent banking system, the Federal Reserve took root and control of our currency, not a coincidence.

The list goes on and on ad infinitum, but the truth is that those groups of people in the top .01% have been controlling our political system for some time now slowly applying Pavlovian type indoctrination (training) to the general public primarily through manipulation of the media but also through our schools of higher learning by way of so-called non-profit foundations, to accept their own slavery.

Obama may be no worse than any other president we have had in the past three decades, but he is the one to move us forward at even a faster pace, he has already begun to nationalize businesses small and large either by direct financial control as he has done with G.M. or veiled through government mandates like the current bill being forced through Congress known as Cap and Trade. Of course he has already bailed out the banks with OUR money, which was never necessary in the first place. Tens of thousands of people have been forced out of their homes due to foreclosure and daddy gov now holds note on most of those homes.

The thing to remember is this, socialism/communism philosophically would be, as it is proposed, utopian, but it is not practical in the real world where greed, lust for money, and power exist. Socialist economy in the hands of this type of person becomes nothing more than another name for Feudal System. The very few at the top (banking families), who control all the money fill the role of royalty, monarchs, and potentates, those that they pay to implement their policies, fill the role of the barons, sheriffs and such (i.e politicians, military leaders, etc) and at the bottom the rest of us the serfs, the peasants, that do all the work and have no way to climb out of that role.

It has been forwarded by some that buy into the “altruistic” plans of elite that they are doing this for the good of all mankind, but are you willing to allow someone else to determine who, what, and where you fit in life? The ONLY system of government that will provide the opportunity to achieve through hard work and dedication at this time is the one that our forefathers set up and that is a Constitutional Republic. Is it perfect, hell no, but there is NOTHING past or present that will allow for individual freedom and protection of the innocent like this system. Once subverted into an economy and legal system ruled from the top down rather than from the people up than we will have lost the stability and meaning of our constitution and no longer will the poor be able to work to change their status in life. Once locked into the entitlement system where people are dependant on the government to provide than there is little to no chance of getting free from that system. In short we would than be vassals of the state.

So in conclusion is Barack Obama a socialist, yes and no. He is a shill for the industrial- banking complex, the Uber-capitalists, applying their directives of socialist enslavement. He is a threat to the freedom of our children, our grand children and us. We have one more year till the next election, we need to be diligent in our watch over Congress, write letters, send e-mails, make phone calls to your representatives and let them know where you stand, and above all vote those in office now that support Obama and the socialist bankers, out. Let them hear the voice of the people as we still have the ability to turn this around, it is not too late. With the grace of God and willingness of the good hardworking people of the nation all can be saved.

Welcome to Marxist America

2009-06-09T07:39:00.000-07:00

I received a call the other day by a really good friend who was curious as to why I have been so quiet on my Blog regarding what is happening in the world today. The conversation led to a discussion about the doomsday prophesies from the Bible, Nostradamus, and even early American Indian cultures like the Mayans and Hopi’s regarding December 12th 2012. Well I don’t know what will happen on that date regarding the world and possible catastrophic happenings, but I can tell you what will happen here in this once great Republic of the United States of America by that date.

In response to why I have been so quiet of late, the answer is quite simple I have been cowed by the media propaganda that has made anyone using terms like conspiracy, socialism, and even simple descriptive words like “liberal” reason for ridicule. I had for the most part given up on “spreading the word” about what is happening and what has already occurred in this country. However, anyone knowing me realizes that I can only stay quiet for so long, especially now that I have grandchildren that I fear will be subjugated to the loss of freedoms we are well on the way to losing.

What we are seeing today is the death of the free enterprise economic system. Our current president and the boot licking Congress are leading us down the path to Marxism. Government now controls GM, the one time model of capitalism and American industry. Over 60% of the ownership of GM is now in the hands of the federal government. GM will be under constant scrutiny and direction by government bureaucrats. This is but one step in the demise of private ownership in this country. The other aspect is the whispered fact that the government now holds note of millions of private property (homes) all over the country, even if sold back to John Q. Public they will effectively hold the mortgages of these homes and subsequently be the true owners.

Sad as it is not one main stream reporter has the intestinal fortitude to admit and publish the truth, however from the once Marxist nation of Russia (USSR) a reporter for Pravda has spoken loud and clear as to what is happening in the U.S. today, and it ain’t pretty. Please read the article that one of JMO’s best contributors Mike Zupkofska posted: Lost in Obamaland, or go directly to the article in Pravda, I believe anyone interested in the truth will find these most interesting.

http://justmyopinion.yuku.com/topic/1774

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-0/

For years I have been asking the question of people just why are some of the wealthiest people in the world pro-socialist. Why is it that a system that seemingly is against massing wealth and power being supported financially and philosophically by these people? The answer is simple, as it was for Hitler, and Stalin, a socialist economy is the most effective way to control the “masses” while the very few at the top have total autonomy.

The system that Obama is forwarding will be the final demise of our once great Republic and will issue in the rise of the Union of Socialist States of America. Watch for discussion on incorporating the U.S., Mexico and Canada in the next few years to a EU style cooperative, that will be the next step. The process was already started by the former president G.W. Bush and was called the S.S.P. or Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America. Even the often time left leaning CNN reported on this and the possible hidden agenda of this agreement.

Obama was asked during the campaign about his thoughts on a North American Union (NAU) and his answer is quite interesting, but not surprising. He feigned ignorance and said that there was nothing he was aware of that supported that idea and yet both he and his wife are affiliated with the Council on Foreign Relations that has been promoting this objective for years, and Bush along with Mexican President Felipe Calderon, and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper had already signed in to S.S.P. agreement just that year, but Obama had not knowledge of this?

2009-03-27T20:29:00.000-07:00

Were there WMD in Iraq?

The simple answer is yes there were, but the question of, when, remains the major debating issue. Were they still there when President Bush ordered the action on Iraq? If they were there just prior to when we went in, where did they go? Or were they even there after 1999-2001 action.

There are a number of neo-conservative web sites that claim some sort of elaborate cover-up regarding the possibility that there were sites where massive amounts of WMD were found shortly after the campaign and due to incompetence with the group(s) involved all those weapons were spirited away by Syrian intelligence with the help of Russian, Chinese, and North Korean intelligence. They claim that the Bush administration covered it up due to embarrassment that they lost all these weapons to the terrorists that they agreed with the democrat hierarchy, who would have been red faced to admit they (the WMD) were there in the first place, not to admit that they found anything.

On the other side of the political spectrum you have the uber-liberal democrat Blogs and web sites that are claiming there were no WMD from 1999 on, and that Saddam was no longer planning on his rebuilding of the Babylonian Empire with force. They dismiss any and all information from the neo-cons as pure fiction.

Maybe there is somewhere, in the middle, that is more a possibility and one supported by a reliable resource, the specialty investigation team from the U.N. called the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC).

I will elaborate on the findings of this report further on in this article, but first I have to ask why this account has NEVER been reported by the media, is ignored by the neo-cons, and not even recognized by those on the left, even though anything U.N. is sacred to them.

First of all there have been numerous reports by the UNMOVIC group, but this is the final one in the investigation of Iraqi WMD, written in 2004, S2004/435. Much of the detail in this report was done just prior to as well as during and after the U.S. invasion into Iraq, which was March 20th to May 1, 2003. It is important to recognize those dates because the timeline drawn in the UNMOVIC reports shows that Iraq DID have WMD right up to and possibly even during the early days of combat in that country. This report is based on investigation from March 1, 2004 to May 31, 2004. So the data included in this report has to do with what Iraq had and where it went.

The first findings of the UNMOVIC report have to do with unmanned aerial vehicle programs and long-range missiles. Here is the actual text from this report.

The Commission’s experts are conducting an investigation in parallel with the
IAEA Iraq Nuclear Verification Office regarding the discovery of items from Iraq
that are relevant to the mandates of UNMOVIC and IAEA at a scrap yard in the
Netherlands. In particular, following a visit of IAEA to a scrap yard in Rotterdam to investigate increased radiation readings, it was discovered, through photographs taken at the time, that engines of SA-2 surface-to-air missiles were among the scrap. They are the type of engines used in the Al Samoud 2 proscribed
missile programme. In addition, a number of items and equipment that may also be relevant to the UNMOVIC mandate were seen among the scrap. The existence of missile engines originating in Iraq among scrap in Europe may affect the accounting of proscribed engines known to have been in Iraq’s possession in March 2003. Both IAEA and UNMOVIC have kept the Security Council informed of this matter.

Please note that it was determined by both the IAEA and UNMOVIC that these long-range missiles were in Iraqi hands at the beginning of the U.S. incursion. How where they moved and who moved them is a question yet to be answered.

It goes on to state:

A team of Commission experts visited the site concerned in the Netherlands
and examined one missile engine that had been salvaged from the scrap metal
process. By comparing the serial production number on the engine with information in the UNMOVIC database, the experts were able to confirm that the engine was one from an SA-2 missile that had been tagged by United Nations inspectors in the past and had not been declared as having been fired.

This proves that a previously tagged WMD that should have been disposed of years before had been kept in Iraq and not disposed of as originally thought.

Representatives of the scrapyard company indicated that a number of similar engines (5 to 12) had been seen in the scrapyard in January and February of this year. More engines could have been processed and passed through the yard unnoticed. Company staff confirmed that other items made of stainless steel and other corrosion-resistant metal alloys bearing the inscription “Iraq” or “Baghdad” had been observed in shipments delivered from the Middle East since November 2003. A number of items were examined and sampled on-site by UNMOVIC experts with a portable metal analyser and were determined to be composed of inconel and titanium — both dual-use materials subject to monitoring. Photographs of other materials bearing Arabic script were taken.

The section I marked in bold clearly shows that these items from Iraq had not arrived till long AFTER the conclusion of the occupation of Iraq by the U.S.

In addition, the Commission is aware from comparative analysis of recent satellite imagery that a number of sites previously known to have contained equipment and materials subject to monitoring have been either cleaned out or destroyed. An example of such imagery is provided in the appendix to the present report. It is not known whether such equipment and materials were still present at the sites(in Iraq) during the time of coalition action in March and April of 2003. However, it is possible that some of the materials may have been removed from Iraq by looters of sites and sold as scrap.

Yes it is possible that looters or maybe Saddam’s henchmen and compatriots in Syria and Lebanon may have removed these during or even after the coalition entry into Iraq, but there is no proof of who took these weapons away.

Again the UNMOVIC report states that Iraq had purchased components for its banned missile program.

There is much evidence that from 1999 to 2002 Iraq procured materials, equipment and components for use in its missile programs. In several instances, the items procured were used by Iraq for programs, such as the production of Al Samoud 2 missiles, that were determined by UNMOVIC in February 2003 to be proscribed. This can be illustrated by the acquisition of at least 380 SA-2 missile engines for Iraq’s prime missile establishment by an Iraqi government-owned trading company controlled by the Military Industrialization Commission through a local Iraqi trading company and a foreign trading company.

Again please note the date.

Lastly the UNMOVIC report mentions the ‘disappearance’ of materials sites and whole buildings during and after the initial assault on Iraq while under satellite surveillance.

While sites in Iraq were being monitored for updates through satellite imagery, it was detected that some sites subject to monitoring by UNMOVIC had been cleaned up and equipment and material had been removed from the sites. In other areas, whole buildings that had previously contained equipment and materials subject to monitoring had been completely dismantled. The work continues to cover all known sites in Iraq.

The bottom line is that both Bush and the neo-cons have essentially given the left an out by claiming they were “misled”, when in fact the intelligence reports from Germany, France, the U.K. as well as Israel’s Mossad and our CIA were in fact correct. Why the subterfuge I have no answer for, however we now have a so-called backlash against conservative representatives that have left this country in the hands of far left proponents.

As I have often stated in my other posts on this site those that have called themselves neo-conservatives are not conservatives at all but in fact liberal lite. It is my opinion that this has been a calculated and well-orchestrated plan to move our country into the hands of socialists. The final push was the economic tumble of the banking and investment market, but that is a discussion for another time.

The Kyklos – Cycle of Government

2009-02-05T11:01:00.000-08:00

For those that are unfamiliar with this term, “The Kyklos” is the phrase used by some classical Greek authors to describe what they saw as the political cycle of governments in a society. It was roughly based on the history of Greek city-states in the same period. The concept of "The Kyklos" is first described in Plato's Republic.

In its simplest form it is the transition from monarchy to aristocracy, to a classical republic, to a democracy, which inevitably evolves into a tyranny. There are several cases of this throughout history with some variation; the most common example is post World War I Germany. Germany went from the monarchy of Bismarck to Wiemar Republic, which evolved into a Democracy to the tyranny of the Nazi Third Reich. Another example and in fact the classic one that Socrates based his concept was Athens itself. Athens started out as a monarchy, moved to republican reform of government, then moved to pure democracy and than tyranny. Socrates saw this cycle in his own lifetime as it move back and forth from tyranny to democracy and back again.

Why is this so important a topic for me? Simply because we are seeing a repeat of this cycle here in our own country. Obviously the cycle is not absolute and can be changed as it was for Athens and even Germany. So being aware of the tendency to move in this pattern is necessary to keep it from happening in the manner of other great cultures, including that of Rome, another example of “The Kyklos”.

Here is the problem though, most people when asked today what form of government we have they will tell you quite proudly “a democracy”, when in fact that is NOT what the founding fathers had in mind for our system of government. The 13 original colonies, which each became independent states, were joined in union as one nation each with its own representation within a SMALL federal government, controlled by a strict set of rules designated in the constitution as a REPUBLIC.

As with the Athenian and Roman models above, the United States of America started out under a monarchy, from there we became a republic, and as of the early part of the twentieth century we moved toward being a democracy and moving ever so steadily toward tyranny.

Time has changed some of the physical conditions of the nation, such as the addition of thirty-seven more states as well as transportation and communication technologies making distances, societal interaction and commerce more available. And the argument for those that have promoted the evolution of our Constitutional Republic to a Democracy has been that these changes have “required” like changes in government.

Under the guise of “for the public good” the federal government has grown not just in bureaucracy but also in power. Few people recognize that until 1913 we had no Federal Income tax, we were not tied to a pseudo private banking conglomerate that has the same economic result as being under the control of a banking oligarchy. We have so many “investigative” branches that when uttered in full they are reminiscent of alphabet soup, CIA, FBI, NSA, NCIS, DEA, and on and on. Now all of these are supposedly under the control of one agency, Home Land Security. Just yesterday our new president put a cap on the wages of corporate CEO’s ushering in the age of New Socialist America. Some politicians, including Obama, have already told us that the constitution is effectively out of date and needs revamping. In other words they want to erase the limitations of federal government that our forefathers expressly put in there to keep us from being a democracy and eventually a tyranny.

I have often used the quote from George Santayana and I will once again remind everyone because it rings so true, “Those that cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” God help us if we as a society refuse to see the warning signals and keep in the direction we are going, for if we do, your children and grandchildren will be living in a despotic government, with little or no concern for individual rights, but only that of the state.

Historic Day in America

2008-11-05T07:26:00.001-08:00

November 4th 2008 was a historic day in United States for several reasons. The first of which and tremendously important to all the citizens of this country was the choice that was made for president of the most powerful country in the world. Barrack Obama, being a man of color represents a turning point in race relations and make up of the country. Through his election the onus of America being a racist nation, more so for people of color within it, than how it was perceived by the rest of the country, is over.

For years the old guard liberal hew and cry was that America was a white man controlled, racist nation incapable of understanding the plight of the Black man. It was a doctrine that the “Man” was forever holding them down, and that most Whites had a grievance with all people of color. This was used to initiate, affirmative action, and other racist programs supposedly designed to “level the playing field”. No longer does this argument hold water. Without the support and votes of a strong majority of white voters Obama would not have been elected.

This event is historic in another way. This is America’s first Marxist president.

Obama’s statements past and present reflect such ideals as, “redistribution of wealth”, and that there are, “too many restrictions in the constitution”, his words not mine. The redistribution of wealth is right from the foundation of Marxist ideology and the statement that there are too many restrictions in the constitution shows me that Obama has little understanding of the intent of our forefathers.

The Constitution was intentionally set up as being restrictive. It was made to limit the power of a central government from making a one-size fits all decision for the whole country. It was designed to give each state and community the CHOICE to decide for them selves what is best for them. It was restrictive in that it gives the power to the people, power to speak freely without repercussion, power to seek out that which makes them happy or to worship in whichever manner they want without interference from government.

With the Congress being controlled by Democrat representatives Obama will have a virtual open door to appoint judges that will in turn rule on constitutional issues with a bias toward “wealth re-distribution”. This is not conjecture on my part but in fact based on an interview with Obama in which he openly stated that one of his frustrations was the courts did not do enough to rule on the redistribution of wealth.

Again he has espoused a very negative view of our constitution and the role of the judicial branch of the government. If we are to survive this onslaught and attack on our basic freedoms and rights as listed in the constitution we must make our representatives aware that we see what the potential dangers in making the judicial branch of government a tool to undo the meaning and significance of that constitution.

This election IS historic, not to say all in a positive way, but could be a wake up call to all of us that cherish or freedoms and rights. Let’s not allow the positive aspect of this election to be tarnished with the possible erasure of our constitutional rights.

Although I am not a supporter of President elect Obama’s voting record or his campaign rhetoric I have a hope that he will not be as far left as he has appeared to many of us that are conservative and/or libertarian and pray that his vision is clear and his choices for our future are imbued with wisdom.

God Bless and good luck Mr. President.

Jefferson On Religion

2008-09-16T06:25:00.000-07:00

For some reason last week while in deep contemplation the thought of Jeffersonian religious thought invaded my meditation, which led me to reflect on what is meant by freedom of religion, and the separation of church and state, maybe due to the fact that some of the most celebrated Christian Holidays are coming up soon.

Although Jefferson was a Christian, in that he thought that Christ’s teachings were, "outlines of a system of the most sublime morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man." he was often accused of being a libertine, or an atheist, because of his rather unorthodox approach to “religion”. He is often times referred to as a Deist, in other words, Jefferson believed in the existence of a Supreme Being who was the creator, and sustainer of the universe and the ultimate ground of being, but this was not the triune deity of orthodox Christianity, he did not believe in the divinity of Jesus, even though as stated above he held that Jesus was the greatest of moral teachers.

The reason I bring up his personal belief is that I feel it is reflected in his statements regarding putting up a “wall between church and state”. He rightfully accused religions of the past of using their “power” for tyrannical control over a populous, and that government that established a “state” religion where guilty of the same tyrannical despotism.

What I have argued in the past, as have others who consider themselves Christians, is that our country was founded on Christian principles, and therefore the exclusion of the mention of Christian holidays, celebrations, and moral imperatives, such as the case against abortion, is contrary to the original intent of the founding fathers.

The argument on the other side of the debate states that the founding fathers and in particular Jefferson wanted no mention of ANY religion in the schools, or in any public institution. That religion was personal and should be kept separate.

Both are valid interpretations, but taken to the extreme on both sides.

Jefferson’s writings and statements I feel have been taken out of context to forward the thinking of the “no religious mention at all in public” types. For instance one quote (half quote) that is often used is one in which involved the Elementary School Act of 1817. The partial quote they use is: "No religious reading, instruction or exercise, shall be prescribed or practiced [in the elementary schools]…

However the whole quote says something quite different.

"No religious reading, instruction or exercise, shall be prescribed or practiced [in the elementary schools] inconsistent with the tenets of any religious sect or denomination."

This is quite different than banning all mention of religion in public schools, but in fact ONLY states that the banning of ANY books or materials regardless of subject (including that of a religious nature) is not acceptable, that any particularly denominational instruction or exercise, such as saying the Our Father, or reciting the Koran as a required function of everyday procedure was not to be allowed. However It did not ban the personal prayer in a school or government edifice.

The anti-religion groups have interpreted the separation of church and state in the severest of terms, to completely remove all mention and public expression of religion, using Jefferson’s criticism of organized church as their foundation. However, Jefferson although not a Christian by orthodox standards also believed that the decision was up to the individual AND COMMUNITY and that in a free society that expression was not to be suppressed in ANY way in particular by Federal Government edict.

Jefferson stated in a letter to Samuel Miller in 1808: "I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from inter-meddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the United States. Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise or to assume authority in religious discipline has been delegated to the General (Federal) Government. It must then rest with the states, as far as it can be in any human authority."

On the other side of the argument are the fundamentalist Christians that insist that Christianity, in particular, is the foundation of the country and those things such as prayer in school, the national celebration of Christmas et.al were understood to be a major part of this countries culture.

The truth is that religious Holiday celebration such as Christmas was outlawed in Puritan New England until 1856, so six of the thirteen original colonies didn’t even allow Christmas celebration as we do today. This restriction was based on the RELIGIOUS principles of the Puritan controlled government, and more than likely one of the things that Jefferson so abhorred. However it was the states that chose this restriction and not the Federal Government.

Things such as the Pledge of Allegiance didn’t have the statement One Nation under God until 1954 or in God we trust on our money until 1957, both initiated due to the Cold War fear of Godless communism.

In summation both sides have valid points, and both appear to be using Jefferson as their Champion, however if Jefferson’s writings are taken as a whole and not expurgated or take out of context the separation of religious practice and government went BOTH ways. Neither group should hold judgment or control over the other. To ban the FREE expression of a religious event of ANY denomination or belief system was in his mind as repugnant as civil law being decided on by any religious group or Church.

Can We Drill Our Way Out of the Oil Crisis

2008-08-13T05:55:00.000-07:00

The simple answer is no we can’t, however here is a better question. Can we, as a nation, afford to not drill for more oil here while we transition to alternative energy platforms?

The answer to that is the same, no we can’t, on several levels. The first and foremost is plain and simple economic reasons. While some politicians claim that we should focus strictly on finding, and implementing alternative energy sources, and just “bite the bullet” putting up with a “little inconvenience” for a while, they are neglecting to mention that what they consider a “little inconvenience”, to some is the choice between having heat in their home vs. having food on the table.

Americas productivity, and economic strength has been, and is still dependent on “cheap energy”. Up until the mid 70’s that was the case, and the U.S. economy was its strongest when we had cheap energy, and as we have seen, manufacturing, especially, was hurt when escalating costs, and limited supply became a factor since then. A number of factors played into the loss of this “cheap energy”, starting with the divestiture of Oil Company owned wells in the Mid East, and then the subsequent rules, and regulations imposed on U.S. oil companies domestically added to the problem. This would not have been too important an issue as technology came up with an alternative that “could save the day”, nuclear power.

So what happened to that new technology? Congress is what happened, scare tactics from many sources, especially groups like Greenpeace, pushed to have the technology buried. I can go into all the reasons they claimed, but suffice it to say the cost/emissions/waste arguments are all specious, but they prevailed anyway, because the media picked up their banner, and ran with it without any true research into the facts, and the general public bought into the scare tactics, and summarily Congress reflected this in bills that would essentially stop all future production of nuclear power as an alternative to fossil fuel sources.

Add to the erroneous treatment of nuclear as an alternative, that same group of Greenies, where well on the way to stopping the construction of refineries in the United States, further hindering our ability to produce cheap energy. In fact due to aging facilities we actually have 20% fewer oil refineries today than we did in the 70’s.

So what was/is the fallout? Well there are numerous repercussions many not felt right away, but over time, as we see now they are devastating. Over the past thirty years it has cost us our once unmatched manufacturing industry, which in turn cost American’s jobs, and subsequently forcing U.S. businesses into foreign lands in order to be able to maintain their profits. Some of those jobs were absorbed into the “services” industry, but now with oil reaching far over the $100.00 a barrel cost, we are now seeing even the services industries like trucking, and other forms of transportation being adversely affected, and in turn the cost of goods including food are also increasing. Add to this the cost of business, heating and cooling offices, stores, warehouses etc. And the consumer with rising fuel costs, for travel, work commute, heating, food, and a myriad of other expenses can no longer afford to spend as we once did. Once again we see more loss of income, and jobs for the average middle class American. It is a cascading effect that will eventually destroy not only our quality of life, but if not stopped the country itself, along with all our freedoms. Which is the second reason for more domestic drilling - security. By our continued use of foreign sources for oil we are at risk of being shut off, which can have devastating effects, i.e. the gas crunch in the 70’s, and also impact our national security.

Now some of our elected leaders are telling us we need to deal with a “little inconvenience” while we transition to new technologies for energy. How much more will we as a country be able to sustain before we loose what little manufacturing and service industry we have left?

Can we drill our way out of the problem - no emphatically NO, but we need to maintain our ability to sustain our current businesses as well as the quality of life for middle, and lower class working families. Allowing American oil companies to drill for more domestic petroleum, and by lifting restrictions on refineries, and nuclear power, while we develop new technologies to get away from the use of petroleum energy is necessary. Providing tax incentives to oil companies, and other domestic energy producing companies instead of taxing them more, which will only trickle back down to those that are most affected, the lower, and middle class, would be the intelligent, practical, and safe way to proceed.

Affirmative Action - A Racist Policy

2008-06-19T06:07:00.000-07:00

Most people who will read the title of this post will think the usual, that I am going to engage in the “backlash” or “reverse discrimination” argument, sorry I’m not going there, in fact it might surprise people, but affirmative action is white racism against blacks.

In my minds eye I can see the shocked look on people reading this, but in truth this is the case. Think about this for a moment, has ANY other group had to have quotas drawn up in order to excel in business or schooling? No, even the Irish when they came to this country, when they were met with “Irish need not apply” didn't need government intervention to get beyond this. Did the Asian population that came here (many as slave labor and/or indentured servants) need to have the government mandate quotas for them to build their businesses or attend the schools of their choice? No, not one group of people that came here willingly or as forced labor have been subject to being labeled as “required” to be hired to fill a quota.

What the white establishment, starting with LBJ, and furthered by Richard Nixon, which was the first president to establish “quotas” for federal government employment, and carried on through today are saying, is that if you are black you don’t have the ability to make it on your own. Harsh accusation you may say, but it really isn’t, it is sadly the innate racism that is subconsciously taught to most Anglos. I do not believe that it is an intentional slight to those of color, but never the less it is what it is - racism.

Historically we should have known this, as a similar, “white guilt” scenario played out hundreds of years ago regarding the native peoples in the northeast part of this continent in which, the bleeding hearts of the day chagrined at the treatment of these people decided that they would help by giving them food and clothing, just enough to help them subsist, and inevitably those brave hunters stopped hunting, and became the first victims of welfare.

My belief is that this type of pandering is meant not to really erase bigotry, but to garner votes and to quell white guilt. Social Welfare programs directed at people of color, employment quotas, and other “free ride” measures are in fact more detrimental to those of color than they are helpful. Regardless of what skin color you have, if you find that you can “get over” on the system, and receive a living, or get ahead without having to really work at it you will take that route. In some cases many of the poor, white, and black have found that it is easier to live in relative poverty (by U.S. standards) and not have to work, but still be able to feed your family and enjoy certain “luxuries” sufficient.

On the flip side of this there are those that poverty is not acceptable regardless of the color of their skin. One huge example that comes to mind is a Black woman by the name of Madam Sarah Walker. Ms. Walker was the FIRST female millionaire, black or white in the U.S. She did this in a time that there were no affirmative action programs, and not even many anti-discrimination laws, and in the south, to boot. According to the liberal racists in our country without their help no black person should be able to do this.

We have just come out of Black History month not long ago, and if anyone bothered to listen to some to the programs on T.V. or read about the accomplishments of many Black entrepreneurs, politicians, scientists, educators, and military hero’s they would have noticed that the vast majority of them did this in a free society unburdened with discriminatory affirmative action programs. They didn’t need whiteys help to excel, or become wealthy, all they needed was the OPPORTUNITY to do so, and even in a nation that has a long history of prejudice they did accomplish much, and maybe it was just that environment of adversity that made them strong.

Like all the people that have migrated here or came here as forced labor, people of color should have the same rights and privileges as everyone else, there is no doubt about that, but to mandate employment, or to provide handouts to any group is NOT helping them, but trapping them in a never ending cycle of dependence, dependence on government, and not on them selves. Providing people, any people, with handouts does not encourage them to excel, but in fact does the opposite, it locks them into a pseudo-comfort zone that invariably is stagnant and unproductive.

Like most liberal thinking the desire, and intent to help is honorable, but the implementation of the laws/mandates are typically counter productive, and in fact do more to harm to those that they are trying to help, than good.

Health Care Costs - Why is it so high?

2008-06-03T09:46:00.000-07:00

This election has brought a number of issues to the table but one in particular that is a concern for many Americans is the rising cost of health care. Obama, Hillary and even McCain want to get government involved in some form of other, not that is bad, just that we need to be cautious as to what kind of involvement.

Obama’s plan has some good points regarding reduction of cost, including electronic records keeping, and is the most detailed plan I have seen from the three candidates. Although not the same as the Canadian or U.K. socialist health care it would be another Washington run bureaucracy, destined to cost more to run than what it would save on the other end.

Hillary actually has a rather interesting plan, at least at face value, she plans of providing tax cuts to all those that have health care insurance and opening up the same insurance programs, until now only available to members of Congress to the general public. The problem with her plan is that it doesn’t get to the root of the problem and that is, why is the cost so high to begin with, again a band-aid on a wound that needs to be sutured.

McCain’s plan is strikingly similar to Hillary’s plan however he has added a little more meat and potatoes to his plan by supporting tort reform to help lower the cost of health care and modernization of records systems. This is a good start, but not the entire picture of WHY our costs are through the roof.

The knee jerk attitude of many is to blame the insurance companies. Believe me when I say I have no love for insurance companies, but they are NOT the prime cause for the escalating costs, but merely a secondary symptom of what is truly ailing the countries health care system. Much like the oil companies being blamed for the increase in fuel costs the insurance companies are being made the fall guy for the problems with health care.

Malpractice suits have been another knee jerk answer for the increasing health care costs but in truth the cost of medical insurance for doctors to protect themselves from malpractice is less that 1% of the current costs. However it does play a role in other respects that I will discuss later in this article.

So what are the real causes you ask? There is no simple answer to the problem, no silver bullet to kill the inflationary monster of health care, but a series of issues some of which we ourselves are to blame.

The major reason for increase in these costs is something many of us would not expect or even think of, and that is TOO MUCH health care. We have become a nation of hypochondriacs in many ways, we go to the doctor or hospital for ailments that we think we may have because of some ad or some documentary we saw on TV last night.

To further exacerbate the issue doctors are ordering tests and medications that are unnecessary and/or even harmful and causing other illness. It is not because doctors are trying to milk the patient for more money, because in most cases the doctor receives no moneys for these tests. So why do they do it? Simply because of the aforementioned issue about malpractice suits. In order to avoid these suits doctors are doing more tests and issuing more medications in the belief that if it APPEARS that they are doing all they can the patient will be less likely to sue.

There are some doctors however that DO over proscribe medications for personal gain, fortunately not many, but enough to cause concern. The era of “specialization” has also been a factor in that these doctors are paid by the case, furthering the number of surgeries and or procedures that may not be always necessary. Again I want to stress here that this is but a fraction of the doctors in this country, but still a concern and an expense in both dollars and lives in some cases.

There are some other issues that are causing these increases, some recognizable and some not so apparent. One of those less apparent is the cost of records keeping. The vast majority of hospitals have not switched to electronic records keeping and this slows the process down to be able to access and transfer patient data. Medications and previous test results as well as patient histories are being lost or to slow to arrive, once again costing us millions of dollars in proper medical care.

Pharmaceutical companies are also to blame. Their advertising has people running to their doctors for the latest magic bullet remedy. Add to this the control U.S. pharmaceutical companies have on the FDA and Congress. They have effectively stopped the import of many drugs from competing companies from other nations giving them a virtual monopoly on the industry. They have also hidden the fact that many of the drugs we take for one ailment of another are no better than some of grandma’s remedies.

Holistic medicines and health care are equally being sloughed off as “witch doctor” treatments. One example is the thousands of cases of chronic back pain. Today’s practitioners of medicine arbitrarily recommend spinal fusion, yet there has been no independent testing done to prove that this procedure actually works. Another example is carpel tunnel syndrome which medical doctors recommend surgery as the only answer. Both of these conditions I have personally seen and experienced being corrected by chiropractic and until fairly recent this form of treatment wasn’t even covered by most insurance companies.

I’m sure that there may be other factors involved like the illegal alien use of hospitals and never paying, and although part of the problem, I feel that it is one that we may not see an end to, due to the fact that none of the mainstream candidates nor enough in Congress want to stop this particular problem, it would be best that we focus on the main issues that I have mentioned above.

So how do we fix these problems?

1. Tort reform to lessen the inclination for doctors to over proscribe, as well as cut the cost of malpractice insurance.
2. Require all hospitals, clinics and private practice doctors to maintain electronic records keeping in order to facilitate less costly and quicker more accurate records keeping.
3. Open up our borders to allow foreign drug companies to compete in this market. This will not only lower prices due to competition but also possibly open up new remedies that previously have not been allowed in this country.
4. Tied into this is to restrict the pharmaceutical companies regarding their involvement with the FDA and AMA.
5. Disallow medical practitioners from owning stock in pharmaceutical companies. This removes any possible complicity on the part of doctors to proscribe needless drugs.
6. Restrict Doctors from being paid by the case and instead provide a salary a couple of the more prestigious hospitals are now doing.
7. And finally as with any issue research and education for the public and the medical industry on alternative remedies and cures.

Cost of Oil - How and Why?

2008-05-08T08:05:00.000-07:00

I have read dozens of articles on predictions, reasons, and effects of the huge cost of oil today, and none of them seem to explain WHY the prices have more than tripled in the last two years, other than “fear” that we will soon run out of oil due to the increasing growth and demand in China and India. Frankly I am at a loss as to all the reasons why and can only speculate that there is something more than “fear” of running out of fossil fuels, that has triggered these prices.

Think about this, Mobil/Exxon, Shell and many more of the large oil conglomerates are investing in “alternative” fuels, such as hydrogen and bio-fuels, like ethanol. Major automobile companies are also switching gears to create vehicles that run on these fuels, or electric power. Toyota with their decade long investment in hybrid cars, Honda, GM and Ford all rolling out hybrids. GM is also looking at all electric, which they already had pretty much done in the 70’s but found little INTEREST and was too cost prohibitive due to the technology of that time regarding battery power. Today they are working with a Watertown MA, company that has developed or is in the final stages of developing a lithium-ion battery that is cost effective, reliable, safe, and long lived. Germany and other European countries have rolled out hydrogen based public transportation developed by a consortium of Euro-oil companies (Shell being one), BMW, and government agencies. Shell has also setup Beta Sites for hydrogen fueled vehicles here in the U.S. based in California and Washington D.C.

What is my point in mentioning all this? Simply that until there is a serious demand for alternative fuels none of these programs will come to fruition. Point in case is the GM attempt in the 70’s to produce and market an all-electric car – no one wanted it. My feeling is that the high oil prices is an attempt by oil companies, auto manufacturers, and other fossil fuel dependent business to create a market more open to development and sales of these alternative energy sources.

Unfortunately petroleum will still be a necessity for years to come due to the fact that it is not just used in the production of fuel, but also used in products that we use every day, from plastics to cosmetics, to even pharmaceutical products. It is my feeling that once a better fuel market has been established we will see a marked drop in crude oil prices but this will take years to happen.

In the meantime the poor and middle class will suffer the most, as they will not have the finances to be able to keep up with the rising costs of products and services due to the increase in prices due to transportation and production costs. This has me concerned in that it will give an excuse for the government to increase its involvement into the lives of the citizen population. The paradox is that this would be the right thing to do, to assist as a temporary situation, but as we have seen from the past once a “safety net” or entitlement is in place it never leaves and once again the government becomes more of the Nanny state than previous.

I do not think that the crude oil price increase is due to some sort of calculated conspiracy to grow government, but I do think that it will afford some of our politicians the opportunity to take advantage of the situation, and that we should be cautious of how our elected officials will deal with the inevitable repercussions of the crude oil increases.

JMO - Sound Off

2008-03-25T09:46:00.000-07:00

JMO - Sound Off

Cost of Illegal Immigration

2008-01-02T10:17:00.000-08:00

As those who read my posts here, and on JMO – Sound Off, know, one of my biggest issues with our current government is total lack of action regarding illegal immigration. It has been brought up to me on several occasions the totally erroneous statement that “it would cost too much to round up and deport these criminals out of the country”. I have yet to see figures that prove this by those that hold to that argument. I, on the other hand, have seen proof of it being completely the opposite - it costs us more to allow them to stay than it would to deport them all – all 12-20 million of them.

The Council on Immigration Studies estimated in 2004 the annual cost of illegal immigration to be somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 BILLION dollars, that was three years ago. This study is reflected by other studies such as the 1997 National Research study, the 1998 Urban Institute study, and even the Inspectors Generals office of the Treasury. Research findings where gathered from the Census Bureau and the National Research council. Also I might remind those reading this that at the time of this study there were an estimated 8.7 million illegal aliens in the country and that has nearly doubled since then and continues to grow at an estimated 500,000 more a year, thereby increasing the studies estimate to 20 Billion plus a year.

For those interested in reading the study: http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html

These studies deal primarily with the direct effects of illegal immigration as it relates to taxes, welfare, and job loss for legal American’s, however there are other hidden cost’s that are not taken into account. Some of those not mentioned in this or other studies include the misuse of hospital services, primarily on the border, but are now happening all over the U.S. in which these social leaches are using medical services and NEVER paying for it. The extreme criminal element from street gang violence and drug dealing (supported, by the way, by subversive terrorists groups like MEChA) as well as murders, and rapes has cost millions of dollars in destruction and loss of life. Add to this the FACT that 30% of the current U.S. prison population is illegal immigrants primarily from Mexico, of which the American taxpayer is paying for their incarceration. Add these all up and we are looking at an estimated 340 BILLION a year, a hundred billion more than the most critical liberal think tanks claim it would cost to depart them all.

And that is still not the entire picture, each year dozens of law enforcement people are killed or severely injured by these malcontents and asinine laws like the current law in Los Angeles California which restricts law enforcement from going after these people for immigration violations, further prohibit the just imprisonment and expulsion of these individuals. These laws are also repeated in cities like New York, Chicago, and even San Diego, Houston, and Boston, making our major cities virtual havens of crime.

Which brings me to my next point the “how” would I propose to round up and deport theses people if they are all “underground”. But first it is important to bring up the liberal side of the argument that claims it would be too expensive to validate my earlier statement. Their argument is based on “studies” by liberal think tanks like the Center for American Progress, that have projected a cost of some 230 to 250 billion over a five year period and on the surface that would seen to validate their argument however they are basing this on employing “mass deportation”, with only a small change in strengthening law enforcement practices, which is NOT what I am advocating, Even they admit that with just this ONE change the result would be a 10-20% voluntary exodus out of the country by illegals.

Now let’s look at what can be done to truly effect “voluntary” deportation. First we must enact legislation that turns around several of the laws in place that enable the illegals, such as the ridiculous restrictions on local law enforcement to go after illegal immigrants. Second we need to refine, and redefine the 14^th amendment that makes any child born in the U.S. an automatic citizen. Third we need to increase and enforce fines and penalties on employers that hire illegals. We also need to mandate that anyone using certain hospital and/or welfare services, other than emergencies, must have some form of proof of legal residence in the U.S. such as a valid drivers license. These steps alone will not totally correct the problem, but will probably increase voluntary deportation by another 20-30%, or even more, meaning that almost half those here illegally will have no more reason to be here, as they can no longer suck off the government teat, and will have to return to where they came from.

As for the seriously criminal element like the rapists, murderers, terrorists, and drug dealers we treat them as we would ANY criminal, once found guilty they should be incarcerated and when completing their sentence they be immediately deported with the caveat that if caught back in the country illegally they will be subject to the death penalty. Of course we also need to erect a truly protective fence between our southern borders and increase our border enforcement on both the northern and southern borders, or all of this will be a meaningless exorcise.

For some these recommendations may seem severe, but we are talking about the cultural, and economic survival of our country as well as our sovereignty. We should be treating this as we would any invasion, as that is just what this is - an invasion - by those only interested in pillaging our nation of it’s wealth and for many like those that are loyal to the Mexico First extremists like MEChA to also conquer our nation, and turn it into a subdivision of Mexico.

Rich elite - Socialists?

2007-11-23T15:03:00.000-08:00

In one of the boards that I frequent and am an administrator a member brought up the issue that Democrats are the party of the rich and another brought up the fact that the Republican's are not much better. No surprise to me I have been saying this for years.

Does anyone ever wonder why those that are the richest people in the world promote socialism? Everyone from Warren Buffet, to the Hollywood elite, we see a continual assault on the free market economy and promotion of socialist policy.

Many people are confused as to the difference between capitalism, socialism, and free market economies. Most assume that free market is capitalism but that is not true. Capitalists may have gained their wealth through free market, but they are not one in the same. Once many (not all, such as those like Forbes and a few others) have gained the financial where with all to be able to control whole countries they are dedicated to maintaining that power by locking the door behind them and the method of doing this is the new feudalism called socialism.

Socialism contrary to common belief does NOT tax the rich to balance the books sort to speak. The theory of “redistribution” in an of itself makes sense, but in fact those that make the decision as to who should be “taxed” are those that are in power already and typically it is those that are wealthy. They are not about to give up their wealth, and therefore their power to this altruistic “redistribution” of wealth.

What has ALWAYS happened whether it be the Soviet Union, China, or here in the Socialist States of America is that the middle class is the one paying the bills. The elite tell us that we need to give to HELP those in need, they structure taxation so that they have the loop holes to avoid paying while we all sit here year after year trying to figure out how we can make ends meet.

The sad part is that these uber-rich have the money to promote programs that sound good and play on our sympathies where we feel obligated to follow their lead. However they have the money to throw out a thousand here, and thousand there, where we are looking at just making next months mortgage or rent.

Each election year we are faced with a decision in this country as to who will do the best for the common good. and each year we are confronted by politicians that float in circles. and hobnob with these rich elite, if not one themselves. The old saying of a "chicken in every pot" is quite telling here because we have a group of politicians most of which are playing to the new “downtrodden” the illegal immigrants, and trying to make them the new voting block that will get them elected, or at least keep them in power.

Truth be told most people haven’t the time or the patience to sift through the machinations that our politicians weave their way through it is time we had a third of fourth party that at the very least hold the feet of the other two parties to the fire.

He's Our Uncle Not Our Dad

2007-09-19T06:37:00.000-07:00

Once again we the citizens of Massachusetts are facing more tax increases. As the cost of home heating oil increases, due to the stock market speculator frenzy, and oil company greed, both domestic, and foreign, our state government wants to increase our gas tax by another 11 cents a gallon. This will not only affect the individual, but town operating budgets, as they have to pay the going rate for fuel used in police cruisers, fire trucks, and ambulances, highway, and park department vehicles, etc.

I for one want to know just where the hell our money is going to, on not just a local level, but state and federal as well. Our roads, and bridges country wide are crumbling, our health care system is in shambles, and getting worse, with cuts being made in Medicare, and Medicaid, which only exacerbates the issue, doctors, and hospitals are having to increase their fees to a point where even the average middle class can’t afford it, let alone the poor.

The question I asked above was intended to be rhetorical, as I DO know where the money is going. What we are seeing today is the result of the let Daddy Sam, (once Uncle Sam, but elevated by liberals, neo-cons, Republican, and Democrat alike to parent status), be in charge of our financial “well-being” from cradle to grave. It is also the folly of both parties that have allowed undocumented (illegal) immigrants to come into, and remain in our country, draining our health care, and S.S.I, not to mention filling our jails with murderers, thieves, and drug dealers, again costing us the law abiding tax paying citizens even more.

Add to this the plain, and simple fiscal reality that sending a dollar to a central organization (IRS) that then has to hire thousands of employees to re-distribute the wealth, as well as handle the reams of paperwork and bureaucratic red tape required to manage, staff, and execute this socialist redistribution of wealth, only comes back to us as a dime. We also have the Fed (Federal Reserve Bank – a private corporation) that manipulates our market, and usurps the governments role in printing, and distributing our currency, all the while charging us interest on those same moneys that they neither incur cost for printing, distribution, or backing.

This is a rather simplistic laundry list of reasons for our current situation, but the bottom line is that our politicians from both parties are moving us from a free enterprise system to controlled socialist/capitalist market. I know that sounds contradictory, the use of socialist and capitalist together, but it is not. The system we are now heavily entrenched in is much like the fascist socialism of Nazi Germany. It is a system where the middle class is reduced to a working class poor, the poor are subsidized to maintain a voting block to keep in power the wealthy elite, and further entrench, and protect the uber-wealthy.

Take a look at this list of taxes, which by the way is not complete as it does not include numerous other taxes called fees, as well as county taxes that many areas of the country also have to pay out too, many of which did not exist fifty-sixty years ago when this country was experiencing the greatest growth of the middle class, as well scientific and manufacturing growth in the history of the world and none of which existed a hundred years ago and we were the most prosperous nation in the world, and we had NO national debt.

Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
Social Security Tax
Medicare Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax
School Tax
Sales Taxes (State and Local)
Real Estate Tax
Property Tax
Building Permit Tax
Well Permit Tax
Septic Permit Tax
Utility Taxes
Severance Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Accounts Receivable Tax
Privilege Tax
Inventory Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel permits tax
Inheritance Tax
Capital Gains Tax
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Service Charge Taxes
Telephone federal excise tax
Telephone federal universal service fee tax
Telephone federal, state, and local surcharge taxes
Telephone minimum usage surcharge tax
Telephone recurring and non-recurring charges tax
Telephone state and local tax
Telephone usage charge tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Trailer registration tax
Road Toll Booth Taxes
Toll Bridge Taxes
Toll Tunnel Taxes
Watercraft registration Tax
Gasoline Tax (state and federal)
Road Usage Taxes (Truckers)
Dog License Tax
Fishing License Tax
Hunting License Tax
Cigarette Tax

More than half of our pay goes to some form of tax, and if you are a union employee take out another 1-3 % for union dues, than take out your cost for health insurance, and what are you left with? Back when we did not have all these taxes it only took ONE person in the family to provide, now both adults and sometimes the children also need to work when they are of age or both parents need to work more than one job. Ask yourself if in fact the quality of life has improved with all these government programs. Ask yourself why the percentage of poor has INCREASED not decreased with all the so-called war on poverty programs that were initiated in the mid –sixties till now. Ask yourself why we have to work longer hours and why one parent can't stay home to raise the children.

One last thing we need to ask ourselves, why is it that the vast majority of the super-wealthy in the world support socialism and a socialist economy?

Mattel Recalls Toys Again

2007-08-15T05:41:00.000-07:00

It appears that there is a lot of controversy in this latest recall of toys from Mattel. The talking heads from both sides of the political spectrum appear to be waving their particular flag expounding on the evils of one thing or another.

The purveyors of the “nanny state” form of government are of course issuing statements to the effect, “this is the result of capitalism”. Their argument is that due to the greed of corporations like Mattel they have ignored the potential hazards to our children. And of course they are also finding fault with the Bush administration because the CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) has been under funded and hasn’t had a department head (commissioner) for months and the only candidate that the Bush administration has recommended was a former manufacturing lobbyist.

The other side of the political spectrum is arguing that this is the fault of many administrations, including that of Pappa Bush and Clinton as well. They feel that those who are advocating “global economy” and have pushed agreements like NAFTA and GATT are the culprits. Their argument is that by handing off most of our manufacturing to off shore plants quality has diminished because of the lack of oversight and good old-fashioned American know-how.

Both groups are in agreement that the bottom line is greed and avarice. The businesses, wholesale manufacturing and retail giants like Wal Mart and K-Mart/Sears et al are the cause of this malaise. However some are also pointing the finger at the consumer - you and I, as well.

I am one of those that agree with that last statement. My opinion is that all of the above mentioned is the problem. We have an agency (CPSC) that was formed in the mid seventies that has been steadily losing funding and has had little leadership, and the growing advocacy for a “global market” by our politicians, as well as corporations looking to “grow” their business (cute euphemism for make more money) are all at least partly at fault. But the bottom line and driving factor for all the above is us, yes, you, and I, the consumer.

We can sit here and admonish our politicians and crucify the CEO’s of business, but in fact we are the ones that are asking for cheaper and cheaper product, we are the ones that flood the stores at Christmas, and other times of the year as well, to buy the latest Barbie Doll or Game Boy, or other products that the Jones might have. We have to be the first on our block to own this thing or that, we don’t want our kids to feel “left out” because they don’t have the latest sneaker or hoodie or new electronic gadget.

Is some of this market driven by advertising and other modes of “peer pressure”? Yes most definitely, but the decision to buy or not to buy, to prioritize what is REALLY important lays with us. The way capitalism works is that there has to be a market for things, the consumer DICTATES the market not the other way around.

Parenting - Government or Parent Responsibilty?

2007-07-19T07:27:00.000-07:00

The Chinese government has passed a law that would require Internet Gaming companies to implement a program that would force all users under the age of 18 to register an ID code to play Internet games. If the child goes over three hours the game would be interrupted and give them a message to go end the game and do something physically active and constructive. If they do not than their scores would be wiped and/or other disruption of the game would occur.

For the last several years we have been hearing more and more about the relative inactivity of our young, and the resulting weight and health issues. Apparently this is becoming a problem in China as well and they have approached this problem with the usual Daddy government response. Obviously we would not want that kind of government intrusion on our lives but how long before our government will see the need to step in because parents aren’t doing their job?

The question comes up is this strictly the fault of the parent and I say no not entirely. There are numerous factors that play into this “condition” for lack of a better term. Let me try to list them and you can figure out if my conclusion as to the causes of this malaise is accurate.

One: Around the mid sixties women were being indoctrinated to think that they were less of person if they didn’t go out into the work place and compete with men. Today nearly every household has both parents working with little to no real supervision of the children.

Two: Income tax and taxes in general have increased to such a degree that it is now virtually necessary for both parents to work to maintain a household. Again leaving the children under supervised.

Three: In addition to taxes, the “desire” to have the newest fanciest Suv or two, the huge multi-room house, the latest fad clothing, video game, wide screen TV, etc. also has parents not only both working, but some two or more jobs. This avarice, greed, materialism whatever you want to call it has also played a role in absence and under supervision of our young.

Four: Technological advance at a break neck speed and the accompanying advertising has also created much of the foundation for this problem. The latest gadgets in the electronics world are a “must” for the materialistic society we have become. $500.00 for a cell phone and people were waiting some for days on sidewalks in front of stores to be the “first one” to own one. Does anyone else besides me see a problem with this?

Five: Societal attitudes such as the aforementioned materialism and prideful jealousy or simply put need to outdo the Jones, as well as this spare the rod spoil the child indoctrination we have experienced over the last few decades also serves to corrupt the very basis of discipline so lacking with today’s young.

Six: Diet is also a result, as well as a factor, in this upside down family structure. Due to the work schedules and lack of supervision, many kids, eat at the local fast food joints, snack on high sugar, high sodium, “munchies” and drinks and the parents wonder why their youngin’ has ADHD. So instead of recognizing the lack of activity and sugared out chemistry at play we would rather feed them Ritalin or some other drug.

I am sure that we can all think of even more of the factors at play, but lets just take a look at those that we have listed here.

The underlying culpret appears to be “greed”. Greed by the corporation to sell, sell, sell, greed by the adults that buy, buy, buy, and that transferred to the kids that have to have the latest Play-Station, and $150.00 fad sneakers. Add to this a general attitude of self worth which relegates the needs of the community to the garbage heap - unless of course it directly effects us personally.

So what are we to do you say? The answer although simple may not be very easy to accept by most of us. Adults need to re-evaluate what is truly important; we need to realize that it isn’t necessary for Jimmy-Joe or Sally-Sue to have what the neighbors kids have. We have to start realizing that there just may be too many structured “events” that they and their children are involved in. We need to look around ourselves and ask the question “do we really NEED that”. Have someone stay at home to raise the children, and maybe God forbid, do without as our parents did. Put the children first instead as just being another “item” on our list of wants in our home budget. Set rules for these young people, they need and WANT to be guided and if we don't someone or something else will.

I know that one of the items I left off the list is probably the underlying factor to all of this and that is to give our children more than our parents gave us, to live better than our parents, but again we need to evaluate what truly is “living better” and “having more”, is it really the material that will make for “more and better”, or might there be something else?

If we do not change the way we function and deal with our children, than someone or something else will, as I said. How long before daycares become government controlled and our government has to take the draconian messaures that China has taken, not only with the Internet but with other aspects of "raising" our children? Sounds all too Orwellian I realize. but if we remain unaware or hide our head in the sand about the crisis we are in, it can, and will happen. There will come a time that we will not be the major factor in the raising of our own children unless we change our direction on what is important.

Live Earth - Farce

2007-07-07T07:30:00.000-07:00

Al Gore’s “Live Earth” Concert kicked off last night in Sydney Australia and will continue through out the day today to purportedly raise awareness that “we’re all gonna die” if we don’t do something about global warming.

As I have stated on other articles for this Blog the jury is still out on if global warming is in fact really happening, and whether man has been the major cause of these perceived changes. In fact not only is there NO consensus among scientists about mans influence in global climate change, but there is increasing skepticism that it is even happening.

Aside from the scientific argument I have a problem with this event as do many others including people like Evan Serpick, columnist for Rolling Stone magazine. Serpick reports that the media in the U.K. has given this event major bad press and many people view this as pomposity at it’s best, (worst).

Let’s face it people these so-call philanthropic events are getting a little tired. They are nothing more than aggrandizing spectacles that to make people feel better about themselves and to provide a venue for self-serving rockers to promote themselves.

I have read and re-read dozens of articles, listened to radio, and TV, news, and promotional programming and have yet to hear where the money raised for this event is going. Concert promoter and venture capitalist Keven Wall is the main organizer of this event and if anyone thinks that he isn’t making a bundle off this than they are delusional or naïve.

Regardless of whether you believe in the global crisis that Gore and his leftist buddies are trying to promote, this concert is nothing more than a vehicle to grow the egos and pocketbooks of the promoters and the participants. The hypocrisy of the show is that in order to put this together, and to transport its “star cast”, and accommodate the thousands of concertgoers there will be more pollution pumped into the climate – way to go Al.

Heat Wave Cautions

2007-06-26T06:22:00.000-07:00

Heat Wave Cautions

One Man - One Woman - Marriage the Foundation of our Culture

2007-06-19T11:04:00.000-07:00

Over the last couple of weeks our readers have been going on about same-sex marriage and a few things have surfaced on RocklandNews and on JMO-Sound Off that, although not surprising to me, is upsetting.

First of all the total rejection of allowing the people to vote on a social/cultural issue that can and will affect all of us.

Second the complete, ostrich like reaction of the pro-same-sex marriage group in dealing with reasoning against allowing same-sex marriage, usually using the “homophobe” and “religious fanatic” arguments.

I ran across this on JMO-Sound Off on several occasions where I was providing historical, and anthropological based arguments against altering the institution of marriage. Never once did I mention religion and seeing as my best friend is gay, the homophobe argument didn’t work either - but some kept bringing up the “bigotry” and “religious” argument never once responding to the points I brought up based on sociological information. In fact only one person truly debated with me the points of the argument.

The same-sex marriage push, although possibly not intentionally, is one of many attacks on our American Culture. It is being presented to us under the cloak of “lifestyle Choice” and “tolerance. What we are seeing is not just a “modern and expanded view” of marriage, but an attempt to change the concept of its initial meaning.

What the advocates for same-sex marriage are effectively saying is that marriage has nothing to do with childbearing, procreation, or family. It is an attempt to make marriage merely a “personal” concept completely lacking in social relevance. These expanded or alternative marital unions are filled with unrecognized difficulties. Without the biological bond of procreation these relationships become nothing more than mutually agreeable sexual unions.

Now there are some at this point in my argument that are saying to themselves, or possibly yelling at this page that homosexual relationships do have an emotional and mental aspect to it just as in a heterosexual relationship. It is true that some homosexual couples have profound affection and devotion for one another, that is undeniable and I am not saying that is not true. However due to the absence of any relation to mutual reproduction, the “marital” relation is reduced to a mere sensory experience.

Now I have been berated for bringing up the reproduction thing on a couple of levels.

One I was told that it is no longer important to procreate because we are over populated as it is. That is an unfortunate attitude because procreation, the siring of children, and unity of the family will ALWAYS be important in society, any society, large or small.

The other level was the mention that a homosexual couple can adopt (which was tied into the overpopulation argument) or via artificial insemination. However ONLY in a heterosexual relationship is there a true biological potential for procreaction.

Few people realize that having children in some ways plays an important part in ones psychological view of life and death. It is a means of “immortality” if you will. It is a part of carrying forward something of your self. When two people of opposite sex are involved in the procreation of a child it is part of them, and an additional bond between the two – something a homosexual couple can never have. The compelling reasons for us to defend and preserve the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman is the potential reproductive power of that union.

Again I need to return to the fact that same-sex unions although they can be emotionally and physically involved, they will never reach the capacity to experience more than mere sensory stimulation.

We should also recognize and continue to make a distinction between non-reproductive and reproductive sex. If we should abandon these principles and reduce “marriage” to a mere personal sensory experience than we are opening up arguments to accept ANY consensual sexual practice.

Our current laws regarding sexual behavior, i.e. age, incest, and polygamy are based on the principles of the current marriage definition. Once that definition has been altered to become purely a “sensory experience” than all forms of sexual partnership, no matter how unacceptable or repugnant will be allowable. There will no longer be any principled ground upon which to determine and deny ANY form of sexual union - even with children.

Abandoning the definition of marriage and altering it to an expanded state will eventually have repercussions that we can only estimate, but if historical evidence is to be believed than this “open minded” attitude toward relationships such as that of Rome at its height will result in the same end as Rome.

Sen. Hedlund to Vote against Gay Marriage Ballot Question

2007-06-14T09:38:00.000-07:00

Sen. Hedlund to Vote against Gay Marriage Ballot Question

Congress Votes to Screw U.S. workers

2007-05-17T16:00:00.000-07:00

Well, they’ve gone and passed the new illegal immigrant amnesty bill, and our President has already said that he is in favor of this economic and cultural slap in the face of every American and legal immigrant.

With the provisions of this bill in place, like what I call the “Dream Act”, wherein it states that those here already can bring in their “family” members. This may seem to be an act of compassion but like so many “compassionate” acts by our government it will cause more harm than good.

We now have an estimated 12,000,000 illegals in this country that will receive their amnesty, if they only bring in ONE relative each we have doubled the number of immigrants coming into our country. This bill states also that these immigrants will be naturalized based on education and abilities, but the initial program or Z-card status will take between 8 to 13 years to naturalize them as citizens, so in the meantime they take up American jobs, increase our welfare rolls, and tax our already failing healthcare system.

Of course our elected officials like Kennedy, McCain, and Bush claim that they will strengthen the fines and legal actions against employers that hire these CRIMINALS, but if history is repeated by this administration then I will have to see it to believe it. President Clinton went after and charged more employers that broke the law by hiring these illegals, than the Bush administration – almost TWICE as many.

As for the cultural impact on the U.S. what we have seen historically in the past two decades is a people that don’t want to let go of their language or become integrated into American society as American’s. Radical groups like La Raza Unita (considered legitimate lobbyists in the Capitol) have stated quite clearly that they have no intention of relinquishing their Latino roots. In fact they also believe that the American Southwest is theirs and are in full support of El Reconquista or in English the re-conquest of their “native lands” – read my previous post on Chicano Insurgents: http://jmosoundoff.blogspot.com/2007/05/chicano-insurgents.html

What we are seeing is a quiet invasion of our country, unless we start calling on our elected officials to abandon these plans we will lose our nation, both culturally and economically.

Sharpton - Demogogue

2007-05-10T06:34:00.000-07:00

After hearing Al Sharpton’s bigoted remark toward Romney I am reminded of just how those like Jessie Jackson and Sharpton have used the race card time and time again, but feel no guilt or remorse for statements like calling New York “Hymie Town” or saying “…as for that one Mormon running for President, those who really believe in God will defeat him…”

There is racism and bigotry in America today, but it isn’t just the white population against blacks. Sharpton and his ilk have in fact been a detriment and an embarrassment for good hardworking American’s of color. This is not Sharpton’s first bigoted act, back in 1991 Al Sharpton along with other so-called black leaders, hastened to Crown Heights in New York after several days of rioting to take advantage and capitalize on the notoriety of so-called protest marches in the area.

A couple of days before Yankel Rosenbaum, a twenty nine year old Australian ultra-Orthodox Jew who was in New York to conduct historical research at the YIVO Institute, was beaten and stabbed by attackers who shouted “Get the Jew” and “Kill the Jew".

Neither Sharpton nor any of his fellow “leaders” grieved for Mr. Rosenbaum, nor did they call for a stop or criticize the fire bombings, and looting of Jewish owned businesses that followed Mr. Rosenbaum’s murder. In fact Sharpton and his entourage spun their own version of events by bringing up the accidental death of a black child, Gavin Cato, by a Jewish man who had lost control of his vehicle during one of the riots hitting several children on a sidewalk. Not only was he wrongly accused by Sharpton of intentionally “murdering” young Gavin Cato, which later incited even more rioting, but when the Jewish man got out of his car to help the children he was beaten and robbed by the rioting crowd.

Furthermore not ONE black leader after three days of rioting in this neighborhood, or in the following more peaceful “marches” expressed a concern or criticized the blatant anti-Semitism expressed in signs that had messages like “Hitler didn’t do his job”.

Sharpton has time and time again shown his racist hatemongering personality and yet the mainstream media appears to ignore his hate filled rhetoric. From his speech in 1994 lauding his opinion that Blacks were culturally superior because, "White folks were in caves while we were building empires… We taught philosophy, astrology, and mathematics before Socrates and those Greek homos…", to his actively supporting the hoax by Tawana Brawley, falsely accusing New York prosecutor Steven Pagones, and spouting all kinds of racist remarks against the police, and whites in general.

Sharpton and Jackson have done more to harm the Black community than they have done to help, and it is time for them to take a stand against these rabble-rising demagogues.

Age Old Enemies?

2007-05-09T10:14:00.000-07:00

Many times over the last couple of years, when discussing the issues in the Middle East, I have heard it said that the Jews and Arabs have been bitter enemies for centuries and that there is no way to resolve this age old hatred and distrust. Like most people I agreed with that train of thought. That is, until recently.

It is true that there has been an underlying religious disagreement dating back to the Biblical conflict between Abraham’s two sons. Arab belief is that they are descendants of Ishmael and that the Jews are descended from Isaac. They believe that Isaac usurped Ishmael’s birthright, but the so-call religious conflict and subsequent persecution, claimed by both extremes, (Jihadist’s and Zionists), has been exaggerated.

If one looks at the history of the Middle East there is little evidence that supports the constant conflict between Arabs and Jews. It is rarely pointed out that when the Crusades began in 1099 that BOTH Jew and Muslim stood side by side to defend Jerusalem. The Crusaders massacred Muslim and Jew alike. In fact, after the Muslim hero Saladin defeated the Crusaders in 1187, only then did displaced Jews return to the area.

The Jewish community flourished and prospered under Muslim leaders from that point on, and in fact grew even more numerous in the 15th and 16th centuries when the Ottoman Empire welcomed them into the area when they (the Jews) were expelled from Spain, by the Christians. For the next several centuries, under both the Ottoman rule, and later British rule after WWI, Arab, and Jewish communities peacefully coexisted in this area.

So what happened, you might ask. The real start of the Arab-Israeli conflict started around the year 1920. A man named Haj Muhammad Al Husseini, the grand mufti of Jerusalem, the Imam of the Al Aqsa Mosque, was a brutal and controlling despot that killed Jews and Arabs he considered to be a threat to his control of Jerusalem’s Arab population.

Similar to his counterpart in the West, Adolph Hitler, he used anti-Jewish propaganda to separate and polarize the Arab and Jewish communities who for centuries had lived peacefully together. In 1920 and again in 1929, Al Husseini incited anti-Jewish riots by claiming the Jews were plotting to destroy the Al Aqsa mosque. The riots resulted in the massacre of hundreds of Jewish civilians and a virtual end to the Jewish presence in Hebron.

In 1936, partially funded by the Nazi’s, Al Husseini began a revolt against the British using Arab militias, which also were used to massacre Jewish citizens. The Brits quelled the uprising by 1939 and Al Husseini fled to Iraq and helped to orchestrate a jihad against the British once again in 1941.

Once more the Brits were able to put down this rebellion and Husseini fled to Nazi Germany. He found that the Nazi anti-Jew ideology fit nicely with his extremist view of Islam. Husseini and Hitler schemed to create a pro-Nazi pan-Arab-style fascist government for the Middle East.

Even after the fall of El Alamein in 1942 Al Husseini called for continued Arabic resistance to Allied forces and was summarily know as the “Arab Fuhrer” or the “Fuhrer’s Mufti”. In one of his radio broadcasts from Berlin in 1944 Al Husseini called for a jihad to “kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases Allah, history, and religion.” Sound familiar?

Time after time Husseini did what ever he could to kill “the Jew”, including the blocking of the Red Cross to help Jewish children. He recruited Bosnian Muslims for the German Waffen SS, known as the Hanjer (Saber) Division, which murdered 90% of the Yugoslavian Jewish population. Heinrich Himmler was so delighted with their “accomplishments” that he established the Mullah Military School in Dresden.

After the fall of Nazi-Germany, Al Husseini fled to Cairo. Throughout the 1940’s and 50’s he helped develop a pro-fascist group in Egypt known as “Young Egypt”. Gamal Abdul Nassar (a member of Young Egypt), along with other pro-fascists among the military, seized control of the Egyptian government in 1952. He was also instrumental in influencing the founding members of the Ba’ath Party - the party of Saddam Hussein and current controlling party of Syria. And finally Al Husseini played a central role in creating the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO).

Many in the Arab world today, thirty years after his death in 1974, still revere this despot as a hero. It seems to me that Husseini’s close relationship to Hitler and Nazi ideology may be the reason that Hitler’s Mein Kampf is one of the best selling books in the Arab world.

At this point, you may ask where I am going with this. Simply I was challenged a short time ago when I drew an analogy to this current form of extremist Islam with fascism, calling them Islamofascists.
Husseini’s descendants and followers remain active in Middle Eastern affairs today and I could go on and on with the numerous connections to Al Qaeda and other groups, who consider this man a hero, but suffice it to say this pro-Nazi leader is the cornerstone of today’s radical Islamic Jihadists.

We have been fed a steady diet by the media that this is a centuries old conflict that is un-winnable. I have even heard some of my most learned friends spouting the “Zionist conspiracy” ravings of the fascists, reminiscent of the Nazi propaganda of the last century. I must point out here that in fact the Zionists are the extreme of the other side, but not the international demons they are proposed to be by some.

Let us not forget that there are more of those like Ata and his band of suicide Jihadists who murdered almost 3000 innocent people on September 11, 2001, who are hell bent on our destruction. Until we start recognizing this enemy for who they are, and that they are not just terrorists, which is a misnomer, they are fascists we will not defeat them. We are NOT at war with Islam but a sect of extremist/fascists radicals, which are using religion as their excuse for murder and dictatorial control.

Until we begin to understand this than we will not win this war. And if we allow these fanatics and outright nut jobs to turn this into some sort of religious war, this too will be disastrous. The truth is we are at war once again with fascism. We are embroiled in a war none of us want, but one we must win, or we will lose all we hold dear, our freedom, our independence, our lives, and the lives of our loved ones.

The Federal Reserve Scam

2007-05-03T16:49:00.001-07:00

Few people know, or understand what the Federal Reserve is. Most people think it is part of the government and that the government controls the Fed, this simply is not so. The Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE corporation that profits from control of our monetary system.

Here is how, the U.S. Government borrows money from the Fed, say 1 million dollars, the Fed prints the 1 billion dollars on OUR own printing presses, at our governments expense, and lends this money to the government WITH interest. They have neither printed the money, nor have they provided any resource other than to okay the printing of this money, and yet we are indebted to them to pay it back plus interest. Furthermore the Fed since it’s inception in 1913 has never once been audited and pays NO taxes on the money it takes from us.

This system effectively controls the flow of money and in turn the economic wellbeing of the nation. They can tighten up on this flow and it will create conditions that will force unemployment or they can allow for the printing of too much currency thereby creating inflation.

The secondary fallout from this is system is the Federal Income Tax. Here again most people have been lulled into believing that we need the FIT because we need roads and to help the elderly and poor, etc. This belief is not only untrue, but in fact completely the opposite of what it claims.

Since the initiation of the FIT only one class has benefited from it and that is the super-wealthy. I’m not talking about the wealth of the Walton or Gate’s kind, although they are listed as two of the richest men in the world that is a misnomer. They are miniscule in comparison to the International Banking Families and the controlling interest of the Federal Reserve. Some of those family names may be familiar to you Rothschild, Rockefeller, Chase, and Lehman. The Fed has challenged this on several occasions, but a study of Standards and Poors will quickly reveal that in fact this is the case.

I’m sure at this point you are asking why have our leaders allowed this to happen and why haven’t they stopped it. Quite simply many have, but have been thwarted in one way or another to turn it around.

In fact when Woodrow Wilson signed the order in 1913 to affiliate with and allow our currency to be controlled by the Fed he was going in direct opposition to our constitution, but even he was quoted as saying later “ I have unwittingly ruined my country”, when referring to the Fed.

Our Constitution strickly forbids private control of regulating and coining our currency. Article I, Section 8, Clause 5, of the United States Constitution provides that Congress shall have the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof and of any foreign coins.

Thomas Jefferson warned about using private banks to control our currency, stating, " I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies". Further stating, "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." Others like Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln were also opposed to a privately owned banking system controlling U.S. currency.

More recently there were those like Representative and member of the House Banking and Currency Committee, Charles A. Lindberg Sr. who stated in a speech he gave on January 15, 1915 "The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people's money, and in the interest of the stockholders and those allied with them." Again in 1932 it was severely criticized by Representative Louis T. McFadden also a member of the House Banking and Currency Committee, in which he states, "Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions. They are private credit monopolies that prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign and domestic swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders."

The last one to oppose the Federal Reserve System was President John F. Kennedy. On June 4th 1963 President Kennedy sign into law executive order 11110 that stripped the Fed from being able to loan the U.S. money with interest. However less that than six months later President Kennedy was assassinated, and his successor Lyndon Baines Johnson rescinded the order.

Henry Ford is also quoted as stating, "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning".

The thing that everyone should understand is that neither the Congress nor the President has control of the national debt; it is in the hands of this private corporation. Until we put pressure on our representatives to remove us from this system we will continue to spiral down into the abyss of financial dependence and debt. Once we have removed ourselves from the FED we will no longer have the need for the Federal Income Tax as it now stands. A more equitable and reasonable system of taxation to pay necessary government functions can then be instituted.

Chicano Insurgents

2007-05-03T10:59:00.000-07:00

A couple of months ago in papers and news reports from all over the country we heard about President Bush’s South and Central American visit and I noticed that he was criticized by two of the leaders of the countries he visited. Both the Mexican and Guatemalan Presidents commented about the measures the U.S. was taking to stop illegal immigration from their countries. Bush was cordial in his responses, but I think that a more Teddy Roosevelt, or Andrew Jackson like stand would have been more appropriate, tell them to go to hell, that their people are costing the U.S. and it’s citizens millions of dollars and we will do all we can to stop their invasion of our country. But of course that will never happen.

These Latino leaders are against the measures to thwart the criminal migrants that enter the U.S. because they send back tens, if not, hundreds of thousands or millions of American dollars to their countries. They blame the U.S. for their plight and expect US to foot the bill to grow their economies. All the while they are reluctant to stem the illegal drug traffic and militia like thieves that have tortured, killed, raped, and stolen from hundreds of innocent tourists over the years, not to mention the corruption within their own governments.

We don’t hear much about this behavior in the liberal controlled media, but there are numerous incidents of this type of thing happening repeatedly, especially out of Mexico. As I reported some time ago Mexican schools have been teaching “gringo hate” for decades and general thought in these schools is that most of the American South West is theirs and that the U.S. stole it from them, so stealing and even killing American’s is rationalized as payback.

This same thought pattern has grown a sub-culture of radicals’ hell bent on conquering the U.S. South West. These Mexican radicals will employ any means to recover this land, starting with mass migrations, and then planned insurgency and rebellion by groups like, MEChA, which is the Chicano Student Movement of Aztlan, or the communist revolutionary group the Brown Berets, as well as supposed moderate liberal groups like Barrios Unidos, and La Raza Unita.

Now I expect to see a response that tries to label me racist or anti-Latino, but that is not the case. The vast majority of U.S. citizens with Latino background are as patriotic to this country as anyone else, however the target group for these insurgent provocateurs is the second and third generation of these upstanding American citizens, their children, and grand children, as well as the illegal population entering our country today.

In my opinion we have as much to fear from these insurgents as we do from Al Qaeda and need to begin recognize the potential dangers these criminal organizations represent. There are intelligence reports of South American criminal organizations linked to Al Qaeda. The sale of illegal drugs and distribution in the U.S. by groups like M13 have been helping to finance Al Qaeda and other radical anti-American groups for some time now. Unless we begin to recognize that these silent invaders are a threat we may someday soon wake up to a very different and no longer free America.