When and where are we going to be able earn the money it takes to sustain economic growth? That is the burning question. Meanwhile, the Feds are printing billions of dollars. But printed money can only serve to temporarily prop up a failing economy while it devalues the money earned through honest labor.  Inevitably, the result will be inflation, which is far more devastating than a recession or a depression. As an example I will use Southern Rhodesia's recent  fall from 300+ years of prosperity. The disaster was caused by socialist who decided that white farmers were too rich. They killed some and chased the others out of  their country. It's now known as Zimbabwe, a poor starving country where,  in a few short years, a thousand of their dollars can't buy what one dollar could buy before they ousted the rich white farmers.

We are headed down the same sorry road. The con-job the government is handing us is criminal in its negligence of the public trust. They are printing money to keep up the appearance that we are still a prosperous society. It’s all a sham. The rich are being demonized and their businesses are being taken over by a pettty tyrant for the good of society. More and more goods are being produced in third-world countries while our government encourages us to spend more and more money on foriegn commodities. In fact, they send us checks in the mail so we’ll have money to spend.

Spending unearned money is like spending monopoly money because we aren’t earning it by working at jobs. It goes out of one government pocket into another. Because, it creates no wealth nor growth in business, it will eventually be useful only as toilet paper. To make matters worse, the earned money we spend on goods made in China and elsewhere doesn’t stay in this country. That money can’t be re-circulated through our banks to be available as loans, to build homes, start up new businesses, and to purchase inventory.

In trying to make lemonade out of lemons, the present administration tells us that a weak U.S. dollar is good for exports. “Our goods will be cheaper overseas,” they tell us. There’s only one problem with that theory: businesses can’t afford to produce the goods necessary to take advantage of this windfall. Meanwhile, the money that was supposed to stimulate businesses has disappeared down a rat hole.

We can’t produce the goods in America because it costs too much to manufacture them. Between unions, taxes, minimum wage, and mandated health care, employers can’t realize the profits necessary to reinvest in capital, nor can they entice wary shareholders to invest in them. It's all basic economics 101 stuff, but this administration thinks it’s illogical and they are convinced that capitalism exploits the worker. They don’t understand that in American capitalism, the employer/employee relationship is a mutually beneficial activity. Liberals are stuck in the 1900’s when Marx and Lenin correctly described the exploitive labor situation in Europe at the start of the Industrial Revolution. Those horrible conditions do not exist in America and if they did, we wouldn’t need the government to correct the situation. Labor can take care of itself without government backed unions. When unions (such as those that exist in America today) have the full force of the government behind them, it’s the same as being forced at gun-point to do their wishes. This mutually beneficial arrangement between socialist thugs and union thugs has crippled businesses. It’s the origin of the phrase “Socialist Union” as in USSR.

If we continue to destroy the environment that produces risk takers, entrepreneurs, and innovators, and if we continue to allow the ongoing corruption resulting in vanishing billions, we will be no better off than any banana republic. Individualism and liberties will be stripped from us because those are concepts that tyranny cannot abide.

Meanwhile, we impotently watch China replicate the capitalist system that we once enjoyed. We marvel at the exploding economic power they have produced in a few short years. We shake our heads as we learn that China has chastised our president and given him lectures on how to cut spending, reduce taxes, and to allow businesses to flourish and expand. We truly are a sorry country let by a sorry president elected by a sorry society. We no longer have the capability to earn enough money to live as free people without interference from a heavy-handed government. We are about to experience what “equality” is all about. Welcome to the world of communism where the misery is spread equally among all except those in the inner circle of the politburo in Washington, D.C.

President Obama, you are purposely tying the hands of your generals in the fight against terrorism. If that’s your policy, then go public with it and stop dithering and stalling like a simpering wimp. You have made your feelings about war public with your statement that, “…the idea of victory makes me uneasy.” You go on to relate how the pictures of the Japanese surrendering on the USS Missouri made you feel sorry for the Japanese. This sends a clear mandate to the terrorists that you do not intend to fight them to any conclusive victory. I must conclude by your inaction that you do not intend to fulfill your earlier promises to us and to your generals. You also do not intend to honor your oath to protect our troops if you can so casually stand by and let your generals twist in the wind. This is no time to be whistling past the graveyard, Ms. Obama. Your speeches are empty promises. You keep telling us that you’re working hard on the problem, that your “people” are all over it, yet days turn into weeks that turn into months, etc. and no decisions are forthcoming.

As Rush Limbaugh often says, “Hope is for losers.” It’s action that gets things done. Appeasing our enemies and hoping they will become reasonable and lay down their arms is wishful thinking, Ms. Obama. We’ve been there before with these animals in Iran. Remember Ms. Carter? He/she also acted like a closet queen and tried to appease Muslim terrorists. They responded by taking the entire American Embassy as hostages. For over a year, Ms. Carter was unable to persuade the man, who is now president of Iran, to release them. It took the election of Mr. Ronald Reagan to immediately change his mind, because he knew Reagan would actually do something to get the hostages back, and it wouldn’t be to play patty-cake for months on end.

Inaction in war is a sure recipe for disaster. Don’t assume that the enemy is sitting around their hookahs waiting for us to make a move. They are planning their attacks this very minute; laying out new strategies based on our inaction, and anyone with a brain larger than a peanut knows that a major Tet-like attack is imminent.

Would anyone care to wager a bet that Obama is playing this waiting game secretly hoping that a large body count will upset the American public and give him just cause to pull the troops out of the Middle East, thereby handing his Muslim friends the victory they’ve been looking for, and making his liberal fringe friends happy?

STOP PRETENDING

It’s time to stop pretending that Obama’s Marxist socialism will bring prosperity, peace, and good will to society. For more than 70 years, everywhere Marxist socialism is tried, we've witnessed the devastating results. There are still plenty of us alive today who remember the stark differences between East (socialist) and West (capitalist) Germany. Many of us recall the problems that Soviet Russia had just to feed its people after 40 years of communism (the other name for Marxist socialism). Because so many people have risked their lives to leave, it's evident that Cuba must be a horrible place to live. The same can be said about the Vietnamese boat people after the Communists took over the South. We can see the dramatic difference between North (communist) and South (capitalist) Korea. We can see France, England, and Spain, once mighty political and economic powers as they have deteriorated under milder forms of socialism. We’ve witnessed China go from abject poverty to prosperity just a few short years after embracing capitalism. The evidence is clear, it is loud, and it is empirical. The devastating effects of Marxist socialism are the inevitable outcome of Obama’s plan to “fundamentally change” America.

It’s time we Americans found the courage to stand up to the Marxists in Washington -- to those who believe that their "time has come" -- and let them know in no uncertain terms that we will not allow them to drag us down into the hell-hole of communism. Let them know we see the bloody skeletons their kind has left behind wherever they’ve been. It is patently clear that this form of government is not really about the welfare of men, women, and children but about power and control of society by those who are unscrupulous, unprincipled, and un-feeling about life in general. When one man deems it necessary to take control of our country by assuming control of corporations, banks, payrolls, and our health care in the manner of Hitler’s blitzkrieg war machine, it is time to wave the red flags, send up the flares, and sound the sirens.

We know the inevitable results of Marxism, and we understand that its real purpose is not to wish peace and goodwill on anyone. The world is witness to the death, destruction, and despair it has caused; therefore, the evidence demands our attention. So why are we standing around like a bunch of sheep waiting to be taken to the slaughterhouse?

Well, you say, they voted for him. It was the will of the people, what can I do? They voted for Hitler and he also lied to and misled the people to get his way. Fortunately, this isn’t pre-war Germany and there is plenty you can do. For starters you can write your congressmen and women, and your senators. We have to let them know how disgusted we are with the direction they are taking our country. Also, we have to get active in the voting process by doing volunteer work and getting out the vote. Write to the op-ed section of your local newspapers and your favorite news magazines. Write encouragement to television and radio conservative talk shows. Show up at the rallies and tea parties with your signs. Make yourself heard.

Yes, we voted for Obama, but so did Germany vote for Hitler. He too ran on a platform of hope and change. He too lied and promised wonderful things, and the people fell in love with him just like they fell for Obama. But, in time (for them it was too late), they realized he was a monster. I know I’m not the only one beginning to feel the same way about Obama.

The main goal of socialism is to strip away individual property rights and turn them over to society as a whole. The means of production and distribution of goods and wealth comes under state control. Remember that the money you earn is property and it’s considered theirs; all of it!

For how many years have we heard socialists like FDR and LBJ and Clinton go on about the abolition of poverty, prosperity for all, and the promise of world peace? Even George W. Bush was suckered into that hogwash,  and he promised a kinder, gentler (moderate) Republican party. So far, instead of economic prosperity and jobs that Obama promised 9 months ago, we have economic paralysis; millions of people without jobs, and millions of people who have just given up looking for jobs (these are not counted as unemployed for some strange reason). The  unemployment rate is topping 10%; the same as it was during the Great Depression. I have to admit, the future looks pretty terrifying considering the glaring differences between what was promised nine months ago and what he have today: the dollar is being replaced on the world market by the Euro, China owns us lock stock and barrel, and our whole world has been turned upside down by a president who promised us the moon but gave us moon pie and appears to be flipping the bird at us.

Changes We Can Truly Believe In - 2010

The government is seriously contemplating several new taxes that allow them to spend on new government programs. Along with raising “sin” taxes on cigarettes, there’s talk about a “sin” tax on soda to help fight obesity, and alcohol to help fight alcoholism. And Congress is starting to make noises about a VAT (value added tax); a national tax on everything we buy i.e., another income tax. Americans are waiting in vain for Congress to start reversing this trend, to start making serious noises about curbing spending and giving us some tax relief. How does creating new sin taxes, or punishment taxes, and raising those already in place make good sense? As soon as the higher taxes succeed in producing the desired behavior, wouldn’t the government receive less revenue? Or do they want more people to smoke, drink alcohol, and eat themselves into an early grave just to raise more revenue? The problem is this; they never cut spending, thereby, creating a perpetual, cloying need for more revenues. In turn, government moves to come up with even more clever ways to “tax and fool” us into believing we are helping to divert yet another dire crises (obesity, global warming, 47 million people without health insurance, ad nauseum). When the government can’t raise revenue in added taxes, they resort to the printer.

While the government can mint and print more money, they cannot create wealth. Wealth can be described as ownership of material things such as property and other items like stocks and bonds that are relatively scarce and have a high social value. Money, in and of itself, is not wealth unless it is invested or used to create things of value. All the printed money in the world is useless if you can’t buy anything with it. Unless money is generated through the production of goods and services, it is not useful to the maintenance of a free market capitalist society. In the same way, whenever money, earned by labor, is confiscated by the government and redistributed to non-productive government programs, the free flow of wealth is interrupted and society is the worse for it. Bailing out failing companies with tax-payer money is not a fruitful use of money.

A free society cannot long exist while the government incrementally and systematically schemes ways to confiscate more and more the wages of working people and redistribe that money to non-producing government programs. The only return on government spending of that hard-earned money is a growing sector of society dependent upon those who work, being looted by an armed government and forced to forfeit an ever-increasing portion of their wages to the nurturing and support of free-loaders and moochers. We are no longer working to support our own families, businesses, and communities; we are working to support an increasingly dependent society. We are like sheeple who placidly sacrifice self to the “greater good of society” while ignoring our own responsibility to first serve ourselves and then others. Socialists and communists view our attitude as self-serving and selfish when, in reality, it is the essence of the Judeo-Christian work ethic. It is the work ethic that made this country the most economically powerful country on the planet.

When people start to believe that it is better to work for the “world” and for “society” instead of for themselves, they surrender to a kind of death sentence of drudgery, boredom, and constant service to those who demand more and more. Freedoms are sacrificed for the “greater good of society,” and once a freedom is lost, it can only be regained by blood, sweat, and tears.

 Now is the time to take a good look at where we are as Americans and to decide if this is what we truly desire for our ourselves, and our children and grandchildren. Look long and hard at the options and when you enter the voting booths all across the nation, vote your conscience, not for what seems expedient. Think about the future of this country and whether we want ourr children to work under the yoke of communism where even the freedom to think is no longer “good for society.” Think about whether we want them to be free to use their minds to invent new things, to start their own businesses, to pursue their own studies; or do we want them to live out their lives for the “greater good of society”? Should we leave future generations with no choice of medical treatment and force them to accept sub-quality treatment from a totally corrupt and ineffective government system? Think about whether we want our children and their children to be forced to ride public transportation if they want to go to the store (if they will even have stores like we have today with their mind-boggling assortments of goodies and necessities).

The stories of Russian women coming to America during the cold war era, entering American grocery stores, and crying are true. They could not believe that such places could exist in the world. I hope our future generations will not have to go through that kind of experience.  

The year 2010 is our time; the time to derail the bullet-train that is rapidly leading us further into Communism. Don’t forget, the ruling classes in all communist countries believe in democracy for themselves, but autocracy for the masses. Consider how this has been going on for some time now. Congressmen wouldn’t think of educating their children in public schools or submitting themselves to a public health care system, but it’s good enough for the masses.

At the voting booths you and I can end the punishing “sin” taxes and out-of-control spending. Do we have as much moxy as the International Olympic Committee. Can we just say “NO” to Obama? We can shock the world by showing the true grit of the American people. Vote for those who will get the government out of our health insurance and work to end the corruption and inefficiencies in the existing government programs, especially public education and Medicaid and Medicare. Now those are “changes” we can truly believe in.

Unfortunately, liberals have long ago figured out how to circumvent that "troublesome document" by going through the judicial system. It's called legislating from the bench, or judicial activism. Whatever it's called it's unconstitutional. But that has never stopped liberals from treating our founding fathers as if they were so many "dead white men", therefore, their document must be just as dead. Liberalism wants to liberate the American people from having to be tied to a lot of old, outdated, irrelevant Western World morals and values. They pooh-pooh Christianity because of the belief that we are all born sinners. They believe this is a ridiculous out-moded concept which has no place in today's world.

In truth, it is people like the "killer" who are the foolish ones; they who think that their superior intellect and compassion has somehow made them the ultimate decision makers of how we Americans should live and die. First of all, they seem not to know or understand that the majority of Americans are 'doers' not victims. The majority of us are independent people who prefer NOT to have the government simpering and fussing over us and telling us how to live our lives because we are too stupid or too lazy to figure out how to survive on our own. We are tired of the minority lording it over the majority. You cannot long deny the majority without causing chaos and distruption of society (though that is precisely the aim of Obama and his Marxist minions). If most liberals and "progressives" and "moderates" knew just how useful they are to Obama and his worshippers, they would no doubt feel foolish. How long do you think real freedom loving, independent Americans will endure being brow-beaten by so many ridiculous minority demands that cost more and more trillions of dollars that keep the printers going 24/7? Do they believe that we will stand by and let you rob our grandchildren of their future? Do you believe that we will just let you make them slaves of a socialist regime who believes that wealth and ownership of property are inherently evil?

   I read today that Henry Nostrils had compromised the bill in so many ways in order to get it passed that it really wouldn’t be that effective anyway. Also, I read, and I hope it’s true, that the Senate gives this bill no chance of passing.   It is humorous to see how the Democrats are congratulating themselves on pulling off the biggest con job we’ve ever had pulled on us, and are now rubbing their hands together getting geared up to do the same thing with Nationalized Health Insurance, and M*A*S*H-style health care. The House of Representatives should change their name to the Central Committee because by the time they get done we will no longer be a Republic; we’ll be a communist government with our social and business activities controlled by Chairman Obama and his lap-dog, Nancy Pelosi.

   The sad part is we did it to ourselves. We voted for these balloon-heads in the House who, in my estimation, have no clue that they are taking America on the fast track to communism. I seriously doubt that very many of them ever have a thought of their own, and if they did, they are told to stifle it, or else by a sewing needle-wielding Nancy Pelosi. How can a Representative NOT know that this whole circus was a power grab? How can they delude themselves into thinking they were voting to save the planet?  It boggles my mind. What the hell are they thinking? Do they really believe that by shutting down all but the most essential businesses, by forcing all of us to drive electric carts, or by urging us to ride bicycles, or make us take the eco-friendly train, that they can effectively change the frikken climate? Other up-and-coming industrial countries like India and China are laughing their @$$es off and have already made it clear that they have no intention of putting such a ridiculous burden their businesses people. But that’s okay, because if we Americans stop polluting, we’ll save the earth. Even Jimmy knows this is, in his words, “retarded.”

   When they succeed in killing the American spirit — and they will because they NEVER give up — we will no longer be able to start up a business of our own because the costs and the regulations would be prohibitive. If you are  “lucky” enough to save your business, you’ll be told what and how much you can produce, or to whom and how much you will charge for services. The rest will be forced to work in mind-numbing government jobs, and I do mean forced, because there will be very little money for those who are idle. And because no one will be able to afford a home (unless you are part of the ruling class) you’ll be forced to live in government high rises — as soon as someone dies and that apartment becomes available. Of course, I don’t need to mention the long lines at your local M*A*S*H tent. I see a very bleak future for my country and all because too many people are willing to give up their freedoms for a false security. Communism never has produced what it promises, simply because it can’t.

   The year 2010 will make or break us. Although I am very disappointed today, and my outlook for the short term is pretty crappy, I can envision an epic landslide for the Republicans in the House of Representatives. Let’s hope and pray that my vision comes true.

WHAT ARE ALL THOSE ISMs PART II

In part one, I wrote a sketch of four political/economic isms; socialism, communism, fascism, and Marxism.  In Part II I will attempt to describe five more isms; capitalism, anarchism, corporatism, totalitarianism, and conservatism.  As mentioned before, these political isms are also economic systems concerned with the production and distribution of goods.  Capitalism is the only economic system that can claim to be a moral political system because it is the only system dedicated to the protection of individual rights, property, and contract.  Of all the isms, capitalism is not an ideology.

Capitalism: An economic system in which businesses are either privately or corporately owned.  Successful businesses are able to make a profit and continue to be successful by prudent reinvestment of those profits.  Capitalism is also known as the “free market” or a Laissez Faire doctrine that: “opposes governmental regulation or of interference in commerce beyond the minimum necessary for a free-enterprise system to operate according to its own economic laws.”  The American economic system is unique to us because without individual and property rights capitalism could not flourish.  The role of government to provide these protections is the only proper function of government.  That is why capitalism is not only an economic system it is a system of government based on freedom and individual rights.  What are needed in a capitalist market are risk takers willing to risk all in the pursuit of wealth, and willing to lose it all if they fail.  In American capitalism, the more the economy flourishes, the stronger America becomes and vice versa.

Anarchism: When I came across this ism I couldn’t help thinking what a mess the world would be if we all lived by the tenets of Anarchy.  The first problem with Anarchism is you have to presume that all people are naturally good; you must assume everyone will play nice with each other.  Anarchists believe that social institutions are an imposition on the natural order of things.   The hippy communes of the 70’s and 80’s tried to live free and unfettered with no rules or order.  They were a dismal failure because human nature simply cannot abide sitting around stagnating for very long.  Living in a commune means you have to sacrifice your personal time for the good of the community, and for most folks, this goes against their nature to be self-serving.  A healthy selfishness means you love life and you understand that life cannot be lived constantly doing for others rather than yourself. 

Some folks confuse freedom with having no boundaries, no rules, no social obligations, and believe that anarchy is Utopia.   I can’t think of a more naïve notion, because all it takes is for the first armed thug to come along and turn Utopia into hell. 

Corporatism: The word has nothing to do with the organization of a business.  The only thing in common is the name which has its root from the Latin word for body, corpus.  The best analogy I can come up with is that under Corporatism, society and government would be controlled by labor unions representing each branch of business.  It’s simply a form of socialism.  Another word for corporatism is syndicalism, a movement to bring industry and government under the control of labor unions very much the same as Medieval Trade Guilds.  This would be accomplished through such actions as strikes and sabotage.  Basically, society together with their economy would, according to their interests, form groups called corporations with representatives of those groups settling problems through negotiations and mutual agreements.  This would be starkly different than the collective bargaining that competitive businesses and unions conduct now.  Corporatism could very well have as their motto, “Why can’t we all just get along?”

Totalitarianism: The poster boy for a totalitarian state was Iraq under Saddam Hussain.  Cuba is other example that comes to mind. This is, as you can well imagine, not something to be desired by the people of a country.  Businesses would remain in private hands, but they would be tied closely to the rulers of the state.  There is a total lack of private space for citizens of a totalitarian state.  When the state has utter control of religion, education, social, cultural, families, health care, and economic livelihood you have a totalitarian state. 

Conservatism: I saved this for last because, to me, it is more important that people understand just what conservatism is and what it isn’t.  In college classrooms, students are told that conservatives want to stubbornly maintain the status quo that they want to oppose, at all costs, any sort of progress.  Liberals today equate conservatism with Islamic fundamentalism.  However, the truth is that conservatism wants to maintain what is known as classic liberalism.  To define conservatism as the desire to maintain and preserve the past is a typical modern liberal tactic to twist the meaning of words to fit their agenda.  Speaking of living in the past, how many liberals do you know who wish they could go back to the days of Woodstock? Conservatives actually are always open to change, just not change for the sake of change.  And they believe in the classic definition of liberalism.  We can no longer use the word liberal without thinking of socialism, nor can we use the word conservative without conjuring up Islamic radicals.  We can thank our socialist friends for 70 years of purposely creating this confusion.  On the web, Conservative-resources.com clears this up by explaining that “liberalism is a standing argument between classical liberals and modern liberals, who are usually called conservatives and liberals, respectively.

America made its greatest progress when we followed the classic liberal (conservative) principles.  Our founding fathers believed in classic liberalism and they were obviously not averse to change.

The following shows the differences between conservatism and liberalism.

Defining Principles Conservatism                        Defining Principles of Liberalism

1.  Belief in natural law                                               1.  Positive Law

2.  Belief in established institutions                              2.  Progress

3.  Preference for liberty over equality                        3.  Equality over liberty

4. Suspicion of power — and of human nature           4.  Benevolent government

5.  Belief in exceptionalism                                         5.  Human perfectibility

6.  Belief in the individual                                            6.  Community

This is a good place to stop my discussion of the major isms. I did not mention libertarianism because to me they are too far ahead of their time to be of much use in this discussion.  I wanted to leave you with a look at the differences between conservatives and liberals and will post another blog on this subject as Part III.

WHAT ARE ALL THOSE ISMs ANYWAY?

                                                                                              PART I

I have to chuckle whenever I see liberals use the word neocon.  Actually, the neocons are the old liberals — our founding fathers.  They were the folks who believed that individuals are more important than the dumb masses (yes, you’re reading the last two words correctly).   Seventy years ago the word “liberalism” was hijacked and used as a cover for Marxist communism.   It is no wonder that today’s conservatives feel insecure what with socialism, communism, fascism and Marxism, under one umbrella called liberalism, is competing for the hearts and minds of the American people…and winning.

With all these isms flying around, I decided to look into them in order to understand the differences.  Most of these definitions are from a college text book someone gave me back in the 80’s.

Socialism, communism, fascism, and Marxism are similar to each other, but there are some important differences.  Let’s look at the two ways in which they are alike.   First, all four deal with an economic system in which the mode of production of goods and services are controlled by the government.  Second, they all believe that the self-serving individual is evil and society should be self-sacrificing.  People should serve each other for the greater good.  In all of these societies, the individual cannot be allowed to exist in isolation from the others.  Individuals and community are considered to be one unit. The differences between these  forms of government have to do with how the combined individual slash community interrelates with the social/economic/political environment.

Socialism:  Since the days of Franklin D. Roosevelt, we find ourselves living in an increasingly socialistic America.  Republicans and Democrats alike have moved toward socialism.  We still have individuals who own their own businesses creating needed goods and services, and providing jobs to those who would trade their labor for wages, but this is soon going to be a thing of the past.  It would seem that full-blown socialism is the new zeitgeist of our society.  In a socialist society the primary concern is that everyone is economically equal and each has their basic needs provided for by a central government.  The socialist mind-set believes that making people work for  basic needs such as housing, clothing, food, transportation, and health care is degrading to the workers.  They believe that businesses motivated by profit will always take advantage of labor by their selfish drive to make more and more money.  We will still own our own small businesses and still be able to acquire private property, but more and more, the government under Obama will nationalize the major corporations for the “good of society.”  With increasing frequency, we see the gradual erosion of private property ownership as local and federal government programs confiscate it for the “good of society.”  Large concentrations of wealth will no longer be tolerated which will result in the wealthy leaving America for better opportunities abroad.  That leaves Joe six-pack (me) living off the dole where the only legal jobs available are low-paying, mind-numbing government jobs.  Everyone but the ruling class will be living in government provided quarters.  Drugs and gangs will become even more desirable to young people seeking to express themselves.  I could go on painting a gloomy future, but I think you all understand that socialism leads inevitably to communism.

Communism:  Those of us old enough to have seen the “hippies” living in their pathetic little communes have a pretty good idea of what communism is all about.  In fact, communism goes back to the early Christian days.  It’s been tried many times and in many ways and it just doesn’t work because people are naturally self-serving.  And some are downright evil as we’ve seen with communism under Stalin and Mao.  To some, this pre-Stalin, pre-Mao form of communism seems an ideal way to live with all forms of production and all property being owned by the “community.”  And for those who have no ambitions other than to live their lives in peace and harmony every day, communism seems the perfect Utopia.  How sweet the siren’s call of “from each according to ability, to each according to need.”  The communist mind-set believes that private property (by the way, that includes money) and religion are the causes of all the evils of the world.  Today’s Marxist communists (of which many are college professors and politicians) see America and any other freedom loving peoples in the world as the chief cause of the problems of the world.  They must either be eradicated or transformed for the “good of society.”  If you want to know how wonderful communism is today, ask any Cuban who risked his/her life and limb getting into this country.

Marxism:  Conservatives believe that anyone who is anti-capitalist is a Marxist.  That’s not true. There are others who don’t agree with capitalism.  That would be your everyday garden variety long-haired hippy-type commie-pinko, and the tattooed, trinket-adorned (leave-no-external-organ-unpierced) weirdo.  It's the eggheads that teach our children who bother me.  Our children are being taught by the eggheads K-12 through Phd that Marxism is far superior to capitalism.  They are taught that capitalism deprives  human beings of their ability to be creative.  How anyone can swallow that hog-wash is beyond my understanding.  How creative was capitalism to be able to repeatedly put men on the moon?  No other form of government has ever done anything like that.  What other government had the wealth to accomplish such an astounding feat?  Our children are also taught that when they sell their labor, they turn their productive activity into a commodity, and in so doing they damage their self-esteem.  Furthermore, individualism (capitalism) prevents human beings from achieving their true nature (whatever the hell that means).   From the college textbook I mentioned earlier: “Marxism is a respected philosophical system.  And as a rigorous analysis and alternative to [conservative] capitalism is unmatched.” (Neopolitics, American Political Ideas in the 1980s, Linda J. Medcalf and Kenneth M. Dolbeare, Random House, 1985 p 205)

Fascism:  We all equate fascism with Nazi Germany and Mussolini’s Italy, but in modern times this view is passé.  Obama, in his usual demagogic manner, used fascist solutions to “aid” capitalism.  By nationalizing GM and Chrysler, two major automobile producers, Obama has, in his eyes, protected and maintained a major corporation.  This is the classic definition of fascism.  Allow me to quote from the same book I referenced above in speaking of fascism: “Managing the population includes rousing patriotic and nationalistic appeals, calls to sacrifice for the good of the nation.  It implies an adept use of symbols in order to manipulate a gullible, sheep like citizenry. (Remember the “Office of the President Elect” symbol he used during his campaign?)  Though the population may be engaged in the beginning, skillful manipulation of crises, economic and political, gradually leads to almost religious patriotic fervor.  Suppression of any dissent becomes increasingly oppressive, though still within procedural, legal limits.  Eventually, all necessary roads are taken to maintain the governing partnership.” [Between business and government] (p 206)  parenthesis and brackets are mine. Fascism allows small businesses to flourish but maintains control of production of the major corporations.  I have to admit that the definition I found in the textbook doesn’t quite match what Obama is doing.  The religious fervor isn’t for the nation, it’s for Obama himself.  I believe that was Hitler’s downfall at the end.

This is by no means all of the isms that exist today.  There is corporatism, anarchism, totalitarianism, conservatism, and capitalism to name the ones I didn’t cover.  There are some surprising things about these isms that I want to discuss in a future posting.

MISUSING THE FORCE OF LAW

A society that can depend on it’s government to enforce the laws in the name of justice for all, regardless of social standing, race, or religion is a peaceful society with no grudges against the rich or the poor, no complaints about one person having more than any other, in other words, an ideal society.  But we all know this is not the case in any country today, and especially in America where the force of law is used as a weapon against society more often than not.

Whenever I use the phrase force of law I am talking about how the government uses their legislative (and lately the Judicial) powers to organize the activities of various groups of people in our society. 

For instance, the government uses the force of law to educate our children, never mind that the entire system is designed to make good little liberal voters out of our children, they demand an ever-increasing, never-ending supply of our money. We see clearly the disaster our school system has become.  It’s an entirely corrupt system with the union and government working in tandem to thwart the will of the people and force feed our children with liberal propaganda.  In other words, through the force of law, our money is being plundered to support a corrupt propaganda organ of the Democrat party.

I know the word plunder leaves a bad taste, but it is the only word appropriate enough to describe how the government takes money (which is property) from one person, without their consent and without compensation, and gives it to another.  It is a violation of property, and in any other circumstances, the government would be obliged to act on the behalf of the victims to see that they receive justice in the way of compensation and to ensure the perpetrators receive justice in the form of punishment. The fact that the government commits the act does not make it any less a criminal offense; it merely makes it legal plunder.  In addition, their legal plundering destroys justice by making a mockery of it.  When you destroy justice, you destroy liberty and freedom of both the victims and of the beneficiaries of the plunder. 

Though there is no evil intent for the legal plunderers, the unintended consequences are far-reaching.  There are countless ways the government commits legal plunder against its citizens.  Slavery used to be our worse problem of plunder, but today it is our safety net programs that have been systematically and purposely over-burdened so that the good-intentioned legal plundering finally caused the collapse of the economy.  This was planned and carried out by Marxist organizations throughout every political district in the country and by Marxists activists within our own Senate and House, and now the White House.

We are presently engaged in an all-out war against Marxism, or should I say the Marxists are engaged in an all-out war against the free market system.  Whichever, if we don’t engage them now, I don’t mean in bloody battles, but in legal battles, and especially at election time, we are going to lose our country to a dictatorial, and so far, benevolent leader who will truly show us “changes we can believe in.”

Ultimately, it is we the people who are responsible for the mess we find ourselves in.  We were too busy making money and living the good life to see the gradual takeover of our government by those who saw our way of life as evil.  We didn’t realize that Obama was the Trojan Horse who was finally able to penetrate our defenses.  Now those who were envious of us have control of the country, and they are about to unleash their version of justice on us.  If we don’t just roll over and give up, we can take our country back next year, but it won’t be easy.  Remember, Acorn with its millions of dollars (mostly our own tax money) is flooding every voting district in the country and will use every means necessary to see that their people win this election.  It’s going to be dirty and nasty, but we will overcome.

I’ll start with the obvious reasons that she is a danger to society.  She and Obama are cut from the same bolt of socialist cloth.  They both believe in the collective rights of society over the rights of individuals.  She believes that owning a gun is not a fundamental right, Obama his creeping around the fringes of registering all guns ala Canada so that at some point in the future he will have a data base of all gun owners.   When this occurred in Canada, the next step was confiscation of all firearms unless under very rare circumstances.  Look for the next census to have the question about how many firearms are in your house.

But I digress.  We can look at this nomination in two ways:

Firstly, Obama displays not only a poor understanding of judicial duties but used very poor judgment in selecting Sotomayor, a judge with a 60% reversal rate in the SCOTUS.

Or, the version I believe is correct; Obama knows exactly what he is doing and understands well that if he can get Sotomayor seated on the Supreme Court his chances of forcing his social and economic agenda on Americans will increase, especially if another Justice retires during his term.  He wants to deflect what happened to FDR during the Great Depression when most of his New Deal programs were scrapped by the SCOTUS as unconstitutional.  FDR got around that by nominating more “progressive” Justices and succeeded in seeding the court with a majority who favored his idea of economic justice.  We are still dealing with some of his programs like, Social Security, Medicare, the TVA (actually a fairly successful Fascist-like enterprise), the IRS and the Federal Reserve.  As you can see, these programs have far-reaching consequences and have hung on for nearly a century now.  Think about what damage Obama can do with a few Supreme Court justices and a quick and ready pen.

LEGALIZED PLUNDER:  With a sympathetic SCOTUS Obama will be able to change laws to make even more plundering legal.  Remember, there are still trillions of dollars out there somewhere, no one knows where, to be tapped into and with the right laws the participants can have a field day and never have to face the music because what they are doing will be “legal.”  One such new legal plunder is now under way, it’s called Cap and Trade.  An old one that's has been ongoing for a long time now is called "progressive" taxation.  There are a lot of ways the public can be plundered and it all sounds legitimate.  Public schools are one of the greatest plunderers of our wealth by forcing us to send our children to schools that demand more and more of our money and give less and less in quality teaching.  Easy or free credit is another way: the coercion of banks by Congress to write unsecured, risky loans for mortgages to the poor managed to help bring about the collapse of our economy.  These are the many of the same ways that France was being plundered before her Revolution in 1848.

WHY SOTOMAYOR?  I think because it was a typical Obama move.  Bold and swift; catch the opposition off guard, then slam it down their throat.  You know… the same way all petty tyrants do in South America and Africa and Venezuala.  By the time the opposition has time to figure out what just happened, there’s another, even more audacious move by Obama.  The liberals are high-fiving and pumping their fists.  They aren’t aware that the  leadership Obama displays is without an understanding of the far-reaching unintended consequences of his ill-thought-out policies.  He chose Sotomayor because she is an activist, plain and simple.  He could have chosen a qualified liberal, but that was the furthest thing from his mind. He has just slapped the American people in the face and is sitting back saying, “What are you going to do about it?”  It’s just one more nail in the coffin of the republic.

SO WHAT’S ALL THE FUSS ABOUT?  Seven Republican Senators hold the fate of the country in their hands.  They are all on the Senate Judiciary Committee and will be among those who must decide whether to release Sotomayor’s nomination to the full Senate.  They are: Jeff Sessions, Orrin Hatch, Charles Grassley, Jon Kyl, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn and Tom Coburn. Will they stand up for us?  Only one of them has to fold and vote to send her nomination to the Senate and its Katie bar the door.  I believe at least one will fold and the resulting debate in the Senate has the potential to divide our country on racial, economic, and social grounds even more, and as old Abe Lincoln said, “…a house divided cannot stand.”    Do you see now why Obama so admires Lincoln?  I do, and it’s certainly not what you think it might be.  This man is looking to divide the country so he can take control that much faster.  If he delays too long, people will catch on to what he's up to. And THAT's what all the fuss is about.