The talking heads are all aflutter with the latest bout of economic news. For a couple of months now several prominent personalities have repeatedly proclaimed the “recession” to be over and that America is well on its way back to prosperity. How they could make such claims while looking at the same data the rest of us see defies both logic and common sense. The problem with the talking heads is that they have now committed themselves to their predictions of recovery while, in fact, we are very far away from seeing any such thing realistically materialize. They are focusing on individual bits of data that seem encouraging and positive, while ignoring warning signs and negative information. They are simply not looking at the bigger economic picture.

While they praise the perceived beneficial effects of the $787 billion stimulus package (less than 20% of which has been spent thus far) for bringing the economy back from the brink of total collapse, they conveniently ignore the fact that this so-called stimulus is only a massive “credit injection” that has been created literally out of thin air, is based on and backed by nothing, and can therefore ultimately produce nothing. It is entirely fictitious.  And, while certain trends may indicate an improvement in economic conditions in the near term, what is certain is that any long term prospects for a real healing of this economic hemorrhaging are equally fictitious for as long as the "recovery" is dependent upon credit created out of thin air, based on nothing, and with no value.

Indeed, essentially every step taken by Congress, the administration (current and previous), the traditional media, and, sadly, many respected economists, to identify, assess and combat this growing financial crisis has also been based in fiction. The very fact that these same people who created the conditions that encouraged and enabled the behaviors that resulted in this crisis is alarming enough. Their elation over the latest housing numbers merely demonstrates the latest stage of denial and their almost universal ignorance of logic and good economic sense.

While celebrating the latest housing sales numbers, up 9.4%, and proclaiming this as the latest indicator that the “recession” is all but over, the talking heads seem to have forgotten about the commercial real estate market that is about to implode and drag many more financial institutions with it, as well as the flash-in-the-pan that was “cash for clunkers.”  (continued...)

In the early part of the Twentieth Century this movement caught on and came eventually to control the apparatus of both the Democrat and Republican parties.  Any assertion to the contrary is patently false.  Of those individuals most influential in the advancement of the Progressive agenda, the most popular names that come to mind are Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, William Jennings Bryan, Thomas Dewey, etc.  Lesser known are those who thought and wrote extensively on how to institutionalize and perpetuate the cause, to normalize it and thus allow it to overcome, overwhelm and entirely pervert the original system as designed by the Framers.

Indeed to this very day we all suffer the effects of this treasonous plot and, in fact, as mentioned above the movement is presently and most rapidly approaching it’s apex, for over the last eight years a great deal of advancement was made in terms of establishing the final foundation from which would spring a transformation in government never anticipated, much less intended, by the Framers of our Constitution, by which the rights of the citizens of this republic would cease to be as they had been, and the balance of power would shift to the federal government as it usurps those rights and claims its own right as supreme arbiter of the rights of the people, citing the interest of national security.  Now, what we have observed since the new administration has assumed power is the implementation of the final stages of advancing this statist agenda with blinding speed and appropriate distraction to turn the attention of those less savvy away from what is really happening.  While employing such benevolent-sounding terms as “social justice,” “economic justice,” and “common good,” the progressives have and continue to imply a desire to “help those less fortunate.”  However, the inevitable result that they intentionally hide from and deny is that the means they have decided to employ in order to achieve such lofty-sounding goals as economic and social “justice,” those means being government authority and force, are wholly incompatible with what is perhaps the most important and vital premise upon which this republic was founded, that being equality of opportunity.  In sum, where the Framers of the Constitution sought to establish conditions to promote and perpetuate equality of opportunity, these “progressives” of both major political parties seek to replace that original intent with an equality of outcome.

The very essence and sole aim of the established Democrat-Republican duopoly in modern politics in America today is perpetuating oneself in power at all costs.  The ends justify the means for both the Republican and Democrat parties; hence the critical situation these treasonous miscreants have created.  Whether one or the other is elected, the end result is the same – more government encroachment, more unconstitutional activity, and an ever-increasing threat to our individual liberty.  No one in government, save very, very few men and women of honor who are knowledgeable of the growing danger to our republic and our liberty – indeed to our continued existence as a nation of freemen – are willing to stand up and speak the truth to the people.   What is telling about the real agenda of both the Democrat and Republican parties is the fact that those who do speak out against the unconstitutional and tyrannical actions of the government and its officials are labeled as “extremists” and “fringe” candidates and either ignored, ostracized or silenced by their own parties. 

 Indeed, the sad truth of the matter is that for at least the last hundred years of our history, the truth of our national history and the proper role of government has been intentionally obfuscated by those in power so that they might remain in power.  Crises are intentionally created and managed for maximum benefit to the ruling party, the tactic of fear mongering is shamelessly employed in an attempt frighten the masses into compliance, to coerce them to cede their God given rights to a government promising security and stability.  It would be most prudent for all citizens to remember the words of Benjamin Franklin, who once stated that a people who are willing cede their liberty for the promise of security deserve neither and will lose both.

One need not be the most astute student of history, politics and economics to seek and find the truth. One need only approach this quest with honesty and as open a mind as one can muster given the context in which this information has been heretofore presented to the public over the course of the last hundred years.  Interestingly, upon studying pertinent and largely omitted factual information one will quickly realize that the actual historical facts do not agree with the claims of politicians and other government officials, with the presentations and interpretations offered by most influential and mainstream news media, and certainly not with much of what passes for acceptable curriculum in government schools and in universities throughout the country. 

It is no small thing to make such an assertion, to declare that the modern American political system, economic system and a substantial portion of the news-media is based upon a lie; a lie well known and understood by those who perpetuate it and manipulate it to their advantage and to the detriment of this republic.  The lie itself is rooted in a political movement whose objective has always been Statism: that is, the elevation of the rights and authority of the State superceding and ultimately usurping the rights of the individual.  In the case of our republic, the process is manifesting itself by “giving” rights to the State, specifically the federal government, while simultaneously and necessarily abrogating the rights of individuals.  The transfer of power is transformed from a “bottom-up” system of popular representation to a “top-down” system of administration (czars, anyone?) according to the design originally devised by the early American Progressives, most notably Wilson, the Roosevelts, Goodman, Croly, Beard and Dewey.

 The lie itself is the very history of this nation, political and economic, as it is now popularly explained, understood and accepted.  As outrageous as this claim may seem on the surface, I expect that the reader will find the documentary evidence as powerful and irrefutable as I did, simply because it is true.

Now that the election is over and the American people have spoken, the task for the Right becomes at first obvious. That first task, ultimately, is to find and define itself – and to do so as expeditiously as is practicable. This much is obvious. What is not so obvious, of course, is how this all-important task will be or ought to be accomplished – if at all. 

To the question of whether this can even be accomplished, whether or not a new conservatism can be first, defined, and second, molded into a cohesive movement solid enough to accomplish what it must, that being nothing less than arresting the rise of tyranny and arbitrary government through the advancement of government-imposed socialism, I would submit that it can only be accomplished outside of the duopolistic hegemony of the current mainstream party system. The cause of the new conservatism must be begun and advanced wholly and entirely apart from the Republican Party. More pointedly, the new conservatism must be held as sacred and kept secure from contamination by the Republican Party, because for the foreseeable future, that Party, even if it survives its current implosion, will continue to be entirely void of true conservatism and, as such, poison to any true conservative movement that has the unfortunate occasion to be defined as affiliate with it. 

To succeed, the new conservatism must find a home where it is wanted – outside the mainstream of politics and nonsensical parties – in the realm of what we recognize as third parties, such as Libertarian, Constitution, Conservative, etc. Indeed, it would be most beneficial to the larger movement to have members and activists within all of these third parties taking responsible and active roles in defining the path and goals of the new conservatism, for healthy debate amongst the various legitimate schools of conservative thought and discussion and proper understanding of the significance of the varying trends and norms from the various parts of the nation will be essential to the success of such a movement. That much is, or at least ought to be, obvious.

What is also obvious is that in its infancy this new conservatism and the war it wages will be largely a war of words, that is, words employed to convey and explicitly define ideas both for our side as well as for the opposition. Thus, it is essential in this war of words to not be the one defined by the rods of the other, but to first define the other employing those words that best convey the message intended.

To that end, I would suggest a definition of this new conservatism: that socio-economic and socio-political thought which is analogous to the classical liberalism of such great minds as Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton, Jay, von Mises, Hayek, Hume, Locke, Bastiat, Montesquieu, etc. I suggest this particular definition for, while it is necessary to divest ourselves of any connection whatsoever to the “nouveaux” or simply “faux” conservatism currently embraced by the Republican Party and its surrogates, it is just as necessary – if not even more so - to define how the opposition is intended by us to be perceived. I do not intend to suggest that any sort of deliberate deception be employed to that effect; on the contrary, I submit that the language and terminology employed be selectively vetted so as to best convey truth, for if it is truth that is the very essence of what we wish convey to the general populous, then if we should employ duplicity and deception to as to achieve our end, then the truth becomes that we are no more righteous than those who would oppress us, and thus the intended affect is obviously lost. It must be, then, that this war or words be fought from the very beginning with the overtly expressed desire and intent to shine ever brightly the light of truth so as to expose the darkness of the authoritarian form of socialism that surely awaits us given the current trend toward “change” at any cost. If the people will not accept truth and still choose willfully to subject themselves to tyranny, only then ought other, more questionable methods and tactics be employed.

Having stated that, then, and keeping in line with professing the truth of the current political climate, my conclusion and suggestion is to redefine the Progressive Left not as they would define themselves (the Progressive Left) but as what they are: new-socialists. To be sure, they are not “progressive” in any sense of the word, with the possible exception of the fact that their “newness” is found in bringing socialism to the United States for the first time. They are, in fact, “regressive,” falling back to the worn rhetoric and failed socialism of past ages – all of which has ruined the respective societies that have embraced such ideas. They cannot be called “liberal” because true “liberalism” is found in the newness of the great minds listed above. 

“Liberalism,” in the classical sense, is analogous to the advancement of new ideas and the promotion of Liberty. It goes without saying that the present self-proclaimed “Progressives” are anything but open to dialogue and advancement of new ideas. Therefore it is all the more fitting to tag them with the most appropriate label and effectively chain them to the erroneous ideology they embrace as their truth, and which is wholly and entirely antithetical to the principles upon which our Constitution is founded: The Democrat Party ought now be termed the “Neo-Socialist Left,” with all the negative connotations of regressivism inherent in such language.

To be sure, those of us advancing the New Conservatism should not shy away from defining the Neo-Socialist Left as such but should immediately adopt such terminology and employ it to the benefit of our cause. Likewise, we should not resist embracing new or, for that matter, old language to clearly define our ideas. Therefore we should not be ashamed to employ such terminology as “Classical Liberalism” or a “Liberalism of the Classical School” in conjunction with the use of the word “conservatism” to that the desired perception be projected. Indeed, the words themselves attest to the truth we seek to convey. Thus, it is our present duty to properly employ them to our desired end.

Watching the news last night I was disturbed by the image of video showing Barack Obama HOLDING AND KISSING BABIES.  I was appalled, to say the least.  I wonder if those mothers would have let him hold their babies if they were open to hearing the truth about Barack Obama's monstrous stance on abortion and infanticide?  One wonders if these people understand that if any these babies were born (early) due to an abortion that didn't work out as intended, Obama's position would be to let them die - or to kill them and finish the job, so to speak.  This man is evil.  His success on the campaign trail this year has been due as much to the economy falling apart and his competitor being a tired old man as is has been due to Obama's running a campaign rife with corruption on a scale I have never seen before.  He has repeatedly lied about his positions on virtually every issue, most notably abortion, infanticide and redistribution of wealth through government intervention.  He has orchestrated a cover-up of his entire life with the exceptions of the brief snippets he has decided to share with the public.  His birth, medical, university and some private records along with many of those of his wife - most notably her thesis on "Blackness" in America (a black rage against white folks from what I understand) have all been ordered sealed until after the November 4 election.  Would such arrogance and secrecy be tolerated by any white, male, conservative candidate? Of course not.

Back to abortion and infanticide.  Here are my thoughts on this subject for whatever it is worth:

Abortion is a holocaust.  It is murder.  It is unconscionable and inherently unjust under ANY circumstances.  We all know that when cells begin multiplying and growing they are doing so under the guidance and instruction of the human DNA blueprint so wisely planned out by God.  We all know that these cells are human - that this is a baby.  We all know that when something grows and reproduces and multiplies that is can do so only because it is alive - were it not alive and living it would not be able to grow or reproduce, correct? 

Abortion is the merciless killing of an innocent unborn child by either literally ripping the child apart limb by little limb, burning it to death in a caustic chemical-saline mix, inducing early labor to birth the child early and leaving the helpless infant to die without assistance or comfort, or by almost completely delivering the baby, leaving the head inside the mother while the murderer HOLDS THE BABY'S FEET, TURNS THE BABY OVER AND PLUNGES SCISSORS INTO THE BACK OF IT'S NECK, THEN APPLIES A VACUUM TO SUCK THE BABY'S BRAIN OUT.  No one method is any more evil than the others.  Murder is murder, plain and simple, and in my own very judgmental, politically-incorrect, far-right-wing-conservative-conspiratorial assessment, there is a very special place in hell reserved for such as those who could hold the feet of an infant and plunge scissors into it's neck with the premeditated intent of killing such innocent life.  There, I've said it.

It is unconscionable that a civilized society would not merely acquiesce to such barbarity, but elevate it to the noble status of law - and the Law of the Land, at that.  It is, to my feeble mind, inconceivable that such atrocities could be given legitimate and protected legal status in a republic whose Constitution is supposedly firmly rooted in the promotion and protection of Liberty, to which the protection of life is indeed essential.  When one is deprived of life one is not afforded Liberty.   As President, Barack Obama would deprive millions upon millions more babies of their lives by gleefully signing the Freedom of Choice Act into law, which would purportedly override any and every restriction on any abortion procedure at any stage of a pregnancy.  This is not merely un-American, it is something out of Nazi Germany - in fact, that is essentially how the Nazis were able to lead up to the implementation of their "Final Solution to the Jewish Problem." 

Abortion-on-demand through the third trimester over several years numbed and desensitized the masses to the horrors of what the Nazi regime had planned.  It lead to partial-birth abortion, euthanizing the mentally retarded and physically deformed children to "spare them the difficulties of life," and ultimately to millions of innocent people being killed because the government didn't like them.  The Soviets employed the same policy, as do the Communist Chinese at present.  If you don't think such horrors can happen here just go to YouTube and watch a partial-birth abortion.  If you were to watch such a thing and be wholly un-phased by witnessing an innocent life brutally taken by such barbaric means, I would suggest that there is very likely a special place in hell reserved for you right next to the guy who killed the baby.  Maybe you could even share a drink with Hitler and Himmler - but just remember that even as head of the SS Heinrich Himmler collapsed and threw up in convulsions after witnessing a mass execution by firing squad at one of his favorite death camps.

Do I think it could happen - that abortion-on-demand could lead to people like you and I being separated from our families, and led off to prison camps to be executed?  My answer is that I don't know.  I don't know about a lot of things these days.  But I do know that I am a Christian.  And I do know that a President Obama would not like the things that I believe.  And I do know that he has no regard for human life, that he is a liar, that he has employed a corrupt and thuggish organization to steal an election, and that most people know absolutely nothing of substance about this man because he refuses to unseal pertinent information to be vetted. I also know where he stands on my right to bear arms and the rest of the Constitution, for that matter: 

"But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And to that extent as radical as people tried to characterize the Warren court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you, it says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf."  Like kill you in the womb. 

I don't know a lot of things, but I do know I will be purchasing non-perishable items, outdoor clothing, and that I will be frequenting gun shows looking to make acquisitions.  Do I think horrors can happen here?  I don't know, but if our next President loads the Supreme Court with justices who interpret the Constitution as being fluid, living an devolving with the times, that tells me we don't really have one and that I should be prepared.

Below is a link to a video I found through New Advent.  It is a little long, but very much worth watching.  It is not graphic or violent - simply words - Obama's own words, images and music.  There is a picture of a deceased baby at the very end of the video, but it is intact - the result of a saline induced abortion.

http://www.onetruemedia.com/shared?p=7030bd098cca768e72d111&skin_id=701&utm_source=otm&utm_medium=text_url

This video should be widely distributed - especially to Obama supporters.  It is very tactfully done, as much as a video on such a topic can be done tastefully.  They cannot deny the truth - and they cannot say they never knew....

Or, would he prefer to remain in the Democrat majority of the Senate come January 20? Or maybe he’s even sending out feelers for a Cabinet post in an Obama Administration… It is getting hard to tell. In fact one could possibly argue that he doesn’t really want it. After all, how many opportunities has McCain had to call into question Obama’s stealth past, his socialist and terrorist connections, his complete and very obvious lack of any academic work that might offer even a minute view into that the man is really thinking and how he views the world – and he has passed nearly all of them by until last week. Indeed, even going on the attack for Senator McCain seem to mean letting you running mate do the dirty work. It is not an abnormal thing to have the candidate at the top of the ticket try to remain above the fray and appear more “statesman-like” while their running mate goes for the jugular. 

Here’s where I have a problem with McCain’s alleged strategy: he’s not going for the jugular and I don’t think he will. Worse, I believe it’s not that he wouldn’t, it’s that he believes he shouldn’t. Senator McCain, a career navy man who has more than served his fair share of time in combat and the living hell of North Vietnamese POW camp, no doubt understands very well the essence of combat. Whether the combat is military or political the goal of combat is victory, and one achieves victory in only one of two ways: one forces the enemy to surrender, or one destroys and terminates the enemy. 

Given the stakes in this election and the fact that they have just been raised immeasurably higher by the recent government actions to nationalize massive segments of the private economy, which McCain himself supports, one would think the Senator would be fighting as hard as he can to destroy and terminate the enemy rather than simply try to force him to capitulate and surrender, and this most especially so given the fact that Obama is undoubtedly the most dangerous man ever to position himself for a takeover of the US Government. I say takeover, rather than “seek election” because in seeking election one does not employ miscreants to engage in vote fraud on a massive scale, nor does one celebrate little children being forced to sing propaganda songs about “hope and change,” nor does one remain conspicuously silent on the subject of youths dressed in fatigues performing paramilitary drills in public schools while shouting out Obama’s plans for “change.”

The thing I am finding truly disturbing is that right now he appears to be fighting for neither capitulation nor destruction of the enemy. In fact, just within the last couple of days Senator McCain has actively defended Obama. His admonished his own supporters for demanding he hit Obama harder over his connection to terrorist William Ayers, and then called Senator Barack Obama an inherently good and decent man who loves and believes in America.

Senator, I beg to differ wit your assessment of Mr. Obama, and here’s why:

1. Inherently good and decent men do not enable infanticide;

2. Inherently good and decent men do not remain silent when their supporters threaten to bring criminal charges against anyone who speaks ill of The One;

3. Inherently good and decent men do not remain silent when children are being exploited for political purposes;

4. Inherently good and decent men to not go out of their way to hide their past;

 5. Inherently good and decent men to not remain silent when children are indoctrinated into politically extremist views by those who are entrusted with their care and education’

6. Inherently good and decent men would not have spent 20 years in a racist, anti-American “church” listening to their pastor incite hate in the name of Christ;

7. Inherently good and decent men would admit to their past associations with extremist groups like ACORN, would admit to the roles they served, and denounce attempts to win an election by fraud;

8. Inherently good and decent men do no associate with admitted and unrepentant terrorists;

9. Inherently good and decent men would denounce their endorsements by Marxist and socialist groups, as well as foreign terror organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah;

10. Inherently good and decent men would not actively try to subvert the foreign policy of the sitting President (however misguided he may be…);

11. Inherently good and decent men would not subvert the Constitution at every opportunity;

12. Inherently good and decent men would not subvert their own nation’s sovereignty to a world body like the UN;

13. Inherently good and decent men speak plainly about what they believe and what they want to do;

14. Inherently good and decent men do not actively sanction the suppression of free speech;

15. Inherently good and decent men do not devalue human life to the equivalent of a “mistake”;

16. Inherently good and decent men do not engage in corrupt activity and then point fingers at others;

17. Inherently good and decent men would admit to past mistakes and ask forgiveness;

18. Inherently good and decent men do not play the “race-card”;

19. Inherently decent men do not incite race-riots through their surrogates;

20. Inherently good and decent men would speak the truth.

There is nothing good and decent about Barack Obama. He is a monster who enabled infanticide simply so he could continue to rake in campaign money and support from Planned Parenthood. He was an “academic” yet never published any professional work, only is self-crafted and spun autobiography. He has denied associations anyone with an internet connection can validate that he had, he refuses to answer questions on almost every facet of his life’s story, and he received not merely a free pass but the adulation and love of the smitten masses who have been waiting for “the One.” History shows time and again when a man come out of nowhere and ascends to high office without vetting and proper examination, the consequences can be most severe. And now with the perfect storm brewing economically, socio-politically, and culturally, we have in Obama the most extreme and dangerous ideological zealot every to seek the Presidency, and a man who has employed masterfully the teaching of his master, Saul Alinsky – deceit on a massive scale, because one cannot divulge who they really are lest they be rejected. Hence the necessity of pretending to be like everyone else; to lie, cheat and steal, to employ thuggish threats and corruption, and to deny everything with a smile while playing the “race-card.” 

The fact is that we no more about Sarah Palin’s 17 year of daughter’s pregnancy and Sarah’s newborn son Trigg than we do about Obama. But John McCain believes he is a good and decent man. The man who as President would utterly destroy what is left of capitalism and liberty in this country is a “good and decent man?” 

While I had been a “fence-sitter” or a “nose-holder,” in less than lukewarm support of this ticket, with this statement coming from a man who portents to be a conservative and a maverick, I can stand it no longer, because with such a statement McCain has as much as openly admitted that he will not rock the boat in Washington, he will not cross the line that counts, he will not be a real maverick when it comes to truly standing up for what is right. And most disappointingly of all, in admonishing his supporters he makes it clear that he will not go for the jugular and fight to terminate Obama’s chances at the White House with the arsenal he has available to him. He will not use all the weaponry at his disposal to bring this combat to a victorious conclusion for the American people. He will not put his country first – for fear of offending fence-sitting Democrats and perhaps losing their support. At this point, in my own opinion, the only reason McCain can call himself a maverick is because he has fought conservatives every inch of the way. 

Like many others out there, I can take a lot and compromise to a point. My line in the sand has been crossed. And, I am now more than ever convinced that if this republic is to survive as a free society, it will be because the third parties run the Democrats and Republicans out of town and make the Constitution the law of the land once again. Anything less will be un-survivable after an Obama Presidency. Continued capitulation to Obama’s Chicago socialist propaganda machine is merely a policy of appeasement that will only serve to undermine the cause of the right. I am now convinced that McCain does not have it in him to fight Obama to the death, so to speak. We all know the MSM is in the bad for Obama, and that Obama is a vey intelligent man with a massive underground extremist organization determined to hand him the Presidency licitly or illicitly – by any means necessary. 

And now we know that the GOP leadership will roll over and cut the best deal it can with these traitorous thugs while leaving the rest of us with false hope. I will not be fooled. I know the GOP cannot be trusted any more than the Democrats. If the future of this republic is in any way to resemble the glories of her past days, the only viable way to set this course is through independent candidates, third parties and merciless phone and email assaults on Capitol Hill. I, for one and for what it is worth, will be throwing myself into third party activism and campaigning. If I had money I’d be throwing that too. It is far better to begin and end the revolution with the ballot rather than with the shedding of blood which should be avoided at all costs, although I am not at all convinced that the government, especially under Obama, would be able resist the temptation to fire the first shot. May God help us in our righteous cause of Liberty.

Here’s a news-flash you won’t see on CNN, FOX, or any other media outlet of ill repute for that matter: the US Government thinks you are stupid. So do the politicians we continue to elect to “represent” us at the legislative and executive levels. So do the bureaucrats that are appointed and hired by the government. They all think we are stupid, and they might even be right.

Why would I even suggest such a thing, that we the people might just really be as stupid as the politicians assume us to be? Here’s my answer: because we are acting like it. And if we don’t wake up real soon and take some serious action we are going to be jolted awake one morning only discover that we no longer live in a free republic, and all the evidence, coupled with the total economic impact of the events of the last several weeks suggest that we are coming perilously close to that day.

Many, if not most, who are reading this would agree with this assessment, but for the sake of those who haven’t been paying attention to history, have no clue that we have a Constitution that is being knowingly and continually violated with seeming impunity by our elected representatives, bureaucrats and judges, and for those who, being either blissfully ignorant about the truth regarding the economic catastrophe our once-free market has become or who simply nod their heads at the assurance of government that they are working hard to fix the problem and everything is going to be OK, I have some disturbing news for you: the government and the politicians you elected are all lying to you – because they think you are stupid. And if you continue to believe them, then you are stupid.

Here is the ugly truth: In the last month your government has committed to spend approximately $1 trillion to bail out various Wall Street financial institutions, along with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. That brings the officially acknowledged federal deficit to roughly $10 trillion. And there will most certainly be more regardless who wins the election: more spending, more promises of programs to help homeowners in over their heads, more debt. The Treasury will have to continue bailing out the FDIC as it (the FDIC) has already paid out the $45 billion fiscal insurance policy it holds to the many banks that have already failed. Amid all this chaos the government officials and elected representatives and candidates for office step up and promise they’ll fix it. One of these reprehensible bulwarks of all that is wrong in the world, Rep. Barney Frank – a man who is at the very least (along with his many Democrat and Republican comrades) complicit if not guilty of gross negligence in facilitating this mess has promised to do “major surgery” on the nation’s financial system. 

If Frank and his compatriots in the Congress hold true to their promise you can bet there will be more bank failures and this current recession will likely devolved into a long depression. Why? Because the whole reason the world’s financial system is on the verge of total collapse is because of government meddling in the economy by trying to manipulate and perpetuate artificial conditions of a growing economy. This is called central economic planning, a long discredited manipulative policy that has been proven unsustainable over time, as we are currently witnessing. You will never hear your Congressman or Presidential candidates speak of this, for to do so would betray the truth, and the truth would set us free, so to speak. 

Speaking this truth would be the equivalent of admitting that our planned and over-manipulated economy is no more a true free market system than was the Soviet economy that imploded in 1991 – and as this ugly truth stares us in face all we hear from politicians and bureaucrats is that “greedy Wall Street CEOs” are the ones to blame. In fact, some in Congress are already holding hearings featuring testimony from CEOs of several of the companies recently bailed out or that have failed. The Congress has the sheer audacity to lay 100% of the blame at the feet of these CEOs, who certainly deserve their share of the blame to whatever degree they jumped on the high-risk bundle bandwagon, while conveniently overlooking their own actions that directly contributed the creation of an environment where such catastrophically stupid business practices were not merely possible but were strongly encouraged. One party accuses the other of deregulating the finance industry as if that were the cause while the other accuses the first party of enacting senseless regulations as if those were the cause – and to an extent, both are correct. What was had prior to deregulation was a lot of bad regulation that was replaced by nothing that would solve the problems the bad regulation created, and most would agree that this is so.

However, while enacting laws for the purpose of regulation of commerce is a legitimate function of the Congress, enabling the Federal Reserve to secretly enact policy of its own, and for which it is unaccountable and un-auditable, specifically designed and intended to manipulate the money supply and interest rates to create and perpetuate a false prosperity nicely contained in a bubble that is an anomaly of free market operation, is not. In fact not only does the existence of a central bank go against the advice of the Founding Fathers of our country, it essentially violates all of the core principles upon which the Constitution is founded.

The Founders knew all too well the pitfalls of a fiat currency, that is, a currency of paper money that derives its “value” by the arbitrary authority of government declaring it’s worth, as it is in reality not backed up by any tangible assets. During the Revolutionary War, the Continental Congress financed itself partly by its self-produced Continental currency – paper money like we use today – that was not backed up by gold or anything else of any intrinsic value. The people were forced to use it, and the government simply was able to produce more of it by printing it, until they had printed such an overabundance of it that the currency itself became entirely worthless. Unfortunately the geniuses in government and those at the fed have not correctly understood the warnings of the Founders, because we have been doing the same thing since 1971 when Nixon took us of the gold standard. Either that or they know exactly what they are doing, which would be even more disturbing.

The fact of the matter is that those running the Fed are not stupid – everything they do is calculated. So why would they deliberately choose to destroy the dollar, because that is exactly what our government’s economic “rescue plan” or bailout will achieve if it continues the current charted course. They are destroying the dollar because the fundamental element of this “rescue plan” is the infusion of massive amounts of cash into the monetary system. The problem is that the treasury has none, and so it is left to the Fed to print it. With each new dollar that gets printed and injected into the system, the value of all the other dollars out there is diminished so they become worth even less on the market; therefore the buying power of individuals is likewise diminished as the value of the dollar goes down. The more currency produced, the less value it has. 

This is “inflation 101” and everyone on Capitol Hill and in Washington ought to know that. But, then again, these are by and large the same folks who signed on to creating the conditions that ultimately brought about this catastrophe, so it is not entirely surprising that they would sign on to allowing massive amounts of money to be printed and injected into the system. My dark theory on this is that in doing so they are inviting hyperinflation, which is when so much fiat currency is produced that it becomes essentially worthless (take Italy, for example, where you would pay 10,000 Lira for a pack of cigarettes). Perhaps they know this. Perhaps they don’t care. At the very least, they’d tell us, they are working hard and doing something to “fix the problem. 

But that is exactly the root of the problem in the first place, and so here is where the idea of individual responsibility and self-government comes in. The people are running like sheep in whatever direction the government leads – even if it is off a cliff- and unfortunately they have become so conditioned to looking to government to solve their problems that to do otherwise is often not even an afterthought. The people are not asking the right questions either – if they’re asking them at all. But, they are demanding that government “do something.” If they were living up to their civic responsibilities in the first place they would have been paying attention and seen this coming and would have been able to put enormous pressure on their elected representatives to stop the insanity before the crash became inevitable. 

The fact that this is happening in a Presidential election year makes the idea of individual self-government all the more important. The people are panicking as they see a long and deep recession looming, the politicians are panicking because they are afraid they’ll not be re-elected, and no one wants to tell the truth about how we got here in the first place. And now with the totality of the erosions of our Constitutional liberties having been much accelerated in recent years and the government nationalizing massive segments of industry, taking over individual home mortgages to presumably have courts renegotiate rates or perhaps dictate them, a complacent and uninformed electorate is only weeks away from electing a relatively unknown, unprepared, and untested politician who has spend the vast majority of his life immersed in the world of radical socialist ideology while pretending not to be. Our economy, our nation, our republic is being handed to him like John the Baptist’s head on a platter.

The people are crying, “Do something!”   Be careful what you ask for, because now that the government is doing something everything is going to get worse. You don’t believe that? Then name something outside of the realm of military action or law enforcement that the government does well. Incidentally, the national defense and law enforcement are really the only useful Constitutionally mandated obligations of the Federal Government, aside from the construction of roads, and the legitimate regulation of commerce. 

Also of note is Article I, Section 8. Under the title “Power Granted to Congress,” paragraph 5 reads: “To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin and fix the Standard of Weights and measures.” Note that nowhere in this paragraph is there mentioned an entity known as “The Federal Reserve,” nor is the authority to coin money and fix its value given to a single principal in the person of the Chairman of the Federal Reserve. Furthermore, it is important to note that the Constitution as written is binding as the Supreme Law of the Land, except where amended and ratified. No amendment created the Federal Reserve; rather, by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 did the Congress unconstitutionally give charter to the Federal Reserve and illegally abdicate its obligation to coin money and set its value. Indeed, as if the creation of the Fed as an illicit central bank wasn’t bad enough, think for a moment of the sheer audacity and arrogance in thinking that one person with even the best and brightest minds to assist them, could ever permanently manipulate the forces of the free market to create a condition of permanent prosperity. And that is a major part of the problem.

If the markets were left to themselves there would indeed be periods of growth and periods of correction; however, absent mountains of poorly defined or ill-scoped regulation and meddling politicians abusing their lawful authority to implement self-serving policies pandering to their own constituencies and thereby exerting massive, undue influence and encroachment on the machinations of the free market, those corrections would be comparably mild and sort-lived. Yet those very persons responsible for creating those conditions encouraging greed and corruption are now the same who demand of us still more of our money and our trust. The talking heads on the TV, with few notable exceptions, tell us repeatedly that as unfortunate as it is, we have no other option. 

To those who suggest as much I say this: economic freedom and liberty are inseparable – you cannot have the one without the other. If the market can be so easily manipulated by the arbitrary will of government for the benefit of the few, then the market is not free and neither are those who participate in it. If, on the other hand, the market is allowed to dictate unto itself and to its participants the worth of goods and services and the worthiness of those who seek them, then all are able to prosper to the extent that they wish to share in that prosperity. Such is free-market capitalism is spared undue meddling of government. That is our other option, indeed our only option; for if we do trust these power hungry fools again, the hegemony of the government, then we are exactly as stupid as they think we are, and we deserve the misery that shall most certainly befall us. If not for liberty we would only then have no other option but follow along like sheep and give to government all that it demands. We are now at a crossroad in the history of this nation, and the decisions to be made and the actions to be taken in the immediate future will have a profound and perhaps irreversible impact on our lives and those of our children. 

Let us not fool ourselves: we have been asleep at the wheel for far too long, and if we don’t immediately wake up and grab the wheel we run the very serious risk of driving right off the cliff. If you don’t believe in the possibility of an authoritarian socialist regime in the United States you are either very naïve or ignorant of history, because the possibility is not only very real but is staring us in the face. Right now our system is still the best in the world, albeit imperfect. It would be even better and we would be returned to great prosperity if our representatives and government were actually abiding by the Constitution. They will not do so unless we the people force them too.

It could be argued that we are in the beginning stages of tyranny, of the proverbial “benevolent dictatorship.” The government is moving now, through the Fed, to take over controlling interest in even more of the banks in the US. The government is also planning on purchasing mortgages and will thus become the largest homeowner in the world. As they “loan” billions to the auto industry and then, doubtless, to others they will likewise require oversight, if not “public ownership” in those companies. Does “public ownership” sound familiar?   Once government encroaches on a segment of the private sector it will not extricate itself unless the people force it to do so. Remember, the New Deal was sold to the people on the premise that it was a temporary measure to meet the needs of an extraordinary crisis. This same line is being sold to us today. Don’t believe it.

At a time when government encroachment into the private lives of citizens at the federal and state level is at an unprecedented level, where state executives and legislatures usurp the rights of parents by mandating that children receive certain “vaccines,” where the Federal Government is pursuing a course to take over massive segments of the economy, where private sector jobs are being lost while government jobs are being created, and where the most likely winner of the upcoming Presidential election will seek to force state run health care, “world” taxes payable to the UN, and the elimination of the right of Americans to keep and bear arms, complacency is not an option. We must be organized and united starting today, for we must take back control of our government and make it work for us and not against us. Government encroachment into areas heretofore left to the individual self-government and personal responsibility of each citizen is out of control, and if left unchecked it will consume us. Keep this in mind: our Founding Fathers sacrificed their very lives for the liberty we are letting the government illicitly usurp piece by piece. So, as you witness these current events continue to unfold, keep asking yourself this question each day: “Am I sovereign or a subject?” Wake up, America, before it’s too late.

Since today is Respect Life Sunday I felt the need to repost an article I wrote some time ago. It is an article about Obama’s extreme pro-abortion stance and his support of infanticide. It has been modified slightly from its’ original form. I believe Obama’s pro-abortion extremism and activism warrants not merely revisiting the subject over and over again, but indeed speaking and writing of it so often that the average citizen with their head in the sand cannot help but to notice. 

For me, from my Catholic Christian perspective, it is an obligation to illuminate the unspeakable evils enabled by men and women of Obama’s ilk, yet all too sadly such discussion of the truth fall on deaf ears even in many Christian circles. This truth is ugly and must be told and acknowledged. What is perhaps most disturbing to me is that as Americans so many profess to be Christians, believers in the salvation of humanity bought by the price of the Blood of Christ, yet so many of these self-professed believers also either actively sanction the unjustifiable slaughter of the innocent unborn in their own mother’s wombs or they take the politically correct approach and claim that it would be wrong to “impose” their moral beliefs on others. I submit that such a weak excuse will not win the favor of the Almighty when at judgment the tens of millions of holy innocents fill the Holy Courts and ask, “Why?”

Indeed, for those who profess belief in God in general and in Christ as Savior in particular there cannot be any validity found in what we Catholics term the “cafeteria” approach where one accepts all the warm-and-fuzzy sentiments and rewards of Christianity while rejecting either tacitly or outright the difficult moral stances required in order to obtain even the possibility of attaining such rewards.

To say that Americans have become complacent in their faith is an understatement, for it is increasingly clear that many do not see the inherent and irrefutable connection between the moral evils being perpetrated in this country and our collective woes as a nation. To pass such things off as merely coincidental is not only naïve but deadly – both to one’s soul and to our republic. I readily confess that I am no theologian; however, to deny the correlation between, say, the tens of millions of abortions that have been allowed to take place on American soil – something we know as Christians is inherently evil and unjustifiable under any condition or pretext – and the idea that disobedience to God by the continuing perpetration of grave moral evils will ultimately result in the loss of His grace to sustain us is completely and utterly stupid, not to mention hypocritical. When we turn our collective backs on God and His Commandments as a nation should it be any surprise, then, that He withdraws His grace and leaves us to our own devices in our imperfect and fallen condition, subject to our own concupiscence to fend for ourselves? It is any wonder that the more prideful we become as a nation the less guidance and assistance we can expect from our humble and living God? 

If we are to regain our footing and return our nation to prosperity it is necessary to acknowledge God and His commandments, to honor them, and to collectively repent of the evils that go on within our boarders. Darkness cannot withstand the light of Truth, and it is indeed His Truth that will once again set us free from slavery to sin. We can illuminate the darkness by speaking the truth and here is a good place to start: actions have consequences in the eyes of God, for Jesus tells us as much throughout the Gospels. Remember the wheat and the chaff?   Let us not mince words, then.

What is the true cost of the proposed government bailout?  While most of America was enjoying the last weekend of summer and watching football, our unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats at the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve were busy working on how to “solve” the financial crisis that seems to grow bigger and worse by the day. The “initial” solution that they came up with will cost between $700 billion and $1 trillion. That is the initial estimate of the cost. You can bet it will go much higher.

Wall Street has essentially collapsed and its geography has been forever change due to the deadly combination of greed, ineptitude of oversight, and government interference in the form of too much bad regulation. All this coupled with the Fed eternally manipulating interest rates and printing money in a vain attempt to affect a positive outcome and stave off the looming crisis as it simmered only served to compound the problem, and we are seeing the results. The result is an economic collapse or meltdown.  It is primarily due to government manipulation and meddling in something it has neither the authority nor the tools nor the competence to be meddling with. It is the result of “command economics” and central planning. Central planning is always bad for an economy, and in this case really, really bad planning results in a really, really bad problem

Admittedly, there was a certain degree of satisfaction watching the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd, Harry Reid, Barney Frank and the rest of the criminals on Capitol Hill standing there like deer in the headlights, with the shock and awe clearly displayed on their faces after their conference with Treasury Secretary Paulson and Fed Chairman Bernanke. One has to wonder, though, if the looks of grave concern were precipitated by the fact that they had just been told that the economy would imminently collapse if AIG were allowed to fail, or if it was because they understand that they are complicit in this financial catastrophe and are terrified that they will be found out. 

Sadly they have no real cause for concern, though, because the only pseudo-mainstream publications that actually report the truth of this mater and name who is complicit in creating the conditions and ignoring the signs that allowed this financial meltdown to occur are your usual “right-wing conspiracy” theorists like the editors and reporters at the Wall Street Journal, Portfolio, National Review, Weekly Standard, Investors Business Daily and the like. Guaranteed you won’t hear Katie Couric and Charlie Gibson bringing up names like Donna Shalala, Jamie Gorelick, James Johnson or, heaven help us, William Jefferson Clinton.

A remarkable thing is occurring before our very eyes in Washington, though – Republicans and Democrats seem to be genuinely working together to implement a solution as quickly as possible to calm fears and the markets. Certainly there are many differences being voiced, but in general they are all in agreement and the final product will be a matter of hammering out the minutia, so to speak. This is actually more frightening than the actual financial crisis. Why? Because these are the folks that got us into this mess in the first place due to their own narrow self-serving interests, incompetence and corruption, and purposeful lack of oversight of the Leviathan wherein this meltdown began – Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

The solution as it stands would give at present would give Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson extraordinary, unprecedented and essentially dictatorial authority to essentially do what he pleases with $ 1 trillion in taxpayer money. The Wall Street Journal called it for what it is: “Lots of money. Lots of power. Naked, ugly dictatorial power.”

The actual language in the proposed bailout Act as written by Treasury lawyers doesn’t inspire comfort either: “Decisions by the Treasury pursuant to the Authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.” This language is self-explanatory. And it is frightening.

And this is most likely only the beginning, the tip of the proverbial iceberg. On Monday former President Bill Clinton called for a bailout for all those homeowners who can’t afford to make their mortgage payments. The auto industry in Detroit is lining up for handouts to the tune of $50 billion minimum, a deal that has all but been cut between Detroit lobbyists and Speaker Pelosi. One can be sure that credit card debt will mushroom sooner rather than later and all those banks holding that debt will be demanding their share of the taxpayer-funded pie. The airlines won’t be far behind as they are being crushed by unprecedented fuel prices. And on it goes with no end in sight, and that is precisely the problem with government bailouts on such a massive scale; once they begin they do not end.

Right now it is difficult to assess whether we are still at the crossroads or if we have turned a corner toward authoritarian socialism, but is the language in the proposed plan is any indication suffice it to say that things to not look good for the future of a free market or for liberty in the US. And this is unconscionable.

In undertaking to engage in the extraordinary practice of massive government bailouts and nationalization of the most fundamental sector of the economy the US government has stepped into territory unknown since before the Revolutionary War. In fact, it was this exact type of arbitrary government authority that was the reason for fighting the Revolutionary War. While the talking heads on TV and radio speak of entering into “uncharted territory,” the brutal fact of the matter is that this is far from uncharted territory for this same unchecked and arbitrary government power was seen, understood and resisted the Founding Fathers of our republic as they were not afraid to call it for what it is. It is called tyranny.  

It is no secret to anyone who has read the Constitution of the United States with even a modicum of understanding that al three branches of the Federal Government have been violating their Constitutional authority for quite some time now. However, the actions taken by the government over the course of the last week are truly unprecedented. No branch of the government has any Constitutional authority whatsoever to takeover operations of a private business. No government authority is granted by the Constitution to appropriate public fund for such purposes. And certainly no Constitutional authority exists to allow for granting dictatorial powers to a cabinet secretary to run and attempt to manipulate the economy as he sees fit. It is unprecedented and entirely unconstitutional.

And yet knowing it is unconstitutional, out of fear this Congress will overwhelmingly approve this illegal action. And they will hope and pray that it works. And if it doesn’t? It this plan doesn’t work – and keep in mind that there is no Plan B because this is Plan B – amid all the uncertainly that would follow such events, the one thing you can be assured of is even more invasive and strict government intervention. But to what end? Government issued and approved credit becoming mandatory and the sole acceptable manner of conducting commerce? Government seizure and control of all banks and credit issuing agencies? Where does it end?

And what if it does work? What if those administering the government later decide that the government should remain in total control of the financial sector and through still more illegal Acts of Congress continue to "renew" the contrived authority to seize and maintain private companies in conservatorship? What then? 

Perhaps most frightening is that no one in government is listening to anyone who is raising these concerns because that is what happens when fear rules the day, and more alarming still is the known fact people will accept anything that promises even temporary security when real fear is being held over their heads. Hitler, Stalin and Mao did not rise to power because people were happy and comfortable and felt secure politically and economically. Fear is a dangerous weapon and history has shown time and again how fear, when employed and exploited by government, always proves fatal to liberty. And when government moves quickly to address a problem, even a well-intentioned solution will result in some very foreseeable repercussions that no one in Washington wants to acknowledge, much less address.

When a people willingly sacrifice their liberty – as is about to occur here – they are no longer sovereign, but subjects, for a republic exists only when a free people willingly submit to a governmental authority de jure, that is an established and mutually agreed upon system of government that by law may operate only with clearly defined limitations, purpose and intent. Should said government exceed any or all of those limitations, thereby exceeding its constitutional authority, it is the responsibility of a free people to take what power with which it is vested – that is all real power – and bring an abrupt end to government abuses of authority. 

In a republic, government exists and operates at the pleasure and by the authority of the people. That is what is meant by government de jure – government by and of legitimate law. When government abuses its power and acts outside of its legally defined authority it acts arbitrarily and becomes a government de facto, that is government by decree or imposition. In such a case citizens are no longer sovereign, but subjects; and, so it almost goes without saying that given the purpose of government being control, thus it’s natural tendency to encroach on liberty and thereby necessitating a clear legal definition of its valid scope of authority, once government exceeds said limitations of authority with impunity it will continue to do so. And in doing so it will continue to encroach upon and usurp individual rights and liberty unless the people fulfill their own obligations as a free people and stop it. 

In a republic such as ours, all true, valid and legitimate power and authority is vested in the people, not in the government. That is unless or until the people relinquish that power either by action or inaction to the government. Such is our present predicament.

As stated above, we all know that all three branches of our government have been exceeding their legitimate authority for many, many years now, encroaching on liberty and violating the Constitution. With this latest government incursion and illegitimate execution of authority it does not have the stakes have become frighteningly high and all too real in a vey short span of time. Now is the time for the people to decide: subject or sovereign, courage or cowardice. This action now being undertaken by the US Government takes the idea of sanctioning the violating of the Constitution to an unprecedented and very dangerous level. This time the politicians and bureaucrats have not only arrogantly wiped their hind-sides with the Constitution, but once they are finished wiping they intend to rub it in our collective faces – but only if we let them. 

If we rise up and let our voices be heard, they will respond, for nothing motivates career politicians like fear, especially in an election year and with the elections a little over a month away. We have a choice: we can make our collective voices heard now, loud and clear and force them to respond, or we can wait and see what happens. The problem with the latter choice is that the next time the people decide to rise up in the face of tyranny they may have to do it with torches and pitchforks and rifles.

So what is a trillion dollar government bailout really worth? What does it really cost? The true cost of the thing is liberty and a free market economy. The price we will eventually pay is subjection to tyranny.

This morning as I was watching some coverage of the 9/11 Memorial Services in New York, Washington, and Pennsylvania, FOX News aired a 19 minute piece that showed the attacks and major news events of that day as they happened though in much abbreviated format. As I watched it I was dumbstruck, and was moved in a may I had not been since September 11, 2001.

I was out of the country when Al Qaeda hit New York, DC, and rural Pennsylvania. My wife and I were on vacation in London, and had just come up out of the Tube having spent the day at the London Museum. We saw crowds of people rushing to the newsstands grabbing the evening papers. It was obvious to us that something was going on; yet when I got a copy of the paper in my hands and saw the front cover with the image of an airliner smashing through the North Tower, I was speechless. We stood there and read for a few minutes and then ran to our hotel and promptly turned on the TV. There we watched the images over and over again. We wept and stared in disbelief. 

At the time all I, knew was that the planes that hit the Twin Towers had taken off from Boston. I assumed that they were the US Airways Shuttles from Boston to New York and Washington that both had been hijacked and had been flown into the towers.   The news channels did not have all the information and were only able to report what they could, and there were lots of unanswered questions about the attacks, and lots of missing information to put the whole thing together. 

As we watched the coverage from our London hotel room we also tried frantically to call home to our families in Dallas and Boston, which took hours to get through. Still thinking it was the Shuttles that had taken down the towers, I reflected and mourned for those crews and those passengers. I mourned for those families whose loved ones would never be coming home again. And, I thought about how easily it could have been me on one of those planes. 

You see, at the time I was an airline pilot living in Boston, based out of New York LaGuardia, and I commuted to LGA several times each week via the Shuttle. I knew the crews. I knew the passengers. I thought, like everyone else, “How could this have happened?” And in the wake of the sham that was the 9-11 Commission, half of whom were complicit in enabling the atmosphere that allowed the attacks to be executed, I still wonder. Today I watched, and wondered and reflected. And I grew angry and was moved beyond words. I don’t quite know how to describe the experience. 

My little girl was running and playing and laughing around the family room, blissfully unaware of what I was watching and what it meant for her future. I think it was precisely that which weighed so heavily on my heart this morning. I looked at her precious face and held her and hugged her, and I promised her that I would always be there to protect her. I thought about what kind of monsters would wantonly kill masses of people in the name of their religion, who would deprive children like my precious daughter of their parents – and parents of their children. I thought about our troops overseas and their families praying for their safe return. I thought about what the future holds. Never again – this can never happen again.

As an Army veteran, a former cop and airline pilot, security is something that is always on my mind. I have lived my life in code yellow since I was 18 years old, and will until the day I die. If necessary I will run to my country’s defense. And, when necessary I will disagree vehemently with my government and protest loudly when they screw things up. They screwed up royally before 9/11 with their heads buried in the sand and passing up opportunity after opportunity to get Osama Bin Laden when they knew he was a threat. Of course, not too many could have predicted something on the scale of 9/11, but that’s the point – that is what we are up against. Now is not the time for complacency. Not now, not ever. 

Perhaps that is what bothered me the most on this seventh anniversary of the attack of September 11, 2001: the fact that so many Americans have once again become complacent in the face of the threats of terrorism, while so many others have willingly surrender so much to arbitrary government authority for the promise of protection from terrorists. There is a delicate balance that must be maintained, and a certain amount of trust that we have to place in our government officials to keep our nation safe from those who would harm us. But that trust has to go both ways: government must respect our Liberty, and we must never relinquish any of our rights, any of our Liberty for the promise of security or prosperity. Not now, not ever; because history has shown time and again that once Liberty is relinquished to government, it is seldom, if ever given back to the people.

Complacency in the face of danger is fatal – always. This November we will elect our President, Senators and Representatives in Congress who will be the ones who will address these serious issues and will be charged with the heavy burden of responsibility of protecting our national interests and security. 

As you tuck your precious children into bed tonight and look at their innocent little faces, ask yourself what kind of world you want them to inherit. Ask yourself whether you want a President who will not back down from their threats and will pursue them to the ends of the earth, or one who will seek understand them so that he can better empathize with their grievances against us. Ask yourself if you want a President who has been to war and knows its horror all too well, or one who views men and women in uniform as bloodthirsty fascist thugs. Ask yourself if you want a President who has personally suffered at the hands of evildoers of the same ilk as Bin Laden, or one who thinks he can charm them into abandoning their Jihad? Look at your children and think about these things. 

One choice will cost us in the short term and will enable us to preserve our Liberty and way of life and to pass it on to our children. The other choice could cost us everything. It’s not just about where you were on September 11, 2001; it’s about whether or not enough of us remember and make the choice to make sure such atrocities never, ever, happen again.

http://www.dfwtex.com/html/never_forget.html

I remember, and I will never forget.

Or, are they suffering from a bit of buyers’ remorse from their excessive secularization and collective devolution into socialist nanny states and wants us to become just like them? Since the Republican National Convention last week and the shift in momentum, European socialists and socialists throughout the world seem are lamenting the obliteration of Obama’s lead in the polls by the McCain-Palin ticket. There is a rising clamor abroad, you might say, incredulous that Americans could possibly make such a grave mistake as to NOT elect Obama. After all, polling data in many European countries show that Obama would be elected there in landslide victories, and we all know how “progressive” they are now, don’t we?

In fact, now there are not-so-veiled threats of pending severe bouts of “anti-Americanism” emanating from the four corners of the globe. OK, it’s mostly leftists trying to disguise themselves as non-leftists, but whatever. An article in Britain’s Guardian UK online tries to make that point as if to scare Americans in to electing Obama’s corrupt socialist political machine in November. The article is entitled, “The world's verdict will be harsh if the US rejects the man it yearns for: An America that disdains Obama for his global support risks turning current anti-Bush feeling into something far worse.” Are you shaking in your boots yet? Good. I’m not either. It gets better, though. Here’s the first sentence: “The feeling is familiar. I had it four years ago and four years before that: a sinking feeling in the stomach. It's a kind of physical pessimism which says: ‘It's happening again. The Democrats are about to lose an election they should win - and it could not matter more.’”

After several paragraphs bashing Sarah Palin and making McCain out to be George W. Bush Jr., the author Jonathan Freedland writes this gem: “Remember, this is a woman who once addressed a church congregation, saying of her work as governor - transport, policing and education – ‘really all of that stuff doesn't do any good if the people of Alaska's heart isn't right with God.’” Remember this folks: cultured, enlightened and properly progressive European politicians would never address a church of any kind, nor entertain the thought of acknowledging God in a public venue, because Europe acknowledges no God – only Allah. And don’t you soon forget it, or they’ll put out a Fatwah on you.

But here is what is probably the best reason NOT to vote for Barack Obama on November 4: “But what of the rest of the world? This is the reaction I fear most. For Obama has stirred an excitement around the globe unmatched by any American politician in living memory. Polling in Germany, France, Britain and Russia shows that Obama would win by whopping majorities, with the pattern repeated in Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Latin America. If November 4 were a global ballot, Obama would win it handsomely. If the free world could choose its leader, it would be Barack Obama.” (emphasis mine) 

And if McCain-Palin win we can expect the cold-shoulder from our comrades in Europe “For it will have been the American people, not the politicians, who will have passed up a once-in-a-generation chance for a fresh start - a fresh start the world is yearning for.”

In a poll of 22,000 of our fellow global citizens, “49 per cent across the 22 countries preferred Senator Obama compared with 12 per cent preferring Senator McCain.”

I bear no ill will to our friends in Europe or anywhere else, for that matter – at least toward those who are not trying to kill us. The problem that the rest of the world is suffering from is that the rest of the world is not America. The do not understand us, they do not think like us, they can neither conceive of nor truly grasp what makes one “American.” They never will. 

We are different from the rest of the world. Always have been. Always will be. Most of the time we are willing to work well with others, but sometimes we find it necessary to go it alone, regardless of world opinion, because at the end of the day those 22,000 people polled in Moscow, and Berlin, and London, and Paris, and Khartoum, and Beijing, and Singapore, and Seoul, and Beruit, and Gaza, and Amman, and Istanbul, and Riyadh are not Americans. 

The Europeans cannot understand us because they have sacrificed their Liberty for comfort and security – and obtained neither. Europe has devolved by choice into a continent rife with socialism or the kind that would make Karl Marx proud. They have become one giant bureaucracy that dictates to every aspect of daily life. This is something that, when it comes right down to it, is inconceivable and unconscionable to Americans. For all of our differences and eccentricities, the one thing we Americans all have in common is that we cherish our Liberty; and, even though there are those among us who even now are misled, misguided and deluded into thinking that we can achieve a benevolent government run welfare state to care for our every need, provide our security, bring a lasting peace to the rest of the world and still retain their Liberty, we respectfully make our case, the case for Liberty, and try to enlighten them as to why they are wrong. That is the American way, a way that other peoples cannot understand. 

Many have come to understand that socialistic government programs must by their very nature as dictated by the purpose for which they are created, encroach upon the Liberty of the people. Government authority and Liberty are diametrically opposed forces, irreconcilable except for law. A free people cannot relinquish only “a little” Liberty; a people is either free or it is not. 

With all due respect, the continent of Europe has forsaken Liberty for the vain promises of arbitrary government authority, and it is failing them. Europe is in decline, economically, morally, socially, militarily, politically and in any other way one can imagine, and it has been in decline for decades. When one trusts in government, any government – no matter how well designed – to fulfill roles never intended for government one is bound to be disappointed. The Europeans want Obama because his vision for the future is Europe, and they understand that. They revile resistance to such “enlightened” positions as radical or extremist because they have become so secularized by their own government systems that they cannot understand Americans’ willingness to fight and die for such things as going to church on Sunday.

Europe chose socialism and is now paying the price, and that price is the decline and ultimately the death of nationhood and liberty. That is where Obama’s vision will lead us if we allow him to. So, if you really need another reason NOT to vote for Obama on November 4, just look to Europe.

Bad things happen. It screws up everything – even the correct understanding of what, exactly, government is supposed to do and, more importantly, what it ought not to do. For those within the government, especially you “progressive” and faux-conservative politicians out there, here’s a little clue: the government has no business messing with the economy. Our government has become so monstrous that the confused masses of America now overwhelmingly look to this Leviathan to cure all that ails our nation. Why? Because they’ve been taught to. They don’t know that government has no such Constitutional authority as helping citizens and funding businesses and fixing the economy. Perhaps they (especially politicians) ought to actually read the document some time – it is very enlightening indeed.

Here’s how bad it is: when most people are asked who is to blame for the economy being screwed up, they tend to answer that the government is responsible. This answer is not at all incorrect. But, here’s the problem: when asked how the woes of the economy ought to be healed, most believe that the government needs to “do something about it.” Then they demand that Congress and the President act now! Seriously – isn’t the government the entity that is responsible for screwing things up in the first place? Now we are demanding that this screwed up government “fix” things? We want to entrust an impotent and self-serving Congress with a 9% approval rating and an Administration with little understanding of Constitutional restraint to “fix” things? The government has no business messing with the economy in the first place because in doing so it just messes things up even more and ends up costing the taxpayers (don’t even get me started).

On Sunday Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson announced that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were being placed in a “government conservatorship.” The plan to take control over the companies was approved by Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke. Paulson also affirmed that the Treasury would do “whatever it takes” to keep these two bastions of government excess from failing. Initially the Treasury would receive $1 billion in preferred shares, and then is initially prepared to provide up to $200 billion to help the companies heal from their financial hemorrhaging over excessive risky home loans. Remember that word: initially… you’ll see why in a minute.

The CEOs of both companies were fired – sort of. Freddie Mac’s Richard Syron and Fannie Mae's, Daniel Mudd, were respectively replaced by David Moffett, a former top official at US Bancorp and Herb Allison, formerly with Merrill Lynch. But, Syron and Mudd won’t be leaving immediately – they’ll be sticking around for the transition. If that weren’t enough, The Treasury's plan puts the two companies under a conservatorship, giving management control to their regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency.   FHFA was created recently by Congress specifically to oversee Freddie and Fannie. Are you beginning to see the pattern here?   Try Googling FHFA.gov to find its website and you’ll see that there is none. Either the agency is too new, or the government has become so big there’s no more room left in cyberspace for any more.gov websites. I am inclined to believe the latter.

According to the Wall Street Journal, with the government seizure of Freddie and Fanny, “the U.S. mortgage crisis entered a new and uncharted phase, potentially saddling American taxpayers with billions of dollars in losses from home loans made by the private sector. Bush administration officials argued that the cost of doing nothing would be far greater because of the toll on the economy of falling home prices and defaults in the $11 trillion U.S. mortgage market.” Potentially? Are they kidding? The bill is already in the mail.

But, the best is yet to come. Secretary Paulson noted that more than $5 trillion of debt and mortgage-backed securities issued by Fannie and Freddie is owned by central banks and other investors world-wide.

Do you know what that means? Think back to where the Treasury pledged to initially provide up to $200 billion and how Secretary Paulson stressed that the Treasury will do “whatever it takes” to save Freddie and Fanny. Factor that in with the $5 trillion of debt that is owned by foreign central banks and investors and then put Congress into the mix, and guess what you have? A Congressional authorization for our comrades at the Federal Reserve to do “whatever it takes” even to the tune of, oh, say, $5 trillion. After all, it won’t really be “debt,” because said “debt” will just go back to the Treasury to be auctioned off to more foreign central banks and investors. And eventually, our taxes will go up and we’ll pay for foreign bankers to get filthy rich. 

Keep in mind that the whole reason Freddie and Fanny were created by Congress is summed up in the following signature mission statement: “Freddie Mac is a stockholder-owned corporation established by Congress in 1970 to provide liquidity, stability and affordability to the nation's residential mortgage markets. Freddie Mac raises capital on Wall Street and throughout the world's capital markets to finance mortgages for families across America.” Translated from Congress-speak this means: all investments through Freddie and Fanny are safe because Uncle Sam guarantees them. 

There is no risk at all to the investor. And that is exactly the problem. That is exactly why government should never, ever be involved in messing around with the economy.

From the Wall Street Journal: “The intervention also marks the failure of the public-private experiment that was created to boost home ownership among Americans. Fannie and Freddie were created by Congress to help prop up the housing market, and investors have long believed the government would bail the companies out in a crisis. But the companies have long been owned by private shareholders seeking to maximize profits.”   And they will. And the people will be angry, but Congress won’t care. You can bet on a new-and-improved “public-private scam that will certainly fleece the taxpayers of even more money. 

One economist from the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School said, “Without government support for the mortgage market, home prices would fall much further, exposing the country as a whole to greater economic strain.” Any reasonable person who has ever read the Constitution with even a modicum of understanding and who gets the basic principles of supply and demand as the basis of a free market capitalist system of economics would argue the exact opposite. Why? Because of the difference between a supply system vis-à-vis a command system: once the government enters into the business of supporting various sectors of the economy the entire economy becomes de facto an artificial bubble, ever more removed from the reality of the market and prompting more and more government intervention until the government has to take control of or nationalize most of the economy in order to regulate prosperity and production and keep the whole thing from imploding. The problem here is obvious: Freddie and Fanny are the most startling examples of who our Founding Fathers never intended the government to be involved in such things.

Today President Bush had this to say: “Putting these companies on sound financial footing, and reforming their business practices, is critical to the health of our financial system and to making further progress with the housing correction that today is weighing heavily on our economy. Allowing the companies to fail or further deteriorate would damage our home mortgage market, and could weaken other credit markets that are unrelated directly to housing." He went on to stress that this is not a government bailout. 

Well, if a pledge of $200 billion for starters with a real possibility of running into the trillions is not a government bailout, I don’t know what it is. Wait a minute - maybe I do. It’s called nationalization. It’s called command economics. It is a deadly endeavor for a free republic. It is the inevitable result in a series of mortal errors that began with the creation of a central bank, the Federal Reserve System, by the Federal Reserve Act enacted December 23, 1913. That Act alone was a treasonous violation of the Constitution that has effectively sealed the ultimate fate of this republic – unless it can someday be repealed. It was shortly followed by another treasonous abomination, the 16^th Amendment ratified 03 February 1913 resulting in the Federal Income Tax Act of 03 October 1913. All must be repealed because all are deadly to a free republic because they by their nature usurp Liberty and encroach upon the rights of the individual. Not surprisingly a progressive income tax and a strong central bank are number 2 and 5, respectively, of Karl Marx’s list of 10 essential measures that must be enacted in order “to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organized as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.” For those who are interested, this list is located toward the end of Chapter II of the Communist Manifesto. 

Every American should read the Communist Manifesto. They should read it so that they all understand what happens when government gets too big. They should read it all be frightened and angered. They should read it so that they can better understand why our Founding Fathers gave us the Constitution of the United States of America, and why that document was crafted so as to never to be tampered with or reinterpreted, lest we lose our Liberty to government hegemony, for such hegemony against individual Liberty is the only possible result when government grows too big to be stopped. It feeds on Liberty and snuffs out freedom. And this is only the beginning – unless it can be stopped.

I, like many others, have been wildly unenthused about our choices for President this election cycle. I was definitely in the Ron Paul camp and would have been able to settle for Huckabee, but McCain? I was a McCain supporter in 2000; that is of course until the Neo-Con wing of the Republican Party torpedoed his chances at the White House with some really unscrupulous ads in South Carolina. Since then McCain seems to have wandered about between cheering on Bush, Cheney and the other highly decorated beneficiaries of the Great Deferments of the Vietnam War era, and at other times cozying up to the likes of Ted Kennedy and Russ Feingold on issues of immigration and amnesty. One thing is for sure regarding McCain: he is a man who will surprise you if you are paying attention. I must admit that I was pleasantly surprised by his performance on Saturday night during the Saddleback Civil Forum with Rick Warren.

A couple of days before the forum I was sitting in traffic behind a car with all sorts of bumper stickers covering it’s rear-end – you now the kind, with all the anti-war slogans surrounding a gigantic image of commie-criminal Che Guevera that reads, “PEACE!” Anyway, one of the stickers caught my eye. It simply read, “McSAME.” I chuckled and at first thought that it was clever. Then I thought some more about it and now, after seeing McCain come alive during this forum, I think that who ever thought up that slogan has an aversion to reality.

Let me state for the record that I am NOT an enthusiastic McCain supporter. I have issues with the Senator, as do most of you. If the election were held today and I were to give him my vote it would be a vote against Obama to avoid the unconscionable disaster that will be sure to follow the current administration should he become President. 

McCain may not be to my liking on every issue, but then again, who will be? One of the pleasant surprises coming out of Saturday’s forum, at least for me, was to discover just how completely different these two men – McCain and Obama – truly are. Obama seemed to hem and haw and talk circles around issues, almost like he wanted to avoid answering the important questions at all cost. Wait a minute – that’s exactly what he wanted to do. I don’t know: perhaps a choreographed rehearsal and a teleprompter for the main event would have helped him. Maybe it’s just me, but this guy seems to be completely lost without his teleprompter to tell him what to say.

In contrast, McCain appeared, at least to me, to only waffle on one question regarding embryonic stem cell research – which I do find troubling. Otherwise, he was very direct and to the point. He answered the questions. At no point was the contrast between these two men more stark than when the question, “When do you believe life begins?” was asked. Obama fluffed off the question with a lame, “that’s above my pay grade.”   McCain said without hesitation, “at conception.” Throughout the forum, McCain answered directly, concisely, and unashamedly made his positions known, while Obama was obviously going out of his way to hide his true positions. Darkness cannot withstand the light of Truth now can it, Senator?

McCain is no Bush. I’m not going to blame George Bush for having grown up in a privileged family – would it were that we could all be so fortunate. McCain, however, was able to convey in one hours’ time a life of service and of sacrifice the like of which should make both Bush and Obama crawl under the nearest rock. I’m not going to re-hash McCain’s military record and sacrifice as a POW, for these things speak for themselves, and they speak volumes. No, McCain has live a long life devoted to serving his country with honor and integrity. Obama has served less than 200 days of actual time spent on the floor in the U.S. Senate and before that was a street activist and professor of U.S. Constitutional Law where he taught his students about how the Constitution is a living document whose meaning and intent changes over time (God help us!). Bush was an outstanding governor of Texas (I was living there from 1998 to 2000), but he quite obviously didn’t care for military service seeing as he just stopped showing up for drill. I can personally attest to the fact that flying jets can get old after a while. Bush also grew up having the very best of everything – right down to education and career. I don’t blame him for these things because that is just the way it is when your grandfather is a highly respected and powerful U.S. Senator and your dad is a former Congressman and CIA Director, among other things. Seriously, who can blame the old man for taking care of his kids?

But, these are the things that shape the very core of who you are, these kinds of life experiences. If you have had everything handed to you on a silver platter and never really had to work hard or sacrifice, then you can’t really appreciate what success means, because for you it was a forgone conclusion. Likewise, if you’ve been sitting in a church where an extreme version of Marxist liberation theology has been preached for the entire twenty years you’ve been there and it is that type of theology that has driven you to activism in the political arena, again it is these types of things that shape the very core of your being. 

McCain, much more so than these other men I believe, truly understands and appreciates liberty and freedom in a way that these others – and most of us – cannot even begin to fathom. In his answers to the two last question posed, “Why do you want to be President?” and “What would you say to those who would oppose me asking you these questions in a church?” To the very last question he responded without hesitation, “This election is very, very important. Our country was founded on Judeo-Christian principles.” To the former question he said, in part, “I want to inspire a generation of Americans to serve a purpose greater than their own. I believe that America’s best days are ahead of us. This is a time for all of us to come together. I have always put my country first. I put my country first when I had the honor of serving in the military; I put my country first while serving as a member of the House of Representatives and later in the Senate. Americans believe its time to put our country first. I will go to those places where I know they probably won’t even vote for me and promise them that I will be everyman’s President.”

The most impressive moment for me, however was when McCain was speaking about what America means to him, how blessed we truly are as a nation, and how other nations around the world who do not have what we have – liberty, freedom, valid law – want to look to us and emulate us. I took the following from marketwatch.com:

"Our Judeo-Christian principles dictate that we do what we can to help people who are oppressed throughout the world. I would like to tell you that I still think that even in the worst places in the world today, they still harbor this hope and dream someday to be like us and have freedom and democracy. We remain, my friends, the most unusual experiment in history and I'm privileged to spend every day of my life in it. I know what it is like to be without it."  Wow.  That statement left me stunned.

My other differences with him aside, I think it can safely be said that John McCain is a man who understands profoundly the value of liberty, very much in the same way our Founding Fathers did. He has experienced tyranny and has survived its inhumanity. He is, I think, an inherently decent man who wants to be President because he feels strongly that it is his duty. On Saturday night I saw a John McCain that I had not seen since 2000. We need to see more of this John McCain and less Obama-worship on the evening news (yeah, like that will happen). Here is a guy who will commit to appointing originalist justices to the courts, to vetoing legislation filled with pork, and to preserving our sovereignty at all costs.

Right now, for me, it is more a case of the lesser of two evils, but the more I get to see of a John McCain who visibly believes in what he is saying and is not just pandering to a particular demographic, the more I could me inclined to become excited and inspired.

The question is this: do we want a President who understands sacrifice and suffering, who understands the intrinsic value of liberty, who understands what is worth fighting and dying for, or do we want a president who goes out of his way to hide his true positions in a Christian forum. One man says he will fight to preserve our liberty, and right now I am inclined to believe him. Time will tell. One thing is for certain, however: Obama will bring us to places we don’t want to see and force this nation to make choices of life or death for our republic. The groundwork has already been laid through a government that has become such a monstrosity that it can no longer be kept under restraint, for the advancement of his type of misguided Marxist ideology. 

For those who are of the mind to sit this one out because they think that McCain is either too far to the left or is too much like Bush look at the issues. McCain is no Bush, and Obama is no McCain. There is far too much at stake – indeed the very future of our republic. Right now – and this could change –but right now, I defer to McCain’s answer to the question posed on how do we deal with evil in the world. He said, “Defeat it.” And there it is. Defeat evil. Defeat Obama.