Recall the VP saying the President as the “first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.”1 No?
How about the VP claiming Deleware was a slave state, at least he knew it was a state,
“You don’t know my state. My state was a slave state … my state is the 8th largest black population in the country,”1 Still nothing?
Well I give up just make sure you don't "go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I’m not joking.”1 Wait that was Joe, not me.
1 Fox Nation. Bill McMorris, Washington Free Beacon August 16, 2012 6:21 pm July 1, 2012.
http://nation.foxnews.com/joe-biden/2012/08/17/top-5-racist-biden-gaffes
Monday, July 1, 2013
Sunday, June 30, 2013
Behind the Scenes of S.744 - a must read
From the June 7 2013 Congressional record, I have condensed, but not changed the wording, what Senator Sessions had to say as the full Senate began debate on S.744 (Immigration Reform) and added some relatively uncovered news afterwards related to what Senator Sessions presented on this day.
Senator Sessions:
We did have a markup in the Judiciary Committee...Repeatedly Members of the Senate who agreed to an amendment say they must vote against the amendment because it upsets some deal? Throughout the bill we can see the influence these groups had on the drafting of it. Some of the groups actually did the drafting. Big labor and big business were active in drafting this legislation, with the entire deal obviously hanging on, it was reported, their negotiations.
For example,
Wall Street Journal, March 10:
Competing interests abound. The Chamber of Commerce and businesses it represents are locked into negotiations with the AFL-CIO about workers in industries like hospitality and landscaping. Meanwhile, farm-worker unions have been quietly negotiating with growers associations about how to revamp short-term visas for agricultural workers. And senators on both sides of the aisle are weighing in to ensure their state industries are protected.
Washington Post, March 10: ``Hush-hush Meetings for Gang of 8 senators as they work on sweeping immigration bill.''
They are struggling on the question of legal immigration and future workers, and are trading proposals with leaders of the AFL-CIO and the Chamber of Commerce to try to get a deal.
Roll Call, March 21:
Talks led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO over a new guest-worker program for lower-skilled immigrants are stalled, prompting members of the bipartisan group of eight senators to get personally involved to try to nudge the negotiations on to resolution.
Who is the agreement between? It is between the unions and big business, which are representing the American worker, effectively.
New York Times, March 30:
The nation's top businesses and labor groups have reached an agreement on a guest worker program for low-skilled
immigrants, a person with knowledge of the negotiations said . . . Senator Schumer convened a conference call on Friday
night with Thomas J. Donohue, the president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Richard L. Trumka, the president of
the AFL-CIO, the nation's main federation of labor unions, in which they agreed in principle on a guest worker program for low-skilled, year-round, temporary workers.
We know there is one group not included in these talks...The national ICE union, the customs and enforcement organization, pleaded with the Gang of 8 to consult them. They were shut out of every meeting and never have been consulted. It is interesting to note, however, that others weren't shut out of the meeting.
The Washington Post, April 13:
While Obama has allowed Senate negotiators to work on a compromise that can win approval, a White House staff member attends each staff-level meeting to monitor progress and assist with the technical aspects of writing the bill.
Who is influencing the White House, President Obama?
The Daily Caller, on February 6, notes this:
On February 5th, Obama held a White House meeting with a series of industry leaders, progressive advocates and ethnic
lobbies, including La Raza, to boost support for his plan that would provide a conditional amnesty to 11 million
illegal aliens, allow new immigrants to get residency for their relatives and elderly parents, and also establish rules
for a ``Future Flow'' of skilled and unskilled workers. The invitees included the CEO of Goldman-Sachs, Motorola,
Marriott, and DeLoitte.
Also, we know participating in a lot of these discussions was the American Immigration Lawyers Association. This group obviously was involved in writing the bill, and I have to tell my colleagues that they will be the biggest winners of this legislation. Time and again, rules that were fairly clear--and probably should have been made clearer--are muddled, provisions were placed in that will create litigation and encourage lawsuits, delays, and will increase costs. What does ``hardship'' mean? It means a trial. That is what it means. So the Immigration Lawyers Association was substantially involved in the meetings.
Politico, on March 9, said:
In a bid to capitalize on the shared interest in immigration reform, a budget deal and new trade pacts, the
White House has launched a charm offensive toward corporate America since the November election, hosting more than a dozen conference calls with top industry officials--which have not previously been disclosed--along with a flurry of
meetings at the White House. Participants on the recent calls include the heads of Goldman Sachs, the Business Roundtable, Evercore, Silver Lake, Centerbridge Partners, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as well as the heads of Washington trade groups representing the banking industry, such as the Financial Services Roundtable.
Even foreign countries have had a say in drafting our law
The Hill, on February 7, reported:
Mexico's new Ambassador to the U.S., Eduardo Medina-Mora, has had a ``number of meetings with the administration''
where the issue of immigration has come up since he took office last month, said a Mexican official familiar with the
process. He is expected to meet with lawmakers shortly as legislation begins to take form. ``Probably like no other
country, we are a player in this particular issue,'' the source said.
So in case anyone doubts the role of special interests in drafting the legislation, pay attention to this quote by Frank Sharry, executive director of the liberal pro-amnesty group, America's Voice, in the Wall Street Journal, April 17:
The triggers are based on developing plans and spending money, not on reaching that effectiveness, which is really quite clever.
The National Review, on May 29, reported:
A number of immigration-activist groups, such as the National Council of La Raza, would be eligible to receive
millions in taxpayer funding to ``advise'' illegal immigrants applying for legal status under the bill.
So money will go to these activist groups, such as La Raza. La Raza is responsible for advocating, not enforcing, our laws. So La Raza is in the meetings. La Raza is an open advocate for not enforcing laws involving illegal immigration. They are active participants in advocating for amnesty.
The National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigrant group, has been involved in some of these discussions.
The Huffington Post, April 16, headline: ``Senate Immigration Group Turns to Keeping Fragile Agreement Intact.''
It goes on to quote Senator McCain as saying:
We will pledge to oppose, all eight of us, provisions that would destroy the fragile agreement we have.
They have an agreement with the unions and big business and the agribusinesses and the food processors and La Raza
and the immigration lawyers. In discussing an amendment that would require workers to make a good-faith effort to hire American workers first, Senator Whitehouse said
this--this is what happened in the committee--I'm in a position which I'm being informed that this would be a deal breaker to the deal. I, frankly, don't see how that could be the case, but I'm not privy to that understanding, and so I'm going to vote in support of the agreement that has been reached.
In other words, Senator Whitehouse says: Well, I do not understand this. I would like to vote the other way, but I am told you have a deal and this would damage the deal and so I cannot vote for it. He was not even in the Gang of 8 but went along with that. Related to that same amendment, Senator Franken echoed the remarks, saying:
I really just want to associate myself with Senator Whitehouse's remarks...I don't want to be a deal breaker.
In discussing an amendment that would increase family-based immigration, Senator Feinstein noted:
I think it's been a unique process because those people who are members of a group that put this together have stood
together and have voted against amendments that they felt would be a violation of the bipartisan agreement that brought
both sides together.
In reality, the special interests--La Raza, the unions, the corporate world, the big agriculture businesses, the food processors--they are the ones that made the agreement in this process, and the Senators merely ratified it, and they cannot agree to a change because they promised these special interest groups things.
The ICE union has voted no confidence in John Morton, their supervisor. What a dramatic event. I am not aware of that ever happening in my 14 years-plus as a Federal prosecutor--the actual employment union declaring that they have no confidence in their supervisor. And what did they say? They said he spends all his time advocating for amnesty and not enforcing the laws. He is directing us to not follow legal requirements we took an oath to follow.
The ICE officers have filed a lawsuit in Federal court attacking Secretary Napolitano, or at least the conduct of her office. They have asserted she is not above the law, she is not authorized to direct them not to follow plain requirements of Federal law.
Nobody is even talking about it. It has been the position of this administration, everybody has to know, to see that the law is not being effectively enforced, particularly in the interior of America.
---------------------------------------
Okay, so now that we know what Senator Sessions had to say. It was reported by John Hill, Executive Director of Stand with Arizona, that a federal judge has ordered DHS to enforce current immigration laws, a victory for the ICE union.
See http://standwitharizona.com/blog/2013/04/24/judge-sides-with-ice-agents-says-obama-admin-cant-refuse-to-deport-illegal-aliens/
Also, check out ICE Agent union president Chris Crane, blast the Gang of 8 in his testimony.
http://standwitharizona.com/blog/2013/04/27/disgusted-ice-agent-faces-down-gang-of-eight-in-dramatic-senate-testimony/
And finally, with out any mention of the ICE Union vote of no confidence, the Washington Times reported Monday, June 17, 2013 that ICE Director John Morton is resigning to take a position at Capital One.
See http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/17/john-morton-ice-director-leave-agency-july/
Feinstein, Franken, McCain, Schumer and Whitehouse. If you voted for these Senators then you are just as guilty as they are for selling out America.
This means you CALIFORNIA, MINNESOTA, ARIZONA, NEW YORK, RHODE ISLAND
Senator Sessions:
We did have a markup in the Judiciary Committee...Repeatedly Members of the Senate who agreed to an amendment say they must vote against the amendment because it upsets some deal? Throughout the bill we can see the influence these groups had on the drafting of it. Some of the groups actually did the drafting. Big labor and big business were active in drafting this legislation, with the entire deal obviously hanging on, it was reported, their negotiations.
For example,
Wall Street Journal, March 10:
Competing interests abound. The Chamber of Commerce and businesses it represents are locked into negotiations with the AFL-CIO about workers in industries like hospitality and landscaping. Meanwhile, farm-worker unions have been quietly negotiating with growers associations about how to revamp short-term visas for agricultural workers. And senators on both sides of the aisle are weighing in to ensure their state industries are protected.
Washington Post, March 10: ``Hush-hush Meetings for Gang of 8 senators as they work on sweeping immigration bill.''
They are struggling on the question of legal immigration and future workers, and are trading proposals with leaders of the AFL-CIO and the Chamber of Commerce to try to get a deal.
Roll Call, March 21:
Talks led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO over a new guest-worker program for lower-skilled immigrants are stalled, prompting members of the bipartisan group of eight senators to get personally involved to try to nudge the negotiations on to resolution.
Who is the agreement between? It is between the unions and big business, which are representing the American worker, effectively.
New York Times, March 30:
The nation's top businesses and labor groups have reached an agreement on a guest worker program for low-skilled
immigrants, a person with knowledge of the negotiations said . . . Senator Schumer convened a conference call on Friday
night with Thomas J. Donohue, the president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Richard L. Trumka, the president of
the AFL-CIO, the nation's main federation of labor unions, in which they agreed in principle on a guest worker program for low-skilled, year-round, temporary workers.
We know there is one group not included in these talks...The national ICE union, the customs and enforcement organization, pleaded with the Gang of 8 to consult them. They were shut out of every meeting and never have been consulted. It is interesting to note, however, that others weren't shut out of the meeting.
The Washington Post, April 13:
While Obama has allowed Senate negotiators to work on a compromise that can win approval, a White House staff member attends each staff-level meeting to monitor progress and assist with the technical aspects of writing the bill.
Who is influencing the White House, President Obama?
The Daily Caller, on February 6, notes this:
On February 5th, Obama held a White House meeting with a series of industry leaders, progressive advocates and ethnic
lobbies, including La Raza, to boost support for his plan that would provide a conditional amnesty to 11 million
illegal aliens, allow new immigrants to get residency for their relatives and elderly parents, and also establish rules
for a ``Future Flow'' of skilled and unskilled workers. The invitees included the CEO of Goldman-Sachs, Motorola,
Marriott, and DeLoitte.
Also, we know participating in a lot of these discussions was the American Immigration Lawyers Association. This group obviously was involved in writing the bill, and I have to tell my colleagues that they will be the biggest winners of this legislation. Time and again, rules that were fairly clear--and probably should have been made clearer--are muddled, provisions were placed in that will create litigation and encourage lawsuits, delays, and will increase costs. What does ``hardship'' mean? It means a trial. That is what it means. So the Immigration Lawyers Association was substantially involved in the meetings.
Politico, on March 9, said:
In a bid to capitalize on the shared interest in immigration reform, a budget deal and new trade pacts, the
White House has launched a charm offensive toward corporate America since the November election, hosting more than a dozen conference calls with top industry officials--which have not previously been disclosed--along with a flurry of
meetings at the White House. Participants on the recent calls include the heads of Goldman Sachs, the Business Roundtable, Evercore, Silver Lake, Centerbridge Partners, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as well as the heads of Washington trade groups representing the banking industry, such as the Financial Services Roundtable.
Even foreign countries have had a say in drafting our law
The Hill, on February 7, reported:
Mexico's new Ambassador to the U.S., Eduardo Medina-Mora, has had a ``number of meetings with the administration''
where the issue of immigration has come up since he took office last month, said a Mexican official familiar with the
process. He is expected to meet with lawmakers shortly as legislation begins to take form. ``Probably like no other
country, we are a player in this particular issue,'' the source said.
So in case anyone doubts the role of special interests in drafting the legislation, pay attention to this quote by Frank Sharry, executive director of the liberal pro-amnesty group, America's Voice, in the Wall Street Journal, April 17:
The triggers are based on developing plans and spending money, not on reaching that effectiveness, which is really quite clever.
The National Review, on May 29, reported:
A number of immigration-activist groups, such as the National Council of La Raza, would be eligible to receive
millions in taxpayer funding to ``advise'' illegal immigrants applying for legal status under the bill.
So money will go to these activist groups, such as La Raza. La Raza is responsible for advocating, not enforcing, our laws. So La Raza is in the meetings. La Raza is an open advocate for not enforcing laws involving illegal immigration. They are active participants in advocating for amnesty.
The National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigrant group, has been involved in some of these discussions.
The Huffington Post, April 16, headline: ``Senate Immigration Group Turns to Keeping Fragile Agreement Intact.''
It goes on to quote Senator McCain as saying:
We will pledge to oppose, all eight of us, provisions that would destroy the fragile agreement we have.
They have an agreement with the unions and big business and the agribusinesses and the food processors and La Raza
and the immigration lawyers. In discussing an amendment that would require workers to make a good-faith effort to hire American workers first, Senator Whitehouse said
this--this is what happened in the committee--I'm in a position which I'm being informed that this would be a deal breaker to the deal. I, frankly, don't see how that could be the case, but I'm not privy to that understanding, and so I'm going to vote in support of the agreement that has been reached.
In other words, Senator Whitehouse says: Well, I do not understand this. I would like to vote the other way, but I am told you have a deal and this would damage the deal and so I cannot vote for it. He was not even in the Gang of 8 but went along with that. Related to that same amendment, Senator Franken echoed the remarks, saying:
I really just want to associate myself with Senator Whitehouse's remarks...I don't want to be a deal breaker.
In discussing an amendment that would increase family-based immigration, Senator Feinstein noted:
I think it's been a unique process because those people who are members of a group that put this together have stood
together and have voted against amendments that they felt would be a violation of the bipartisan agreement that brought
both sides together.
In reality, the special interests--La Raza, the unions, the corporate world, the big agriculture businesses, the food processors--they are the ones that made the agreement in this process, and the Senators merely ratified it, and they cannot agree to a change because they promised these special interest groups things.
The ICE union has voted no confidence in John Morton, their supervisor. What a dramatic event. I am not aware of that ever happening in my 14 years-plus as a Federal prosecutor--the actual employment union declaring that they have no confidence in their supervisor. And what did they say? They said he spends all his time advocating for amnesty and not enforcing the laws. He is directing us to not follow legal requirements we took an oath to follow.
The ICE officers have filed a lawsuit in Federal court attacking Secretary Napolitano, or at least the conduct of her office. They have asserted she is not above the law, she is not authorized to direct them not to follow plain requirements of Federal law.
Nobody is even talking about it. It has been the position of this administration, everybody has to know, to see that the law is not being effectively enforced, particularly in the interior of America.
---------------------------------------
Okay, so now that we know what Senator Sessions had to say. It was reported by John Hill, Executive Director of Stand with Arizona, that a federal judge has ordered DHS to enforce current immigration laws, a victory for the ICE union.
See http://standwitharizona.com/blog/2013/04/24/judge-sides-with-ice-agents-says-obama-admin-cant-refuse-to-deport-illegal-aliens/
Also, check out ICE Agent union president Chris Crane, blast the Gang of 8 in his testimony.
http://standwitharizona.com/blog/2013/04/27/disgusted-ice-agent-faces-down-gang-of-eight-in-dramatic-senate-testimony/
And finally, with out any mention of the ICE Union vote of no confidence, the Washington Times reported Monday, June 17, 2013 that ICE Director John Morton is resigning to take a position at Capital One.
See http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/17/john-morton-ice-director-leave-agency-july/
Feinstein, Franken, McCain, Schumer and Whitehouse. If you voted for these Senators then you are just as guilty as they are for selling out America.
This means you CALIFORNIA, MINNESOTA, ARIZONA, NEW YORK, RHODE ISLAND
Saturday, June 29, 2013
The Apple before my cart
I have been listening to Rush Limbaugh since 1989 when I was a junior in high school. I was already a huge fan of Reagan and his no nonsense conservative values. I adored Rush and his wisdom so much I now have a B.A. in political science after starting off declaring as a physics major. I have never really had the need to speak to Rush on the show because frankly we agree on everything and he doesn't need a caller to come on and say "keep up the good work".
Now my mom just retired this year and told me she wants an Apple iPad for Christmas. The first thing that I thought of was wow I better start saving now it will take me at least until December to save enough for one. My second thought was I'll get her a Kindle because mostly she will read books, but you know the iPad is an all around machine with apps and checking email etc. So I am listening to Rush
today and its of course Open Line Friday where Rush takes calls and lets us talk about anything under the sun. I am listening and sweeping my kitchen floor and I hear him talking about the iPad and he gives one away.
So my ears perk up and the light bulb comes on. I hit the computer find the number to call the show and to my surprise...busy signal. Try again...busy signal. I gave up after a while. Figured it would be awkward anyways. "Hey Rush your a God and my only hero ever, can I have an iPad for my sweet mom because Obama has put me in the poor house". Its like calling your idol and saying , "Glad to meet you I am a complete loser". It is sad commentary on my own values that I was willing to have the first contact with the Great One for my own selfish agenda. Now I know how dirty politicians must feel when they sell their souls for an election.
Now my mom just retired this year and told me she wants an Apple iPad for Christmas. The first thing that I thought of was wow I better start saving now it will take me at least until December to save enough for one. My second thought was I'll get her a Kindle because mostly she will read books, but you know the iPad is an all around machine with apps and checking email etc. So I am listening to Rush
today and its of course Open Line Friday where Rush takes calls and lets us talk about anything under the sun. I am listening and sweeping my kitchen floor and I hear him talking about the iPad and he gives one away.
So my ears perk up and the light bulb comes on. I hit the computer find the number to call the show and to my surprise...busy signal. Try again...busy signal. I gave up after a while. Figured it would be awkward anyways. "Hey Rush your a God and my only hero ever, can I have an iPad for my sweet mom because Obama has put me in the poor house". Its like calling your idol and saying , "Glad to meet you I am a complete loser". It is sad commentary on my own values that I was willing to have the first contact with the Great One for my own selfish agenda. Now I know how dirty politicians must feel when they sell their souls for an election.
Friday, June 28, 2013
Lets Play Juror!
As an intern years ago, I was a defense investigator working for a state public defenders office. I know charges in cases like this are always set hard and heavy in an attempt to force plea deals and avoid trials. This case at most should have came to trial as a 2nd degree murder, but in reality from what I heard of the evidence and the testimony a grand jury system should never have made an indictment. Let me explain what I understand to be facts:
So far that is what we know and the only information a jury can use to convict
Anyone can take that information in their mind and using logic convict Zimmerman is lying to themselves.
Hear is the scenario that immediately came to my mind after seeing these facts.
Zimmerman sees Martin walking and looks like a prowler/ burglar to him. Zimmerman confronts verbally after walking briskly to catch up and inquiries to the reason for his presence, Trayvon verbally confronts and then continues walking while Zimmerman grabs him causing Martin to yell "get off get off" as the phone drops to the ground. Melee ensues with Martin getting the best of Zimmerman and ends up in a dominant position punching Zimmerman repeatedly probably as a defense of himself feeling attacked by Zimmerman. Zimmerman wounds indicate a severe beating resulting in fear for life and pulls out his weapon and kills Trayvon Martin.
Had Zimmerman not have been subjected to life in a high crime area and be a man of poor temper, I believe Trayvon Martin would be alive today. However, Zimmerman is not guilty of murder or man slaughter because in the end he broke no law by confronting Martin and he broke no law in defending his life. An unfortunate set of circumstances placed a street tough teen and a hot headed old man on a path of confrontation and that teen kicked the every living crap out of him so bad that the old man finally shot him.
Now before anyone starts rioting and burning down their own neighborhood
*cough* *cough* Rodney King riots *
Zimmerman is not white.
Martin is not white.
Don't be yelling foul to white America about racism when Zimmerman is found innocent.
Blame the fucking state-run CNN for even putting this case in the news. It is not even a story.
Should have been in the local paper and local news. For fucks sake their is a teen girl that went missing here 3 or 4 weeks ago...just POOF. Is that on CNN ???? NO. And she might be alive
somewhere no amount of CNN coverage could bring Martin home alive.
- A teenager named Trayvon was killed
- A neighborhood watch member Zimmerman admits to the killing.
- Zimmerman has a huge wound on the back of his head.
- eye witness indicates Trayvon straddled across the chest of Zimmerman
- eye wtiness indicates it appeared Trayvon was punching down repeatedly toward Zimmerman
- eye witness indicates hearing Zimmerman screams
- Jeantel testifies Martin being followed by a man and verbally confronting
- Jeantel soon heard a bump and a noise like wet grass and Martin saying "get off, get off"
- Police did document the defendant's backside to be very wet and covered with grass
So far that is what we know and the only information a jury can use to convict
Anyone can take that information in their mind and using logic convict Zimmerman is lying to themselves.
Hear is the scenario that immediately came to my mind after seeing these facts.
Zimmerman sees Martin walking and looks like a prowler/ burglar to him. Zimmerman confronts verbally after walking briskly to catch up and inquiries to the reason for his presence, Trayvon verbally confronts and then continues walking while Zimmerman grabs him causing Martin to yell "get off get off" as the phone drops to the ground. Melee ensues with Martin getting the best of Zimmerman and ends up in a dominant position punching Zimmerman repeatedly probably as a defense of himself feeling attacked by Zimmerman. Zimmerman wounds indicate a severe beating resulting in fear for life and pulls out his weapon and kills Trayvon Martin.
Had Zimmerman not have been subjected to life in a high crime area and be a man of poor temper, I believe Trayvon Martin would be alive today. However, Zimmerman is not guilty of murder or man slaughter because in the end he broke no law by confronting Martin and he broke no law in defending his life. An unfortunate set of circumstances placed a street tough teen and a hot headed old man on a path of confrontation and that teen kicked the every living crap out of him so bad that the old man finally shot him.
Now before anyone starts rioting and burning down their own neighborhood
*cough* *cough* Rodney King riots *
Zimmerman is not white.
Martin is not white.
Don't be yelling foul to white America about racism when Zimmerman is found innocent.
Blame the fucking state-run CNN for even putting this case in the news. It is not even a story.
Should have been in the local paper and local news. For fucks sake their is a teen girl that went missing here 3 or 4 weeks ago...just POOF. Is that on CNN ???? NO. And she might be alive
somewhere no amount of CNN coverage could bring Martin home alive.
The real threat to America
The federal government is out of control, from outside the bubble of the beltway there is every indication that they are becoming increasingly hostile to the people and our freedoms and the government seemingly has preparations in place to seize our only means of defense, take our property, use policy to economically destroy us, and manipulate markets to make commodities such as fuel and food scare until we are complacent.
Honest patriotic Americans are talking about it and preparing for a civil war to soon erupt. The government for years has only inflamed those fears daily with NSA spying, IRS election destruction, DHS ammunition purchases, authorizing due process-free drone killings of Americans, drones spying on Americans, and a series of impeachable lies that are never tried. Since the beginning of the 20th century the liberals and socialists, collectively known as the Democratic Party, have put us on a destructive path of entitlement and spending designed for the end-game of turning the U.S. into a socialist nation.
The threat to America is not terrorists or any foreign power, it is the individuals and agencies in the District of Columbia that we collectively call the Federal Government and the socialist-democratic elitists. Joe McCarthy was on the right track to an extent in the fact that the socialist are a threat to this nation, but he never had to search farther than the district for the enemies of the state. Yet this current government has pushed our buttons too many times and we are irritated and not willing to become a socialist nation. The federal government must stop this now before civil war erupts. If Congress, the Executive, or the Court thinks they will take our guns and let the government enslave the people they are sorely mistaken.
You can legislate and rule all you want, but the truth is the government has no right to make any gun laws based on the reading on our Constitution. As long as the weapons are of similar technology to what a soldier would normally be issued. That means automatic weapons, that means licenses to build and sell weapons and ammunition. Do you understand what I am saying? You do not have the Constitutional right to "interpret" the Constitution and any court ruling that does is on its face invalid.
The truth is all most federal gun laws and even all abortion laws are unconstitutional and should be vigorously challenged in court and loudly protested until the government and or courts response accordingly and honor the social agreement that created this republic. The Constitution is a social contract between the people to form a national government for our republic and the government has become the enemy of the people and a monster out of control. The people will decide when the contract is null and void because it is a contract created by and amongst men. The Constitution is merely a framework for the design of a corporation for the daily organization and coordination of the many states of the republic. Lincoln violated this social contract when he declared war against the states that succeeded from this union.
The end of the federal government taking our freedom, lying, and cheating the American people must come to an abrupt halt. Liberals, moderates, and conservatives must work together to restore freedom and liberty and secure this nation from radical socialists and self-aggrandizing politicians.
I implore you to cast aside thoughts of party and use your vote to wisely remove anyone that supported the Affordable Care Act and its mandates and fines, gun control legislation, or abortion legislation; as they do not stand for a free America.
Before you begin to attempt to judge let me put this forth. I have not owned a gun for over 20 years.
I believe in my heart abortion is murder. I have Medicare for insurance. I am a conservative libertarian. I believe in making health care available to those that need it through Medicaid and food stamps to feed those in need. I offer this information only so those that may read this know that I believe that we can be above party politics and put securing freedom and liberty for fellow citizens and our posterity above our own needs and beliefs.
Honest patriotic Americans are talking about it and preparing for a civil war to soon erupt. The government for years has only inflamed those fears daily with NSA spying, IRS election destruction, DHS ammunition purchases, authorizing due process-free drone killings of Americans, drones spying on Americans, and a series of impeachable lies that are never tried. Since the beginning of the 20th century the liberals and socialists, collectively known as the Democratic Party, have put us on a destructive path of entitlement and spending designed for the end-game of turning the U.S. into a socialist nation.
The threat to America is not terrorists or any foreign power, it is the individuals and agencies in the District of Columbia that we collectively call the Federal Government and the socialist-democratic elitists. Joe McCarthy was on the right track to an extent in the fact that the socialist are a threat to this nation, but he never had to search farther than the district for the enemies of the state. Yet this current government has pushed our buttons too many times and we are irritated and not willing to become a socialist nation. The federal government must stop this now before civil war erupts. If Congress, the Executive, or the Court thinks they will take our guns and let the government enslave the people they are sorely mistaken.
You can legislate and rule all you want, but the truth is the government has no right to make any gun laws based on the reading on our Constitution. As long as the weapons are of similar technology to what a soldier would normally be issued. That means automatic weapons, that means licenses to build and sell weapons and ammunition. Do you understand what I am saying? You do not have the Constitutional right to "interpret" the Constitution and any court ruling that does is on its face invalid.
The truth is all most federal gun laws and even all abortion laws are unconstitutional and should be vigorously challenged in court and loudly protested until the government and or courts response accordingly and honor the social agreement that created this republic. The Constitution is a social contract between the people to form a national government for our republic and the government has become the enemy of the people and a monster out of control. The people will decide when the contract is null and void because it is a contract created by and amongst men. The Constitution is merely a framework for the design of a corporation for the daily organization and coordination of the many states of the republic. Lincoln violated this social contract when he declared war against the states that succeeded from this union.
The end of the federal government taking our freedom, lying, and cheating the American people must come to an abrupt halt. Liberals, moderates, and conservatives must work together to restore freedom and liberty and secure this nation from radical socialists and self-aggrandizing politicians.
I implore you to cast aside thoughts of party and use your vote to wisely remove anyone that supported the Affordable Care Act and its mandates and fines, gun control legislation, or abortion legislation; as they do not stand for a free America.
Before you begin to attempt to judge let me put this forth. I have not owned a gun for over 20 years.
I believe in my heart abortion is murder. I have Medicare for insurance. I am a conservative libertarian. I believe in making health care available to those that need it through Medicaid and food stamps to feed those in need. I offer this information only so those that may read this know that I believe that we can be above party politics and put securing freedom and liberty for fellow citizens and our posterity above our own needs and beliefs.
Slavery Started by a African-American
So I was listening to Glenn Beck this morning and heard that the first slave owner in America was a black man. I used the magical power of google to figure out the name of this man...Anthony Johnson. Apparently Johnson arrived in 1621 to the colony of Virginia. He was from Angola and a neighboring tribe captured him and sold him to a Dutch company, later called slave traders, but kind of just indentured servant traders for the time being (rolls eyes). He was traded for money and thus became indentured. After his terms of service expired he was a freeman. Eventually he became a huge plantation owner and had his own indentured servants. Apparently he paid for one and was told the service was for life and when someone else claimed after a certain time the servant owed them time in service as well, the Virginia courts along with an Anthony Johnson were responsible for the first American slave.
In summary, a African-American started slavery after African-Africans through a partnership with a Dutch company supplied slaves to the English colony of Virginia.
And now for your entertainment, a little satire:
In the interest of social justice, I propose that an executive order should be issued to direct the IRS to fine all African-Americans as reparation for causing slavery.
For more information on some amazing African-American history download the following free books from google books.
The Journal of Negro History
Volume I
http://goo.gl/6l1Fd
Volume II
http://goo.gl/BPRx1
Volume III
http://goo.gl/AbEyo
Volume IV
http://goo.gl/SBYA8
Volume V
http://goo.gl/GdYCk
Volume VI
http://goo.gl/bD7gA
Volume VII
http://goo.gl/5r7HW
In summary, a African-American started slavery after African-Africans through a partnership with a Dutch company supplied slaves to the English colony of Virginia.
And now for your entertainment, a little satire:
In the interest of social justice, I propose that an executive order should be issued to direct the IRS to fine all African-Americans as reparation for causing slavery.
For more information on some amazing African-American history download the following free books from google books.
The Journal of Negro History
Volume I
http://goo.gl/6l1Fd
Volume II
http://goo.gl/BPRx1
Volume III
http://goo.gl/AbEyo
Volume IV
http://goo.gl/SBYA8
Volume V
http://goo.gl/GdYCk
Volume VI
http://goo.gl/bD7gA
Volume VII
http://goo.gl/5r7HW
Political Correctness Defined
I can't take credit for this. It was an email from someone a while back, but its priceless.
"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by a mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a piece of shit by the clean end."
Thursday, June 27, 2013
Free phone program is not subjected to sequestering
A massive non-stop turn out for a "outreach event" for free government cell phones occurred yesterday in the north hill part of akron, ohio. I got these with my cell phone and edited on photoshop so you could see. I forget the name of the company that was giving them out, but
people were literally scurrying to get in line.
people were literally scurrying to get in line.
John Boehner to star in the new movie THE METRICS
Move over NEO!! The Matrix..err metrics is back and better than ever!
As usual it seems the U.S. Congress needs a little encouragement, yes? I have decided to offer my expertise with this immigration fiasco. My particular expertise is in calling bullshit when I see it. Democrats want to extend their voter base and Republicans want to stop this. Republicans might want to help some friends with a cheap labor pool and so Democrats are exploiting this. Thus you see the Speaker selling out and Rubio, etc.
On Hannity some democrat was indicating the bill hasn't passed because they cannot agree on the metrics to measure the desired outcomes. So without further ado here is simplified immigration and border security reform.
First, build the 720 miles already promised.
Was it built, is it monitored ? If Yes >>>>
Allow 180 days for all illegal immigrants to begin the normal application for citizenship.
All accepted to begin citizenship get the proper permits needed to stay and work.
After 180 days ICE and local authorities begin the immediate deportation of all remaining persons in the country illegally while the remaining border it built. Border states will have direct deportation power.
Citizens will be given a $250 reward for every illegal citizen they report that ends up begin deported.
The border states will appoint a non-political, non-paid,bi-partisan committee to determine if their portion of the border is secured.
The border bill will be passed with no PORK, no amendments, take it or leave it.
As an option, Congress may designate a national "Politicians are Worthless" day.
As usual it seems the U.S. Congress needs a little encouragement, yes? I have decided to offer my expertise with this immigration fiasco. My particular expertise is in calling bullshit when I see it. Democrats want to extend their voter base and Republicans want to stop this. Republicans might want to help some friends with a cheap labor pool and so Democrats are exploiting this. Thus you see the Speaker selling out and Rubio, etc.
On Hannity some democrat was indicating the bill hasn't passed because they cannot agree on the metrics to measure the desired outcomes. So without further ado here is simplified immigration and border security reform.
First, build the 720 miles already promised.
Was it built, is it monitored ? If Yes >>>>
Allow 180 days for all illegal immigrants to begin the normal application for citizenship.
All accepted to begin citizenship get the proper permits needed to stay and work.
After 180 days ICE and local authorities begin the immediate deportation of all remaining persons in the country illegally while the remaining border it built. Border states will have direct deportation power.
Citizens will be given a $250 reward for every illegal citizen they report that ends up begin deported.
The border states will appoint a non-political, non-paid,bi-partisan committee to determine if their portion of the border is secured.
The border bill will be passed with no PORK, no amendments, take it or leave it.
As an option, Congress may designate a national "Politicians are Worthless" day.
Monday, February 23, 2009
As for me, I choose freedom
I can still hear the words of Ronald Reagan vividly as when he spoke them in 1987, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!". President Reagan was speaking of more than freeing the people of Berlin and Eastern Europe. The President made it clear that the world sees the failure of socialist policy as the core of government planning.
Before the total collapse of the United States, like the Soviet Union before her, it is time the whole of the American people declare that their legislature should make no law respecting the establishment of socialist programs, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus build a wall of separation between governance and social welfare.
Congress may have no power over social welfare, but the people do retain their power over social welfare. Each person may choose to donate labor or monetarily to social programs and public exercise their desires to be charitable toward their neighbors. Social welfare is best developed when it is an act of free will and not plotted by a few, ran by the corrupt, and funded by the unknowing or unwilling. Let us build a wall between social welfare and sate as an act of free will. We need to let the government handled things which we consider to be specifically political and let others handled issues we take to be specifically social.
The central government cannot be the creator of the wall of separation between social and political in a free republic; only the people may do this. There is another reason why the government cannot build the wall. The government cannot decide what is political and what should be included as social welfare because these are matters of opinion that vary from person to person. These are issues between each individual and their conscious. In a free republic, the central government has no right to inform matters of personal opinion on its citizens.
We, the people, need to build this wall of separation and force our government out of our right to choose individually the level of charity and morality we find in our soul.
Before the total collapse of the United States, like the Soviet Union before her, it is time the whole of the American people declare that their legislature should make no law respecting the establishment of socialist programs, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus build a wall of separation between governance and social welfare.
Congress may have no power over social welfare, but the people do retain their power over social welfare. Each person may choose to donate labor or monetarily to social programs and public exercise their desires to be charitable toward their neighbors. Social welfare is best developed when it is an act of free will and not plotted by a few, ran by the corrupt, and funded by the unknowing or unwilling. Let us build a wall between social welfare and sate as an act of free will. We need to let the government handled things which we consider to be specifically political and let others handled issues we take to be specifically social.
The central government cannot be the creator of the wall of separation between social and political in a free republic; only the people may do this. There is another reason why the government cannot build the wall. The government cannot decide what is political and what should be included as social welfare because these are matters of opinion that vary from person to person. These are issues between each individual and their conscious. In a free republic, the central government has no right to inform matters of personal opinion on its citizens.
We, the people, need to build this wall of separation and force our government out of our right to choose individually the level of charity and morality we find in our soul.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Rebellion against traitors
Most of us are loyal to our country and that loyalty remains steadfast even after the victorious usurpation of our liberty and freedom by the President-Elect and the leftist media which reduced all civility and truth to subserviency of a long hidden socialist movement that all but
disappeared after the Roosevelt's Presidency. Soon we will have no choice to become rebels by submission. Rebellion out of loyalty to our country, but even a greater loyalty to liberty and freedom.
We are entitled to the allegiance of our government as it was made for the people by the people and to its protection, but the allegiance of the weak and the meek surrendered to that usurpation with a blow struck of their defense of socialism, having become traitors by ceasing to resist and vote for usurpation of liberty.
That is exactly the case of the loyal people of America, a majority of whom was unquestionably loyal before the fall in November of 2008, but who found themselves at the moment absolutely at the mercy of the conspirators against our republic. This state of things was the result of
the convience of the government of the United States with no traitors, who, by the aid of secret societies of progressive socialists, had organized and overwhelming political force secured by the infiltration of the mass media over the past two generations and by political intrigue the executive, legislative, and judicial power in many states.
The President-Elect is their executive. Every cabinet office appointed by by him is of their choosing. They have a controlling majority in both branches of Congress. The Supreme Court will within a few years be at their devotion. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, may stand alone against all of the subversion of the controlling functionaries, true to his country. Every other head of administration, with the exception of this time-worn patriot, contributed to betray our country into the hands of its enemies - those that would take away liberty for the disguise of brotherhood. The Senate and the House of Representatives in their are hot-beds of sedition to fire the movement that became victorious by their half-century of disenfranchisement of the American people.
John McCain's policy and campaign, then and since, and his motives are still a mystery; but the result of his devious course was manifestly detrimental to this great nation as a catalyst of disgruntlement amongst the masses that would defeat the power directing the conspiracy from its council chamber in caucus in Washington, New York, and Chicago.
We have fought this movement with loyalty for a century and more and afforded to meet their socialist prejudice with conciliation, exaction with concession which surrendered no principle, and violence and anger with the right hand of peace. We resisted all this time the dissolution of our principles until the betrayal of 2008 finally allowed the snake into the chicken coup.
So while we maybe in rebellion it is against the administration and the current government and will not affect our loyalty to our country. We will organize and route this coercive enemy from within. We will restore this country and make the changes to keep this government for the people. While we may be rebellious, our rebellion is against what is assured to be seditious traitors. When we are finished laws will be changed, amendments made, liberty will now longer be in jeopardy. Elected officials will once again and forever serve the people and not a constituency hidden in the corporations, financial institutions, foreign regimes, and inside
the beltway. We will take a hundred years of lessons and use it to fix what the Founding Fathers could no foresee. We are watching, we are waiting, we will defeat you.
disappeared after the Roosevelt's Presidency. Soon we will have no choice to become rebels by submission. Rebellion out of loyalty to our country, but even a greater loyalty to liberty and freedom.
We are entitled to the allegiance of our government as it was made for the people by the people and to its protection, but the allegiance of the weak and the meek surrendered to that usurpation with a blow struck of their defense of socialism, having become traitors by ceasing to resist and vote for usurpation of liberty.
That is exactly the case of the loyal people of America, a majority of whom was unquestionably loyal before the fall in November of 2008, but who found themselves at the moment absolutely at the mercy of the conspirators against our republic. This state of things was the result of
the convience of the government of the United States with no traitors, who, by the aid of secret societies of progressive socialists, had organized and overwhelming political force secured by the infiltration of the mass media over the past two generations and by political intrigue the executive, legislative, and judicial power in many states.
The President-Elect is their executive. Every cabinet office appointed by by him is of their choosing. They have a controlling majority in both branches of Congress. The Supreme Court will within a few years be at their devotion. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, may stand alone against all of the subversion of the controlling functionaries, true to his country. Every other head of administration, with the exception of this time-worn patriot, contributed to betray our country into the hands of its enemies - those that would take away liberty for the disguise of brotherhood. The Senate and the House of Representatives in their are hot-beds of sedition to fire the movement that became victorious by their half-century of disenfranchisement of the American people.
John McCain's policy and campaign, then and since, and his motives are still a mystery; but the result of his devious course was manifestly detrimental to this great nation as a catalyst of disgruntlement amongst the masses that would defeat the power directing the conspiracy from its council chamber in caucus in Washington, New York, and Chicago.
We have fought this movement with loyalty for a century and more and afforded to meet their socialist prejudice with conciliation, exaction with concession which surrendered no principle, and violence and anger with the right hand of peace. We resisted all this time the dissolution of our principles until the betrayal of 2008 finally allowed the snake into the chicken coup.
So while we maybe in rebellion it is against the administration and the current government and will not affect our loyalty to our country. We will organize and route this coercive enemy from within. We will restore this country and make the changes to keep this government for the people. While we may be rebellious, our rebellion is against what is assured to be seditious traitors. When we are finished laws will be changed, amendments made, liberty will now longer be in jeopardy. Elected officials will once again and forever serve the people and not a constituency hidden in the corporations, financial institutions, foreign regimes, and inside
the beltway. We will take a hundred years of lessons and use it to fix what the Founding Fathers could no foresee. We are watching, we are waiting, we will defeat you.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Patronize me? Not Twice.
You may patronize me by donating to the socialist after he wins? I understand hedging your bet and donating both ways ..maybe. But as far as I am concerned this makes you red.
I will urge everyone everywhere to never do business with any of the businesses listed her. Watch any movie involving the companies, actors, and writers in this list. Never donated to any charity in this list, never invest with any fund in this list, never send a child to any school in this list, never listen to any artist on the label.
1st Metropolitan Mortgage
911 Media
Arts Center
AEA Investors Inc
Adams Dean and Co.
Adaptive Analytics
Agrama Films
Agvar Chemicals
Americhoice
An-Byce Foundation
Atlantic Foundation
BFC Partners
Baskahegan Co
Bergman and Frockt
Bohemian Foundation
Bonanza Oil Company
Bonnie Turner - Hollywood Writer
Brico Fund
Bright Electric Supply
Bumper Inc.
CBS
Cal IV Entertainment
Carsey Werner LLC
Casa le Asher
Casey Gerry Law Firm
Cedars-Sinai HospitalCentralbridge Partners
Cheyenne Exploration Inc
Choicepoint, Inc.
Coca-Cola - see http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/brands/brandlist.html
Command Information
Conzelman Vineyards (Harmonique brand wines)
Council on Governmental Relations
Crown Surgery Medical Group
Dechert LLP
Del Mar Partnership, Inc.
Deloitte Tax LLP
Delos Foundation
Destination DC
Dormont Manufacturing
Dreamworks
Dunn & Crutcher
E.B.I. Inc
Elizabeth Galvin - Aritst and Clothing Designer
Entercan Communications
Ernst & Young
Federal Management System
First Financial Service Center, LLC
Fisher Financial Group LLC
Flether Asset Management
Fulcrum Investiments
Full Sail University
GEM Investors
Georgia State University
Girl Scouts of America Council
Global Green USA
Global Healing Community
Grovesnor Capitol
Haney Pzena Investment Management
Harbinger Capital Partners
Horning Brothers
Hudlin Media Empire
ImageMovers
Interpublic Group
Isaac Ray Center
Issues Management International
JEHT Foundation
JMB Realty Corp
James Lassiter - Hollywood Executive Producer
Jamie Foxx - Movie Star
Jim Henson Company
Jordan Real Estate Investments
Kraft Construction in Florida
Kraft Foods
Kuan-Yin Foundation
LMN Equity
Land O Lakes
Lobo Media Group
Loma Verde Properties
MRV Communication
MSNBC
MWW Group
Magno International
Major Brands
Marisla Foundation
Matlock Capital
Mccormack Communications
Mcgarr Capital Holdings
Mesirow Financial
Microsoft Corporation
Motir Services, INC
Motown Records
NBC
Nemazee Capital
New York League of Conservation Voters
News Web Corporation
Noreen Investment
North Star Group
Northwestern Medical Faculty Foundation
OM ORGANICS
Oaktree Capital Management
Ontelligence
Oreck Vacuums
Otis College of Art and Design
Pasedena City College
Phoenix IP Ventures
Pohaku Fund
Popcap Games
Preod Corporation
Pukyong National University (SOUTH KOREA)
Qualcomm, Inc.
Ralmor Corporation
Reliant Pharmaceuticals
Renaissance Technology
Rentech Inc
Richman Companies
Ripplewood Holdings, LLC
Rockefeller Family Fund
SZT Promotions, Inc.
Select Management Resource
Seminote Capital Partners
Sharon Stone - Slut
Simmons Law Firm
Simon Property
Skadden Arps LLP
Small Ventures USA
Snap-On tools
Solar Turbines
Soros Fund Management
Stanford University
Starz (integrated entertainment company)
Strategic Analysis
Stryker Corporation
Sword Group (international technology company)
Teddy Bear Holdings
Tera Pharmaceutical Industries
The Baskin Law Firm
The Blume Co.
The Capital Group
The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
The Reinvestment Fund
Third Security LLC
Trace Foundation
Tyco International
United Therapeutics Corp
Viacom
Voyager Management
Waite, Schneider, Bayliss and Chesley
Wallace Global Fund
Warland Investments
Western Development
Windy City Inc
Winner & Associates Working Assets
YesTraderYogaFit
I will urge everyone everywhere to never do business with any of the businesses listed her. Watch any movie involving the companies, actors, and writers in this list. Never donated to any charity in this list, never invest with any fund in this list, never send a child to any school in this list, never listen to any artist on the label.
1st Metropolitan Mortgage
911 Media
Arts Center
AEA Investors Inc
Adams Dean and Co.
Adaptive Analytics
Agrama Films
Agvar Chemicals
Americhoice
An-Byce Foundation
Atlantic Foundation
BFC Partners
Baskahegan Co
Bergman and Frockt
Bohemian Foundation
Bonanza Oil Company
Bonnie Turner - Hollywood Writer
Brico Fund
Bright Electric Supply
Bumper Inc.
CBS
Cal IV Entertainment
Carsey Werner LLC
Casa le Asher
Casey Gerry Law Firm
Cedars-Sinai HospitalCentralbridge Partners
Cheyenne Exploration Inc
Choicepoint, Inc.
Coca-Cola - see http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/brands/brandlist.html
Command Information
Conzelman Vineyards (Harmonique brand wines)
Council on Governmental Relations
Crown Surgery Medical Group
Dechert LLP
Del Mar Partnership, Inc.
Deloitte Tax LLP
Delos Foundation
Destination DC
Dormont Manufacturing
Dreamworks
Dunn & Crutcher
E.B.I. Inc
Elizabeth Galvin - Aritst and Clothing Designer
Entercan Communications
Ernst & Young
Federal Management System
First Financial Service Center, LLC
Fisher Financial Group LLC
Flether Asset Management
Fulcrum Investiments
Full Sail University
GEM Investors
Georgia State University
Girl Scouts of America Council
Global Green USA
Global Healing Community
Grovesnor Capitol
Haney Pzena Investment Management
Harbinger Capital Partners
Horning Brothers
Hudlin Media Empire
ImageMovers
Interpublic Group
Isaac Ray Center
Issues Management International
JEHT Foundation
JMB Realty Corp
James Lassiter - Hollywood Executive Producer
Jamie Foxx - Movie Star
Jim Henson Company
Jordan Real Estate Investments
Kraft Construction in Florida
Kraft Foods
Kuan-Yin Foundation
LMN Equity
Land O Lakes
Lobo Media Group
Loma Verde Properties
MRV Communication
MSNBC
MWW Group
Magno International
Major Brands
Marisla Foundation
Matlock Capital
Mccormack Communications
Mcgarr Capital Holdings
Mesirow Financial
Microsoft Corporation
Motir Services, INC
Motown Records
NBC
Nemazee Capital
New York League of Conservation Voters
News Web Corporation
Noreen Investment
North Star Group
Northwestern Medical Faculty Foundation
OM ORGANICS
Oaktree Capital Management
Ontelligence
Oreck Vacuums
Otis College of Art and Design
Pasedena City College
Phoenix IP Ventures
Pohaku Fund
Popcap Games
Preod Corporation
Pukyong National University (SOUTH KOREA)
Qualcomm, Inc.
Ralmor Corporation
Reliant Pharmaceuticals
Renaissance Technology
Rentech Inc
Richman Companies
Ripplewood Holdings, LLC
Rockefeller Family Fund
SZT Promotions, Inc.
Select Management Resource
Seminote Capital Partners
Sharon Stone - Slut
Simmons Law Firm
Simon Property
Skadden Arps LLP
Small Ventures USA
Snap-On tools
Solar Turbines
Soros Fund Management
Stanford University
Starz (integrated entertainment company)
Strategic Analysis
Stryker Corporation
Sword Group (international technology company)
Teddy Bear Holdings
Tera Pharmaceutical Industries
The Baskin Law Firm
The Blume Co.
The Capital Group
The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
The Reinvestment Fund
Third Security LLC
Trace Foundation
Tyco International
United Therapeutics Corp
Viacom
Voyager Management
Waite, Schneider, Bayliss and Chesley
Wallace Global Fund
Warland Investments
Western Development
Windy City Inc
Winner & Associates Working Assets
YesTraderYogaFit
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
err for liberty
If it does not hinder the liberty of another it should not be restricted as a freedom. Restrictions as proof of competency such a drivers licensing is in place to try to assure the liberty of your neighbor’s grandmother from your demon possessed car. Yet other restrictions such as the type of firearm make no sense and are simply disarming the public whom may someday need to stop the tyranny of evil. A gun safety class keeps you from shooting the neighbor’s grandmother accidently, but it does not matter if it was a shotgun or a belt-fed machine gun that you accidently killed her with. Regulating the type of weapon is government stealing your freedom.
The same could be said about illegal drugs that have people filling our prisons. Everyday hundreds of thousands of beers are sold in bars then people get in their cars and drive their drunken asses’ home, potentially robbing you of your liberties as they bounce you under their muffler. Yet if they do not drive, it is perfectly acceptable. Well are all these illegal drug busts of people driving on drugs??? I think not and there is no difference. Alcohol and pot both affect judgment. Light up and have a beer, but sit your ass at home.
Let us extend this to abortion. Are you killing a person and taking their liberty? Conservatives would say yes and liberals would say it’s not a human. They cover up with spin and talk about the liberties of the mother, etc. Chill out both of you. You want an abortion …go for it. There is no one on this planet that can save definitively where a fetus is a human with a soul or if anyone has a soul. I do say this; if there is a God he or she is perfectly capable of waiting to avenge this murder. If he can be patient and wait for some chick to die rather than smote her then so can I Until you can know 100% and all sides say its human….err on the side of liberty. Abortions should remain legal.
Economy is another sore spot. Johnny has $100 and gives his wife $20. Johnny then wants to buy a stereo for $85 dollars. How many dollars does Johnny have left? The answer is $80 because he doesn’t buy it until he has the damn money. Government should be like Johnny. Constitutionally it should be mandated that government is like Johnny. Now onto income tax. STOP IT!! Income I make from work is not PROFIT to be taxed. It is a fair market exchange of my labor for cash from a company. If you tax income it is inherently interfering with the free market and if you are too stupid to realize that only a completely free market works then just off yourself now. Not an almost free but subsidized. Not an almost free but trade barriered. Not a lets force minimum wage up. Not a lets make regional trade agreements to create false markets. A FREE TRADE CAPITALIST ECONOMY IS THE ONLY ONE THAT WORKS.
I make tires for $20 and some Japanese guy makes tires for $17 including his cost to ship them to the U.S. Well I am sorry but you deserve to save $3 and if I can’t figure out how to do it then I should start another business. And while I’m having my stroke….show me in the Constitution where it says tax the shit out of me and give it to Ford to save 100,000 jobs? Your government, not nurse maid. Quit letting everyone suckle and let them go. They had the chance to foresee the future and were not smart enough to change, let them burn. Yes, I am sorry Uncle Joe lost his union welding job at Ford because the union literally drove Ford out of business, but people should think about the consequences of unions. So you have two dynamics here. Americans as consumers deserve an open market and Americans as workers deserve to have companies naturally adapt or phase out if they cannot compete. In the case of the U.S. auto industry it was costly government regulations and the Unite Auto Workers(communists) responsible for its demise. Fuck you. I am not bailing them out and if the government does….you will never see me buy another one of their cars again just to spite them. How about getting rid of NASCAR you dumbasses.
I sure wish someone would pay me not to work. Perhaps I should become a farmer. Can you really tell me that government should be paying farmers’ income so they don’t grow certain crops and thus influence the free market? More market interference nothing more or less.
While I am think about taxes….lower taxes makes more spendable income. Spending means businesses make money. Businesses making money hire people. Hiring people makes more spendable income. Damn that is so simple. Close the IRS. Start raising sales tax on non-food and non-medicinal products. Make life fair without making it socialist.
The same could be said about illegal drugs that have people filling our prisons. Everyday hundreds of thousands of beers are sold in bars then people get in their cars and drive their drunken asses’ home, potentially robbing you of your liberties as they bounce you under their muffler. Yet if they do not drive, it is perfectly acceptable. Well are all these illegal drug busts of people driving on drugs??? I think not and there is no difference. Alcohol and pot both affect judgment. Light up and have a beer, but sit your ass at home.
Let us extend this to abortion. Are you killing a person and taking their liberty? Conservatives would say yes and liberals would say it’s not a human. They cover up with spin and talk about the liberties of the mother, etc. Chill out both of you. You want an abortion …go for it. There is no one on this planet that can save definitively where a fetus is a human with a soul or if anyone has a soul. I do say this; if there is a God he or she is perfectly capable of waiting to avenge this murder. If he can be patient and wait for some chick to die rather than smote her then so can I Until you can know 100% and all sides say its human….err on the side of liberty. Abortions should remain legal.
Economy is another sore spot. Johnny has $100 and gives his wife $20. Johnny then wants to buy a stereo for $85 dollars. How many dollars does Johnny have left? The answer is $80 because he doesn’t buy it until he has the damn money. Government should be like Johnny. Constitutionally it should be mandated that government is like Johnny. Now onto income tax. STOP IT!! Income I make from work is not PROFIT to be taxed. It is a fair market exchange of my labor for cash from a company. If you tax income it is inherently interfering with the free market and if you are too stupid to realize that only a completely free market works then just off yourself now. Not an almost free but subsidized. Not an almost free but trade barriered. Not a lets force minimum wage up. Not a lets make regional trade agreements to create false markets. A FREE TRADE CAPITALIST ECONOMY IS THE ONLY ONE THAT WORKS.
I make tires for $20 and some Japanese guy makes tires for $17 including his cost to ship them to the U.S. Well I am sorry but you deserve to save $3 and if I can’t figure out how to do it then I should start another business. And while I’m having my stroke….show me in the Constitution where it says tax the shit out of me and give it to Ford to save 100,000 jobs? Your government, not nurse maid. Quit letting everyone suckle and let them go. They had the chance to foresee the future and were not smart enough to change, let them burn. Yes, I am sorry Uncle Joe lost his union welding job at Ford because the union literally drove Ford out of business, but people should think about the consequences of unions. So you have two dynamics here. Americans as consumers deserve an open market and Americans as workers deserve to have companies naturally adapt or phase out if they cannot compete. In the case of the U.S. auto industry it was costly government regulations and the Unite Auto Workers(communists) responsible for its demise. Fuck you. I am not bailing them out and if the government does….you will never see me buy another one of their cars again just to spite them. How about getting rid of NASCAR you dumbasses.
I sure wish someone would pay me not to work. Perhaps I should become a farmer. Can you really tell me that government should be paying farmers’ income so they don’t grow certain crops and thus influence the free market? More market interference nothing more or less.
While I am think about taxes….lower taxes makes more spendable income. Spending means businesses make money. Businesses making money hire people. Hiring people makes more spendable income. Damn that is so simple. Close the IRS. Start raising sales tax on non-food and non-medicinal products. Make life fair without making it socialist.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Education vs. Values
I compared the 2006 census data and compared % of College Graduates over the age of 25 and how the state voted in the 2008 elections.
Out of the 25 Most Educated States, only 6 voted for McCain.
Out fo the 25 Least Educated States, 13 voted for McCain.
What does this information truly say? Well to me it says a good bit.
It confirms higher education is very liberal in its direction.
It confirms hard worker blue collar American vote for values and not bling.
It confirms that high education means more income and less decision making on economic variables.
The coal miners of West Virigina, factor workers of Kentucky, dock workers of Louisianna, the crab fishermen on the Bearing Sea, and the Republic of Texas DID NOT SELL OUT THEIR VALUES.
Out of the 25 Most Educated States, only 6 voted for McCain.
Out fo the 25 Least Educated States, 13 voted for McCain.
What does this information truly say? Well to me it says a good bit.
It confirms higher education is very liberal in its direction.
It confirms hard worker blue collar American vote for values and not bling.
It confirms that high education means more income and less decision making on economic variables.
The coal miners of West Virigina, factor workers of Kentucky, dock workers of Louisianna, the crab fishermen on the Bearing Sea, and the Republic of Texas DID NOT SELL OUT THEIR VALUES.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Logic
Logic tells me that to feed starving childen in Africa do not give money to Sally "fat assed" Struthers or she will be hitting Taco Bell by the morning.
Policy that will not achieve useful consequence is pointless as well. This happens all the time. Politicians make laws that do way more harm trhen good or do not even impact what it is they set out to change. The love to tell us taking not action is just like taking an action, etc, etc.
PFFT.
Policy that will not achieve useful consequence is pointless as well. This happens all the time. Politicians make laws that do way more harm trhen good or do not even impact what it is they set out to change. The love to tell us taking not action is just like taking an action, etc, etc.
PFFT.
I'm cold so put on your coat
Maggie Fox at Reuters had an interesting article on Obama's plan for our healthcare system.
PriceWaterhouseCooper estimated his plan will cost tax-payers, not the 40 million that don't pay, but real tax-payers $75 billion the first year. It will however provide health insurance to 95% of Americans.
What they are really saying is half of America already has health insurance and a good bit of the non-insured will not have heathcare.
There are 47 million Americans and ILLEGALS that lack healthcare and this plan will only cover 66% of them leaving the remaining 15 million plus with no coverage. Not a very good solution, Karl must be burning in hell looking up with a very disapproving look on his face.
The good news is the estiamate a shortage or primary care physicians because people will stop becoming medical doctors and that the program costs, like anything implemented by the federal governemtn will become "unsustainably high".
As a bonus, another socialist from Montana, Senator Max Baucus, has unveiled a reform plan to require all Americans to carry healthcare. More government telling Americans what is good for them. Reminds me of a mother feeling cold on a nice fall day so she bundles her child up in winter-like clothing so he can run around outside sweating like its mid-summer. She may have the best of intentions, but just as she cannot use her body to judge that of a young active boy, the government, led by people, cannot use their experiences to make policy, they should try going to the people and asking.
There is no reason in this modern day that any member of Congress cannot have simple registration and polling systems on their websites to really get daily input from members of their constituency. I kind of laugh at the power driven naivity of our elected officials.
source: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE4AB67T20081112?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=10112
PriceWaterhouseCooper estimated his plan will cost tax-payers, not the 40 million that don't pay, but real tax-payers $75 billion the first year. It will however provide health insurance to 95% of Americans.
What they are really saying is half of America already has health insurance and a good bit of the non-insured will not have heathcare.
There are 47 million Americans and ILLEGALS that lack healthcare and this plan will only cover 66% of them leaving the remaining 15 million plus with no coverage. Not a very good solution, Karl must be burning in hell looking up with a very disapproving look on his face.
The good news is the estiamate a shortage or primary care physicians because people will stop becoming medical doctors and that the program costs, like anything implemented by the federal governemtn will become "unsustainably high".
As a bonus, another socialist from Montana, Senator Max Baucus, has unveiled a reform plan to require all Americans to carry healthcare. More government telling Americans what is good for them. Reminds me of a mother feeling cold on a nice fall day so she bundles her child up in winter-like clothing so he can run around outside sweating like its mid-summer. She may have the best of intentions, but just as she cannot use her body to judge that of a young active boy, the government, led by people, cannot use their experiences to make policy, they should try going to the people and asking.
There is no reason in this modern day that any member of Congress cannot have simple registration and polling systems on their websites to really get daily input from members of their constituency. I kind of laugh at the power driven naivity of our elected officials.
source: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE4AB67T20081112?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=10112
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Honor Those That Served
Today is Veterans Day. Not much news about ceremonies or parades. It reminds me of spring of 1999 when I was in the district for a semester. I was working as an investigator for the Department of Public Defender for the state of Maryland and living in Falls Church. I was able to spend a free day in Arlington. I was awe struck finding the markers of some of my favorite heroes - Omar Bradley, Audey Murphy, George Patton. I was also very touched by the Kennedy memorial thinking of his little boy saluting his casket and when you see the flame always burinng at his memorial you understand this country and what it stands for is much bigger than even our Presidents or any single group of religions or races or ideologies. The Tomb of the Unknowns is guarded all day everyday regardless of weather, such is the honor that our fighting men and women have earned. I have never felt so saddened, so alive, and so full of pride then that day when I personally got to visit Arlington and just be wih myself and my beliefs for a day of introspection about my personal beliefs and about my country and what sacrifices I would make for it if asked.
To my grandfather, whom I never met; To my father, whom I haven't spoke to in years because of personal reasons; and to my older brother Robert.
You all served our country. My grandfather in the Army during the great war. My father a graduate of Paris Island and Vietnam grunt. And my lifer Navy brother whom has been around the world and in too many war zones and conflicts. The extent of what you gave was often deep I know the horrors of war has haunted my father since 65. Eighteen year olds should never have to kill or see their friends killed.
I am very proud of your service. And while I am thankful I never went to the Air Force academy like I wanted to, I am glad I avoided the endless ribbing I would have taken for it. I am deeply saddened that I will never know the honor of having served in the military like most of my family. Such is the esteem at which I hold your service and the service of all in our armed forces. One of the few regrets that I will take with me to my end is not having served my country in the military.
To my grandfather, whom I never met; To my father, whom I haven't spoke to in years because of personal reasons; and to my older brother Robert.
You all served our country. My grandfather in the Army during the great war. My father a graduate of Paris Island and Vietnam grunt. And my lifer Navy brother whom has been around the world and in too many war zones and conflicts. The extent of what you gave was often deep I know the horrors of war has haunted my father since 65. Eighteen year olds should never have to kill or see their friends killed.
I am very proud of your service. And while I am thankful I never went to the Air Force academy like I wanted to, I am glad I avoided the endless ribbing I would have taken for it. I am deeply saddened that I will never know the honor of having served in the military like most of my family. Such is the esteem at which I hold your service and the service of all in our armed forces. One of the few regrets that I will take with me to my end is not having served my country in the military.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Amazing how values never change
Speech by Ronald Reagan.
Address on behalf of Senator Barry GoldwaterRendezvous with DestinyOctober 27, 1964
I have spent most of my life as a Democrat. I recently have seen fit to follow another course. I believe that the issues confronting us cross party lines. Now, one side in this campaign has been telling us that the issues of this election are the maintenance of peace and prosperity. The line has been used "We've never had it so good."
But I have an uncomfortable feeling that this prosperity isn't something on which we can base our hopes for the future. No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income. Today, 37 cents of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector's share, and yet our government continues to spend $17 million a day more than the government takes in. We haven't balanced our budget 28 out of the last 34 years. We have raised our debt limit three times in the last twelve months, and now our national debt is one and a half times bigger than all the combined debts of all the nations in the world. We have $15 billion in gold in our treasury--we don't own an ounce. Foreign dollar claims are $27.3 billion, and we have just had announced that the dollar of 1939 will now purchase 45 cents in its total value.
As for the peace that we would preserve, I wonder who among us would like to approach the wife or mother whose husband or son has died in South Vietnam and ask them if they think this is a peace that should be maintained indefinitely. Do they mean peace, or do they mean we just want to be left in peace? There can be no real peace while one American is dying some place in the world for the rest of us. We are at war with the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars, and it has been said if we lose that war, and in doing so lose this way of freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening. Well, I think it's time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers.
Not too long ago two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, "We don't know how lucky we are." And the Cuban stopped and said, "How lucky you are! I had someplace to escape to." In that sentence he told us the entire story. If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth. And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except to sovereign people, is still the newest and most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election. Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.
You and I are told increasingly that we have to choose between a left or right, but I would like to suggest that there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down--up to a man's age-old dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order--or down to the ant heap totalitarianism, and regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.
In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the "Great Society," or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a "greater government activity in the affairs of the people." But they have been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves--and all of the things that I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations. For example, they have voices that say "the cold war will end through acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism." Another voice says that the profit motive has become outmoded, it must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state; or our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century. Senator Fullbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the president as our moral teacher and our leader, and he said he is hobbled in his task by the restrictions in power imposed on him by this antiquated document. He must be freed so that he can do for us what he knows is best. And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as "meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government." Well, I for one resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me--the free man and woman of this country--as "the masses." This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, "the full power of centralized government"--this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.
Now, we have no better example of this than the government's involvement in the farm economy over the last 30 years. Since 1955, the cost of this program has nearly doubled. One-fourth of farming in America is responsible for 85% of the farm surplus. Three-fourths of farming is out on the free market and has known a 21% increase in the per capita consumption of all its produce. You see, that one-fourth of farming is regulated and controlled by the federal government. In the last three years we have spent $43 in feed grain program for every bushel of corn we don't grow.
Senator Humphrey last week charged that Barry Goldwater as President would seek to eliminate farmers. He should do his homework a little better, because he will find out that we have had a decline of 5 million in the farm population under these government programs. He will also find that the Democratic administration has sought to get from Congress an extension of the farm program to include that three-fourths that is now free. He will find that they have also asked for the right to imprison farmers who wouldn't keep books as prescribed by the federal government. The Secretary of Agriculture asked for the right to seize farms through condemnation and resell them to other individuals. And contained in that same program was a provision that would have allowed the federal government to remove 2 million farmers from the soil.
At the same time, there has been an increase in the Department of Agriculture employees. There is now one for every 30 farms in the United States, and still they can't tell us how 66 shiploads of grain headed for Austria disappeared without a trace and Billie Sol Estes never left shore.
Every responsible farmer and farm organization has repeatedly asked the government to free the farm economy, but who are farmers to know what is best for them? The wheat farmers voted against a wheat program. The government passed it anyway. Now the price of bread goes up; the price of wheat to the farmer goes down.
Meanwhile, back in the city, under urban renewal the assault on freedom carries on. Private property rights are so diluted that public interest is almost anything that a few government planners decide it should be. In a program that takes for the needy and gives to the greedy, we see such spectacles as in Cleveland, Ohio, a million-and-a-half-dollar building completed only three years ago must be destroyed to make way for what government officials call a "more compatible use of the land." The President tells us he is now going to start building public housing units in the thousands where heretofore we have only built them in the hundreds. But FHA and the Veterans Administration tell us that they have 120,000 housing units they've taken back through mortgage foreclosures. For three decades, we have sought to solve the problems of unemployment through government planning, and the more the plans fail, the more the planners plan. The latest is the Area Redevelopment Agency. They have just declared Rice County, Kansas, a depressed area. Rice County, Kansas, has two hundred oil wells, and the 14,000 people there have over $30 million on deposit in personal savings in their banks. When the government tells you you're depressed, lie down and be depressed.
We have so many people who can't see a fat man standing beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion that the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one. So they are going to solve all the problems of human misery through government and government planning. Well, now, if government planning and welfare had the answer and they've had almost 30 years of it, shouldn't we expect government to almost read the score to us once in a while? Shouldn't they be telling us about the decline each year in the number of people needing help? The reduction in the need for public housing?
But the reverse is true. Each year the need grows greater, the program grows greater. We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry each night. Well, that was probably true. They were all on a diet. But now we are told that 9.3 million families in this country are poverty-stricken on the basis of earning less than $3,000 a year. Welfare spending is 10 times greater than in the dark depths of the Depression. We are spending $45 billion on welfare. Now do a little arithmetic, and you will find that if we divided the $45 billion up equally among those 9 million poor families, we would be able to give each family $4,600 a year, and this added to their present income should eliminate poverty! Direct aid to the poor, however, is running only about $600 per family. It would seem that someplace there must be some overhead.
So now we declare "war on poverty," or "you, too, can be a Bobby Baker!" Now, do they honestly expect us to believe that if we add $1 billion to the $45 million we are spending...one more program to the 30-odd we have--and remember, this new program doesn't replace any, it just duplicates existing programs--do they believe that poverty is suddenly going to disappear by magic? Well, in all fairness I should explain that there is one part of the new program that isn't duplicated. This is the youth feature. We are now going to solve the dropout problem, juvenile delinquency, by reinstituting something like the old CCC camps, and we are going to put our young people in camps, but again we do some arithmetic, and we find that we are going to spend each year just on room and board for each young person that we help $4,700 a year! We can send them to Harvard for $2,700! Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting that Harvard is the answer to juvenile delinquency.
But seriously, what are we doing to those we seek to help? Not too long ago, a judge called me here in Los Angeles. He told me of a young woman who had come before him for a divorce. She had six children, was pregnant with her seventh. Under his questioning, she revealed her husband was a laborer earning $250 a month. She wanted a divorce so that she could get an $80 raise. She is eligible for $330 a month in the Aid to Dependent Children Program. She got the idea from two women in her neighborhood who had already done that very thing.
Yet anytime you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we are denounced as being against their humanitarian goals. They say we are always "against" things, never "for" anything. Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so. We are for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we have accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem.
But we are against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments to those who depend on them for livelihood. They have called it insurance to us in a hundred million pieces of literature. But then they appeared before the Supreme Court and they testified that it was a welfare program. They only use the term "insurance" to sell it to the people. And they said Social Security dues are a tax for the general use of the government, and the government has used that tax. There is no fund, because Robert Byers, the actuarial head, appeared before a congressional committee and admitted that Social Security as of this moment is $298 billion in the hole. But he said there should be no cause for worry because as long as they have the power to tax, they could always take away from the people whatever they needed to bail them out of trouble! And they are doing just that.
A young man, 21 years of age, working at an average salary...his Social Security contribution would, in the open market, buy him an insurance policy that would guarantee $220 a month at age 65. The government promises $127. He could live it up until he is 31 and then take out a policy that would pay more than Social Security. Now, are we so lacking in business sense that we can't put this program on a sound basis so that people who do require those payments will find that they can get them when they are due...that the cupboard isn't bare? Barry Goldwater thinks we can.
At the same time, can't we introduce voluntary features that would permit a citizen who can do better on his own to be excused upon presentation of evidence that he had made provisions for the non-earning years? Should we allow a widow with children to work, and not lose the benefits supposedly paid for by her deceased husband? Shouldn't you and I be allowed to declare who our beneficiaries will be under these programs, which we cannot do? I think we are for telling our senior citizens that no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds. But I think we are against forcing all citizens, regardless of need, into a compulsory government program, especially when we have such examples, as announced last week, when France admitted that their Medicare program was now bankrupt. They've come to the end of the road.
In addition, was Barry Goldwater so irresponsible when he suggested that our government give up its program of deliberate planned inflation so that when you do get your Social Security pension, a dollar will buy a dollar's worth, and not 45 cents' worth?
I think we are for an international organization, where the nations of the world can seek peace. But I think we are against subordinating American interests to an organization that has become so structurally unsound that today you can muster a two-thirds vote on the floor of the General Assembly among the nations that represent less than 10 percent of the world's population. I think we are against the hypocrisy of assailing our allies because here and there they cling to a colony, while we engage in a conspiracy of silence and never open our mouths about the millions of people enslaved in Soviet colonies in the satellite nation.
I think we are for aiding our allies by sharing of our material blessings with those nations which share in our fundamental beliefs, but we are against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world. We set out to help 19 countries. We are helping 107. We spent $146 billion. With that money, we bought a $2 million yacht for Haile Selassie. We bought dress suits for Greek undertakers, extra wives for Kenyan government officials. We bought a thousand TV sets for a place where they have no electricity. In the last six years, 52 nations have bought $7 billion worth of our gold, and all 52 are receiving foreign aid from this country.
No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this Earth. Federal employees number 2.5 million, and federal, state, and local, one out of six of the nation's work force is employed by the government. These proliferating bureaus with their thousands of regulations have cost us many of our constitutional safeguards. How many of us realize that today federal agents can invade a man's property without a warrant? They can impose a fine without a formal hearing, let alone a trial by jury, and they can seize and sell his property in auction to enforce the payment of that fine. In Chico County, Arkansas, James Wier overplanted his rice allotment. The government obtained a $17,000 judgment, and a U.S. marshal sold his 950-acre farm at auction. The government said it was necessary as a warning to others to make the system work. Last February 19 at the University of Minnesota, Norman Thomas, six-time candidate for President on the Socialist Party ticket, said, "If Barry Goldwater became President, he would stop the advance of socialism in the United States." I think that's exactly what he will do.
As a former Democrat, I can tell you Norman Thomas isn't the only man who has drawn this parallel to socialism with the present administration. Back in 1936, Mr. Democrat himself, Al Smith, the great American, came before the American people and charged that the leadership of his party was taking the part of Jefferson, Jackson, and Cleveland down the road under the banners of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin. And he walked away from his party, and he never returned to the day he died, because to this day, the leadership of that party has been taking that party, that honorable party, down the road in the image of the labor socialist party of England. Now it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? Such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, inalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment. Our Democratic opponents seem unwilling to debate these issues. They want to make you and I believe that this is a contest between two men...that we are to choose just between two personalities.
Well, what of this man that they would destroy? And in destroying, they would destroy that which he represents, the ideas that you and I hold dear. Is he the brash and shallow and trigger-happy man they say he is? Well, I have been privileged to know him "when." I knew him long before he ever dreamed of trying for high office, and I can tell you personally I have never known a man in my life I believe so incapable of doing a dishonest or dishonorable thing.
This is a man who in his own business, before he entered politics, instituted a profit-sharing plan, before unions had ever thought of it. He put in health and medical insurance for all his employees. He took 50 percent of the profits before taxes and set up a retirement program, a pension plan for all his employees. He sent checks for life to an employee who was ill and couldn't work. He provided nursing care for the children of mothers who work in the stores. When Mexico was ravaged by floods from the Rio Grande, he climbed in his airplane and flew medicine and supplies down there.
An ex-GI told me how he met him. It was the week before Christmas during the Korean War, and he was at the Los Angeles airport trying to get a ride home to Arizona for Christmas, and he said that there were a lot of servicemen there and no seats available on the planes. Then a voice came over the loudspeaker and said, "Any men in uniform wanting a ride to Arizona, go to runway such-and-such," and they went down there, and there was this fellow named Barry Goldwater sitting in his plane. Every day in the weeks before Christmas, all day long, he would load up the plane, fly to Arizona, fly them to their homes, then fly back over to get another load.
During the hectic split-second timing of a campaign, this is a man who took time out to sit beside an old friend who was dying of cancer. His campaign managers were understandably impatient, but he said, "There aren't many left who care what happens to her. I'd like her to know I care." This is a man who said to his 19-year-old son, "There is no foundation like the rock of honesty and fairness, and when you begin to build your life upon that rock, with the cement of the faith in God that you have, then you have a real start." This is not a man who could carelessly send other people's sons to war. And that is the issue of this campaign that makes all of the other problems I have discussed academic, unless we realize that we are in a war that must be won.
Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us that they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy "accommodation." And they say if we only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he will forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answer--not an easy answer--but simple.
If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based upon what we know in our hearts is morally right. We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion now in slavery behind the Iron Curtain, "Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skin, we are willing to make a deal with your slave masters." Alexander Hamilton said, "A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one." Let's set the record straight. There is no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there is only one guaranteed way you can have peace--and you can have it in the next second--surrender.
Admittedly there is a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson in history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face--that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight and surrender. If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand--the ultimatum. And what then? When Nikita Khrushchev has told his people he knows what our answer will be? He has told them that we are retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes to deliver the ultimatum, our surrender will be voluntary because by that time we will have weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically. He believes this because from our side he has heard voices pleading for "peace at any price" or "better Red than dead," or as one commentator put it, he would rather "live on his knees than die on his feet." And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don't speak for the rest of us. You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin--just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard 'round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn't die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well, it's a simple answer after all.
You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, "There is a price we will not pay." There is a point beyond which they must not advance. This is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater's "peace through strength." Winston Churchill said that "the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits--not animals." And he said, "There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty."
You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on Earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.
We will keep in mind and remember that Barry Goldwater has faith in us. He has faith that you and I have the ability and the dignity and the right to make our own decisions and determine our own destiny.
Address on behalf of Senator Barry GoldwaterRendezvous with DestinyOctober 27, 1964
I have spent most of my life as a Democrat. I recently have seen fit to follow another course. I believe that the issues confronting us cross party lines. Now, one side in this campaign has been telling us that the issues of this election are the maintenance of peace and prosperity. The line has been used "We've never had it so good."
But I have an uncomfortable feeling that this prosperity isn't something on which we can base our hopes for the future. No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income. Today, 37 cents of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector's share, and yet our government continues to spend $17 million a day more than the government takes in. We haven't balanced our budget 28 out of the last 34 years. We have raised our debt limit three times in the last twelve months, and now our national debt is one and a half times bigger than all the combined debts of all the nations in the world. We have $15 billion in gold in our treasury--we don't own an ounce. Foreign dollar claims are $27.3 billion, and we have just had announced that the dollar of 1939 will now purchase 45 cents in its total value.
As for the peace that we would preserve, I wonder who among us would like to approach the wife or mother whose husband or son has died in South Vietnam and ask them if they think this is a peace that should be maintained indefinitely. Do they mean peace, or do they mean we just want to be left in peace? There can be no real peace while one American is dying some place in the world for the rest of us. We are at war with the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars, and it has been said if we lose that war, and in doing so lose this way of freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening. Well, I think it's time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers.
Not too long ago two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, "We don't know how lucky we are." And the Cuban stopped and said, "How lucky you are! I had someplace to escape to." In that sentence he told us the entire story. If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth. And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except to sovereign people, is still the newest and most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election. Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.
You and I are told increasingly that we have to choose between a left or right, but I would like to suggest that there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down--up to a man's age-old dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order--or down to the ant heap totalitarianism, and regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.
In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the "Great Society," or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a "greater government activity in the affairs of the people." But they have been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves--and all of the things that I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations. For example, they have voices that say "the cold war will end through acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism." Another voice says that the profit motive has become outmoded, it must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state; or our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century. Senator Fullbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the president as our moral teacher and our leader, and he said he is hobbled in his task by the restrictions in power imposed on him by this antiquated document. He must be freed so that he can do for us what he knows is best. And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as "meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government." Well, I for one resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me--the free man and woman of this country--as "the masses." This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, "the full power of centralized government"--this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.
Now, we have no better example of this than the government's involvement in the farm economy over the last 30 years. Since 1955, the cost of this program has nearly doubled. One-fourth of farming in America is responsible for 85% of the farm surplus. Three-fourths of farming is out on the free market and has known a 21% increase in the per capita consumption of all its produce. You see, that one-fourth of farming is regulated and controlled by the federal government. In the last three years we have spent $43 in feed grain program for every bushel of corn we don't grow.
Senator Humphrey last week charged that Barry Goldwater as President would seek to eliminate farmers. He should do his homework a little better, because he will find out that we have had a decline of 5 million in the farm population under these government programs. He will also find that the Democratic administration has sought to get from Congress an extension of the farm program to include that three-fourths that is now free. He will find that they have also asked for the right to imprison farmers who wouldn't keep books as prescribed by the federal government. The Secretary of Agriculture asked for the right to seize farms through condemnation and resell them to other individuals. And contained in that same program was a provision that would have allowed the federal government to remove 2 million farmers from the soil.
At the same time, there has been an increase in the Department of Agriculture employees. There is now one for every 30 farms in the United States, and still they can't tell us how 66 shiploads of grain headed for Austria disappeared without a trace and Billie Sol Estes never left shore.
Every responsible farmer and farm organization has repeatedly asked the government to free the farm economy, but who are farmers to know what is best for them? The wheat farmers voted against a wheat program. The government passed it anyway. Now the price of bread goes up; the price of wheat to the farmer goes down.
Meanwhile, back in the city, under urban renewal the assault on freedom carries on. Private property rights are so diluted that public interest is almost anything that a few government planners decide it should be. In a program that takes for the needy and gives to the greedy, we see such spectacles as in Cleveland, Ohio, a million-and-a-half-dollar building completed only three years ago must be destroyed to make way for what government officials call a "more compatible use of the land." The President tells us he is now going to start building public housing units in the thousands where heretofore we have only built them in the hundreds. But FHA and the Veterans Administration tell us that they have 120,000 housing units they've taken back through mortgage foreclosures. For three decades, we have sought to solve the problems of unemployment through government planning, and the more the plans fail, the more the planners plan. The latest is the Area Redevelopment Agency. They have just declared Rice County, Kansas, a depressed area. Rice County, Kansas, has two hundred oil wells, and the 14,000 people there have over $30 million on deposit in personal savings in their banks. When the government tells you you're depressed, lie down and be depressed.
We have so many people who can't see a fat man standing beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion that the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one. So they are going to solve all the problems of human misery through government and government planning. Well, now, if government planning and welfare had the answer and they've had almost 30 years of it, shouldn't we expect government to almost read the score to us once in a while? Shouldn't they be telling us about the decline each year in the number of people needing help? The reduction in the need for public housing?
But the reverse is true. Each year the need grows greater, the program grows greater. We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry each night. Well, that was probably true. They were all on a diet. But now we are told that 9.3 million families in this country are poverty-stricken on the basis of earning less than $3,000 a year. Welfare spending is 10 times greater than in the dark depths of the Depression. We are spending $45 billion on welfare. Now do a little arithmetic, and you will find that if we divided the $45 billion up equally among those 9 million poor families, we would be able to give each family $4,600 a year, and this added to their present income should eliminate poverty! Direct aid to the poor, however, is running only about $600 per family. It would seem that someplace there must be some overhead.
So now we declare "war on poverty," or "you, too, can be a Bobby Baker!" Now, do they honestly expect us to believe that if we add $1 billion to the $45 million we are spending...one more program to the 30-odd we have--and remember, this new program doesn't replace any, it just duplicates existing programs--do they believe that poverty is suddenly going to disappear by magic? Well, in all fairness I should explain that there is one part of the new program that isn't duplicated. This is the youth feature. We are now going to solve the dropout problem, juvenile delinquency, by reinstituting something like the old CCC camps, and we are going to put our young people in camps, but again we do some arithmetic, and we find that we are going to spend each year just on room and board for each young person that we help $4,700 a year! We can send them to Harvard for $2,700! Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting that Harvard is the answer to juvenile delinquency.
But seriously, what are we doing to those we seek to help? Not too long ago, a judge called me here in Los Angeles. He told me of a young woman who had come before him for a divorce. She had six children, was pregnant with her seventh. Under his questioning, she revealed her husband was a laborer earning $250 a month. She wanted a divorce so that she could get an $80 raise. She is eligible for $330 a month in the Aid to Dependent Children Program. She got the idea from two women in her neighborhood who had already done that very thing.
Yet anytime you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we are denounced as being against their humanitarian goals. They say we are always "against" things, never "for" anything. Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so. We are for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we have accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem.
But we are against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments to those who depend on them for livelihood. They have called it insurance to us in a hundred million pieces of literature. But then they appeared before the Supreme Court and they testified that it was a welfare program. They only use the term "insurance" to sell it to the people. And they said Social Security dues are a tax for the general use of the government, and the government has used that tax. There is no fund, because Robert Byers, the actuarial head, appeared before a congressional committee and admitted that Social Security as of this moment is $298 billion in the hole. But he said there should be no cause for worry because as long as they have the power to tax, they could always take away from the people whatever they needed to bail them out of trouble! And they are doing just that.
A young man, 21 years of age, working at an average salary...his Social Security contribution would, in the open market, buy him an insurance policy that would guarantee $220 a month at age 65. The government promises $127. He could live it up until he is 31 and then take out a policy that would pay more than Social Security. Now, are we so lacking in business sense that we can't put this program on a sound basis so that people who do require those payments will find that they can get them when they are due...that the cupboard isn't bare? Barry Goldwater thinks we can.
At the same time, can't we introduce voluntary features that would permit a citizen who can do better on his own to be excused upon presentation of evidence that he had made provisions for the non-earning years? Should we allow a widow with children to work, and not lose the benefits supposedly paid for by her deceased husband? Shouldn't you and I be allowed to declare who our beneficiaries will be under these programs, which we cannot do? I think we are for telling our senior citizens that no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds. But I think we are against forcing all citizens, regardless of need, into a compulsory government program, especially when we have such examples, as announced last week, when France admitted that their Medicare program was now bankrupt. They've come to the end of the road.
In addition, was Barry Goldwater so irresponsible when he suggested that our government give up its program of deliberate planned inflation so that when you do get your Social Security pension, a dollar will buy a dollar's worth, and not 45 cents' worth?
I think we are for an international organization, where the nations of the world can seek peace. But I think we are against subordinating American interests to an organization that has become so structurally unsound that today you can muster a two-thirds vote on the floor of the General Assembly among the nations that represent less than 10 percent of the world's population. I think we are against the hypocrisy of assailing our allies because here and there they cling to a colony, while we engage in a conspiracy of silence and never open our mouths about the millions of people enslaved in Soviet colonies in the satellite nation.
I think we are for aiding our allies by sharing of our material blessings with those nations which share in our fundamental beliefs, but we are against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world. We set out to help 19 countries. We are helping 107. We spent $146 billion. With that money, we bought a $2 million yacht for Haile Selassie. We bought dress suits for Greek undertakers, extra wives for Kenyan government officials. We bought a thousand TV sets for a place where they have no electricity. In the last six years, 52 nations have bought $7 billion worth of our gold, and all 52 are receiving foreign aid from this country.
No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this Earth. Federal employees number 2.5 million, and federal, state, and local, one out of six of the nation's work force is employed by the government. These proliferating bureaus with their thousands of regulations have cost us many of our constitutional safeguards. How many of us realize that today federal agents can invade a man's property without a warrant? They can impose a fine without a formal hearing, let alone a trial by jury, and they can seize and sell his property in auction to enforce the payment of that fine. In Chico County, Arkansas, James Wier overplanted his rice allotment. The government obtained a $17,000 judgment, and a U.S. marshal sold his 950-acre farm at auction. The government said it was necessary as a warning to others to make the system work. Last February 19 at the University of Minnesota, Norman Thomas, six-time candidate for President on the Socialist Party ticket, said, "If Barry Goldwater became President, he would stop the advance of socialism in the United States." I think that's exactly what he will do.
As a former Democrat, I can tell you Norman Thomas isn't the only man who has drawn this parallel to socialism with the present administration. Back in 1936, Mr. Democrat himself, Al Smith, the great American, came before the American people and charged that the leadership of his party was taking the part of Jefferson, Jackson, and Cleveland down the road under the banners of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin. And he walked away from his party, and he never returned to the day he died, because to this day, the leadership of that party has been taking that party, that honorable party, down the road in the image of the labor socialist party of England. Now it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? Such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, inalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment. Our Democratic opponents seem unwilling to debate these issues. They want to make you and I believe that this is a contest between two men...that we are to choose just between two personalities.
Well, what of this man that they would destroy? And in destroying, they would destroy that which he represents, the ideas that you and I hold dear. Is he the brash and shallow and trigger-happy man they say he is? Well, I have been privileged to know him "when." I knew him long before he ever dreamed of trying for high office, and I can tell you personally I have never known a man in my life I believe so incapable of doing a dishonest or dishonorable thing.
This is a man who in his own business, before he entered politics, instituted a profit-sharing plan, before unions had ever thought of it. He put in health and medical insurance for all his employees. He took 50 percent of the profits before taxes and set up a retirement program, a pension plan for all his employees. He sent checks for life to an employee who was ill and couldn't work. He provided nursing care for the children of mothers who work in the stores. When Mexico was ravaged by floods from the Rio Grande, he climbed in his airplane and flew medicine and supplies down there.
An ex-GI told me how he met him. It was the week before Christmas during the Korean War, and he was at the Los Angeles airport trying to get a ride home to Arizona for Christmas, and he said that there were a lot of servicemen there and no seats available on the planes. Then a voice came over the loudspeaker and said, "Any men in uniform wanting a ride to Arizona, go to runway such-and-such," and they went down there, and there was this fellow named Barry Goldwater sitting in his plane. Every day in the weeks before Christmas, all day long, he would load up the plane, fly to Arizona, fly them to their homes, then fly back over to get another load.
During the hectic split-second timing of a campaign, this is a man who took time out to sit beside an old friend who was dying of cancer. His campaign managers were understandably impatient, but he said, "There aren't many left who care what happens to her. I'd like her to know I care." This is a man who said to his 19-year-old son, "There is no foundation like the rock of honesty and fairness, and when you begin to build your life upon that rock, with the cement of the faith in God that you have, then you have a real start." This is not a man who could carelessly send other people's sons to war. And that is the issue of this campaign that makes all of the other problems I have discussed academic, unless we realize that we are in a war that must be won.
Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us that they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy "accommodation." And they say if we only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he will forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answer--not an easy answer--but simple.
If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based upon what we know in our hearts is morally right. We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion now in slavery behind the Iron Curtain, "Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skin, we are willing to make a deal with your slave masters." Alexander Hamilton said, "A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one." Let's set the record straight. There is no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there is only one guaranteed way you can have peace--and you can have it in the next second--surrender.
Admittedly there is a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson in history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face--that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight and surrender. If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand--the ultimatum. And what then? When Nikita Khrushchev has told his people he knows what our answer will be? He has told them that we are retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes to deliver the ultimatum, our surrender will be voluntary because by that time we will have weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically. He believes this because from our side he has heard voices pleading for "peace at any price" or "better Red than dead," or as one commentator put it, he would rather "live on his knees than die on his feet." And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don't speak for the rest of us. You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin--just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard 'round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn't die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well, it's a simple answer after all.
You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, "There is a price we will not pay." There is a point beyond which they must not advance. This is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater's "peace through strength." Winston Churchill said that "the destiny of man is not measured by material computation. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we are spirits--not animals." And he said, "There is something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty."
You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on Earth, or we will sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.
We will keep in mind and remember that Barry Goldwater has faith in us. He has faith that you and I have the ability and the dignity and the right to make our own decisions and determine our own destiny.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)