Are we in Russia Now?

I don’t think I’d ever consider just how bad things have gotten in this country over time. For some reason we’ve all come to expect each downgrade in our lifestyle as the new normal. As a result people just don’t make much of a stink over where things are going.

When I was a child people didn’t live in houses that were always uncomfortably cold. Contrary to what the left would have us believe this is not because the rich have gotten richer at our expense, or even because the middle class is shrinking. This is because of all the government regulations against every form of energy known to man. They feel that any form of energy use is prohibitively damaging to the environment and therefore must be squashed. As a result of this extreme leftist, globalist, environmentalist view the cost of energy has skyrocketed even as Obama warned us it “Must!”

This has not happened by accident. It hasn’t happened because we’ve run out of fuel. It hasn’t happened because we all love living in the cold even in our own homes. It’s happened because we’ve allowed whackos to take over the policies of our nation.

People are now told what they can and can’t eat. Stores are told what is permissible to sell. It has reached the point where kids can’t even sell lemonade at lemonade stands without risking severe fines to their parents.

If you buy land it doesn’t mean it’s yours to do with as you please. In states like California you can’t even cut down or plant a tree on your own property without first getting permission from the government, which involves environmental studies, permits, arborists coming out to evaluate the property, all at the expense to the owner and even then he may not be able to cut it down or plan another. This means that your property is really not your own to do with as you please. Oddly at the same the right to privacy gives a woman the right to mutilate the unborn child she is carrying without any study or objections. If anything she is encouraged to take the life of that unborn child.

I wonder if our founders would have ever put up with this in the past. I cannot help but believe our founding fathers wouldn’t have stood for any of this. They would have viewed this as no less than the rule of the king over the lives, most especially because the rules imposed on us never apply to the people writing them, only the rest of us.

When OWS talks about the 1% maybe they should talk about the .001%, those people in congress and government who have not better to do than to constantly make new laws for the rest of us to comply with. Consider in California where this year alone there were over 700 new laws for the citizens to comply with. Do you think that the people who passed all those laws didn’t exempt themselves?

Consider for a moment what would happen if you didn’t pay your taxes, but those in congress make a habit of flaunting the fact they haven’t paid theirs’ and we’re suppose to just accept that fact.

We go to stores and frequently can’t find what we want any more as well as seeing the prices skyrocket on food. I am old enough to remember a time when all these things would be unthinkable.

Now we bow to the slightest threat of someone being offended with what we say, do, eat, smoke. The rule of our society has become that we are not to offend anyone or we might find ourselves brought into court, sued or even thrown in jail for saying something unpopular.

There is almost no area of your lives that is not effected by government anymore, yet we continue to put up with it. Congress has less than a 10% approval rating yet like idiots people continue to vote back in their own representatives at a rate of about 95%. No wonder they don’t really care what we think or want. They are not the least bit afraid of being voted out. All they have to do is lie to us and we like idiots think maybe they’ve really changed and will really do what is best for us even though they have shown absolutely no history of doing that in the past.

Do you think the communist leaders of any country are afraid of being voted out? This is the situation we find ourselves in now and yet we do nothing to stop it. The nation we live in differs little from any communist nation. You must get a permit from the government for almost everything. I joke about this, but only a little, it may not be long before you’ll need a permit to travel under the excuse that our travel needs to be limited for the environment.

The communist in this country, and don’t fool yourselves they are here, have found a real friend in the environmentalist movement. We may even have a communist in the seat of the presidency though everyone is afraid to say so. The unproven idea that man is responsible for global warming has led to every manner of regulation in almost every area of our lives and yet everyone is afraid to confront it for the big lie it is. It has gained religious status, it is to be believed regardless of how little proof there is for it.

We have leaders who refuse to let us drill for oil and now don’t even want us to be able to use it. They now want to mandate that they can turn off our electricity or gas when they deem we are using too much and of course no one is standing up against it. Houses have become more like caves than homes. Even cavemen had fires in their caves to stay warm, at least as much as they could. But we live in fine house in the cold all the time. We cannot even be comfortable in our own homes unless we are willing to live on bread and water so we can pay for the heat. We were even being told what kind of light bulbs we could have in our homes till they finally repealed that law. Of course they’ve throw enough scare into the light bulb manufacturers that they will probably not start producing them again.

The environmentalists threw such a scare into the dish washing soap makers that they “voluntarily” stopped using phosphates in their soaps before they were forced to. The phosphates are what make it so dirt, oil, grime and food don’t stick to surfaces and thus your dishes come out clean. But you have to know those same phosphates were blamed for causing massive algae growth and so that had to be stopped. Doesn’t anyone consider that phosphates are natural? They’ve been there all along. They are something found in nature. So why are we expected to live so apart from nature that we almost can’t live at all?

None of this matters to either the environmentalists or the communists. All they care about is more and ever more control over our lives and they are certainly getting that in spades, and still the people say and do nothing to stand up against it.

If we allow this to continue we will find we are no different than Russia during the high of the Soviet Union. Sadly too few people are alive anymore to remember what that was even like. Too many of our young people have not been taught about what it was like in Russia during the height of the communist regime. Our schools not only don’t teach it, they also are busy teaching communism is as though it was a good thing.

Too many of our youth are being brought up to think that communism isn’t really such a bad thing or at least that it wouldn’t be if it was just done right. We need leaders who are willing to stand up and confront this even if they are accused of McCarthyism.

Communism in High Places

How is it that Americans have come to the place that we feel communism and communism should have an equal place in our government and that if we want communists in charge of our government that we should be able to have them.

It seems the American people have forgotten about a pesky thing called the constitution. Our leaders have all sworn to uphold and defend the constitution against enemies both foreign and domestic. Well communists and communism are directly opposed to the constitution so how can they then fulfill their oaths?

These things are diametrically opposed to each other and as such communists should be rejected from office as soon as they are found out. If they have supported communism even in the past it ought to be enough for us to prohibit them from being part of our government. This does not mean they are not citizens. It does not even mean that they do not have a right to their beliefs. It only means they should have no place in the leadership of our government.

In Hamilton's day it was expressed that if anyone was found to be a monarchist even after becoming president that they should be impeached. The reason for this was quite clear. It was because it was not possible for a person to support or believe in a monarchy and not oppose the constitution. It was in no way an issue of free speech in our founders minds. It had to do with defending the country and the laws of the land. In their minds the law was above all men and all men under the law were equal. There were not special rules from some and different rules for others.

We only need to look at other nations that have tried communism and socialism to see that they all have 2 sets of laws. One set of laws is for and by the ruling elite, which always rises to the top and the other set of laws was for what might be termed the common people.

It is sad but true that we already have much the same situation today. Congress constantly passes laws which we are expected to abide by but which they make clear they are exempt from. This was not what our founding fathers every intended and we need to put a stop to it if it means voting out every person in office till they start to follow the constitution again.

Republicans Always on the Defense

It thoroughly mystifies me how it is that republicans can have the upper hand and yet always come out looking like they're the bad guy.

They offered a bill that would both extend the tax cut and also provide more jobs through the pipeline. The democrats in the Senate take that bill, gut it, and shorten it to a ridiculous 2 months, and then leave so they don't have to deal with whatever the senate sends back to them.

This is as much as to say that he house better just pass what they send back to them. It also implies that the house has no right to make any changes, but this is just the reason the founders determined this process. Sure they must have known that the house would make changes and send it back to them, but they decide to leave town so the bill is left hanging with republicans and then blame the lack of passage on the republicans when in fact the lack of passage is because the senate left town thinking this would force the republicans to just vote on whatever was sent them.

Now my question is, "Why don't the republicans explain the facts to the American people?" We're not idiots. We are certainly smart enough to get it and be mad at the right people about the lack of an extension to the bill. Clearly the democrats wanted the bill rejected and hanging with the house. All the house had to do was just make their changes back to what they wanted and send it back to the Senate. Then it is no longer their fault that the democrat controlled Senate isn't voting on their bill because they're too interested in getting home for Christmas.

It is almost as though republicans want to make themselves irrelevant so that they can later blame the democrats, but the problem is the only time they seem able to do that is when they are out of power. When they are in power they seem unable to mount any decent defense.

Maybe it is time for the republican party to go away and be replaced by some independent party that is willing to vote, stand and defend their consciences.

Media Politics

Maybe it's just me, but I have to admit I'm getting very tired of the media telling me who can win and who cannot. I'm also getting tired of the media telling me we all have to come closer to the middle and it's the middle that matters. The problem with this is that there is very little difference between the left and the right really. We need to be discussing consitutional and unconstitutional where politics are concerned. The republicans most certainly don't have it right which is clear from how reluctant they are to cut government or cut government spending. They also believe government is the answer it is just that they are not as extreme or nearly in the rush to produce a communist nation that the democrats are, but they are certainly still heading there.

They start a bill designed to cut 300 million dollars. Now that is a far amount, but then end up cutting only 30 million dollars. This is not even 1 day's worth of government spending. They were willing to settle for this and it is for this reason that I say that I'm not the least bit interested in having one of those republicans in charge of our economy. They want to slow the RATE of growth of government, but they still believe government is the answer and that the only way it can be the answer is if it gets more of our money.

So back to the media. The media looks at all the wrong things where the candidates are concerned and it is for this reason that we need to ignore them. One of the main things they look at for a viable presidential candidate is how much money they're bringing in for their campaign. This most certainly should not be the primary concern of who we elect. The money they raise is only a small indicator of the number of people who support their views. I say it is only a small indicator because usually a huge portion of that money comes from those who are wealthy and want their interests represented should that candidate win, and not because they really support their views. Because most people of the money does not come from the little people the amount of money really reflect the minority of the people who support that person which probably means that they are not the people we want. Those who are rich as well as the big corporations must feel this person's support can at least in part be bought and thus it already belies the possibility that, that candidate is not one of moral value, so I say best that we avoid that person.

It is also interesting to watch how reluctant the media is to really cover those they don't like such as Herman Cain and Michele Bachman. It indicates that they also feel they have a horse in the race. They are continually telling us how Bachman and Cain are so far behind that they can't win, hoping we'll give up on them. This same thing happened to Alan Keyes several elections ago. he probably expressed and supported what the American people wanted better than anyone else but he hardly got any coverage.

The media are more concerned with how "vulnerable" a candidate is? They avoid bringing up their actual records, or maybe it's just that they've become as lazy as the rest of the Hollywood Elite. They just love to hear themselves talk. They can't be bothered with all the tedium of looking up actual facts and finding out what these people have done. They are too concerned with sound bites.

Consider during the last republican debate that the candidates had a whopping 30 secs to respond on such issues as the war in Iraq, or Afghanistan, or the issue of Iran. Can that really be done in 30 secs? We all know that it cannot but what it means is that it gives the media plenty of room to criticize everything the candidate didn't say or didn't have time to correct or elaborate on due to the 30 second rule. This means that they can twist it any way they like.

It is well past the time that we paid much attention to these lazy propaganda hounds that masquerade as news reporters. No I'm not just talking about MSNBC, or NBC, or CBS, or any of the other LAME STREAM media. FOX News is at least as guilty as the rest when it comes to already starting to declare winners when we're still more than a year out from the election.

We need to start sending all the media outlets emails and telling them how fed up we are with this kind of lame reporting. In many respects they are like our representatives in government. They don't have a clue and won't get a clue till we start making a lot more noise abbout what they're doing.

Yet more evidence of media politics is how the media is now finding Cain guilty of sexual harrassment on nothing more than an allegation. They already believe he's guilty much like the white kids at Duke University were found guilty immediately and have ever had the names tarnished since. Yet Oddly this same media can keep saying Weiner wasn't guilty till it was "proved" no matter how much evidence came up. They did everything they could to sidestep that story till they were forced to address it and even them they tried to help lead Weiner in his answers so it might appear that he was still innocent or at least that it could not be proven one way or the other.

I started writing much of the above before the Cain campaign came to a crashing halt, but it seems he's been tried in the court of the media and public opinion. In spite of the fact that not one actual indictment or one piece of evidence was brought against him they continued to report on him as though he were guilty till he finally just gave up. I've seen the tactic work all too often and  even destroy both the marriage and careers of men simply because they were presumed guilty till proven innocent.

Is this really what our nation has come to? Is this really what our politics have come to?

Yet when we have one truly questionable situation after another involving Obama, his birth records, school records, work history, associations, all of which are either already documented or at least easily documented there is hardly a word from the media including Fox News.

Presidential Campaigns

Credentials

I wonder how many of us would accept the following as presidential qualifications if it were Rick Perry or Mitt Romney?

"... I would argue, though, that my experience previous to elected office equips me for the job. You know, I have a background as an attorney (doesn't name any major cases he worked on). I've represented affordable housing organizations (doesn't name them) to build affordable housing, something that is a major issue in the district. I've chaired major philanthropic efforts in the city, like the Chicago Annenberg Challenge that gave $50 million to prop school reform efforts throughout the city." Aaron Klein The Manchurian President p. 25

Did that help the schools. It sounds more like weak resume material. He completely sidesteps the whole issue of his lack of experience in government, yet this is the same thing they are criticizing Cain for now.

I wonder how the media would treat any of the current candidates, especially republican ones if they attempted to cover up their educational backgrounds? I wonder if they wouldn't raise such a stink about it that even the most embarrassing records would be released because of the doubt the media would throw on the candidate unless he did release them. Yet, Obama escaped any such investigation or even news coverage and to this day there is next to nothing about his educational years either socially or academically.

I wonder further if all the news about Obama's various relationships will be reported in this next campaign or if it will all be treated as something passe and not worth looking at? I hpe this is the noth case because there is more than enough evidence of his communist, Marxist, Maoist, socialist ties to indicate that if for no other reason this man does not deserve to be our president and he didn't deserve it the first time around.

Obama  had no experience in governing or even running any large company or group. What he had was training in Marxist, Maoist anti Americanism, and community organizing, which is just another word for dividing people against each other and terrorizing the groups you want to get something out of. Obama was nothing more than an activist. Like all resume writing when you don't really have the skills or experience needed you learn to reshape your experience to fit the need of the job. You make things sound like more than they were, you minimize the downside to things you did, or at least the things that don't apply. This is exactly what Obama did in the statement above. By calling it a Community Organizer he somehow raises the respectability of what he did. If he said he was an activist it makes it sound like nothing more than public rantings by college students who are disatisfied with the way the world runs but are not actual contributors. All they do is stand on the sidelines and continually criticize what others do. This is exactly what Obama has done since he became president. He did the same thing as a senator and he certainly did the same thing as an activist.

At this point I refuse to even call what he did community organizing because of the false elevation that term implies. He was an activist that's all. With the help of others he was able to remake himself into something supposedly respectable, but all he has done with his time in office is activism in the purest sense of the term. He has yelled or at least stated from his high seat all about racism at every chance possible even though he is the most powerful man in the most powerful nation of the world.

Maybe he feels some guilt for only being half black. Maybe he feels some guilt because even the half that is black has no history of American slavery. Remember his father was from Kenya and his mother was white. No slavery in that mix at all. He was the son of an interracial family so even in this he should have known more about the acceptance of racial differences than anyone, but instead he bought into all the class warfare and racist talk he could.

In some respects this is rather comical. It would be like somnone of born half black joining the KKK and declarin how much they hate the blacks. It just simply doesn't make sense, but it is yet another of those common sense things that should have been covered by the media but wasn't. He is no more qualified to complain about slavery than I am; indeed I am probably more qualified than he is, being half jewish, my people have been made slaves in Egypt, the Mede/Persians tried to make them extinct, and the Germans tried the same thing. Obama knows nothing of any of these things either personally or generationally having no black people in his heritage who suffered American slavery.

We should call things as they are. Obama simply hates capitalism and is embarrassed about his participation in America. He has worked very hard at purposely trying to break this nation financially. For people to keep pretending either that he is an idiot and just doesn't know what to do is for them to put their heads in the sand. He is following his Marxist, Maoist ideology and is trying to ruin this nation economically. I fear there are many in congress who support him in this.

Obama has had ties to the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC) and it is admitted that rather than be a separate party they have made it a point to infiltrate the Demcrat party and have apparently been quite successful.

Tom Hayden who was a member of Students for Economic Democracy said: "Communism is one of the options that can improve people's lives," and Jane Fonda's public utterances have included her statement that "We chould strive toward a socialist society - all the way to communism." The Manchurian President by Aaron Klein p 37.

Obama has clear stated that he believes in redistribution of wealth, let's call this what it is communism.

Obama has said to his Czars (unelected officials) that he wants them to find every way possible to get around congress and impliment what he wants, which so far as been as much spending and as many regulation as possible to put as much pressure on both small and large businesses as possible. Does any of this sound like he's really trying to help America or hurt it?

What mystifies me even more is how the media can say that the president has a good chance to win. Would any reasonable person keep a CEO on at a company if he did to that company what Obama has done to this country almost single handed. He's been very good at keep his hands off what has happened. He's delegated all of it to Reid and Pelosi, willing accomplices so if something does go wrong they take the fall and he can say he had nothing to do with it even though he promised to do these things during his campaign.

As far as I'm concerned we couldn't get this man out of office fast enough.

Trump Debate

As I've been reading some of the blogs about the latest debate featuring Donald Trump as its moderator I have to admit I tend to agree with Ron Paul. To have the star of a reality TV show hosting such an event does seem to be beneath the dignity of the office these men are running for. It is true that if Trump had not been the star of the reality TV show there is probably no reason that he could not be the moderator, but it is also true that he stated possible intentions to run for the office himself and as such it would seem that alone would disqualify him from moderating this debate. This would be rather like asking a disgruntled employee from a company doing an interview of his previous employer. It just seems to be too much bias and it should be more neutral.

On the other hand when was the last time we saw a debate where the moderators didn't seem to just keep trying to bait the candidates? I find myself wishing that the process had more dignity to it, but it seems that our presidents are rapidly becoming laughing stocks. At every opportunity the media tries to humiliate them and find everything wrong they do. Now I understand that it is the job of the news to report important things regardless who they are about, but it is also important that they do so in a responsible way.

One thing I would definitely like to hear is more real solution, less platitudes and less attacks on the "other guy." I just don't think this practice which has become the center piece of the presidential debates has any place in the debates. If these men have ideas the debates should be the place for them to expound those ideas. Rather than making constant personal attacks and attacks on on their character, let them say what they would do and what they have done.

Did we ever hear during the entire Obama campaign what he had done? No! We never heard what he had done because he hadn't done anything. I fear the same will be true on this next election. Obama really doesn't have much of a record to run on and as such I have little doubt that it will decline into personal attacks, class warfare, and racism.

I suppose if we had Cain still in the race it would be impossible for them to play that card but now that he's out they're going to feel free to use that one over and over. Once again we'll probably end up with nothing but a lot of mud slinging and no real quality of ideas. Obama will have to come up with something new and certainly won't be able to run on "Hope and Change" again.

Nonetheless, having Trump as a moderator really doesn't say a lot for the quality of people that we are finding to interview or moderate these debates. I almost hope that no one even takes the time to listen to them, but of course it will be a media thing to watch. If nothing else people will watch to see if any sparks fly just like other really bad reality TV. This is almost like a surprise appearance among the many debates we've already had and it seems we have yet more to come. I only wonder if we're going to see more like this if it proves to be a big draw.

Occupy Wall Street, The Real Story

I believe the real story regarding occupy Wall Street is being completely missed. It is already plainly understood that most of the protesters, at least those chosen at random for interviews don't really have a clue why they are there. It has also been reported, though only to the extent that they must at least mention it that many of the protesters are being paid to be there.

The real story isn't what the protesters want. They don't know. They're protesting because they were paid to. The media keeps trying to come up with a reason for them to be there since the protesters donn't have one. Without some real coherent reason to be there it is a non-story for the most part.

The real questions that they ought to be asking are: Who is really organizing these protests? What are their goals? What do the real organizers what to accomplish? Why are they trying so hard to stay in the background. How long have they been planning this? They are certainly well organized and have plenty of money and as such they probably also have some clearly stated goals.

The media ought to be doing this kind of reporting, but instead they try to make up a story and a motive for the people who are involved who have no story or motive of their own.

on the few occasions that any serious research has been done it has come out that Marxist, communist and socialist groups are behind this and they are all very anti American in their goals. Once again the media refuses to question the patriotism of these people and instead support that they are upset about the economy and the like. Well this has happened before, but we have never people proposing that the government and the American way of life should be destroyed and replaced with something completely new and foreign to its constitution.

It is most certain they want to see the American government overthrown and are not merely exercising their constitutional rights. They are exercising sedition. The constitution does not allow for the overthrow of the government, as a matter of fact it strictly prohibits it.

We have come to believe a lot of false things about freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does not necessarily apply to the overthrow of the government though the constitution most certainly allows for that if the government becomes oppressive. However, it must be added that this provision is allowed for when the government begins to ignore the constitution it is sworn to uphold. It is not simply to replace the constitution or to choose some completely different and foreign form of government. 

It was reported today on various news websites that there are finally anti occupation groups preparing to demonstrate against the occupy groups in Denver. We can only hope this phenomena spreads as there has already been far too much communist and anti-capitalist stuff coming out of the OWS groups as it is. No one wants to call those groups what they are, but it is clear they are anti-capitalist and there for are directly opposed to the many freedoms that are essential to the United States and our way of life.

OWS seems to think the answer more and ever more regulation. Regulation always means the loss of some freedom or liberty you had before. The more regulations you have the harder it becomes to do anything. It is because we are not realistic about this truth that we have already lost so many of the freedoms and rights we once had. People think they still have property rights, but just try and cut down a tree on your property without the approval of some government official and see what happens. Try to grow something on your property that has not been approved and see what happens. Try to add some extension or make some improvement to your home without the ok from a government official and see what happens. This list is unending of what you must or may do with your property to the point where you can hardly do anything you want unless you get the government to give you the ok. This is only dealing with property rights. The list of other government regulation on what you can eat, where you can eat it, when you can eat, whether you can smoke or drink what you want and where you want it. All of these things are supposedly in the name of the public good but are they really for our good?

We have representatives who now see their primary job as one of coming up with as many pages of new regulations per year as they can. All of this did not happen at one time. They first found things that sounded rather legitimate and helpful for the public protection and with each infringement took another step toward restriction on our liberties. If there is not push back about this very soon only one of two things can happen. Either we will see some kind of violent revolt against this or we will simply give in and see our liberties perish. I for one am not excited about either of those possibilities.

The OWS people as has been said are trying to get as many government regulations as they can manage because at their root they are communists and socialists and are not at all for liberty. They view liberty as nothing but bad making it all to easy for people to do as they please assuming that will always be the worst thing and that the "government" always knows what is best for us. They seem to forget that the goverment is made up of people just as fallible and greedy as the people they are expected to regulate.

It is for this reason that I must admit I am a little excited to hear that at least some counter demonstrations are expected in Denver and I hope they will spread to other places. I am not hoping for open confrontation so much as I am that the counter demonstrations will be very clear in their message and thus be a stark contrast with the message of the OWS groups. It is also my hope that they might actually shame the OWS people to go back home. So far the OWS groups have more or less encountered the same kind of opposition that the Kent State protests did and the anti-Viet Nam protests did; which is to say they didn't encounter any opposition at all and thus lent an air of legitimacy to their cause. If people had criticized protestors at Kent State as unpatriotic and cowardly things may have been different.

It must be realized though as well that these counter demonstrations may have an unexpectedly bad result which is that they will galvanize the OWS people to actually come up with a stance that causes them to actually have a cause and gain a message where they had none before. If this happens we could find things getting very tense very quickly. Even though things may become very intense from this it is still something that needs to happen. The American people need to rise up in such numbers against OWS that they thoroughly understand their cause is not, and will not be the cause of the American people. It is clear that a stand must be made and if one is not made we may end up with something far worse than the riots at Kent State. Even back then they didn’t have every manner of crime happening. They didn’t have people simply occupying areas for months on end with no permits and no reason to be there. The people at least had a clear message that was more than simple chaos for chaos’ sake.

I only hope we will see more of this since it is certainly well past time at this point. I think it may have lasted as long as it did with no counter demonstrations only because people thought they would burn out on what they were doing and then it turned out that they were not. They have continued and seem to be both funded as well as supported by our progressive representatives such that they feel empowered to continue as long as they like.  This ought to cause all of us a great deal of concern because it means that those in government mirror their views and are always will or even complicit in seeing the government gain this kind of control. This is a bad sign and we should pay a lot of attention and start getting organized the way Denver is doing.