Road to Socialism: Racist Panel or Stupid Masses?

•February 21, 2009 • 5 Comments

I was going to write about the so-called “racist” cartoon in the news, but stumbled upon a blog with much the same viewpoint I had. The cartoon is not racist because the stimulus package was put together by mostly white people.

The meaning I get from the cartoon is this: people compared George Walker Bush to an ape because the laws that were passed during his tenure were idiotic to the average American, and because he played a good moron. Let us not forget, though, that the laws were passed by Congress, and that for the last part of his presidency the Congress was mostly Democratic. Barack Obama and John McCain voted for the expanded use of warrentless breaking and entering, a direct violation of our explicitly-stated Constitutional freedom from search without evidence. Read it. It is very clear.

The point is that seemingly primitive people are in control, even after Savior Obama’s victory in the election and the strengthening of the Democratic control of Congress. The truth is, though, that both parties are and have been working to bring Nazi ideals to our great Union, strengthening the federal government, and ever-growing the police state and military-industrial-financial complex.

We have been propagandized to believe we need the government to control our healthcare. Ask someone who is on Medicare or Medicaid if you want the feds in charge of your medical decisions. Yet, soon enough, the people in office will make another attempt to socialize the healthcare system.

We have been misled to believe that humans, and not the sun cycle, are responsible for the warming trend. The truth is that changes in carbon dioxide levels follow changes in temperature. CO2 levels have been higher than they are now. And other planets in the solar system are heating up. I highly doubt your SUV is sending smog to Saturn. Yet soon you will be taxed on having too many children and by your “carbon footprint”, a brilliant propaganda term, coined in the style of the originator of public relations and nephew of Freud, Edward Bernays. Remember that China’s one-child policy started as a tax on multiple children. Today Hillary Clinton said we need stronger relations with China.

Anyway, the point is that the status quo has to go. Republi-crat-ism is a dog-and-pony show, designed to give you the illusion of choice. The masses are deluded into beliving that they are making weighty decisions that will change the course of our Union’s future. If they read their Constitution, they’d realize that the federal government isn’t supposed to have power to do anything they are doing, and they’ve outsourced one of their duties to the private Federal Reserve. At the same time they are talking about nationalizing banks, and have already done so. However, what they mean by nationalization is giving control over to the Federal Reserve and the FDIC, both private corporations. They are theiving from the rich to give to the richer, screwing you in the process. They are corrupt and they are increasing their power daily.

If you want to return the Union to its rightful status, if you want to regain sovereignty for your State and your Person, if you want your rights to life, liberty, and property, join in the movement to restate your sovereignty. New Hampshire, Oklahoma, and other states have introduced resolutions to remind the federal government of their constitutional responsiblities and limits. Their statutes (rules of society that have the “force of law”, but which are therefore not laws) are null and void. They have no power. 3 letter organizations are illegal. Most federal “law” is illegal. They only have these powers because you’ve been led to believe, over a multi-generational campaign, to believe that they can do these things.

Now they are going to play the proverbial race card. Attorney General Eric Holder stated that Americans are “cowards” for not discussing racial issues. This is the same attorney who argued for the Washington D.C. complete gun ban in front of the Supreme Court in the Heller case. Now there is outcry of this cartoon, which is obviously not targetted toward Obama, being racist. Expect more similar propaganda in the future. Equal rights movements, sparked by the international bankers, will be the vehicle to socialism. Mark my words. FEMA internment camps are being built. Forced labor, here I come.

An Open Letter to Linda S. Bolon

•February 11, 2009 • Leave a Comment

Following is a letter I wrote to Ohio House Representative Linda S. Bolon (D), District 1.

I urge you, as a representative of the People of this great State of Ohio, to read New Hampshire House Resolution HCR 0006, available at <a title=”states rights” href=”http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html&#8221; target=”_blank”>http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html</a&gt;

The co-sponsors of this resolution in New Hampshire are true American patriots, acting to protect the People of their State from the out-of-control Federal government which was formed to protect the same. The Constitution, which was ratified by the several States, and accepted by our State, explicitly states that any power not specifically delegated to the Federal government belongs to the States or the People. Nearly all acts of Congress in our lifetimes have been unconstitutional acts, seeking to take liberty from the States and the People. The constitution is very straightforward and does not allow for the statutes and laws, executive orders, and judicial orders so often passed into “law” by the Federal government. All of these “laws” are null and void, according to the Constitution for the United States.

We have long forgotten, as a People, what exactly the Constitution means, and what “State” means, and who is supposed to have the power in this Union. We act as though we are one nation, which is absolutely false. We are a Union of fifty nations, fifty States, bound together by certain, enumerated principles, spelled out specifically in the Constitution for the United States. We have for too long allowed the Federal government to exercise power over the individual States and it is high time this was put to an end.

I call on you to act swiftly in introducing a similar resolution in the Ohio House of Representatives. It is your duty as a representative of the People of this great State to protect our liberties and those of our State.

Sincerely,
Jeremy D Forsythe
Salem, Ohio

Piercing Cats Nets Cruelty Charges

•January 23, 2009 • 2 Comments

Read this article.

Am I dreaming? Animal cruelty charges for piercing cats and removing their tails?

Now, don’t get me wrong, I think it’s absolutely stupid to pierce your cat or make its tail fall off. Stupid. But…

Tails are removed from dogs ALL THE TIME. How is this any different? How is piercing “cruel” but spaying and neutering aren’t? How is sticking a needle through a cat’s ear cruel, but declawing (cutting off it’s first joint, like amputating part of your finger) isn’t? I think that putting a ring in a cats ear is MUCH more humane than cutting its genitals off, although this practice is encouraged by the same authorities who have charged these folks.

Do a search for pictures of declawing surgery and then tell me that piercing is cruel.

Gender Confusion and the Degradation of the Family Unit in Modern Man

•January 21, 2009 • 3 Comments

In nature, things are simple – propagate, propagate, propagate. Each species has a unique way in which this is carried out. Some animals have intercourse while in other species the male fertilizes eggs outside the female’s body. In some species the young are carried in a pouch while plants have no contact with their offspring. These gender roles are biologically programmed into each species. It is their strongest desire to fulfill their mission. That is what makes them happy. Humans are no different than other living creatures. It is no coincidence that love, sex, and parenthood are such strong, good feelings. The human tragedy is that we’ve developed the ability to make ourselves miserable.

For millennia humans performed their innately programmed roles – males provided stability and security, females provided love and nurturing. Men have traditionally been the hunters, soldiers, and bread-winners. Females have always taken care of the nest and the family. Men taught the children strength, pride, and motivation, and women taught love, humility, and loyalty.

These roles have been consistent throughout the world for our whole history until the 20th century. In our utter lack of insight and tendency to prove Murphy’s Law true, the Western world began a grand experiment in the 1900s to evolve the human being by “freeing” us from our tyrannically-imposed gender roles.

It cannot be refuted that there were gender-specific rules which were unfair. Women’s suffrage and their slow but much-improved acceptance into the workplace have been positive strides toward equal treatment. But it is also unfair to claim we have given our young ladies a choice to stay at home or pursue a career and on the other hand so strongly emphasize a career that they feel being a homemaker is equivalent to failure.

It is also unfair to our young men that women are bombarded with ideas like: “men should be sensitive and express their feelings”. Women are taught, through movies, television, and teen magazines, to desire men who behave outside their traditional gender role. Men, in their desire for women, began capitulating, cheered on by being immersed in our own evolved-human movement. I aver that this is the direct cause of the increased divorce and infidelity rates in the West.

Women don’t want soft, sensitive men. Women want stability and security. They want to be taken care of and to not have to worry about danger or where the next meal is coming from. When a woman comes to cry on a man’s shoulder, she expects him to be her rock. He should not have tears rolling down his cheek, whimpering like a baby. When the bills come due, she wants money in the bank, and at dinner there should be food to put on the table. Fulfilling these duties for her will make a woman feel good. She’s programmed that way.

The reverse is also true – women can make men happiest by providing the things nature makes them desire: love, nurturing, loyalty, support, and family cohesion. A man needs a woman who will cheer him on, and when he comes home from the war he wants his woman to still be there for him. He wants love and support to keep him motivated and proud. These are the things that make him happy.

This experiment we’ve undertaken has taught us to stop behaving in ways that make our mates feel at peace. Instead of giving them what they want most, we’ve begun hijacking their duties – the things they’re designed to be best at – and we’re forcing them to take on our roles. We’re miserable in this environment, as a culture, and it shows. Over half of all marriages in America end in divorce. This is exactly what one would expect if we all stop trying to meet the needs of our significant others.

What we need is a world where everybody has a choice to fulfill any role they wish, but what is stressed is that each individual choose the role that will bring them the most happiness in life. There are factors that could make certain individuals happier in different roles, but in general men are happiest when they act like men, and women when they act like women. We seem to have forgotten this simple fact.

Budget of the United States Government

•December 17, 2008 • 8 Comments

Budget of the United States Government

Discretionary Spending by Agency (in dollars)

Agency FY 2007
(law)
FY 2008
(request)
Department of Agriculture 19,600,000,000 20,200,000,000
Department of Commerce 5,600,000,000 6,600,000,000
Department of Defense 429,600,000,000 481,400,000,000
Department of Education 56,000,000,000 56,000,000,000
Department of Energy 22,800,000,000 24,300,000,000
Department of Health & Human Services 69,100,000,000 69,300,000,000
Department of Homeland Security 32,000,000,000 34,300,000,000
Department of Housing & Urban Development 34,700,000,000 35,200,000,000
Department of Interior 10,300,000,000 10,600,000,000
Department of Justice 19,400,000,000 20,200,000,000
Department of Labor 11,700,000,000 10,600,000,000
Department of State, et al 28,700,000,000 35,000,000,000
Department of Transportation 10,700,000,000 12,100,000,000
Department of Treasury 11,400,000,000 12,100,000,000
Department of Veterans Affairs 33,200,000,000 39,400,000,000
Army Corps of Engineers 4,700,000,000 4,900,000,000
Environmental Protection Agency 7,500,000,000 7,200,000,000
Executive Office of the President 300,000,000 300,000,000
Judicial Branch 5,300,000,000 6,100,000,000
Legislative Branch 3,700,000,000 4,400,000,000
NASA 16,200,000,000 17,300,000,000
National Science Foundation 5,600,000,000 6,400,000,000
Small Business Administration 400,000,000 500,000,000
Social Security Administration 7,600,000,000 7,900,000,000
Other Agencies 6,500,000,000 7,500,000,000
Total Discretionary Spending 852,800,000,000 929,800,000,000

Is America Headed for a Second Revolution?

•December 17, 2008 • 9 Comments

In an interview with LewRockwell.com, Gerald Celente predicted $2,000 an ounce gold, a depression “the likes of which no one has ever seen before”, and a second American Revolution. Visit LewRockwell.com or click here to listen to the complete interview. Highlights appear below. Gerald has successfully predicted Black Monday, the fall of the Soviet Union, the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, and the 2007-present subprime mortgage crisis.

GERALD CELENTE: So We’re looking at unemployment numbers that are going up to around 25%, to rival the Great Depression. And in many ways this coming depression is going to be much worse, because back then.. most people didn’t own homes, so they weren’t carrying insurance or paying property taxes. There was no such thing as a home equity loan and people didn’t have credit cards. So they weren’t burdened with over $14 trillion of debt. And back then we had budget surpluses and trade surpluses and now we have major deficits in each. $700 billion a year trade, $11.5 trillion total budget, and close to $1 trillion coming online this year, another deficit.

GC: So yeah, people are going to be in very dire straits. All these people that are getting fired, all these stores that are closing – Circuit City going bankrupt, KB Stores, Steve and Barry’s, Linens n Things – we’re seeing closings – Starbucks, Office Depot, the other day, announced 142 stores. Number one, where are these people that are being fired or laid off, where are they going to find jobs? And number two, who’s going to take all these vacant retail spaces and commercial spaces that are going to be left empty? The answer to both of those questions is nobody… So we’re looking at a melt-down, a catastrophe, the likes of which no one has ever seen before.

GC: To watch grown men grovel is a disgusting spectacle. And that’s all they do, when you’re in government. That’s how people get to the top – they suck their way to the top. And when they’re big enough, as they’re bringing back all these failures from the Clinton administration, they fail their way to the top.

On what you should keep in mind in the near future:

GC: Well what I would suggest they do is they don’t spend a dime that they don’t have, and also realize that their dollar might be worth dimes in the coming years because they’re creating a situation for hyperinflation, so we’re looking at gold to go to probably $2,000 an ounce.

LEW ROCKWELL: And the dollar plummeting?

GC: Yeah if they keep printing money, you’re creating hyperinflation, so you have deflation of product commodities where you have inflationary pressures on worthless currencies. They did it in the Weimar Republic, they’re doing it in Zimbabwe, and they’re going to do it again. Because that’s Obama’s only solution, is to create 2.5 million jobs by creating job work projects. So he’s printing more money, it’s not going to solve anything.

GC: The people that have caused the problem are now running the show… Wall Street is running Washington.

LR: Big banks got the government to create the Federal Reserve system for them, so now they’re reaping the rewards and they’re killing the rest of us…

GC: That’s exactly what’s going on. The too-big-to-fail are being saved, and the too-small-to-save are being drowned.

LR: Gerald, are we going to see riots in this country? Are we going to see tax revolts, as happened in the Great Depression?

GC: Yes, absolutely, we’re going to see revolution, and we expect it to happen… probably this year we’ll start seeing some of it.

LR: So what do you think the upshot of that will be? Will they just suppress it? Is that why they’re bringing the troops home? [see also this article]

GC: Well they’re going to try to, obviously, and there is all this talk about opening up these detention centers and hiring the goon squads – the Blackwaters and the rest of them – to run them. So these are realities that are going on as we speak. And whether they keep saying that they’re opening up these detention centers in the event of migrant problems, but of course it’s much bigger than that. It’s under the Department of Homeland Security, and KBR – the engineering and construction subsidy of Haliburton – have been awarded a half a billion dollar, one year base period, to get these national emergency / national disaster centers up and running. So yeah, it’s in the cards, they know what’s going on. And we’re really in a period of off-with-their-heads. It’s going to be the people against the politicians, the new kings and queens of commerce, as well.

GC: It’s a fight against a totalitarian government. You can call it “communist” when a state-owned monopoly runs everything, or you can call it “fascist” or you can call it “socialist” – but the one thing you cannot call it is “free-market enterprise”. So yeah, there are going to be rebellions, and, you know, things will change for the better if we break up these criminal governments that are in place right now.

US History Textbook: New World Order is Here

•December 7, 2008 • Leave a Comment

Watch the video below to see an American History textbook that teaches the students that the United States is, and has been, a part of the New World Order.

FDA: OK to Spray Virus Mixture on Meat

•December 4, 2008 • Leave a Comment

In a not-so-shocking display of stupidity – they did approve Donald Rumsfeld’s aspartame – the FDA gave the green light for manufacturers to begin spraying a virus mixture on ready-to-eat cold meats, like lunch meat and hot dogs. The viruses are bacteriophages that specifically target the bacteria that causes listeriosis, an infection that makes 2,500 people seriously ill and kills 500 per year.

All in all it may sound like a good idea, but if the meat manufacturers cannot be trusted to keep their meat free from bacteria, why should we trust yet another company to correctly purify this virus spray? We’re adding another possibility of serious illness to all of our cold meats, for nearly 300 million people, and what is the benefit? 500 people might be saved from death?

I’m not against saving these 500 people, but how about stricter regulations of food handling to make sure that the cold meats don’t even grow the bacteria in the first place, instead of spraying all of our meat with viruses? The FDA says the spray is safe, but we know they cannot be trusted. In the past, they’ve approved aspartame and said that companies could sell cloned meat to consumers without labeling it as such. Now it’s okay to spray viruses on our food. And the FDA says, “Consumers won’t be aware that meat and poultry products have been treated with the spray,”

Read the full article here.

Wake up.

Preparing a Military Coup d’Etat in the United States

•December 2, 2008 • Leave a Comment

From Washington Post:

“The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011…”

Excuse me?
Yes, twenty thousand uniformed soldiers on active duty inside the United States. Has the military coup begun?

John Feinstein is an Idiot

•December 1, 2008 • 1 Comment

I just finished reading this article by Washington Post writer John Feinstein. Feinstein was making his comments on the New York Giants’ wide receiver, Plaxico Burress, who allegedly took a gun into a nightclub last week and accidentally shot himself in his leg.

I could tell from the beginning, the moment I read the headline, “Time for Leagues to Do Something About Players With Guns”, what this idiot was going to say. It is fascinating that someone so ignorant of our Bill of Rights and grammar could get a job as a journalist.

Following are some tidbits from the article. It’s a fascinating read, revealing the result of the socialist indoctrination of our children from kindergarten to college. They are growing up to beg the government to exercise total control of their lives – from socialized medicine to the banning of firearms, Social Security to foreclosure relief.

“Most likely, it is not the case more often than not…”
(Yes, that’s professional journalism at its finest.)

“The owners and players should agree that players can’t own handguns.”

“Now, let’s not start screaming about the Second Amendment. To begin with, the amendment should be abolished — a sensible interpretation of the amendment is that it was written to allow the people to raise a militia for protection and to hunt for food. Clearly no one needs to raise a militia these days, and those who hunt for a living can be licensed to do so.”

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Hold on there, buddy. The second amendment is not about hunting at all. And there is no “raising” of a militia. Militia, as used in the Bill of Rights, means every citizen owning a gun to protect themselves, their families, and their country from all enemies, especially standing armies from international or domestic government. It was mostly meant to protect Americans in case there was a military coup d’etat, so they could take back the country and preserve the Republic. Let’s look at some quotes from early America to show this is the case.

Boston Journal of the Times, April 13, 1769:
“Instances of the licentious and outrageous behavior of the military conservators of the peace still multiply upon us, some of which are of such nature, and have been carried to such lengths, as must serve fully to evince that a late vote of this town, calling upon its inhabitants to provide themselves with arms for their defense, was a measure as prudent as it was legal: such violences are always to be apprehended from military troops, when quartered in the body of a populous city; but more especially so, when they are led to believe that they are become necessary to awe a spirit of rebellion, injuriously said to be existing therein. It is a natural right which the people have reserved to themselves, confirmed by the Bill of Rights, to keep arms for their own defence; and as Mr. Blackstone observes, it is to be made use of when the sanctions of society and law are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression.”

John Adams, as defense attorney for the British Soldiers at the Boston Massacre trial:
“Here every private person is authorized to arm himself, and on the strength of this authority, I do not deny the inhabitants had a right to arm themselves at that time, for their defense, not for offence…”

St. George Tucker published an interpretation of the Constitution in 1803 and told how it differed from the restricted “right” to bear arms in England:
“The bill of rights, 1 W. and M, says Mr. Blackstone, (Vol. 1 p. 143), secures to the subjects of England the right of having arms for their defence, suitable to their condition and degree. In the construction of these game laws it seems to be held, that no person who is not qualified according to law to kill game, hath any right to keep a gun in his house. Now, as no person, (except the game-keeper of a lord or lady of a manor) is admitted to be qualified to kill game, unless he has 100l. per annum, &c. it follows that no others can keep a gun for their defence; so that the whole nation are completely disarmed, and left at the mercy of the government, under the pretext of preserving the breed of hares and partridges, for the exclusive use of the independent country gentlemen. In America we may reasonably hope that the people will never cease to regard the right of keeping and bearing arms as the surest pledge of their liberty.”
And:
“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Amendments to C. U. S. Art. 4, and this without any qualification as to their condition or degree, as is the case in the British government.”

Finally, in 1833, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, Joseph Story, wrote of the Second Amendment:
“The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them. And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burthens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights.”

The Second Amendment did not give us the right to bear arms, it was a codification of a previously-existing common law right to have weapons to defend yourself, your family, your land, and your country, from all enemies, foreign and domestic, but most especially from tyrants in your own government.

Nobody, not athletes nor idiot sports journalists, should be denied their right to self defense and self preservation. Nobody should be denied their right to self protection against tyrannical government. Agreed, people should be smarter than Mr. Burress apparently was in their handling of said weapons, but the only person suffering from his actions is himself, so I see no need for punishment in this instance.