"The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants" - Albert Camus

Wednesday, April 30, 2014

An Abbreviated History of America and Its Decline

Ever since the classical Greek era, starting with Plato, a new political philosophy based on reason and the sanctity of the individual started to develop.  The theory of natural law sought to establish rules of moral behavior that were universal in nature.  This meant the recognition of the concept of unalienable, or natural, rights all humans have by birth.  Throughout centuries, this philosophy evolved in to a movement that would culminate in the Age of Enlightenment and the birth of classical liberalism. 

America was founded on the timeless classical liberal tenets of liberty and equality.  Our founding fathers, who were influenced by likes of Locke, Montesquieu, and Hobbes among others, knew instinctively that replacing one monarchy with another potentially despotic system of governance would have failed to set Americans truly free; hence our glorious constitutional republic anchored on a set of founding principles consistent with classical liberalism was established.  Yet, our founders also recognized that the road we were to travel on had its share of natural, man-made pitfalls.  As Madison in Federalist 51 said:

“It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.”

Human nature, itself, would be the undoing of liberty and equality.  And Madison was right.  The explosive combination of man’s greed and desire for security would eventually start undoing the constitutional republic by weakening its original purpose. 

The transition away from our constitutional republic hastened in earnest starting with the Progressive Era under Theodore Roosevelt.  The next 100 years would witness a slew of laws and court decisions that left our original intent in shreds.  But, if we are to accept that along with security needs people also have a yearning to be free, what were the underlying dynamics behind this fundamental transition?

There are many dynamics involved but perhaps the most relevant is mis-education, or the lack of proper perspective students get in their primary and secondary education.  As mentioned above, in order to truly comprehend our raison d'être, an individual must understand the philosophy, logic as its natural extension, and history behind it – something the education establishment completely ignores.  Reasons behind this ignorance – or as I call it, academic malpractice – are not all evolutionary in nature.  Forces like cultural Marxism, advanced by progressive collectivist teacher unions, have played a major role in killing off the critical thinking capability of the recent generations.  As insidious as it sounds, the reality is that individualism is in an existential struggle with collectivism, and the individualists are losing by most standards of measure, whether we accept that or not.

The existential struggle we are engaged in can only have one victor.  Collectivism does not, and cannot, tolerate non-participation because it is the fruits of the productive class – usually the individualists – that must feed the beast.  The question, therefore, is what we can do about it – if anything!

In order for us constitutionalists to regain our republic, the legislative damage done to our constitutional republic must eventually be reversed, which in turn requires we first ensure that a critical mass of our citizens learn to appreciate America as envisioned by our founding fathers.  For that, we must simply undo the damage done by the educational establishment.  Until we can take over PTAs and school boards – potentially a goal with a long time horizon – we must strive to educate Americans on what it really means to be an American.  I still believe that the average American yearns for freedom, but for him to realize that, he must have a thorough understanding of the philosophical moorings of our nation and learn to think critically.  The challenges that await us are immense but hopefully not insurmountable.

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Freedom: The Real Significance of Civics Education

Civics, to most people, is one of those subjects they barely remember from their secondary education.   Perhaps because I am an immigrant, I am appalled when the average American tells me what good is it to remember what they apparently regard as being irrelevant to their lives now.  Unfortunately, these are largely the same 'citizens' who can easily recite what transpired in the latest episode of their favorite T.V. show, but scratch their heads in wonderment why America is no longer the country that was envisioned by our founding fathers, or for that matter, even the country they themselves knew just a few precious decades ago.  Indeed the trajectory of our nation is troubling, and unless this course is righted in a hurry, it is one that is likely to place this greatest of all nations in the dustbin of history alongside that other once great civilization the world knew as the Great Roman Empire for uncannily similar reasons.

So, what is civics and why does it matter?  Perhaps a quote might best summarize the critical purpose of civics education:

Si nescis unde venias, nescis quo adeas” (English translation from Latin: If you don’t know where you come from, you don’t know where you are going).

Civics is the study of citizenship in all its aspects: rights as well as responsibilities, both towards each other as in civil society, and to the governing body within the confines of our Constitution.  Its thorough comprehension, however, requires a much deeper look at related subject matters that give it the proper context; these being history as well as philosophy, and its inseparable accompaniments logic and ethics – unfortunately all subject matters that are barely paid lip service in academia, if taught at all.  It is all about knowing where we came from and understanding our philosophical moorings.

The intellectually feeble among us might wonder why all the extra work when they can simply read what these rights and responsibilities are.  In order for anyone to gain a thorough understanding of any concept or issue, they must first make sense of what they are dealing with.  That process requires taking a series of logical steps, each one clarifying the next.  Just as learning algebra before learning calculus or trigonometry is essential for forming a sound foundation in math, one must know where we come from and why we are who we are in order to be truly responsible citizens.  This knowledge includes the chain of historical events that led to our founding starting with advent of private property rights which gave birth to reason based political philosophy of Socratic era, which in turn spawned natural rights theory, classical republicanism as touted by Cicero et al, Age of Enlightenment, and eventually the birth of classical liberalism. 

America is the only nation in history that was founded on a creed, as the great British intellectual G.K. Chesterton once said.  Of course, he was referring to the following immortal passage from our Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Yet, let alone the knowledge of the chain of events mentioned earlier, poll after poll shows that unsettlingly large majorities of Americans do not even know what is meant by unalienable rights – our very essence and raison d’etre.

History is not kind to those who forget what made them great.  We must strive to understand and teach others the essence of America because that comprehension is the only way Americans will realize the precious nature of our liberties, recognize tyranny in the form of progressivism, and reignite the passions of the majority to recapture the spirit of American exceptionalism.  Our freedoms rest on our success in this endeavor because the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, and that requires knowing where we came from so that we can appreciate where we are going.


Monday, April 28, 2014

Progressivism: The Trojan Horse of Ideologies


Many of us are too quick to label ourselves as a conservative, liberal, progressive or whatever without thinking what those labels really mean and where they come from. There is no keeper of labels, thus historians, philosophers, and every other academician can make up their own terminologies which may or may not take hold, or be accurate for that matter. This is the abbreviated but sordid story of one of those labels – perhaps the most misunderstood and misused one: Progressivism. However, we must first understand the meaning and evolution of the concept of liberty in order to truly appreciate the existential threat progressivism poses to it.

A brief history of the evolution of liberty:

Liberty is the state of individual freedom to self-determine. It is freedom from arbitrary and sometimes despotic control by other entities. Individual liberties that we enjoy in free societies are the result of a chain of events spanning two and a half millennium.

Ancient Greek farmer soldiers known as Hoplites were the first known private property owners in the western world. The prosperity that property ownership afforded the Hoplites also allowed them the luxury of reflecting on and philosophizing about life in general. They were the fore-runners of the great ancient Greek philosophers of the Socratic era who would pioneer the reason based political philosophy that would evolve in to classical liberalism among other variants of individualism.

Natural byproduct of reasoning about nature of things is virtue. A virtue is a positive trait or quality deemed to be morally good and thus is valued as a foundation of principle and good moral being. Observations of the nature of things and the resulting logical conclusions yielded certain universal moral absolutes, like the Golden Rule. Natural law and the unalienable rights concepts were the byproducts of virtue. So was republicanism as it was necessitated as a form of governance that elevated the individual to a position of primacy over the state and the collective. This evolution would eventually culminate in the Enlightenment, which allowed the western civilization to finally leave the dark ages behind and advance like never before.

A movement is born:

Virtue dictates that people take responsibility for themselves, as the alternative would be to impose on the unalienable rights of those taking responsibility in a civilized society where human feelings like empathy and compassion make it impossible to turn a blind eye to misery. Adhering to such moral imperatives has always had its opponents since socialism was introduced around mid-19 century under the guise of fairness to the proletariat or the working class. Thus, a hundred and thirty years ago, a parallel movement under the guise of transforming the society in to a utopian vision held by a group of elite socialist intellectuals, drug abusers, and sexual deviants started in the United Kingdom. They would be known as the Fabian Society and later become the pre-eminent academic society in the U.K., whose influence far exceeded the bounds of the empire.

The driving force behind the Fabian Society was the desire to establish global socialism and use of British imperialism as a progressive, modernizing force. Thus the modern, debouched version of the word 'progressive' entered the lexicon. This progressivism, however, was nothing like the original meaning of the word. The desired end result was socialism - a collectivist ideology - rather than individualism as characterized by the reason based Socratic approach to advancement of mankind through individual freedom of thought and action.

Fabian elitists had no stomach for socialism through revolutionary change, therefore adopted their name after the Roman general Fabius Maximus - Fabius translating to 'the delayer'. Theirs would be a gradualist movement that subscribed to incrementalism as agent of change.

Gradualism and deception:

Gradualism is policy of change by gradual, often slow stages. In contrast to impatient and hot headed revolutionary Marxists of the 20th century, Fabians understood just enough about human nature to realize that socialism via revolution would only alienate society and never last, but over time, people would voluntarily buy in to a socialist utopia given the right stimuli. The funny thing about human nature, especially in the West that had been enlightened in the virtues of liberty and equality, is that it yearns for freedom as much as it craves security. It was obvious, therefore that the appeal to the security needs of the masses was the key to everlasting utopia. The problem was that socialism seemingly provided what was essentially a false sense of security, but it was also antithetical to individual liberty as the Fabian socialist vision had no room for unfettered capitalism or private property rights. Right to one's fruits of their labor is the most basic requirement of freedom, and most every person knows this instinctively. This dilemma could seriously jeopardize the chances of success for socialism dissembled as progressivism. Hence, it was a given that along with gradualism, deception would also have to be a central feature of the progressive agenda.

War against traditionalism:

Fabians realized early on that traditionalism had to give way to what some termed modernism if global socialism was ever going to be realized. This implied that the traditional institutions of the society had to be dismantled. Hence, traditionalism along with traditional values had to be vilified as ‘intolerance’ and society made to feel guilty for holding these views. This was a battle for the hearts and souls of the masses – one that the traditionalists did not realize the importance of. Over the next century plus, progressivism assaulted society in a multi-prong attack that would mercilessly decay the traditional institutions of society.

On the education front, or as I refer to as the indoctrination side, classical education was slowly but surely replaced by progressive education that allowed social activism to be introduced in to classes instead of a strong curriculum in the liberal arts that would promote critical thinking. Concepts like service learning, cooperative learning, and social responsibility became everyday classroom activities; all while subjects like history and civics were being revised to fit the progressive mantra.

Progressive education also claimed and continues to claim to promote critical thinking. This is just another deceptive marketing ploy progressivism uses in gaining acceptance. Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness. Critical thinking requires going through all three stages of education: grammar, logic, and rhetoric. A vigorous curriculum in liberal arts is vitally important in learning how to think critically because the inter-disciplinary connections must be made effectively if critical reflection is to take place. Progressive education makes this impossibility as the demands placed on students by imposing progressive concepts leaves insufficient time for adequate exposure to liberal arts, not to mention the fact that revisionist gobbledygook taught poisons the foundation of knowledge necessary to draw proper conclusions.

On the cultural front, which I call the propaganda front, progressives undermined traditions by infiltrating the entertainment and media institutions to the point of nearly exterminating traditional voices and points of view.
The progressive agenda not merely survived but thrived throughout the free world. Cultural Marxists gave birth to different schools of thought (perhaps most famously the Frankfurt School) that all converged on the same themes of gradualism and deception, which would gradually change accepted definitions and values from their traditional senses to progressive ones. Eventually, what was right or moral would be wrong and immoral, and vice versa.

For example, when John Dewey, the father of American progressive education, advanced the idea of replacing classical education with his brand that would inevitably abandon the quadrivium, he never said that his goal was to dumb down future generations so that they could not think critically. Likewise, John Maynard Keynes who was closely associated with the original Fabian society members, never announced that his brand of neo-classical capitalism had not much to do with free flow of capital, but rather inhibit the free economies by injecting the heavy hand of the government under the guise of normalizing business cycles. Finally, Frances Fox Pivens is yet to admit openly that the strategy that bears her name - Cloward Piven Strategy - relies on collapsing the society from within in order to facilitate Marxism.

A Trojan horse:

Progressivism is a Trojan Horse. As socialists at heart, its most ardent adherents will never admit to their true desires as they instinctively know that the devious ideology they advance must be concealed and public led down the path to socialist utopia under false pretenses. Most others who consider themselves progressives have simply been conned in to thinking that progressivism is liberalism. In reality, progressivism is the opposite of liberalism. The central tenets of liberalism lie in individual liberty, equality under the law, and small unintrusive government to make it all possible. Individualism and liberalism are one in the same, and the opposite ideology should properly called collectivism, not liberalism in typical progressive double-speak. Having to use the term collectivist would amount to a public relations disaster for socialists. It is high time that we took the language back and force the proponents of what amounts to be indentured servitude and equality in misery to display their true colors.

Monday, April 21, 2014

I am Baaaaaaack!

A year older, and quite a bit wiser, I have decided to revive this blog after extensive activity on LinkedIn forums.  The struggle to preserve our diminishing liberties continues to be the ever increasing focus of all of our efforts, as it must be.

Probably, this will be a transition in to a bigger and better site that will include articles by regular contributors with unique perspectives on liberty here and abroad, among other features.  I plan on bringing on board some of the brilliant minds I met over the past year.  Contributions of my valuable team members are always welcome.
I hope that my team will still be sticking with me.

Long-live freedom

Friday, April 12, 2013

Quote of the Week

“If Dr. Gosnell had walked into a nursery and shot seven infants with an AR-15, it would be national news and the subject of presidential hand-wringing.” – Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ)


Oh, how true is that.  Journalism isn't only dead, but rotten to its core.  What other profession is there where integrity counts so heavily, yet is nowhere to be found?!  All they know is how to be lapdogs to the Obama Administration and the progressive cause!

Tuesday, April 9, 2013

Rest In Peace Iron Lady

May you and Gipper watch over us from up above and your legacy inspire the new generations. Your contributions to saving freedom not only in Great Britain but all around the western world will be etched in history books for eternity. You will be missed every bit as much as our beloved Gipper. Good night gentle lady.

Friday, March 29, 2013

Example #5,435,421,251 - Inhumanity of Progressive Mindset

A fetus past six weeks old has a heart beat, therefore is alive. At 21-22 weeks, prematurely delivered babies can and regularly do live.  So, I ask, how is abortion not murder?
Well, not according to the baby killing machine called Planned Parenthood.  Here is their spokesperson defending the parent's right to terminate babies born alive as a result of botched abortions.

I used to believe in a woman's right to abort up to a certain point.
I am not a religious person.  I am a spiritual agnostic who believes that we are all endowed with certain unalienable rights in nature: LIFE, LIBERTY, and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.
Call me silly but even a fetus with a recognizeable heartbeat is a live being, therefore deserves to be protected under the laws - both of nature and man.

Friday, March 15, 2013

Why California Is Broke...

...and why states like Illinois and Connecticut are following close at its footsteps:

Fight businesses with outrageously onerous regulations, offer illegals all the privileges of a citizen, raise taxes to levels that prompt both businesses (as in the case of CA) and individuals (as in MD and most other deep blue states) to flee the state,.......the reasons are as endless as the collectivist utopian dreams of progressives.
No wonder why the census bureau found that there is a net migration away from these states and in to red states!

Will the last person leaving these failed Democrat run states please turn the lights off?

Saturday, March 9, 2013

Blood in the Water

In nature, when the weak, or otherwise vulnerable, prey is ready for easy taking by predators, they instinctively gang up on it to finish it off.  There is blood in the water and the sharks are circling their prey.  The sharks in this case are the collectivist nations of the world as represented by the U.N., and the wounded prey is the U.S.A.

The above analogy is near perfect in describing how the U.N. is lately using environmental and economic initiatives to deal a decisive blow to free market capitalism worldwide.  First, it was the global wealth redistribution schemes, then came various over-reaches in the name of controlling Internet and the biggest scam of them all: man-made global warming.

U.N. has a long history of anti-capitalist sentiment.  The problem had always been that the U.S. was always led by governments that would not put up with such nonsense.  However, starting in 2009, U.N. finally found a sympathetic ear at the White House to compliment the collectivists that were already running the legislative branch.  The collectivists at the U.N. were now perfectly complimented by one of their ideological mates at the helm of the main force that was stopping them.  The full court press was on.

Free market capitalism is hated by collectivists everywhere because it is the utmost expression of triumph of individualism.  Mind you that collectivists are not always communists of different stripes but rather European style social democrats who have bastardized capitalism to serve their ends.  So other variants of capitalism such as welfare capitalism, state capitalism, or regulatory capitalism is the preferred economic system of most nations that do not happen to adhere to outright communism.  Social democrats are one in the same with present day Democrats in the U.S.A.

So, how do you kill off free market capitalism?  One of the biggest enemies of collectivism is free flow of information as people who can access unlimited information are bound to discover the failures of the collectivist systems they live under.  Consequently, under all tyrannies information and its exchange is, and must always be, controlled strictly. 
What is the biggest disseminator of information?  Internet.  So, it goes without saying that in the eyes of collectivists, Internet must be controlled. 

Although control of the internet was a long time dream, it was 2012 when the latest push, spearheaded by China, Russia, and many Arab countries, started.  The attempt would eventually prove to be ill-fated, partly thanks to the GOP controlled House of Representatives,  but not abandoned by any means.  The international collectivists' hopes now lie in the 2014 mid term elections in the U.S. that could give full control of the legislature to the collectivist Democrats and thus potentially clear the way for wrestling away the control of the Internet from the people.  Is it a far-fetched idea?  Just contrast the statements put forth by Canada and the U.S., both of which opposed the the treaty effectively handing over control of the Internet to the U.N.  Canadian statement said "...the treaty jeopardized its commitment to an Internet "in which people are free to participate, communicate, organize and exchange information."  In contrast, the U.S. Ambassador Terry Kramer declared: "[It's] with a heavy heart and a sense of missed opportunities that the U.S. must communicate that it is not able to sign the agreement in the current form,"  It is up to each person to interpret the highlighted words, however the statement clearly indicates the openness of the progressive mindset of the Obama Administration to at least some control over the Internet.

The effort to killing off free market capitalism being a multi-prong one, U.N has also been busy trying to achieve their goal through their climate initiatives.  Germans had it right when they coined the expression "green is the new red".  It is a documented fact that the green movement is all about using the environment to redistribute wealth at a global scale while killing free market capitalism.

Early in the Obama Administration, in 2009, a United Nations document on 'climate change' was distributed to a major environmental conclave that envisioned a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer, millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes -- all under the supervision of the" United Nations. 

The man-made global warming hoaxers have been making it very clear what their objective has been all along, and that is fleece the United States of America.  It's a giant money grab on the surface of it, but it is also the careful undoing of free markets while preserving the goose that lays the golden egg - capitalism in its grotesquely regulated form. 

The efforts of the environmentalist Marxists have in the past clearly indicated their willingness to use whatever deception necessary to achieve their goals.  Their dire warnings have continuously proven to be false while they have kept a semblance of consensus by threatening scientists that do not go along with their agenda.  Most recently, when the British MET reported that there had been no global warming of any sort over the past 16 years, those who reported on it were pilloried despite even Mr. Pachauri, scientist leading the climate panel of IPCC, grudgingly admitting to it.

Leading to the get together in Doha, the current U.N. boss Christina Figueres admitted as much that the goal is a global revolution engineered by central governments.  She carefully mentioned the words 'societal transformation' - as in' fundamental transformation' of America uttered 4 years earlier by Obama.  Do you see the connections, or do you need even a bigger mallet to be hit on the head with?
And if that doesn't send a shiver down your spine as a freedom loving American, I don't know what will!

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

The Doomsday Clock

Outlook for humanity remains quite dim.  LiveScience.com recently reported that the infamous Doomsday Clock has been left unchanged at 5 minutes to midnight by esteemed (sarc.) scientists.  For those who are not familiar, this is the symbolic clock that indicates how close we are to the destruction of human kind. 

In their letter to President Obama, the leaches...ehem, scientists whose salaries are largely paid by governments via the taxpayers...have pleaded action on the climate change front.  Of course, Obama is happy to oblige as he made the issue a centerpiece of his second term agenda as if we face no immediate problems elsewhere.  And, of course again, no mention was made in Live Science or in the MSM that even the Met and IPCC's crooked chief (Dr. Pachauri) admitted recently that there has been no warming at all over the past 17 years - man made or any other type!

Scientists are correct in one thing though.  The doomsday clock needs to be left unchanged at 5 minutes to midnight.  This is no thanks to man made global warming but rather the real man made disaster who is getting ever so close to bankrupting the U.S.A. while taking our liberties away and destroying the remaining vestiges of American exceptionalism - namely Barack Hussein Obama.

The world will undoubtedly survive mother nature's cyclical changes but human spirit can in no way survive the scourge that progressivism/collectivism represents.

Friday, December 21, 2012

A Poem

Father, must I go to work?
No, my lucky son.
We're living now on Easy Street
On dough from Washington.

We've left it up to Uncle Sam,
So don't get exercised.
Nobody has to give a damn -
We've all been subsidized.

But if Sam treats us all so well
And feeds us milk and honey,
Please, daddy, tell me what the hell
He's going to use for money.

Don't worry, bub, there's not a hitch
In this here noble plan-
He simply soaks the filthy rich
And helps the common man.

But, father, won't there come a time
When they run out of cash
And we have left them not a dime
When things will go to smash?

My faith in you is shrinking, son,
You nosy little brat;
You do too damn much thinking, son,
To be a Democrat."

Monday, November 19, 2012

Immigrants and the American Dream: Then and Now

The broken immigration policy of this country does not aim to allow for immigrants whose professional or financial qualifications make them the primary candidates for invitation to become U.S. residents. Instead, it is those who can slip in to this country, usually destitude, and ready to attach to the government's teet, who are welcome in today's America.  In fact I know this first hand as my mother-in-law, who was legitimately entitled to residency was given hell of a time (and whose files were lost after a costly and lengthy period of "processing"), got so disgusted that she went back to her native country. But that is a story for a different occasion.

How did America become the success story that no other nation could emulate in the grand scale that she accomplished?  The short and simple answer is its founding principles, which served as the principal magnet for millions of immigrants who left behind everything just for the opportunity to excel in a free society in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

They came to escape oppression - both political as well as economic.  As they risked everything, they had nothing to lose other than the chains that were holding them back in their old homes.  So, they worked hard and expected nothing but the full fruits of their labor.  They invented, innovated, and produced like no one ever did.  As a result, they became the key drivers of the wealthiest nation that ever existed.

Today, and for the last half century, we have the same economic refugees as well.  However, these are primarily refugees with a twist: ones who are coming to the U.S. because of the welfare society that it is fast becoming.  Just as Western Europe is attracting Middle Eastern and African refugees (thanks to the generous benefits they provide) who are draining their coffers, the United States is attracting leaches from primarily Latin and Carribean countries.

The main force behind encouraging these immigrants is none other than the U.S. government.  From insisting that the Embassy and the government of Mexico inform its citizens of the goodies they are entitled to last year, to the U.S.C.I.S.'s web site, the progressive policies adopted by this government are assuring that they (Democrats primarily) can count on their votes come election time.  It is a recipe for disaster.

American dream is no longer the opportunity this country offers to entrepreneurs and professionals, but rather what people conditioned to recieve government benefits can get from Uncle Sam.  Just like the great Roman Empire self destructed, the great American experiment is also headed for a disastrous conclusion, and that disastrous end is finally in sight.  God help our children!

Thursday, November 8, 2012

Fool Me Once Shame on You; Fool Me Twice....

Americans voted for Barack Obama in 2008 because of many reasons; among them were Bush fatigue, a boring Republican candidate in McCain who could not make a persuasive argument for his vision and the root of our problems, an ailing economy, the excitement of electing the first minority president, and many more.

In the months leading to November 2008, many on the right (as well as some in the Hillary Clinton camp prior to her defeat in the primaries) rightly raised many troubling questions about this relatively unknown candidate - Barack Obama.  The progressive media quickly circled its wagons around their candidate of choice and protected him from being exposed as the radical collectivist that he had always been.  Obama was quickly painted as a moderate whose radical parents, mentors, associates, speeches, even school records were nothing out of the ordinary.  Obama was never asked the difficult questions.  He was never made to answer any of the well supported allegations.  Heck, no reporter even bothered to ask him what he meant by "fundamental transformation" of America despite the obvious connotations.  Why would anyone who loved his country and the principles it was founded on want to fundamentally transform it?  No one cared to ask questions or demand answers.  The American electorate fell for it and the dye was cast.

The next four years proved the loyal opposition correct on a weekly, daily basis.  Again, the conventional media sources concealed the truth as well as all the myriad of scandals from Fast and Furious to Benghazi, any one of which should have been more than enough to bring down the presidency.  But the American people had a choice - alternative media as well as digging further in to sources like the Reuters and the A.P.; they simply did not exercise their duty as responsible citizens who are charged with protecting the integrity of politics in a republican system of government.

As per polls, Americans still do not believe in a collectivist state. Self identified conservatives outnumber self identified progressives by almost 2:1.  Majority believe that the government is trying to do too much. Almost all Americans who are intellectually honest know the economic dire straits we find our selves in from unemployment to crushing indebtedness.  Yet, Americans, in character with human nature, do not vote with their heads, but rather with their hearts. At the end, Romney could not bridge the head and the heart together.  At the end, although Romney presented a much more distinct and clearer choice compared to McCain, American electorate chose to give the biggest domestic and foreign policy failure in modern times another 4 years to continue on the same disastrous path he put the nation on. 

America has been on the road to ruin for quite a while thanks to continuing advancement of progressivism - over a century to be exact.  This advancement speeded up in the 1950s with the hijacking of the public education system, and later with progressive liberal domination of the media as well as the entertainment establishments.  This type of cumulative effect and the damage it does to the fabric of a society is rarely reversible, if ever.  Obama is just the latest in a long line of grim reapers who have promised what equates to eternal life in return for the soul of the society.  It is sad to see that Americans were not immune from promises that are too good to be true as they lost sight of the timeless principles our nation - the greatest ever devised on earth - was founded on.

Let me be on the record as not blaming Obama for what is about to happen to our country.  I am not even going to blame the media or the educators or entertainers of the nation.  They all have the same agenda, but we all make our own beds and therefore must sleep in them.  Americans made their bed by not being engaged.  On election day 2012, 13 million fewer voters went to the polls compared to 2008 despite the grave problems the nation is faced with.  Democrats had the ground game and overcame the late surge by candidate Romney.  And the rest is history - one that will be marred by the apathy of irresponsible citizens who are directly responsible for what befell America. 

With citizenship comes solemn responsibility.  Americans rejected this responsibility.  They were fooled once in 2008 and I blamed the media establishment.  They were fooled for the second time 4 years later despite everything that happened in the meanwhile. 

Freedom is not only protected by soldiers.  It is first and foremost protected by a citizenry that takes its duty to be vigilant seriously.  Shame on those who would not learn from history.  Shame on them for letting our brave soldiers, preserving their freedoms, shed their blood on foreign soils in vain. 
America could surely survive the rule of collectivists as their reign is but temporary; but America just as surely cannot survive the apathy of its people or the poverty of spirit dependancy brings with it.  This surely was the biggest let down of 2012, nothing else!

Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Zero Hour

It is here folks.
Get out and do your civic duty.
Do it for your freedoms.
Do it for the souls of those like Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty that cry out for justice.
Do it for restored respect around the globe.
Do it for the sake of those allies who rely on a strong America against collectivist and radical Islamic tyranny.
Do it for the 20 million plus unemployed Americans who are told that this is the 'new reality'.
Do it to restore dignity to the record number of welfare recipients, without which human spirit is dead.
Do it for energy independence.
Do it for fiscal sanity.
Do it for regulatory sanity.
Do it for your children's future.
Whatever your reasons may be, just get to your polling station and do it.
It is time to restore power where power is meant to reside: The American public!
It is time to depose the shamelessly corrupt narcissistic megalomaniac!

Wednesday, October 31, 2012

"We Leave Nobody Behind" - OH REALLY MR. PRESIDENT?!?!

Spiking the football, trying to score political points as he is accustomed to, the egomaniacal narcissist who we call our President said to the American Red Cross yesterday that "We (America) leave nobody behind".

Normally, this statement would not be so outrageous if only six weeks ago he did not leave four Americans to die in Benghazi without as much as lifting a finger during the nearly 7-hour ordeal.

What kind of a man (and I use the term loosely in this case) sits in the Whitehouse situation room and literally watches and listens to those he is charged with protecting ask for help three times over a 7-hour period and not lift a finger despite having forces at the ready only an hour away?  What kind of conscience must such a scoundrel have to be so callous?

No, Mr. President, America normally never leaves any of its citizens behind.  That, however, requires leadership.  You never left the campaigning mode after the 2008 election.  You never went in to the governing mode because that actually requires making tough decisions - something you have proven to be incapable of!  For you to make such a statement while your hands are still dripping the blood of Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty - our heroic CIA security personnel who assisted the consulate against orders and gave their lives defending their compound - is no doubt the lowest point of your shameful, scandal ridden presidency.  You are America's shame; one that will leave a stench for a long time no matter what happens in six days.

Monday, October 29, 2012

Benghazigate: Enraging Story of an Unraveling Presidency and Media Corruption

Ill winds of a major scandal are once again blowing in Washington, D.C.  Along with it, a shameful chapter in American presidential history is about to be closed even if it is no consolation for the loved ones of heroic souls Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, along with Ambassador Chris Stevens and Sean Smith of the Diplomatic Corps, who were sacrificed in the name of political expediency by a narcissistic megalomaniac and his inept and corrupt Administration; all aided by a shamelessly corrupt media.  The pivotal role that each - the Administration and the media - play in this whole affair makes this two scandals in one.

The news developments in the Benghazi affair are coming fast and furious.  Folks, this is dead-serious, infuriating stuff.  In fact it is nothing short of a scandal of epic proportions that should end the political careers of all sorts of politicians, bureaucrats, and journalists involved in this cover-up.  I say 'should', sadly because only FNC is widely reporting the revelations while the other Obama adoring lapdog media is brushing over this, having gotten cover by the Administration's assurances that they are "investigating" the matter.  The idea is to delay reporting on more scandalous and potentially criminal details of just what happened during and after the Benghazi attack.

Here is a brief timeline (for more details follow this link), the troubling details, as well as the inconsistent statements and damning lies the Administration has been repeating:
► On the eleventh anniversary of 9/11, at 9:40 p.m. local time, the United States consulate/mission in Benghazi, Libya came under organized attack by an Al Queda affiliated terrorist group - Ansar Al-Sharia - using rocket-propelled grenades, hand grenades, assault rifles, 14.5 mm anti-aircraft machine guns, diesel canisters, gun trucks, and mortars. 

► Inside the consulate, which was not a secure building by any diplomatic standards, were Ambassador Chris Stevens and Sean Smith protected only by five contracted security agents, and four Libyans who fled the scene at the first sign of trouble. 

► Ambassador Stevens was apparently involved in more than just diplomacy in its traditional sense.  He played a pivotal part in arming the anti-government forces in Syria as well as Libya before Kaddafi's fall.  He regularly was meeting with governmental sources from Turkey and Qatar who were sending armaments to the rebels.  In fact, the good Ambassador was likely involved in clandestine activities that would make Iran-Contra or Fast and Furious look like child's play.  The night he was killed, he had just met with an unnamed Turkish official in Benghazi.  We will learn more about this later, but if true, this might further explain the reluctance by the Administration in divulging information, especially since this being an election year.

► There were multiple requests made for beefed up security in the months leading to the tragic events due to the increasing turmoil in the region, but were all turned down by the State Department which cited no specific reasons for the denials.  A month after the tragedy, the Administration (led by the V.P.) would falsely claim that Republican led House of Representatives had cut the security budget severely as the reason security was not beefed up despite the fact that there were $2 billion dollars set aside for specifically this purpose that the State Department could have used.

► Within a mile of the consulate, a CIA compound/annex had several agents who were observing the events as they unraveled while being in constant communication with their supervisor.  They were denied permission to leave the compound and assist the Ambassador and his entourage on two different occasions as we have found out (later CIA chief said that they were not the ones who denied the military support request, making White House the likely source of the denial).  Two of these men - Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty - would later be casualties of this reckless, gutless Administration.

► Also, in the air above were two Predator drones sending real-time images/information to situation rooms in the White House, the State Department, the Pentagon, and all sorts of intelligence agencies including the CIA.  This is one of the critical facts that came out as a part of the Congressional hearings over the past two weeks.

► The total duration of the two separate attacks on the consulate and the CIA annex was roughly 7 hours during which we lost four Americans who were bravely serving their country in different capacities.  Once again, despite multiple requests for assistance and ample opportunity for a rapid response force to arrive from their base in Italy, these men were callously left to fend for themselves.

► At any time during the assault, no U.S. military intervention of any type occurred despite three different requests.  The only assistance rendered (in violation of the orders from politicos in D.C.) were by Woods, Doherty, and two other CIA operatives at the annex.  Later Woods and Doherty would give their lives while manning a machine gun on the top of the CIA compound.

► Following the tragic events in Benghazi, President Obama, Vice President Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, Defense Secretary Panetta, and a host of other Administration officials made the tour of political talk shows and gave numerous press conferences where they gave conflicting statements ranging from this being the result of a protest against the infamous "Innocence of Muslims" movie trailer, to the assault being possibly a terror act against the U.S.A.  To this date, the Administration is still not clear about what exactly went wrong and are refusing to release to the Congress the video of the fateful events.

The Plot Thickens:
But wait, the twists in this sickening story still do not end there.  We also know that two high rank military commanders have also been taken off duty since Benghazi.  First, and the more damning, is the firing of General Carter Ham, head of AFRICOM.  General Ham, as the commanding officer, received in real-time the same e-mails and communications as did the Situation Rooms in the White House and elsewhere.  The unconfirmed story is that he was outraged by the order to Stand Down on requests for assistance that he over-ruled Washington's order.  This explains why and how Woods and Doherty were able to go to the Consulate and assist in evacuating the survivors despite the outrageous orders to Stand Down.  General Ham was reportedly fired one minute after he gave his orders to disregard the Stand Down order by his second in command.  Since his firing, General Rodiguez has been given his post.
The second commanding officer to be dismissed right after the terror attack was Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette, the commander of an aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle East.  At the time of the assault in Benghazi, Admiral Gaouette's strike group was deployed off the coast of Libya.  It is my speculation that Adm. Gaouette ordered the two Predator drones to be deployed against orders from Scty. Panetta.
These two firings are also anectodal evidence that the orders coming from Washington on that fateful night were too outrageous for these honorable military commanders to obey.

The Media Angle:

Despite the obvious scandal surrounding the administration's action before, during and after the Benghazi atrocity, an equally outrageous scandal is the one surrounding the corrupt mainstream media's handling of it. When the final chapter of this dreadful story is written, the media will also have a lot to answer for over its indefensible conduct.

Consider the fact that Steve Kroft of CBS "60 Minutes" interviewed President Obama on Sept. 12, just hours after the attack. In acknowledging the pre-meditated terrorist nature of the attack, Obama told Kroft:

"You're right that this is not a situation that was exactly the same as what happened in Egypt, and my suspicion is, is that there are folks involved in this who were looking to target Americans from the start."

But CBS did not release this video clip until more than one month after it was recorded. Why? Meanwhile, CBS dutifully reported the White House-crafted cover story about the attack being due to a spontaneous protest over a 14-minute video that somehow spun out of control, a falsehood that the administration clung to for more than two weeks. CBS could have easily blown the cover off of that falsehood before it even got off the ground. But it remained silent and did not post the Kroft video clip online until Oct. 19, which was 37 days after it had been recorded.

Fox News reported on Friday that besieged consulate operatives on the evening of Sept. 11 had requested assistance through CIA channels and had twice been refused, with orders telling them to "stand down" rather than to help the ambassador. Yet this earth-shattering news was not reported on adjacent outlets. The New York Times, The Washington Post, USA Today, CNN, NBC, ABC, and CBS all maintained complete silence.

NYT had room for 3 endorsements of Obama's re-election but no room to report this story. By contrast, a day earlier all of these outlets were able to give a full-throated airing to Defense Secretary Panetta's defense of the administration claiming that DoD did not have "real time information" despite the fact that the State Department's Charlene Lamb had continuous phone contact throughout the attack with the Benghazi consulate and there had been an aerial drone sending live-link video feed back to the White House situation room almost from the start of the attack.
Later in the day on Friday, CIA Director David Petraeus announced through agency spokesperson Jennifer Youngblood that:

"no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate."

That meant one and only one thing. Orders to "stand down" had been issued from the Oval Office and nowhere else. Again, mainstream media sites maintained total news blackout. That blackout was maintained until AP reported the story almost 24 hours later, sourcing its report back to the original Fox News account as described in the linked story below. And notice AP's headline which touts the White House disputing the blockbuster revelations rather than the revelations themselves.

Whether it was media hostility to Fox News or outright cheerleading complicity with the Obama administration is not known. It is for those outlets to clear up the uncertainty. Don't hold your breath waiting for an honest answer. What is not even the slightest bit in doubt is that the mainstream media has sacrificed any entitlement to a presumption of integrity.

We expect politicians to lie, especially if a very unhelpful development occurs just as they are waging a desperate uphill battle to be re-elected. But we don't expect to endure media corruption at the same time, especially when they appear to be complicit with an increasingly endangered administration. Failure of mainstream media to pursue this entire story forthrightly has broadened it from an administration scandal into a major media scandal.


Here is what it all boils down to, folks.  Any foreign diplomatic post is in essence United States territory.  Obama knew that a disastrous attack on its soil so close to the general election would have been a fatal blow to his re-election chances - especially since what allowed this to happen was their own criminal negligence in not taking threats that were communicated to them weeks before by the Egyptian and Libyan sources seriously, and the willful ignoring of requests by the Ambassador himself for extra security, the requests by CIA personnel for permission to assist those in the consulate, pleas for intervention by AC130 gunships and drones overhead as well as the quick reaction force deployed only an hour away in Italy.

It all (this inaction) makes perfect sense if you look at the Obama doctrine of leading from behind.  In their demented view, the U.S. must never be seen as aggressors on foreign soils where we are trying to win the hearts and minds of the populace.

What was and is being protected here by the Administration as well as the main stream media, at a cost of innocent lives, is the myth of the unassailability of the Obama record as commander in chief.  Obama himself has lied about it  - no surprise here as he has proven over and over again that he is a pathological liar.   He has covered up the trail of events before and after.  He has shown no remorse.  Just as vitally, he has not executed his job as commander-in-chief of the armed forces of our country, therefore he should be impeached for abdication of responsibilities under Article 2 of the constitution.

The progressive left has historically never had any problem sacrificing the truth, or even human lives, when it comes to achieving the outcomes they desire.  Anyone with a sense of justice and regard for humanity can only hope that they drown in the spilled blood of those they are responsible for sacrificing.  So come November 6th, as you are about to make your choice for president, listen well - the distant voices you hear are those of Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty crying for at least a small measure of justice.

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Listen to Trevor Loudon

Trevor Loudon, a great New Zealender who does more to expose Marxists and other collectivists around the globe than anyone else, has recorded this message.  Heed his warnings; he has been crusading against enemies of freedom for decades:

Monday, October 22, 2012

Questions Romney Should Bring Up in Tonight's Debate

In a perfect world, an impartial moderator would ask candidates about points of contention as well as other questions begging for answers.  Well, that would be in a perfect world!  Since we do not live in such a place where the media displays no bias, here is my suggestion for how Romney should approach this sham of a debate and the questions he should ask himself.

Romney needs to actively do three things tonight: Attack, Attack, Attack!
Obama foreign policy is the most incompetent and disastrous ever - much, much worse than even Carter's.
Point it out, Mr. Romney.  Ask questions like:

'Mr. President, you would not support the Iranian protestors who begged for support and let them be massacred, yet you actively supported the pro-sharia Arab Spring protestors; can you tell the public why?'


'Mr. President, can you tell the American public why you flew to Las Vegas and Colorado on fund raisers within 24 hours of our Ambassador's assasination - the first in 30+ years - instead of meeting with your National Security Council?  And while you are at it, can you please tell us why you have missed fully 60% of your National Security Briefings during your presidency?'


'Mr. President, isn't it abdicating your responsibility to our diplomatic staff overseas to deny them added security on the anniversay of 9/11 when they asked for it over and over again?'


'Mr. President, why did your Administration spokespeople keep on repeating a lie that you knew nothing about the cause of the Benghazi attack when later the CIA and other NSA officials made it clear to Congress in hearings that you knew this was a terrorist attack within 24 hours?  While you are at it, why did the V.P. lie about the reason for added security to be denied when he said the Congress cut funding for security when it came out that there is over $2 billion available for such contingencies waiting to be disbursed?'


'Mr. President, what did you exactly mean when you whispered in to Mr. Medvedev's ear to tell Putin to give you time until after the election when you will have more "flexibility"?  Is this the natural progression of us letting our allies down in the Czech Republic and Poland three years ago when we refused to honor our promise to install a missile defense shield?  What exactly is our commitment to our eastern European allies in an age Putin's Russia is starting to behave as a bully once again?'


'Mr. President, your White House asked Palestinians to sit tight on statehood until your re-election.  Coupled with your earlier comments regarding Israel's need to withdraw to its 1965 borders, are you letting our only ally in the Middle East know that they cannot count on the U.S.A. under your presidency?'


'The island nation of Fiji recently fell under Marxist rule and has become a base of sorts for the Chinese, what is your view on this situation and why have you or your State Department not made any comments about this worrisome development?'


Mr. President, you refused to back allies in Taiwan when you refused to sell them F-18 combat aircraft, in Colombia when you cozied up to their enemies in Venezuela and Ecuador who support the Marxist FARC guerillas, ......(list the long list of allies let down by this POS); can you explain to the American public if this is what 'leading from behind' is all about?'


'Do you think that a U.S. that abandons allies and cozies up to traditional enemies fosters trust on the part of our allies?  Do you see the U.S. as a super power which needs to defend America's interests around the globe while protecting our steadfast allies?'


'What do you think is the likely outcome of a foreign policy that leads to our allies not trusting us and our enemies not fearing us in an age when radical Islamists the world over are openly declaring their goal of annihilating Israel as well as infidels who reject Islam?'

It doesn't end with those vital questions.  There are so many more questions this POS has to answer unfortunately, but we all know that the lapdog who will be moderating will ask none of it.  So it is up to Mr. Romney to ask.  Go get him, Mitt!

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Welfare State Rages On

Good news fellow Americans!  For the first time, we have broken the $1 trillion mark in welfare spending.

After all, all those food stamp parties that the Administration has thrown, pleas to the Mexican government to let their citizens who are illegally here know they too can use such benefits in states like California that refuse to implement I.D. requirements for welfare recipients (but don’t dare farm your land, god forbid the smelt may be harmed somehow), and a myriad of other enticements the Obama Administration has worked so hard to provide for our ever so proud, ever growing dependency class.

Greece, eat your heart out!

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

The Real World John Galt

Those of you who may have read Ayn Rand's famous novel Atlas Shrugged are surely familiar with the character of John Galt.  Galt is a creator, philosopher, and inventor who symbolizes the power and glory of the human mind. He serves as a principled counterpoint to the collectivist social and economic structure depicted in the novel. The depiction portrays a society based on oppressive bureaucratic functionaries and a culture that embraces stifling mediocrity and egalitarianism, which the novel associates with socialistic idealism or utopianism as I prefer.  Sounds familiar?  Well, it should because that is just what we are experiencing in the U.S. right now.

As in Atlas Shrugged, business owners/investors in the U.S. have decided to boycott the government policies.  This boycott takes form of a investment and hiring freeze many businesses have instituted over the past two years.  Survey after survey, members of business groups like the Chamber of Commerce, NFIB, NAM, and others have overwhelmingly indicated that their biggest concerns are the fiscal and regulatory uncertainties they face. 

Any reasonable person would agree that no prudent investor would risk his capital and sweat equity in new or expanded ventures when progressive forces in Washington have launched an outright assault on them.  Despite the Administration's (and its henchmen in media and academia) best efforts to convince the unsuspecting, apathetic public that the problem is lack of demand and insufficient stimulus spending, the truth has been conveyed loud and clear by those who create the jobs - or as I like to call them, those in the know.

Last week, David Seagal, owner of Westgate Resorts, showed the courage of informing his employees what might happen if they vote for more of the class warfare President Obama has unleashed on our society.  Mr. Seagal recieved a lot of misplaced criticism from the usual suspects for his blunt assessment.  I, for one, believe that he is if anything compassionate for telling it as it is.  Afterall, his duty as an employer who cares for his employees, is to let them know what is in their best interests.  Here is his memorandum to his employees:

Subject: Message from David Siegel
Date:Mon, 08 Oct 2012 13:58:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: [David Siegel]
To: [All employees]

To All My Valued Employees,

As most of you know our company, Westgate Resorts, has continued to succeed in spite of a very dismal economy. There is no question that the economy has changed for the worse and we have not seen any improvement over the past four years. In spite of all of the challenges we have faced, the good news is this: The economy doesn't currently pose a threat to your job. What does threaten your job however, is another 4 years of the same Presidential administration. Of course, as your employer, I can't tell you whom to vote for, and I certainly wouldn't interfere with your right to vote for whomever you choose. In fact, I encourage you to vote for whomever you think will serve your interests the best.

However, let me share a few facts that might help you decide what is in your best interest.The current administration and members of the press have perpetuated an environment that casts employers against employees. They want you to believe that we live in a class system where the rich get richer, the poor get poorer. They label us the "1%" and imply that we are somehow immune to the challenges that face our country. This could not be further from the truth. Sure, you may have heard about the big home that I'm building. I'm sure many people think that I live a privileged life. However, what you don't see or hear is the true story behind any success that I have achieved.

I started this company over 42 years ago. At that time, I lived in a very modest home. I converted my garage into an office so I could put forth 100% effort into building a company, which by the way, would eventually employ you. We didn't eat in fancy restaurants or take expensive vacations because every dollar I made went back into this company. I drove an old used car, and often times, I stayed home on weekends, while my friends went out drinking and partying. In fact, I was married to my business - hard work, discipline, and sacrifice. Meanwhile, many of my friends got regular jobs. They worked 40 hours a week and made a nice income, and they spent every dime they earned. They drove flashy cars and lived in expensive homes and wore fancy designer clothes. My friends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I, however, did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into this business --with a vision that eventually, some day, I too, will be able to afford to buy whatever I wanted. Even to this day, every dime I earn goes back into this company. Over the past four years I have had to stop building my dream house, cut back on all of my expenses, and take my kids out of private schools simply to keep this company strong and to keep you employed.

Just think about this - most of you arrive at work in the morning and leave that afternoon and the rest of your time is yours to do as you please. But not me- there is no "off" button for me. When you leave the office, you are done and you have a weekend all to yourself. I unfortunately do not have that freedom. I eat, live, and breathe this company every minute of the day, every day of the week. There is no rest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. I know many of you work hard and do a great job, but I'm the one who has to sign every check, pay every expense, and make sure that this company continues to succeed. Unfortunately, what most people see is the nice house and the lavish lifestyle. What the press certainly does not want you to see, is the true story of the hard work and sacrifices I've made.

Now, the economy is falling apart and people like me who made all the right decisions and invested in themselves are being forced to bail out all the people who didn't. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed 42 years of my life for. Yes, business ownership has its benefits, but the price I've paid is steep and not without wounds. Unfortunately, the costs of running a business have gotten out of control, and let me tell you why: We are being taxed to death and the government thinks we don't pay enough. We pay state taxes, federal taxes, property taxes, sales and use taxes, payroll taxes, workers compensation taxes and unemployment taxes. I even have to hire an entire department to manage all these taxes. The question I have is this: Who is really stimulating the economy? Is it the Government that wants to take money from those who have earned it and give it to those who have not, or is it people like me who built a company out of his garage and directly employs over 7000 people and hosts over 3 million people per year with a great vacation?

Obviously, our present government believes that taking my money is the right economic stimulus for this country. The fact is, if I deducted 50 percent of your paycheck you'd quit and you wouldn't work here. I mean, why should you? Who wants to get rewarded only 50 percent of their hard work? Well, that's what happens to me.

Here is what most people don't understand and the press and our Government has chosen to ignore - to stimulate the economy you need to stimulate what runs the economy. Instead of raising my taxes and depositing that money into the Washington black-hole, let me spend it on growing the company, hire more employees, and generate substantial economic growth. My employees will enjoy the wealth of that tax cut in the form of promotions and better salaries. But that is not what our current Government wants you to believe. They want you to believe that it somehow makes sense to take more from those who create wealth and give it to those who do not, and somehow our economy will improve. They don't want you to know that the "1%", as they like to label us, pay more than 31% of all the taxes in this country. Thomas Jefferson, the author of our great Constitution, once said, "democracy" will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."

Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate business, not kill it. However, the power brokers in Washington believe redistributing wealth is the essential driver of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth and this is the type of change they want.

So where am I going with all this? It's quite simple. If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, as our current President plans, I will have no choice but to reduce the size of this company. Rather than grow this company I will be forced to cut back. This means fewer jobs, less benefits and certainly less opportunity for everyone.

So, when you make your decision to vote, ask yourself, which candidate understands the economics of business ownership and who doesn't? Whose policies will endanger your job? Answer those questions and you should know who might be the one capable of protecting and saving your job. While the media wants to tell you to believe the "1 percenters" are bad, I'm telling you they are not. They create most of the jobs. If you lose your job, it won't be at the hands of the "1%"; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country.

You see, I can no longer support a system that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, so will your opportunities. If that happens, you can find me in the Caribbean sitting on the beach, under a palm tree, retired, and with no employees to worry about.

Signed, your boss,
David Siegel

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Hillary: Clear and Present Danger

The U.S. presidents have made some terrible foreign policy/national security appointee choices in the past.  Top two disastrous names that come to mind are Zbigniew Brzezinski who was appointed by Carter as his National Security Advisor - a man who believed much like our current President that U.S. needs to step back from its position as the leading power in the world -, and Madeleine Albright - Secretary of State for President Clinton who played a pivotal role in turning a blind eye to the growing Islamic radical threat overseas.

Whomever the bad choice, they always were limited in the damage they caused due to their limited political ambitions and scope of their involvement in affairs other than foreign policy. The most recent disastrous foreign policy choice, Hillary Clinton, however is not so unambitious or shy about her views on other matters. 

Hillary's damage to the U.S. interests here and abroad are not limited to the disastrous Administration policy of ignoring and/or backstabbing allies like Israel, Taiwan, Poland, Czech Republic, Iranian dissidents/protestors, Honduras, Colombia,..........(the list goes on seemingly endlessly) while cozying up to and conceding to our mortal enemies in Russia, Iran, China, various radical Muslim leaders, Chavez, Castro, and many other dictators all around the world.  Oh, and let's not forget turning against our own states either!  Scariest prospect of all, however, is that Hillary still has presidential aspirations, and that is a serious problem because, if successful in getting elected in 2016, she will undoubtedly finish off the job of fundamentally transforming the U.S. Obama started but hopefully will not have a chance to finish off.

Hillary's commitment to establishing progressive utopia here in the U.S. is no less than that of her boss, Barack Obama.  Her radical past speaks for itself, and her present mind set as displayed just a couple of weeks ago when she pushed for a global tax on the wealthy proves that we have every bit of a revolutionary leftist in Hillary as we do in our President.

Former Secretaries of State like George Schultz, Alexander Haig, and Condoleeza Rice never stepped outside the professional boundaries of their duties.  Mrs. Clinton and other radicals of the left seem not to be able to help themselves because, to them, the goal isn't to conduct their duties to the best of their abilities while ensuring America's self interests, but its to tear down this country in their zeal to fundamentally transform our constitutional republic. 

A word to the wise:  Watch out for Hillary in 2016!

Thursday, October 11, 2012

A Fair Warning From One Who Knows

Thomas Peterffy grew up in socialist Hungary. Despite the fact that he could not speak English when he immigrated to the United States in 1956, Thomas fulfilled the American dream. With hard work and dedication, he started a business that today employs thousands of people. In the 1970s, Thomas bought a seat on the American Stock Exchange. He played a key role in developing the electronic trading of securities and is the founder of Interactive Brokers, an online discount brokerage firm with offices all over the world.
Here is his fair warning to unsuspecting sheeple that call themselves Democrats and Independents on the most part:

Friday, October 5, 2012

An Amateurishly Conceived October Surprise?

Forget bomb shell revelations about candidates.  Forget hidden video or audio recordings of candidates making nebulous and innocuous statements that can be used by the opposition to feather and tar them through misrepresentation.  Sometimes October surprises can come in the form of statistics, as it seems to have this morning.

At 8:30 a.m., the government released its latest unemployment data and boy, was it a doozy!
Let me get this straight, without breaking out in uncontrollable laughter.  Here are the dubious facts as reported by the government:
1) The economy added 114,000 new jobs
2) Unemployment rate (U-3) went down from 8.1% to 7.8%
3) The real unemployment rate (U-6) remained unchanged at 14.7%
4) The drop in the rate was NOT due to a reduction in the labor force participation rate.

Now, I don't know about what others think but the math is as suspect as a three dollar bill.  We know for a fact that the economy needs to create a little over 150,000 jobs per month to break even with the net increase in the labor force.  So what gives?  We get about 25% fewer jobs created than necessary to break even.  According to the government, there is no reduction in the participation rate - meaning no additional discouraged workers or those who exhaust their unemployment benefits.  On top of it all, the U-6 figure remains unchanged. 

The first reason it does not make any sense is because you cannot possibly have the outcome portrayed by the BLS with the facts given - it is a mathematical impossibility.  The second reason is that you cannot possibly have the U-3 go down by three tenths of a percent but have no change in the U-6 figure without reduction in the labor force.  And finally, the contradictions in the slew of data released by the BLS is beyond what might be expected from an outfit that has been doing a reasonably decent job. 

So, what we have here is as apparent as day, folks.  Under the fearless leadership of Secretary Hilda Solis (a committed leftist hack), the Labor Department is doing what it must to salvage the Presidents prospects after his embarassingly poor debate performance in front of the largest TV debate audience in history.  Had we a national media with integrity, this wouldn't fly, but with the exception of some economists and reporters, the media seems to be swallowing the Administration's latest propaganda despite its oviously questionable nature.  That is what lapdogs do.

In the true sense of what passes as serious economic reporting today, many sources applauded the brave new report of this wonderfully rosy employment picture without questioning the impossible math behind it.  And why wouldn't day?  After all, the investment of the media in this Administration is as total as any previous in history.  As one might say in modern day slang...ROFL!

Wednesday, September 19, 2012

Mitt the RINO Accidentally Comes Out of the Closet

The telling part of the audio recording of Mitt that surfaced wasn't what the Democrats are making it out to be.  What Mitt said was nothing but stating the obvious in an exagerrated way - I say exaggerated because among the 47% not paying federal taxes are some conservatives who happen to be retired and those who simply do not make enough money. 

Neither was it the bias of the media, as we all know it and they do not even attempt to hide it anymore.  The same media - L.A. Times to be exact - that would not release the 2008 recording of Obama at a fund raiser with a bunch of muslims where allegedly damaging things were said, is always all too eager to release innocuous material on Republicans and try to make scandals out of them.  But of course, there are no vital stories in recordings that surface where the President is plainly stating that he is all for redistribution of wealth or that he will have more flexibility after the election when it comes to making concessions to the Russians on missile defense.

No, the truly telling aspect of this recording was that Mitt is no conservative.  He is a RINO as I have alleged for a long time now.  Forget Romney Care as a tell tale sign.  Mitt clearly thinks in pure political terms.  His faulty analysis of the supposed alleigence of the 47% being with Democrats aside, Mitt clearly showed us that he has no constitutional conservative convictions.  He does not believe in the human spirit yearning for freedom.  If Reagan was in his shoes, he undoubtedly would have not written off anyone.  He would, as he always did, appeal to the liberty loving nature of Americans and inspire them to reach for their personal best while pointing out the insidious nature of collectivism.  After all, Reagan knew all too well that government centric approach of progressives are designed with the sole purpose of killing individual initiative, therefore the spirit.

The difference is glaringly obvious.  Reagan was an inspirational leader who believed in the greatness of the individual; Mitt clearly lacks the depth of philosophical conviction that every individual has the potential to be truly great and yearns to achieve it given the chance.
We will always miss your greatness, Mr. Reagan.

Sunday, September 16, 2012

Death of American Foreign Policy

American foreign policy since 1776 has been nuances ranging from periodic pre-world war II isolationisms to the more hawkish stance that started with the Truman doctrine in 1947.  Whatever the prevailing policy of any given era was, however, the goal of American foreign policy had always been the promotion of America and the American way across the globe as it should unquestionably be.  After all that is what our national interests as well as our belief in American exceptionalism dictates. 

Role of American Exceptionalism on foreign policy:

Believing in American Exceptionalism does not simply mean everyone else is second class citizens of the world. American Exceptionalism is the idea that the “United States and the American people hold a special place in the world, by offering opportunity and hope for humanity, derived from its unique balance of public and private interests governed by constitutional ideals that are focused on personal and economic freedom”. I like to call it a quality that directly and indirectly enhances the human condition all around the world – not inhibit it.

Although the current President would take an issue, we have proven our exceptionalism continuously for over two centuries by defending liberty with our own blood and treasure all around the globe; opening up our shores to the downtrodden and the oppressed; and as a byproduct by our innovative and productive leadership and our charity in general.

What makes us unique as a nation? Are we geographically blessed more than anyone else? Have we had thousands of years of shared history or common religion as people to build our nation on? Are we a homogenous people who might be somehow superior to others? The answers are obviously NO!

More fundamentally, what makes us unique is our exceptionalism emanating from having broken away from European feudalism and forming a nation, based on a collection of founding documents that were inspired by natural law (as historically ascribed by Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, and others) that placed utmost importance on the concept of civil society.

As the English writer G. K. Chesterton observed, "America is the only nation in the world that is founded on a creed." That creed is set forth most clearly in the Declaration of Independence, by which the American colonies announced their separation from Great Britain. The Declaration is a timeless statement of inherent god given rights, the proper purposes of government, and the limits on political authority.

Just think for a moment. This collection of men, who based on the norms of their era could have created any type of government and given themselves any amount of power, chose to create a republic that would be effectively governed by people, with limited, enumerated powers reserved for the government. An amazingly enlightened course of action as likes of Chesterton would extensively write about. Perhaps the best summation, still, is as Alexis deTocqueville observed: “America is exceptional because of our uniquely American ideology based on liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism and laissez-faire – all working in harmony.”

In sum, America is an exceptional nation, but not because of what it has achieved or accomplished. America is exceptional because, unlike any other nation, it is dedicated to the principles of human liberty, grounded on the truths that all men are created equal and endowed with equal rights. 

So, what is more morally imperative than spreading the creed that has made us the beacon for freedom in the world? 

The Death of American foreign policy:

I call the two decade period starting with 1989 the decline of American foreign policy.  This is when the United States lost its focus on spreading the 'American way' across the globe and embarked on a foolish policy of nation building.  Reagan was our last leader who believed in the true meaning of American exceptionalism and the importance of spreading that message to the world - not as a means of boasting of our superiority, but rather for other nations to emulate us in adopting respect for individual rights. 

The act of nation building - a la Iraq or Afghanistan - is a foolish substitute for simply spreading the gospel of American exceptionalism.  Democracy is not a hardy flower that can take root regardless of the soil it is planted on.  The necessary ingredient for democracy is a healthy respect for individual rights.  Such respect does not exist in certain cultures, thus regardless of blood and treasure spent, these societies will never adopt a republican form of government nor will they have a civil society in the foreseeable future. 

2009 marked the beginning of yet a new era in American foreign policy.  I call it the postmortem era since there is no discernible American foreign policy anymore under the progressive regime of president Obama.  We apparently should be rejoicing in the fact that we now live in a utopian world where all the hard facts and complexities of millenia of ethnic and religious coexistence have disappeared thanks to the election of the great one.

The Obama doctrine is simple enough.  It dictates our equality with all nations on this earth - no matter how despotic the regime might be.  This egalitarian utopianism is typical of Marxism and other collectivist ideologies.  So, it is no wonder that this administration wholeheartedly supported the Arab spring which has replaced all friendly dictators with Islamic radicals of groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, who are sworn to erase the Western civilization from the face of this earth?  At the same token, this Administration has double crossed almost all our former friends - including Israel, Taiwan, Poland, Czech Republic, Honduras, Colombia, and many more - in favor of tyrants like Iran's Ahmedi Nejad, Russias's Putin, or Venezuela's Chavez.  After all, America is an unjust society and must be cut down to size in the sick minds of progressives - and the best way to accomplish that is by working against American as well as western interests.

As Obama famously said in 2008, he believes in American exceptionalism as much as Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.  Disecting this statement gives us a window to the psyche of our president.  Obama clearly believes that we have no moral authority to spread our creed to the rest of the world.  In other words, American exceptionalism means nothing to Obama and his progressive ilk, and why should it?  Believing in it would be wholesale rejection of the collectivist policies progressives subscribe to.