Obamanomics

Liberty: The Only Real Policy

"...To promote the general Welfare,..."

One of my friends at work has been telling me what he wants out of Welfare. He is not like me, and wants complete abolition of the "Welfare"-system. However, he wants a more strict purchasing power of it. Such as, you can buy pasta but not soda.

I have always disagreed with him, and still do! However, today I was checking for a customer, who used food stamps to purchase their groceries. Most of it was for living, and that I can understand as that is what welfare is supposed to be there for. However, he bought five giant bags of candy. I don't know about you, but I don't want our tax money going to some guy so he can provide little kids with candy on Halloween, so they guy can still buy alcohol and pet food.

If we are going to keep this retarded system, can we at least get some limitations on this? Is Congress really that inept and corrupt? What exactly is going on here?

Welfare drives up inflation pretty bad because of this, we keep pumping the money in, and I keep seeing more and more people on it. How is this helping a nation in need of more knowledge of economics and budgeting?

Economic Crisis to bring about Socialism

This whole economic crisis has brought about so many crazy and radical ideas through the political elite it's crazy. It started out with bailouts of major U.S. banks before the stock market fell. Henry Paulson said that we needed to bailout the banks and Wall Street at the cost of $700 Billion dollars, and to have NO oversight or judicial review (???).

That's more money than the entire Iraq War, and they have begun to buy into banks to "recapitalize" the banks, which is just fancy wording for Nationalization of Banks. As if that wasn't bad enough, they are planning on nationalizing insurance companies, and everyone knows how if the democrats get a strong hold in the senate, the house, and the white house, we may just have completely nationalized healthcare as well. You tell me how this isn't socialist, because, frankly that's socialism at it's best.

In addition, Nicolas Sarkozy of France is calling for a single global currency, and considering how countries work, it would not be backed. A global fiat system would be not only inconceivable, but tyrannical. If you thought the British Kingdom was bad, this global network will be way worse, it will make King George look like a peacekeeper. If there is a credible U.N., which is what a global currency is a huge step towards, then you tell me..

If America, the greatest nation in the world, can be corrupted and full of deceit, what happens if this global government is corrupted and people attain absolute power in a global network. You tell me how international sovereignty is a good idea. I can't stock it, just like I can't stomach being a Republican anymore.

Is third-party really a wasted vote?

If you live in a swing state, it MAY be more of an argument, but I disagree! When we are going to the poll booth to choose our next President, we are not supposed to be presented the response of: "Oh.. well.. this guy isn't as bad as the other guy.."

We are supposed to be saying: "This guy has great ideas, and great things to do to bring this country forward, and continue the freedom in the Constitution!"

This doesn't happen anymore. Everyone thinks that if Republicans mess up, we must turn to the Democrats, however we elected them 8 years ago, because the Democrats were becoming corrupt! Now we turn to them because the Republicans are (WOW! WHAT A SURPRISE!). How can this be, how can people let themselves be drawn in to such a deceptive trap?

If you live in Solid red or blue states, your vote is definitely not a wasted vote (or its completely wasted), it won't matter who you vote for, since it's solid, no matter what you do, McCain or Obama has already won! If you dislike McCain, but hate Obama or vice versa, give them up!

There are four candidates running that aren't talked about enough:
Cynthia McKinney - Green Party (Liberal)
Ralph Nader - Independant (Liberal)
Bob Barr - Libertarian Party (Conservative)
Chuck Baldwin - Constitutional Party (Conservative)

Vote for what you believe, not what you don't want!

Congressional Ratings are superb!

Our Congress generally has poor ratings. Like, really poor ratings recently. In July it was as bad as 9% (and people think Bush has a bad rating). Most of the year it has hovered around 15% and it usually does not get much better than that. However, more than 90% of our beloved and well-liked congressmen and congresswomen are re-elected.

Does this make any sense? How are over 90% re-elected with 15% of approval. It is absolutely insane, but partisan politics is to blame. Really. In 1886, the first real majority was in congress. It was the Republican Party, and in 1888 they made getting on a ballot much more difficult and much more expensive. This would then later ignite what would be known as the Progressive Movement, and would continue to degrade and destroy our civil and inalienable rights.

Here are just some examples of what Partisan Politics have done to our nation:

- Federal Reserve (Third and Permanent Central bank)
- Social Security and FICA
- Income Tax
- Interventionist Foreign Policy
- Inflation
- Abundance of Bureaucracy

Those are just some examples of what has happened to us since 1888. In the 18th and 19th centuries, our president's followed the Founders pretty well, there were some bumps and bruises along the way, but the checks and balances worked together and continued to strengthen our country. Today, however, it is a game of unfulfilled promises from both sides of partisan table, the Republicans and Democrats are equally as vulnerable to corruption.

George Washington advised against Political Parties for this very reason, destruction of liberties. Parties are good as checks and balances if there are plenty and no majority, but when there is a majority, how does a minority check a majority? Also, when third-parties are considered weirdos and do not get elected, how can they possibly even check the minority.

Selective Service and the Draft

In what is known as the "Progressive Movement", which is really just a fancy name for Socialist Movement, there have been many atrocities, which a few I've touched on such as Income Tax, FICA and the Federal Reserve. Another one I would like to speak of is Conscription, or more so known as Selective Service.

Here straight off their government site:

The mission of the Selective Service System is:

* to provide manpower to the armed forces in an emergency; and
* to run an Alternative Service Program for men classified as conscientious objectors during a draft.

(http://www.sss.gov/mission.htm)

The first form of conscription, or the draft,was brought during the Civil War, and then later during World War I in 1917. It would later be used in World War II and Vietnam. Many people would argue that conscription is necessary in wartime. However, if there was a war, that was absolutely necessary, wouldn't the people themselves stand up for their rights, if they truly deserved them?

People will fight for one reason, when they believe their life is in danger, and if the government hides the secrets of war, and does not show that their life is truly in danger, and brings about fallacies and says they need to join the military to fight for their cause, is either just?

Why should we give power to the government to force it's own people against their will to go fight their war. The whole idea of conscription which is littered throughout all of European history, is the most immoral act a government can take. How is it that conscription exists within a FREE SOCIETY?

This whole idea that the government knows better than you is outrageous. I know our founding fathers supported a "form" of conscription, but it was one where state militia and not unwilling citizens, would be taken into National defense for the cause of our government. However, James Madison did attempt during the War of 1812 to enforce a mandatory draft, but the legislation failed. He was a great man, but on this count I must disagree with him. It is why I am thankful we had a legislation of true patriots in Congress, unlike those in Congress today...

The Civil War and Abraham Lincoln

We all know how great Abe was, and how the Union was completely correct in the war to take back the South to ensure that America did not fall. I will say that, we have been deceived in public school, they did not tell us the whole story. The Civil War was much more complicated than slavery and Lincoln was nothing of a Civil Rights activist. He was just another politician.

Here's a quote from the Lincoln Library during a debate with Douglas:

I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And in as much as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.

This was during his run for Senate and not for the President, but I fail to see where that makes a difference. So we can tell by these words that Lincoln did not care for the true and honest freedom of blacks, but to further prove my point, I will use quotation of a letter he sent to Horace Greeley:

If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that...I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free.

If it wasn't slavery that the South was so mad about what was it? It was partly slavery, even though slavery was being practiced less and less in the South, that was part of the reason, the other part was the high tariffs the North had placed on the South. It was a taxation without representation type of deal going on. The South felt cheated because their taxes were off the roof, and the North big business's were thriving. Also, they felt that States should have more power than that of the Federal Government, and so in a sense they were trying to emulate our great Founding Fathers.

I'm not going to do a complete history lesson, but the South wasn't wrong, but neither was the North completely wrong. They both had pros and they both had cons. The South did major injustice at Fort Sumter, and the North did major injustices by levying high taxes. Remember, the North didn't want to end slavery immediately, they just wanted to end slave expansion so it would die out. I would hardly consider this a just or even necessary war.

ABOLISHtheFED

Article I - Section 8: Powers of Congress

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

It is something that shouldn't have been worked into the United States. It is something of the most evil that has gone through Capital Hill. 1913 the Income Tax was passed and in 1913(silly congress!) the Federal Reserve was created. These are two of the most Socialist and vile ideas to be conceived by a government. This is where destruction starts in a long, painful destruction.

It is a hard thing to wake up to, it is something not only my parents generation grew up learning and knowing of, but my grandparent's as well. There are two things that need to be done before our country crumbles to the might of inflation, wasteful spending and destruction of liberty. One is to fix our foreign policy, one that people are finding hard to even take seriously. Many people think that by being Iraq we are truly fighting terrorism, when in reality, it is only giving them an easier target while they find another easy breach into our National Security.

The other is the abolition of the Federal Reserve. The Fed was instrumental in creating money to allow us to enter World War I, that laid the seeds for not only the Holocaust, but the worst War in modern history, the devastation of extreme Nationalism. This is the single entity that answers to no one, and liquidates currency that weakens the US Dollar, and has also become the currency of the World. It has completely replaced gold as the base currency, and the dollar is facing a likely and potential collapse.

We must end these pointless and deadly wars and abolish the Fed!

The Dreaded Taxes on Income

I was looking at my paycheck stub when I received it from work last Friday after reading a Benjamin Franklin quote that got me thinking about the Income Tax:

"It would be a hard government that should tax its people one-tenth part of their income." - Benjamin Franklin

Last week I made a total of $354.84, but due to the taxes on every week of my paycheck, it was reduced down to $289.46. Which would be a 19% decrease in the amount of money I made for the weak. That is close to $60 dollars off my paycheck which could be the majority of one day of work. If we took it off only one day of work I would make $8 dollars for that day, which is less than what I make per hour.

I don't about the rest of America, but 19% seems a bit excessive, and 1% seems 1% too much. We are supposed to be a Republic, not a Democratic Socialist country as is found all over Europe and on our borders. The Income Tax and FICA are socialist monstrosities.

FICA is the acronym for the Federal Insurance Contributions Act. This act mandates that an employer withhold a set percentage of an employee’s salary each pay period. FICA also requires that the employer match the employee’s amount and contribute the money to a government account known as the Social Security Trust Fund. This fund provides retirement income, as well as disability insurance, Medicare, and benefits for survivors.

After reading that.. I just felt more socialist.

Brady on the Bailout

Rep. Brady of the 9th District of Texas, said in the Houston Chronicle yesterday that he did not agree with all the Pork in the bill, but did agree with the basis of the bill. First of all, he should have said no on ALL of the bill, but I think that if he disagrees with the "pork", he should place a no on the bill and state what he disagrees about the pork, or the idea of the pork being in the bill.

He never said he disagreed with what else was in the bill, he just said it didn't need these attachments to the bill, and I'm a little disappointed by my congressmen to say the least. Unfortunately, with how the districting is done, the chances of him not getting re-elected are nearly impossible.