Inependence Day - 2010

July Fourth marks the anniversary of the Declaration of Independence; the announcement that the British colonies established in the new continent would no longer yield to the edicts of Great Britain and would establish a new system of self rule based on the principals that their freedoms were ordained by God and not granted by the British crown.

Like many, I received a mass e-mail signed by Barack Obama and sent through democraticparty@democrats.org; the official e-mail link to the Democratic National Committee to commemorate the 4th. I will reprint that e-mail below for the benefit of those that may not have received one:

Paul --
The Fourth of July is especially dear to my family. For us, it is not just our nation's birthday. It is the day Michelle and I became parents 12 years ago. And I can't wait to watch the fireworks with Malia on her birthday tonight, as we do every year.

As we celebrate the profound pride of being American, today is a time to honor the women and men in our armed forces, whose immeasurable bravery and sacrifice have made our country what it is today.That sacrifice is shared with husbands and wives, with sons and daughters, with fathers and mothers, who are asked to wait at home as their loved ones protect our nation. Their heroism, too, has helped pave the path of our freedom.

Even before we moved into the White House, Michelle was a champion for those military families. She has witnessed their struggles, and she has made it her personal mission to fight for them. On this Fourth of July, she recorded a personal message, commemorating our nation's birthday and paying tribute to these families.

Please take a minute to watch Michelle's video -- and join us as we honor our military families here and abroad.

:http://my.democrats.org/page/m/4052b0db/51f4b9d/6b18329e/74b960b9/1130136430/VEsE/.

From all of us, happy Independence Day.

Thank you, and may God bless America.

President Barack Obama
July 4th, 2010


The President’s message mentions family and fireworks or more specifically, his family and fireworks. Yes, just as any confirmed narcissist would do, he has even managed to make Independence Day about him. It’s not just our nation’s birthday…it’s the day that he became a parent twelve years ago. In all fairness he did mention the brave men and women serving in America’s armed forces and I have no issue with that except to say that he failed to mention the real reason we celebrate the Fourth of July.

Considering the President has a staff of speech writers, advisors and special advisors, I doubt that failure was an oversight. Perhaps the President fears that drawing attention to the Declaration of Independence would create additional impediments for his radical Progressive (Socialist) agenda. Let’s face it; the Declaration of Independence was more than just a document that announced our intention to sever ties with Great Britain. The Declaration also included a list of grievances that the colonists noted as justification for their actions. Many of the grievances written into the Declaration of Independence are once again becoming issues in the United States but this time the oppressor is not the King of England, it is the Federal Government itself. Don’t believe me?

Well, the Declaration begins, in part, by saying that “…to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…” It is clear to most that the passage of TARP, Healthcare Reform and the current drive to pass the cap and trade and immigration reform legislation has all happened without the consent of the governed. In fact, the polls against such legislation and the massive public outcry witnessed throughout the process displays that this administration has not only sought to forward their agenda without the consent of public but in spite of it.

One of the grievances listed in the Declaration says: “He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.” Doesn’t that sound like the entire argument behind Federal opposition to the Arizona Illegal Immigration Law (SB1070). The Governor signed a bill into law presented to her by the duly elected State Legislature to address the immediate and pressing need of reigning in illegal immigration and the crime that accompanies it. Once signed into law, the Federal Government is now prepared to sue Arizona because Immigration policy, in their interpretation, is the sole responsibility of the Federal government; a responsibility that the Federal Government has chosen to ignore for political expedience.

How about this one? “He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.” No, I’m not making this up…it’s in the original document. There are hundreds of agencies and panels created by the new healthcare bill alone. Let’s not forget the debt reduction panel that is now meeting in secret to figure out how the American Tax payer is going to resolve the trillions this President intends to add to our already massive public debt. Of course their findings will not be released until December 2010, well after the mid-term elections. We have a gulf oil spill commission to study the effects and suggestions to effect remediation of the leak but just this past week, the President established a second commission to oversee the operations of the first commission. The EPA under the Obama administration is using their newly expanded powers to threaten Congress to vote for Cap and Trade or else. If Cap and trade is not passed, the EPA warned Congress, the nation will face dire economic consequences as the administration unilaterally enacts carbon restrictions that will bring American businesses to a halt.

How about: “He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation”. What is Cap and Trade, Climate Accords and the U.N. Small Arms agreement other than allowing a commission of foreign powers to exact controlling power over the citizens of America without our consent or representation"? Yes, it can be argued that there is representation because those agreements must be ratified by the Senate, but we have all seen the coercion and bribery used to gain Senate support for other items in the President’s agenda so can we be absolutely certain that the rights of free American’s are being protected if the process allows any meetings to be held in secret? Do we really have representation if we are bound to foreign agreements once they are ratified and have no power to rescind bad agreements through our electoral process?

Then there is: “For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.” The Federal Government may not have suspended the State legislatures but the actions of the Federal Government since the inception of the Progressive Era have rendered them increasingly impotent. The Federal Government has gained control of millions of acres of State lands and in some cases, lands equal to 90% of the State’s entire land mass. Those lands can not be exploited for their rich mineral deposits nor can they be used for private purposes that could generate billions in revenues for the afflicted States. States that have enacted legislation to protect the Second Amendment rights of their citizens to own guns for hunting and for their own protection have received letters from Federal authorities reminding them that Federal Law supersedes State law under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. States that have enacted legislation to protect their citizens from having to purchase healthcare insurance because of the unlawful mandates in the healthcare bill are facing court challenges under that same Supremacy Clause.

Of course, to have that supremacy, the Federal law in question must be constitutional but now that we have adopted a policy that allows ideologues with no judicial qualifications to be seated in the Supreme Court simply because their politics favor the President’s agenda, is there any doubt that the highest court in the land is now as completely corrupted as the Federal Government is?

No, the President will not mention the founders or the actual Declaration of Independence on Independence Day. He knows full well that if more people actually read this incredibly important document or took an interest in the Founding Fathers that not only his agenda, but the Democratic Party as well as the Progressive movement would be brought to their knees. Do not be fooled by the Obama’s feigned respect of the armed forces. Progressives know all to well that everyone in the military has taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic and that this oath takes precedent over the orders issued by the commander in chief. Obama’s glowing admiration of the military is meant simply to hold them at bay while he continues to “transform America” little by little; hoping they won’t notice until he’s done.

Paul

The Young, The Old and The Truth

For as long as I can remember, there has been a divide between the young and the old. Middle aged men decry the waste of youth on the young and the young respond in kind; accusing the old men of stubbornness and of being single minded or worse, senile. Many have dismissed these difficulties as unavoidable noting that the old and young will always be at odds because the old have been tempered with the scars, bruises and pains of harsh experience and the young see the world in the simplest terms because their dreams have not been tested against brutal reality.

This is partially true. Plato wrote about the hardships parents had with their teenagers more than two thousand years ago and some of Shakespeare’s greatest works were centered on the passion of the young pitted against the blindness of their parents. The young look at our old photos, hear us talk about record players and black and white television and eventually argue that their meager experiences were earned in far more complex times than their parents knew and therefore, their experiences are at least equal, if not superior to those earned in the veritable stone age that their parents grew up in. The real shame is that these passionate young people don’t know how much they don’t know.

This is not to say that they are not capable individuals; many are highly intelligent and motivated and will invariably become the next generation of leaders. They are politically active and genuinely want to contribute to making America a better place. Their ideology is based largely on what they have learned in school, college and through a deeply flawed news media. If they only knew how much of the truth has been kept from them in order to shape their opinions and tenants, they might actually have very different ideas. In fact, I would bet that a wave of anger would sweep through the younger generations if they ever found out that they were being played as pawns by a group of globalist elitists far older and cynical than they ever imagined their parents to be.

The real game and the ultimate battleground is information. At first, only conservative leaning news organs, mostly Fox, would dare speak out against the President and his agenda. The Obama administration responded to those unflattering stories by dismissing Fox as not being a “real” news network. That worked for a while but now other networks and news outlets have started to come out of the ether and harsh criticisms have begun to seep into the coverage offered by CNN, MSNBC and even the L.A. Times! In order to counter the negative stories that have recently been taking a toll on Obama’s ratings, the President actually told a group of graduating students that too much information can be a distraction. After all, he couldn’t very well say that all of those media giants have somehow slipped out of the mainstream and have relinquished their status as “real” news networks simply because their coverage of him has become something less than the adoration he once enjoyed. Of course the real question is will those students heed the President’s advice or will they begin to ask themselves why an American President would suggest that public disregard any information and simply rely on official government sources?

In the past, even our most sinister Presidents were politically savvy enough to avoid hinting that they sought to actively control information. While they may have been silent on the issue, sadly, their records are rife with actions to sanitize not only the news, but history itself. Entire pieces of American history have been carefully scrubbed out of the text books and curriculum the American students see from the moment they walk into first grade right on through their college years. Fortunately, with the internet the truth is still out there but before you can find it, you have to know the right questions to ask.

The purge began in earnest during the Progressive Era of the early 20th century. Woodrow Wilson, a Progressive Democrat, saw to it that school text books were cleared of all information pertaining to African American patriots that fought and died as heroes in the American Revolution. Wilson actually went further than that; purging blacks from Federal jobs and in segregating the military. Isn’t it funny how those little tidbits of history are curiously left out of the studies of Woodrow Wilson? In fact, anything that doesn’t portray Progressivism as an enlightened and benevolent ideology is similarly struck from the public record. Of course, if you perform a simple Google search about Wilson’s segregation of the military, the elimination of blacks from civil service or the editing of school books during his administration; suddenly, pages and pages of documents begin to appear.

These students have been taught to believe that America was a bigoted nation founded on the belief that black slaves, and even white women, were denied basic rights by a ruling class of elderly white men. They have been taught that the three-fifths rule proves this legitimized racism when the Constitution was drafted with a provision that slaves represented only three-fifths of a human being. Would these students be surprised to know that more than five thousand African Americans fought side by side with whites in the Revolution; many serving with historical distinction. That is until Wilson’s school book purge made that information unavailable to students.

Would they be amazed to know that an African American was one of the first patriots killed in the Boston massacre and that many more would die a hero’s death in every major battle of the war? Would they be shocked to learn that not only did New England elect America’s first black judge during the early 1790’s but that he was continually re-elected, eventually serving for over forty years? Would they believe that America’s first black Speaker of the United States House of Representatives had been seated in 1869? Suddenly, this doesn’t sound like the history of a racist nation at all.

So what of the evil three-fifths rule? What the learned professors at our most lauded colleges will not tell their students is that the three-fifths rule was a carefully crafted strategy designed to deny the slave States governmental representation that included the full measure of the number of slaves they held. Even though the Northern States were populated with more citizens, slaves were few and far between. If it were not for the three-fifths rule, the Southern States would have enjoyed a sufficient majority within the House of Representatives to guarantee slavery in perpetuity simply by buying more slaves.

The young are also being taught that Capitalism has failed and the free market is only a tool used by the rich to retain their wealth. How the free market can be fairly judged when Progressive giants like Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt have instituted Federal programs and policies that have strangled the free market for nearly one hundred years is beyond me. Ask anyone educated in the public school system in the last fifty years and they will tell you that FDR ended the Great Depression through a myriad of government programs that stimulated employment and bolstered the economy. The truth is that after ten years of government intervention, there was no measurable improvement in either the unemployment rate or any of the leading economic indicators of the day. It was World War Two that ended the Great Depression, not FDR.

The other economic factor that has been totally eliminated from the realm of academic study is the Depression of 1920. Whenever I mention the Depression of 1920 most will immediately say “No, it was 1929.” The Depression of 1920 that followed the fiscal mismanagement of the Wilson administration has been nearly eradicated from all discussion because the facts surrounding that financial disaster are devastating to the neo-socialist beliefs of modern Progressives. While FDR struggled with funding one massive government program after another to stave off the effects of the Great Depression, President Warren Harding halved government spending and cut taxes by nearly 75%. The end result? Roosevelt’s depression lingered for over a decade until World War Two changed the balance of industrial power in the world while the economic policies of Warren Harding revitalized the American economy, ending his depression in a brief two years; giving us the halcyon days of the “Roaring Twenties”. As an interesting note, the depression of 1929 is considered to be a direct result of the damage wrought to the economy when Calvin Coolidge left much of the economic and regulatory policy decisions up to Progressive activist, Herbert Hoover; then, Coolidge’s secretary of Commerce. Hoover then drove the final nails in our economic coffin when he assumed the Presidency in 1929 and completed his work of undoing the Harding tax and spending cuts.

All of these facts and more are out there for anyone that will take off their blinders and dares to seek the information for themselves. The President is wrong about information. It is not distracting; it is liberating. So long as America is free, the truth remains a potent reminder of the incredible genius of the founding fathers and the best laid path to our future prosperity as a nation. If these future leaders let that liberty slip away; if they allow Socialist Professors to ignore history and Washington bureaucrats to erode the Constitution, then the light of truth will be extinguished forever. Orwell warned that he who controls the present controls the past and he who controls the past controls the future. Don’t take my word for any of this. These facts may no longer be taught in American schools but they are still available to those who seek the truth. However, if we allow this “fundamental transformation” of America to continue unabated, those truths may be lost for all time and with them, our place in the world as a free people.

Paul

Life is Change and Change is Inevitable

Life is change and change is inevitable. No, I am not talking about the change that Barack Obama sold an unsuspecting public during his campaign, although his brand of change has much to do with the changes taking place in all of our lives.

Business is struggling with the uncertainty of how successful this President will be in achieving his radical goals. Business thrives with the ability to make and achieve short and long term goals. The plans those goals are based on are how companies create business plans to obtain bank financing, to determine employee compensation and even employee levels. The Federal government, under this administration, has cast a shadow of doubt over the nation and has forced American businesses to become dangerously reactionary instead of confidently focused.

My focus must now be sharpened on reacting appropriately in the face of so many dangers. If we cannot plan for the future, we must now create the dynamic infrastructure to allow us meet daily challenges quickly and effectively. I cannot serve two masters. The well being of friends and their families depend heavily upon on my ability to remain attentive to the demands of our business and I cannot devote the time and attention that demands and continue to write a daily blog.

As with any muscle, the Constitutional amendments that protect us all must be routinely exercised or fall prey to atrophy. I still believe in the need for the Vigilance Project, especially now that our most sacred first amendment rights are under assault, but I can no longer maintain the quality of my work here and in business without one or the other suffering. I had to make a choice.

Effectively immediately, The Vigilance Project will be a weekly publication with new posts being offered for review every Monday. I apologize for the absence of new materials over the past three weeks but other matters had to be dealt with.

Thank you for your patience.

Paul

Obama and More Orwell

Originally published in 1949, George Orwell’s dystopian novel “1984” described what life under a totalitarian oligarchy would look like. Through his many books, Orwell warned us about government controls that would seek out and punish those who were not in line with the edicts of that government. Many thought that “1984” was Orwell’s indictment of the British Labor Party and Oceania, the country profiled in this book, was meant to be the future of England if the socialist movements in Great Britain remained unchecked. Mr. Orwell dismissed that rumor and hinted that the book was in fact, reflective of his disdain and deep distrust of Stalinist Russia.

Oceania's four government ministries are in pyramids the façades of which display the Party's three slogans, the names of which are diametrically opposed to their true functions: "The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. Through his work, he warned us about the heavy hand of unchecked government and the inherent corruption that is inevitable when government officials become a small core group of powerful elites.

The Ministry of Peace reported daily on the heroic advances in Oceania’s perpetual war. Of course there were periodic “mini crisis’s conjured up to keep the cause for war alive and well but Oceania would always prevail in the end, at least in the news. Oceania’s world was the remnant countries that survived the atomic war that Orwell largely believed was unavoidable. It is comprised of the three coalesced “superpowers” of Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia.

While the three powers remained in a constant state of war, the war was never fought within the borders of any one country but rather, only in a disputed area. Each superpower was strong enough that it could not be beaten by the combined strength of the other two “nations”. Alliances were made and broken constantly but the Ministry of Truth would simply revise history so that the Party could claim the “new alliance” always will and always had existed.

The Ministry of Truth, similar to Russia’s Pravda, was responsible for the news, entertainment, education and the arts. This Ministry of Truth was also charged with monitoring the statements of the Party and if needed, re-writing history to insure that whatever the Party said would be true.

The Ministry of Love would identify, monitor, arrest, and convert, real and imagined dissidents because the only valid and therefore, permissible love, was love of the Party.

The Ministry of Plenty rationed and controlled food, goods, and domestic production; every fiscal quarter, the Ministry published false claims of having raised the standard of living, when it has, in fact, reduced rations, availability, and production. Of course the “war” was always cited as the need for rationing and the need for Oceania to demand patriotic increases in productivity.

There seems to be an awful lot of parallels to “1984” in modern America, so much so, that I think that Orwell may have been more of a prophet than a novelist. Anyone that has read a newspaper or watched network news lately can only find it hard to ignore that the mains stream media has routinely disregarded anything that would detract from Obama’s image or impair his mission to “fundamentally transform America”.

When the Tea Parties converged on Washington to protest against healthcare reform the press, or should we say “The Ministry of Truth”, re-wrote History and underreported the numbers by a factor of ten. They scoured the crowd to find that one out of a thousand that held signs that were a bit bolder than the rest and crafted stories about the “angry mobs”, negating the peaceful nature of the gathering. Independent estimates placed the crowd size at between one and two million people and the National Park Service confirmed that not only were there no arrests for disorderly conduct, but that the crowd actually cleaned up after themselves as they left leaving nothing behind that would detract from their message.

In comparison, a group of only five thousand socialist activists gathered in Pittsburgh to protest against capitalism during last year’s G-20 summit. Trash bins were set ablaze and rolled through the streets at the line of police officers guarding the conference. In one night of protests, the police had to resort to firing tear gas grenades and “bean-bag” non-lethal bullets into the mob and reported over two hundred arrests. Of course, reports covering these protests were hard to find and where they appeared at all, were soft-peddled rather than risk showing that anyone would protest against President Obama.

I suppose the Ministry of Plenty would have to be the White House itself. Only the White House could claim victory for the Stimulus Bill as unemployment climbed from 7.6% before the bill’s passage in February of 2009, to over 10.2% in October of that year. The “Ministry” created a web site to extol the virtues of the Governments actions and that web site has been rife with misinformation and fictitious claims and exaggerations of created and saved jobs. Even a peripheral examination of the figures claimed on recovery.gov show a web of deceit with jobs created figures inflated up to ten times the actual amount and outright lies regarding jobs figures from Congressional districts that simply do not exist.

The White House cannot show any success in the economy in general so it has taken the next best step. People are still losing jobs in record numbers as the economy sags even deeper into recession so the numbers people within the White House are quick to point out that even though more than 450,000 people lost their jobs last week; the job loss figures were slightly lower than the previous month so the stimulus bill and the White House “in essence, saved thousands of jobs. Only government could be so bold. If the government was a corporation and the same people used this logic in reporting the profit and loss statement to the board of directors, they would all be at home working on their resume’s,

The Ministry of Love? Well, that is evenly divided between Congress and the White House. Promises to address gay rights issues such as same sex marriage and the exclusion of openly gay individuals from serving in the military are on the opposite end of the scale that Democrats used to craft the Healthcare bill. The healthcare bill, like many other provisions of the tax code contain a marriage penalty that levies higher taxes on married couples than it does on individuals. I suppose if there was any good reason to support gay marriage it would be to eliminate the marriage penalties from the tax code. After all, Democrats wouldn’t dare use the same antiquated tax structure that punishes married couples once those couples include such a vocal portion of their core constituency.

I believe the biggest travesty in this administration is the Ministry of Peace and that is Obama himself. Part of the responsibility of the Presidency is the role as Commander in Chief of the United States Military. Under this administration the effectiveness of the military has taken a back seat to the image of the President. American troops are still fighting and dying in Afghanistan as the President continues to provide only portions of what the field commander says he needs to guarantee victory. Ignoring the treat to the troops that are already in the field does not promote peace but only displays the vacuous policies of a weak an ineffective President. While I am sure he has a sincere desire for peace, the reality is that this poor showing bolsters the will of those that would do us harm and America now faces new threats from Iran and North Korea. It would do Obama well to recall the words of Benjamin Franklin who correctly said “If we act like sheep we will be eaten by wolves.”

Paul

What Would Orwell Write About Obama - Or Has He Already?

Originally published in 1949, George Orwell’s dystopian novel “1984” described what life under a totalitarian oligarchy would look like. Through his many books, Orwell warned us about government controls that would seek out and punish those who were not in line with the edicts of that government. Many thought that “1984” was Orwell’s indictment of the British Labor Party and Oceania, the country profiled in this book, was meant to be the future of England if the socialist movements in Great Britain remained unchecked. Mr. Orwell dismissed that rumor and hinted that the book was in fact, reflective of his disdain and deep distrust of Stalinist Russia.

Oceania's four government ministries are in pyramids the façades of which display the Party's three slogans, the names of which are diametrically opposed to their true functions: "The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. Through his work, he warned us about the heavy hand of unchecked government and the inherent corruption that is inevitable when government officials become a small core group of powerful elites.

The Ministry of Peace reported daily on the heroic advances in Oceania’s perpetual war. Of course there were periodic “mini crisis’s conjured up to keep the cause for war alive and well but Oceania would always prevail in the end, at least in the news. Oceania’s world was the remnant countries that survived the atomic war that Orwell largely believed was unavoidable. It is comprised of the three coalesced “superpowers” of Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia.

While the three powers remained in a constant state of war, the war was never fought within the borders of any one country but rather, only in a disputed area. Each superpower was strong enough that it could not be beaten by the combined strength of the other two “nations”. Alliances were made and broken constantly but the Ministry of Truth would simply revise history so that the Party could claim the “new alliance” always will and always had existed.

The Ministry of Truth, similar to Russia’s Pravda, was responsible for the news, entertainment, education and the arts. This Ministry of Truth was also charged with monitoring the statements of the Party and if needed, re-writing history to insure that whatever the Party said would be true.

The Ministry of Love would identify, monitor, arrest, and convert, real and imagined dissidents because the only valid and therefore, permissible love, was love of the Party.

The Ministry of Plenty rationed and controlled food, goods, and domestic production; every fiscal quarter, the Ministry published false claims of having raised the standard of living, when it has, in fact, reduced rations, availability, and production. Of course the “war” was always cited as the need for rationing and the need for Oceania to demand patriotic increases in productivity.

There seems to be an awful lot of parallels to “1984” in modern America, so much so, that I think that Orwell may have been more of a prophet than a novelist. Anyone that has read a newspaper or watched network news lately can only find it hard to ignore that the mains stream media has routinely disregarded anything that would detract from Obama’s image or impair his mission to “fundamentally transform America”.

When the Tea Parties converged on Washington to protest against healthcare reform the press, or should we say “The Ministry of Truth”, re-wrote History and underreported the numbers by a factor of ten. They scoured the crowd to find that one out of a thousand that held signs that were a bit bolder than the rest and crafted stories about the “angry mobs”, negating the peaceful nature of the gathering. Independent estimates placed the crowd size at between one and two million people and the National Park Service confirmed that not only were there no arrests for disorderly conduct, but that the crowd actually cleaned up after themselves as they left leaving nothing behind that would detract from their message.

In comparison, a group of only five thousand socialist activists gathered in Pittsburgh to protest against capitalism during last year’s G-20 summit. Trash bins were set ablaze and rolled through the streets at the line of police officers guarding the conference. In one night of protests, the police had to resort to firing tear gas grenades and “bean-bag” non-lethal bullets into the mob and reported over two hundred arrests. Of course, reports covering these protests were hard to find and where they appeared at all, were soft-peddled rather than risk showing that anyone would protest against President Obama.

I suppose the Ministry of Plenty would have to be the White House itself. Only the White House could claim victory for the Stimulus Bill as unemployment climbed from 7.6% before the bill’s passage in February of 2009, to over 10.2% in October of that year. The “Ministry” created a web site to extol the virtues of the Governments actions and that web site has been rife with misinformation and fictitious claims and exaggerations of created and saved jobs. Even a peripheral examination of the figures claimed on recovery.gov show a web of deceit with jobs created figures inflated up to ten times the actual amount and outright lies regarding jobs figures from Congressional districts that simply do not exist.

The White House cannot show any success in the economy in general so it has taken the next best step. People are still losing jobs in record numbers as the economy sags even deeper into recession so the numbers people within the White House are quick to point out that even though more than 450,000 people lost their jobs last week; the job loss figures were slightly lower than the previous month so the stimulus bill and the White House “in essence, saved thousands of jobs. Only government could be so bold. If the government was a corporation and the same people used this logic in reporting the profit and loss statement to the board of directors, they would all be at home working on their resume’s,

The Ministry of Love? Well, that is evenly divided between Congress and the White House. Promises to address gay rights issues such as same sex marriage and the exclusion of openly gay individuals from serving in the military are on the opposite end of the scale that Democrats used to craft the Healthcare bill. The healthcare bill, like many other provisions of the tax code contain a marriage penalty that levies higher taxes on married couples than it does on individuals. I suppose if there was any good reason to support gay marriage it would be to eliminate the marriage penalties from the tax code. After all, Democrats wouldn’t dare use the same antiquated tax structure that punishes married couples once those couples include such a vocal portion of their core constituency.

I believe the biggest travesty in this administration is the Ministry of Peace and that is Obama himself. Part of the responsibility of the Presidency is the role as Commander in Chief of the United States Military. Under this administration the effectiveness of the military has taken a back seat to the image of the President. American troops are still fighting and dying in Afghanistan as the President continues to provide only portions of what the field commander says he needs to guarantee victory. Ignoring the treat to the troops that are already in the field does not promote peace but only displays the vacuous policies of a weak an ineffective President. While I am sure he has a sincere desire for peace, the reality is that this poor showing bolsters the will of those that would do us harm and America now faces new threats from Iran and North Korea. It would do Obama well to recall the words of Benjamin Franklin who correctly said “If we act like sheep we will be eaten by wolves.”

Paul

The Roots of Socialism in America

I listen to students and young people comment on politics or society and wonder “how could they possibly believe what they are saying?” It dawned on me that to be able to draw reasonable conclusions, these young minds would have to have been properly educated and have access to all of the facts and not just the select few that suit the political agenda of the educator. While frustrating, there are reasons for this apparent lack of common sense.

The roots of socialism in America are found much as they were in Europe; a revolt against the harsh working conditions of the industrial revolution. It was Karl Marx, a philosopher, political economist, historian, political theorist, sociologist, communist and revolutionary, whose ideas are credited as the foundation of modern communism. Marx summarized his approach in the first line of the first chapter of The Communist Manifesto, published in 1848: “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.”

Marx argued that capitalism, like previous socioeconomic systems, will inevitably produce internal tensions which will lead to its destruction. Just as capitalism replaced feudalism, he believed socialism would, in turn, replace capitalism, and lead to a stateless, classless society called pure communism. This would emerge after a transitional period called the "dictatorship of the proletariat": a period sometimes referred to as the "workers state" or "workers' democracy".

While Marx remained a relatively obscure figure in his own lifetime, his ideas began to exert a major influence on workers' movements shortly after his death. This influence gained added impetus with the victory of the Marxist Bolsheviks in the Russian October Revolution in 1917, and few parts of the world remained significantly untouched by Marxian ideas in the course of the twentieth century.

Teddy Roosevelt would never be known as a Socialist but he did espouse many ideas that were Socialist in nature. He considered himself a progressive and while he did believe in American Imperialism and a strong world military presence, he also believed in heavy government regulation, government control of wages and the redistribution of wealth for the public good.

On the heels of the Russian Revolution, Communist and Socialist movements found an audience in the American Labor movement. The Socialist Party of America was a coalition of local parties based in industrial cities. Even though by 1912 they claimed more than a thousand locally elected officials in 33 states and 160 cities, the party was factionalized. The conservatives, led by Victor Berger, promoted progressive causes of efficiency and an end to corruption. The radicals wanted to overthrow capitalism, tried to infiltrate labor unions, and sought to cooperate with The Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). With few exceptions the party had weak or nonexistent links to local labor unions.

Once the stock market collapsed in 1929 forcing enormous numbers of people into unemployment, the communists surged once again and began to organize rallies and marches in support of workers and workers rights. In March, 1930, hundreds of thousands of unemployed workers marched through New York City, Detroit, Washington, San Francisco and other cities in a mass protest organized by the Communist Party’s Unemployed Councils. In 1931, more than 400 relief protests erupted in Chicago and that number grew by 150 in 1932. The leadership behind these organizations often came from radical groups like Communists and Socialists, who wanted to organize “unfocused neighborhood militancy into organized popular defense organizations.” Workers turned to these radical groups until organized labor became more active in 1932, with the passage of the Norris-La Guardia Act.

While Communists and Socialists did gain a foothold in these turbulent years, Walter Philip Reuther the president of the United Auto Workers (UAW) would soon change that. As a prominent figure in the anti-Communist left, he was a founder of the Americans for Democratic Action in 1947. He had left the Socialist party in 1939, and throughout the 1950s and 1960s was a leading spokesman for liberal interests in the CIO and in the Democratic Party.

Labor unions eventually eliminated the public connections between the unions, Communism and Socialism. They traded those links for something less troubling in the public eye, the progressive arm of the Democratic Party which espoused many of the same ideals as Socialists without the negative connotations; what some would call “Communism light”. Now the real work to transform the nation could begin under the American flag and right under the noses of the American people.

Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet leader 1958 to 1964, had once made a statement is a speech saying that he would “bury” America. Some thought that meant that he meant military action or that he would launch a nuclear attack to bring about his prophecy. That raised even more fear among average Americans during the cold war even though war was hardly his intention.

Khrushchev was perfectly willing to let America move to the left incrementally; here a little, there a little. When speaking about FDR’s New Deal, Khrushchev said, "We can't expect the American people to jump from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have communism.”

Changing terminology and calling socialist programs “compassionate conservativism” doesn’t change the nature of the beast itself. Redistributing the wealth to win votes will produce the same devastating end as redistributing the wealth because you are an outright socialist.

From 1959 until 1989, the Communist Party of the United States of America (CPUSA) received a substantial subsidy from the Soviet Union. Starting with $75,000 in 1959 this was increased gradually to $3 million in 1987. This substantial amount reflected the Party's subservience to the Moscow.

Yuri Alexandrovic Bezmenov, now known as Tomas David Schuman, was born in 1939 in the former Soviet Union and worked as a journalist for Pravda. In this capacity, he secretly answered to the KGB. His true job was to further the aims of communist Russia After being assigned to a station in India, Bezmenov eventually grew to love the people and culture of India, while, at the same time, he began to resent the KGB-sanctioned oppression of intellectuals who dissented from Moscow's policies. He decided to defect to the West.

Bezmenov/Schuman is best remembered for his Pro-American Anti-communist lectures and books from the 1980s. From his writings and speeches Mr. Bezmenov said: “Ideological subversion is the process which is legitimate and open. You can see it with your own eyes.... It has nothing to do with espionage. I know that intelligence gathering looks more romantic.... That's probably why your Hollywood producers are so crazy about James Bond types of films. But in reality the main emphasis of the KGB is NOT in the area of intelligence at all. According to my opinion, and the opinions of many defectors of my caliber, only about 15% of time, money, and manpower is spent on espionage as such. The other 85% is a slow process which we call either ideological subversion, active measures, or psychological warfare. What it basically means is: to change the perception of reality of every American that despite of the abundance of information no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.

It's a great brainwashing process which goes very slow and is divided into four basic stages. The first one being "demoralization". It takes from 15 to 20 years to demoralize a nation. Why that many years? Because this is the minimum number of years required to educate one generation of students in the country of your enemy exposed to the ideology of [their] enemy. In other words, Marxism-Leninism ideology is being pumped into the soft heads of at least three generation of American students without being challenged or counterbalanced by the basic values of Americanism; American patriotism.

The result? The result you can see ... the people who graduated in the 60's, dropouts or half-baked intellectuals, are now occupying the positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media, and educational systems. You are stuck with them. You can't get through to them. They are contaminated. They are programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern. You cannot change their mind even if you expose them to authentic information. Even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you still can not change the basic perception and the logic of behavior.”

Thanks to the soviet doctrine in “ideological subversion”, America now has over 10,000 avowed socialist professors teaching in our universities that continue the practice of indoctrination. We also have over 70 members of Congress that consider themselves socialists or progressive socialists. In fact, Henry Waxman and Ed Markey, the authors of the Climate Bill (cap and trade) are two of the Progressive Socialists in Congress which a great reason to oppose that Bill all by itself.

Paul

Joe Sestak and Occam's Razor

It’s the Friday before a Holiday weekend so it must be time for the White House to clear up some troubling events with a minor press release. This is how the Obama Administration has always dealt with such issues. After all, the number of people available for comment is scarce and the stories that will be written will hit the papers and television news over the weekend when relatively few people are paying attention.

A brief press release issued this morning by White House Council and long time Obama associate, Bob Bauer, to answer the growing question about Congressman Joe Sestak’s claim that a White House official offered him a job if he would agree to abandon his primary challenge against Senator Arlen Specter. Bauer’s statement said that Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel used former President Bill Clinton as an intermediary to offer Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) an unpaid, executive branch advisory board position to “avoid a divisive Senate primary”. Bauer denied rumors that Sestak was offered a nomination as Navy secretary, and said all discussions were “consistent with the relevant law and ethical requirements.”

If this statement is correct and the White House acted in a manner “consistent with the relevant law and ethical requirements”, why did it take ten weeks and a media storm before the White House would respond to this controversy and why did the White House contact Congressman Sestak’s office as well as Sestak’s brother and campaign manager, Richard Sestak, before issuing this statement? According to Bob Bauer, the White House has “concluded that allegations of improper conduct rest on factual errors and lack a basis in the law". In other words…..we looked at the issue and everything is fine so just trust us. Really?

For the past ten weeks, Joe Sestak has held firm in his account of the exchange. He said not once, but a number of times that he had been contacted by a member of the Obama administration and he was offered a high-ranking administration job in exchange for dropping his primary bid. When asked about the rumors that he was offered the nomination for Secretary of the Navy, Sestak declined to elaborate, saying that doing so would be just getting into politics. Now that the White House has contacted Sestak and his campaign manager prior to today’s press release, Sestak’s account is now mysteriously saying something completely different.

Sestak released his own statement today saying "Last summer, I received a phone call from President Clinton. During the course of the conversation, he expressed concern over my prospects if I were to enter the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate and the value of having me stay in the House of Representatives because of my military background," Sestak added. "He (President Clinton) said that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had spoken with him about my being on a Presidential Board while remaining in the House of Representatives. I said no."

"I told President Clinton that my only consideration in getting into the Senate race or not was whether it was the right thing to do for Pennsylvania working families and not any offer," he continued. "The former President said he knew I'd say that, and the conversation moved on to other subjects."

Was Sestak having a “Blumenthal moment”? If you recall, Democrat Dick Blumenthal who is running for the Connecticut Senate Seat has been accused of lying about his military service by hinting that he was a Viet Nam veteran. Blumenthal has since apologized and even though there are at least eight different occasions that this happened on film, he simply said he “misspoke” a few words that were taken out of context. The few words were silly things like “in Viet Nam” instead of “during Viet Nam” and “when we returned from Viet Nam” instead of “when my duty with a State-side reserve unit was over”. You know….easily mistaken comments. Could Sestak have simply misspoken a few words, confusing a “high ranking administration job” with a “non-paid appointment to an advisory board”? Perhaps he also confused Bill Clinton with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when he said he was contacted by a member of the Obama administration? Let’s face it….those high pressure jobs add years to your looks so maybe it was an honest mistake now that Hillary has added a few more wrinkles and some gray hair.

I am a huge fan of Occam’s razor. Occam’s razor (or Ockham's razer) is a theoretical principle proposed by 14th-century English logician, theologian and Franciscan friar William of Ockham that "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity" (entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem). In essence; that the simplest solution is usually the correct one. In this case, before we can arrive at the simplest solution we must identify the actual questions.

The obvious questions are:

1- Why did the White House refused to comment on this matter for ten weeks?

2- Why was Bill Clinton asked to “intercede” on behalf of the White House?

3- Why did Representative Sestak refuse to elaborate on the issue beyond his initial statement for the past ten weeks?

4- Why was Representative Sestak’s office and campaign manager contacted before the White House press release was issued?

5- Why has Representative Sestak’s account of the incident changed so drastically?

The simplest solution to all of these questions is that the press releases from both the White House and Joe Sestak are lies meant to cover up the true nature of the offer made to Joe Sestak and the identity of the person that made that offer. I’m sure the White House contacted Sestak after his initial statement and told him of the legal ramifications of his allegations. Sestak has nothing to gain by causing the White House embarrassment by further implicating them in what was obviously a criminal act. After all, Sestak is now the Democratic candidate for Specter’s Senate seat and will need the support of the White House and the DNC if he has any hopes of succeeding this November. That easily explains Sestak’s reluctance to elaborate on the offer that was made.

The dismissive non-response to the press’s questions issued by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs tells me that they initially believed that this would all fade away after the primary, but to their surprise, it didn’t. Legal analysts were scouring US code looking for possible violations of law and the ramifications of those laws being violated meant someone was going to have to be sacrificed if there was any truth to Sestak’s story at all. Since this was fast becoming an issue that could affect the upcoming elections, fellow Democrats joined in the call for explanations and that could not be ignored. Some way had to be found to “help” Joe Sestak back away from his claims without damaging his race for the Senate but the real trick was that it had to be done in such a way that the White House was also clear of any wrong doing.

Ten weeks seems like a plausible amount of time for legal council to review the incident and issue recommendations. I'm sure those recommendations included the need to portray a series of events where someone that was not a member of the administration (Bill Clinton) would speak with Sestak only to suggest that his chances for success in the primary were limited so he should just drop out of that. “Oh by the way…Rahm Emmanuel would like to place you on a Presidential Advisory Board as a non-paid advisor while you retain your all important seat in the House of Representatives.” No government employee and no promise of power or money would skirt all of the problems. While that scenario certainly plays well with respect to the laws against using the power of a government office to interfere with a primary or general election, it does not sit well with the good Congressman’s previous and frequent statements.

As convoluted as this story is, it certainly does not play well with respect to Occam’s razor either. It makes no sense that the White House would risk the political damage of letting people believe that they were stone-walling the issue for ten weeks if Sestak’s original story of the attempted bribe were not true. It makes no sense that Joe Sestak would suddenly change his story so drastically on the day of the White House press release and risk his chances in the November election if he were not coached by the White House that this was the only acceptable way out of this for the both of them. It makes no sense that the White House would attempt to entice Sestak with a non-paid position on an advisory panel when the man was running for the United States Senate. Knowing that Sestak is not one of the wealthier members of Congress like Kerry or Kennedy, that wouldn’t fly at all so they further complicated the story by adding that he was told he could serve on that board and keep his seat in the House; something that Congressional rules currently prohibit. Curiously, Joe Sestak has been avoiding any direct interviews in the wake of the statement he released today that directly contradicts his previous assertions.

About the only part of the story that makes any sense is the Bill Clinton connection. Billy misses the limelight (not to mention access to female White House aides) so he doesn’t mind being drawn into something like this. Actually, Clinton was the perfect name to use in place of Rahm Emmanuel. He is not a member of the White House staff nor is he a paid employee of the Obama administration and if this ruse fails and an investigation is forced upon the White House, we all know that Bill Clinton has no problem lying to special prosecutors, Grand Juries or to the American People.

Paul