When They Take Our Guns, They Take Everything
From Citizen to Slave
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
*******************
Why is it that when some nut kills great quantities of people, then "off's" himself, the politicians want to take the guns away from the people who did nothing wrong? Ever notice that?
I have thought about that for awhile now and I have concluded that our government is scared witless of us!
Good thing, too. That fear by the government of the people is what has kept us free for two and a half centuries.
If there was ever a time in the history of America when guns are the only thing standing between the American citizen and pure government tyranny -- it is today! Right now!
Even a blind fool can see the US government is inoperable. It's broken. It has blundered into a corner from which it cannot escape and it is about to take the nation down with it.
How many times has this scribe -- and others -- warned of calamitous events headed our way only to have them arrive amid gasps of surprise? How many times have we pointed to the immediate future and told our readers that thus and so was about to happen only to witness it unfold, right before us, as we watch in stunned amazement?
Understand: The democrats are going hell bent for leather to pass a gun control bill in the next three weeks. If you are counting on the republicans to stop it, you are going to be extremely disappointed. The GOP is going to split -- and a larger than expected portion of them WILL support the Assault Weapons Ban pushed by the democrats. It is my sense, at this writing, that THE ASSAULT WEAPON BAN WILL PASS CONGRESS and be signed into law by Obama later this month or early in February.
I can only ask that you forgive my frustration. You see, I am having difficulty grasping the fact that my fellow Americans are going to lie down, whimpering, as the bullies of the political left just run right over them.
While the left is in the streets demanding the government take our guns, the only resistance I am seeing and hearing is coming from individual gun owners standing alone with their single voices drowned out by the whirlwind cacophony of the gun grabbers of that socialist party known today as the Democratic Party.
Where are the gun rights organizations? Where ARE they, huh? The socialist gun grabbers didn't even wait for the bodies to be removed from the scene of the slaughter before they struck. And now they have the upper hand.
Look, this is not just about guns. This is about freedom and liberty and the continued existence of the republic.
Do not think just because the Second Amendment exists that that alone will save us. Absolutely not! The Fourth Amendment sure as heck stopped illegal searches didn't it? Been to an airport lately? Looked at those cameras hanging on seemingly every lamp post lately. Heard the drones flying overhead, lately? Yes, just because the Fourth Amendment is written down somewhere it sure did stop unreasonable searches and seizures, now didn't it?
Look. They're going to run roughshod over the Second Amendment, ripping it to shreds, and then they are going to cram those shreds down our throats.
A friend and fellow commentator told me recently, BEFORE the Connecticut massacre, "Longstreet", he said, "You are going to be amazed at how many Americans won't fight." Sadly, he was correct on BOTH counts. I WAS amazed -- and-- even now, I am having difficulty grasping the lack of fight in my fellow Americans today. It seems only the political left and their brown-shirted hordes have any fight in them.
I know I am getting old. But, I still believe freedom is worth fighting for. But over the past few years it has become obvious that I, and my ilk, are in the minority in America today. We now have a nation which had much rather have a baby sitter than have the responsibility of taking care of themselves. That whole idea is anathema to me. It is revolting, repugnant, and in my estimation -- un-American. But it is the reality of the America we live in today. It is a hollowed-out husk of my America. A mirage. The real American no longer exists. And I am heart sick over that loss.
One last time, before you bare your neck to Obama's socialist/communist chains, take a look at the constitution. Note that without the Second Amendment the entire remainder of the constitution -- and the Bill of Rights -- isn't worth the paper it is written on. Once our Second Amendment rights are gone, all other rights are gone, as well. We become slaves in our own country.
Soon the Presidential Executive Orders will begin to fly. Then the assault weapons ban and the ammo clip bans, and the large magazine bans, then the semi-automatic weapons ban, extremely high taxes on cartridges, and shells, limits on the quantity of ammo one can purchase in a given transaction, outlawing gun shows, etc., etc. It's all coming -- and more.
They're coming for your guns. But that's not the worst of it. They're coming for your freedom, for your liberty, for your life.
I live on the very edge of one of the swamps where the famous Swamp Fox of the American Revolutionary War camped as he made his way up and down the southeastern coast as the bane of the British Army. As I recently looked out over the watery marsh surrounding the deep, dark, foreboding swamp just beyond, I wondered at how those men must have suffered hunger, cold, pain, and loneliness to do their part in winning this country's freedom from a tyrant. And then I thought out loud: "For THIS?"
Look around you, America. The children and grand children of the "Greatest Generation," the men and women who saved the world from tyranny, are spitting on their legacy!
There is an eerie parallel between current events in America and the events of 1917 and the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, which finally culminated in the formation of the Soviet Union in 1922.
America is most certainly in a state of "becoming." WHAT she is becoming is uncertain -- for now. What IS certain is that the New America will NOT be a constitutional republic. BUT -- for this change to be completed the Second Amendment must be neutralized. In the next few weeks and months we will see that take place at incredible speed.
© J. D. Longstreet
*********************
VISIT J. D. Longstreet's "INSIGHT on Freedom" Face Book Page!!: (Just click on the link for more conservative commentary by J. D. Longstreet and other popular conservative writers!)
*********************
Illinois Democrats Move To Tighten Firearm Regulation/Restrictions...
by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
As the country struggles to understand, and come to grips with random acts of firearm violence by unstable and unbalanced individuals Illinois is already taking action to further regulate firearms. Like the millions of law abiding citizens I am torn between the right to bear firearms and finding the point at which it makes logical sense to restrict that right. In a modern society in which the tools of warfare are advanced beyond what the founders could possibly have envisioned, and the efficiency of modern armies are such that the citizens would stand no reasonable chance against the modern army, does the possession of semiautomatic assault weapons have any real purpose for the homeowner and sportsman? If deemed they do should they not be highly regulated and restricted to HELP reduce the incidents of tragedies like Sandy Hook?
I certainly do not have the answers, nor do I believe the anti-gun crowd has the answers either. Anymore than I believe Wayne LaPierre and the NRA has the answers. Reasonable minds from all sides however must come together and find answers to these questions and others. The American people are deserving of the effort. We can preserve the right to bear arms , and make our society a safer place for our children at the same time. At the same time recognizing that there will always be some level of violence even if firearms were to be banned as some advocate. There will always be criminals, unstable people, and a black market. The challenge is to reduce firearm violence to the lowest possible incident level AND protect the right to bear arms.
I welcome and encourage anyone, from either side of this issue to point out the issues with the Illinois effort as described in the article.
Via: Memeorandum
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
As the country struggles to understand, and come to grips with random acts of firearm violence by unstable and unbalanced individuals Illinois is already taking action to further regulate firearms. Like the millions of law abiding citizens I am torn between the right to bear firearms and finding the point at which it makes logical sense to restrict that right. In a modern society in which the tools of warfare are advanced beyond what the founders could possibly have envisioned, and the efficiency of modern armies are such that the citizens would stand no reasonable chance against the modern army, does the possession of semiautomatic assault weapons have any real purpose for the homeowner and sportsman? If deemed they do should they not be highly regulated and restricted to HELP reduce the incidents of tragedies like Sandy Hook?
I certainly do not have the answers, nor do I believe the anti-gun crowd has the answers either. Anymore than I believe Wayne LaPierre and the NRA has the answers. Reasonable minds from all sides however must come together and find answers to these questions and others. The American people are deserving of the effort. We can preserve the right to bear arms , and make our society a safer place for our children at the same time. At the same time recognizing that there will always be some level of violence even if firearms were to be banned as some advocate. There will always be criminals, unstable people, and a black market. The challenge is to reduce firearm violence to the lowest possible incident level AND protect the right to bear arms.
FOX NEWS - Illinois Senate Democrats advanced legislation late Wednesday to restrict semiautomatic weapons and high-capacity magazines, pressing forward with new gun control measures in the waning days of the session over the objections of firearms groups.
Amid the developments, the Illinois State Rifle Association issued an “urgent alert” to its members warning them that Democratic legislators were trying to push through last-minute anti-gun legislation.
“There would be no exemptions and no grandfathering,” the group stated in its alert. “You would have a very short window to turn in your guns to the state police and avoid prosecution.”
A Senate committee approved two bills, one dealing with the weapons and the other with magazines. Democratic supporters could face a tough sell in the full Senate.
One measure would ban the possession, delivery, sale and transfer of semiautomatic handguns and rifles. People who currently own such weapons could keep them but would have to register them. The bill would allow semiautomatic weapons to be used at shooting ranges, but those facilities would be regulated.
Skip
The other bill, introduced by Democratic state Sen. Dan Kotowski, would limit ammunition magazines to 10 or fewer rounds.
Those pushing for enhanced restrictions say stricter rules are needed in the wake of a string of high-profile mass shootings -- most recently the deadly school shooting in Newtown, Conn. Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn had been trying earlier this year to pass new legislation in the wake of the Colorado movie theater shooting, but lawmakers are taking another crack at it.
Kotowski sponsored legislation in 2007 that would have prohibited assault weapons and .50-caliber rifles. His bill made it through a Senate committee but died on the floor.
Another Democratic state lawmaker, Antonio Munoz, introduced the ban on all assault weapons “designed for war.” {Read More}
I welcome and encourage anyone, from either side of this issue to point out the issues with the Illinois effort as described in the article.
Via: Memeorandum
Avoiding the Cliff, Small Acts of Courage...
by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
The deal, such as it is, the kicking the can down the road a piece was finally hammered out so at least for now, the "fiscal cliff" was avoided. The nation can thank Mich McConnell and Joe Biden for it getting done.
Every so often in this charged political era we see something that gives reason for possible optimism. But then again...
Via: Memeorandum
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
The deal, such as it is, the kicking the can down the road a piece was finally hammered out so at least for now, the "fiscal cliff" was avoided. The nation can thank Mich McConnell and Joe Biden for it getting done.
Yahoo NEWS - If John Kennedy had not written “Profiles in Courage,” today we might have a more realistic understanding of political valor. But JFK’s 1957 Pulitzer Prize-winning book so raised the bar for bravery in public life that it now seems obvious that no modern figure can measure up.
Who in the 21st century could possibly match Daniel Webster’s oratory as he heroically struggled to save the Union? Or replicate Edmund Ross’ moral fortitude as he destroyed his political career to cast the decisive vote against impeaching Andrew Johnson? Where once legislators risked being burned in effigy and physically threatened, these days the likely consequence of a courageous vote in Congress is a new career as a high-priced lobbyist.
This week’s ungainly legislative compromise that merely delayed the fiscal apocalypse until March can be ridiculed as a Profile in Timidity. Rather than ratify a grand bargain that would reform taxes and spending for a decade, Congress in predictable fashion did as little as possible as late as possible. No one, Republican or Democrat, is going to brag in their memoirs about the fortitude they displayed, dangling over the abyss, as they scaled the Fiscal Cliff.
But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker John Boehner deserve credit for the last-minute fortitude they displayed in ending the dispiriting deadlock over extending the Bush tax cuts. It wasn’t Kennedy-defined courage—and it doesn’t erase the prior stubbornness on taxes by the Republican congressional leaders—but their political moxie should be noted.
On Sunday, with the countdown clock ticking, McConnell made a direct appeal to Joe Biden when his negotiations with Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid reached a dead end. Rather than setting up secret back-channel talks with Biden, a longtime colleague, McConnell announced on the Senate floor, “I also placed a call to the vice president to see if he could help jump-start the negotiations on his side.”
The Biden-McConnell agreement challenged Republican orthodoxy in two major ways: It raised taxes on families earning more than $450,000, and it did not extract spending cuts from the Democrats. But the White House also made a big concession: Barack Obama abandoned his mantra since 2007 that families earning more than $250,000 should pay more in taxes. {Continue Reading}
Every so often in this charged political era we see something that gives reason for possible optimism. But then again...
Via: Memeorandum
Extreme Initial Claims Danger v.30
Click to enlarge.
Click to enlarge.
One trend, two trend, red trend, blue trend
Red trend, blue trend, old trend, new trend
See Also:
Extreme Initial Claims Danger v.29
One Fish Two Fish Red Fish Blue Fish
Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Initial Claims
DOL: Initial Claims
Is Ahmadinejad Planning A Coup Against The Mullahs?
By Findalis
Monkey in the Middle
Word is leaking out of Iran that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is planning an end-run around the ruling Mullahs and is planning to take full control of Iran.
Ahmadinejad's second and last term of office expires in June. It is very highly unlikely the Mullahs will support him in another term of office. In fact, reports show they and the Revolutionary Guard are grooming his successor. A man who will do their bidding, be their mouthpiece, and follow orders without question.
From Debka:
A President with a "ceremonial" role, a ruling elite of religious fanatics who are living in the 7th Century and not the 21st, a elite military group that will lose its power if the mullahs are defeated, and add to this a nuclear program coming to completion and there is a recipe for a disaster. A disaster that might spread not only to Iran's neighbors, but to the whole Muslim world.
Monkey in the Middle
Word is leaking out of Iran that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is planning an end-run around the ruling Mullahs and is planning to take full control of Iran.
Ahmadinejad's second and last term of office expires in June. It is very highly unlikely the Mullahs will support him in another term of office. In fact, reports show they and the Revolutionary Guard are grooming his successor. A man who will do their bidding, be their mouthpiece, and follow orders without question.
From Debka:
I wonder if there are rumblings of an Iranian Spring. There was one 4 years ago, but unlike the Arab Spring of 2 years ago, President Barack Hussein Obama sided with Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs. An opportunity to destroy the reign of the Mullahs lost. Now Ahmadinejad is trying to start and Arab Spring without him being thrown out of power.In the unexpected role of social crusader, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in a speech at Kermanshah Wednesday, Jan. 2, “The country’s economy should not be controlled by 3,000 or 10,000 people.” Seventy-six million Iranians still don’t benefit from the country’s oil revenues – “only an elite minority,” he said.
Predictably, Debkafile’s Iranian sources report, the Iranian president’s relations and friends are rushing for the exits: they are selling property and packing their bags ready to quit the country, worried about his fate and their own, as Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his powerful machine prepared to hit back.
Ahmadinejad is certainly in for serious persecution even before his six months as president are up in June. In his second four-year term as president, he made enemies of the most powerful parts of the ruling establishment: He attempted to overshadow the Supreme Leader, brushed aside the advice of his mentor, the influential religious figure Ayatollah Mesbah-Yazdi, and dared to poke a finger in the eye of the powerful Revolutionary Guard Corps, by asking why they controlled and profited from the largest slice of the nation’s assets instead of the people.
Now they are all gunning for him, using as their political bludgeon allegations of financial corruption.
But Ahmadinejad has not been put off. Although he sees his undoing written large on the wall, at every opportunity, before even small audiences of 300-400 people, he continues to maintain that the only way the country can save itself is by forcing the redistribution of national wealth.
His message goes down well in the Iranian street and he is beginning to build a grass-roots power base that may help protect him from retribution by Khamenei and his henchmen. The “elite minority,” which need to be relieved of their assets, was easily understood to impugn the super-rich, like Khamenei’s own son Mojtaba and some of the Revolutionary Guard commanders.
Our sources in Tehran say that many of his associates have already taken the precaution of removing themselves to safety in the United States or Europe; others are keeping their heads down or knocking on the president’s door to wangle foreign postings so long as he has the clout to disburse them. One such prominent figure is Hamid Baqa’I, the president’s deputy for executive affairs. In two months, he is due to take up the post of Iranian ambassador to UN institutions in Geneva and New York, in place of the incumbent Mohammad Khaza’i. Ahmadinejad is going through the motions of promoting his close aide Esfandyar Rahim Masha’I, who is also the father of his daughter-in-law, as presidential contender in June. But he knows it is a lost case. Masha’i is also likely to end up at a foreign posting with his family, when his candidacy is disqualified by the Guardian Council of the Constitution which is under Khamenei’s thumb.
Foreign appointments also appear to be in the works for some other members of Ahmadinejad’s inner circle, such as Seyyed Hossein Moussavi, Malek-Zadeh and others.
But not all his hangers-on are getting a sympathetic hearing. Our sources in Tehran have learned that the president lost patience this week when a bunch of his cronies confronted him with demands for cushy overseas appointments. He threatened instead to fire some of them Under heavy criticism for mismanaging the Iranian economy, he may use the opportunity to assign the blame to his less favorite advisers, sweep them out and replace them with new faces. One of the most prominent heads on the block may be First Vice President and de facto prime minister Mohammad Reza Rahimi.
Rahimi stirred an international furor by his anti-Semitic remarks which accused Jews of “spreading narcotics around the world in accordance with the teachings of the Talmud … whose objective is the destruction of the world.” He almost outperformed his boss, now turned social crusader, who more than once attracted international condemnation for his inflammatory remarks about Israel and Jews.
Most recently, Ahmadinejad called his close cronies together for a pep talk. He told them he held an insurance policy for his and their survival: the secret dossiers of 300 top Iranian officials containing detailed records of their misdeeds. He obtained them by rifling the archives of the Ministry of Intelligence and Security during the brief period after he sacked the intelligence minister, Heydar Moslehi, and before Khamenei forced him to reinstate the minister a week later.
He and his staff had meanwhile combed through the incriminating files and made copies of them which were now held safe in the presidential office.
Khamenei, who has the support of the bulk of Iran’s political and military leaders, knows all about Ahmadinejad’s plans and is determined to eliminate him one way or another and make sure that the 300 dossiers never leave the president’s office.
More than once, Ahmadinejad has implied recently that he would make their contents public if he or members of his clique were charged with corruption or the misappropriation of state funds. For now, he is weeding out of his administration the officials he regards as its Achilles heels – according to our sources, the first scheduled to go are Oil Minister Rostam Qassemi and Interior Minister Mohammad Mostafa Najjar.
The Iranian Oil Ministry is a notorious hotbed of financial embezzlement, whereas the Interior Ministry is responsible for organizing the upcoming presidential election a and Ahmadinejad would prefer one of his confidantes to be sitting in that office. Only last week, he sacked Health Minister Marzieh Wahid Dastjerdi for remarking that Ahmadinejad prefers to earmark foreign currency for importing dog food rather than medicines. Her dismissal put many backs up against the president in the top echelons of government.
President Ahmadinejad was publicly warned this week to shut his mouth and stop ruining his reputation by Esma’il Kovsari, Khamenist adherent and powerful parliamentary voice. Kovsari pointed out that the Revolutionary Guards helped Ahmadinejad come to power as president and supported him on many occasions and so he must not turn his back on them now.
Another supporter of Khamenei, Al Sa’idi, said that most regime heads are now sorry they brought Ahmadinejad to power because he has become a different person.
Does this royal battle within the Iranian establishment affect its nuclear plans? The answer is no. Will crucifying the president cause rioting over the summer election? Not likely. Politically, Ahmadinejad is on his way out and leaves the stage to the most radical elements of the regime. And physically? Well, car accidents are a common feature of the Iranian political scene.
A President with a "ceremonial" role, a ruling elite of religious fanatics who are living in the 7th Century and not the 21st, a elite military group that will lose its power if the mullahs are defeated, and add to this a nuclear program coming to completion and there is a recipe for a disaster. A disaster that might spread not only to Iran's neighbors, but to the whole Muslim world.
Expect the unexpected
Hello everyone!
I hope you all had an excellent start of 2013! I wish for this new year to bring us peace, happiness, and all our wishes to come true, and last but not least, to keep having great times here together.
In this FIRST post, you will see what I wore on New Year's Eve. Nothing sophisticated, just a short, bold printed dress and a few sparkly accessories as this pair of vintage earrings, Marc Jacobs clutch ( Christmas gift) and a Vince Camuto ring. I started the new year with colors & prints, just the way I like it !
Let's make 2013 an amazing & colorful year!
Dress: thanks to Sheinside/ Here
Coat: Land's End/ option Here
Clutch: Marc Jacobs for Target & Neiman Marcus/ Here
Ring: Vince Camuto/ another great option Here
Earrings: vintage
Heels: BCBGeneration/ similar Here
Sunglasses: Ralph Lauren
2010 Election Just a Preview? ... J. D. Longstreet
2010 Election Just a Preview?
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
************
I was reading a piece by John Ransom at TownHall.com the other day in which he said: "Wonks and politicians may not see it, but those guys are in the process of self term-limiting out of business anyway- either by votes or by pageviews. 2010 was just a preview, (emphasis mine) not a conclusion even accepting the standstill in the 2012 election." SOURCE: http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/johnransom/2012/12/30/on-obamacare-and-guns-we-wont-comply-n1476096/page/2
I think Mr. Ransom is right.
A drive through my community and you will see a fresh crop of Gadsden flags sprouting from flagpoles and door posts all over the county, including the doorpost of my own home and office. The Gadsden flag is the flag with the golden field and a coiled rattlesnake with bared fangs and the phrase: "Don't tread on me." It is quickly becoming the emblem of choice for those who intend sending the government a message. That message is clear. "This far and no farther! We've had our fill and we intend to fight back!"
Mr. Ransom refers to our resistance as non-compliance. I would call it nullification. See, I believe, as did my Confederate ancestors, that every state has the power of nullification. It is the states'-rights doctrine that a state can refuse to recognize or to enforce a federal law passed by the United States Congress.
Americans are saddled with the damnable law called "Obamacare" that is going to strangle us to death financially and with smothering government intrusion into our lives, and very soon now, we are going to be slammed with all sorts of gun control laws that seek to disarm, neuter, geld, and make impotent the American citizen in the face of the government making him, for all intents and purposes, a slave of the government.
No matter how much the DPM (Democratic Propaganda Ministry), known as the Mainstream Media, reports on all the wonderful benefits of Obamacare the American citizen still hates it and wants it gone. It is a horrible law and needs to be repealed in its entirety.
Frankly, I see no way short of states nullifying the law and standing up to the Congress -- as sovereign states -- and saying "Hell, NO! We will NOT comply with your law!"
Sometime a well placed metaphorical two by four applied skillfully, and with abundant force, to the head of the opposition will get their attention. In the case of my Confederate ancestors the application of the two by four, over a couple of decades, still did not work and they had to take it to another level. They dropped the metaphors and went physical.
A truism is a fact that stubbornly holds fast no matter the lies surrounding it. One such truism you can always count on is this: "Fools always rush in!"
With the Newtown Massacre I was counting backwards from ten waiting for the gun control fools to rush in. Of COURSE they DID! HOW could they NOT? They are emotional people. They can not control themselves. They are convinced -- to their core -- that THEY are so much more intelligent than you and I and THEY care so much more than you and I, and that THEY have an obligation through "Noblize Oblige" to see that we do the right thing -- even if they have to force us into it by weight of law.
Of COURSE it is the HEIGHT of hypocrisy. But understand -- these people ARE hypocrites! But they are dangerous hypocrites.
Blinded by their own arrogance and super-sized self esteem they have blundered into a realm where even angels fear to tread.
Only those deprived of a modicum of good judgment would be so absolutely gullible as to believe they can force their brand of cowardice, their ignorance of firearms, their fear of the appearance of certain weapons, their utter repugnance at the thought that another living human being may, just MAY, have the COURAGE to stand up for themselves and their fellowman by using a firearm in self-defense -- or in the defense of others -- would dream, even in a fevered Morpheus inspired nocturnal assignation, of forcing -- F O R C I N G -- mind you, their gun control laws on the people of the Old Confederacy. (Did I mention that ONLY a FOOL would do this???)
Look. There is a strong sense among citizens of this country that America is about to come apart at the seams. The rush to arm one's self is as American as, well, using the gun to attain freedom and then using the gun to PRESERVE that freedom once it WAS attained. It is "what we do." It happens to be exactly what we are doing right now.
No one should be surprised when confrontation(s) between federal and state law enforcement agencies become numerous. Nor should anyone be surprised when shooting begins, as it indubitably will.
If such laws are, indeed, passed citizens will demand that enforcement be overridden by either sovereign state nullification or state sponsored non-compliance. If the Congress does not finally come to its senses and wipe such offensive tripe from the US Code, I have concluded it is well within reason to expect a number of states to begin secession procedures.
I think it is prudent to issue a warning to our national legislators in the Congress that they are tip-toeing on extremely thin ice. One can say, with no hesitation, a purge of Congress is in the offing in the next election cycle (in 2014) IF they insist on placing their political careers on the line -- and in jeopardy -- by foolishly aligning themselves with the gun control hysterics.
I must agree that the historic election of 2010 was, indeed, a preview of 2014, a prequel, even. The electorate is in no mood for additional hijinks by the Congress. They are going to demand a reckoning, and they will begin at the ballot box.
© J. D. Longstreet
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
************
I was reading a piece by John Ransom at TownHall.com the other day in which he said: "Wonks and politicians may not see it, but those guys are in the process of self term-limiting out of business anyway- either by votes or by pageviews. 2010 was just a preview, (emphasis mine) not a conclusion even accepting the standstill in the 2012 election." SOURCE: http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/johnransom/2012/12/30/on-obamacare-and-guns-we-wont-comply-n1476096/page/2
I think Mr. Ransom is right.
A drive through my community and you will see a fresh crop of Gadsden flags sprouting from flagpoles and door posts all over the county, including the doorpost of my own home and office. The Gadsden flag is the flag with the golden field and a coiled rattlesnake with bared fangs and the phrase: "Don't tread on me." It is quickly becoming the emblem of choice for those who intend sending the government a message. That message is clear. "This far and no farther! We've had our fill and we intend to fight back!"
Mr. Ransom refers to our resistance as non-compliance. I would call it nullification. See, I believe, as did my Confederate ancestors, that every state has the power of nullification. It is the states'-rights doctrine that a state can refuse to recognize or to enforce a federal law passed by the United States Congress.
Americans are saddled with the damnable law called "Obamacare" that is going to strangle us to death financially and with smothering government intrusion into our lives, and very soon now, we are going to be slammed with all sorts of gun control laws that seek to disarm, neuter, geld, and make impotent the American citizen in the face of the government making him, for all intents and purposes, a slave of the government.
No matter how much the DPM (Democratic Propaganda Ministry), known as the Mainstream Media, reports on all the wonderful benefits of Obamacare the American citizen still hates it and wants it gone. It is a horrible law and needs to be repealed in its entirety.
Frankly, I see no way short of states nullifying the law and standing up to the Congress -- as sovereign states -- and saying "Hell, NO! We will NOT comply with your law!"
Sometime a well placed metaphorical two by four applied skillfully, and with abundant force, to the head of the opposition will get their attention. In the case of my Confederate ancestors the application of the two by four, over a couple of decades, still did not work and they had to take it to another level. They dropped the metaphors and went physical.
A truism is a fact that stubbornly holds fast no matter the lies surrounding it. One such truism you can always count on is this: "Fools always rush in!"
With the Newtown Massacre I was counting backwards from ten waiting for the gun control fools to rush in. Of COURSE they DID! HOW could they NOT? They are emotional people. They can not control themselves. They are convinced -- to their core -- that THEY are so much more intelligent than you and I and THEY care so much more than you and I, and that THEY have an obligation through "Noblize Oblige" to see that we do the right thing -- even if they have to force us into it by weight of law.
Of COURSE it is the HEIGHT of hypocrisy. But understand -- these people ARE hypocrites! But they are dangerous hypocrites.
Blinded by their own arrogance and super-sized self esteem they have blundered into a realm where even angels fear to tread.
Only those deprived of a modicum of good judgment would be so absolutely gullible as to believe they can force their brand of cowardice, their ignorance of firearms, their fear of the appearance of certain weapons, their utter repugnance at the thought that another living human being may, just MAY, have the COURAGE to stand up for themselves and their fellowman by using a firearm in self-defense -- or in the defense of others -- would dream, even in a fevered Morpheus inspired nocturnal assignation, of forcing -- F O R C I N G -- mind you, their gun control laws on the people of the Old Confederacy. (Did I mention that ONLY a FOOL would do this???)
Look. There is a strong sense among citizens of this country that America is about to come apart at the seams. The rush to arm one's self is as American as, well, using the gun to attain freedom and then using the gun to PRESERVE that freedom once it WAS attained. It is "what we do." It happens to be exactly what we are doing right now.
No one should be surprised when confrontation(s) between federal and state law enforcement agencies become numerous. Nor should anyone be surprised when shooting begins, as it indubitably will.
If such laws are, indeed, passed citizens will demand that enforcement be overridden by either sovereign state nullification or state sponsored non-compliance. If the Congress does not finally come to its senses and wipe such offensive tripe from the US Code, I have concluded it is well within reason to expect a number of states to begin secession procedures.
I think it is prudent to issue a warning to our national legislators in the Congress that they are tip-toeing on extremely thin ice. One can say, with no hesitation, a purge of Congress is in the offing in the next election cycle (in 2014) IF they insist on placing their political careers on the line -- and in jeopardy -- by foolishly aligning themselves with the gun control hysterics.
I must agree that the historic election of 2010 was, indeed, a preview of 2014, a prequel, even. The electorate is in no mood for additional hijinks by the Congress. They are going to demand a reckoning, and they will begin at the ballot box.
© J. D. Longstreet
how did i do - 2012 goal review
Happy New Year to you! I hope you enjoyed a great holiday with family, friends or the remote. I enjoyed all of the above and truly had a relaxing and enjoyable time off. But the Christmas decorations are put away and the tree is at the curb, so its time to get to work.
Before I share my goals for 2013 I thought I'd see how I did with my 2012 goals.
1. Redo the master bedroom. Woop Woop. Check this sucker off. The big bedroom reveal was back in May but I've kept making updates as recently as last week (more on that later). I'm happy with the room but you know it's gonna keep evolving.
2. Repair and redo deck and stairs. I'm on a roll. This one was wrapped up in June and talk about a pandora's box of crazy. It was dirty, sweaty and a hell of a lot longer than planned, but we are digging it now and use it more than we ever did.
3. Plant a herb garden. Big fat goose egg on this one. I must have been drunk when I thought of this because the idea that my children would give me enough time to dedicate to a herb garden is laughable. We barely are able to get raking and mowing done. Maybe in a few years. Until then I'll just continue to watch Barefoot Contessa and pretend that's my herb garden.
4. Lighting. Well...sort of. I did get a new chandelier for the dining room, (which will be moving again soon - stay tuned) but I never got around to the hallway light and the deck got candle sconces rather than electric ones. So maybe 75% complete? I completed the 'light' but not the 'ing'.
5. Reupholster couch. It wasn't quick, and often not a pretty process, but I'm giving myself a gold star on this one. And on top of it all I discovered a new talent that led me to tackle this and this.
So there you have it. 4 out of 5. I gotta say, this is the best I've ever done sticking to a list. Will I be able to do as well this year? I'll post the list tomorrow and let you be the judge.
How about you? Do you make any goals? Have any new year traditions?
Before I share my goals for 2013 I thought I'd see how I did with my 2012 goals.
1. Redo the master bedroom. Woop Woop. Check this sucker off. The big bedroom reveal was back in May but I've kept making updates as recently as last week (more on that later). I'm happy with the room but you know it's gonna keep evolving.
2. Repair and redo deck and stairs. I'm on a roll. This one was wrapped up in June and talk about a pandora's box of crazy. It was dirty, sweaty and a hell of a lot longer than planned, but we are digging it now and use it more than we ever did.
3. Plant a herb garden. Big fat goose egg on this one. I must have been drunk when I thought of this because the idea that my children would give me enough time to dedicate to a herb garden is laughable. We barely are able to get raking and mowing done. Maybe in a few years. Until then I'll just continue to watch Barefoot Contessa and pretend that's my herb garden.
4. Lighting. Well...sort of. I did get a new chandelier for the dining room, (which will be moving again soon - stay tuned) but I never got around to the hallway light and the deck got candle sconces rather than electric ones. So maybe 75% complete? I completed the 'light' but not the 'ing'.
5. Reupholster couch. It wasn't quick, and often not a pretty process, but I'm giving myself a gold star on this one. And on top of it all I discovered a new talent that led me to tackle this and this.
So there you have it. 4 out of 5. I gotta say, this is the best I've ever done sticking to a list. Will I be able to do as well this year? I'll post the list tomorrow and let you be the judge.
How about you? Do you make any goals? Have any new year traditions?
Return of the "Red Decade" ... J. D. Longstreet
Return of the "Red Decade"
Democratic Party Embraces Socialist Bill of Rights
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
*****************
If you are a regular to this column, then you know we have mentioned many times that current events in Washington, are very familiar. We've seen this movie before. And we have.
For the past four years we have drawn our readers attention to the fact that Obama's agenda is, in fact, a socialist agenda a form of "Marxism Lite", if you will. In fact, we have pointed out many times that the Democratic Party, itself, seems to reflect the agenda of the socialist party. We have even, on occasion, suggested the Democratic Party change it's name to more accurately reflect its socialist ideology.
The curse of America is its refusal to learn from its past. In fact, more often than not, we refuse to look back for guidance even when compelled to do so by out-of-control events. We pay a heavy price for that reluctance and reticence.
Had we looked back recently, we would have realized the roots of the machinations of the Democratic Party, and its current leader Barack H. Obama, are deep in "The Red Decade" of the 1930's in America.
"The Red Decade is a term coined by journalist and historian Eugene Lyons to describe a period in American history in the 1930s characterized by a widespread infatuation with communism in general and Stalinism in particular. Lyons believed this idolization of Joseph Stalin and exultation of Bolshevik achievements to have reached its high point in 1938, running deepest amongst liberals, intellectuals, and journalists and even some government and federal officials." SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Red_Decade
Consider this: "Communal consciousness was also stimulated by the activities of socialists and communists throughout the 1930s. Although probably fewer than 100,000 Americans were members of socialist or communist parties in the 1930s, enough prominent intellectuals joined or gave their support to such parties, and enough strikes and demonstrations were led by such groups, to earn the 1930s the title of "the red decade" from some historians. For both socialist and communist groups the goal was not communal consciousness, but class consciousness—a recognition by the poor and the workers in America of their common plight and of their common exploitation by the rich. Socialist and communist political parties often required extraordinary dedication from their members to the cause—in the case of the Communist Party, the near-complete subordination of their individual lives to collective action and party leadership. Socialists and communists sponsored colleges, newspapers, journals of opinion, plays, art exhibits, folk-music concerts, parades, and summer camps to promote class consciousness. Socialists and communists led various labor and farm unions and sought to build class solidarity among these members." Source: http://www.enotes.com/1930-lifestyles-social-trends-american-decades/red-decade-solidarity-individualism
Now consider this from an article published in 1948:
The Democratic Party Adopts the Soviet Bill of Rights:
“[The] historic Democratic party is no more, that it has been transformed into a labor party so completely that there is nothing left of it but the name. The process by which [the] transformation….was brought about had its beginnings during the period of “crisis government” established by Franklin D. Roosevelt and his “brain trust” in 1933. Measures having far-reaching application and effect were drafted by the President’s “advisors” and were jammed through Congress, frequently without most of the members having an opportunity to read them.
Mr. Roosevelt had been elected in 1932 by an electoral majority of eight to one….In such circumstances, Congress practically abdicated. It became literally a “rubber stamp” Congress. And Republican Senators and Representatives, with the majority of their constituents supporting President Roosevelt, were careful not to show too much opposition to measures which he favored. That’s why is was so easy to junk the Democratic platform of 1932 and to enact so many measures that violated the most fundamental principles of the historic Democratic party without protest from Southern Democrats, and even with their support.
One sequence [of the transformation] began during the period from 1935 to 1937, or at the very height of what Eugene Lyons has called “The Red Decade,” when it was fashionable in certain circles in New York, Los Angeles and Washington to glorify all things Russian and to affect a “revolutionary” attitude toward all existing institutions in the United States. It was a time when literally dozens of organizations with high-sounding names were set up in this country by the Communists to attract innocent “fellow travelers” and when The Daily Worker undertook to popularize the slogan “Communism is the Americanism of the Twentieth Century.”
In February, 1935, Joseph Stalin announced that the Russian Constitution would be democratized; in June, 1936, the first draft of the new Soviet Constitution was completed and published, [and adopted December 5, 1936]. It was promptly translated into English and by February, 1937, copies of it in the form of a five-cent pamphlet were available throughout this country. It immediately became the leading topic of discussion among the so-called “liberals” in the United States.
[The] Soviet Bill of Rights….guarantees every citizen a job….the right to material security in old age and also in case of illness and loss of capacity to toil….[and] “The equal rights of citizens of the USSR, independent of their nationality and race, in all fields of economic, state, cultural and public-political life is unalterable law. Any direct or indirect limitation of rights, or conversely, any establishment of direct or indirect preferences of citizens dependent on their racial and national membership, as well as all preaching of national exclusiveness, or hate and contempt, is punishable by law.”
[In late January, 1944] President Roosevelt revealed that the [New Deal] was being replaced by a streamlined post-war program. Here is what President Roosevelt said:
“As our nation had grown in size and stature, however – as our industrial economy expanded – [our previous life and liberty] political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness. We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident.
We have accepted, so to speak, a second bill of rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all – regardless of station, race or creed. Among these are: The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or mines of the nation; The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation; The right of every business man, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad; The right of every family to a decent home; The right of adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health; The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident and unemployment; The right to a good education.”
The striking resemblance which this whole passage bears to the….Soviet Bill of Rights need not be dwelt upon. In his message to Congress on September 6, 1945, President Truman said:
“The objectives for our domestic economy which we seek in long-range plans were summarized by the late President Franklin D. Roosevelt over a year and a half ago in the form of an Economic Bill of rights. Let us make the attainment of those rights the essence of post-war American economic life.”
Notably, he issued a “salute to labor” on Labor Day, 1946, and more recently on June 28, 1947….he discussed the subject in an address to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People at Lincoln Memorial in Washington. In his “salute to labor,” President Truman said:
“Labor, perhaps more than any other group, has consistently supported [FDR’s] “Economic Bill of Rights.” We must now move forward to full achievement of these objectives: useful and remunerative jobs for all; income high enough to provide adequate food, clothing and recreation; freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopoly; adequate health protection; more effective social security measures, and educational opportunities for all.”
In his more recent address to the [NAACP], by coupling these “economic” rights with other civil rights, he stated clearly….that it is the responsibility of the federal government to guarantee and to enforce these new rights. “The extension of civil rights today means not protection of the people AGAINST the government, but protection of the people BY the government.”
(The South’s Political Plight, Peter Molyneaux, Calhoun Clubs of the South, Inc., 1948, pp. 56-57, 67-70, 75-77, 81-84,)
Where, and from whom, have you heard those very same words and sentiments expressed in recent months? As the writer says above: "The striking resemblance which this whole passage bears to the…Soviet Bill of Rights need not be dwelt upon." I would agree. The reason is abundantly clear.
What we are seeing, right now, in Washington, DC and, indeed, throughout the United States is nothing more than a replay of "The Red Decade" from America's 1930's.
It's "Marxism on the March" in America. All the while we are suffering from the damage done this country during the original Red Decade.
I am slowly coming around to the conclusion that America's financial crisis and Obama's election and reelection and even the current "fiscal cliff" crisis have been carefully contrived and orchestrated.
Looking at our immediate future, I am now expecting a devastating US monetary collapse probably before the summer of 2013. Why? Because it is the next logical step in the devolution of the United States as a constitutional representative republic.
If I am right, and I now believe that there is a very good chance that I am, the US government must be rendered inoperable. We are very nearly there even now.
Not to worry, though, I suspect there is a brand new government, waiting in the wings, to immediately step forward and save the day. It won't be a constitutional government. It won't be a representative republic. It WILL be an authoritarian, powerful, central government based on Marxism -- Communism.
Why in the world would I dare even speculate such a thing? Because, dear reader, I am a student of history. (Emphasis on "STUDENT". I'm STILL learning!) We are told by "the preacher" in the book of Ecclesiastes in the Bible "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun." Ecclesiastes 1:9.
It is unfortunate but most do not understand that by studying the past one also studies the future.
I have made an attempt here to connect the past of the US to the its present and to my interpretation of the country's immediate future. And no, it is not pretty nor pleasant.
May God Bless America -- and SOON!
J. D. Longstreet
Democratic Party Embraces Socialist Bill of Rights
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
*****************
If you are a regular to this column, then you know we have mentioned many times that current events in Washington, are very familiar. We've seen this movie before. And we have.
For the past four years we have drawn our readers attention to the fact that Obama's agenda is, in fact, a socialist agenda a form of "Marxism Lite", if you will. In fact, we have pointed out many times that the Democratic Party, itself, seems to reflect the agenda of the socialist party. We have even, on occasion, suggested the Democratic Party change it's name to more accurately reflect its socialist ideology.
The curse of America is its refusal to learn from its past. In fact, more often than not, we refuse to look back for guidance even when compelled to do so by out-of-control events. We pay a heavy price for that reluctance and reticence.
Had we looked back recently, we would have realized the roots of the machinations of the Democratic Party, and its current leader Barack H. Obama, are deep in "The Red Decade" of the 1930's in America.
"The Red Decade is a term coined by journalist and historian Eugene Lyons to describe a period in American history in the 1930s characterized by a widespread infatuation with communism in general and Stalinism in particular. Lyons believed this idolization of Joseph Stalin and exultation of Bolshevik achievements to have reached its high point in 1938, running deepest amongst liberals, intellectuals, and journalists and even some government and federal officials." SOURCE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Red_Decade
Consider this: "Communal consciousness was also stimulated by the activities of socialists and communists throughout the 1930s. Although probably fewer than 100,000 Americans were members of socialist or communist parties in the 1930s, enough prominent intellectuals joined or gave their support to such parties, and enough strikes and demonstrations were led by such groups, to earn the 1930s the title of "the red decade" from some historians. For both socialist and communist groups the goal was not communal consciousness, but class consciousness—a recognition by the poor and the workers in America of their common plight and of their common exploitation by the rich. Socialist and communist political parties often required extraordinary dedication from their members to the cause—in the case of the Communist Party, the near-complete subordination of their individual lives to collective action and party leadership. Socialists and communists sponsored colleges, newspapers, journals of opinion, plays, art exhibits, folk-music concerts, parades, and summer camps to promote class consciousness. Socialists and communists led various labor and farm unions and sought to build class solidarity among these members." Source: http://www.enotes.com/1930-lifestyles-social-trends-american-decades/red-decade-solidarity-individualism
Now consider this from an article published in 1948:
The Democratic Party Adopts the Soviet Bill of Rights:
“[The] historic Democratic party is no more, that it has been transformed into a labor party so completely that there is nothing left of it but the name. The process by which [the] transformation….was brought about had its beginnings during the period of “crisis government” established by Franklin D. Roosevelt and his “brain trust” in 1933. Measures having far-reaching application and effect were drafted by the President’s “advisors” and were jammed through Congress, frequently without most of the members having an opportunity to read them.
Mr. Roosevelt had been elected in 1932 by an electoral majority of eight to one….In such circumstances, Congress practically abdicated. It became literally a “rubber stamp” Congress. And Republican Senators and Representatives, with the majority of their constituents supporting President Roosevelt, were careful not to show too much opposition to measures which he favored. That’s why is was so easy to junk the Democratic platform of 1932 and to enact so many measures that violated the most fundamental principles of the historic Democratic party without protest from Southern Democrats, and even with their support.
One sequence [of the transformation] began during the period from 1935 to 1937, or at the very height of what Eugene Lyons has called “The Red Decade,” when it was fashionable in certain circles in New York, Los Angeles and Washington to glorify all things Russian and to affect a “revolutionary” attitude toward all existing institutions in the United States. It was a time when literally dozens of organizations with high-sounding names were set up in this country by the Communists to attract innocent “fellow travelers” and when The Daily Worker undertook to popularize the slogan “Communism is the Americanism of the Twentieth Century.”
In February, 1935, Joseph Stalin announced that the Russian Constitution would be democratized; in June, 1936, the first draft of the new Soviet Constitution was completed and published, [and adopted December 5, 1936]. It was promptly translated into English and by February, 1937, copies of it in the form of a five-cent pamphlet were available throughout this country. It immediately became the leading topic of discussion among the so-called “liberals” in the United States.
[The] Soviet Bill of Rights….guarantees every citizen a job….the right to material security in old age and also in case of illness and loss of capacity to toil….[and] “The equal rights of citizens of the USSR, independent of their nationality and race, in all fields of economic, state, cultural and public-political life is unalterable law. Any direct or indirect limitation of rights, or conversely, any establishment of direct or indirect preferences of citizens dependent on their racial and national membership, as well as all preaching of national exclusiveness, or hate and contempt, is punishable by law.”
[In late January, 1944] President Roosevelt revealed that the [New Deal] was being replaced by a streamlined post-war program. Here is what President Roosevelt said:
“As our nation had grown in size and stature, however – as our industrial economy expanded – [our previous life and liberty] political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness. We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident.
We have accepted, so to speak, a second bill of rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all – regardless of station, race or creed. Among these are: The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or mines of the nation; The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation; The right of every business man, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad; The right of every family to a decent home; The right of adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health; The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident and unemployment; The right to a good education.”
The striking resemblance which this whole passage bears to the….Soviet Bill of Rights need not be dwelt upon. In his message to Congress on September 6, 1945, President Truman said:
“The objectives for our domestic economy which we seek in long-range plans were summarized by the late President Franklin D. Roosevelt over a year and a half ago in the form of an Economic Bill of rights. Let us make the attainment of those rights the essence of post-war American economic life.”
Notably, he issued a “salute to labor” on Labor Day, 1946, and more recently on June 28, 1947….he discussed the subject in an address to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People at Lincoln Memorial in Washington. In his “salute to labor,” President Truman said:
“Labor, perhaps more than any other group, has consistently supported [FDR’s] “Economic Bill of Rights.” We must now move forward to full achievement of these objectives: useful and remunerative jobs for all; income high enough to provide adequate food, clothing and recreation; freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopoly; adequate health protection; more effective social security measures, and educational opportunities for all.”
In his more recent address to the [NAACP], by coupling these “economic” rights with other civil rights, he stated clearly….that it is the responsibility of the federal government to guarantee and to enforce these new rights. “The extension of civil rights today means not protection of the people AGAINST the government, but protection of the people BY the government.”
(The South’s Political Plight, Peter Molyneaux, Calhoun Clubs of the South, Inc., 1948, pp. 56-57, 67-70, 75-77, 81-84,)
Where, and from whom, have you heard those very same words and sentiments expressed in recent months? As the writer says above: "The striking resemblance which this whole passage bears to the…Soviet Bill of Rights need not be dwelt upon." I would agree. The reason is abundantly clear.
What we are seeing, right now, in Washington, DC and, indeed, throughout the United States is nothing more than a replay of "The Red Decade" from America's 1930's.
It's "Marxism on the March" in America. All the while we are suffering from the damage done this country during the original Red Decade.
I am slowly coming around to the conclusion that America's financial crisis and Obama's election and reelection and even the current "fiscal cliff" crisis have been carefully contrived and orchestrated.
Looking at our immediate future, I am now expecting a devastating US monetary collapse probably before the summer of 2013. Why? Because it is the next logical step in the devolution of the United States as a constitutional representative republic.
If I am right, and I now believe that there is a very good chance that I am, the US government must be rendered inoperable. We are very nearly there even now.
Not to worry, though, I suspect there is a brand new government, waiting in the wings, to immediately step forward and save the day. It won't be a constitutional government. It won't be a representative republic. It WILL be an authoritarian, powerful, central government based on Marxism -- Communism.
Why in the world would I dare even speculate such a thing? Because, dear reader, I am a student of history. (Emphasis on "STUDENT". I'm STILL learning!) We are told by "the preacher" in the book of Ecclesiastes in the Bible "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun." Ecclesiastes 1:9.
It is unfortunate but most do not understand that by studying the past one also studies the future.
I have made an attempt here to connect the past of the US to the its present and to my interpretation of the country's immediate future. And no, it is not pretty nor pleasant.
May God Bless America -- and SOON!
J. D. Longstreet
Happy New Year! Attention Washington: fix our spending problem
By James Shott
As last week came to a close the nation was peering over the edge of “Fiscal Cliff” with only a few days left to fix the problem, and it seemed likely that nothing more would be done before 2013 arrived.
Nearly everyone likes to celebrate holidays, but when there is a crisis afoot, the people whose duty it is to address that problem are expected to make the appropriate sacrifices and do their job. Finding that your house is on fire, you expect the fire department to respond to your call. You don’t expect to be told, “sorry, but all firefighters are taking the holiday off.”
Where the fiscal cliff is concerned, the public servants we pay to responsibly run our government have put that priority behind others they consider more important. They went home for the holiday, or to Hawaii.
President Obama tells us over and over how the policies of conservatives and Republicans are responsible for "getting us in this mess." But that is wrong: what got us in this mess is decades of irresponsible and improper spending and taxation. It has not always been like it is today, and we are the victims of wrong-headed policies from those public servants.
Senator Kent Conrad (D-N.D), retiring Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, told the National Press Club recently that raising both spending and taxes really should not be a problem, when viewed as a percent of gross domestic product (GDP). He noted that since 1969 the budget has been balanced five times and tax revenue was around 20 percent of GDP each of those times, and that the budget has never been balanced at the historical level of 18 or 18.5 percent of GDP, the level many Republicans favor.
Spending for Fiscal Year 2012 exceeds 22.9 percent of GDP, according to the 2012 edition of “Federal Spending by the Numbers.” In the past 20 years, federal outlays have grown 71 percent faster than inflation, and the average American household’s share of this spending is $29,691, or roughly two-thirds of median household income. Federal spending is projected to continue increasing at this rate, pushing total government outlays to $5.5 trillion a decade from now, and to about 36 percent of GDP in the next 25 years. To quote Mr. Obama: “That’s irresponsible. That’s unpatriotic."
As last week came to a close the nation was peering over the edge of “Fiscal Cliff” with only a few days left to fix the problem, and it seemed likely that nothing more would be done before 2013 arrived.
Nearly everyone likes to celebrate holidays, but when there is a crisis afoot, the people whose duty it is to address that problem are expected to make the appropriate sacrifices and do their job. Finding that your house is on fire, you expect the fire department to respond to your call. You don’t expect to be told, “sorry, but all firefighters are taking the holiday off.”
Where the fiscal cliff is concerned, the public servants we pay to responsibly run our government have put that priority behind others they consider more important. They went home for the holiday, or to Hawaii.
President Obama tells us over and over how the policies of conservatives and Republicans are responsible for "getting us in this mess." But that is wrong: what got us in this mess is decades of irresponsible and improper spending and taxation. It has not always been like it is today, and we are the victims of wrong-headed policies from those public servants.
Senator Kent Conrad (D-N.D), retiring Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, told the National Press Club recently that raising both spending and taxes really should not be a problem, when viewed as a percent of gross domestic product (GDP). He noted that since 1969 the budget has been balanced five times and tax revenue was around 20 percent of GDP each of those times, and that the budget has never been balanced at the historical level of 18 or 18.5 percent of GDP, the level many Republicans favor.
Spending for Fiscal Year 2012 exceeds 22.9 percent of GDP, according to the 2012 edition of “Federal Spending by the Numbers.” In the past 20 years, federal outlays have grown 71 percent faster than inflation, and the average American household’s share of this spending is $29,691, or roughly two-thirds of median household income. Federal spending is projected to continue increasing at this rate, pushing total government outlays to $5.5 trillion a decade from now, and to about 36 percent of GDP in the next 25 years. To quote Mr. Obama: “That’s irresponsible. That’s unpatriotic."
Sen. Conrad is a fiscal hawk that sensibly advocates balance between revenue and spending, a philosophy that would eliminate the annual budget deficits the Obama administration loves. But like so many of those in Congress and in the administration, he accepts the current levels of both spending and taxation as appropriate. They are not only inappropriate, but are eight times higher than the average level over the first 130 years of our history.
Dean Kalahar, economics teacher and author of Practical Economics, explains that from 1787 to 1849, federal spending averaged 1.7 percent of GDP. For the next 51 years, from 1850 to 1900 (including fighting the Civil War) spending averaged only 3.1 percent. And from 1901 till 1930 (including fighting WWI) it never reached 8 percent, and averaged approximately 3.2 percent.
During the height of the progressive movement, including FDR's New Deal, federal spending never exceeded the 1934 level of 10.7 percent. And even though as WWII raged and spending shot to 43.6 percent of GDP, four years later it had fallen to 11.6 percent. For 130 years of our existence, federal spending averaged around 2.5 percent of GDP, says Mr. Kalahar.
That level of spending was close to what the Founders had in mind for their limited government. But it has grown incrementally, as politicians abandoned constitutional limits and today this statist, socialistic philosophy has moved us toward fiscal collapse.
Mr. Kalahar understands what public servants and many, perhaps most, Americans do not: Government spending is taken directly out of the pockets of the people, or out of the economy. “Every dollar consumed by our profligate government is one less that could fund productive advancement in the private economy,” he wrote. “Every dime needlessly spent by government comes at the cost of efficiency in moving scarce resources to their most valuable use.”
What that means in simple terms is that if left alone, the private economy will most often cruise along comfortably, repair itself when necessary, and the genius of Americans will produce an expanding economy that benefits us all.
“The just and proper fiscal balance is to give the state what it needs to protect you and your property while at the same time protecting you and your property from the state,” he wrote. “Looking at the low historical trends that allowed this great nation to lead the world into prosperity would be a good place to start an honest debate in determining federal spending. A good rule of thumb would be to give half of what the politicians ask for.”
And, as economist Walter Williams reminds us about federal spending, "If 10 percent is good enough for the church, it ought to be good enough for Congress."
As we have incrementally increased spending as a percent of GDP, now we must begin to incrementally return to the spending level before 1930.
Cross-posted from Observations
Dean Kalahar, economics teacher and author of Practical Economics, explains that from 1787 to 1849, federal spending averaged 1.7 percent of GDP. For the next 51 years, from 1850 to 1900 (including fighting the Civil War) spending averaged only 3.1 percent. And from 1901 till 1930 (including fighting WWI) it never reached 8 percent, and averaged approximately 3.2 percent.
During the height of the progressive movement, including FDR's New Deal, federal spending never exceeded the 1934 level of 10.7 percent. And even though as WWII raged and spending shot to 43.6 percent of GDP, four years later it had fallen to 11.6 percent. For 130 years of our existence, federal spending averaged around 2.5 percent of GDP, says Mr. Kalahar.
That level of spending was close to what the Founders had in mind for their limited government. But it has grown incrementally, as politicians abandoned constitutional limits and today this statist, socialistic philosophy has moved us toward fiscal collapse.
Mr. Kalahar understands what public servants and many, perhaps most, Americans do not: Government spending is taken directly out of the pockets of the people, or out of the economy. “Every dollar consumed by our profligate government is one less that could fund productive advancement in the private economy,” he wrote. “Every dime needlessly spent by government comes at the cost of efficiency in moving scarce resources to their most valuable use.”
What that means in simple terms is that if left alone, the private economy will most often cruise along comfortably, repair itself when necessary, and the genius of Americans will produce an expanding economy that benefits us all.
“The just and proper fiscal balance is to give the state what it needs to protect you and your property while at the same time protecting you and your property from the state,” he wrote. “Looking at the low historical trends that allowed this great nation to lead the world into prosperity would be a good place to start an honest debate in determining federal spending. A good rule of thumb would be to give half of what the politicians ask for.”
And, as economist Walter Williams reminds us about federal spending, "If 10 percent is good enough for the church, it ought to be good enough for Congress."
As we have incrementally increased spending as a percent of GDP, now we must begin to incrementally return to the spending level before 1930.
Cross-posted from Observations
As the Melodrama Continues...
by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
As the nation watches (as well as the world at large) the United States House, led by the rEpublican false conservatives have us serfs standing at the cliff's edge as we look into the abyss.
Perhaps, just maybe, the intransigent false conservatives are running out of time and their true motives are being recognized by the many who heretofore believed them. As more disgruntled past supporters turn their backs on the false conservatives maybe, just maybe they ought to look to history to find the ultimate result of their type of behavior and intransigence. Even a staunch Ayn Rand Objectivist has the ability to see beyond the present as he peers into the future. At least this one does. Echoes of our founding fathers are ringing in my ears as I write this.
Eric Cantor, the intelligent yet blind House Majority leader may very well, and soon find himself the object of ridicule. As difficult as it might be for some to accept the reality is he will have reaped the benefit of his intransigence.
A lifelong conservative/libertarian I have come to the realization that the party of Eisenhower/Goldwater/Reagan has morphed into something most rational and reasonable people now struggle, or even fail to recognize let alone understand. It is indeed unfortunate as the opposition party, the democrat progressives offer little of which one can be entirely hopeful of as well.
So hang on folks, the future ain't too hopeful or bright. All we can hope for is the smoothest ride down and hopefully a not to violent landing. The thing is, most of America won't even recognize, let alone understand they have been scammed. The Oligarchs however will be laughing and licking their chops all the way to the financial institutions and the seats of power they own lock, stock, and barrel.
It is indeed puzzling that students of political science and history, including economic history have brought us to this point. What is most interesting is it has been the party that should have been the champion of Friedrich A. Hayek that has LED us to record deficits and an unsustainable national debt. Rather than acting like the fiscal conservatives they would have everyone believe they were in fact our nation's biggest spendthrifts. There has never been greater enthusiasts of Keynesian deficit spending economics than the modern rEpublican party.
And folks, that IS a Fact.
Via: Memeorandum
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
As the nation watches (as well as the world at large) the United States House, led by the rEpublican false conservatives have us serfs standing at the cliff's edge as we look into the abyss.
Perhaps, just maybe, the intransigent false conservatives are running out of time and their true motives are being recognized by the many who heretofore believed them. As more disgruntled past supporters turn their backs on the false conservatives maybe, just maybe they ought to look to history to find the ultimate result of their type of behavior and intransigence. Even a staunch Ayn Rand Objectivist has the ability to see beyond the present as he peers into the future. At least this one does. Echoes of our founding fathers are ringing in my ears as I write this.
Eric Cantor, the intelligent yet blind House Majority leader may very well, and soon find himself the object of ridicule. As difficult as it might be for some to accept the reality is he will have reaped the benefit of his intransigence.
A lifelong conservative/libertarian I have come to the realization that the party of Eisenhower/Goldwater/Reagan has morphed into something most rational and reasonable people now struggle, or even fail to recognize let alone understand. It is indeed unfortunate as the opposition party, the democrat progressives offer little of which one can be entirely hopeful of as well.
So hang on folks, the future ain't too hopeful or bright. All we can hope for is the smoothest ride down and hopefully a not to violent landing. The thing is, most of America won't even recognize, let alone understand they have been scammed. The Oligarchs however will be laughing and licking their chops all the way to the financial institutions and the seats of power they own lock, stock, and barrel.
BuzzFeed Politics - WASHINGTON — Less than 12 hours after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Vice President Joe Biden marshaled a strong 89 votes for their fiscal cliff plan, the agreement appeared on the brink of unraveling at the hands of a House Republican revolt that includes Majority Leader Eric Cantor.
During a closed-door meeting of the GOP conference Tuesday afternoon, Cantor told his colleagues that he would not support the deal — despite the fact that he and Speaker John Boehner the night before had vowed to “consider” the bill.
Although his remarks were brief, they sent shock waves through his conference, which was already extremely skeptical of the agreement, and perhaps looking for a leader.
Conservative opposition to the agreement stems from a host of issues, including the fact that the deal does not include any spending cuts, would significantly add to the nation’s deficit and raises taxes on those making more than $400,000 a year.
And Cantor’s not alone in opposing the deal: the agreement is universally disliked within Republican circles, and even Democrats in the House and Senate have voiced complaints about the deal.
The lack of spending cuts in the Senate bill was a universal concern amongst members in today’s meeting," said Boehner spokesperson Brendan Buck. "Conversations with members will continue throughout the afternoon on the path forward.”
Rep. Steve LaTourette, a Boehner ally, said there were “two schools of thought” expressed in the meeting: To accept the deal and “live to fight another day,” or amend the measure and send it back to the Senate.
The latter option clearly enjoyed support from the majority of the conference.
“I think it’s moving in that direction," LaTourette said.
Still, Cantor’s decision to come out against the agreement was unexpected.{Continue Reading}
It is indeed puzzling that students of political science and history, including economic history have brought us to this point. What is most interesting is it has been the party that should have been the champion of Friedrich A. Hayek that has LED us to record deficits and an unsustainable national debt. Rather than acting like the fiscal conservatives they would have everyone believe they were in fact our nation's biggest spendthrifts. There has never been greater enthusiasts of Keynesian deficit spending economics than the modern rEpublican party.
And folks, that IS a Fact.
Via: Memeorandum
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)
