CC

An Intense Moment Of Truth

2012-01-27T21:33:00.000-07:00

The Real Dirt On Slick Rick Santorum

2012-01-27T19:07:00.001-07:00

by Jake Morphonios, Nolan Chart

Saturday, January 7, 2012

Texas Congressman Ron Paul has just released a hard-hitting ad against former Senator Rick Santorum. The ad, entitled “Betrayal”, exposes Santorum’s record of hypocrisy, duplicity and corruption. But is the ad fair?
Rick Santorum did well in Iowa and may do well in South Carolina because he is perceived to be deeply committed to family and social values. He is an outspoken opponent of gay marriage and abortion. He wears his religious beliefs on his sleeves.
Many fall for his pious act - but remember, Santorum is a sly lawyer-turned-politician-turned-lobbyist. Don’t let the sweater vests fool you. Santorum played the people of Iowa like a harp, and he’s hoping to do the same thing to social conservatives in South Carolina.
If Santorum is going to claim to be a champion of values, we need to look not only at what he says, but what he has done. And fortunately, Rick Santorum has left us with a voluminous record of big-government hypocrisy and outright corruption to sift through. Before making your decision about Rick Santorum, take a minute to learn the facts. There’s more to being a “values” candidate than simply bashing gays all the time. Personal ethics matter. And in that department, Santorum comes up short...

Read entire article at Nolan Chart - http://www.nolanchart.com/article9242-the-real-dirt-on-slick-rick-santorum.html

The Electability Of Despicabilty

2012-01-24T18:11:00.001-07:00

Travis Jackson, CC

It's hard to imagine that voters in South Carolina were so easily swayed by the smooth talking Newt Gingrich. Once again, we were witness to another politician escaping public scrutiny by brandishing big words and attacking the media when a legitimate question arises about ethics and electability.

I do not necessarily agree with how the question was asked, nor agree that the debate started off with this line of questioning, but in order to truly know who we are voting for, shouldn't we know the truth?

A man that supposedly supports family values yet has three overlapping marriages should raise questions about his moral character. Unfortunately, this fact was lost on the voters of South Carolina. Gingrich, as in Newt fashion, effectively dodged the query by blaming others for bringing it to light, calling their actions "despicable." Failing to answer for his own despicable actions, he painted the liberal media as the enemy and somehow managed to win over the voters in South Carolina and remove himself from their cross-hairs. It almost seems that Americans, so used to the lies and deception, have lost the ability to think critically about anything. The real question should be, why should we allow a free pass to Gingrich who, after attacking Mitt Romney's "character" in South Carolina with his Bain Capital allegations, goes on and offers up disdain when his own character is questioned? This is the very definition of hypocrisy, a defining characteristic of all Republican candidates not named Ron Paul.

For the average American voter, character, electability, and integrity should all be important when it comes to electing leaders. For Newt Gingrich to dismiss this question so indignantly means two things: He is right, and the media is trying to create a story to take down the poor, innocent, former Speaker; Or, he is wrong and he has something to hide. Let's examine a little of his history to see just how honest he really is.

When asked about his eighty-four ethics violations as Speaker of the House, Gingrich was once again indignant and responded by saying that the congressional ethics investigation against him was conducted by "a very partisan political committee" in a way that "related more to the politics of the Democratic Party than to ethics." PolitiFact, checking his claim, rated this statement as "pants on fire," stating that "The full House went on to pass the ethics report 395 to 28, with 196 Republicans voting for it and just 26 voting against it." (here) The overwhelming support for the ethics investigation against Gingrich in 1997 resulted in his being reprimanded by the House of Representatives and fined $300,000. It also led to his eventual "resignation" from Congress.

We are also talking about a man who recently claimed:

“I went to a Goldwater organizing session in 1964. I met with Ronald Reagan for the first time in 1974. I worked with Jack Kemp, and Art Laffer and others to develop supply side economics in the late ’70s. I helped Governor Reagan become President Reagan. I helped pass the Reagan economic program and worked with the National Security Council on issues including the collapse of the Soviet Empire…”

According to Glenn Greenwald at Salon, this is not true either. In fact, "Gingrich denounced President Reagan’s rapprochement with Gorbachev in 1985 as potentially 'the most dangerous summit for the West since Adolf Hitler met with Chamberlain in 1938 at Munich.'" (here) Did Gingrich help win the cold war as he claimed? The answer is no. This is just another bold lie to pander to the Republican Party. As far as his support of Goldwater, Gingrich can tell us which side he supported in his own words:

Whether it is supporting the individual mandate for healthcare, TARP funds, bailouts, or his payouts from Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac, Gingrich has been caught lying and twisting words to fool the American voter too many times. As a self claimed "expert" on history, it is ironic that he cannot even remember his own. His constant lies and manipulations could even give the king of flip flopping, Mitt Romney, a run for his money. Yes, I could spend hours blowing holes in most of the statements he has made during this Presidential run, but this article would be too long and redundant. Instead, I invite you to do a little research on your own. Remember, the media is not doing its job vetting these candidates so it is up to you to know who it is you are voting for. Please take the time to do research for yourself this voting season. America depends on it.

I will leave you with a really good clip from Jon Stewart who usually calls it like he sees it.

The Daily Show
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Hello, I Am A Republican And I Would Like My Party Back!

2012-01-22T00:55:00.001-07:00

Travis Jackson, CC

It was less than twelve years ago that the party I grew up believing in seemed to be on the right track, resembling a much different version than the one we see today.

On Oct. 12, 2000, when George W. Bush was running as a Republican to become president of the United States, he was asked during a debate, "One of you is about to be elected the leader of the single most powerful nation of the world-- economically, financially, militarily, diplomatically, you name it. Have you formed any guiding principles for exercising this enormous power?"

Considering the foreign policy stance of most republicans today, the answer George W. Bush gives may surprise you. He says: "When it comes to foreign policy, that will be my guiding question. Is it in our nation's interests? Peace in the Middle East is in our nation's interests. Having a hemisphere that is free for trade and peaceful is in our nation's interests. Strong relations in Europe is in our nation's interests. I've thought a lot about what it means to be the President. I also understand an administration is not one person but an administration is dedicated citizens who are called by the President to serve the country, to serve a cause greater than self. And so I've thought about an administration of people who represent all America, but people who understand my compassionate and conservative philosophy."

He continues:"If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us; if we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us. And our nation stands alone right now in the world in terms of power, and that's why we've got to be humble, and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom...I'm not so sure the role of the United States is to go around the world and say this is the way it's got to be. We can help. And maybe it's just our difference in government, the way we view government. I mean I want to empower people. I want to help people help themselves, not have government tell people what to do. I just don't think it's the role of the United States to walk into a country and say, we do it this way, so should you."

With a humble foreign policy, no nation building, and a common sense approach to foreign affairs, G.W. won over the majority of the Republican party.

And then...he forgot.

And then...we forgot.

Today we stand upon a precipice economically, and the Republican party that used to preach peace and humbleness, has become a party of pre-emptive war and nation building, touting regularly that peace is achieved through strength. Many of today's popular "Republican voices" say that this is just "the conservative way!" Opponents of this thought process are branded as "unpatriotic," and listeners are told that detractors of this philosophy "don't support the troops!" This once proud party that believed in fiscal responsibility are damning our economy with their war rhetoric and propaganda, while reaching into the minds and hearts of their base and stealing their souls. Slowly but surely, people are forgetting who they are and what conservatism truly means. They have become zombies, slipping into line and marching to the drums of war. Fear has replaced hope and the blood-lust for those they are told to fear has replaced common sense and dignity.

Fear is a natural consequence when one loses control. In that instant, two things can happen: A man can conquer his fear, learn from his mistakes, and become stronger for it, or that man can cower down, and become a slave to that fear he so desperately hates. The men who lead this country have given in to fear. The pundits and personalities on the news and radios are slaves to it. The few voices of reason are drowned out by the chorus of desperate voices that cling to hate. They flex their military might at will, spilling innocent blood in the name of security. Little do they realize that the strength of our nation was never found in our military, but rather in our goodness, our spirit, our freedoms, and our prosperity.

I feel sorry for the many who follow so blindly, and who look to government and our military to care for them and to keep them safe. Those who believe that "terrorists" are the real threat, do not truly understand what is really occurring in our country. They have been brainwashed to go along, yet all the while their country falls apart around them. Their focus being far off, considering what might be, makes them blind to the dangers right outside their home.

You would think the "conservative" party would have taken a step back and listened when, recently, Navy Admiral, Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff stated, "I've said many times that I believe the single, biggest threat to our national security is our debt, so I also believe we have every responsibility to help eliminate that threat." Likewise, Ron Paul, the Congressman from Texas running in the Republican primary has stated on several occasions that we cannot afford this military adventurism overseas and that it would eventually bankrupt our nation. Even while Americans and our leaders were still in a daze from 9/11, allowing fear to overtake them, he stood up and railed before Congress saying, "If we can’t or won’t define the enemy, the cost to fight such a war will be endless. How many American troops are we prepared to lose? How much money are we prepared to spend? How many innocent civilians, in our nation and others, are we willing to see killed? How many American civilians will we jeopardize? How much of our civil liberties are we prepared to give up? How much prosperity will we sacrifice?

That single voice of reason, the one that stands on principle and truth, is still being drowned out today. We have a chance to elect a real leader in this country that has shown he is no slave to fear. Instead, sadly, most Republicans continue to vote with hatred in their hearts. They continue to be slaves to the same party that is laying the groundwork for war right outside their doorstep.

Ever since Congress passed the Patriot Act back in 2001, it seems the floodgates have been opened for more and more intrusions and abridgements of those fundamental liberties expressly protected in the Bill of Rights. From the Patriot Act, to the Military Commissions Act, to the NDAA (Indefinite Detention Act), and to now the Enemy Expatriation Act (EEA), big government Democrats AND Republicans in Washington, D.C., are clearly and unmistakingly declaring war on the American people.

This is where most of todays "Republican Conservatives" would stop and laugh about conspiracy theories and kookiness. However, let's look at a few of the policies and legislation that's been passed since 9/11:

The Patriot Act has been talked about for many years. It did more to destroy our Bill of Rights than all other pieces of legislation in American history combined. It basically allows the government to be pre-emptive in going after "terrorist suspects," to the point they can violate our Constitutional rights at will.

The year 2009 brought us The Military Commisions Act (MCA) which effectively casts aside the Constitution and the principle of habeas corpus, protecting against unlawful and indefinite imprisonment. This also gave the president absolute power to designate enemy combatants, and to set his own definitions for torture.

Also in 2009, we saw an "official," secret report by Homeland Security called "The Missouri Papers" leaked to the press after they handed it down to law enforcement agencies in Missouri. It warned that, supporters of Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and Chuck Baldwin should be identified as potentially dangerous “militia members,” and Missouri State law enforcement officials were notified to be on guard. Beyond that, anyone that identified themselves as being pro-life, pro-Second Amendment, anti-Federal Reserve, Christians who believe in the return of Christ, and even returning Iraq War veterans were likewise targeted as potentially dangerous to Missouri State law enforcement personnel.

At the end of 2011, The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), otherwise known as the “Indefinite Detention Act,” was passed and signed into law by President Obama on New Years Eve of this year. This legislation gives the U.S. government the power to use the military to arrest and detain American Citizens indefinitely without trial.

And now, Congress has been working to pass other laws, such as SOPA and PIPA that will regulate the internet, thus attacking free speech and free media; but the worst may be coming, a draconian bill designed to give the federal government the power to turn American citizens into enemies of the state for virtually any reason it deems necessary.

The bill is HR 3166 and S. 1698 also known as the Enemy Expatriation Act. This bill sponsored by Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Charles Dent (R-PA) would give the US government the power to strip Americans of their citizenship WITHOUT being convicted of being "hostile" against the United States. In other words, you can be stripped of your nationality for "engaging in, or purposefully and materially supporting, hostilities against the United States." Legally, the term "hostilities" means any conflict subject to the laws of war. Considering the fact that the War on Terror is a little ambiguous and encompassing, ANY action could be labeled as supporting terrorism.

It is now or never.

The Republican party must look inside itself and remember the true roots of conservatism. They must look back into the not too distant past when we believed that a humble foreign policy was wise and part of the party platform. We can no longer be zombies in this world of warfare. The war is more about OUR hearts and minds than it is about some unnamed enemy. It is time to look for the answers that our party has not given us. It is time to seek the truth. It is time to recognize that the dangers are not overseas in a far off land, but rather right here at home. It is time to dig deep and stand together with the ONLY sane candidate in the room. It is time to follow the example of a true leader and shake this fear and hate from our hearts and our party, and stand tall! It is time to take responsibility for our part in this economic calamity, and finally recognize the dangers of these Big Government Republicans and what they represent - they have led our party astray for too long! It is time to demand honest and principled leaders. It is time to strangle this government leviathan that is reaching into our homes from Washington and wrapping its tentacles around every aspect of our lives. It is time to take back our party. It is time to fight for our country. It is time to vote for Ron Paul!

Christianity and Ron Paul - The Just War Theory

2012-01-17T00:23:00.022-07:00

Travis Jackson, CC

Being a Christian man, I am amazed at the number of other Christians and Christian leaders that refuse to support Ron Paul's campaign. Countless times I have heard men and women say that Ron Paul has good ideas but his foreign policy is crazy, or insane, or isolationist. I believe the failure to recognize the merits of his foreign policy is dangerous and that blindly going into war is completely incompatible with Christian doctrine. It is becoming apparent to me that fewer and fewer Christians actually understand the lessons that Jesus taught while on this earth.

The idea of pre-emptive war is not, in any way, compatible with what I believe to be the heart of the message of Christ. To deny this is folly and will only sink us deeper into the mess we are in economically, and further diminish the respect that we once maintained around the world. It is interesting to me that the biggest proponents of war are Christians themselves. Although most claim to be conservative, they are willing to spend this country into oblivion to "defend freedom." Economically, many understand that continued domestic spending poses a threat to the health of our nation, but readily support printing and borrowing money to keep America "safe" through the barrel of a gun. Some applaud at the thought of bombing our unnamed enemies. Some will even agree that the unintended consequence of killing innocent Iraqis, Afghans, or Iranians is simply a consequence of war and can be excused. I say, the biggest threat to our freedom is the continuation of a flawed foreign policy that will only result in the loss of the heart and soul of America.

Once upon a time we believed in the "Just War Theory." Ron Paul brings this up time and time again in his arguments of why we should have a sane foreign policy. His stance on war comes from his convictions. His convictions are born of his belief in Christian principles. Yet, these convictions are marginalized and questioned by some of the most ardent of "Christians."

For those of you who do not understand what Dr. Paul is talking about, the main points of the Just War Theory are as follows:

-A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.

-A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Even just causes cannot be served by actions taken by individuals or groups who do not constitute an authority sanctioned by whatever the society and outsiders to the society deem legitimate.

-A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause (although the justice of the cause is not sufficient--see point #4). Further, a just war can only be fought with "right" intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury.

-A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.

-The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.

-The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.

-The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target.

Jesus did not come to this earth to force people to follow him; it was his example and his message that attracted people to him. It should be easy to understand that force is the least effective way to lead. It creates in the subjugate resentment and anger. This is why using force of arms to achieve peace is unnecessary and ignoble, and why ultimately, it will fail. However, the United States' foreign policy is built upon this very premise and it has created "unintended consequences," which Ron Paul and our own CIA has cited as blowback. It is our insistence on meddling in the affairs of other nations that stirs up resentment and hatred of our country. It is irrational to believe that these so called "terrorists" attack us because we are free and prosperous. If this were so, why are they not attacking other free nations? As Ron Paul has stated on numerous occasions, maybe we should take time to listen to our enemies' lists of grievances as to why they attack us. Perhaps we can learn something from them. Perhaps we can achieve peace through diplomacy and compromise. Perhaps we can come up with a solution that doesn't lead to war unnecessarily.

The truth of the matter is that wars of aggression will always create more enemies than are destroyed. With our current foreign policy, these new enemies will only be used as an excuse for more war. It is a never-ending cycle which will lead to never-ending war, with peace being unattainable. Such a foreign policy will only serve to erode the very foundation of freedom and liberty, not only for the world, but for us here at home. It should also be noted that economically it is unsustainable. Before long, much like Rome before us, our corrupt empire will fail from within.

If peace through force creates enemies, should not the opposite be true? If Christ is our example, should we not look to scripture to guide us? John 3:16 says that "for God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son..." The question remains, did God save the world through force or through something quite different? It is love that saves us, and it is love that creates peace in all men's hearts. If we are truly concerned for others, would we needlessly bomb them? If we truly desired peace would we still cling to this idea of pre-emptive war? Why is Ron Paul mocked because he desires peace? Does scripture not teach us the following?:

Matthew 5:5 - "Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth."

Matthew 5:7 - "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy."

Matthew 5:9 - "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall shall be called Sons of God."

When did we forget that we should be representing these basic tenets of The Law? Is gentleness, mercy, and striving for peace weak? Is it outdated? Is our love and mercy merely reserved to ourselves and fellow Christians? Is it only to be applied to Americans?

Matthew 5:43-48 - "You have heard that it was said, 'You should love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your father who is in heaven, for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Therefore you are to be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect."

Ignoring such simple teachings has transformed us into a nation of Pharisees. Now, as we vote to elect the next leader of our once great nation, many Christians are ignoring the only candidate that represents the very ideals that Christ taught!

Tonight, in South Carolina during a debate, Ron Paul stated that we should apply the Golden Rule to how we deal with other nations and was booed by the audience! When is "doing unto others as you would have them do unto you" or "loving your neighbor as yourself" unpopular among Christians? Have we sunk so far that we cannot recognize the evils of pre-emptive war? Jesus was especially critical of the Pharisees in his time for ignoring "the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness...." (Mt 23:23) and it makes me wonder, what he would say today. Would he support Americans blindly following a policy of aggressive war and reprisal without considering the consequences? In Iraq, over 100,000 innocent people were killed based on the lie of weapons of mass destruction. Would Christ agree with our irrational fear of a helpless nation like Iran trying to defend itself from a meddling superpower? Iran has not attacked us in any way, and are incapable of doing so, yet, we want to drop bombs on them and start a war over possibilities? Is this just? Is this merciful? Is Iran worthy of our fear? Are you willing to risk killing another 100,000 innocent people to make a point? In Matthew 10:28 Jesus says, "Do not fear those that kill the body but unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Ask yourself, who should fear who?

I think it is time we re-think our position on foreign policy. I think it is time that we consider Matthew 5:14-16 where it says "You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden...it gives light to all who are in the house. Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven."

Christians who do not stand with Ron Paul should be ashamed. Those who ridicule his positions without giving them proper thought are as guilty as our leaders and corporations that profit off of war and death. Even Solomon, the wisest of men said "When a man's ways please the LORD, he makes even his enemies to be at peace with him." (Proverbs 16:7)

Ron Paul, in 30 years of public service, has consistently warned of the dangers facing this nation. He has consistently stood for the American people and defended the Constitution. He predicted the economic collapse that we are currently facing and he was right when he warned Congress about overreacting in respect to Iraq. Despite this, he has been smeared and ridiculed, lied about, and ignored. Have we forgotten that Christ said we will be blessed "when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me...?" (Mt 5:11)

It is time to take a stand. Thomas Jefferson said, "Every country has the government it deserves." For too long, the people of this nation have elected leaders that were not worthy of being leaders. A vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil. Do not be fooled into thinking that this election does not matter. We deserve better and should demand better. The drums of war are sounding once again and we need to ask ourselves, can we really afford to be wrong again? Should we elect a leader who will mindlessly lead us into more war? Did Jesus not say in respect to Jerusalem "If you had known in this day, even you, the things which make for peace! But now they have been hidden from your eyes." (Luke 19:42) Would he not say these very words to us today?

To men of all faiths I make this plea. Open your eyes! Do not be like the Pharisees who Jesus considered to be "...whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness." (Mt 23:27) It is time to repent as individuals and as a nation. It is time to once again, through peace and example, become a city on a hill for the whole world to see. Jesus taught this, and our Founding fathers understood this. Ron Paul is the only candidate that has shown he believes it.

The Cause of Freedom

2012-01-11T20:54:00.003-07:00

Travis Jackson, CC

What made America great in the past was the spirit of liberty that resounded in the hearts and minds of her citizens. Freedom was something that was fought for and gained on the battlefield sure, but it was also an intellectual war that gained momentum on a continent far removed from the halls of tyranny in England.

Today, part of the population understands the basic principles of freedom, part are beginning to realize something is not quite right with the direction of our government and her policies, and some simply do not care. Those who do not care are not really necessarily to blame. They have been culled into a mindset of rights and privilege and educated to believe government is the caretaker.

So we fight this fight without them, deflecting the barbs and slings of media and the establishment with common sense arguments and a hope for something better.

Today I read a blog downplaying the significance of Ron Paul's run for President. One of the authors arguments was as follows: "...but Paul is mentoring a significant slice of young Americans to hate government and to disparage any notion of a common purpose."

Here is my reply:

Mr. Lou,

I have to respectfully disagree with you on this line from your article.

Ron Paul is considered a mentor by many of us Americans, not just the young people. I am 35 years old and was re-awakened in 2007 during Ron Paul’s run for the Republican nomination. I am upper middle class, and am well educated. I will not bore you with details on how I came to where I am in my support of Dr. Paul, but it is important to remember that Ron Paul’s reach goes far beyond a small group of college kids.

It is, in fact, the common purpose of liberty that unites us all. Contrary to popular opinion, it is not Ron Paul himself that creates such support, but rather, the ideas that he has steadfastly and honorably represented in his time in Washington. He garners such a following because he is incorruptible, often being the lone voice of reason screaming on the road less traveled. I heard it said recently that “Most politicians spend their career chasing the electorate.” “Ron Paul is unique in that he’s spent his career for decades standing in one place, and now people are coming to him.”

His ideas of limited government, personal liberty, and a common sense approach to foreign policy should be ideas that everyone should embrace. They are the ideas of our heritage, the views of our founders, and the very principles that inspired the writing of our Constitution.

To insinuate that he is in any way teaching others to hate government is an argument born of fallacy and a lack of understanding. Government is always dangerous because of man’s quest for power. Thomas Jefferson said, “In questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

It is not a question of hating government, but one of distrust in the men who seek power to control the people. This is and always has been the danger of any central government. It is an ideological battle that the founders understood and once upon a time (not too long ago) Americans embraced. Ron Paul is the messenger that reminds us of our duty to our country and to one another. This movement and our support of Dr. Paul is not a fight to overthrow government, but rather, a fight to return the power back to its rightful place, the people. We do this for Paul, we do this for ourselves, and more importantly, we do it for all Americans, even those like you who do not yet realize the importance of the battle we are in.

Media Bias

2011-09-21T16:48:00.005-06:00

Travis Jackson, CC

Once again, as we prepare for the new election cycle, one man is being ignored like no other. It is not so surprising, really, that Ron Paul is being treated as if he doesn't exist. The intellectual integrity and solid record he possesses go against everything we've come to expect from today's politicians. Ron Paul stands against everything today's government is for, and rightly so. Anyone who truly understands the basis of our Constitution, or the principled foundations of liberty would quickly surmise that he is the only candidate that makes any sense! Is it any wonder then, that the media tries so hard to lead you in other directions?

Make no mistake, those who are in control are terrified of Ron Paul and his growing number of supporters. To date, Ron Paul has won all but one straw poll, the lone exception being Iowa where he lost to Michelle Bauchman by 9/10 of a percentage point. When you keep in mind that this is her home state, the results are impressive. Better yet, Ron Paul finished first in voting at this years Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) where, since 1973, winners have been deemed by the media as "frontrunners" in upcoming Presidential elections. Historically, this annual event has been THE mainstream event in the evaluation of conservative candidates for president. The annual CPAC straw poll vote traditionally serves as a barometer for the feelings of the conservative movement, yet, for the first time, the winner of this event has been deemed by the mainstream media as "unelectable." Interestingly enough, Ron Paul also won the straw poll at CPAC in 2010.

Below are a few examples of this years deception, and we're only a few weeks in!

How To Bring A Country To It's Knees - Part II - The Rise of The Central Bank And The C.F.R.

2011-03-24T15:54:00.028-06:00

Travis Jackson, CC

“We wield over American political and economical institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political structure, one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” -
David Rockefeller - Council on Foreign Relations:

“We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine & other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promise of discretion for almost 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plans for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government." - David Rockefeller, Co-founder of the Trilateral Commission:

"There appears to be no evidence that the American people themselves are even aware of the catastrophic events soon to overtake them." -
Steve LeFemine, independent candidate for Congress

"Our worst fears confirmed! We are suffering a coup d,etat in America. It is in the final stages of completion...the program to abrogate American Sovereignty...May God have mercy on America." -
Lawrence Patterson Criminal Politics (May-June 2006)

These quotes are alarming, not just in the fact that these revelations go against our ingrained sense of freedom that we believe we posses, but against the express guidelines of freedom that have been afforded to us in our Constitution. An attack on our sovereignty is an attack on all of us - democrat or republican, our government is now beholden to influences that are corrupt and evil, and we the citizens are at their mercy.

I could stop there and many would say I'm an alarmist, conspiratist, or any of the key words the media uses to label anyone who questions our countries direction and their march toward a "one world government." The government itself has begun to take a stand against its own citizens as is seen in the controversial "Missouri papers" that were issued to law enforcement personnel. These papers stated in a secret report distributed by the Missouri Information Analysis Center that Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, people who display bumper stickers, people who own gold, or even people who fly a U.S. flag are domestic terrorists and compares them with radical race hate groups and terrorists. This is merely the latest example in an alarming trend which confirms that law enforcement across the country is being trained that American citizens are a dangerous enemy.

Perhaps due to the outlandish and shocking nature of the document, some people are still having difficulty believing it is real.

(download pdf file here)
http://www.mediafire.com/?vk64ohn9araua2g

In order to understand why "informed citizens" are the enemy, you have to understand that power and money are at the crux of of all of America's ills.

The fall began in 1913. After several unsuccessful attempts to establish a lasting central bank in the United States, the Federal Reserve was born during a secret meeting on Jekyll Island. Seven very powerful men that represented one quarter of the worlds wealth met together and drafted what would later be known as the Federal Reserve Act. These men represented the great financial institutions of Wall Street and Europe.

These men were:

1)Nelson Aldrich - Republican "whip" in the Senate, Chairman of the National Monetary Commision, business associate of J.P. Morgan, and father in law of John D. Rockefeller, Jr.
2)Abraham Piatt Andrew - Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury
3)Frank A. Vanderlip - president of the National City Bank of New York (the most powerful of the banks at the time) and representing William Rockefeller and the international investment banking house of Kuhn, Loeb & Co.
4)Henry P. Davidson - Senior partner of the J.P. Morgan Company
5)Charles D. Norton, president of J.P. Morgan's First National Bank of New York
6)Benjamin Strong - head of J.P. Morgan's Bankers Trust Co.
7)Paul M. Warburg - a partner at Kuhn, Loeb & Co, a representative of the Rothschild banking dynasty in England and France, and brother to Max Warburg who was head of the Warburg banking consortium in Germany and the Netherlands.

These seven men had five goals:
1)Stop the growing competition from the nation's newer banks
2)Obtain a franchise to create money out of nothing for the purpose of lending
3)Get control of the reserves of all banks so that the more reckless ones would not be exposed to currency drains and bank runs
4)Get the taxpayer to pick up the cartel's inevitable losses
5)Convince Congress that the purpose was to protect the public.

(To truly understand this monster, you need to understand both fractional reserve banking and central banking which we will get to in Part III.)

These men realized that in order to achieve their goals and create this cartel, they had to partner with the politicians that ran Washington and that the structure of their creation would have to be a central bank. With their special interests now being influential in both major parties, these men faced little political resistance in achieving their goals. With a "secret sect" on Wall Street and in Washington reportedly numbering around 270, they worked on passing the Federal reserve act.

At the time, most Americans distrusted centralization of power as well as the big banks. They had witnessed the rise and fall of The Bank of the United States (1816-36), Wall Street's early attempt at an American central bank. Their efforts were thwarted by President Andrew Jackson, who believed that it threatened the nation. He wrote, "The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government, the distress it had wantonly produced...are but premonitions of the fate that awaits the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it."

Central banks had also been staunchly opposed by Thomas Jefferson, who wrote, "The Central Bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the principles and form of our Constitution...if the American people allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." Both of these men strove for a virtual elimination of government from American life. It was to be a government without debt and with no direct federal or excise taxes.

However, the money powers that ruled Wall Street and Europe had other plans. On the opposing side of the debate were advocates of a strong national government that was empowered to vigorously intervene in the domestic economy. These proponents felt that a more “liquid," or more easily inflatable money supply would assist in funding the mass expenditures required for such “robust” government action. They were known as Hamiltonian Federalists in the early years and were later called Whigs and Republicans. (note: It would not be long before the inflationary view came to dominate both political parties. Today, the American people have forgotten, or more correctly, are conditioned against the warnings of our founding fathers on the dangers of a powerful federal government and the central banks.)

The bankers, of course, belonged to the latter view. Having waged this battle for economic supremacy since the inception of the country, they began a silent war against the hearts, minds, and better judgments of the citizenry. The powerful elite, recognizing an opportunity for "change," found their salvation by funding and manufacturing the Progressive Era through which the ideas of a "better society" would allow them to take over business and industries across America. (sound familiar?)

In order to accomplish this, "special interests" formed an alliance with the “opinion-molding classes” – media, academia, philanthropists, etc. This was not difficult, as most that comprised these classes were statist in nature. These influential men and women already believed that government intervention was needed to force "good" social change upon the citizenry. Propaganda was used to convince the people that government action was required to save the free market and more government controls needed to protect the public interest. (note: this still goes on today, with media, and educational institutions "shaping" the minds of young people so they will grow up not questioning government intervention and behaving as "good citizens.")

One of the key figures in the early 1900's that helped transform the mindset of the people of this nation, and, more notably, those in Washington, was a Texan named Edward M. House. He was a key individual before and during the Wilson administration. He would go on to help establish the income tax, the Federal Reserve System, would coin the phrase "league of nations," draft the covenant for the League of Nations (now the U.N.) and preside over the creation of the Council on Foreign Relations (C.F.R.).

Col. Edward M. House inherited a fortune estimated at around $1.5 million. His father, Thomas William House came to Texas to fight under Sam Houston and was an American agent for the Rothschild's London Banking interests. The elder House said he wanted to raise his sons to "know and serve England" and thus surrounded himself with prominent members of the Fabian Society.

In the winter of 1911-1912, Edward House wrote Philip Dru: Administrator. House said he was working towards "Socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx..." This book was a fictional plan that detailed the conquest of America through the takeover and control of both the Republican and Democratic parties. The detailed plan went on to use these political parties as the tools to usher in a socialist world government. Central to this plan was the importance of creating a graduated federal income tax and a central bank. The book also outlined an inheritance tax, suggested taking functions away from the states and handing them over to the central government, and devised a means that would guarantee that no candidate in a primary might be nominated whose views were not in accord with "theirs."

After writing his book, House gave it to his father-in-law, Dr. Sidney E. Mezes. Mezes, who read and approved the book, was Director of the College of the City of New York and former President of the University of Texas. With Mezes' endorsement and encouragement, House sent his book to future Wilson cabinet member David F. Houston. Houston declared the work economically sound but said the fiction in it was so thin that he advised it be rewritten as a serious work.

After his November 1912 election, President Woodrow Wilson, on vacation in Bermuda, read Philip Dru for the first time. Arthur Howden Smith wrote, "In nine months the Wilson administration completely reorganized the financial structure in accordance with the conceptions outlined in 'Philip Dru.'" From 1912-1914, Wilson's legislative program "was largely the program of House's book..."

Interestingly, another key figure who read the novel, was Franklin Delano Roosevelt, then Assistant Secretary of the Navy. FDR went on to become President and authored "The New Deal." Although the propaganda machine still running in our school systems touts the brilliance of this legislation, there are important things that pro-New Dealers would prefer not be mentioned, such as the similarities between Roosevelt’s philosophy and programs and those of Mussolini, Stalin, Hitler and Karl Marx.

For more than 125 years, the American people had lived under an economic system in which people kept everything they earned and decided for themselves what to do with it. Economic activity was, by and large, free of government regulation. Charity was voluntary, even with respect to taking care of parents.

That’s what was known as freedom, free markets, and free enterprise. Despite what statists say about the supposed "horrors" of the Industrial Revolution, this unique and unusual economic system brought about the most prosperous, and most charitable nation in history. Although this prosperity would take a huge blow with the enactment of the 16th Amendment and the Federal Reserve System, "The New Deal" succeeded in permanently establishing an entirely new economic system in America, one we commonly refer to today as the welfare state and the regulated economy.

FDR gave a speech in Troy, NY on March 3, 1912 in which he laid out his philosophy. He placed the "liberty of the community" over "the liberty of the individual." He said competition was bad but cooperation was good. The speech was a concerted assault on the idea of private property. "...why can we not...predict that the state will compel every farmer to till his land or raise beef or horses?" He also claimed that the state could force "idle" men to labor. He imposed no limits on the power of the state. His definition "by liberty we mean happiness and prosperity" is not liberty at all but could as well mean slavery. He pointed to the Germans as proving that we "had passed beyond the limits of the individual."

In his first inaugural speech, FDR said, "rulers of the exchange of mankind's goods have failed" and threatened Congress and asked for dictatorial powers. It is easy to deduce that many if not most of FDR's ideas and opinions were spawned from Philip Dru and similar works (see Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto)

(Now back to House)

In 1917 a bookseller wrote regarding the House book: "As time goes on the interest in it becomes more intense, due to the fact that so many of the ideas expressed...have become laws of this Republic, and so many of his ideas have been discussed as becoming laws."

In 1918, Franklin K. Lane, Woodrow Wilson's Secretary of the Interior, stated in a private letter: "All that book has said should be, comes about...The President comes to Philip Dru, in the end."

Charles Seymour called Col. House "the unseen guardian angel of the (Federal Reserve) bill."

The Warburgs, the Kuhns, the Rockefellers, and the Morgans put their faith in House to turn the tide and on November 17, 1913, Paul Warburg requested an interview with House to include two men: Jacob Schiff, a representative of the European Rothschild financial dynasty whose assigned task was to seize control of the money supply of the U.S. Government, and Cleveland Dodge, a wealthy backer of Wilson. The Federal Reserve Act was passed by a small percentage of Congressmen on December 23, 1913, in a contrived meeting over Christmas break, and afterword, Schiff wrote to House. In his letter he stated "I want to say a word of appreciation to you for the silent, but no doubt effective work you have done in the interest of currency legislation..."

After his work in helping to create the Federal Reserve, House then turned to international affairs. With his powerful connections with international bankers in New York and Europe, represented by such people as Paul and Felix Warburg, Otto H. Kahn, Louis Marburg, Henry Morgenthau, Jacob and Mortimer Schiff and Herbert Lehman, Edward House worked on creating the Council on Foreign Relations. All the bankers that were part of the original 270-secret crowd that created the Federal Reserve System were all in the original (CFR) membership. They included Nelson Aldrich, Frank Vanderlip, Jacob Schiff, Averell Harriman, Bernard Baruch, J.P. Morgan and John D. Rockefeller. (some of the names on this list might look familiar)

With the influence of House paving the way, associates of J.P. Morgan and Company created an American parallel group to the Royal Institute of International Affairs, a British Round Table group. The purpose of this British institute was to coordinate Anglo-American cooperative efforts. In order to prevent the American people from reacting with patriotic fury if it was discovered that the CFR was in fact a subsidiary of the British Round Table, a new name was given and on July 29, 1921, the Council on Foreign Relations was born.

It should be apparent at this point that both the Federal Reserve, and the C.F.R. were created by the same world powers. These men, from the very beginning, tried and succeeded in exerting their will over domestic and foreign policy, over Presidents, over Congressmen, and even over Supreme Court Justices. Their work is continued today as they press on towards their goal of conquering and destroying our Constitution and sovereignty. Their push for a "New World Order," (George H.W. Bush) is hidden in plain site and should be apparent in America's crumbling economy and our swift plunge into corporatism and socialism.

"The CFR, dedicated to one-world government, financed by a number of the largest tax-exempt foundations, and wielding such power and influence over our lives in the areas of finance, business, labor, military, education and mass communication-media, should be familiar to every American concerned with good government and with preserving and defending the U.S. Constitution and our free-enterprise system. Yet, the nation's right-to-know machinery, the news media, usually so aggressive in exposures to inform our people, remain conspicuously silent when it comes to the CFR, its members and their activities. The CFR is the establishment. Not only does it have influence and power in key decision-making positions at the highest levels of government to apply pressure from above, but it also finances and uses individuals and groups to bring pressure from below, to justify the high level decisions for converting the U.S. from a sovereign Constitutional Republic into a servile member state of a one-world dictatorship." -
Rep. John R. Rarick of Louisiana - 1971

The New York Times wrote, "The Council's membership includes some of the most influential men in government, business, education and the press (and) for nearly half a century has made substantial contributions to the basic concepts of American foreign policy."

Newsweek called the Council's leadership the "foreign policy establishment of the U.S."

Well-known political observer and writer Theodore White said, "The Council counts among its members probably more important names in American life than any other private group in the country."

In 1971, J. Anthony Lukas wrote in the New York Times Magazine: "If you want to make foreign policy, there's no better fraternity to belong to than the Council."

From 1928-72, nine out of twelve Republican Presidential nominees were CFR members. From 1952-72, CFR members were elected four out of six times. During three separate campaigns, both the Republican and Democratic nominee were, or had been a member. Since World War II, practically every Presidential candidate, with the exception of Johnson, Goldwater, and Reagan, have been members.

The position of Supreme Allied Commander has usually been held by CFR members, like Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, Gen. Matthew B. Ridgeway, Gen. Alfred M. Gruenther, Gen. Lauris Norstad, Gen. Lyman L. Lemnitzer, Gen. Andrew J. Goodpaster, and Alexander M. Haig, Jr. Most of the superintendents at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point have been members.

In Sen. Barry Goldwater's 1979 memoir, With No Apologies, he wrote, "When a new President comes on board, there is a great turnover in personnel but no change in policy." The reason? CFR members have held almost every key position, in every Administration, from Franklin D. Roosevelt to Barack Obama. During that period, every Secretary of State, with the exception of Cordell Hull, James F. Byrnes, and William Rogers, have been members. Every Secretary of Defense, from the Truman Administration, up to the Obama Administration, with the exception of Melvin Laird, have been members. Since 1920, most of the Treasury Secretaries have been members, and since the Eisenhower Administration, nearly all of the National Security Advisers have been members.

"The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is the American Branch of a society which originated in England...(and) ...believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established." -Carrol Quigley, member of CFR and mentor to Bill Clinton

"The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is promoting the disarmament of U.S. Sovereignty and national independence and submergence into an all powerful, one world government" - Admiral Chester Ward, former CFR member and Judge Advocate general of the US Navy

"Once the ruling members of the CFR shadow government have decided that the US Government should adopt a particular policy... the very substantial research facilities of (the) CFR are put to work to develop arguments, intellectual and emotional, to support the new policy... and to confound and discredit, intellectually and politically, any opposition." - Admiral Chester Ward, former CFR member and Judge Advocate general of the US Navy

It is no wonder that our country has been traveling on the course that it has. The moral, educational and financial decline of this nation has been no accident. It has been due to a carefully contrived plot on behalf of these conspirators, who will be satisfied with nothing less than a one-world government. They are well funded by the most powerful and wealthy of the ruling elite. The roots of these organizations (Federal Reserve, Federal Government, C.F.R.) intertwine throughout the pages of history and today, the branches of this cooperation and centralization of power reach into every man's life.

As each year goes by, the momentum of a plan, inspired by the socialist propaganda of Marx, and penned long ago in the pages of a book of fiction, take shape before our very eyes. It is becoming increasingly clear what road our government is continuing to take us down. The proponents of one-world government are becoming less secretive, and the warning signs are becoming more visible. These elitists have become so entrenched in our government, our financial structure, and our commerce, that they probably DO control this country, if not the world. If allowed to continue without opposition, their plans will be fully implemented, and the United States of America will be vanquished from within. The American people need to open their eyes and see with clear vision the enemy that stands before them. We MUST stand together as one if we are to stop this open aggression on our freedom and sovereignty. We may be the only ones who can.

READ THE FOLLOWING LIST

U.S. Presidents who have been CFR members:

Barack Obama
George W. Bush
Bill Clinton
George H.W. Bush
Jimmy Carter
Gerald Ford
Richard Nixon
Dwight Eisenhower
Herbert Hoover
Dick Cheney (Vice-President)
Al Gore (Vice-President)

Members of the CFR who ran for President in 2008:

Hillary Clinton - Senator NY
Barack Obama - Senator IL
John Edwards - Senator NC
Joseph Biden - Senator DE
Chris Dodd - Senator CT
Bill Richardson - Governor NM
Rudy Giuliani - Mayor NYC
Fred Thompson - Senator TN
John McCain - Senator AZ
Mitt Romney - Governor MA

Although Mike Huckabee is not a member, he did have meetings with the CFR - around the time his poll numbers made a dramatic jump from third tier candidate to a "top tier" candidate.

Only Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel and Ron Paul were not members.

If you remember, Ron Paul had a huge following. He accepted no corporate donations but still managed to set a record for most money raised in a single day by any politician in our nations history. All of these donations came from private citizens. Ron Paul was a threat, and the media treated Ron Paul as such. They called him a quack, called his followers "crazy," refused to allow him into certain debates, and went so far as to make fun of him in the ones he was in. They did this in spite of Ron Paul winning the majority of straw polls and being one of the most viable Republican candidates. Below is a video showing how he was treated and his response. (Coincidentally, this segment was never included when Fox News re-aired this debate - most likely because he handled himself so well).

(Also coincidentally, Rupert Murdoch, the owner of Fox News. is also a member of the C.F.R.)

Want to know who else is a member?

Read below, this list is VERY long.
-----------------------------------
KEY:
CFR = Member of the Council on Foreign Relations

TC = Member of the Trilateral Commission ("The Trilateral Commission is international and is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the U.S." - Senator Barry Goldwater.

BB = Member of the Elite Bilderbergs
(note: Bilderbergs and Trilateral Commission are important pieces to this puzzle as well - I will try and touch on these in part III)
------------------------------------

Other members of the CFR during the Clinton Adminstration:

David Rockefeller, Chairman Emeritus
Peter G. Peterson, Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations
Paul Volker, North American Chairman of the Trilateral Commission

President of the United States of America
William Clinton -- CFR, TC, BB

Asst. Sec. for Administration, United Nations
Dick Thornburgh -- CFR

National Security Advisor
Anthony Lake -- CFR

Vice President of the United States of America
Albert Gore, Jr. -- CFR

Secretary Of State
Warren Christopher -- CFR

Secretary Of Defense
Lee Aspin (Deceased)-- CFR

Chairman Joint Chiefs Of Staff
Colin L. Powell -- CFR

Director Central Intelligence Agency
James Woolsey -- CFR

Chairman, Council of Economics Advisors
Laura Tyson -- CFR

Treasury Secretary
Lloyd Bentsen -- Former CFR, BB

Secretary of Interior
Bruce Babbitt -- CFR

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Henry Cisneros -- CFR

Secretary of Health & Human Services
Donna Shalala -- CFR, TC

JUDICIARY:

Sandra Day O'Connor, Assoc. Justice, U.S. Supreme Court -- CFR
Steve G. Breyer, Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit, Boston -- CFR
Ruth B. Ginsburg, U.S. Court Of Appeals, Wash., DC Circuit -- CFR
Laurence H. Silberman, U.S. Court of Appeals, Wash., DC Circuit -- CFR

U.S. INSTITUTE FOR PEACE:

John Norton Moore, Chairman -- CFR
Elspeth Davies Rostow, Vice Chairman -- CFR
Samuel W. Lewis, President -- CFR
John Richardson, Counselor -- CFR
David Little, Senior Scholar -- CFR
William R. Kintner, Director -- CFR
W. Scott Thompson, Director -- CFR

OFFICE OF U.S. TRADE REPRESENTATIVE:

Gary R. Edson, Chief of Staff & Counselor -- CFR
Joshua Bolten, General Counsel -- CFR
Daniel M. Price, Dep. General Counsel -- CFR

TREASURY DEPARTMENT:

Roger Altman, Deputy Sec. -- CFR
Robert R. Glauber, Under Sec., Finance -- CFR
David C. Mulford, Under Sec., Intntl Affairs -- CFR
Robert M. Bestani, Dep Asst Sec., Intntl. Monetary Affairs -- CFR
J. French Hill, Dep. Asst. Sec., Corp Finance -- CFR
John M. Niehuss, Dep. Asst. Sec., Intntl. Monetary Affairs -- CFR

OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: (Ended in '95)

Joshua Lederberg, V. Chmn Adv. Counc. -- CFR
John H. Gibbons, Director -- CFR
Lewis M. Branscomb, Adv. Council -- CFR

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY:

James M. Strock, Asst. Adm., Enforcement And Compliance -- CFR

AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION:

Leonard H. Robinson, Jr., President -- CFR

WHITE HOUSE STAFF:

George Stephanopoulos, Director, Communications -- CFR
Willian J. Crowe, Chief Foreign Intelligence Advisory Bd. -- CFR
Nancy Soderberg, Staff Director, National Secuity Council -- CFR
Samuel R. Berger, Deputy Advisor, National Security -- CFR
W. Bowman Cutter, Deputy Assistant, National Economic Council -- CFR

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET:

Alice Rivlin, Deputy Director -- CFR

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK:

John D. Macomber, President & Chairman -- CFR
Eugene K. Lawson, 1st VP & Vice Chairman -- CFR
Rita M. Rodriguez, Director -- CFR
Hart Fessenden, General Council -- CFR

OFFICE OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY:

William R. Graham, Jr., Science Advisor to President & Director -- CFR

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS:

James H. Billington, Librarian, Chmn. Trust Fund Board -- CFR
Ruth Ann Stewart, Asst. Librarian National Programs -- CFR

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION:

Frank H. T. Rhodes, Bd. Of Directors -- CFR
James B. Holderman, Bd. Of Directors -- CFR
D. Allen Bromley, Bd. Of Directors -- CFR

U.S. ARMS CONTROL & DISARMAMENT AGENCY:

Thomas Graham, Jr., General Council -- CFR
William Schneier, Chmn., General Advisory Council -- CFR
Richard Burt, Negotiator On Strategic Defense Arms -- CFR
David Smith, Negotiator, Defense & Space -- CFR

FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER:

William W. Schwarzer, Director -- CFR

DEPARTMENT OF STATE:

Madeleine Albright, UN Amabassador -- CFR
Clifton Wharton, Jr., Deputy Sec. -- CFR
Lynn Davis, Under Sec. for International Security Affairs -- CFR, TC
Brandon H. Grove, Dir. of Foreign Service Institute -- CFR
H. Allen Holms, Asst. Sec., Bureau Of Politico-Military Affairs -- CFR
John H. Kelly, Asst. Sec., Near East-South Asian Affairs -- CFR
Alexander F. Watson, Deputy Rep., United Nations -- CFR
Jonathan Moore, UN Mission -- CFR
Joseph Verner Reed, Chief of Protocol -- CFR
Dennis B. Ross, Director, Policy Planning Staff -- CFR
Edward Perkins, Dir. of Personnel -- CFR
Abraham David Sofaer, Legal Advisor -- CFR
Peter Tanoff, Under Sec. for Political Affairs -- CFR, TC
Brian Atwood, Under Sec. For Management -- CFR
Joan E. Spero, Under Sec. Eco. & Ag. Affairs -- CFR
George E. Moose, Asst. Sec. African Affairs -- CFR
Winston Lord, Asst. Sec., East Asian & Pacific Affairs -- CFR, TC
Stephen A. Oxman, Asst. Sec., European Affairs -- CFR
Timothy E. Wirth, Counselor -- CFR

DEPARTMENT OF STATE -- AMBASSADORS:

Strobe Talbott (Special Advisor For CIS) -- CFR
Thomas R. Pickering (Russia) -- CFR
Morton I. Abramowitz (Turkey) -- CFR
Michael H. Armacost (Japan) -- CFR
Shirly Temple Black (Czechoslovakia) -- CFR
Julia Chang Bloch (Nepal) -- CFR
Henry E. Catto, Jr. (Great Britain) -- CFR
Frances Cook (Camaroon) -- CFR
Edward P. Djerejian (Syria) -- CFR
Geoge E. Moose (Senegal) -- CFR
John D. Negroponte (Mexico) -- CFR
Edward N. Ney (Canada) -- CFR
Robert B. Oakley (Pakistan) -- CFR
Robert H. Pelletreau, Jr. (Tunisia) -- CFR
Christopher H. Phillips (Brunei) -- CFR
Nicholas Platt (Phillipines) -- CFR
James W. Spain (Maldives & Sri Lanka) -- CFR
Terence A. Todman (Argentina) -- CFR
Frank G. Wisner II (Egypt) -- CFR
Warren Zimmerman (Yugoslavia) -- CFR

UNITED STATES CONGRESS -- SENATORS:

David L. Boren (D-OK) -- CFR
William Bradley (D-NJ) -- CFR
John H. Chafee (R-RI) -- CFR, TC
William S. Cohen (R-ME) -- CFR, TC
Christopher J. Dodd (D-CT) -- CFR
Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) -- TC
Bob Graham (D-FL) -- CFR
Joseph I. Lieberman (D-CT) -- CFR
George J. MiTChell (D-ME) -- CFR
Claiborne Pell (D-RI) -- CFR
Larry Pressler (R-SD) -- CFR
Charles S. Robb (D-VA) -- CFR, TC
John D. Rockefeller, IV (D-WV) -- CFR, TC
William Roth, Jr. (R-DE) -- CFR, TC

UNITED STATES CONGRESS -- REPRESENTATIVES:

Howard L. Berman (D-CA) -- CFR
Thomas S. Foley (D-WA) -- CFR
Sam Gejdenson (D-CT) -- CFR
Richard A. Gephardt (D-MO) -- CFR
Newton L. Gingrich (R-GA) -- CFR
Lee H. Hamilton (D-IN) -- TC
Amory Houghton, Jr. (R-NY) -- CFR
Nancy Lee Johnson (R-CT) -- CFR
Jim Leach (R-IA) -- TC
John Lewis (D-GA) -- CFR
Robert T. Matsui (D-CA) -- CFR
Dave K. Mccurdy (D-OK) -- CFR
Eleanor Homes Norton (D-DC) -- CFR
Thomas El Petri (R-WI) -- CFR
Charles B. Rangel (D-NY) -- TC
Carlos A. Romero-Barcelo (D-PR) -- CFR
Patricia Schroeder (D-CO) -- CFR
Peter Smith (R-VT) -- CFR
Olympia J. Snow (R-ME) -- CFR
John M. Spratt (D-SC) -- CFR
Louis Stokes (D-OH) -- CFR

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

(PAST & PRESENT - PARTIAL LIST):
Alan Greenspan, Chairman -- CFR, TC
E. Gerald Corrigan, V. Chmn./Pres. NY Fed. Res. Bank -- CFR
Richard N. Cooper, Chmn. Boston Fed. Res. Bank -- CFR
Sam Y. Cross, Manager, Foreign Open Market Acct. -- CFR
Robert F. Erburu, Chmn. San Francisco Fed. Res. Bank -- CFR
Robert P. Forrestal, Pres. Atlanta Fed. Res. Bank -- CFR
Bobby R. Inman, Chmn., Dallas Fed. Res. Bank -- CFR, TC
Robert H. Knight, Esq. -- CFR
Steven Muller -- CFR
John R. Opel -- CFR
Anthony M. Solomon -- CFR, TC
Edwin M. Truman, Staff Dir. International Finance -- CFR
Cyrus R. Vance -- CFR
Paul Volcker -- CFR, TC

BANKING INSTITUTIONS:

Chase Manhattan Corp.:
Thomas G. Labrecque, Chairman & CEO -- CFR, TC
Robert R. Douglass, Vice Chairman -- CFR
Willard C. BuTCher, Dir. -- CFR
Richard W. Lyman, Dir. -- CFR
Joan Ganz Cooney, Dir. -- CFR
David T. Mclaughlin, Dir. -- CFR
Edmund T. Pratt, Jr., Dir. -- CFR
Henry B. Schacht, Dir. -- CFR
Chemical Bank:
Walter V. Shipley, Chairman -- CFR
Robert J. Callander, President -- CFR
William C. Pierce, Executive Officer -- CFR
Randolph W. Bromery, Dir. -- CFR
Charles W. Duncan, Jr., Dir. -- CFR
George V. Grune, Dir. -- CFR
Helen L. Kaplan, Dir. -- CFR
Lawrence G. Rawl, Dir. -- CFR
Michael I. Sovern, Dir. -- CFR
Richard D. Wood, Dir. -- CFR
Citicorp:
John S. Reed. Chairman -- CFR
William R. Rhodes, Vice Chairman -- CFR
Richard S. Braddock, President -- CFR
John M. DeuTCh, Dir. -- CFR
Clifton C. Garvin, Jr., Dir -- CFR
C. Peter Mccolough, Dir. -- CFR
Rozanne L. Ridgeway, Dir. -- CFR
Franklin A. Thomas, Dir. -- CFR
First City Bancorp, Texas:
A. Robert Abboud, CEO -- CFR
Morgan Guaranty:
Lewis T. Preston, Chairman -- CFR
Bankers Trust New York Corporation:
Charles S. Stanford, Jr., Chairman -- CFR
Alfred Brittain III, Dir. -- CFR
Vernon E. Jordan, Jr., Dir -- CFR
Richard L. Gelb, Dir. -- CFR
Patricia Carry Stewart, Dir. -- CFR
First National Bank of Chicago:
Barry F. Sullivan -- TC
Manufacturers Hanover Directors:
Cyrus Vance -- CFR
G. Robert Durham -- CFR
George B. Munroe -- CFR
Marina V. N. Whitman -- CFR, TC
Charles J. Pilliod, Jr. -- CFR
Bank America:
Andrew F. Brimmer, Dir. -- CFR
Ignazio E. Lozano, Jr., Dir. -- CFR
Ruben F. Mettler, Dir. -- CFR
Securities & Exchange Commission:
Michael D. Mann, Dir. International Affairs -- CFR

LABOR UNION LEADERS:

Jay Mazur, International Ladies' Garment Workers Union -- CFR, TC
Jack Sheinkman, Amalgamated Clothing & Textile Workers Union -- CFR
Albert Shanker, Pres., American Federation Of Teachers -- CFR, TC
Glen E. Watts, Communication Of Workers Of America -- CFR, TC

U.S. MILITARY:

Department Of Defense:
Les Aspin, Secretary of Defense -- CFR
Frank G. Wisnerll, Under Secretary for Policy -- CFR
Henry S. Rowen, Asst. Sec., International Security Affairs -- CFR
Judy Ann Miller, Dep. Asst. Sec. Nuclear Forces & Arms Control -- CFR
W. Bruce Weinrod, Dep. Asst. Sec., Europe & NATO -- CFR
Adm. Seymour Weiss, Chairman, Defense Policy Board -- CFR
Charles M. Herzfeld, Dir. Defense Research & Engineering -- CFR
Andrew W. Marshall, Dir., Net Assessment -- CFR
Michael P. W. Stone, Secretary of the Army -- CFR
Donald B. Rice, Secretary of the Air Force -- CFR
Franklin C. Miller, Dep. Asst. Sec. Nuclear Forces & Arms Control -- CFR
Allied Supreme Commanders:
1949-52 Eisenhower -- CFR
1952-53 Ridgeway -- CFR
1953-56 Gruenther -- CFR
1956-63 Norstad -- CFR
1963-69 Lemnitzer -- CFR
1969-74 Goodpaster -- CFR
1974-79 Haig -- CFR
1979-87 Rogers -- CFR, TC
Superintendents of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point:
1960-63 Westmoreland -- CFR
1963-66 Lampert -- CFR
1966-68 Bennett -- CFR
1970-74 Knowlton -- CFR
1974-77 Berry -- CFR
1977-81 Goodpaster -- CFR
CFR Military Fellows, 1991:
Col. William M. Drennan, Jr., USAF -- CFR
Col. Wallace C. Gregson, USMC -- CFR
Col. Jack B. Wood, USA -- CFR
CFR Military Fellows, 1992:
Col. David M. Mize, USMC -- CFR
Col. John P. Rose, USA -- CFR
Joint Chiefs of Staff:
Gen. Colin L. Powell, Chairman -- CFR
Gen. Carl E. Vuono, Army -- CFR
Gen. John T. Chain, Co Sac -- CFR
Gen. Merril A. Mcpeak, Co Pac AF -- CFR
Lt. Gen. George L. Butler, Dir. Strategic Plans & Policy -- CFR
Lt. Gen. Charles T. Boyd, Com. Air Univ. -- CFR
Lt. Gen. Bradley C. Hosmer, AF Inspector General -- CFR
Secretaries of Defense:
1957-59 Mcelroy -- CFR
1959-61 Gates -- CFR
1961-68 McNamara -- CFR, TC
1969-73 Laird -- CFR
1973-75 Richardson -- CFR, TC
1975-77 Rumsfeld -- CFR
1977-80 Brown -- CFR, TC
1980-88 Weinberger -- CFR, TC
1988- Carlucci -- CFR
1988- Cheney -- CFR
Additional Military:
Mg R.C. Bowman -- CFR
Bg F. Brown -- CFR
Lt Col W. Clark -- CFR
Adm Wm. Crowe -- CFR
Col P. M. Dawkins -- CFR
V. Adm. Thor Hanson -- CFR
Col W. Hauser -- CFR
Maj R. Kimmitt -- CFR
Gen W. Knowlton -- CFR
V. Adm J. Lee -- CFR
Col D. Mead -- CFR
Mg Jack Merritt -- CFR
Gen E. Meyer -- CFR
Col Wm. E. Odom -- CFR
Col L. Olvey -- CFR
Col Geo. K. Osborn -- CFR
Mg J. Pustay -- CFR
Lg E.L. Rowny -- CFR
Capt Gary Sick -- CFR
Mg De Witt Smith -- CFR
Bg Perry Smith -- CFR
Ltg Wm. Y. Smith -- CFR
Col W. Taylor -- CFR
Adm S. Turner -- CFR
Mg J. Welch -- CFR
Gen J. Wickham -- CFR

MEDIA:

CBS:
Laurence A. Tisch, CEO -- CFR
Roswell Gilpatric -- CFR
James Houghton -- CFR, TC
Henry Schacht -- CFR, TC
Dan Rather -- CFR
Richard Hottelet -- CFR
Frank Stanton -- CFR
NBC/RCA:
John F. Welch, CEO -- CFR
Jane Pfeiffer -- CFR
Lester Crystal -- CFR, TC
R.W. Sonnenfeidt -- CFR, TC
John Petty -- CFR
Tom Brokaw -- CFR
David Brinkley -- CFR
John Chancellor -- CFR
Marvin Kalb -- CFR
Irving R. Levine -- CFR
Herbert Schlosser -- CFR
Peter G. Peterson -- CFR
John Sawhill -- CFR
ABC:
Thomas S. Murphy, CEO -- CFR
Barbara Walters -- CFR
John Connor -- CFR
Diane Sawyer -- CFR
John Scall -- CFR
Public Broadcast Service:
Robert Mcneil -- CFR
Jim Lehrer -- CFR
C. Hunter-Gault -- CFR
Hodding Carter III -- CFR
Daniel Schorr -- CFR
Associated Press:
Stanley Swinton -- CFR
Harold Anderson -- CFR
Katharine Graham -- CFR, TC
Reuters:
Michael Posner -- CFR
Baltimore Sun:
Henry Trewhitt -- CFR
Washington Times:
Arnaud De Borchgrave -- CFR
Children's TV Workshop (Sesame Street):
Joan Ganz Cooney, Pres. -- CFR
Cable News Network:
W. Thomas Johnson, Pres. -- TC
Daniel Schorr -- CFR
U.S. News & World Report:
David Gergen -- TC
New York Times Co.:
Richard Gelb -- CFR
William Scranton -- CFR, TC
John F. Akers, Dir. -- CFR
Louis V. Gerstner, Jr., Dir. -- CFR
George B. Munroe, Dir. -- CFR
Donald M. Stewart, Dir. -- CFR
Cyrus R. Vance, Dir. -- CFR
A.M. Rosenthal -- CFR
Seymour Topping -- CFR
James Greenfield -- CFR
Max Frankel -- CFR
Jack Rosenthal -- CFR
John Oakes -- CFR
Harrison Salisbury -- CFR
H.L. Smith -- CFR
Steven Rattner -- CFR
Richard Burt -- CFR
Flora Lewis -- CFR
Time, Inc.:
Ralph Davidson -- CFR
Donal M. Wilson -- CFR
Henry Grunwald -- CFR
Alexander Heard -- CFR
Sol Linowitz -- CFR
Thomas Watson, Jr. -- CFR
Strobe Talbott -- CFR
Newsweek/Washington Post:
Katharine Graham -- CFR
N. Deb. Katzenbach -- CFR
Robert Christopher -- CFR
Osborne Elliot -- CFR
Phillip Geyelin -- CFR
Murry Marder -- CFR
Maynard Parker -- CFR
George Will -- CFR, TC
Robert Kaiser -- CFR
Meg Greenfield -- CFR
Walter Pincus -- CFR
Murray Gart -- CFR
Peter Osnos -- CFR
Don Oberdorfer -- CFR
Dow Jones & Co (Wall Street Journal):
Richard Wood -- CFR
Robert Bartley -- CFR, TC
Karen House -- CFR
National Review:
Wm. F. Buckley, Jr. -- CFR
Readers Digest:
George V. Grune, CEO -- CFR
William G. Bowen, Dir. -- CFR
Syndicated Columnists:
Geogia Anne Geyer -- CFR
Ben J. Wattenberg -- CFR

ENERGY COMPANIES:

Exxon Corporation
Lawrence G. Rawl, Chairman -- CFR
Lee R. Raymond, President -- CFR, TC
Jack G. Clarke, Sr., Vice President -- CFR
Randolph W. Bromery, Dir. -- CFR
D. Wayne Calloway, Dir. -- CFR
Texaco
Alfred C. Decrane,Jr., Chairman -- CFR
John Brademas, Dir. -- CFR, TC
Willard C. BuTCher, Dir. -- CFR
William J. Crowe, Jr., Dir. -- CFR, TC
John K. Mckinley, Dir. -- CFR
Thomas S. Murphy, Dir. -- CFR
Atlantic Richfield-Arco:
Hannah H. Gray, Dir. -- CFR
Donal M. Kendall,Dir. -- CFR, TC
Henry Wendt, Dir. -- TC
Shell Oil Co.:
Frank H. Richardson, CEO -- CFR
Rand V. Araskog, Dir. -- CFR, TC
Mobil Corp.:
Allan E. Murray, Chairman & President -- CFR, TC
Lewis M. Branscomb, Dir. -- CFR
Samuel C. Johnson, Dir. -- TC
Helene L. Kaplan, Dir. -- CFR
Charles S. Sanford, Jr., Dir. -- CFR
Tenneco, Inc.:
James L. Ketelsen, Chairman -- CFR
W. Michael Blumenthal, Dir. -- CFR
Joseph J. Sisco, Dir. -- CFR

INDUSTRY:

General Motors Corp.:
Marina V.N. Whitman, VP -- CFR, TC
Anne L. Armstrong, Dir. -- CFR
Marvin L. Goldberger, Dir. -- CFR
Edmund T. Pratt, Jr., Dir. -- CFR
Dennis Weatherstone, Dir. -- CFR
Leon H. Sullivan, Dir. -- CFR
Thomas H. Wyman, Dir. -- CFR
Ford Motor Company:
Clifton R. Wharton, Dir. -- CFR
Roberto C. Goizueta, Dir. -- CFR
GE/NBC Corp.:
John F. Welch, Jr. Chairman -- CFR
David C. Jones -- CFR
Lewis T. Preston -- CFR
Frank H.T. Rhodes -- CFR
Walter B. Wriston -- CFR
Deere & Co:
Hans W. Becherer, Chairman/CEO -- CFR
IBM:
John F. Akers, Chairman -- CFR
C. Michael Armstrong, Sr. VP -- CFR
Amtrak:
William S. Norman, Executive VP -- CFR
AT&T:
Robert E. Allen, Chairman & CEO -- CFR
Randall L. Tobias, Vice Chairman -- CFR
Louis V. Gerstner, Dir. -- CFR
Juanita M. Kreps, Dir. -- CFR
Donald F. Mchenry, Dir. -- CFR
Henry B. Schacht, Dir. -- CFR
Michael I. Sovern, Dir. -- CFR
Franklin A. Thamas, Dir. -- CFR
Rawleigh Warner, Jr., Dir. -- CFR
Thomas H. Wyman, Dir. -- CFR
Chrysler Corp.:
Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Dir. -- CFR
Peter A. Magowan, Dir. -- CFR
American Express Co.:
James D. Robinson,Ceo -- CFR
Joan Edelman Spero -- TC
Anne L. Armstrong -- CFR
William G. Bowen -- CFR
Charles W. Duncan, Jr. -- CFR
Richard M. Furlaud -- CFR
Vernon E. Jordan, Jr. -- CFR, TC
Henry A. Kissinger -- CFR, TC
Frank P. Popoff -- CFR
Robert V. Roosa -- CFR
Joseph H. Williams -- CFR

BUSINESS & INDUSTRY LEADERS

Richard D. Wood, CEO, Eli Lily & Co -- CFR
Richard M. Furlaud, CEO, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co -- CFR
Frank Peter Popoff, CEO, Dow Chemical Co. -- CFR
Charles Peter McColough, Chmn Ex. Comm, Xerox -- CFR
Rozanne L. Ridgewar, Dir., 3M, RJR Nabisco, Union Carbide -- CFR
Ruben F. Mettler, Former CEO, TRW, Inc. -- CFR
Henry B. Schacht, CEO, Cummins Engines -- CFR
Edmund T. Pratt, Jr., CEO, Pfizer, Inc. -- CFR
Rand V. Araskog, CEO, ITT Corp. -- CFR, TC
W. Michael Blumenthal, Chairman, Unisys Corp. -- CFR
Joseph John Sisco, Dir., Geico, Raytheon, Gillette -- CFR
J.Fred Bucy, Former Pres, CEO, Texas Instruments -- CFR
Paul A. Allaire, Chairman, CEO, Xerox Corp. -- TC
Dwayne O. Andreas, Chairman, CEO, Archer Midland Daniels -- TC
James E. Burke, Chairman, CEO Em., Johnson & Johnson -- TC
D. Wayne Calloway, Chairman, CEO, Pepsico -- TC
Frank C. Carlucci, Vice Chmn., The Carlyle Group -- TC
Lynn E. Davis, VP, Dir., Rand Corp -- TC
Stephen Friedman, Sr., VP, Co-Chairman, Goldman, Sachs -- TC
Louis V. Gerstner, Jr., Chairman, CEO, RJR Nabisco -- TC
Joseph T. Gorman, Chairman, Pres, CEO, TRW Inc. -- TC
Maurice R. Greenberg, Chairman, CEO, American International Group -- TC
Robert D. Hass, Chairman, CEO, Levi Strauss -- TC
David J. Hennigar, Chairman, Crownx, Vice Chairman, Crown Life -- TC
Robert D. Hormats, Vice Chairman, Goldman Sachs Int. -- TC
James R. Houghton, Chairman, CEO, Corning Inc. -- TC
Donald R. Keough, President, CEO, The Coca Cola Co. -- TC
Henry A. Kissinger, Chairman, Kissinger Assoc. -- TC
Whitney Macmillan, Chairman, CEO, Cargill, Inc. -- TC
Robert S. McNamara, Former President, The World Bank -- TC
William D. Ruckershaus, Chairman, CEO, Browning-Ferris Ind. -- TC
David Stockman, Gen Partner, The Blackstone Group -- CFR
Henry Wendt, Chmn, Smith Kline Beecham -- TC

EDUCATION:

University Professors:
Graham Allison, Prof. Of Gov., Harvard Univ. -- TC
Zbigniew Brzezinski, Prof., Johns Hopkins -- TC
Gerald L. Curtis, Prof. Poli Sci, Columbia Univ. -- TC
Martin S. Feldstein, Prof. Econ, Harvard Univ. -- TC
Richard N. Gardner, Prof. Law, Columbia Univ. -- TC
Joseph S. Nye, Jr., Prof. Int'l Affairs, Harvard Univ. -- TC
Robert D. Putnam, Prof. Politics, Havard Univ. -- TC
Henry Rosovsky, Prof. Harvard Univ. -- TC
Geoge P. Shultz, Hon. Fellow, Stanford Univ. -- TC
Lester C. Thorow, Dean, Sloan School if Mgmt., MIT -- TC
Paul Volcker, Prof. Int'l Econ., Princeton Univ -- TC
College & University Presidents:
Robert H. Edwards, Bowdoin College -- CFR
Vartan Gregorian, Brown University -- CFR
Hanna Holbom Gray, University of Chicago -- CFR
Joseph S. Murphy, City Univ. of NY -- CFR
Michael I. Sovern, Columbia Univ. -- CFR
Frank H.T. Rhodes, Cornell University -- CFR
James T. Laney, Emory University -- CFR
Rev. Joseph A. O'Hare, Fordham Univ. -- CFR
Thomas Ehrlich, Indiana Univ. -- CFR
Steven Muller, Johns Hopkins Univ. -- CFR
Alice S. Iichman, Sarah Lawrence College -- CFR
Edward T. Foote, II, University Of Miami -- CFR
S. Frederick Starr, Oberlin College -- CFR, TC
Joseph Duffey, Chans., Univ. Of Mass. -- CFR
John M. DeuTCh, Institute Professor, MIT -- CFR, TC
Lester C. Thurow, Dean, Sloan Sch., MIT -- CFR
Bernard Harleston, City College of NY -- CFR
John Brademus, New York University -- CFR, TC
Wesley W. Posvar, University of Pittsburg -- CFR
Harold T. Shapiro, Princeton University -- CFR
Charles W. Duncan, Jr., Chmn, Rice University -- CFR
Dennis O'Brien, Univ. Of Rochester -- CFR
David Baltimore, Rockefeller University -- CFR
Donald Dennedy, Stanford University -- CFR
Richard Wall Lyman, Pres. Em., Stanford -- CFR
Hans M. Mark, Chancellor, Univ. of Texas -- CFR
Robert H. Donaldson, Univ. of Tulsa -- CFR
Stephen J. Trachtenberg, George Washington Univ. -- CFR
William H. Danforth, Washington University, St. Louis -- CFR
John D. Wilson, Washington & Lee University -- CFR
Nannerl O. Keohane, Wellesley University -- CFR

George W. Bush Administration

Executive Branch – Cabinet

Richard B. “Dick” Cheney -Vice President
Jan. 20, 2001 – present
Colin Powell -Secretary of State
2001-2005
Condoleezza Rice -Secretary of State
2005-present
Donald Rumsfeld -Secretary of Defense
2001-2006
Robert Gates - Secretary of Defense
2006-Present
Elaine Chao-Secretary of Labor
2001-present

White House Staff

Condoleezza Rice-National Security Advisor
2001-2005
Stephen J. Hadley-National Security Advisor
2005-present
I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby-Chief of Staff to the Vice President
2001-2005

Executive Agencies

Stephen Friedman-Director, National Economic Council
2001-2005
Robert B. Zoellick-U.S. Trade Representative (recently named World Bank President)
2001-2005
Joshua Bolten-Director, Office of Management and Budget

Independent Offices

George Tenet-Director of Central Intelligence Agency
1997-2004
Porter Goss-Director of Central Intelligence Agency
2004-present
Christine Todd Whitman-Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency
2001-2003
Alan Greenspan-Chairman of the Federal Reserve
1987-2006
Roger W. Ferguson-Vice-Chairman of the Federal Reserve
1999-present
William J. McDonough-President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York
1993-2003
Timothy Geithner-President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York
2003-present
Michael Moskow-President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
1994-present
Richard W. Fisher-President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
2005-present
Philip Merrill-Chairman and President, Export-Import Bank of the U.S.
2002-2005
James H. Lambright-Chairman and President, Export-Import Bank of the U.S. (acting)
2005-present
William H. Donaldson-Chairman of Securities and Exchange Commission
2001-2005
Michael K. Powell-Chairman, Federal Communications Commission
2001-2005

State Department

Colin Powell-Secretary of State
2001-2005
Condoleezza Rice-Secretary of State
2005-present
Robert Zoellick-Deputy Secretary of State
2005-present
Philip D. Zeliko-Counselor
2005-present
Paula J. Dobriansky-Under Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs
2001-present
R. Nicholas Burns-Under Secretary for Political Affairs
2005-present
John R. Bolton-Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security Affairs
2001-2005
Henrietta H. Fore-Under Secretary for Management
2005-present
Josette S. Shiner-Under Secretary for Economic, Business, and Agricultural Affairs
2005-present
Richard N. Haass-Director of Policy Planning Staff
2001-2003
Mitchell B. Reiss-Director of Policy Planning Staff
2003-2005
Stephen Krasner-Director of Policy Planning Staff
2005-prsent
William H. Taft IV-Legal Adviser (Great, Great Grandfather was President of the United States and member of the Skull and Bones secret society from Yale U. and his Great Great Great Grandfather Alphonso Taft created the Skull and Bones society)
2001-2005
John B. Bellinger III-Legal Adviser
2005-present
Stephen Rademaker-Assistant Secretary for Arms Control
2005-present
Walter H. Kansteiner III-Assistant Secretary for African Affairs
2005-present
Constance B. Newman-Assistant Secretary for African Affairs
2001-2005
Robert Charles-Assistant Secretary for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
2001-2005
Kim R. Holmes-Assistant Secretary for International Organization Affairs
2001-2005
William J. Burns-Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs
2001-2005
C. David Welch-Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs
2005-present
Lincoln Bloomfield-Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs
2001-2005
John Hillen-Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs
2005-present
Christina B. Rocca-Assistant Secretary for South Asian Affairs
2001-present
Barry F. Lowenkron-Assistant Secretary for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor
2005-present
Carlos E. Pascual-Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization
2004-present

Defense Department

Donald Rumsfeld-Secretary of Defense
2001-2006
Paul Wolfowitz-Deputy Secretary of Defense (Former President of World Bank)
2001-2005
Douglas Feith-Under Secretary for Policy
2001-2005
Eric S. Edelman-Under Secretary for Policy
2005-present
Dov S. Zakheim-Comptroller
2001-2005
Peter W. Rodman-Assistant Secretary for International Security Affairs
2001-present
James G. Roche-Secretary of the Air Force
2001-2005
Johnnie Carson-Senior Vice President, National Defense University
Stephen J. Flanagan-Vice President for Research at National Defense Univ.
Gen. Richard B. Myers, USAF-Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff
2001-2005
Gen. James L. Jones, USMC-Supreme Allied Commander, NATO
2003-present
Gen. John P. Jumper-Air Force Chief of Staff
2001-2005
Gen. T. Michael Moseley-Air Force Chief of Staff
2005-present
Adm. Vernon E. Clark-Chief of Naval Operations
2000-2005
Gen. John Abizaid-Commander of Central Command (CENTCOM)
2003-present
Lt. Gen. John R. Baker, USAF
2005-present
Lt. Gen. William J. Lennox Jr.-Superintendent of West Point
2001-now
Gen. Michael M. Dunn-President, National Defense University
Gen. Paul J. Kern
2003
Gen. James T. Hill, Army-Commander of U.S. Southern Command
2003
Gen. Ralph E. Eberhart, USAF-Commander of U.S. Northern Command
2003
Adm. Frank L. Bowman-USN
2003
Gen. Robert H. Foglesong-USAF
2003

Treasury Department

Kenneth W. Dam-Deputy Secretary of the Treasury
2001-2003
Henrietta H. Fore-Director, U.S. Mint
2001-2005

Department of Homeland Security

James M. Loy-Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security
2002-2005
Clark Kent Ervin-Inspector General
2003-2004

Ambassadors to Foreign Countries

Zalmay Khalilzad-Afghanistan
2002-2005
Then Iraq
2005-present
L. Paul Bremer III-Iraq
2003-2004 (proconsul)
John Negroponte-Iraq
2004-2005
Robert W. Jordan-Saudi Arabia
2001-2004
William J. Burns-Russia
2005-present
Howard Baker Jr.-Japan
2001-2005
Joseph Preuher-Red China
1999-2001
Clark T. Randt Jr.-Red China
2001-present
Robert Blackwill-India
2001-2003
David C. Mulford-India
2003-present
C. David Welch-Egypt
2001-2005
Aurelia Brazeal-Ethiopia
2001-present
Johnnie Carson-Kenya
1999-2003
Sue McCourt Cobb-Jamaica
2001-2005
Mary Ann Peters-Bangladesh
2000-2003
Carlos Pascual-Ukraine
2000-2003
Charles A. Heimbold Jr.-Sweden
2001-2004
Cameron Hume-South Africa
2001-2004
Edmund J. Hull-Yemen
2001-2004
John J. Danilovich-Costa Rica
2001-2004
Then Brazil
2004-present
Eric S. Edelman-Turkey
2003-2005
Daniel Kurtzer-Israel
2001-present
Jeffrey D. Feltman-Lebanon
2001-present
Alexander Vershbow-Russia
2001-2005
Franklin L. Lavin-Singapore
2001-present
Robin Renee Sanders-Congo (Brazzaville)
2002-present
Michael E. Guest-Romania
2001-2005

Ambassadors to Foreign Organizations

John Negroponte-United Nations
2001-2004
John Bolton-United Nations
2005-present
R. Nicholas Burns-NATO
2001-present
Jeanne L. Phillips-OECD
2001-2003

MISCELLANEOUS

Skull and Bonesmen in the “Dubya” Bush Administration

George W. Bush-President of the United States
2001-present
William H. Donaldson-Chairman, Securities and Exchange Commission
2001-present
George Herbert Walker III-Ambassador to Hungary
Victor Ashe-Ambassador to Poland
Roy Austin-Ambassador to Trinidad and Tobago

Trilateralists in the “Dubya” Bush Administration

Richard B. “Dick” Cheney-Vice President
Jan. 20, 2001 – present
Alan Greenspan-Chairman of the Federal Reserve
1987-2006
Robert Zoellick-Deputy Secretary of State
2005-present
Paul Wolfowitz-Deputy Secretary of Defense
2001-2005
Paula Dobriansky-Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs
2001-present

Rhodes Scholars in the “Dubya” Bush Administration

Clark Kent Ervin-Inspector General of Homeland Security Dept.
2003-2004

Bilderbergers in the “Dubya” Bush Administration (year indicates attendance of Bilderberg meeting)

Timothy F. Geithner-President of Federal Reserve Bank of New York
2004, 2005
Alan Greenspan-Chairman, Federal Reserve System
2002
Paul Wolfowitz-Deputy Secretary of Defense
1997, 2000, 2005
Kenneth W. Dam-Deputy Secretary of the Treasury
1991, 1993-1995, 1997, 2001, 2002
Douglas Feith-Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
2004
Gen. James L. Jones-Supreme Allied Commander, NATO
2005
William J. Luti-Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs
2005
Rockwell A. Schnabel-Ambassador to the European Union
2004
Donald Rumsfeld-Secretary of Defense
2002
John R. Bolton-Ambassador to United Nations
2003
Richard N. Haass-State Dept. Policy Planning Director
2003, 2004, 2005
Robert B. Zoellick-U.S. Trade Representative/ Deputy Secretary of State
2003

Full List as of 2011 can be found here: http://www.cfr.org/about/membership/roster.html

Re-Post - How to Bring a Country to it's Knees - Part 1 - The Philosophy Of Rule

2011-03-23T18:59:00.005-06:00

Travis Jackson, CC

"You have to ask yourself, 'Who owns me? Do I own myself or am I just another piece of government property?' " -- Neal Boortz
"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." -- Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, June 28, 2004.

Marxism, Socialism, Fascism, Leninism, Totalitarianism and Statism are essentially the same things. Other than a few discrepancies from ism to ism, you'll find that you can sum up all these groups in a category called Collectivism.

Many people don't understand this concept and don't realize that the ideas of Collectivism have hijacked our political, economic, and educational systems and is broadcast through our homes by the media.

So what is Collectivism?

Ayn Rand states "Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group -- whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called 'the common good'."

Bert Rand reminds us: "Don't forget that pure democracy is a form of collectivism -- it readily sacrifices individual rights to majority wishes. Since it involves no constitutional bill of rights, or at least, no working and effective one, the majority-of-the-moment can and does vote away the rights of the minority-of-the-moment, even of a single individual. This has been called 'mob rule,' the 'tyranny of the majority' and many other pejorative names. It is one of the greatest threats to liberty, the reason why America's founding fathers wrote so much so disparagingly of pure democracy."

Many would stop here and smirk thinking, "Wait a second!! We ARE a democracy!"

The fact is, we are not. Or more correctly, we were never supposed to be. The founding fathers worked exceedingly hard at making sure that the United States of America was established as a REPUBLIC. Much of their personal writings talk extensively on the dangers of a democracy. In fact, NOT ONCE does the word 'democracy' appear in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, or the constitution of any of the fifty states. Yet today, our teachers and politicians use it as if the word itself was noble and the impetus to lead the world to peace and prosperity.

One might wonder what is so bad about democracy. To put it simply, a democracy is the power of the majority to rule over the minority. It is the right to allow a group through consensus to overthrow the rights and liberties of the minority or individual. It is essentially collectivism and the last thing the founding fathers wanted for this nation.

"Wherever the real power in a Government lies, there is the danger of oppression. In our Governments the real power lies in the majority of the community, and the invasion of private rights is chiefly to be apprehended, not from acts of Government contrary to the sense of its constituents, but from acts in which the Government is the mere instrument of the major number of the Constituents." -- James Madison, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, 1788

"The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society." --Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1816

"The people cannot delegate to government the power to do anything which would be unlawful for them to do themselves." -- John Locke

"A pure democracy ... can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party... Hence it is that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." -- James Madison, Federalist No. 10

In fact, the Constitution is very specific on the type of government we should have.

"The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government..." -- United States Constitution, Article IV, Section 4
To understand the objective of the framers of our Constitution, you have to understand the definition of another 'ism.' This 'ism' separates itself from those found in the broad category of collectivism and stands alone in it's support of the individual over groups. It is the basis of freedom, of liberty, and is the idea behind what made America's government so special and so different from its contemporaries. It is called Individualism.

The founding fathers had been under rule from a corrupt government where it's citizens served the king, and where rights and property did not belong to the individual, but to the crown. After they fought and gained freedom, they wanted nothing to do with the collectivist ideals that had been forced upon them. Having their opportunity, they set out to create a nation whose government would be the smallest in the world and with very limited power. Their goal? To assure to every American that their life would be their own by establishing a Constitution that guaranteed that THEIR government would never have the capacity to interfere in their lives. It was an experiment. It was a revolutionary idea. And it failed.

Today we have the largest and most powerful government the world has ever seen. This is a far cry from the ideas of Jefferson and his pals as they penned forth their vision of the very opposite on that famous piece of paper we know as The Constitution of the United States of America. But that comes later. Let's get back to Individualism.

"Individualism regards man -- every man -- as an independent, sovereign entity who possesses an inalienable right to his own life, a right derived from his nature as a rational being. Individualism holds that a civilized society, or any form of association, cooperation or peaceful co-existence among men, can be achieved only on the basis of the recognition of individual rights -- and that a group, as such, has no rights other than the individual rights of its members." -- Ayn Rand

"This right to life, this right to liberty, and this right to pursue one’s happiness is unabashedly individualistic, without in the slightest denying at the same time our thoroughly social nature. It’s only that our social relations, while vital to us all, must be chosen - that is what makes the crucial difference." -- Prof. Tibor R. Machan

"The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom." -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas
"In principle, there are only two fundamental political viewpoints. That is, two contradictory ends of the 'political spectrum.' Those two principles are freedom and slavery." -- Mark Da Cunha

It is this ideology that guided the framing of The Constitution. At no time in history had a government been established that guaranteed that every individual was his own master. As the Declaration of Independence declares, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

The fight for Liberty was costly. Many Americans died fighting for their freedoms and the founding fathers did not take lightly what they wrote. Some of our leaders today have referred to our Constitution as a "living document," essentially meaning that as society progresses, we can not be expected to abide by the chains or confines of this document. To say that we can contradict its limiting powers or ignore its constraints is irresponsible and is an affront to the very freedoms that so many died for.

The Constitution is binding, a contract for all time between the people and its government and it was meant to be so. Because the cost of freedom was so high for so many, would it make sense that some of the greatest thinkers of all time would leave us with a flimsy Constitution that could be changed and molded to fit the whims of government? The answer is a resounding no. These men were fighters, they were champions of freedom and liberty, and they were serious.

..."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, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." -- Jefferson et al, The Declaration of Independence

"In questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution." - Thomas Jefferson

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams

Now back to the present.

As I said before, the great experiment has failed. At no time in history has a government wielded more power, more authority, and more influence than ours. In the coming weeks and months (as I have time) I will be delving into more detail of how we got to where we are, how we can fix the problem or even if we want to. The reality is many people are apathetic or even happy with where we are. They enjoy the ease and comfort of knowing that government takes care of them and even cheer as "patriots" as their rights and freedoms are slowly stripped away. The lack of accountability in this country is astounding to me as is the lack of knowledge. I believe I have a moral responsibility to educate those who will hear and this blog is the beginning of my stand for the ideals that our founding fathers fought for so long ago. I invite you all to join me in this fight, for we all have a voice. Let it be heard.

God Bless,
-Travis Jackson

"But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a society respectful of individual liberty." --Ron Paul

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."-- Samuel Adams

Ending My Hiatus

2011-03-22T14:45:00.009-06:00

After a long break filled with too much work and too little time to do much else, I have decided once again to thrust my head back into the blog-o-sphere. Hopefully, I will have more time to devote to this site, but like most of you, I do work more than I would like. So without further ado...

The Search For Truth Continues...

So often we find ourselves confronted with those who wish to go about their lives pretending that the world is good, that government cares for the people, and that EVERYONE is going to heaven. Such thoughts seem cute, or possibly naive. For some, it may be nice to pretend, to maintain that innocence of the mind. Perhaps they do not want to face any other truth or perhaps they simply do not care, content with the lies and deceit that encompass their "comfortable" life. To me, these thoughts are as dangerous as any enemy. To face those who would do you harm at least has the reward of being able to see them conspiring against you. To deny that the enemy exists, only empowers them more, and allows them to strike at you unaware.

As I have traveled down this road of "truth seeking" these past few years, I have come to the realization that I do not want to go back. Living a life in ignorance only serves to disarm the noblest of minds. For myself, I want to know where the danger lurks, even if it means losing faith in an institution that so many have died to protect.

Yes, we are taught not to question. We are programmed to dismiss anything that speaks against our government as "conspiracy." Yet, our government today is NOT what was established by those who died in the war against the elitists from England. It is NOT the institution that was laid out in our great Constitution. It is NOT what American soldiers have bled for throughout our history, and it is certainly NOT what they want us to believe.

We are being lied to.

It is a giant web, and at the center lies the answer.

I began this blog site on my own, in search for truth back in 2008, prior to the presidential elections. I have, through research and study as I have found time, begun to try and unravel this great web of deceit. It is a web in whose strands we are all caught. It is a web that traps us in our daily routines, ensuring that we do not question. We are all tangled, as are our children. The cocoons, our meaningless lives, are spun by those who champion the very thing they do not believe in.

Truth.

I invite you on a journey once again. Comments are open to anyone, and whether you agree with me or not I will try and answer to the best of my ability. I do not claim to have all the answers. I, like most of you, have been trapped in this web most of my life.

Today I read a post on another site, and the author stated that the idea of a conspiring government was not up for debate. That conspiracy theories are a product of the "liberal establishment." My question is why not? What exactly is conspiracy? Is it not our duty to: Question government? To reign in those who set aside for themselves power? Why do we not question: The ever expanding government? The loss of our liberties? Congress making laws and statutes to which they are not beholden to? Is it coincidence that we are being spoon fed "democracy" as if that was the intention of the framers of our beloved Constitution? What exactly DID the founding fathers say about democracy?

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!"
Benjamin Franklin

"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself."
John Adams

"Democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49%."
Thomas Jefferson

The question remains, should we question government? What is our duty as Americans? So many of us do not want to get involved or are fearful of our self serving government. Yet, standing idly by, waiting for things to get better, has only made our government bolder in their taking of our liberties. What did a former president say about our responsibilities?

"Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature.... If the next centennial does not find us a great nation ... it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces."
James Garfield, the twentieth president of the United States, 1877

The last comment I received before I stopped posting in 2009 asked, "What next?" The answer; It is up to us. If we are going to re-establish our country under the guidelines of our Constitution, if we are going to change the direction of our country, if we are going to rid ourselves of the corruption that perverts this land, we must stand together. We must realize that our current political parties are merely tools for the elite to keep us divided. The petty arguments that exist in our minds are not shared by those who rule. Democrat and Republican have become divisive words that only undermine what we should all be striving for - Freedom.

I encourage all of you to open your eyes. Being American allows for us to have a difference of opinion. The one thing we should all agree on is being free - Free to live our own lives, and free from the watchful eye and constraint of an oppressive government.

"The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing."
John Adams

"Every step we take towards making the State our Caretaker of our lives, by that much we move toward making the State our Master."
Dwight D. Eisenhower

No End in Sight

2009-03-06T19:29:00.000-07:00

Very good article and insight! (Link)

Sleight of Hand

2009-02-13T18:36:00.000-07:00

For those of you who do not understand how we've got to this point in our country, or for those who missed just exactly how the first "bailouts" were passed, here's a refresher course on how your Big Government minded, anti-American Congress takes action to usher in "change."

Three Questions

2009-02-12T02:10:00.000-07:00

Apparently I'm back.

Here's a good article to get your minds thinking again.

http://www.safehaven.com/article-11344.htm

And when you have time, this is a GREAT article - I hope you all will read it.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/crovelli/crovelli23.html

Ignorance is Bliss?

2009-02-12T00:19:00.000-07:00

The Intercollegiate Studies Institute puts out a test every year to measure the knowledge of citizens/college students/educators/elected officials/etc...

The test takes questions from areas that measure a persons knowledge of American history, civics, government, and economics. Questions are taken from past ISI exams and from many national exams, including the test given to those who wish to become American citizens.

This test is not hard and I do not believe it is intended to be. It is 33 questions on basic history and the functioning of our country. However, the average American scored 49% on this exam, Elected officials scored 47%, and educators scored 55%.

I took this test and scored 90.9%. Sadly, I believe that when I graduated college, I may have scored closer to the average. So why is our educational system failing to educate young people to carry on the traditions of this country? It is a great question to ask, and one that, when answered, lends credence to the idea that government run anything is a failure! (take the test and see how you do - here )

As we sink deeper and deeper towards socialism/fascism, I have almost been in awe over how stupid Americans can be as they embrace politicians and policy that lead us further and further away from our sacred Constitution and freedoms. However, I am starting to realize it is not stupidity, it is ignorance.

If people, including our leaders, do not understand what America was built on, what made us so prosperous, and what would lead us back to prosperity, what chance do we have to fight against those who are leading us toward destruction WITH PURPOSE! When a government starts ignoring its people, begins to nationalize banks and industry, when they pass legislation (even wrapped up in tidy little "packages") that would pave the way for national healthcare, when bills are introduced that would allow "detention camps" for U.S. citizens (here and here), when the Constitution is blatantly ignored or thought to be a "living" document or in need of revision, when Change is preached without definition, when socialism is championed - then people should start being afraid.

Seriously, what is it going to take? Ignorance is only an excuse for so long.

It does not take a genius to see that the "stimulus package" only undermines our economy even further. It also does not take a genius to see that our "leaders" in Congress and in the White House have no interest in stimulating the economy. Our government has no money. Which means they have to borrow it, ask the Federal Reserve to print it, or take it from another sector of the economy. We know they can't borrow it - no one will lend it to us, or it will sink us into debt even further. If they take it from another sector of the economy, it only hurts the economy and jeopardizes jobs. So they have to print it, which destroys the value of the dollar, increases inflation, and does NOTHING to stimulate the economy! They have done nothing but doom this country's economy and the dollar. The real question to ask is Why?

How many bailouts do we have to have, how many stimulus packages do we have to ram through Congress (without the approval of Americans) before Americans start waking up? Ask where the previous bailout money went and what it was used for? No one knows!! It is interesting that legislation that has far reaching effects on future generations has not been scrutinized enough to at least have an idea of where it all went or how it was used! Now, a new stimulus package has been gleefully rammed down our throats just months after the first one because as B.O. says - the situation has "gotten worse."

Obviously.

Hope

2008-12-23T13:34:00.000-07:00

Let's drop politics for a moment shall we?

In an era where Christmas spirit is in short supply, and where the idea of wishing someone a Merry Christmas is deemed inappropriate, I submit to you the following story. (link at bottom of article)

In the past, faith, good spirit, kindness, and hope were attributes that Christmas brought out of individuals. It was a time of peace, of good will towards men, of kindnesses, and of heart. This time of year, above all times, is our chance to show we are human and give reason to show one another the good in all of us. I would argue that this should not be a one time a year event, but an everyday occurance, but let's not be picky. We have to start somewhere.

There is something special in the season, and it really does not matter if or how you celebrate the time or not, there is just something irresistable in it all. Yet, hearing how shoppers trample over one another to get the greatest deal or latest gadget might lead one to think that this "spirit" is dying. It can be depressing knowing that "good will towards men" might be turning into "who cares about you, I'm doing what's good for me!"

Despite the negativism in much of our population, and the air of distrust that we project upon one another, let us not forget how a simple smile or kind word can do wonders, how a kindness is not forgotton, and how hope is contageous. It is hope that will get us through hard times, and our ability to love, no matter how different we are, is our way to light up the darkness. Let your light shine this holiday season and EVERYDAY.

I hope this story is an inspiration to you all.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?section=magazine&id=3789373

Dear Readers

2008-12-16T20:17:00.000-07:00

Unfortunately, I have been working a ridiculous amount of hours over the past month and have had no time to post to the site. However, things appear to be slowing down and I will begin posting regularly again in the next few weeks. I apologize to anyone still reading the site, and I look forward to reading and responding to any posts I have not yet addressed.

If you have been following recent events, you would have seen congress continuing to spend at an unprecedented rate, the corruption in the Illinois government, the nationalizing of banks, the efforts to control the auto industry, and the continued power grab by the federal reserve and the U.S. government. All of this points to a continued effort to destroy our freedoms as Americans, and the foundation of the Constitution.

Below is a video that shows that there were those many years ago that saw this coming. Like the people of this nation, they were ignored. Make no mistake, this was no accident. Despite media and government continually trying to point the finger away from themselves, I ask you to think critically as you watch the following video.

What I've Learned

2008-11-06T22:11:00.000-07:00

Reflecting back over the past year's election, I've learned a few things:

The majority of Americans do not understand where our leaders are taking us and more importantly, do not understand the Constitution or the ideas that inspired its writing.
The "progressives" in the Democratic Party have become an instrument of socialism, believe in collectivist ideals, and are working to destroy our Constitution.
The "neo-cons" in the Republican Party have left their conservative base, promote patriotism as allegiance to the state despite the destruction of individual liberty, believe in collectivist ideals, and are working to destroy our Constitution.
The media has been hijacked by corporate interests and big money, is dividing America, promotes racism, and no longer has any integrity.
Government has grown to gargantuan proportions, no longer follows the Constitution, and no longer listen to the people.
Lies and deceit are the trademark of most politicians - I already knew this, but it has become even more apparent.
Americans are not as scared of socialism as they should be.
The voting system is flawed, rigged, and fruadulent. It needs to be reformed.
We are teetering on the brink of something very scary...

And last but not least:

Many Americans are waking up. There is hope!

Here Is Your Handbasket America, It Is Going To Be Hell

2008-11-04T21:25:00.000-07:00

I would have been unhappy had John McCain been elected President. He has never shown a respect for constitutional government, and has meandered over to liberal ideas time and time again. Yet...

It might have been better.

It might have been better than what we are getting. I have never seen a man running for office with so much damaging information and commentary than that of Barack Obama. The astounding amount of ammunition against Obama would have destroyed any other politician. Yet it was hidden, the media was silent, and Americans will suffer.

I think both candidates were poor choices. However, this Barack Hussein Obama is scary. America wants change, they will get it. Americans want something different (even though most Obama supporters don't understand what they want), they will get it. It's going to be ugly. It's going to be painful. It's going to change the political landscape in this country to the point where freedom will be in short supply. It will do nothing but further destroy the economy of this country. I can already hear the footsteps of this march toward socialism, and it frightens me. I am frightened for those who do not realize what they are getting. Those who followed so blindly will get a rude awakening.

Mark my words America. There is no stopping this "progressive" movement. The next four years will be hell. Hopefully you will learn over this time, understand what you voted for and what you lost. You may think socialism is a great idea, but if you look around the globe, those people who are suppressed and oppressed by their governments (socialist, fascist, statist, totalitarianist. etc...) yearn for the freedom that we just lost. The shame is, we had choices. We had the ability to decide and we voted it out. We voted against the Constitution, voted against small government, personal accountability, free markets, liberty, justice, and morality.

Farewell America. You will be missed.

I Stand Corrected...Obama Is No Socialist

2008-11-03T18:45:00.000-07:00

Great article

http://theamericansentinel.com/2008/11/03/obama-is-not-a-socialist/

The Presidential Oath of Office

2008-10-30T19:47:00.000-06:00

Glenn Beck analyzes one of Obama's clips from 2001 and reveals the marxist philosphy in Obama's words.

Glenn Beck does a fabulous job in his commentary explaining the message behind Obama's words. I urge every American to do your homework. Understand the dangers that this type of thinking will have on our Constitution, our people, and our wonderful country. It does not matter what side of the aisle this line of thinking comes from, it is destructive, manipulative, and dangerous for the future of this nation.

Let me end with the oath that every President takes when he enters office. Read it, then ask yourself: How can a president faithfully execute his Office of President when the powers of that office are derived from a document he/she does not believe in? How can a president who wants to change a Constitution that he/she believes is flawed, protect that very Constitution? It is our Constitution that protects us as Americans. It is our Constitution that keeps us free from tyranny, opression, and slavery. It is our Constitution that grants us, THE PEOPLE, liberty. Whether you are Democrat or Republican, the one thing we should all fight together for is Liberty.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." - Presidential Oath of Office

Judge Throws Out Lawsuit Claiming Obama Not Eligible For Presidency

2008-10-25T22:18:00.000-06:00

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging Barack Obama's qualifications to be president.

On August 21, 2008, Philip J. Berg, a lifetime Democrat, alleges that Barack Obama is not a U.S. citizen. His lawsuit claimed that Obama was born in Kenya, and therefore not a "natural born citizen." He also claimed that as a boy, Obama moved to Indonesia and attended school there as a citizen of THAT country. If either of the above is true, Obama is ineligible as outlined by the United States Constitution. Barack Obama and the DNC have both been aware of this lawsuit since it was filed, and have not, as of yet, produced any evidence to the contrary. The birth certificate on Obama's website from Hawaii has also been deemed to be a forgery due to inconsistencies.

U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick on Friday night rejected the suit ruling that Berg lacked standing to bring the case, saying any harm from an allegedly ineligible candidate was "too vague and its effects too attenuated to confer standing on any and all voters." Berg has appealed his case to the United States Supreme Court.

As a citizen of this country, doesn't it serve our best interest to at least have Obama present a valid birth certificate? Yet, instead of silencing those who believe otherwise, he has failed to prove his citizenship of this nation!

What could have been going through the mind of this "judge" when he gave his reasoning for the dismissal? I would like to know if he was pressured into this ruling or if he is just ignorant. Let's look at his comments.

First of all, he stated that Philip Berg lacked "standing" to bring a case against Barack Obama. Is there any better "standing" than being a United States citizen? Does the Constitution not outline a government that is answerable to the people? Are they not OUR voice? Are they not a government FOR and OF the people? How is it then, that a U.S. citizen cannot bring a case against a Senator for NOT MEETING THE CRITERIA FOR PRESIDENT! Berg is doing his constitutional duty. It is actually all of our duty TO HOLD GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE! Or have we forgotton...

Secondly, Judge Surrick claimed that any harm from any ineligible candidate was "too vague and its effects too attenuated to confer standing on any and all voters." So he is essentially saying, the claim is "vague" (seems pretty cut and dry to me) and the effects too "attenuated" (too narrow or diminishing to measure). Let me make this clear. The "judge" in this case is basically saying that the case has no merit, and even if it does, what harm could an ineligible candidate bring to the country?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME???? Has our Constitution not undergone enough harm over the last few years? We have a government that has seriously handcuffed our Bill of Rights. We have a Congress that ignores the people and makes decisions that might be unpopular but "is in the best interest" of the nation (ie. bailouts). If over 90% of the people tell you NO, YOU DO NOT PASS LEGISLATION THAT IS CONTRARY TO THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE! And now, this "judge" wants to know what "effects" will befall the voter if someone ineligible were to run for president? Let's see here...

1) If the allegations are true (which the defendant has yet to admit ANY evidence to the contrary) Barack Obama would have pulled the greatest fraud EVER in an election campaign - and possibly in history.

2) The Democratic National Convention would be a conspirator to the fraudulent CRIMINAL activities perpetuated by Obama and his campaign.

3) Ignoring the mandates established by our founding fathers on eligibility for presidency could open the door for anyone to run for office.

4) The Constitution, which has been ignored by the Executive Branch, and the Legislative Branch, will NOW BE IGNORED BY THE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT WHICH WAS ESTABLISHED TO INSURE THE CONSTITUTION IS FOLLOWED!

5) A dismissal of the case will cause a split in the electorate that may never be repaired. If you cannot trust your leaders in Congress, your president, or the justice system, it will cause a constitutional crisis in this country. Imagine the dissent if Obama is elected without clearing up his citizenship (ask yourself why he has not)?

6) It raises the question about the integrity of one of the candidates. If this fundamental criteria is ignored by Obama and he wins the election, what other parts of the Constitution is he willing to dismiss?

Personally, I hold this judge in contempt! This is a cowardly decision and he should be ashamed of himself. Hopefully the U.S. Supreme Court will carry out their Constitutional duty and at least hear the case. My fear, as it should be with all of you, is that they will not.

Outlining Freedom

2008-10-23T20:48:00.000-06:00

The Destabilization of America

2008-10-19T13:50:00.000-06:00

Yuri Bezmenov, expert on Soviet propaganda and disinformation, escaped to the United States in 1970.

This entire sixteen minute interview, recorded twenty-four years ago, is an alarming prophesy of the Communist infiltration that has rapidly taken root in America and is now in its final stages.

Yuri Bezmenov
by onmyway02

Did Capitalism Fail?

2008-10-13T20:58:00.000-06:00

I was talking to an Obama supporter yesterday, and asked them simply, "do you understand that Obama is essentially promoting socialism?" They answered yes. I was shocked at their response, and asked if they support the idea of America becoming a communist state. They looked at me, and said "well, capitalism sure didn't work!"

Shock and awe are two words that describe how I feel about this new movement towards socialism. The fact that people actually believe capitalism failed acknowledges that either they are ignorant, or that, as usual, the media has betrayed what we may soon refer to as the "old republic."

Capitalism has not failed. Capitalism and free markets do not fail. They go through peaks and valleys for sure, but they do not fail. The free market produces hard work, accountability, and most of all savings. The power behind the market is the workers, something we never have a shortage of in America. Savings is the true definition of capital. It is what we are left with when we have used all we need for living.

However, thanks to big government, bigger corporations, and most of all, the federal reserve, we have allowed a monetary system to be put in place that creates debt, not capital. It is erronious to call our current system capitalistic. Instead, we have central planning, from a central bank, who control the markets through manipulation. This is not free, and it is exactly why the free market system is not working!

My argument is simple. The failure of the market is due to big government and their insistance on an obviously failed monetary policy. Their solution is bigger government, a bigger central bank (world bank), which, in turn would create bigger corporations and even more control for the current monopolies. More government control, more debt, and a continued decrease in our God given rights and Constitutional freedoms is the end result of this socialist march.

The solution seems simple enough to me.

"Our government has lived beyond its means for decades. We now face a crucial juncture, at which we determine whether to continue down the path of debt, inflation, and government intervention or choose to return to the economics of the free market, which have been ignored for almost a century. Increased debt leads to higher taxes on future generations, while increased inflation diminishes the purchasing power of American families and destroys the dollar. No society has ever been achieved prosperity through indebtedness or inflation, and the United States is no exception. We cannot afford to continue our current policies of monetary expansion and unending bailouts. Unless we return to sound monetary policy, sharply reduce government expenditures, and realize that the government cannot act as a lender of last resort, we will drive our economy to ruin." - Ron Paul

The Case Against Obama

2008-10-11T18:30:00.000-06:00

On August 21, 2008, Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvainian lawyer and lifelong democrat, filed suit against Barack Obama claiming that he is not eligible to run for president because he is not a natural born citizen. There are only three requirements to run for president in these United States as stipulated in our Constitution:
1. Candidate MUST be 35 years of age
2. Candidate MUST have been a resident in the U.S. for 14 years prior to running
3. Candidate MUST be a natural born citizen

To fulfill the requirements by law, and to have the case dropped, all Barack has to do is provide a birth certificate to the court. To date, he has not complied and has, instead, used his lawyers to stall procedings until after the election. Why won't he produce the documents? Why not put this to rest? Perhaps he cannot. Perhaps he really IS the fraud anyone with sense understands him to be. Watch the video below and decide for yourself. Then do the research.

If you are an Obama supporter, I urge you not to take what the media says at face value. Understand the issues. Understand the dangers. Trust me, I am no fan of John McCain. He will not receive my vote. Neither will Obama. Until you, the voter, understand the dangers of where your political parties are leading you, we, as a nation, will not be free. If you inform yourself about your candidate, and still cast your lot with Obama or McCain, then at least you will understand what you are voting for and what you are getting.

Just don't complain when you get what you deserve.

Vote Out Bailout Backers!

2008-10-09T21:40:00.000-06:00

Awesome video. Take the time to watch it.

Archived Evidence Proving Obama Was A Member Of Socialist 'New Party'

2008-10-08T23:42:00.000-06:00

Great article from American Thinker. Link to archived documents at bottom of page.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/10/archives_prove_obama_was_a_new.html

The Odinga Connection

2008-10-07T18:34:00.000-06:00

Raila Odinga has, in his own words, a ‘close personal friendship’ with Barack Hussein Obama.

So who is this guy?

Raila Odinga, the Prime Minister of Kenya and Barack Obama, Democratic candidate for President of the U.S. are from the same Kenyan tribe. They are also cousins.

The mainstream media will stop here, but let's look deeper shall we?

In 2006, Barack Obama took a trip to Kenya and voiced his support for his fellow tribesman and political ally, Odinga. Odinga was running on the socialist/democrat ticket in Kenya and wanted to bring the whole of Kenya under Sharia law. After the election in which Odinga lost, he gathered his army of supporters and terrorized the Kenyan people. His "supporters," who are mostly radical muslims, are the same ones who burned alive Christians trapped inside of churches, and the same ones who have pushed for Sharia law, banning of all religions beside Islam, and the closing of all co-ed schools. After WEEKS of murder and rape, where over 300,00 people were left homeless, the Kenyan government created the new office of Prime Minister to alleviate the violence. Through blood and tears, this man now shares power in the Kenyan government.

During Obama's visit to Kenya (payed by your tax dollars of course) he enjoyed rock star status. He was the local boy who had overwhelming success in American politics. Crowds flocked to see him and hear him speak, and Odinga, who rarely left Barack's side, benefitted directly from his fame. Obama campaigned directly for Odinga, sharing the stage and microphone with his cousin throughout his visit. He even spoke at a university in Nairobi where he verbally attacked the sitting Kenyan leadership (Kibaki) calling them 'corrupt.' Mike Flannery, political editor for CBS2 in Nairobi, reported that Obama had accused the Kibaki government (Odinga’s opponent) of corruption “almost every day since he arrived.” After his visit, he filed with the US Federal Elections Commission for his presidential candidacy. He decided America needed change.

Ironically, Odinga was running his campaign on the idea of "CHANGE." Although Kenya was one of the most stable places in Africa, a friend to the United States, and a stalwart ally to the U.S. in the war on terror, Obama flew down on taxpayer money to speak out against the current government despite the fact that Odinga was partnering with Islamic jihadists! Obama willingly associated with the evil men who were behind the violence in Kenya after Odinga's loss at the polls!

Why aren't we hearing about this from the media? Why don't people know? Why are people voting for this man Barack?? I've written other posts about some of Obama's other questionable ties but this one is the scariest. This one speaks to the heart of what kind of man Obama is! We should be asking question after question of Obama and his campaign, because he is running for President!

Although Barack denies being muslim, he DID go to the madrassas in Jakarta and was a practicing muslim. His father was a muslim. His stepfather was a muslim, and in Islam, no matter what your mother is, if your father is a muslim, so are you!! This would be a good time to note that the church Obama does attend now, although "christian," reeks of hatred and anti-American sentiment.

Did he leave Islam, and if so, why the silence? If so, why has the muslim world not called for his head as an apostate? (they instead celebrate his run for president - yes, our enemies support him)!!! If so, WHY DOES HE SUPPORT MEN LIKE ODINGA?

I'm afraid most Americans will only learn of the truth after the election.
(video below)

Why We Have Bailouts

2008-10-05T22:33:00.000-06:00

Top 10 Corporate PAC Contributors:

Obama:
Goldman Sachs $739,521
UBS AG $419,550
Lehman Brothers $391,774
Citigroup Inc $492,548
Morgan Stanley $341,380
Latham & Watkins $328,879
Google Inc $487,355
JPMorgan Chase & Co $475,112
Sidley Austin LLP $370,916
Skadden, Arps et al $360,409

McCain:
Merrill Lynch $349,170
Citigroup Inc $287,801
Morgan Stanley $249,377
Wachovia Corp $147,456
Goldman Sachs $220,045
Lehman Brothers $115,707
Bear Stearns $108,000
JPMorgan Chase & Co $206,392
Bank of America $133,975
Credit Suisse Group $175,503

(Data from Center for Responsive Politics )

side note: Corporations operating in American Samoa - $33 million in pork in bailout package
PELOSI CONNECTION:
*Largest employer in Samoa is Starkist *Starkist's parent company is Del Monte
*PAUL PELOSI (Nancy's husband) has a 17 million share interest in Del Monte
*Del Monte is headquartered in San Francisco

America Loses Again

2008-10-04T22:21:00.000-06:00

Watching John McCain refuse to stand against the bailout bill was just another indication of how poorly he represents the majority of his voting base. How can the leader of the Republican Party, after claiming he has not nor would not support bills filled with "pork," vote for a bill that may be the most atrocious and alarming bill ever to pass through Congress? The fact that Barack Obama signed this travesty is no surprise. Yet, McCain, given the opportunity to possibly win the election by fighting against the "bailout," has alienated himself from his supporters once again.

Looking back, it really is no surprise. This "maverick" has not exactly been a stalwart defender of conservative values throughout his career. His bipartisan approach is definitely not what is needed in the Republican party. In 2002, he helped introduce the McCain-Feingold bill, probably the single most destructive legislation to freedom of speech ever passed through Congress.

Now every conservative is calling for Obama's head because of his criminal ties to Fannie and Freddie, but they forget that McCain was one of the first senators to flirt with criminal dealings with corporate institutions. In fact, in the 80's he joined four Democrats in taking "contributions" from Charles Keating, head of a Savings and Loan Association that was investing their depositors' federally insured savings in risky ventures. When those lost money, Keating tried to hide the losses from regulators by inducing his customers to switch from insured accounts to uninsured (and worthless) bonds issued by Lincoln's near-bankrupt parent company. These five senators, known as the Keating Five were involved in one of the most scandalous events in Congressional history. Until now.

The Savings and Loan crisis of the 80's resulted in the government "bailing out" hundreds of S&L's who were involved in similar criminal activity. Much like this current bailout, the burden fell to the taxpayers of this country.

Is it really any surprise then, that both Obama and McCain voted for this current "bailout" bill? Barack has profited tremendously from his association with Freddie and Fannie execs Franklin Raines and James Johnson, taking "contributions" much like McCain did in the 80's. These same two men, Raines and Johnson, have also been highly active in the decision making of Obama's campaign.

McCain, on the other hand, has announced, if elected, he would appoint N.Y. Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (son of former New York governor Mario Cuomo) as the head of the SEC. When A. Cuomo became Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD) Secretary in 1997, he axed a federal loan sale program that had saved the US $2.2 billion between 1994 and 1997 and reinstituted a system that lost the government money while earning billions for favored friends.
His time serving in office in N.Y. has been marred by rumors of corruption.
http://www.dunwalke.com/sidebars/andrew_cuomo.htm
http://thekomisarscoop.com/2006/08/30/fees-for-our-friends-the-andrew-cuomo-scandal-the-vendetta/

Sound familiar?

McCain and Obama may wear different hats in the political arena, but when those hats are off, maybe these two men are not quite so different. The sad truth of this election year is that whoever wins, America loses...again.

An Argument For Homeschool

2008-10-03T21:14:00.000-06:00

This article might be interesting for any parent who cares about what their kids learn in school.

http://theamericansentinel.com/2008/10/03/nazi-style-christianity-makes-its-way-to-american-schools/

This Is Treason

2008-10-03T20:21:00.000-06:00

I am angry. So should be ALL Americans. Whether you support or oppose the bailout, the majority have spoken and been ignored. Our "leaders" in Congress have passed legislation contrary to the will of the people. It has happened before, but never this blatant, never this calculated.

We no longer have a government of the people or for the people. Those in power only serve themselves. They prance and promise but only to their own benefit. They lie and cheat and steal. They serve their own interests. They are corrupt. They are out of control. They are traitors.

I submit that we live in a monopolistic society. Media, Industry, and Government are all controlled by a handful of people. This cannot be allowed to go on any longer. Capitalism cannot function under a monopoly and a free market system cannot survive under central planning. The curtain has been drawn, and for those that can see, look hard at what has been exposed in this election year. It is a sham. It is a facade. It is a web of lies that we are all caught up in.

It is time for us to say no. It is time for us to take a stand. They have ignored us. They have rejected the will of the people and rejected the Constitution in the process. I make a public plea to ALL Americans - reject this charade we call government. They are elitists and they do not care about you and me. They have made this obvious.

I am a conservative. It is apparent to me, as it should be to all of you, my party has left me. They no longer stand for conservative ideals, conservative principles, conservative economic policy. These "neoconservatives are statists - and are hell bent on destroying our constitutional freedoms and ignoring the constraints of the constitution. I say to my fellow conservatives, "OPEN YOUR EYES!" The republican party is not representing us!!

To Democrats that are rational. Your party has left you. These "progressives" are hell bent on supplanting individualism and constitutional freedoms and replacing it with communism. You see, we may have fundamental differences on how a free society should function, but OPEN YOUR EYES!! Whether you like it or not, we are all in the same boat. This may be the most important time in American history because the very idea of freedom is at stake!

Any senator or representative who voted for this bailout plan should be tried for treason. I submit that if the founding fathers walked into this farce we call Congress, they would hang the majority of those representing us - hang them for treason! There are a few who still care, but they have become the minority. I urge these few to keep fighting, to keep standing for the people and for the Constitution, and I thank you for your voice.

To the voting public - if you really care for these United States, care for freedom and the Constitution, I say let your voice be heard. Vote third party. Reject the two choices that the media has given us. Reject both parties as they have rejected us. It doesn't matter who you vote for, but do not vote for evil. For too long we have voted for the "lesser of two evils." The greatest trick they ever played was convincing all of us that a vote for someone outside the major parties was a "wasted vote." A vote is never wasted. It is your way of standing up and saying NO. If you were the only one, would it not be worth it to say out loud "I CANNOT ACCEPT THIS ANY LONGER!! I DESERVE BETTER!! WE DESERVE BETTER!! But we are not one, we are many. Let us stand together!!

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."- Samuel Adams

Housing Crisis 101

2008-09-30T00:55:00.000-06:00

If you tried to play this video before, you probably found it no longer working. This video has been banned multiple times. I left the original video up so you can see that there are parties out there who are trying to silence the truth. (since removed) Below is a link to an updated version. Still think the media and politicians are on your side? Still think they are telling the truth? This is censorship plain and simple. So let's try this again.

Note: The info on this is factual as far as I can find. Feel free to google for yourself. I agree with this video until the end. I do not support John McCain any more than I support Obama. I don't believe McCain is offering any better change than Barack. I will get to McCain in future posts. It is important to remember that it wasn't "just" democrats that helped get the legislation passed that caused this. There are people to blame on both sides of the aisle. To date, however, from what I have unearthed, the majority of those who benefitted from this housing crisis and helped to pass this damaging legislation DO ride donkeys. Sorry Dems, but it is true.

I Am Barack Obama. I Kill Babies.

2008-09-29T21:37:00.000-06:00

As you can see in my comments section, a friend pointed out that my language was pretty harsh in my previous post under this title. Not that I don't stand by what I said, but I have made a commitment to providing facts, and letting you, reader, decide for yourself what to think.

So here are the facts. Barack Obama has ties to the Chicago mob. Obama has ties to a corrupt activist organization known as ACORN, and was an activist for this organization. Obama received massive amounts of money from the lending firms that went under. Obama has ties to several of the key members responsible for the "bailout" crisis. Obama is friends with known terrorist Bill Ayers and has ties to Weather Underground, a terrorist group. Obama attended a church and was mentored by the pastor Jeremiah Wright who has given several anti-America and anti-"white" speeches. Obama has a very suspect past and voting record. Obama does not believe in free speech (google Truth Squad). I encourage everyone to research for themselves each of these. Even more disturbing is Obama's stance AGAINST legislation that would prevent infanticide in his state of Illinois. (see video below)

A Scary Proposition

2008-09-28T11:40:00.000-06:00

Below is a link to a video of Obama's speech given in Colorodo on July 2, 2008. Around the 15 minute mark he makes the following remark.

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

Obama won’t answer any questions about it, so I'd like to hear what you think. This has the stench of creating a civilian spy force. I know that may sound a bit far fetched but someone explain to me why we would need to have hundreds of thousands of citizens working for “national security?" Especially one that is as well funded as our military.

Also around the 19 minute mark he begins to talk about students from middle school through college learning how to be active citizens. His idea is to teach them respect for "our institutions" so they take citizenship seriously. He would do this by requiring middle and high school students to perform 50 hours of public service a year and college students to perform 100 hours of public service a year.

Sounds a lot like 'Hitler Youth' to me. Does anyone else question the idea of compelled service for high school and college kids? (He also talks about withholding funding from schools if they don’t comply, which seems pretty contrary to his supposed views on No Child Left Behind) We already see the billboards going up across the country: “Turn in your neighbors for illegal guns." We see police already performing “knock and talks," systematically searching urban households door-to-door without warrants. We saw FEMA confiscate firearms from citizens during Katrina. We see metal detectors, fingerprint scanners, and video cameras being set up in schools. I don't mean to be Orwellian on this one, but it sounds like we are indoctrinating the next generation to be comfortable with being spied upon and having their privacy invaded. These measures have been applied by both parties so I am not saying Obama would be any worse than a McCain presidency. Similar bills were signed by George H. W. Bush, Clinton, and George W. Bush. Domestic spying is non-partisan. FISA allows domestic spying without repercussions - legislation pushed through by our current president and surprisingly supported by Obama. The Patriot Act was passed by wide margins in both parties, and along with expanding government control and their ability to invade privacy, it also expanded the Secretary of Treasury's power to regulate financial transactions particularly involving foreign individuals and entities. Yes, more power to Paulson and the Federal Reserve who brought us the housing crisis. (interesting to note the bailout increases his power even more) Add all these facts put together with this “volunteer” force as big and well-funded as the military and the forcing of our children to "serve" may have a slightly more sinister aim than you otherwise might consider.

Watch the video and think about what he’s saying when he explains how he will compel your kids to “volunteer” through legislation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Df2p6867_pw

If you have made it this far, I will submit further interesting material about Obama's "Truth Squads." I won't go into this now, but could these groups popping up all over the country be a precurser to his civilian security force??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GIMhRGFfpI

http://faultlineusa.blogspot.com/2008/09/obamas-squad-threatens-freedom-of.html

The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals

2008-09-28T03:28:00.000-06:00

In 1963 a list of 45 goals found their way down the halls of our great Capitol. As you read this, 45 years later, you should be shocked by the events that have played themselves out. (A few of these no longer apply since the fall of The Soviet Union)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Communist Goals (1963) Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963

Current Communist Goals EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 10, 1963 .

Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.

At Mrs. Nordman's request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following "Current Communist Goals," which she identifies as an excerpt from "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen:

[From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy-making positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.
43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.
44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.
45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.

Congressional Record, Vol. 109 88th Congress, 1st Session Appendix Pages A1-A2842 Jan. 9-May 7, 1963 Reel 12

You will find the 10 Planks of The Communist Manifesto interesting at this point
http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/10planks.htm

Are You Sure You Want Change America?

2008-09-27T21:07:00.000-06:00

So you want change? We've heard a lot about this word in the past few months from many of our presidential candidates. I've decided to look at some of the changes government has brought us over the years.

Our dollar USED to be strong. It used to be backed by gold and silver. Today it is worth less than ever and continues to fall. The culprit? Politicians and the horrible economic legislation they have been passing since 1913 - the same year the federal reserve popped into existence.

We USED to be respected around the world. People looked to America as an inspiration for what real freedom and liberty means. Today many peoples of many nations look to what is happening in America with disdain. The culprit? Politicians and our horrible legislation that continues to trample our Constitution and our horrible foreign policy that permits us to police the world.

Schools and their curriculum USED to be held accountable by parents. After all, their children were attending and it is sensible that they should have a say in what their kids learn. Today schools answer to the state and use government mandated curriculum. The culprit? Politicians and the government created Department of Education. Remember when you could pray in schools, or when we would say the Pledge of Allegiance in school? Patriotism used to be taught as well. Today a good patriot is someone who pays their taxes (see Joe Biden) and is subservient to the state (see Patriot Act).

We USED to have a strong economy. The free market system works. It worked well for a long time. Inflation, price fixing, and government bailouts have left us facing a depression that will negatively effect any American not on Wall Street or Capitol Hill. I could go into import/export taxes as well in this category but I'm afraid I would show that every economic policy our government puts in place actually hurts America. The culprits? Wall Street, The Federal Reserve and Capitol Hill.

We USED to have free speech. This is our first amendment right. However our free speech is now under attack by groups such as Media Matters and is being restricted by legislation such as the McCain-Feingold bill. The culprit? Politicians from both major parties and their attempt to stop the dissenting voices from an ever growing angry American population. Guilty by association? The Media.

Marriage USED to be sacred. I'm not up for a debate with anyone sympathetic with the small minority of gays/lesbians on this one, but has anyone ever asked themselves why one member of a homosexual union still always takes on a more "male" role and the other a more "female" role?? Maybe it's just me but it seems like perhaps it is just natural that men are supposed to be attracted to women. Today people seem confused. The culprit?? Media and the Politicians who are trying to change it.

We USED to have lower taxes. Actually we used to have no income tax. The year it was instituted? 1913, the same year the Federal Reserve was created. Coincidence? Since then, although taxation has fluctuated and how it is applied has fluctuated, we find ourselves paying more taxes, having to work almost 6 months before we as Americans make a profit. Today, politicians are promising bailouts and programs that would raise your taxes even higher. The culprit? Politicians and their incredibly stupid plans to "bail out" the rich and the even more ignorant policies that would socialize America. Guilt by association?? The Media and their pundits who convince us that it is all a good idea.

We USED to enforce legal citizenship. Today politicians pretend we do but we don't. The increase in the socialized structure of America has afforded illegal aliens a multitude of services that they don't pay for. Politicians are also trying to ease the restrictions on voting that would allow illegals to have a voice in our system of government. There are in place a number of plans that would create a North American Union (see NAFTA, NAFTA superhighway, CAFTA, AMERO) It is even more surprising that a country so concerned about "terrorism" refuses to close its borders despite an overwhelming majority of Americans supporting that idea. The culprit? Politicians, Banks, and world leaders (Bush included) who can make a profit off of destroying the sovereignty of America.
(Back to the closing of borders issue. If your house was under threat from a gang of robbers, would you leave your doors and windows open and then enforce a plan (Patriot Act) that would allow you to spy with impugnity on anyone living inside the house??) - like most things government does it doesn't makes sense, makes government bigger, and takes away more rights from Americans.

We USED to have affordable food, housing, and gas but now we don't. We USED to have a right to bear arms but now they can be taken (see Katrina). We USED to believe life was sacred but Roe vs. Wade changed that. We USED to have more freedom. Politicians changed that.

I could go on and on I think, but the point is this. We DO NOT NEED MORE CHANGE!!! Over the last 50 years, legislation has not changed much in its moving of America to a more collectivist society. We have lost the ideals that made us great and the freedom and liberty that was ours by inheritance has been slowly removed peice by peice. From president to president, congress to congress - no matter democrat or republican - government has grown and our freedoms as Americans have decreased. It is not a time for change. It is a time for REFORM!

You Have To Be More Than "Present" To Be A Leader

2008-09-25T20:38:00.000-06:00

In 1999 a bill was introduced to the Illinois legislature that would allow some juveniles to be tried as adults. Current Presidential candidate Barack Obama, the state Senator of Illinois was faced with a difficult choice. A vote for the bill would possibly draw the ire of his African-American constituents. A vote against the measure might tarnish his tough-on-crime image. In an astounding display of leadership, Obama voted "present." Realizing he could not please everyone, he chose to not take a stand. In fact, during his career as a congressman, Obama has voted "present" over 100 times. Leader? No. Politician? Yes.

America needs leaders. America needs honesty and integrity. America needs someone to take a stand and in so doing, stand for the principles of liberty. Obama has none of these characteristics. His ties to ACORN, the Chicago mob, and the large lending firms that went under this past week proves he has neither honesty nor integrity. His voting record shows he is no leader. It is laughable that so many Americans have bought into his smooth talking rhetoric that leaves his audience swooning, and intellectuals scratching their head.

A good leader stands by his principles despite opposition because he realizes being "present" is not enough. Obama has shown he has no desire to take a stand on tough issues and therefore should not be considered a leader by any standard.

A man who stands for nothing is either dangerous or a liar. A man who stands for everything is worse. Be wary America, the devil is at our door.

How to Bring a Country to it's Knees - Part 1 - The Philosophy Of Rule

2008-09-25T01:05:00.000-06:00

"You have to ask yourself, 'Who owns me? Do I own myself or am I just another piece of government property?' " -- Neal Boortz

"We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." -- Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, June 28, 2004.

Marxism, Socialism, Fascism, Lenninism, Totalitarianism and Statism are essentially the same things. Other than a few discrepencies from ism to ism, you'll find that you can sum up all these groups in a category called Collectivism.

Many people don't understand this concept and don't realize that the ideas of Collectivism have hijacked our political, economic, and educational systems and is broadcast through our homes by the media.

So what is Collectivism?

Ayn Rand states "Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group -- whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called 'the common good'."

Bert Rand reminds us: "Don't forget that pure democracy is a form of collectivism -- it readily sacrifices individual rights to majority wishes. Since it involves no constitutional bill of rights, or at least, no working and effective one, the majority-of-the-moment can and does vote away the rights of the minority-of-the-moment, even of a single individual. This has been called 'mob rule,' the 'tyranny of the majority' and many other pejorative names. It is one of the greatest threats to liberty, the reason why America's founding fathers wrote so much so disparagingly of pure democracy."

Many would stop here and smirk thinking Wait a second!! We ARE a democracy!

The fact is, we are not. Or more correctly, we were never supposed to be. The founding fathers worked exceedingly hard at making sure that the United States of America was established as a REPUBLIC. Much of their personal writings talk extensively on the dangers of a democracy. In fact, NOT ONCE does the word 'democracy' appear in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, or the constitution of any of the fifty states. Yet today, our teachers and politicians use it as if the word itself was noble and the impetus to lead the world to peace and prosperity.

One might wonder what is so bad about democracy. To put it simply, a democracy is the power of the majority to rule over the minority. It is the right to allow a group through concensus to overthrow the rights and liberties of the minority or individual. It is essentially collectivism and the last thing the founding fathers wanted for this nation.

"Wherever the real power in a Government lies, there is the danger of oppression. In our Governments the real power lies in the majority of the community, and the invasion of private rights is chiefly to be apprehended, not from acts of Government contrary to the sense of its constituents, but from acts in which the Government is the mere instrument of the major number of the Constituents." -- James Madison, in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, 1788

"The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society." --Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1816

The people cannot delegate to government the power to do anything which would be unlawful for them to do themselves." -- John Locke

"A pure democracy ... can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party... Hence it is that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in thier deaths." -- James Madison, Federalist No. 10

In fact, the Constitution is very specific on the type of government we should have.

"The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government..." -- United States Constitution, Article IV, Section 4

To understand the objective of the framers of our Constitution, you have to understand the definition of another 'ism.' This 'ism' seperates itself from those found in the broad category of collectivism and stands alone in it's support of the individual over groups. It is the basis of freedom, of liberty, and is the idea behind what made America's government so special and so different from its contemporaries. It is called Individualism.

The founding fathers had been under rule from a corrupt government where it's citizens served the king, and where rights and property did not belong to the individual, but to the crown. After they fought and gained freedom, they wanted nothing to do with the collectivist ideals that had been forced upon them. Having their opportunity, they set out to create a nation whose government would be the smallest in the world and with very limited power. Their goal? To assure to every American that their life would be their own by establishing a Constitution that guaranteed that THEIR government would never have the capacity to interfere in their lives. It was an experiment. It was a revolutionary idea. And it failed.

Today we have the largest and most powerful government the world has ever seen. This is a far cry from the ideas of Jefferson and his pals as they penned forth their vision of the very opposite on that famous piece of paper we know as The Constitution of the United States of America. But that comes later. Let's get back to Individualism.

"Individualism regards man -- every man -- as an independent, sovereign entity who possesses an inalienable right to his own life, a right derived from his nature as a rational being. Individualism holds that a civilized society, or any form of association, cooperation or peaceful co-existence among men, can be achieved only on the basis of the recognition of individual rights -- and that a group, as such, has no rights other than the individual rights of its members." -- Ayn Rand

"This right to life, this right to liberty, and this right to pursue one’s happiness is unabashedly individualistic, without in the slightest denying at the same time our thoroughly social nature. It’s only that our social relations, while vital to us all, must be chosen - that is what makes the crucial difference." -- Prof. Tibor R. Machan

"The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom." -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas

"In principle, there are only two fundamental political viewpoints. That is, two contradictory ends of the 'political spectrum.' Those two principles are freedom and slavery." -- Mark Da Cunha

It is this ideology that guided the framing of The Constitution. At no time in history had a government been established that guaranteed that every individual was his own master. As the Declaration of Independence declares, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

The fight for Liberty was costly. Many Americans died fighting for their freedoms and the founding fathers did not take lightly what they wrote. Some of our leaders today have referred to our Constitution as a "living document," essentially meaning that as society progresses, we can not be expected to abide by the chains or confines of this document. To say that we can contradict its limiting powers or ignore its constraints is irresponsible and is an affront to the very freedoms that so many died for.

The Constitution is binding, a contract for all time between the people and its government and it was meant to be so. Because the cost of freedom was so high for so many, would it make sense that some of the greatest thinkers of all time would leave us with a flimsy Constitution that could be changed and molded to fit the whims of government? The answer is a resounding no. These men were fighters, they were champions of freedom and liberty, and they were serious.

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, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." -- Jefferson et al, The Declaration of Independence

"In questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."- Thomas Jefferson

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."- Samuel Adams

Now back to the present.

As I said before, the great expiriment has failed. At no time in history has a government wielded more power, more authority, and more influence than ours. In the coming weeks and months (as I have time) I will be delving into more detail of how we got to where we are, how we can fix the problem or even if we want to. The reality is many people are apathetic or even happy with where we are. They enjoy the ease and comfort of knowing that government takes care of them and even cheer as "patriots" as their rights and freedoms are slowly stripped away. The lack of accountability in this country is astounding to me as is the lack of knowledge. I believe I have a moral responsibility to educate those who will hear and this blog is the beginning of my stand for the ideals that our founding fathers fought for so long ago. I invite you all to join me in this fight, for we all have a voice. Let it be heard.

God Bless,
-Travis Jackson

"But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a society respectful of individual liberty."--Ron Paul

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."-- Samuel Adams

The Lesser of Two Evils

2008-09-25T00:48:00.001-06:00

Every election people complain about the choices they are given. This year was especially exciting as there were polarizing figures on both sides of the isle.

In one corner we had Hillary and Obama. These two candidates managed to split the Democratic Party in two. Hillary supporters are still disgruntled over her loss and some vow to vote for McCain instead of Obama. It's funny that the policies of the two Democratic candidates were not that different.

In the other corner we had a slew of candidates with McCain being one of the least popular in the early going. Most Republicans, at least those I talked to, had VERY good reason not to vote for McCain and supported another candidate.

The Primaries came and went, and we were left with the two candidates that many in each party were not happy with.

And the old debates began:

Which of these is the lesser of two evils??

Which of these will harm the country least??

The average American will hold their nose and vote for the candidate that bears their political affiliation under the assumption that it's their only option and convinced a vote for a third party would allow "the other guy" to win. Many will jump on board the party bandwagon and do everything to discredit their opponent forgetting why they disliked theirs to begin with. In so doing, they will stop thinking, ignore the obvious similarities between the two "main" parties, and focus on the small things the media champions as differences.

It's a beautiful game really...and it's rigged.

Some Americans do not even vote. Some vote third party. The biggest ruse ever pulled on Americans was the convincing that voting anyone other than the main two parties is a "wasted vote." Imagine if everyone who didn't vote, everyone who was dissatisfied with the choices, and everyone who voted third party actually went to the polls and voted for someone they liked! Would this not send a message? Imagine if the candidate from one of the parties won the national election with only 35% of the national vote or less. Or better yet, someone could ascend to knock off the two favorites.

Until we realize we don't have to settle, we will continue to get someone less than we deserve. A vote for "the lesser of two evils" is still a vote for evil.

I heard it said that the difference between a republican and a conservative is that a Republican will vote their party. A conservative on the other hand will vote their conscience. Don't fall for the party lines. Stop listening to the media. Vote your conscience America, you deserve better!

Ron Paul on the Bailout Plan

2008-09-24T14:00:00.000-06:00

Once again, Ron Paul says it best. Hopefully, this time, people will listen.

Letter from Ron: Time is running out

Dear Friends,

Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster is about to strike.

The events of the past week are no exception.

The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress’ throat is not just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China! “This is welfare for the rich,” he said. “This is socialism for the rich. It’s bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters.”

That describes the current bailout package to a T. And we’re being told it’s unavoidable.
The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it. But that has become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences - predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics - are being let off the hook. The Federal Reserve System is actually positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess!

• The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets at any one time. That means $700 billion is only the very beginning of what will hit us.

• Financial institutions are “designated as financial agents of the Government.” This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.

• Then there’s this: “Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.“ Translation: the Secretary can buy up whatever junk debt he wants to, burden the American people with it, and be subject to no one in the process.

There goes your country.

Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this “sadly necessary.” Sad, yes. Necessary? Don’t make me laugh.

Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind - another example of the big choice we’re supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes. Now, with a backlash brewing, they’re not quite sure what their views are. A sad display, really.

Although the present bailout package is almost certainly not the end of the political atrocities we’ll witness in connection with the crisis, time is short. Congress may vote as soon as tomorrow. With a Rasmussen poll finding support for the bailout at an anemic seven percent, some members of Congress are afraid to vote for it. Call them! Let them hear from you! Tell them you will never vote for anyone who supports this atrocity.

The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are about to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? Do we care?

When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the media?

Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and what kind of country we shall be.

In liberty,
Ron Paul

Take Off The Diaper America, It's Getting Poopy In Here

2008-09-23T18:34:00.000-06:00

Children are distracted easily. If the "adults" in the room need to talk about something important, and do not want them to hear, they are placed in the next room, toy in hand; Or better yet, placed in front of a television screen that will quickly help them tune out all that happens around them.

What is ironic, is that in American society, the people who are supposed to keep government in check (the citizens) have been silently lulled into a sleep induced coma while those who need to be watched like children (government/fed) plan and execute disastrous policies that effectively diminish the restraints on government, socialize America, and systematically destroy the free market system and the dollar. Some call this progress, some call this change. (sound familiar??)

Children rely on parents for all things. Protection, needs, and wants are all supplied by the loving parent, and children learn to trust, respect, and rely on their mother and father for it all. America is no different. As we have been lulled to sleep by the evergrowing media, we have lost our accountability. Like infants we demand from government all our wants and needs, and in so doing, lose the foundations of liberty that made this nation great.

And so their power grows. Ever bigger.

The events of this past week show the ignorance and complacency of Americans toward the elitists that run our government. The same people who brought us financial disaster offer us a "bailout" plan. Yet, few Americans truly understand what caused the housing crisis and what this bailout plan truly encompasses. To put it simply, it is a laundering scheme without a ceiling proposed by the fed to increase it's power and influence. Most Americans watch from their couches and nod in unison as the Secretary of Treasury tries to push this bill through Congress to "save America." We are told that there are but two choices: Pass the Bailout plan, or watch as the U.S. falls into economic turmoil. This, however, is not true.

Since 2002, people have been talking about impending disaster. Numerous plans have been submitted to Congress and to Paulson that would eliminate the housing bubble, and at the same time put restraints on the big lending companies in order to alleviate the stress on the economy. It is still not too late. To say there are only two options - the bailout plan or impending doom - is misleading and irresponsible. If you look at history, this is not unprecedented and some would argue that it is purposeful. The fed has been responsible for a number of banking collapses and economic declines in our history and each time has used the opportunity to gobble up competition and increase their power and influence. Sadly though, Americans most likely will sit in the next room and stare blankly at the tv while our "leaders" in Congress will do nothing but squabble over technicalities. It is time to wake up. It is time to grow up. Take off your diaper America, because this downright stinks!

Are You On Board??

2008-09-20T12:30:00.000-06:00

Writes a person from Texas: "I was a delegate to the Texas Republican Convention this year. If any delegate was known to be sympathetic to Dr. Paul, they were not allowed to speak to the convention. If they approached a microphone, the microphone would be turned off. If a delegate began to speak and attempted to mention Ron's name, the mic would be cutoff. Anyone sympathetic to the Paul delegates or even those for fair and open discussion were threatened with arrest. Houston police were everywhere and all they needed was a nod from the power brokers to haul someone off without offense."

As the media blacked out Ron Paul during the primaries, steps were taken to silence and intimidate those who might interfere with the parties agenda. This was very effective in limiting the message of limited government and fiscal responsibility that Dr. Paul was challenging the Republican party with. As the media ignored and labeled him and his followers as crazy or conspiracy freaks, behind the scenes there were numerous reports of fraud, theft, intimidation, and illegal activity surrounding this years primary elections. Strangely though, other than a small blurb on CNN during the NH primary (which was later removed during the re-airing) - nothing has been mentioned. The only place you can find mention of the fraudulent tactics used is over the internet. Is it any wonder that there is a push from some of our "elected" congressman (and presidential nominees) to regulate the internet - the last place where you can actually find information not controlled by the men and women in power??

Police raids were conducted in Minneapolis before the Republican National Convention in the homes of people who had planned peaceful protests. Several instances of 20+ armed men with assault rifles and riot gear broke into houses, handcuffed residents, and held them at gun point (assault rifles) while they confiscated computers, books, etc. Despite demands from those being held hostage, no warrant was issued, and no questions answered.

Recently, at the RNC, Ron Paul was not given a speaking role at the convention, nor was he given access to the convention floor because he was not on board with the direction of the party. Despite being a U.S. Congressman which ALLOWS him access to the floor, he was told he would not be issued a pass unless he swear allegiance to McCain and be under escort during the convention.

Now, I am a conservative first, and consider myself a Republican, but I AM NOT on board either. We are heading towards a police state with a government wishing to expand it's power, blatantly and openly attempting to silence Americans - and more importantly, ignore the constraints of the Constitution. Neither McCain nor Obama will end this trend. Our economy will continue to suffer, we will continue to lose freedoms, and our dollar will continue to be devalued. Imperialism or Socialism - McCain or Obama - The choice is yours. My vote is still with Paul.

http://blog.lawsonforcongress.com/2008/09/06/winning-the-battle-losing-the-war/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/sep/05/st-paul-minn-8212-fearing-demonstrations-from-ron-/
http://www.dailynewscaster.com/2008/09/04/secret-service-confiscates-books-button-from-ron-paul-delegates/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DYUMw0weu5s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgTEgcC6inY

"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin