The word "paradigm" and the phrase "paradigm shift" should be reserved to the natural sciences (and excluded from the social sciences), according to the reknowned Thomas Kuhn--- author of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Despite that, the words have found their way into many disciplines; therefore, with apologies to Kuhn, we shall apply them to politics.
The old paradigm in politics---Conservative versus Liberal (not classical liberal) or Right versus Left [or even Republican versus Democrat]---is rapidly dying, or already dead. This notwithstanding popular opinion to the contrary. A new paradigm has been emerging for decades, and so, we are in a paradigm shift of monumental proportions and significance. The new paradigm is not easy to describe or comprehend, but we'll give it a try below.
This description is not meant to be all-encompassing or strictly definitive, but merely an overview of the situation. Nor is it meant to coin terms. For lack of established terms, let's refer to one group in the new paradigm as the Globalist Corporatocracy, or for simplicity, the Corporatocracy. It is comprised of elites in the banking field, the corporate landscape, and the Government (particularly the Fed Govt) who are loosely joined by mutual interests and goals. We shall refer to the other group---much more difficult to define---as the National Sovereignty-Individual Sovereignty-Populist folks, or for simplicity, the Sovereigns.
The Sovereigns, though comprised of dissimilar groups, have evolved into a broad political category largely because of a shared disappointment with Government. Even folks of the Progressive Left have begun to realize that they have common interests and goals with Conservatives (not Neoconservatives) and Libertarians when it comes to issues such as individual rights, and accountability in Government. Many Sovereigns undoubtedly still do not see completely that Government and Corporatism now have a perfect marriage in the U.S., but the opportunist Bush is making that lack of sight more and more a thing of the past.
Our current President (King George), who ran in 2000 on a platform with planks of a humble foreign policy and no nation-building, completely reversed himself once elected. Commentators may crow forever about how 9-11 changed everything, but elements of the Bush Administration had plans for more use of the military and for nation-building LONG before 9-11. We may thank the current Administration, however, for bringing together unlike groups of people who finally are beginning to see the outline of a Shadow Govt (the Corporatocracy).
The Corporatocracy continues to promote the old political paradigm (Right versus Left) because it makes the electorate easier to manipulate. Nowhere is this more evident than in the mainstream, Corporate Media---which appear to be dominated completely by the Corporatocracy. Edward R. Murrow's warning about the devolvement of (in particular) TV News shows into vehicles controlled by biased Corporatism certainly was right on the mark. The old "divide and conquer" strategy is blatantly obvious in Corporate Media's promotion of an outdated, dying political paradigm. Pitting one group against the other is a good way to keep the shadow government out of the light of exposure. [The premise is: our ills are not due to the Corporatocracy, but rather to the activities of the Right...or, those of the Left.]
In our opinion, the paradigm shift became readily apparent (though it existed previously) shortly after the 1964 Presidential election. Barry Goldwater (the Right) and Lyndon Johnson (the Left) had been through a volatile and heated campaign for the Presidency, and Johnson won in a landslide victory. There were many issues involved, but it eventually boiled down to this: Goldwater was portrayed as a "warmonger", and Johnson was portrayed as the "peace" candidate. Keep in mind that up until the election our involvement in Vietnam was relatively minor. We all know what happened: after being elected to office and sworn in as President, it didn't take Johnson long to begin an exponential escalation of the Vietnam "War" (it was officially known as the Vietnam Conflict, primarily because Congress had not declared war). The "peace" candidate of the Left became the "warmonger" of the Right, so to speak.
Johnson did not run for a second full term, so in 1968 it was Richard Nixon running against Hubert Humphrey. Humphrey definitely could be considered a Liberal, but Nixon---though he ran as one---was no Conservative. At best, Nixon was a Moderate. He ran vowing to end the increasingly unpopular Vietnam "War". We all know what happened: Nixon took office in January, 1969, and our involvement in Vietnam did not end until 1975. [Nixon was out of office by then, due to the Watergate scandal.]
The point of this bit of history is to illustrate that the influence of the Corporatocracy was becoming more and more apparent in the middle to late '60s, and into the '70s. The military-industrial complex made a ton of money because of the involvement of the U.S. in Vietnam. Johnson, the "peace" candidate in '64, most likely was influenced heavily by the military-industrial complex (a major part of the Corporatocracy) to expand the war. Same with Nixon, who had run on a platform of ending the war. The Corporatocracy won---it didn't matter whether a Republican or a Democrat was President.
Other moves by the Globalist Corporatocracy can be seen in my previous post, The Fed Government & the Corporatocracy. The ultimate goal is seamless global business, with the political governments of the world run by a Corporatist shadow government, all for the benefit of billionaires. In all fairness though, we should concede that a few members of the Corporatocracy (e.g., David Rockefeller) do have some altruistic goals---they actually believe that they can save the world (eliminate poverty, etc.) if only we eliminate the restraints of national sovereignty and have a one-world government run by business people (corporatists).
In order for the Sovereigns to be politically effective, they have to throw off completely the old Right-Left paradigm. Should that happen (and it probably will...eventually), a political force will emerge that is fully capable of defeating the Corporatocracy. Until then, we should expect less individual freedom, the virtual elimination of borders, almost zero accountability in government, and more war.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
The Fed Government & the Corporatocracy
There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that our Govt virtually has been hijacked by the Corporatocracy. But unlike many people, I believe that it started decades ago...not just recently with the NeoCons. To me, it started in 1913 when bankers like Paul Warburg, et.al., ramrodded the Fed Reserve Act through Congress at a time when most politicians were on vacation---Xmas-time, I think. At the same time, they knew that money would be necessary to pay interest on what would be a huge debt, so they also managed to push through the 16th Amendment. Bankers would receive some of those interest payments because they would "buy" some of the debt---in other words, they would loan money to the Govt. [The Supreme Court almost fouled up that plan with rulings (never reversed) stating that the word "incomes" in the 16th Amendment meant "gain from corp activity"; but that didn't stop the IRS from levying an income tax on wage-earners...it was a "voluntary " tax---that part was buried in the Code & in very small print.]
Then there was WW I...a war in which we had no business whatsoever, but a war in which some folks made lots of money.
The next big move was in 1933 when Roosevelt declared a national "emergency" (due to the Depression) and outlawed the private possession of gold (except for jewelry). Roosevelt and others, according to many reports, also probably allowed Pearl Harbor to happen...much like certain NeoCons PROBABLY allowed 9-11 to happen...in order to get us into war. There are always big bucks to be made when we are at war. [People forget their history---the majority of Americans did not want to participate in either World War...they had to be sold on the idea in each case...and it wasn't an easy sell.]
Next, in 1940-something, the Govt pushed through the income tax withholding law, wrapping it in patriotism vis-a-vis WW II. [It was voluntary by the way.] In 1951 (or thereabouts), the Govt abrogated the Constitution by going to war with N. Korea without a Declaration of War and at the behest of the U.N., setting a dangerous precedent. Again, the military-industrial complex made big bucks.
In 1954, the Congress and the IRS finally removed the word "voluntary" from the Individual Income Tax Statute and Regulation, because by then everyone thought that taxes on wages were mandatory.
And on & on...right up to the present. Now don't anyone misinterpret what I'm saying here. I'm NOT saying that all just described was planned from the beginning in some giant master plan or conspiracy. Quite the contrary...at each point in time, bankers and/or other corporatists and/or rogue elements of the Govt most likely simply recognized situations that could be subverted to their mutual benefit. They more or less just stumbled from one rip-off to the next. What they had (and have) is some sort of loose amalgamation...not a tight-knit organization. [I fully realize that some people think there's a giant conspiracy of "Illuminati" out there, and a Master Plan that goes way back in time. I've researched their claims, and I don't believe it. But, to each his own, as the saying goes.]
But there can be little doubt---each subverted situation benefitted part or all of this group: bankers, corporatists, and Elitists in Govt...in other words, the rich and/or powerful...and they manipulated either events or the Fed Govt, or both, to get what they wanted. That's how the Corporatocracy operates---it is essentially a shadow govt "run" by nutcakes like David Rockefeller. [They view the rest of us as not much better than ants.]
Just my opinion.
Then there was WW I...a war in which we had no business whatsoever, but a war in which some folks made lots of money.
The next big move was in 1933 when Roosevelt declared a national "emergency" (due to the Depression) and outlawed the private possession of gold (except for jewelry). Roosevelt and others, according to many reports, also probably allowed Pearl Harbor to happen...much like certain NeoCons PROBABLY allowed 9-11 to happen...in order to get us into war. There are always big bucks to be made when we are at war. [People forget their history---the majority of Americans did not want to participate in either World War...they had to be sold on the idea in each case...and it wasn't an easy sell.]
Next, in 1940-something, the Govt pushed through the income tax withholding law, wrapping it in patriotism vis-a-vis WW II. [It was voluntary by the way.] In 1951 (or thereabouts), the Govt abrogated the Constitution by going to war with N. Korea without a Declaration of War and at the behest of the U.N., setting a dangerous precedent. Again, the military-industrial complex made big bucks.
In 1954, the Congress and the IRS finally removed the word "voluntary" from the Individual Income Tax Statute and Regulation, because by then everyone thought that taxes on wages were mandatory.
And on & on...right up to the present. Now don't anyone misinterpret what I'm saying here. I'm NOT saying that all just described was planned from the beginning in some giant master plan or conspiracy. Quite the contrary...at each point in time, bankers and/or other corporatists and/or rogue elements of the Govt most likely simply recognized situations that could be subverted to their mutual benefit. They more or less just stumbled from one rip-off to the next. What they had (and have) is some sort of loose amalgamation...not a tight-knit organization. [I fully realize that some people think there's a giant conspiracy of "Illuminati" out there, and a Master Plan that goes way back in time. I've researched their claims, and I don't believe it. But, to each his own, as the saying goes.]
But there can be little doubt---each subverted situation benefitted part or all of this group: bankers, corporatists, and Elitists in Govt...in other words, the rich and/or powerful...and they manipulated either events or the Fed Govt, or both, to get what they wanted. That's how the Corporatocracy operates---it is essentially a shadow govt "run" by nutcakes like David Rockefeller. [They view the rest of us as not much better than ants.]
Just my opinion.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Ron Paul Wins Again
The second Republican debate is over. Early poll results show that Dr. Paul again is the most popular candidate.
He was the only one to discuss CIA-generated "blowback" in relation to 9-11, and was right on target. The G-man (Giuliani) wanted him to take back his statement about the results of an interventionist foreign policy, but Paul stood firm. Paul asked how we would feel if China had military bases here. He pointed out that the '79 Iran hostage crisis was a direct result of us installing the Shah in the '50s [BY OVERTHROWING a democratically elected government].
Now watch the Corporate Media characterize Paul as some kind of nut. They can't ignore his popularity anymore, so they'll try a different tactic---smear him...and the ignorant Republican base will buy it.
The Corporatocracy simply will NOT allow him to get the Republican nomination.
Write-in Ron Paul in 2008.
He was the only one to discuss CIA-generated "blowback" in relation to 9-11, and was right on target. The G-man (Giuliani) wanted him to take back his statement about the results of an interventionist foreign policy, but Paul stood firm. Paul asked how we would feel if China had military bases here. He pointed out that the '79 Iran hostage crisis was a direct result of us installing the Shah in the '50s [BY OVERTHROWING a democratically elected government].
Now watch the Corporate Media characterize Paul as some kind of nut. They can't ignore his popularity anymore, so they'll try a different tactic---smear him...and the ignorant Republican base will buy it.
The Corporatocracy simply will NOT allow him to get the Republican nomination.
Write-in Ron Paul in 2008.
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Ron Paul vs. the Corporatocracy
Congressman Ron Paul, a Libertarian Republican from Texas, was the most popular candidate in the first Republican Debate...by any measure. The post-debate MSNBC poll showed him to be head and shoulders above all other nine candidates, especially the so-called "front-runners". Dr. Paul, a long-time physician, made his position clear relative to limiting government and strictly adhering to the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land.
In the days since the debate, the Corporate Media (homogenized beyond belief) have continued the myth that McCain, Romney, and the G-man are the front-runners. Paul is being marginalized at best, ignored at worst. McCain and the G-man, according to the MSNBC poll (which had almost 80,000 participants, though not a "scientific" poll), both lost about half of their pre-debate popularity. Romney did a little better, but did not fare nearly as well as Paul.
The Corporatocracy has started its campaign to keep Ron Paul out of the minds of the voters. I believe that they will be successful. The Elites' influence is extending even to the internet. I saw three reports today that myspace.com was blocking all postings having to do with Dr. Paul.
In the event that the corporate-government-banking cabal is successful in squashing Paul's nomination (and I believe that they will be), We the People who believe in a Constitutional Republic must respond by obtaining a paper ballot and writing-in Ron Paul for President in 2008. In most areas of the country now, a person can request a paper absentee ballot even if you are not going to be out-of-town on election day. Please do it.
In the meantime, whenever possible, boycott the Corporatocracy. The major TV networks (ABC, CBS, & NBC) already are concerned that according to their own studies, they recently have lost about 2.5 million viewers. Let's make that five million...or more. Commercial, network TV is 90% drivel anyway. Another possible boycott: there already is an email campaign to bring down gas prices by boycotting ONE company---Exxon-Mobil. Just buy your gasoline at another station. There are plenty of things that we can do...if we only would.
Write-in Ron Paul in 2008!
Boycott the Corporatocracy whenever possible!
In the days since the debate, the Corporate Media (homogenized beyond belief) have continued the myth that McCain, Romney, and the G-man are the front-runners. Paul is being marginalized at best, ignored at worst. McCain and the G-man, according to the MSNBC poll (which had almost 80,000 participants, though not a "scientific" poll), both lost about half of their pre-debate popularity. Romney did a little better, but did not fare nearly as well as Paul.
The Corporatocracy has started its campaign to keep Ron Paul out of the minds of the voters. I believe that they will be successful. The Elites' influence is extending even to the internet. I saw three reports today that myspace.com was blocking all postings having to do with Dr. Paul.
In the event that the corporate-government-banking cabal is successful in squashing Paul's nomination (and I believe that they will be), We the People who believe in a Constitutional Republic must respond by obtaining a paper ballot and writing-in Ron Paul for President in 2008. In most areas of the country now, a person can request a paper absentee ballot even if you are not going to be out-of-town on election day. Please do it.
In the meantime, whenever possible, boycott the Corporatocracy. The major TV networks (ABC, CBS, & NBC) already are concerned that according to their own studies, they recently have lost about 2.5 million viewers. Let's make that five million...or more. Commercial, network TV is 90% drivel anyway. Another possible boycott: there already is an email campaign to bring down gas prices by boycotting ONE company---Exxon-Mobil. Just buy your gasoline at another station. There are plenty of things that we can do...if we only would.
Write-in Ron Paul in 2008!
Boycott the Corporatocracy whenever possible!
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Our Republic vs. the Corporatocracy
In a Constitutional Republic, the basic rules governing the Government are found in a written document...the Constitution. In our Republic, to change the basic rules requires two-thirds of both Houses of Congress plus approval of three-fourths of the States. The only other legal way to change the basic rules is to call a Constitutional Convention. That's one of the reasons that our form of government is not a Democracy---it takes more than a simple majority to change the basic rules that govern the supposedly servant Government.
Unfortunately, as I've illustrated in previous posts, Establishment politicians (influenced by billionaire corporatists) have abrogated our Constitution and passed laws in areas for which there is no delegation of power to the central Government by the Constitution. In other words, the Constitution is bypassed...and the laws are unconstitutional, that is, those laws which deal in areas for which there is no delegated Constitutional authority. This combination of politics and corporatism is the classic definition of Fascism. In plain language, billionaires buy the votes of politicians...often for the benefit of certain industries, but sometimes for altruistic reasons. Some members of the Corporatocracy (e.g., David Rockefeller) actually believe that they can save the world via Globalism. Our Constitution gets in the way---because it limits what the Fed Govt can do---so everyone simply ignores it.
The Courts are part of the Corporatocracy, so very few unconstitutional laws are ever struck down. The cost to a private citizen of challenging any particular law is generally prohibitive, so again, very few unconstitutional laws are challenged.
Some people ask how one can know if a law is unconstitutional or not. They assume that the issue is so complex that only attorneys, judges, and justices can make such a determination. They cite the fact that the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of constitutionality, so it must be extremely complicated. It is not complicated; 99.999999999999% of the Constitution is plainly written. The problem is that almost no American adults have bothered to study it, at least not since ninth grade American Government class.
The limits on the central Government are clear. Any power not stated, not delegated to the central Government, is reserved (by default) to the States by the Tenth Amendment. Thus, by simply reading the Constitution one can determine that the Fed Govt has absolutely no business whatsoever in (for example) the field of Education. The power to deal in that area is reserved to the States by the last item in the Bill of Rights. There is nothing complicated about it. The same applies to dozens and dozens of other areas---areas in which our central Government has no Constitutional authority, but has passed laws dealing with those areas anyway.
I personally know people who think there is nothing wrong with any of that. In fact, they plainly state that we no longer have a Republic---that the conversion to a Democracy has happened, and they are very pleased about the whole thing. Luckily, there are still folks like me who believe that the Republic should be restored...a lot of folks.
But how---how do we restore our Constitutional Republic...short of violent revolution? It will take time, effort, as much money as each can afford, and dedication. Two excellent starting points are found at:
http://www.givemeliberty.org/ and
http://www.freedomtofascism.com/ .
Another excellent source is: http://www.originalintent.org/edu (see left side of page).
If each of us does not do something, we have no one to blame but ourselves. In the past we were complacent, not vigilant. We allowed the Corporate Globalists to buy our politicians, and we kept electing the same Establishment politicos who most likely will never truly reform campaign financing and most likely will never vote in term limits. We believed that there were significant differences between Republicans and Democrats---there aren't. Except for a very few (e.g., Ron Paul), they are Elitists who are interested in nothing but getting re-elected. Kick the bums out!
Now is the time to stop being complacent. If we work long and hard, then we can restore our Republic; but it won't be easy. It will take education, and action in the form of civil disobedience. It will take dedication and patience.
If you want to start now, go to http://www.givemeliberty.org/ and sign the Petitions for Redress. Then sign up for email alerts, there and at http://www.freedomtofascism.com/ . Get educated relative to the Income Tax, Jury Nullification, the Constitution, Federal Jurisdiction, etc. at http://www.originalintent.org/ . In short, take action---do something.
Unfortunately, as I've illustrated in previous posts, Establishment politicians (influenced by billionaire corporatists) have abrogated our Constitution and passed laws in areas for which there is no delegation of power to the central Government by the Constitution. In other words, the Constitution is bypassed...and the laws are unconstitutional, that is, those laws which deal in areas for which there is no delegated Constitutional authority. This combination of politics and corporatism is the classic definition of Fascism. In plain language, billionaires buy the votes of politicians...often for the benefit of certain industries, but sometimes for altruistic reasons. Some members of the Corporatocracy (e.g., David Rockefeller) actually believe that they can save the world via Globalism. Our Constitution gets in the way---because it limits what the Fed Govt can do---so everyone simply ignores it.
The Courts are part of the Corporatocracy, so very few unconstitutional laws are ever struck down. The cost to a private citizen of challenging any particular law is generally prohibitive, so again, very few unconstitutional laws are challenged.
Some people ask how one can know if a law is unconstitutional or not. They assume that the issue is so complex that only attorneys, judges, and justices can make such a determination. They cite the fact that the Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of constitutionality, so it must be extremely complicated. It is not complicated; 99.999999999999% of the Constitution is plainly written. The problem is that almost no American adults have bothered to study it, at least not since ninth grade American Government class.
The limits on the central Government are clear. Any power not stated, not delegated to the central Government, is reserved (by default) to the States by the Tenth Amendment. Thus, by simply reading the Constitution one can determine that the Fed Govt has absolutely no business whatsoever in (for example) the field of Education. The power to deal in that area is reserved to the States by the last item in the Bill of Rights. There is nothing complicated about it. The same applies to dozens and dozens of other areas---areas in which our central Government has no Constitutional authority, but has passed laws dealing with those areas anyway.
I personally know people who think there is nothing wrong with any of that. In fact, they plainly state that we no longer have a Republic---that the conversion to a Democracy has happened, and they are very pleased about the whole thing. Luckily, there are still folks like me who believe that the Republic should be restored...a lot of folks.
But how---how do we restore our Constitutional Republic...short of violent revolution? It will take time, effort, as much money as each can afford, and dedication. Two excellent starting points are found at:
http://www.givemeliberty.org/ and
http://www.freedomtofascism.com/ .
Another excellent source is: http://www.originalintent.org/edu (see left side of page).
If each of us does not do something, we have no one to blame but ourselves. In the past we were complacent, not vigilant. We allowed the Corporate Globalists to buy our politicians, and we kept electing the same Establishment politicos who most likely will never truly reform campaign financing and most likely will never vote in term limits. We believed that there were significant differences between Republicans and Democrats---there aren't. Except for a very few (e.g., Ron Paul), they are Elitists who are interested in nothing but getting re-elected. Kick the bums out!
Now is the time to stop being complacent. If we work long and hard, then we can restore our Republic; but it won't be easy. It will take education, and action in the form of civil disobedience. It will take dedication and patience.
If you want to start now, go to http://www.givemeliberty.org/ and sign the Petitions for Redress. Then sign up for email alerts, there and at http://www.freedomtofascism.com/ . Get educated relative to the Income Tax, Jury Nullification, the Constitution, Federal Jurisdiction, etc. at http://www.originalintent.org/ . In short, take action---do something.
Saturday, April 28, 2007
Are You an Employee According to the Tax Code?
The definitions for "employee" are found in Title 26> Subtitle C> chapter 24> Section 3401. Confirm with the link provided below.
1. Employment Taxes (Subtitle C)
TITLE 26 > Subtitle C—Employment TaxesCHAPTER 21—FEDERAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTIONS ACTCHAPTER 22—RAILROAD RETIREMENT TAX ACTCHAPTER 23—FEDERAL UNEMPLOYMENT TAX ACTCHAPTER 23A—RAILROAD UNEMPLOYMENT REPAYMENT TAXCHAPTER 24—COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE ON WAGESCHAPTER 25—GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO EMPLOYMENT TAXES
2. Collection of Taxes at the source on wages (Chapter 24)
TITLE 26 > Subtitle C > CHAPTER 24—COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE ON WAGES§ 3401. Definitions§ 3402. Income tax collected at source§ 3403. Liability for tax§ 3404. Return and payment by governmental employer§ 3405. Special rules for pensions, annuities, and certain other deferred income§ 3406. Backup withholding[§§ 3451 to 3456. Repealed.]
3. 3401 (definitions)...
3401 (c) Employee
(c) Employee For purposes of this chapter, the term “employee” includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term “employee” also includes an officer of a corporation.
Are YOU an employee?
See: http://www.article1-taxation.com/verify.html
1. Employment Taxes (Subtitle C)
TITLE 26 > Subtitle C—Employment TaxesCHAPTER 21—FEDERAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTIONS ACTCHAPTER 22—RAILROAD RETIREMENT TAX ACTCHAPTER 23—FEDERAL UNEMPLOYMENT TAX ACTCHAPTER 23A—RAILROAD UNEMPLOYMENT REPAYMENT TAXCHAPTER 24—COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE ON WAGESCHAPTER 25—GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO EMPLOYMENT TAXES
2. Collection of Taxes at the source on wages (Chapter 24)
TITLE 26 > Subtitle C > CHAPTER 24—COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE ON WAGES§ 3401. Definitions§ 3402. Income tax collected at source§ 3403. Liability for tax§ 3404. Return and payment by governmental employer§ 3405. Special rules for pensions, annuities, and certain other deferred income§ 3406. Backup withholding[§§ 3451 to 3456. Repealed.]
3. 3401 (definitions)...
3401 (c) Employee
(c) Employee For purposes of this chapter, the term “employee” includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term “employee” also includes an officer of a corporation.
Are YOU an employee?
See: http://www.article1-taxation.com/verify.html
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
McCain...Just Another Statist
Today John McCain made his bid for the Presidency official by formally announcing that he will seek the office in the next national election. Why would anyone who believes in a Constitutional Republic support him?
It would be nice if Republican voters would realize at last that Republicans (in general) are simply a different side of the same Statist coin. The Republican Party recently has given us more Big Government and Big Spending by (among other things) creating the largest Executive Branch Department in our country's history (Homeland Security), and by generating monstrous budget deficits.
Once McCain lost the bitterly fought Presidential primary (in 2000) to King George, he became just another Party sycophant. His opposition to Bush melted away and he tagged along with the King like a whipped dog. It truly was sickening.
McCain is among the majority who believe that the Executive can put the country at war without a Congressional Declaration of War, merely a Congressional "resolution". That's not what the Constitution says. Those who believe that we should be able to go to war without a Declaration of War need to lobby for a Constitutional Amendment. But the Statists in both major parties won't do that---because they know that the Amendment would never pass. So instead, they simply bypass the Constitution. This has been going on ever since the Korean War, which by the way, was officially known as the Korean "Conflict"...just a sleazy way to make it appear to be Constitutional. The same was true of the Vietnam "Conflict".
I still remember McCain responding to a question about the Declaration of War issue from Jesse Jackson, Jr.---in a town hall type campaign meeting---by saying (paraphrased) something like, "That's not true [that we need a formal Declaration of War], it has been done several times in the past without a Declaration.". Unfortunately, Congressman Jackson did not follow up with something such as, "That doesn't make it Constitutional.".
The Republi-Crats (Republicans and Democrats) have abrogated the Constitution via Legislative Absolutism. In general, they are nothing more than professional, Establishment Statists who think that Big Government is a necessity; the only thing they really are interested in is getting re-elected.
What if they gave an election...and no one showed up?
It would be nice if Republican voters would realize at last that Republicans (in general) are simply a different side of the same Statist coin. The Republican Party recently has given us more Big Government and Big Spending by (among other things) creating the largest Executive Branch Department in our country's history (Homeland Security), and by generating monstrous budget deficits.
Once McCain lost the bitterly fought Presidential primary (in 2000) to King George, he became just another Party sycophant. His opposition to Bush melted away and he tagged along with the King like a whipped dog. It truly was sickening.
McCain is among the majority who believe that the Executive can put the country at war without a Congressional Declaration of War, merely a Congressional "resolution". That's not what the Constitution says. Those who believe that we should be able to go to war without a Declaration of War need to lobby for a Constitutional Amendment. But the Statists in both major parties won't do that---because they know that the Amendment would never pass. So instead, they simply bypass the Constitution. This has been going on ever since the Korean War, which by the way, was officially known as the Korean "Conflict"...just a sleazy way to make it appear to be Constitutional. The same was true of the Vietnam "Conflict".
I still remember McCain responding to a question about the Declaration of War issue from Jesse Jackson, Jr.---in a town hall type campaign meeting---by saying (paraphrased) something like, "That's not true [that we need a formal Declaration of War], it has been done several times in the past without a Declaration.". Unfortunately, Congressman Jackson did not follow up with something such as, "That doesn't make it Constitutional.".
The Republi-Crats (Republicans and Democrats) have abrogated the Constitution via Legislative Absolutism. In general, they are nothing more than professional, Establishment Statists who think that Big Government is a necessity; the only thing they really are interested in is getting re-elected.
What if they gave an election...and no one showed up?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)