Friend, you should have figured out by now that any time this admin, passes a measure which includes the word “fairness” in the title, the measure is meant for anything but fairness. The title is meant to lure and excite uninformed citizens to get emotionally excited: “Yea, I’ll get mine now, and be able to get back at that dirty ______________________.” (fill in the blank) But class warfare doesn’t help ANYONE. Pitting one class of the electorate against another, rich vs poor, white vs black, male vs female, worker vs business owner, whatever, is the most widely used, and most successful way an unjust govt. has stirred emotional angst within the voters as a way of justifying larger govt, expanded policies and taking away our liberty. We have got to look past the sound bites and emotional reactions to see the purpose of the legislation. Our country has been fundamentally altered forever by this current administration, and not for the better.

The country you and I grew up in, where opportunity was available for all who wanted to work hard and pursue their dreams, is GONE. The country as a protected home for liberty and freedom as our founding fathers envisioned is GONE. The Govt now owns 96% of the mortgage business, now controls the banking industry, the health industry, and will control the energy sector also if anything remotely resembling the current “Cap and Trade” legislation passes.

Don’t know about you, but I can’t find ANY country that has prospered under a large, centralized socialist govt. They are currently going broke all over the globe (England, Greece, Venezuela, France) Remember the Soviet Union, they failed under centralized communist govt. and their citizens are still suffering 3 decades later.

Which comes back to the issue of fairness. The world is not fair. We can’t make it fair. Men have different talents and we are able to work, produce and accomplish different things to differing levels of success.Some want to, and can earn a lot. some want to, and can’t create wealth. Then there are those that have talents and don’t want to use them. These are all internal issues, dealing with talent, motivation, and faithful stewardship. which essentially are moral and spiritual issues. The unequal outcomes are a function of internal gifts, personal motivation and faithfulness much more than any external govt regulation.

To tell the people that the govt will step in and equalize the outcome, passing the wealth from the producers to the non producers, is to fight against natures moral order. It is immoral to take from those that are faithful stewards and give to those who are unfaithful. It is simply theft. Now, I’m not talking about taking care of the poor, and righting injustice. The former is the responsibility of God fearing people, and the latter a just task of the govt.

The long and the short of this letter is to say that the Govt is using emotional fervor to justify taking power for itself. This approach to governing people was first described by Karl Marx, a devoted atheist, a man allowed 4 of his own children to die of starvation while he pursued “social enlightenment”, and who advocated violent bloody revolution as a just means of “taking what belongs to the people and returning it to the people.” These policies are the process of becoming enslaved to a bloated, socialist govt which is concerned about amassing and maintaining its own power, not it’s governing its people.

In Washington, Pelosi and the house are preparing to “deem health care passed” without voting on it.  More and more representation in Washington knows how to get what they want in spite of the American people’s will. Check out the story and call your representative.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/House-Democrats-looking-at-Slaughter-Solution-to-pass-Obamacare-without-a-vote-on-Senate-bill-87267402.html

Make up your mind my friend said to me.

I tend to use the labels Fascism, Marxism, Socialism, Totalitarianism and Communism interchangeable, and I think I’ve confused him. I thought I’d take a few minutes to actually define them, and then explain myself.
We’ll go in alphabetical order, because I love words, and it would drive me batty to see them out of order

Communism (N):
1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
2. (often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
3. (initial capital letter) the principles and practices of the Communist party.

Fascism (N):
1. (sometimes initial capital letter) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.
3. (initial capital letter) a fascist movement, esp. the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43.

Marxism (N):
the system of economic and political thought developed by Karl Marx, along with Friedrich Engels, esp. the doctrine that the state throughout history has been a device for the exploitation of the masses by a dominant class, that class struggle has been the main agency of historical change, and that the capitalist system, containing from the first the seeds of its own decay, will inevitably, after the period of the dictatorship of the proletariat, be superseded by a socialist order and a classless society

Socialism (N):
1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

Totalitarianism (N):
1. the practices and principles of a totalitarian regime.
2. absolute control by the state or a governing branch of a highly centralized institution.
3. the character or quality of an autocratic or authoritarian individual, group, or government: the totalitarianism of the father.

So, as you can see, there isn’t really a whole lot of difference in each of the “ism’s”, aside from totalitarianism, which would be a dictatorship-think Iran, Venezuela, Cuba…
I’ve chosen to use them interchangeably, because I don’t see much difference between them, and I think our current administration is exhibiting aspects of all of them:

(C) Obama and his flunkies have gotten their hands in a variety of industries; bailed out, TARPed and variously regulated things the government has NO Constitutional authority to tinker with.
‘…single self perpetuating political party.’ Just look to the hypocrisy taking place in MA this week for evidence.

(F) ‘forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.’
They may not be forcing the suppression of opposition just yet, but it’s coming. The Fairness Doctrine, which is a violation of our freedom of speech, will be attempted through back door dealings; the Internet grab “in an emergency”; calling those who disagree with their policies radicals, people who need to be silenced; crying racism as a way to distract from the real issues; regimenting industry in the name of the climate hoax. It’s all there.
Don’t forget campaign finance reform that takes away your First Amendment rights of freedom of speech, this goes back farther than Obama, and is wrong regardless of whose watch it is.

(M) Class struggles and pitting classes against each other. Vilifying those who are successful; when small businesses are taxed ruthlessly; when “wealthy Americans” are taxed at a higher rate, thereby punishing the successful; redistributing income to make things “fair”. This is Marxism, and it’s rampant in the left-wing.

(S) ’system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.’
This one is a little trickier. “We the People” now own GM, and some banks, and pretty soon some newspapers (won’t that be nice, when we can more fully trust the news coming from THOSE sources?). However, we’ll never get a dime in dividends, or reimbursements, and I’d bet a milkshake, those various companies never get out of the deal they made with the devil. So, we can’t say it’s true Socialism I suppose, but I don’t think the people of the USSR got so much out of their collective ownership either, and it was still Socialism.

(T) As the government continues to take over industry after industry, we may just see a dictator arise. They already revere Obama as a sort of messiah, and this kind of messiah is one step away from a dictator. We don’t have “absolute” control by the state yet, but if we don’t make some noise, and make sure our representatives know we are unhappy, it WILL come to that, the groundwork is being laid now.

The Constitution is hanging by a thread; it is being trampled on by people of all persuasions, all races, all religions, both parties. These “ism’s” are all parts of Obama’s agenda, he’s exhibiting traits from each definition, so when I use them interchangeably, you’ll know why; each one cuts a little deeper into the fabric of the Constitution, cuts a little deeper into the “American Way.” It’s no accident that I rarely use the same one twice in any sentence. I encourage you to use these words often and vociferously in your conversations.
If we don’t, we’ll get all of them, in one neat, tidy, well-spoken man.
That’s why it’s “Obamunism”.

This chart is not evidence of a global economic slowdown, but of a philosophical shift in the most prosperous and productive country on the planet – the US. The world’s marxist governments, like our current administration,  do not want prosperity for their people. A prosperous people are too difficult to control and impossible to make dependent on government.

From tea parties

Click the “Tea Parties” link to see the full sized image.  National prosperity is found in production not consumption. This chart from the OECD shows a worldwide drop in production at almost 20% in the last 9 months.

Our current administration is not working for the prosperity and freedom of its citizens. They have put policies in place which have Intentionally Created this global slowdown in order to Intentionally Create an environment in which the people will look to the Govt for a solution. The Obama administration is pursuing textbook MARXIST policies.

Hard to believe? First consider the people advising him, those whom he has willingly placed around him:

• Van Jones is self-avowed Communist. He is in the White House and advises the president on matters of economic and social policy.
• Treasury Sec. Timothy Geithner: in an interview in May he stated that Treasury policies are working to “Prevent the next economic boom cycle”
• Bill Ayers is a former terrorist who bombed the pentagon. He is a close friend of the president, and a self avowed marxist who has worked to  start a revolutionary war against the United States government in order that capitalist system could be overthrown.(1)
• Political thug Rahm Emanuel sends dead fish to political opponents.  He is the President’s Chief of Staff
• Ezekiel Emanuel: Rahm’s brother, a bioethicist and a rabid proponent of state sponsored euthansia.  E. Emanuel is writing the national health care bill and advising President Obama on health policy.
• The President’s pastor of 20 years (and I use the term very loosely) Jeremiah Wright believes that “White folks greed runs the world in need.”   and that the 9-11 terrorist events were “America’s chickens coming home to roost.”

Therefore, what would proselyte Obama  believe was his mission if given the opportunity?  You and I are watching the answer unfold before our eyes.

Pres. Obama has stated his view of prosperity is that wealth should be “spread around.”  He has stated in political campaign speeches throughout the 90’s and the recent presidential campaign that “The wealth of the nation should be returned to the rightful owners.”  Remember Joe the Plumber?

Karl Marx built his political theories on the following maxim:  “The government should take from each according to their means, to give (redistribute) to each according to their need”  This political ideal will not work in a prosperous economy.  A Govt must have its people in need or close to poverty, and then create boiling hot envy between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots’ (class warfare)  in order for Marxism to be accepted.  A prosperous people have no need or tolerance for this kind of oppressive, socially destructive government policies.

If you still have any doubts – take a look at the inner cities of any major urban center for the inevitable outcome of Obama’s Marxist policy:  Watts, Detroit, South Central LA, the Bronks, the South side of Chicago, Harlem.  Govt welfare policies have created and supported urban neighborhoods such as these.  Welfare programs take money from the productive sector of society and redistribute  it to the poor.  Welfare provides housing, food stamps, free clinics, etc and has done so for more than a generation – an Obama utopian society.

Birds of a feather flock together. If it waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck . . .

Look at the results of social economic redistribution.  I ask you – Is this the kind of America you want to live in??

Light the Fires

Timothy Burns

Postscript: Supporting the poor in our society is not the problem, and this essay should not be confused with a rant against helping out those less fortunate.  The poor will always be among us, and should be cared for by a prosperous, Christian society.  A Government that takes money is the problem.  Taking wealth that an individual or company has earned through hard work is theft.  This action is immoral, under any disguised good intentions.  Giving money to those who don’t know how to manage it is equally damaging to the person, and thereby to society.  Without teaching stewardship and putting accountability in place to be responsible for the support received, the only possible outcome is a sense of entitlement by those who receive the public assistance, and growing demands for more.

(1) Berger, Dan (2006). Outlaws of America: The Weather Underground and the Politics of Solidarity. AK Press. p. 95.

Obamunism - it’s a thought provoking title. Yet do the majority of America’s citizens assent to this characaturization of our new president?  After all, he was elected on a groundswell of American populism (and maybe Acorn voter fraud, but who’s really keeping track).  Until recently, His poll numbers continue to reinforce his self-assumed deification, and the liberal media unquestioningly toes the party line.   With support like this, who wants to challenge the Chicago thuggery politics which have come to the White House with him?

If only we could get an outside point of view – someone who could comment on recent political evolutions in America who doesn’t have Democrat or Republican prejudice.

In april of this year, Pravda, the state run media outlet in Russia printed the following.

“It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.”

Read the full story here: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-american_capitalism-0#

This commentary comes from the Russian state run political news machine. I would suggest that this group knows communisism and marxism when they see it.

Stand up Americans.

Light the Fires

Tim