Hey readers,

I received another response from my family member that I thought I would post for everyone’s benefit. Naturally I’ll continue to protect / respect this individual’s privacy. This time, we were talking foreign policy.

 

____Family Member’s Response_________________

While our foreign policy probably has had negative unintended consequences doing nothing would have also had negative unintended consequences. As doing nothing is also foreign policy.  I believe the real motivations of the Islamic jihadists is based in their religion and world view. Read http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=4292, and http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=3821 .

Our policies are sometimes go too far, total isolation and doing nothing will probably encourage our enemies. Bin Laden stated that our lack of response indicated that we were weak and could be attacked. Also, Islamic terrorism in not limited to the US. There are attacks all over the world in countries with no people in the middle east. There have been attacks in Thailand, the Philippines, Bali, Sudan, Ethiopia, India, Russia, China, Pakistan, Nigeria to name a few.

I am curious, what has Ron Paul said his response to 9-11 would have been?

 

___My Response Below_______________

to […]

GREAT questions.

I don’t believe they attack us because we are free. After all, they don’t attack Sweden or Switzerland. The question is what would we do? This video does a good job contextualizing. http://youtu.be/XKfuS6gfxPY

If Ron Paul was president, there wound not have been a 9/11. Watch him predict that our foreign policy in the 90’s would lead to attacks on our homeland. He would not have conducted the attacks that aggravated them in the first place. http://youtu.be/_6hxE3mPgtM

If we listen to Bin Laden’s reaction to 9/11, we should also listen to his reasons for the attack. He told us outright why he did it, and he didn’t say “because they are free.” He said, because we’d been bombing the middle east, and we had bases on their holy land.
http://youtu.be/DJLMtRt88ZUhttp://youtu.be/-qQYDn5wqeg

NOW let’s say Ron Paul was not the president back then (which obviously he was not) and that 9/11 did happen (which obviously it did). President Paul would have voted for the authority to go after those who harmed us, which he did. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul#Terrorism
He also introduced the introduced the Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001 which would allow us to go after the terrorists, not just after the countries that harbor them.

The problem is that the USA didn’t go after Bin Laden in Afghanistan. Rather we went after Saddam who had no link to Bin Laden according to the 9/11 commission report.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5228545/ns/msnbc_tv-hardball_with_chris_matthews/t/commission-no-link-between-bin-laden-saddam/#.TvFPxdRSQsI

In fact, Ron Paul would have killed Bin Laden in 2001 when he was cornered in Tora Bora
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2011/05/bin-laden-dead-why-didnt-we-get-him.html

To recap:

  1. 9/11 would not have happened under President Paul (or constitution lover like him)
  2. In the event of a 9/11 like attack happening, he would go after those who actually did the dirty deed, not some random dictator.
  3. Under President Paul, Bin Laden would have been killed 10 years earlier than under Bush/Obama

Remember, Ron Paul is the only candidate with military experience, and has raised more money than all other GOP candidates combined (and also more money than Obama) from military and their families. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/07/ron-paul-military-campaign-donations-/1 He is much more trustworthy on foreign policy than someone like Gingrich who dodged his draft orders. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/boyernewt2.html

Thanks again for another quality debate! See you soon,

-DM

P.S. Just for fun, here is Ron Paul predicting the economic collapse – http://youtu.be/9S3lXDOQ7ec

Really Long Email to my Aunt

September 15, 2011

Hi all!  Yep, I agree, being politically involved in today’s world is vital.  Too many people focus on football and American idol… meanwhile the country is falling apart!

Unfortunately, not all of the GOP candidates are pro 2nd amendment, and few are as aggressively supportive as Ron Paul.  I’m glad to hear you like a lot of what he says, and that it’s his stance on moral issues that are troublesome.  In a ‘free’ country, moral issues should not be dictated by the government, but decided on an individual basis so those issues shouldn’t stand in the way of voting for him in the upcoming primary.  Generally speaking, these moral issues are decisive games that politicians play to win votes, but really have little impact on the country… at least compared to war / an economic collapse / a monetary collapse. 

Marriage:

To me, this is an easy one.   I think it’s important for us to understand our roles as Christians, and as citizens and where the two delineate.  The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Federally defining marriage is clearly making a law that respects an establishment of religion.  As Christians, you and I can decide that marriage is between a man and a woman, and we can even promote that idea through the Church, and in our interpersonal interactions.  However, as citizens, we don’t have constitutional authority to define marriage… at least not in a ‘free’ country.  There are lots of things that we oppose as Christians that are legal.  Let’s take the 10 commandments for example:

 

 

  • I am the Lord your God.  You shall have no other gods before me. – legal
  • You shall not make for yourself an idol. – legal
  • Do not take the name of the Lord in vain. – legal
  • Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy. – legal
  • Honor your father and your mother. – legal
  • You shall not kill/murder. – it is illegal to kill
  • You shall not commit adultery. – legal
  • You shall not steal. – it is illegal to steal
  • You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. – legal unless you are under oath
  • You shall not covett your neighbor’s wife. – legal.
So 80% of the 10 commandments (while they are obviously wrong to break) are perfectly legal.  For the U.S. Gov to insist on defining marriage to preserve the moral fabric of the country, shouldn’t that mean that they need to make all of the 10 commandments illegal too?  Shouldn’t they make divorce illegal?  Obviously I’m being sarcastic.   

It’s also interesting to study the origins of modern marriage.  We’ve only had federally recognized marriage for about 100 years, and the reason the government got in to the marriage business was (they said) for health reasons.  The reality, is they didn’t know the ramifications of interracial marriage and because they were afraid of it, they decided to make it illegal   Now, interracial marriage is commonplace, but we are left with the government deeming who is allowed to fall in love (and be recognized) and who is not.  In other words, when George Washington was married, it was not federally recognized… and why should it have to be?  The REAL way to protect the definition of marriage is to let the CHURCHES define it… not the government.  If anything, I think we as Christians should be offended that the government gets to decide who is married and who is not.

As for Ron Paul’s other more ‘out there’ issues, I say this:  Freedom means having the ability to make good and bad decisions.  After all, if we are free only to make good decisions… are we really free?  Does the prohibition of marijuana help anyone?  The prohibition of alcohol gave rise to Al Capone and the gangsters of that era.  Prohibition actually gives power to criminals who will sell it on the black market.  I live in CA where it is easier for under age people to get MJ than it is for them to get alcohol. Keep in mind, I am saying this as someone who has never smoked marijuana, and I never would no matter if it is legal or not.  There are plenty of things that are already legal that I also won’t be doing because I’m capable of making those decisions for myself.

In conclusion (and again, call me crazy) I think God wants us to choose Him, and choose to trust Him and live our life according to His will.  I don’t think there is anything to be gained by forcing others who have not made that Godly commitment to live in His ways.  If anything, I think this pushes people farther from God and alienates them from the Church.  Regardless, if we tell people we are a free society, we should act that way.

Sources

 

 

 

Capital Punishment

I’ve read lots of Christian debate on Capital Punishment and it confuses me honestly.  I personally will stick to “thou shalt not kill.”  While we are on the topic, though, here is a great bit of scripture: 1 Samuel 8:10.  The more I look at our government, the more it resembles an old kingdom… and that really bugs me.

 

Sources

 

 

 

Electability

This is where the media bias just crushes Paul unfairly.  He actually has the best chance against Obama, but the media is viciously anti Ron Paul… and to me that is more confirmation that he is the right guy.  Here are some stats to back up what I am saying:

 

Long story short, don’t believe MSM.  Ron has a great chance to win… they just don’t want him to.  After all, the only thing it takes for him to win… is for him to get more votes than the next guy!  Nobody thought Obama would get elected… and look at the mess we are in now.
Really Awesome Videos

 

 

 


Conclusion

Thanks so much for listening to my craziness.  I agree with you completely – we need to find the best candidate.  The Country can not withstand very many more lying politicians.   I see the big three issues as 1) the economy, 2) health care, and 3) foreign policy.  Fortunately Ron Paul is the only 1) economist, 2) doctor, and 3) Military (air force) person in the race!  

Much love (and thanks for the robust debate),

I actually agree that the ultra rich should pay more in taxes, and do agree with Buffett that the line should be drawn somewhere around the $1 million mark, not the $250K mark as others would suggest. One tax analyst I was watching said that this would raise something like $50 billion in the first year… but that is supposing that all of the people who make $1M decide to stay in the country. I imagine at least some would leave the country. Let’s say they don’t, and the gov raises an extra $50B… so what. That’s a drop in the bucket compared to the… what $12+ trillion of debt?

It’s silly to figure out what the government is spending, and then just try to raise that much money. That presupposes that everything the government spends money on is worthwhile… including war, the “vanishing 25 billion,” TSA, etc. What if the government decided to provide computers for all of us… that’s obviously not the role of government, but should we just raise taxes to meet that demand, or should we actually question what the government spends money on?

The end issue is philanthropy. They tell us that taxes feed the hungry and educate small children and every other fluffy thing they can think of. The reality is that most of the income tax goes to pay the interest on our debt to the federal reserve… so it goes to the bankers. State property taxes pay for schools, and capital gains taxes pay for defense. Federal money does not cover local roads, etc.

At the end of the day, I’d like to see money going to the disadvantaged, not lining the pockets of bankers and politicians, or funding wars and corrupt governments of other countries. What I’d like to see here is some REAL incentives to give to charities. Now, you get a tax deduction that is so small, it’s hardly worth declaring unless you are ultra rich in the first place, and donated tons of money. If in place of a deduction, I could outright REPLACE my taxes (or some percentage thereof) with charitable gifts, I’d make a freaking HOBBY out of charity. In other words, if I could pay 30% in taxes, or pay 10% in taxes and give 20% to give to the charity of my choice, I’d much rather give to charity directly. This also cuts the fat out of the middle man so that the people in need get a higher percentage of my gifts. I don’t have to pay someone to give someone else my money. I’d also feel like I was actually making a difference as opposed to throwing money into the black hole of government.

Another idea is the “opt out” idea. I’d like it if there was an option to pay 10% – 15% federal income tax, and then opt out of some of what the federal government provides. Opt out of social security (because let’s face it, we won’t get it anyway), opt out of medicare and medicade and save/invest/ get our own insurance. Then if the people who believe in the system decide to pay 30%-50% in taxes, more power to them.

I digress.

As it relates to this article, I think Buffett sort of implies in on sentence in the middle that higher taxes means more jobs… which is obviously silly. Even if the government could create jobs, we have no indication that the jobs they decide to create are worthwhile. One of my favorite economists Milton Friedman was in China and some of the government officials were showing him around. They went by a construction site, and there were hundreds if not thousands of Chinese citizens digging a foundation. He asked why they were not using modern machinery – that would make their task much more efficient. The government officials that he was with said “that’s true, but this is a jobs program.” He replied, “I see. Well, if you wanted to create more jobs, you could take away their shovels and give them spoons.” Having jobs for the sake of having jobs is as silly for taxing just for the sake of taxing. The market leads people to make good decisions on how to spend their money carefully. Central economic planners are wasteful because they can’t be as precise as lots of collective individuals.

I’m also wondering how long it takes to raise the taxes for the rich… it seems as though Obama has been in office for a while, and enjoyed a democratic house and senate for the first two years of his term… is it naive of me to think he could have done this? I think not; I think it’s naive for anyone to still believe there is any difference at all in these two parties.

P.S. the Super Committee is ridiculous. No constitutional authority, and small groups are very susceptible to corruption.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/who-pays-the-supercommittee/

Thanks for asking for my opinion 🙂 Sorry you actually got it.

In WWII, Japan’s highest ranking naval officer was Isoruku Yamamoto.

Although he was Japanese, and his loyalties were unquestionably with The Empire, he studied for many years in America, graduating from Harvard University. There is an oft-repeated (and sometimes disputed) quote attributed to him regarding the possibility of any nation taking a ground to American soil:

“You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.”

Here is why he was correct:

America’s Hunters. . .The World’s Largest Army.

The state of Wisconsin has gone an entire deer hunting season without someone getting killed. That’s great, considering there were over 600,000 hunters
that
got permits this year.

Allow me to restate that number:

Over the last two months, the eighth largest army in the world. More men under arms than Iran,more than France and Germany combined. . .deployed to the woods of a single American state to keep the deer population under control.

But that pales in comparison to the 750,000 who are in the woods of Pennsylvania this week. Michigan’s 700,000 hunters have now returned home. Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia and it is literally the case that the hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world.

And that is just FOUR states.

The total population of registered hunters in America today ranges from 23 million to 43.7 million individuals. (Based on annual data provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.) As long as the American Hunter retains his right to bear arms, America will forever be safe from foreign invasion of troops.

Hunting: It’s not just a way to fill the freezer, it’s a matter of National
Security.

Here is how we are told to act. First, pick a box to get into, then do not think outside of it. Politics asside, we are taught to have these attributes. Don’t believe me? Look at the props in Sean Hannity’s show for starters. Themes of football, country music, trucking, and the open road.

Democrats:
Transportation = Public Transpo or Small cars
Music = Broadway/Big Band
Computer = Apple
Sport = Baseball or Basketball
Home = Live in the Big City

Republicans:
Transportation = Trucks
Music = Country Music
Computer = PC
Sport = NASCAR or Football
Home = Live outside the big city

They are teaching us our roles… pushing us into boxes that they can control. You want out of the box? Take the red pill.

http://www.infowars.com

http://chooseliberty.org/bannerbombn.aspx?pid=bb4

“Ten persons who speak make more noise than ten thousand who are silent”

-Napoleon Bonaparte

Conspiracy is a simple word – it means that a group of people are plotting in secret against another group of people, or individual.  Theories are ideas that are not fact, not provable, but ideas that beg to be researched and questioned.  In the past, a number of conspiracy theories have been proven true.  The Dreyfus Affair, MK-ULTRA, Operation Mockingbird, Watergate, The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, Operation Northwoods, The Iran-Contra Affair, the 1990 Testimony of Nayirah, ECHELON, The US Federal Reserve, COINTELPRO, and The Gulf of Tonkin Incident just to name a few.

Disturbingly, many of these true conspiracy (not conspiracy theories) have lead to massive and important world events.  The Gulf of Tonkin resulted in the Vietnam war.  Without it, the government would not have been able to pull the necessary support to go to war.  Conspiracy theorists were warning about the Golf of Tonkin even back then, saying that there was no reason to be at war as the event that got us into the war was a farce.  If more people had listened when the conspiracy was still a theory, perhaps the Vietnam war could have been avoided or shortened.

If more people would have listened when the Tuskegee Syphilis conspiracy was just a theory, perhaps the inhumane treatment of more than 400 African Americans (at least 200 dying as a result of the expirements) could have been avoided.

If more would have listened to the Federal Reserve conspiracy theorists maybe they would not be in charge of our monetary policy and basically in control of our economy today.

Today, the conspiracy theorists are still uncovering more information and are being ignored by masses of people.  This is not to say that all conspiracy theories are true, in fact many are not – after all they are just ideas… i.e. theories. Remember however that some theories turn out to be completely true, and have an incredible impact on you and your family.  The average person, when confronted with a conspiracy theory like “the U.S. Government is testing syphilis treatments (sometimes painful) on an unknowing or un-consenting population” they laugh and dismiss it as a crazy conspiracy theory.  However, that conspiracy turned out to be true.

The average person, when they hear that “attacks on America have been staged in the past” laugh and say that America would never stage an attack and dismiss it as a crazy conspiracy theory.  Unfortunately there have been more than 200 declassified ‘false flag’ attacks.

The examples could continue for quite some time, but the point is this.  Next time you hear something that sounds ‘out there’ it is important to let it enter your mind, and for you to legitimately consider it… heaven forbid even research it for yourself.  Imminently dismissing ideas from these individuals is dangerous and irresponsible.  It is a guarantee that at least some of the conspiracy theories floating around today will end up true in the future, just as has happened countless times in our past.

For example, there is credibility in the conspiracy of secret societies and special interests that have bought and paid for both of our political parties and voting for one or the other makes no real difference as a result.  This is something I would encourage everyone to research.  The Bilderberg Group, the council on foreign relations, skull and bones – if you don’t know about these organizations, you should.

In addition, knowing how many organizations your food actually comes from, or your news actually comes from are also good things to research.  Once a conspiracy is proven true it is important to take steps immediately to protect the truth.  For example, the Federal Reserve did in fact turn out to be a consortium of private banks pretending to be a ‘federal’ entity.  There is legislation now called HR 1207 and S 604 to for the first time in history audit the secret, private federal reserve.  Have you contacted your senator and representative?  Are you going to be one of the ten who stands up for what is right, or one of the ten thousand who remains silent?

-fr

More Corporatism…

February 13, 2010

We have not had capitalism for at least 30 years in this country.  Here’s another example of how corporatism works in this country.

-fr

Argentina in the ’70s:

February 10, 2010

*Here are a couple paragraphs about what was going on in Argentina in the ’70s:*

Anyone suspected of favoring these groups (revolutionaries against the gov) or their ideas was subject to arbitrary arrest. All cultural life was now subjected to strict censorship. The government took control of all labor unions. People were kidnapped on the streets and never seen again. The prisons overflowed with political prisoners and torture was common. There were no trials or pretense of legal process. An estimated 11,000 Argentines disappeared between 1976 and 1982, called *los desaparecidos* or “the disappeared.” More than 30,000 people died during this period, many in Argentine concentration camps modeled after the Nazi camps. At the height of the horror, only the mothers and grandmothers of the disappeared had the courage to stand up to the government. Every Thursday, they began assembling in the Plaza de Mayo in front of the Presidential Palace, demanding information on their missing children. Conditions in the prisons were unfathomable. Prisoners were not allowed to lie down on their cots during the day, and the strain of this sometimes caused paralysis or atrophy of the legs. They were allowed no contact with family or friends, and most prisoners were afraid to write to loved ones, for fear they too would be targeted. Almost all letters were seized by the censors. The prisons would play sad songs by Julio Iglesias to deepen prisoners’ depression (no kidding). Prison guards would stage fake escapes and executions with mannequins to scare the prisoners. When a prisoner was moved out of his cell, he had to keep his eyes straight ahead; one glance over his shoulder meant loss of all privileges and possible torture. Newspapers and radios were banned insider the prison. Only books written before the French Revolution were in prison libraries.

Prisoners were experimented on with tranquilizer darts, were tortured with cattle prods, had the soles of their feet beaten with batons, had metal buckets placed on their heads and then the buckets hammered, had electrical wires applied to breasts, vaginas, anuses, penises, tongues, and other body parts. In some cases, prisoners’ bellies were slit open and they were dropped in a river as “fish food.” Some were thrown out of airplanes fully conscious. The length of sentences was completely arbitrary and had nothing to do with the “crime” committed, and at the end of the prison term, the prisoner or his family had to pay the state back for the cost of his imprisonment or he would not be released.

*And here is what was declassified in 2003 about America’s opinions of what the Argentine Gov was doing:* In 2003, the *Miami Herald* published proof that America and the Ford administration had approved of this brutal military regime. According to a recently declassified U.S. government document, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told the Argentine foreign minister in 1976, at the height of the Dirty War, that America supported the Argentine government. The transcript of the meeting between Kissinger and Argentine Navy Admiral César Augusto Guzzetti in New York is the first documentary evidence that the Ford administration approved of the junta’s harsh tactics. “Look, our basic attitude is that we would like you to succeed,” Kissinger reassured Guzzetti in the seven-page transcript, marked *SECRET*. “I have an old-fashioned view that friends ought to be supported. What is not understood in the United States is that you have a civil war. We read about human rights problems but not the context. The quicker you succeed, the better.” The Argentine military regime was delighted.

A friend asked me what I thought of the SOTU Address… here is what I sent him:

-first response

_____________________

False Recovery:

If you walk into a building and there is a crack on the wall, it’s responsible to patch it up.  Government (Bush, Obama, everyone for the last 40 years) has not fixted the crack in our economy, rather they put some paint on it.  Unfortunately the people won’t wake up to this until our dollar collapses and our economy bubble bursts again.  That is what Keynesian economics does, and that is what we have had in America for at least 4 decades.  We are just printing money, utilizing deficit financing, and we’re not allowing the market to adjust.  We’re not allowing the debt to liquidate which is what is supposed to happen in a correction.  Nobody in government want’s everything to fall apart on their watch, so they just patch things up enough to get to the next president.  It’s corrupt, and we ultimately pay the price.

Each job Obama said he created cost the taxpayers over $80K… for that kind of money he could have paid twice as many people to sit on their butts at home… then he could say he created TWICE as many jobs!  Even though they are jobs that we don’t need and are silly political games.

SOTU Fact Check: Obama Lies About Lobbyists
http://townhall.com/blog/g/6d127822-9bc5-4872-8648-dcadf09c6445

Obama won’t freeze budget:

I don’t like McCain, but HE proposed the budget freeze long ago… Obama is jumping on the bandwagon?

Obama lies about taxes:
Fact checks are being calculated as we speak so more will come on this.  However, when you inflate the currency like he and Bush did, you don’t have to tax.  You don’t take any money from the people… you just take it’s worth so it’s a tax you can hide.  No matter if he literally taxed more or not (which I am sure it will turn out that he did) he indirectly taxed us through evil inflation that is yet to catch up with us.

::BLOGS that I agree with on this topic::
http://maroonedinmarin.blogspot.com/2010/01/state-of-obamas-union-lies-arrogance-on.html
http://news-political.com/2010/01/28/what-was-your-favorite-lie-from-the-state-of-the-union-address/

…other than tha the just told the same lies he told to get elected.  I’ll bring the troops home, I’ll cut taxes, I’ll do health care reform (presumably not making it worse), etc.  He used it as a big PR move… didn’t tell the truth.  Funny that he is now ready to Drill (a conservative idea that he was opposed to at first) go necular (a conservative idea that he was opposed to at first)… there were a few more things that I’m sure the partisin (D)’s will love to hear that they only now like because he is saying it.  No loyalty to truth or what thing is best… just whatever the puppet president says.  The republicans did this with Bush too.  It’s amazing how partisin politics play the people like a flute.  It’s like nobody things for themselves.  McCain says freeze the budget, republicans say YES and democrats say NO.  Then Obama says freeze the budget… republicans say NO and democrats say YES.  Bunch of cowards is what everyone is.

You want to hear the real news?  Download and listen to this on your way to work:

-first response