Reclaiming the American Dream JULY 4, 2008  One of the many hard-to-stomach slogans that has made its appearance in the current charade of "representative government" is the use of the term "Reclaiming the American Dream" as a euphemism for more government. To reclaim something, you must first understand what it is - and I can tell you with certainty that the American Dream is not what shameless politicians would like you to believe it is.  It is not about "socially progressive" judges promoting social justice.  It is not about "excess profits" taxes.  And it certainly is not about political thugs divvying up an imaginary pie in a way that they believe is most likely to keep them in power.  The American Dream is about self‑responsibility - about an individual's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  And the only way he can pursue those rights is if the government gets out of his way. No government has a right to interfere with the sovereignty of any individual. "American Government," said Rose Wilder Lane, "is not an Authority; it has no control over individuals and no responsibility for their affairs.  American Government is a permission which free individuals grant to certain men to use force in certain necessary and strictly limited ways; a permission which Americans can always withdraw from American Government." People who believe they need Big Government, run mostly by people who have never worked a day in their collective lives, to "reclaim" the American Dream for themselves are sadly mistaken.  Government has nothing to do with the American Dream.  The American Dream is a way of life that can be experienced only by free individuals.  People who believe in the real American Dream cannot be distinguished by race, religious belief, nationality, occupation, or sex.  They can be distinguished only by their common belief that liberty must be accorded a higher priority than all other values. The American Dream means the freedom to pursue a better life, and it was that freedom that inspired millions of people to cross the oceans to reach America. Those millions of immigrants were not looking for government handouts.  They were looking for opportunity, and that's what the American Dream gave them. In The Federalist Papers, James Madison warned, "In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself." Madison's warnings were not heeded.  The government did not, and does not, "control itself." "Government by the people" has come to mean government by those in power.  Ironically, the way this is accomplished is through a sleight of hand called "representative government," which gives people a false sense of control.  As Alvin Toffler pointed out nearly thirty years ago, representative government is but an illusion.  Letting people vote every few years is the equivalent of throwing them a piece of raw meat.  Once the election circus is over, they learn once again that they have virtually no power. As early as 1857, Thomas Macaulay, the British historian, predicted what the inevitable results of majority rule would be when he said:  The day will come when [in the United States] a multitude of people will choose the legislature. Is it possible to doubt what sort of a legislature will be chosen? On the one side is a statesman preaching patience, respect for rights, strict observance of public faith. On the other is a demagogue ranting about the tyranny of capitalism and usurers and asking why anybody should be permitted to drink Champagne and to ride in a carriage while thousands of honest people are in want of necessaries. Which of the candidates is likely to be preferred by a workman? ... When Society has entered on this downward progress, either civilization or liberty must perish. Either some Caesar or Napoleon will seize the reins of government with a strong hand, or your Republic will be as fearfully plundered and laid waste by barbarians in the twentieth century as the Roman Empire in the fifth; with this difference, that the Huns and vandals who ravaged the Roman Empire came from without, and that your Huns and vandals will have been engendered within your country, by your own institutions. Macaulay's powers of prophecy were incredibly accurate.  Our democracy has destroyed itself through an excess of democracy.  Majority rule has evolved into a free‑for‑all stampede of citizens appealing to politicians to give them more and more of the plunder.  And there is never a shortage of vile human beings who are willing to resort to euphemistic slogans like "Reclaiming the American Dream" in an effort to accommodate them.  Rational people know there is something wrong with our once-proud culture. We live in an age of tension and uncertainty.  There is ill will and fear all around us. In the 1970s, Eric Hoffer observed that "the feeling of doom is stronger now. There is a widespread feeling that our economic system and our civilization are nearing their end.  In the 1930s we still had values, ideals, hopes, illusions, certitudes.  In the 1970s many people see life drained of meaning, and there is hardly a certitude left." Which begs the question:  If those were Eric Hoffer's thoughts forty years ago, what would he have to say about today's state of the union?  I kind of doubt he'd buy into the notion that the promise of more government control over people equates to "reclaiming the American Dream." While we still live in a relatively free country, it is much less free than it once was.  The dominant question that now confronts us is:  Do moral, straight-thinking people harbor a great enough love of freedom to fight to reclaim it?  WHAT ARE YOU DOING TODAY TO HELP FIGHT FOR AND RECLAIM YOUR FREEDOM? A Sad Day for America Those who are celebrating the recent pro-gun "victory" are blinded by the reality of what it really means.  It was, in fact, a sad day in the waning years of the American Empire when the Supreme Court voted 5-4 that the D.C. ban on handguns is unconstitutional.  I say that because when the U.S. was still the home of the free, the vote would have been 9-0.  Actually, there would not have been a vote, because there would not have been a ban in the first place.  There was a time when the government would not have dared to tell a person he didn't have the right to protect his family. In the next few years, one of the two McBamas running for president will easily move the Supreme Court enough to the left to tilt the 5-4 pro-gun vote in the other direction.  Doesn't every straight-thinking individual realize that the real goal of those in power is to ban all firearms?  As the country continues its economic tailspin, look for more and more legislative decisions from the judiciary.  Ultimately, as people scream for government solutions to their problems, the Constitution will be thrown out the window and the only question that will remain is whether or not the rascals in power will use the National Emergencies Act to impose a "constitutional dictatorship." When people begin to realize that their summer vacations are a thing of the past ... that their once-a-week eat-fests at The Cheesecake Factory, Macaroni Grill, and P.F. Chang's is over ... that taking the train is the only way they can afford to get to work (which has already started to happen) ... they are going to be very angry.  And when you anger an anesthetized brain, look out! As I have pointed out in the past, angerism - along with guiltism, covetism, and envyism - tends to lead to collectivist revolutions.  And villainism - almost always promoted by the scoundrels in power - leads to the use of cute little gadgets like guillotines and racks.  (No water boarding, of course.  That would be inhumane.)  In other words, a majority of people are likely to demand that "rich" heads roll.  I suspect that a villainism dictatorship would eliminate free speech by using the airwaves to convince a majority of Americans that those who produce goods and services at a profit are the villains.  And, of course, that they (the politicians) are the saviors.  Unfortunately, as the current presidential campaigns show, millions of mesmerized people are likely to believe them. The only other possibility is a revolt by those who still believe in liberty and the sovereignty of the individual.  But it's getting harder and harder to find people with such old-fashioned beliefs.  Today's conservatives sound like yesterday's liberals.  Today's liberals, soon to be headed up by a McBama in the White House, sound like yesterday's Bolsheviks.  Every day, deeply concerned readers send me e-mails asking me to provide them with a solution to the inevitable U.S. collapse.  Very flattering, but I'm sorry to say that I have no magic wand.  The only solution I have is the same one I have been offering for the past thirty years (since I first started writing about precisely what is happening today):  Education.  Spread the word, one person at a time.  Read and learn, then pass your knowledge on to anyone who will listen - starting with your own children, who most probably are being, or have been, brainwashed by teachers and professors steeped in angerism, guiltism, covetism, envyism, and villainism. Is it possible to spread the word to enough people to stir up a freedom revolt?  I think so, and I'll tell you why by sharing an interesting observation.  A couple of weeks before the shameful 5-4 Supreme Court vote lifting the ban on handguns in Sin City, D.C., I happened to stop in at a rural gun shop.  As I entered, there was a poster over the door that read: The experts agree ... [pictures of Hitler, Castro, Qadafy, and Stalin] Gun control works! The place was jam-packed with people stocking up on guns, ammo, holsters, and all kinds of goodies intended to help them protect their families.  The atmosphere was serious, but everyone seemed friendly and cordial.  A feeling of mutual respect permeated the air. I studied the makeup of the crowd very carefully.  Redneck hillbillies, right?  Yep, a few.  But guess what?  There were also a number of CEO-looking types in suits and ties.  And three African-American guys - one alone, one with his wife, and one with his wife and two children.  And at least two men wearing a Jewish star ... and many more wearing crosses.  And three or four women who were shopping alone.  Mostly just normal, everyday folks from all walks of life. When I indulged myself at the firing range behind the store, I found the same atmosphere.  Everyone was serious, but friendly and cordial.  And it was clear to me that nary a sole was there to improve his hunting skills. Throughout my visit to this little self-defense paradise, one thought was front and center in my mind:  The United States is an irrevocably divided country.  The McBama folks want to see the manufacture, sale, and ownership of all guns outlawed - right along with free speech and most of our other natural rights.  But at the opposite end of the spectrum are all those rednecks ... and coat-and-tie guys ... and African-American guys ... and Jewish guys ... and Christian guys ... and gals ... and everyday folks.  Of course, all of those people are already sold on the efficacy and morality of liberty. Now, what they need to do is become involved in an education revolution - each person on his own - to sell as many others as possible on giving up their insistence on a state-enforced artificial good life in exchange for long-term freedom.  It's a long, hard, ugly fight that lies ahead ... day by day, person by person.  What's at stake?  Everything.  Because if the education revolution is not won, the revolution from the left - the one that believes in violent means to force its will on the citizenry - will surely prevail.  If enough people know the truth, it literally could set us free.  And we'll know we've won if there is ever another Supreme Court vote on handguns and it comes out 9-0 in favor of the good guys. Then again, there won't be a need for a vote. MANS MOST RELIABLE FRIEND! Have you ever heard that a dog 'knows' when an earthquake is about to hit? Have you ever heard that a dog can 'sense' when a tornado is stirring up, even 20 miles away? Do you remember hearing that before the December tsunami struck Southeast Asia, dogs started running frantically away from the seashore, at breakneck speed? Do you know that dogs can detect cancer and other serious illnesses and danger of fire? Somehow they always know when they can 'go for a ride' before you even ask and how do those dogs and cats get home from hundreds of miles away? I'm a firm believer that animals - and especially dogs - have keen insights into the Truth. And you can't tell me that dogs can't sense a potentially terrible disaster well in advance. Simply said, a dog just KNOWS when something isn't right .. when impending doom is upon us . . . they'll always try to warn us...!

After Energy Independence, Then What?   Glenn Beck recently did a fascinating interview with Ray Kurzweil, the remarkable inventor/futurist.  Among other things, Kurzweil, a member of the prestigious National Inventors Hall of Fame, developed the first print-to-speech reading machine for the blind.  Right on Beck's show, he demonstrated how it works.  It was amazing. While listening to Kurzweil talk, the thought crossed my mind how geniuses like him appear to be able to transcend the junk that you and I allow to flood our brains day in and day out - dumbed-down infomercials ... round-the-clock sports on TV ... nonstop pain-at-the-pump and global-warming tales ... the latest shenanigans of cartoon characters like Vladimir Putin and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ... the childish ramblings of our own presidential candidates ... even the scary news flashes about Hollywood celebs who are threatening to emigrate if their candidate doesn't win the upcoming election.  Listening to Kurzweil reminded me that most of the things people think about, fret about, and argue about don't really matter much in the long run.  Over the past century, we've survived a rash of bad presidents and shameless politicians, unthinkable natural disasters, the Great Depression, and "world" wars (along with a few little skirmishes like Vietnam).  Yet, through it all, humankind stubbornly kept pushing forward.  I believe that one of the biggest reasons for this success is that the people on the leading edge of civilization seem to be unfazed by all the nonsensical stuff.  Now when I say we've survived, I admit I'm talking on a macro basis.  Between the advances, there is almost always a great deal of pain and suffering for the many people who happen to be living in the wrong place at the wrong time.  The Soviet Union is the best recent example of this.  It was only a matter of time until the lie of communism collapsed under its own weight, but for seventy years hundreds of millions of people suffered and tens of million died.  Obviously, the same was true of Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Saddam's Iraq, and Mao's China.  But what's interesting is how, notwithstanding government's best efforts to slow human progress, the best and the brightest keep moving mankind forward. As a result of the exponential progression of information technology, Kurzweil says that the acceleration in the rate of progress itself is now doubling every decade.  In fact, he believes we will experience thirty-two times as much technical progress in the next fifty years as we've seen in the last century!  It's hard for a guy like me, whose neurons shut down at the thought of learning how to load my iPod, to comprehend such things. Kurzweil says that when he first came to MIT, the school had only one computer.  It took up an entire floor and cost more than $10 million.  Now, the computer in a $50 cellphone is thousands of times more powerful than that MIT dinosaur.  Which is why he believes we will see a billionfold improvement in information technology over the next twenty-five years ... and then, in the years that follow, we'll see it again, and again, and again. I could go on and on about Ray Kurzweil's amazing inventions, knowledge, and insights into the future, but the biggest of all his predictions is that due to advances in nanotechnology, we will soon be able to produce highly efficient, lightweight, inexpensive solar panels.  As a result, he is all but certain that solar power will provide 100 percent of the world's energy needs within twenty years - easily and inexpensively.  He points out that the sun provides us with 10,000 times more sunlight than we need to accomplish this.  If Kurzweil is right, it not only will put a damper on Gorism and other draconian save-the-planet ideologies aimed at increasing control over people's lives, it will change the balance of political power worldwide.  It would also mean that millions of hours have been (and will be) wasted over debating whether or not to drill through the hides of caribou or dig up our trillions of tons of coal and convert it to oil. All this reminds me of something that another great futurist, the late Alvin Toffler, said in his landmark book Future Shock.  Toffler believed that at any given time in history, about 90 percent of the population thinks in terms of the past, 7-8 percent have their heads in the present, and 2-3 percent are focused on the future.  When you look back on just the past 10,000 years, the evidence is clear:  Human progress accelerates, notwithstanding little inconveniences such as famines, disease, volcanic eruptions, and asteroids paying their respects from time to time.  Don't get me wrong.  In the coming decades, I believe the U.S. is likely to be a totally different place than it is today.  We may even have to go through a dictator or two ... perhaps even a couple of revolutions.  But the scientific brains and futuristic thinkers don't seem to pay much attention to politics and social upheaval.  They just keep marching forward as though nothing were going on around them. Nevertheless, the big question that remains is the same one that's been implied throughout human history:  What good does human progress do in such fields as technology, medicine, and energy if there continues to be no human progress in the area of goodwill?  Worse, glowing futuristic predictions aside, the thought of ever-greater technology joining forces with ever-greater malice makes it pretty darn hard to envision a happy ending to the history of the human race. I'm short on solutions to that one.  How about you?

 

Congressman
Dr. Ron Paul
ALL AMERICAN HERO
AMERICA'S LEADING CONGRESSIONAL ADVOCATE FOR FREEDOM!
ALTHOUGH DR. PAUL HAS OFFICIALLY ENDED HIS CAMPAIGN FOR PRESIDENT, HE
INTENDS TO CONTINUE ON WITH A NEW FREEDOM EDUCATIONAL MOVEMENT; 
"THE CAMPAIGN FOR LIBERTY"
PRIMARILY HELPING TO RESTORE SOME OF AMERICA'S CORE VALUES AND PRINCIPLES
AND TO GIVE LIBERTARIANS A BIGGER VOICE WITHIN THE GOP!

 

LEARN MORE
ORDER YOUR COPY OF DR. PAUL'S JUST RELEASED
NEW YORK TIMES & AMAZON #1 BESTSELLER !

THIS IS A MUST READ FOR EVERY AMERICAN!

READ CURRENT BOOK REVIEWS!

"ONE CITIZEN SPEAKING BLOG"
IF YOU ONLY READ ONE BLOG THIS IS THE ONE
IF YOU WANT SOME REAL FACTS!

---

OR DO YOU WANT THIS?

 

 "COMMIE"
 OBAMA

CHICAGO
HOME OF COMMIE BARACK OBAMA
THIS DEMOCRAT STRONGHOLD IS AS VIOLENT AND CORRUPT AS IRAQ!
 IF THE DEMOCRATS-COMMIES-MARXISTS CAN'T MANAGE A CITY.
 WHY SHOULD WE TRUST THEM WITH OUR COUNTRY? 
THIS IS A MUST READ!

---

CONGRESSMAN
Dr. Ron Paul On The Issues

Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) is the leading advocate for freedom in our nation’s capital. As a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dr. Paul tirelessly works for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies. He is known among his congressional colleagues and his constituents for his consistent voting record. Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution.

Debt and Taxes

Working Americans like lower taxes. So do I. Lower taxes benefit all of us, creating jobs and allowing us to make more decisions for ourselves about our lives. (Read more...)

American Independence and Sovereignty

So called free trade deals and world governmental organizations like the International Criminal Court (ICC), NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and CAFTA are a threat to our independence as a nation. (Read more...)

War and Foreign Policy

The war in Iraq was sold to us with false information. The area is more dangerous now than when we entered it. We destroyed a regime hated by our direct enemies, the jihadists, and created thousands of new recruits for them. (Read more...)

Life and Liberty

The right of an innocent, unborn child to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty. My professional and legislative record demonstrates my strong commitment to this pro-life principle. (Read more...)

The Second Amendment

I share our Founders’ belief that in a free society each citizen must have the right to keep and bear arms. (Read more...)

Health Freedom

Americans are justifiably concerned over the government’s escalating intervention into their freedom to choose what they eat and how they take care of their health. (Read more...)

Home Schooling

My commitment to ensuring home schooling remains a practical alternative for American families is unmatched by any Presidential candidate. (Read more...)

No Taxes on Tips

It is an outrage that waiters, waitresses, and other service-sector employees have to pay taxes on the tips they earn. (Read more...)

Racism

It is the federal government that most divides us by race, class, religion, and gender. Through its taxes, restrictive regulations, corporate subsidies, racial set-asides, and welfare programs, government plays far too large a role in determining who succeeds and who fails. (Read more...)

Veterans

Any nation willing to ask its men and women to risk their lives serving overseas must also be willing to fulfill the promises that were made to them when they enlisted in our country’s service. We cannot provide adequate care with a VA that is run like the IRS. (Read more...)

Iraq

The United States invaded Iraq under false pretenses without a constitutionally-required declaration of war. Our Founders understood that how we go to war is as important as when we go to war, which is why they vested the power to declare war in the Legislative Branch. (Read more...)

Border Security and Immigration Reform

The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without secure borders is no nation at all. It makes no sense to fight terrorists abroad when our own front door is left unlocked. (Read more...)

Privacy and Personal Liberty

The biggest threat to your privacy is the government. We must drastically limit the ability of government to collect and store data regarding citizens’ personal matters. (Read more...)

Property Rights and Eminent Domain

We must stop special interests from violating property rights and literally driving families from their homes, farms and ranches. (Read more...)

Social Security

Our nation’s promise to its seniors, once considered a sacred trust, has become little more than a tool for politicians to scare retirees while robbing them of their promised benefits. Today, the Social Security system is broke and broken. (Read more...)

Health Care

The federal government decided long ago that it knew how to manage your health care better than you and replaced personal responsibility and accountability with a system that puts corporate interests first. (Read more...)

Education

The federal government does not own our children. Yet we act as it if does by letting it decide when, how, and what our children will learn. We have turned their futures over to lobbyists and bureaucrats. (Read more...)

Environment

The key to sound environmental policy is respect for private property rights. The strict enforcement of property rights corrects environmental wrongs while increasing the cost of polluting. (Read more...)

The Inflation Tax

Today, the federal government burdens us with one of the most dangerous taxes it can impose — the inflation tax. (Read more...)

Energy

As president, I will work to restore a free-market in energy. In particular, I will work with Congress to repeal federal regulations and taxes that impede the development of new energy sources. (Read more...)

National Defense

A defense policy designed to keep Americans safe should start with the idea that we must secure our borders from those who would cross them to do us harm. (Read more...)
 

 

---

Reflecting on Freedom
MEMORIAL DAY 2008

May 26, 2008
Memorial Day is a good time for us to step back and think about the subject of freedom, the commodity for which so many Americans have given their lives. Just about everyone claims to be in favor of freedom, but few seem to agree on what it means.

One person’s idea of freedom can violate another person’s freedom. To one man, liberty means doing what he wants with his own life, while to another it means doing what he wants with other men’s lives. Therefore, both of these men say that the other one’s concept of freedom is tyranny.

To the laissez‑faire businessman, freedom means an end to all government regulation. To the communist, freedom can be achieved only when individual incentive has been crushed and “the people” own everything.

Some people believe that job quotas for minority groups promote freedom. But to a person who is anti-discriminatory in the truest sense of the word, quotas and seniority considerations are a violation of freedom.

Based on the evidence, I think we can safely conclude that throughout history men have miscommunicated on this subject. Since conservatives, liberals, bigots, fascists, communists, environmentalists, and every other group imaginable all claim to be in favor of freedom, they obviously cannot be talking about the same thing.

The dictionary defines freedom as “being free.” In turn, free is defined as “not under the control or power of another.” How can there be so much confusion over a definition so clearly stated? For one thing, when people talk about freedom, they have a tendency to think in terms of freedom for themselves. They see freedom as a license to do as they please.

Also, throughout history, utopian thinkers have confused freedom with equality. But nothing could be more incorrect. No matter what one’s moral desires, nature has made freedom and equality totally incompatible. “Freedom and equality,” wrote Will and Ariel Durant, “are sworn and everlasting enemies, and when one prevails the other dies.’’

As governments step up their attempts to defy nature and bring about equality, they find it necessary to employ force. And when force enters the picture, some people are going to come under the control of others.

Thus, you may be surprised, after a little probing, to find that when people espouse freedom, often they are referring to their freedom, not yours. Worse, you are likely to discover that their freedom necessitates the violation of your freedom.

When freedom is subjectively defined by each individual, it is reduced to a meaningless abstract. The only way freedom can be rationally viewed is in its pure, no‑compromise form: human freedom — the freedom for each individual to do as he pleases, so long as he does not commit aggression against anyone else.

Presidential candidates love to talk about freedom, even while telling us how they intend to further enslave us. They do this by manufacturing “rights” out of thin air. This year’s crop of candidates has been especially bold in this respect, babbling endlessly about our nonexistent rights and how they intend to fulfill them.

The problem is that all artificially created rights are anti-freedom, because in order to fulfill one person’s rights (read, desires), another person’s rights must be violated. That is precisely what is meant by Madam Obama’s infamous statement “Someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so someone else can have more.”

At the heart of such thinking are three converging afflictions: guiltism, envyism, and villainism. (More on all these in future articles.) People suffering from such afflictions do not want a free society. They are usually individuals who are unable to achieve success in a free society, thus they yearn for an external force (government) to “level the playing field” and equalize results.

So, my Memorial Day message to you is this: True freedom means freedom for the “poor,” the “rich,” the “handicapped,” the “oppressed,” the “weak,” and the" strong.” Simply put, human freedom means freedom for everyone.

Think about this in the coming months as the presidential candidates step up their promises to fulfill artificially created rights. Everything in life has a price, and, make no mistake about it, the price of artificially created rights is bondage — the exchange of your rights for someone else’s.

If you would like to speak up about the topic of this article, send your comments to: questions@robertringer.com. (Remember to keep your comments pithy and double spaced for easy reading.)

To read past articles from the Money and Power Series Click Here

To read past articles from The Cho Factor Click Here

To read past Voice of Sanity articles Click Here

Subscribe free to A Voice of Sanity at www.RobertRinger.com

---

HERE'S WHAT AMERICA'S
COMMUNIST-DEMOCRATIC
PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE
STANDS FOR:

 
  "COMMIE"
 OBAMA

FIRST & FOREMOST
"Commie Obama"
STANDS FOR A
Communist-Marxist America
WITH COMPLETE & TOTAL LOSS
OF ALL YOUR FREEDOMS!
******************

(Need proof?
Read on, if you doubt my words of wisdom)

1. Bama and his wife Michelle "SWEETIE PIE" are well known to be devout and "faithful sheep" in the Marxist-Socialist-Communist-Demo-Publican shell game (short con) in its simplest form, based primarily on the premise that "everyone in such a "Utopian Society" gets something for nothing based on their needs!"  (Which I might remind you is not only not sustainable in the real world, it is the most preposterous lie ever peddled by snake oil Politicians in all human history!).  I would also remind you that in the year 2008 almost every American Politician at all levels of Government is guilty of the same charges, especially those Hillbilly Darlings of the Demo-Publican-Socialist Revolution, Hillary and Billy Bob; that is to say, that most, (not all) Politicians in America have evolved to the absolute lowest of the low scum on the planet and most are nothing more than slick talking hucksters, con artists, liars and real psychopaths that will say, promise and do anything to be rewarded with your vote, so they can continue on with their wild out of control ****looting frenzy with your money****, which will eventually bring about the Final Grand Slam of them all; the "TOTAL & COMPLETE LOSS" of every one of your Freedom's as your final reward for giving such sorry leach dog hucksters, worthless liars, crooked shysters, psychopathic con artists and just plain sorry Ass Mother F****** your vote!  Doubt this; just check out Dennis Hastert voted Washington's# 1 SORRY ASS CROOK!  Here are 22 more of the MOST CORRUPT POLITICIANS in Washington.

CROOKED HUCKSTER POLITICIAN
DENNIS "THE CROOK" HASTERT
     
 

****Washington Looting Frenzy Gone Mad:  Why have most of these leech dog, shyster, con artist Politicians that I refer to just recently voted to override President Bush's Farm Bill "Free-Lunch" subsidy  veto (5-20-2008) that was so bloated with slimy add-ons, "Pet Projects," Rancid, Putrid Pork and roads leading to nowhere that the stench of crooked huckster Politicians is almost unbearable as most of this bill had not one damn thing to do with Farmers.  Most Big Farmers I might add, who are making record profits in America today and yet your crooked, shyster, huckster Politicians instead overrode this veto and VOTED FOR MORE "FREE LUNCHES" WITH YOUR MONEY IN THE FORM OF SO-CALLED FARM SUBSIDIES, while the average American citizen is struggling just to put food on the table, buy gasoline and make home payments, primarily because of just this type madness that has become the norm in Washington D.C.!)  And by the way, these billions and billions of dollars they propose to "loot from you" in their phony monetary redistribution scam is money that the Government does not even have and must create out of thin air which in turn only makes your dollars more WORTHLESS, and even more importantly, it's money that is not theirs to give, to ANYONE for ANY REASON!)**** 

With just a casual amount of research, one can easily conclude that in the final analysis all mature Socialist-Communist Demo-Publican societies operating in the "REAL WORLD" end up with the same exact results; that is, that 99.99% of all citizens in such societies eventually exist in a life of shared misery with death as the final reward!   For a "CLASSIC" mini example of this type miserable failure and a first hand look at the inevitable ensuing human misery and suffering, one merely needs look at most any American Indian Reservation. There are incalculable volumes of prose that clearly demolish and smash operational, "REAL WORLD"   Demo-Publican, Socialistic and Communistic regimes for what they really are; clearly demonstrating that this is an absolute "Axiom," reference the overall  tragic human conditions and failures in ALL such societies in the "REAL WORLD." I will not elaborate further on the failures of such societies, primarily because I do not have enough bandwidth nor time to do so, however, if you care to prove me wrong; I would suggest that you first start with a thorough study of the average human living conditions in the following countries: North Korea, North Vietnam, (Old Iraq, contrary to what CNN and NBC are saying, things really are getting better in Iraq) Burma, Cuba, Haiti,  Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, Venezuela, Columbia, Syria, most of Africa, even that much to do about nothing grand positive example of a Socialist Model, SWEDEN, which by the way has simply imploded and disintegrated from within and represents one of the most grotesque and tragic of all Socialist failures, Denmark, England and sadly, I must add Mexico and on and on and on and on! And then you might even look at how far down the road to "SERFDOM" you and America have traveled!

Except for the so-called FEW enlightened leaders of such societies; all citizens of all Fully Functional & Operational Demo-Publican, Socialist and Communist societies always eventually suffer from the most cruel afflictions known to mankind.  Even the dumbest SOB I ever met knew that "Free Lunches" are not FREE and that someone finally always has to pay in one way or another and that the Shell-Ponzi-Game is always over when there are more individuals receiving than paying.  Does this sound somewhat vaguely familiar?  Maybe like our very own Defunct/Bankrupt Social Security Ponzi Scam? And every other Government "Free Lunch" assistance program in America.  The sad fact of the matter is that America is BANKRUPT and has been for many, many years.  Our government borrows billions and billions of dollars and creates even more out of thin air each and every day (which by the way, is why your dollars become more worthless each and every day), just to keep this "Grandest Scam" ever perpetuated afloat. 

One of the most vile, deceitful demagogues (albeit, a very slick but very sick psychopathic hustler) in this almost endless array of slimy-putrid Political con artists is none other than AMERICA'S COMMUNIST PARTY NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT;  "Barack Obama."  A TRUE MARXIST BELIEVER;  presenting himself as the LEADER of "CHANGE WE CAN ALL BELIEVE IN." Change that is nothing more than in the form of a "Utopian Revolutionary American Peoples Communist-Marxist Party!" Commonly referred to as the "DEMO-PUBLICAN-SOCIALIST PARTY USA" or at the "Bama" dinner table when all the cameras and microphones are turned off as; "Lets Get Whitey" for bringing us from an uncivilized mud hut in Africa and giving us the opportunity for a civilized life and education, along with the opportunity to participate in the greatest society that the world has ever known and to be a part of the American Dream and the unprecedented opportunity to be a part of the American Presidential process!  ****(6-3-2008-Commie Obama was officially  chosen as "America's Communist-Democratic-Socialist Party" nominee for President of the United States of America).  ****

After just a casual amount of research, one can easily conclude that in the final analysis the only change that Commie Obama, his wife, "Sweetie Pie" along with all his "utopian-worthless huckster promoters & sheep" really promise is to hasten the day of the final collapse of the United State of America as a free Society. What he refers to as his "defining moment" for every American Citizen that will be unprecedented in America's short history. Commie Obama will work tirelessly for the day that America is finally brought to her knees in a total collapse by all the leeches, liars, scamsters, con artists, sorry ass greedy lobbyists, hate America mongers, crooked politicians, shyster corporate CEO's and private citizens that are in bed with these same crooked politicians for their own gain at your expense!  This is exactly what Bama is betting on and you can be assured he'll do his absolute best to achieve this end result if elected your new President so that he will be in a position to become America's new DICTATOR SAVIOR,  À la carte "BABY DOC" STYLE!  (Go ahead and laugh now!)  You read it here first!  Barack Obama is the most dangerous huckster politician that has ever been nominated as a candidate for President of the United States of America!

Your vote for "Commie Obama," is a vote for the absolute and final destruction of the greatest country and society in the entire world for the past several hundred years, that is; the Freest and greatest civilized society in human history!  And here I emphasize the word "CIVILIZED!"  If you believe that uncivilized  Africans and all other uncivilized groups or persons in America that steadfastly refuse to become assimilated into our greatest civilized society ever known have enhanced the total overall well being of America, then by all means, vote for Commie Obama.  I can assure you that you will get exactly what you deserve!

"A Vote For Barack Obama
Is A Vote For A COMMUNIST-MARXIST AMERICA!"

The Realities of Communism, Part I

Given a couple of e-mails I printed recently in the Feedback Forum, I thought this would be a good time to go back to square one and present a primer on communism, an ideology I am convinced most Americans do not understand.

For years, it was popular to refer to Fidel Castro as “the last communist.” But considering the realities of both human nature and what is actually happening around the globe at any moment in time, that was absurd, to say the least. Communism has always existed, and will continue to exist so long as mankind is around.

Communism is driven by these underlying mental disorders:

Guiltism. This is a condition seen most often in wealthy people, particularly those who inherited their wealth (the Kennedys, the Rockefellers, et al). Shelby Steele refers to one aspect of this condition as “white guilt,” which includes feeling guilty about people of any color who are deemed by self-anointed moralists to be oppressed.

Covetism. Plain and simple, rather than being happy with what they have, covetous people desperately want what someone else has. Without looking in the mirror, liberals often refer to this as “greed.”

Envyism. Envy is different from covetism in that the person afflicted with envy believes that the only thing that can make him happy is to bring others down to his own level by stealing or destroying everything that is precious to them.

Angerism. For reasons that are often inexplicable, some people seem to be born angry. Sometimes the anger is a result of their own failures in life, but often it appears to be a congenital condition that can be soothed only by destroying those who appear to be happy.

Villainism. As Eric Hoffer pointed out in his classic, The True believer, all mass movements require a villain. For Hitler, it was the Jews. For much of the Muslim world, the menace is Israel and America. Above all, villainists see successful businesspeople and large corporations as evil, notwithstanding the fact that they are responsible for the good life that hundreds of millions of people all over the world enjoy.

Now, keeping these mental disorders in mind, let's back up a bit and begin at the beginning.

Communism is technically defined as “a theory advocating elimination of private property; a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed; a totalitarian system in which a single authoritarian party controls state‑owned means of production with the professed aim of establishing a stateless society; a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equally.”

Though the definition of communism is confusing, to say the least, there is really only one thing wrong with it: It doesn't work. It does not work in theory, nor does it work in practice.

By that, I mean to say that theoretical communism, as described by Marx, Engels, Lenin, and other historically prominent communists, bears virtually no resemblance to real communism, i.e., communism as it is actually practiced in so‑called communist countries.

Theoretical Communism

Can we make any sense of the dictionary definition of communism? How are goods “owned in common?” Does this refer to some sort of utopian partnership among individuals? And what is meant by “available to all as needed?” Who determines who is in need? Who determines what it is that they need? Who determines how much they need? The same question stalks us relentlessly: Who shall decide?

Several years ago, I had occasion to ponder the confusing concept of the way communists believe people should live. It happened during a visit to a friend’s beach home. While viewing the beach from the balcony, I became engaged in a discussion with a woman and her husband.

During the course of our conversation, the woman offered her opinion that it was not right for people to build private homes on the beach. I asked why, and she answered, “All the ocean frontage should belong to ‘the people.’” That statement interested me, because I felt she sincerely believed it was morally valid.

Pursuing my curiosity, I began asking her questions. “Who is it that you are referring to when you say the people?”

“Everyone,” she answered.

“Do you mean that you and I should be joint owners, along with millions of other people, of every square inch of this beach?”

“Of course,” she replied with certainty.

It seemed to me that such an involuntary partnership held the potential for enormous practical problems. I pressed on with, “What happens if both you and I want to sit on the same four square feet of beach at the same time?”

“That’s getting overly technical,” she protested. “It would be highly unlikely to occur.” In my mind, I silently translated the real meaning of her response to be: “I can’t answer that.”

Common sense told me that it was just this sort of problem that would, in fact, continually occur in a “common-ownership” society. Worse, it would occur on a much larger scale.

For example, what would stop a gang of people from getting up early each morning and staking out fifty yards of the most desirable beachfront in a certain area? After all, since they would own every square inch of the beach in common with everyone else, it would be their right to do so. Is that what the original communist theoreticians had in mind — a chaotic society that would operate on a first‑come‑first‑served basis?

But wait a minute. Why should the gang have to arise early each morning to lay claim to their preferred section of the beach? Does communism provide for a time limit on the use of commonly owned property? Why not just have a couple of gang members guard the spot at night?

Technically, they would merely be exercising their right to use “common property.” It’s just that their use, in this particular case, would be continuous. To carry this line of reasoning to its ultimate conclusion, why not just live on that piece of beach on a permanent basis? And that would be the precise point at which “the people” would be engaged in something called “private ownership of property.”

In real life, the vague concepts of “elimination of private property” and “goods owned in common” can only mean that land and other wealth should be taken from their rightful owners and made available to the strongest person or group to come along and claim it. Which makes theoretical communism, not capitalism, a dog-eat‑dog system.

The only meaningful way to think of property is that it is either owned by someone or it is not. And the true tests of ownership are (1) whether or not you may do anything you desire with your own property and (2) whether or not anyone else may take all or part of it away from you. Theoretical communism is clear on this point. It favors the view that anyone may take anyone else’s property whenever he pleases.

Next: Sacrificing for “the good of society.”

If you would like to speak up about the topic of this article, send your comments to: questions@robertringer.com. (Remember to keep your comments pithy and double spaced for easy reading.)

To read past articles from the Money and Power Series Click Here

To read past articles from The Cho Factor Click Here

To read past Voice of Sanity articles Click Here

Subscribe free to A Voice of Sanity at www.RobertRinger.com

"A Vote For Barack Obama
Is A Vote For A COMMUNIST-MARXIST AMERICA!"

The Communist Utopia, Part II

Another remarkable aspect of theoretical communism is the notion that the individual is unimportant and that it is, therefore, moral to sacrifice him for “the good of society.” But since “society” is nothing more than a term for a large number of individuals, this means that every person is subject to sacrifice, at any time, and that such sacrifice is subject to the whims of any group of individuals strong enough to enforce its will.

That is precisely the kind of society that existed in pre-civilized times. People lived communally to protect themselves from beasts and other hazards of nature. Cannibalism was considered moral, because only one individual needed to be sacrificed to feed the group.

This is especially interesting since one of the standard arguments of free‑enterprise antagonists is that capitalism is outdated. Advocates of freedom are labeled as old-fashioned thinkers. But, in truth, it is communism that has been outdated since man first discovered the miracle of agriculture and began his climb toward civilization.

The so‑called Labor Theory is an important part of theoretical communism. This is the vague concept that insists upon a laborer’s right to receive all the “fruits of his labor.” But in a division‑of‑labor society (which exists in all civilized countries today), how does one determine how much labor (in terms of money) each laborer has put into a particular product?

Theoretically, the Marxist believes that if a man puts $100 worth of labor into the making of a product (and assuming he makes every aspect of the product himself, which is almost never the case), he is being exploited if someone buys it from him for $100 and resells it for $125. The Marxist would argue that the additional $25 belongs to the laborer.

Of course, the Marxist does not explain what happens if the person who paid $100 for the product can only sell it for $75. Should the laborer then refund his $25 loss? It is only through the phenome