http://lanternsofliberty.us The Battlefield of Ideas Tue, 18 Jun 2013 23:09:49 GMT http://lanternsofliberty.us/images/battlefield.png http://lanternsofliberty.us http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=BD039766-155D-D714-40695DC1050EFFB2 This past week the court jesters for the Progressive cause came out swinging against the Second Amendment. I can admit that outside of the seriousness of the gun debate, I can get a chuckle out of John Stewart here and again. I don’t really watch his show but when there are clips in the news, I can see the appeal for his humor. After all Alex Jones acted like a raving madman on Piers Morgan… Sheesh. How better can you win a debate then have the biggest conspiracy theorist in modern times spinning out of control as if being hopped up on Red Bull and Nodoz. I can appreciate the enthusiasm and passion of Alex and his fears but let’s turn down the main a bit Skid Row. But after you clear all the humor and the conspiracy, what do you have? The Second Amendment has many purposes even though the verbiage in the Constitution is brief. The intellectual arguments for its purpose are pretty simple. Despite all the chuckles and all the efforts by the left to illegalize guns, it is our right to protect ourselves. Now John Stewart and Bill Maher will try to make you feel stupid for having any fear of the ever growing federal government. Moderate Republican David Stockton will even slide in under the wing of the left as if to seem cool in his acceptance of their self-proclaimed rational position. But is it rational? All you have to do is ask some simple questions that are rational? We will get to the questions soon enough. Let’s watch the video of Bill Maher first. [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sRTyIAM8Ps]Bill Maher[/link] First of all I have to nitpick a bit after watching this. Why is it that the people that want to take our right or a portion of our right to bear arms away always seem to not understand simple gun mechanics? Here is Bill Maher, who claims to be so brilliant on the topic of gun control, mentions that people want to limit the number of “clips” in a gun… its bullets in gun Bill. Bloomberg, who has pushed for some of the strictest gun control measures in the nation, mentioned that an “assault weapon” allows a shooter to hold the trigger and “spray bullets” everywhere. This is obviously false since automatic weapons are highly regulated in the country. What he along with many people have called “assault weapons” are semi-automatic which means one trigger pull / one bullet shot. Obama even mentioned that the Sandy Hook shootings involved an automatic weapon which is completely false. Jake Tapper said it articulately, “The gun debate is worth having. We will have that conversation on this show,” Tapper said “But it might help the advocates of gun control if, in their advocacy for stricter measures, they seemed more familiar with what exactly they’re trying to ban.” Maybe Maher is an expert marksman or he has a hired one that carries a semi-auto to protect him and he made a gaffe. Let’s get the language straight if you want gun enthusiasts to take you seriously. Maher also seems a little frustrated with the notion of the filibuster attempt by Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Marco Rubio, etc when he talks about “being allowed” to debate gun control. We have been debating this subject for months. Where have you been Bill? He also seems to belittle the background checks bill in the Senate. First, the whole notion of gun control is built on a false premise. Aren’t we wishing to control crazy people? Now background checks seem to lean in that direction of controlling crazy people but there are so many pitfalls to the logic surrounding background checks. The concept of instituting background checks is one that is in a vacuum where there are no illegal guns. Let’s ask question. [b]Is someone with a criminal record or a person with a questionable mental health record with the intention to do harm to a person or group of people going to stand in line for a background check?[/b] This is a simple question. It is interesting that the left is using the Sandy Hook shooting as a precursor to debate on this matter when back ground checks would not have prevented the incident. In fact existing background check laws prevented the shooter from purchasing a firearm but he still was able to acquire the guns to commit mass murder. The very incident they use disgustingly to tug at American’s heart strings serves as evidence to the void in their logic. So what is next? Prevent the mother of a mentally handicap person from owning a firearm? Do you see the slippery slope here? The fact is the people that are truly affected is law abiding Now that we can see the holes in the logic here, let’s ask another question. [b]If law abiding citizens are the only people that are going to actively participate in the background check process, doesn’t it make harder for law abiding citizens to obtain fire arms to protect themselves from criminals?[/b] If this is the case why would we do it? Well it seems that many people are simply reacting to the “we have to do something” thought. There is not a reasonable American that wishes to see massacres involving guns. The problem is disproportionality directed towards inanimate objects or the access to them. If reducing the availability of guns or outlawing them all together would prevent mass murder, why are there illegal drug addicts? Why didn’t prohibition work? It is natural to want to do something to prevent disastrously evil events like Sandy Hook but the evidence is there that these measures proposed by Republicans and encouraged by Democrats are fruitless. I could detail out the evidence but I would simply be iterating over [link=http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/search?q=background+checks]John Lott’s excellent research[/link]. Bob Costas also mentions something that is quite ironic. He says that we need better enforcement with the new regulations that go into place. I would ask, “Shouldn’t we enforce the laws we have now?” [link=http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/enforce-gun-laws-article-1.1290289]Robert Morgenthau [/link]states beautifully in his opinion piece in the New York Daily News that we are not enforcing currently laws. It is typical of law makers to simply make laws that intend to fix problems and when the Executive Branch fails to enforce the laws the Legislative Branch thinks that writing more laws will somehow fix [i]the governments[/i] ineptness. Instead they choose limit more of our liberty. No one with a reasonable bone in there body wishes a mentally deranged madman to go on a killing spree. But there lies the problem. What is a mentally deranged person? How is “mentally ill” defined? Who defines it? I would argue that some Liberals out there are mentally deranged. However I would not wish to take away their rights to protect themselves. Will the passage of legislation that aims to screen individuals include this definition? Some experts say that [link=http://health.usnews.com/health-news/news/articles/2012/12/16/aspergers-autism-not-linked-to-violence-experts]Asperger's syndrome[/link], which is what the killer of Sandy Hook was diagnosed with, is not linked to violence. There is also research that claims that psychotropic drugs are linked to mass murder. Although the percentage of Americans that fit these demographics are a very small fraction of Americans. Should we take the ability to protect away from all these Americans due to some puzzling research? Even my knee jerk reaction is to prevent them from getting dangerous weapons. Should we deputize doctors with the ability to report determine a person’s ability to have a firearm? These problems are very complex and are obviously more detailed then the clinical definition of “Mentally Ill”. We are talking about individual human rights. [b]Just as the IRS puts fear in people for doing a number of different activities, could we say that this legislation put out by Toomey and Manchin would discourage people with mental illness from getting help?[/b] [link=http://www.redstate.com/2013/04/10/the-toomey-manchin-proposal-will-allow-doctors-to-block-your-right-to-guns/]Erick Erickson at Red State[/link] believes so. If the problem with these mass murderers is that they are in fact mentally ill, do we want to create legislation that could discourage? Erickson also points out the dilemma if a doctor makes a mistake. How much trouble does it take to get someone off of this federal registry so they can exercise their right to protect themself? This legislation will also obviously lead to confiscation. If someone that doesn’t fit the government “mentally capable” profile or a doctor’s profile to keep the right to protecting themselves, the federal government or local police will be demanding the forfeiting of the fire arms. This opens up tons of issue with property rights. Lastly I wish to mention David Stockton’s comments on the outdated nature of our 2nd Amendment as well as John Stewart’s comments on Conservative’s fear of a usurping dictator. These are the comments that are more troubling then Maher’s comments. At least Maher is open about his ignorance and doesn’t really try to intellectualize his hatred for our constitution. When one can intellectualize the desire to disarm a nation since we have this new more advanced democracy that stands more on the principles of free speech then the fear of a gun, I simple think of questions… hmmm [b]Mr. Stockton, if the government was to get wayward and try and take away your right to free speech as they did with your right to bear arms, what is there to protect your rights once guns have been outlawed?[/b] You see Mr. Stockton, the 2nd Amendment is there to protect the 1st. You make a good living speaking freely under the protections of the 1st Amendment while mocking ones desire to protect themselves under the 2nd. Doesn’t this seem to be a bit hypocritical? Were our founders so brilliant to write the 1st in context to changing times but so ignorant not to make the same concession in the 2nd? Mr. Stockton your points seem to be shallow and naive. I am sure that the internet wasn’t within the minds of James Madison when he along with others crafted the Constitution. The principles of free speech do still stand as should the principles of protecting one’s self and one’s property. This isn’t radical. It is common sense and our right! This brings us to the next video with John Stewart and his joke about the “Imaginary Hitler”. Let’s watch. [link=http://youtu.be/0yXGThWEDVo]John Stewart[/link] Now this was would be highly entertaining if it wasn’t being used as a method to take away more of our rights to own fire arms. As mentioned before, Alex Jones doesn’t offer the best message here in response to Piers Morgan’s quest to make American like the failing British nation. Let’s rationally understand the point that Alex Jones is trying to make here. Jones shares the fears of not only millions of Americans in this country but also Jews, Cubans, Russians, Chinese, Vietnamese, and Cambodians who experienced the mass killings of an unarmed populous by vicious dictators. Are their fears of an “Imaginary Hitler” justified? Did the Jews believe that Hitler would intend to annihilate the entire race of Jews? The evidence is there to show that they didn’t. No one with a reasonable mind is suggesting that Obama wishes to kill millions of Americans as he has never gave reason to. This doesn’t eliminate history and the evils that men can do. If we have nothing to fear, why do we need any other Amendments or the Constitution for that matter? Their logic is flawed. It is troubling that the FBI has evidence of plans to kill [link=http://youtu.be/VlN2t0oERHk]20+ million[/link] Americans by radical leftists including Bill Ayers who launched Obama’s political career in his living room. There plans seems to be absurd since no one believes that people within the freest nation in the world would desire such mass murder. It is the same disbelief experienced when Adam Lansa killed innocent babies in Sandy Hook. The only difference is the success. You see we have a society, system, and a constitution that has prevented us from experiencing mass genocide. We have never been invaded as a nation. All of this is due to our 2nd Amendment. To understand the 2nd Amendment we must read the writings of the people that scripted this Amendment to the Constitution. There lies the much disputed word “militia” or more broadly “well regulated militia”. First the militia encompasses the military. Secondly it includes the volunteers of armed American citizenry. [b]military militia[/b] As mentioned in Article 1 Section 8 as to understand the initial intent of the militia prior to the 2nd Amendment. [i]To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;[/i] [b]a prepared citizenry[/b] [link= http://thomas.loc.gov/home/histdox/fed_29.html ]Federalist 29[/link]. [i]The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, nor a week nor even a month, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a [b]well regulated militia[/b], would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss.[/i] As you can see here Alexander Hamilton mentions the “yeomanry” and other classes of citizens. In British terms this is a well-trained group of British volunteers. George Washington even mentions the militia here, [i]I am unacquainted with the extent of your works, and consequently ignorant of the number or men necessary to man them. If your present numbers should be insufficient for that purpose, I would then by all means advise your making up the deficiency out of the best regulated militia that can be got.[/i] George Washington -The Writings of George Washington, pp. 503-4, (G.P. Putnam & Sons, pub.)(1889) The founders saw that it was necessary to have armed citizens for many of reasons including “regulating” the military. James Madison mentions the importance of an armed citizenry to regulate the militia in Federalist 46. [i] To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. . . . Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.[/i] This articulates beautifully the argument between the federalists and the anti-federalists. Madison as well as other federalists feared the power of the federal government to have unbridled power with creating a military. As did the US Constitution separate the powers of government, the Bill of Rights were Amendments intended to punctuate these separations with further clarifications. Madison saw that arming the citizenry was a deterrent to a rogue government armed military because of simple numbers. A military of 25,000 would face impossible odds if half of the citizenry (approx. 500.000) was armed. These odds are the regulation. So how is this relevant today? Well must we ask the question? Is it possible that if we give up enough of our liberties that our government becomes unhinged from its purpose? Of course it is possible. Our constitution has protected us from this. There are enough checks and balances in place to prevent this. To somehow fear tyranny or a tyrannical government is the nature of all free men. There is no expiration to evil or tyranny no matter how advanced our society is. The more we sacrifice our liberties for attempts at achieving a perfect utopian society the closer we get to the death filled society. There is [b]NO[/b] perfect system. There will always be murders and unfortunately mass murder. We need to take common sense steps to prevent any malicious intent but these measures as outlined here are not common sense. Making it harder on law abiding citizens to protect themselves only hurts the civility of our nation. The police cannot be everywhere at once. In most cases violent crimes are already committed before the police arrive. It is evident with 500 homicides in Chicago where 435 were gun related that gun control measures do not stop gun crimes. With Chicago as having one of the worst records for homicides would it make sense to go down the same road nationally? Tue, 16 Apr 2013 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=BD039766-155D-D714-40695DC1050EFFB2 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=625AC23A-155D-D714-40C8C786D0479CE2 I receive tons of links to various articles and images all day on Facebook, Twitter , and via email. That’s what I get for being a publically known political blogger and political junkie. The sharing does bear its fruit on occasion but often does spawn some dissection of fabricated trickery. Since I do tons of research for my writing and podcasts, I welcome information from others since I obviously do not have a monopoly on all the evidence that hard times are coming for our country. This compilation of information takes tons of effort since not all the links that I get are connected to are accurate, tasteful, or even real. People have different opinions on what issues are important in regards to the plethora (to quote Elguapo from the Three Amigos) of political idiocy heard from the beltway wasteland near a once cherished Potomac River. However it is frustrating when I see fabricated information since there is so much effort that goes into researching and validating information to share. I see people that fabricate or share fabricated information as simply lazy. Moreover these individuals are hurting the effort to straighten out the corruption in DC. Sometimes a very simple Google search can validate information or a photo. Hell if something seems fishy; share it with me through a Facebook message or on twitter. The one that I recently received is one that I have seen floating around on the internet. A friend shared it with me through a Facebook message since they know I am a pretty detailed researcher. This image of Obama with a child shows Obama wearing an Aleister Crowley shirt. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/obamacrowley.jpg[/img] For those that are unaware of who Aleister Crowley is, he was an early 20th century occultist. Crowley was a strange character and often considered a Satanist. I have actually read a lot about Crowley and even some of his works and see no evidence of Satanism but he definitely could be viewed as evil to many people. I just see him as a twisted intellectual as I see George Bernard Shaw, Sidney and Beatrice Webb, Hubert Bland, Sydney Oliver, Edward R. Pease, Annie Besant, and Graham Wallas. If the person that fabricated this image with Photoshop really wanted to have the slightest bit of intellectual integrity instead of sloppy graphics development, they could have made a correlation to Crowley’s connection to Philosophy developed by Eastern Culture or their recreational drug use. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/obamacrowleyfake.jpg[/img] Obviously the creator of this fabrication is trying to make some kind of connection between Satanism and Obama. So I implore all of you out there to question all that is shared with you. Do not just see something and share it without validating it first. Feel free to share it with us first on our Facebook page and we can help validate it for you. Or simply send it to me in a message. Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=625AC23A-155D-D714-40C8C786D0479CE2 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=BF31A8BF-155D-D714-409C33877B1745B7 It has been interesting to watch the reactions of people on both on the left and the right in response to Melissa Harris-Perry’s MSNBC “Lean Forward” promo. The now infamous quote, “We have to break through our private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families,” has brewed up a firestorm of criticism – rightfully so. It seems that there have been two responses that have been fairly consistent. [list] [*]right – The collective does not own our children. Parental values should exist within the nuclear family. The community doesn’t bear the burden of clothing, feeding, and disciplining them. [link=http://www.hannity.com/article/outrageous-statement-melissa-harris-perry/17101]Hannity[/link] [*]left – Don’t we have a collective responsibility to protect and nurture our children? Doesn’t bad education of our children affect us collectively? [link=http://www.salon.com/2013/04/10/melissa_harris_perry_doesnt_want_to_steal_your_children/]Salon[/link] [/list] Of course there has been the humor like those that ask when their collective child support payment is coming or even Sarah Palin’s tongue and cheek response from her twitter account, “Dear MSNBC, if our kids belong to you, do your kids belong to us too? If so, can we take them hunting after church in our big pickup truck?” I can say that is pretty witty Sarah while making an excellent point. If we are to act collectively, who’s value system should we use? A Secular Progressive (Humanist) one or a religious one? It seems like either one of these will not be acceptable to a large group of Americans. Although all of these arguments are good points, I see that this idea of “collective parenting” goes much deeper then whether or not we should collectively teach the methods of bear trapping or the usefulness of masturbation. The debate is both a discussion of societal fundamentals as well as a tactic. [b]Fundmentals[/b] – Fundamentally America ‘s greatness has been erected with the individual efforts of millions upon millions of Americans. Arguably this has been a collective effort. However it is not a collective effort as the left promotes. While the left claims, in defense of their position, that we should step in to help our neighbor’s child, the intention is not voluntary but rather forceful. Their efforts are not only to promote “Secular Humanism” to all American’s despite the desires of non-secular families but it also plans to force all American’s to fund it through our tax system. Fundamentally our country since its founding has worked through the community – specifically churches – to help our fellow Americans. The left fundamentally sees this system as flawed, insufficient, chaotic, and outside of their moral control. Why? Because it doesn’t promote the Secular Progressive agenda. [b]Tactic[/b] – There is a reason why MSNBC calls it “Lean Forward” or the left floats under the banner of “Progressivism”. The discussion is intended to create a contentious situation in order to explain the truth about one group’s or person’s beliefs while unveiling the falsities of another’s. This is called a polemic. Granted many people operate within the modes of polemics, Progressives are masterful in the use of it. The intention is to set the stage and define the language for what is needed to progress society or to propel us “forward”. There is no doubting that collectivism is a controversial topic. It is foreign to Americanism. There is no denying this. The simple mentioning of a collective idea sets off a chain reaction of pundits and talk show hosts. This creates the dialectic that the left wishes to operate within. Conservatives re-iterate their principles while Progressives say that those principles have failed. It is ironic as if traditional families and individual responsibility is a reason for the failures in our public education system. Most participants in the debate have been able to articulate their wants and fears fluently but only the argument on the right is rational and reasonable. There have been many instances within our American history that have proven that the “collective” effort has been a complete failure. While the intentions are always well, the results are often fruitless or a massive failure. A perfect example of this collective effort is the “War on Poverty” waged by President Lyndon B Johnson. President Johnson’s “Great Society” initiative is a model at which to reference in regards to America’s federalized collective efforts. When studying Census data in regards to the numbers of Americans in poverty since 1964 after the Economic Opportunity Act was passed, it is apparent that the trillions of dollars spent to provide “Economic Opportunity” as a collective has been a collective failure. In 1969 [link=http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/SNAPsummary.htm]2.8 million[/link] American’s received food stamps in the name of “Economic Opportunity”. Today over [link=http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/34SNAPmonthly.htm]46.6 million[/link] are on food assistance programs. The [link=http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/PA694.pdf]Cato institute[/link] reports that even after the $15 Trillion in welfare spending since LBJ’s initiative, that 46% of American still continue to live under the poverty level and the poverty rate is still above 15% which is the worst in over a decade. This comes after massive spending on Welfare programs under Bush and a record 41% increase in spending under Obama. The Cato report also mentions that if you divide annual welfare spending amongst a figurative household of 3, we could allocate $61,830 per household. That is over 3 times what the poverty level is for a 3 person household ($19,530). So if you do the math, we could eliminate poverty 2 times over by simply giving that money directly to the poor. Isn’t charity and giving what we used to do before the “War on Poverty”? Granted there is more to just giving away money in the charity based system. There has to be value attached to the money that we give charitably. In the free market system, when an individual works, the wage they receive for the sacrifice of their labor is an evaluation of their labor. Now the evaluation has many factors. The employer has to see that the individual is worth that wage and the employee has to agree that their sacrifice is worth that wage. The market plays a factor as well. If a competing employer sees that the competitor’s employee is worth more than what their competitor is paying, then there can be opportunity for the employee. In a charity based system, someone in need works with the church in order to get back on their feet. So when giving money to an individual as charity, there needs to be a value attached. Simply giving the money away without attaching some type of value or a sacrifice for that value takes away the virtue of the charitable nature of the individual or group providing. In a politically based welfare system, politicians set up a false value system with welfare by coercing wanting recipients of government handouts to vote for the politician. The vote is the sacrifice. How many times do we hear angry constituents that did not get what they were promised in regards to their benefits, subsidies, etc? Oh… yes liberals… I know what you are thinking. “Republicans do it to!” It is true! They do it because they have begun to look to their representatives to provide virtue instead of simply getting out of the way. This is why collectivism doesn’t work. Collectivism is a political system not a value system. Moreover it is a failure system. You see, politicians under a collectivist system look for the most vulnerable to represent. Even if these individuals or collective group are a mere a tenth of a percent of the population, they must be an example to the collective whole. It is Obtuse in regards to democracy. So the collectivists that claim that their system is democratic are disingenuous and obtuse in their view. This is evident in the gay marriage debate. If you look at sheer numbers, 54% of California’s population – the most liberal state in the nation – supports same sex marriage. Regardless of the sheer undeniable massive majority of American’s that support the traditional definition of the institution of marriage, the left promotes a federal mandate to change that definition of marriage. Is this democracy? [b]Lean Forward[/b] We see the left ironically using the phrases or similar phrases of collectivists revered not for their success in implementing collectivism but rather the wake of death that was a result of its implementation. Now there is no doubt that even the mentioning of Mao, Lenin, Pot, or even Hitler is controversial but how can we not mention the road without mentioning the inevitable destination. No one with a reasonable mind is accusing our federal bureaucracy of setting up a system that [i]intends[/i] to kill millions of people as did these dictators. I would simply ask did Mao intend to kill 40 million people with his collectivist plan “The Great Leap Forward”? Did he expect that his bureaucrats would falsely report the food production for the sake of politics? Moreover, did Mao expect that by ignoring the importance of individual responsibility and replacing it with collective responsibility would remove the individual’s ability to sustain themselves? I am sure his intentions where good as was Lenin’s and Hitler’s. All of these ministers of collectivist policy promoted making the children the responsibility of the state and not the family unit. In regards to Melissa Harris-Perry’s comments, I would simply ask her, “What are the plans that you have?” Yes we do collectively work together in our communities, our churches, and our schools, but these efforts or voluntary. Is our free market system no successful due to the virtues and progress of a free and voluntary collective or collection of individuals? Not a single American is forced to serve or sacrifice in these American systems. Ms. Perry, your system of education requires force. In a charity based system, if a person needs help they can choose to go the church or community for help just as the members can choose help. This promotes civility. You see Ms. Perry, a value system or a system rooted in virtue promotes civility. A system void of it promotes entitlements and inevitably brings chaos as seen in the socialist European countries. When Americans are one day convinced that they have a right to all these things you propose, it will no longer be valued outside of the constructs of politics. Instead of sacrifice with labor, there will be sacrifice with a vote. This is Democratic tyranny. This is what birthed vile actions from dictators. So not only does the collective system undermine civility, it undermines productivity. When we wonder why our economy is stagnant and not growing, it is simple and obvious to me. Like so many other countries in the world we have embraced Statism – to bridge Aristotle, Reagan, and Levin. Thu, 11 Apr 2013 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=BF31A8BF-155D-D714-409C33877B1745B7 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=88632EA9-155D-D714-402EFF57CD1886EC CONSTITUTION (FUNDAMENTAL LAW) OF THE UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS Adopted at the Seventh (Special) Session of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, Ninth Convocation, On October 7, 1977 Novosti Press Agency Publishing House Moscow, 1985 Constitution (Fundamental Law) of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics The Great October Socialist Revolution, made by the workers and peasants of Russia under the leadership of the Communist Party headed by Lenin, overthrew capitalist and landowner rule, broke the fetters of oppression, established the dictatorship of the proletariat, and created the Soviet state, a new type of state, the basic instrument for defending the gains of the revolution and for building socialism and communism. Humanity thereby began the epoch-making turn from capitalist to socialism. After achieving victory in the Civil War and repulsing imperialist intervention, the Soviet government carried through far-reaching social and economic transformations, and put an end once and for all to exploitation of man by man, antagonisms between classes, and strive between nationalities. THe unification of the Soviet Republics in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics multiplied the forces and opportunities of the peoples of the country in the building of socialism. Social ownership of the means of production and genuine democracy for the working masses were established. For the first time in the history of mankind a socialist society was created. The strength of socialism was vividly demonstrated by the immortal feat of the Soviet people and their Armed Forces in achieving their historic victory in the Great Patriotic War. This victory consolidated the influence and international standing of the Soviet Union and created new opportunities for growth of the forces of socialism, national liberation, democracy, and peace throughout the world. Continuing their creative endeavors, the working people of the Soviet Union have ensured rapid, all-round development of the country and steady improvement of the socialist system. They have consolidated the alliance of the working class, collective-farm peasantry, and people's intelligentsia, and friendship of the nations and nationalities of the USSR. Socio-political and ideological unity of Soviet society, in which the working class is the leading force, has been achieved. THe aims of the dictatorship of the proletariat having been fulfilled, the Soviet state has become a state of the whole people. The leading role of the Communist Party, the vanguard of all the people, has grown. In the USSR a developed socialist society has been built. At this stage, when socialism is developing on its own foundations, the creative forces of the new system and the advantages of the socialist way of life are becoming increasingly evident, and the working people are more and more widely enjoying the fruits of their great revolutionary gains. It is a society in which powerful productive forces and progressive science and culture have been created, in which the well-being of the people is constantly rising, and more and more favourable conditions are being provided for the all-round development of the individual. It is a society of mature socialist social relations, in which, on the basis of the drawing together of all classes and social strata and of the juridical and factual equality of all its nations and nationalities and their fraternal co-operation, a new historical community of people has been formed-- the Soviet people. It is a society of high organisational capacity, ideological commitment, and consciousness of the working people, who are patriots and internationalists. It is a society in which the law of life is concern of all for the good of each and concern of each for the good of all. It is a society of true democracy, the political system of which ensures effective management of all public affairs, ever more active participation of the working people in running the state, and the combining of citizen's real rights and freedoms with their obligations and responsibility to society. Developed socialist society is a natural, logical stage on the road to communism. The supreme goal af the Soviet state is the building of a classless communist society in which there will be public, communist self-government. The main aims of the people's socialist state are: to lay the material and technical foundation of communism, to perfect socialist social relations and transform them into communist relations, to mould the citizen of communist society, to raise the people's living and cultural standards, to safeguard the country's security, and to further the consolidation of peace and development of international co-operation. The Soviet people, guided by the ideas of scientific communism and true to their revolutionary traditions, relying on the great social, economic, and political gains of socialism, striving for the further development of socialist democracy, taking into account the international position of the USSR as part of the world system of socialism, and conscious of their internationalist responsibility, preserving continuity of the ideas and principles of the first Soviet Constitution of 1918, the 1924 Constitution of the USSR and the 1936 Constitution of the USSR, hereby affirm the principle so the social structure and policy of the USSR, and define the rights, freedoms and obligations of citizens, and the principles of the organisation of the socialist state of the whole people, and its aims, and proclaim these in this Constitution. I. PRINCIPLES OF THE SOCIAL STRUCTURE AND POLICY OF THE USSR Chapter 1: THE POLITICAL SYSTEM Article 1. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is a socialist state of the whole people, expressing the will and interests of the workers, peasants, and intelligentsia, the working people of all the nations and nationalities of the country. Article 2. All power in the USSR belongs to the people. The people exercise state power through Soviets of People's Deputies, which constitute the political foundation of the USSR. All other state bodies are under the control of, and accountable to, the Soviets of People's Deputies. Article 3. The Soviet state is organised and functions on the principle of democratic centralism, namely the electiveness of all bodies of state authority from the lowest to the highest, their accountability to the people, and the obligation of lower bodies to observe the decisions of higher ones. Democratic centralism combines central leadership with local initiative and creative activity and with the responsibility of the each state body and official for the work entrusted to them. Article 4. The Soviet state and all its bodies function on the basis of socialist law, ensure the maintenance of law and order, and safeguard the interests of society and the rights and freedoms of citizens. State organisations, public organisations and officials shall observe the Constitution of the USSR and Soviet laws. Article 5. Major matters of state shall be submitted to nationwide discussion and put to a popular vote (referendum). Article 6. The leading and guiding force of the Soviet society and the nucleus of its political system, of all state organisations and public organisations, is the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The CPSU exists for the people and serves the people. The Communist Party, armed with Marxism-Leninism, determines the general perspectives of the development of society and the course of the home and foreign policy of the USSR, directs the great constructive work of the Soviet people, and imparts a planned, systematic and theoretically substantiated character to their struggle for the victory of communism All party organisations shall function within the framework of the Constitution of the USSR. Article 7. Trade unions, the All-Union Leninist Young Communist League co-operatives, and other public organisations, participate, in accordance with the aims laid down in their rules, in managing state and public affairs, and in deciding political, economic, and social an cultural matters. Article 8. Work collectives take part in discussing and deciding state and public affairs, in planning production and social development, in training and placing personnel, and in discussing and deciding matters pertaining to the management of enterprises and institutions, and the use of funds allocated both for developing production and for social and cultural purposes and financial incentives. Work collectives promote socialist emulation, the spread of progressive methods of work, and the strengthening of production discipline, educate their members in the spirit of communist morality, and strive to enhance their political consciousness and raise their cultural level and skills and qualifications. Article 9. The principal direction in the development of the political system of Soviet society is the extension of socialist democracy, namely ever broader participation of citizens in managing the affairs of society and the state, continuous improvement of the machinery of state, heightening of the activity of public organisations, strengthening of the system of people's control, consolidation of the legal foundations of the functioning of the state and of public life, greater openness and publicity, and constant responsiveness to public opinion. Chapter 2: THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM Article 10. The foundation of the economic system of the USSR is socialist ownership of the means of production in the form of state property (belonging to all the people), and collective farm-and-co-operative property. Socialist ownership also embraces the property of trade unions and other public organisations which they require to carry out their purposes under these rules. The state protects socialist property and provides conditions for its growth. No one has the right to use socialist property for person gain or other selfish ends. Article 11. State property, i. e. the common property of the Soviet people, is the principal form of socialist property. The land, its minerals, waters, and forests are the exclusive property of the state. The state owns the basic means of production in industry, construction, and agriculture; means of transport and communication; the banks; the property of state-run trade organisations and public utilities, and other state-run undertakings; most urban housing; and other property necessary for state purposes. Article 12. The property of collective farms and other co-operative organisations, and of their joint undertakings, comprises the means of production and other assets which they require for the purposes laid down in their rules. The land held by collective farms is secured to them for their free use in perpetuity. The state promotes development of collective farm-and-co-operative property and its approximation to state property. Collective farms, like other land users, are obliged to make effective and thrifty use of the land and to increase its fertility. Article 13. Earned income forms the basis of the personal property of Soviet citizens. THe personal property of citizens of the USSR may include articles of everyday use, personal consumption and convenience, the implements and other objects of a small-holding, a house, and earned savings. The personal property of citizens and the right to inherit it are protected by the state. Citizens may be granted the use of plots of land, in the manner prescribed by law, for a subsidiary small-holding (including the keeping of livestock and poultry), for fruit and vegetable growing or for building an individual dwelling. Citizens are required to make rational use of the land allotted to them. THe state, and collective farms provide assistance to citizens in working their small-holdings. Property owned or used by citizens shall not serve as a means of deriving unearned income or be employed to the detriment of the interests of society. Article 14. The source of the growth of social wealth and of the well- being of the people, and of each individual, is the labour, free from exploitation, of Soviet people. The state exercises control over the measure of labour and of consumption in accordance with the principle of socialism: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his work". It fixes the rate of taxation on taxable income. Socially useful work and its results determine a person's status in society. By combining material and moral incentives and encouraging innovation and a creative attitude to work, the state helps transform labour into the prime vital need of every Soviet citizen. Article 15. The supreme goal of social production under socialism is the fullest possible satisfaction of the people's growing material, and cultural and intellectual requirements. Relying on the creative initiative of the working people, socialist emulation, and scientific and technological progress, and by improving the forms and methods of economic management, the state ensures growth of the productivity of labour, raising of the efficiency of production and of the quality of work, and dynamic, planned, proportionate development of the economy. Article 16. The economy of the USSR is an integral economic complex comprising all the elements of social production, distribution, and exchange on its territory. The economy is managed on the basis of state plans for economic and social development, with due account of the sectoral and territorial principles, and by combining centralised direction with the managerial independence and initiative of individual and amalgamated enterprises and other organisations, for which active use is made of management accounting, profit, cost, and other economic levers and incentives. Article 17. In the USSR, the law permits individual labour in handicrafts, farming, the provision of services for the public, and other forms of activity based exclusively on the personal work of individual citizens and members of their families. The state makes regulations for such work to ensure that it serves the interest of society. Article 18. In the interests of the present and future generations, the necessary steps are taken in the USSR to protect and make scientific, rational use of the land and its mineral and water resources, and the plant and animal kingdoms, to preserve the purity of air and water, ensure reproduction of natural wealth, and improve the human environment. Chapter 3: SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND CULTURE Article 19. The social basis of the USSR is the unbreakable alliance of the workers, peasants, and intelligentsia. The state helps enhance the social homogeneity of society, namely the elimination of class differences and of the essential distinctions between town and country and between mental and physical labour, and the all-round development and drawing together of all the nations and nationalities of the USSR. Article 20. In accordance with the communist ideal--"The free development of each is the condition of the free development of all"--the state pursues the aim of giving citizens more and more real opportunities to apply their creative energies, abilities, and talents, and to develop their personalities in every way. Article 21. The state concerns itself with improving working conditions, safety and labour protection and the scientific organisation of work, and with reducing and ultimately eliminating all arduous physical labour through comprehensive mechanisation and automation of production processes in all branches of the economy. Article 22. A programme is being consistently implemented in the USSR to convert agricultural work into a variety of industrial work, to extend the network of educational, cultural, and medical institutions, and of trade, public catering, service and public utility facilities in rural localities, and transform hamlets and villages into well-planned and well-appointed settlements. Article 23. The state pursues a steady policy of raising people's pay levels and real incomes through increase in productivity. In order to satisfy the needs of Soviet people more fully social consumption funds are created. The state, with the broad participation of public organisations and work collectives, ensures the growth and just distribution of these funds. Article 24. In the USSR, state systems of health protection, social security, trade and public catering, communal services and amenities, and public utilities, operate and are being extended. The state encourages co-operatives and other public organisations to provide all types of services for the population. It encourages the development of mass physical culture and sport. Article 25. In the USSR there is a uniform system of public education, which is being constantly improved, that provides general education and vocational training for citizens, serves the communist education and intellectual and physical development of the youth, and trains them for work and social activity. Article 26. In accordance with society's needs, the state provides for planned development of science and the training of scientific personnel and organises introduction of the results of research in the economy and other spheres of life. Article 27. The state concerns itself with protecting, augmenting and making extensive use of society's cultural wealth for the moral and aesthetic education of the Soviet people, for raising their cultural level. In the USSR development of the professional, amateur and folk arts is encouraged in every way. Chapter 4: FOREIGN POLICY Article 28. The USSR steadfastly pursues a Leninist policy of peace and stands for strengthening of the security of nations and broad international co-operation. The foreign policy of the USSR is aimed at ensuring international conditions favourable for building communism in the USSR, safeguarding the state interests of the Soviet Union, consolidating the positions of world socialism, supporting the struggle of peoples for national liberation and social progress, preventing wars of aggression, achieving universal and complete disarmament, and consistently implementing the principle of the peaceful coexistence of states with different social systems. In the USSR war propaganda is banned. Article 29. The USSR's relations with other states are based on observance of the following principles: sovereign equality; mutual renunciation of the use or threat of force; inviolability of frontiers; territorial integrity of states; peaceful settlement of disputes; non- intervention in internal affairs; respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; the equal rights of peoples and their right to decide their own destiny; co-operation among states; and fulfilment in good faith of obligations arising from the generally recognised principles and rules of international law, and from the international treaties signed by the USSR. Article 30. The USSR, as part of the world system of socialism and of the socialist community, promotes and strengthens friendship, co-operation, and comradely mutual assistance with other socialist countries on the basis of the principle of socialist internationalism, and takes an active part in socialist economic integration and the socialist international division of labour. Chapter 5: DEFENCE OF THE SOCIALIST MOTHERLAND Article 31. Defence of the Socialist Motherland is one of the most important functions of the state, and is the concern of the whole people. In order to defend the gains of socialism, the peaceful labour of the Soviet people, and the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the state, the USSR maintains armed forces and has instituted universal military service. The duty of the Armed Forces of the USSR to the people is to provide reliable defence of the socialist Motherland and to be in constant combat readiness, guaranteeing that any aggressor is instantly repulsed. Article 32. The state ensures the security and defence capability of the country, and supplies the Armed Forces of the USSR with everything necessary for that purpose. The duties of state bodies, public organisations, officials, and citizens in regard to safeguarding the country's security and strengthening its defence capacity are defined by the legislation of the USSR. II. THE STATE AND THE INDIVIDUAL Chapter 6: CITIZENSHIP OF THE USSR / EQUALITY OF CITIZENS' RIGHTS Article 33. Uniform federal citizenship is established for the USSR. Every citizen of a Union Republic is a citizen of the USSR. The grounds and procedure for acquiring or forfeiting Soviet citizenship are defined by the Law on Citizenship of the USSR. When abroad, citizens of the USSR enjoy the protection and assistance of the Soviet state. Article 34. Citizens of the USSR are equal before the law, without distinction of origin, social or property status, race or nationality, sex, education, language, attitude to religion, type and nature of occupation, domicile, or other status. The equal rights of citizens of the USSR are guaranteed in all fields of economic, political, social, and cultural life. Article 35. Women and men have equal rights in the USSR. Exercise of these rights is ensured by according women equal access with men to education and vocational and professional training, equal opportunities in employment, remuneration, and promotion, and in social and political, and cultural activity, and by special labour and health protection measures for women; by providing conditions enabling mothers to work; by legal protection, and material and moral support for mothers and children, including paid leaves and other benefits for expectant mothers and mothers, and gradual reduction of working time for mothers with small children. Article 36. Citizens of the USSR of different races and nationalities have equal rights. Exercise of these rights is ensured by a policy of all-round development and drawing together of all the nations and nationalities of the USSR, by educating citizens in the spirit of Soviet patriotism and socialist internationalism, and by the possibility to use their native language and the languages of other peoples in the USSR. Any direct or indirect limitation of the rights of citizens or establishment of direct or indirect privileges on grounds of race or nationality, and any advocacy of racial or national exclusiveness, hostility, or contempt, are punishable by law. Article 37. Citizens of other countries and stateless persons in the USSR are guaranteed the rights and freedoms provided by law, including the right to apply to a court and other state bodies for the protection of their personal, property, family, and other rights. Citizens of other countries and stateless persons, when in the USSR, are obliged to respect the Constitution of the USSR and observe Soviet laws. Article 38. The USSR grants the right of asylum to foreigners persecuted for defending the interests of the working people and the cause of peace, or for participation in the revolutionary and national-liberation movement, or for progressive social and political, scientific, or other creative activity. Chapter 7: THE BASIC RIGHTS, FREEDOMS, AND DUTIES OF CITIZENS OF THE USSR Article 39. Citizens of the USSR enjoy in full the social, economic, political and personal rights and freedoms proclaimed and guaranteed by the Constitution of the USSR and by Soviet laws. The socialist system ensures enlargement of the rights and freedoms of citizens and continuous improvement of their living standards as social, economic, and cultural development programmes are fulfilled. Enjoyment by citizens of their rights and freedoms must not be to the detriment of the interests of society or the state, or infringe the rights of other citizens. Article 40. Citizens of the USSR have the right to work (that is, to guaranteed employment and pay in accordance wit the quantity and quality of their work, and not below the state-established minimum), including the right to choose their trade or profession, type of job and work in accordance with their inclinations, abilities, training and education, with due account of the needs of society. This right is ensured by the socialist economic system, steady growth of the productive forces, free vocational and professional training, improvement of skills, training in new trades or professions, and development of the systems of vocational guidance and job placement. Article 41. Citizens of the USSR have the right to rest and leisure. This right is ensured by the establishment of a working week not exceeding 41 hours, for workers and other employees, a shorter working day in a number of trades and industries, and shorter hours for night work; by the provision of paid annual holidays, weekly days of rest, extension of the network of cultural, educational, and health-building institutions, and the development on a mass scale of sport, physical culture, and camping and tourism; by the provision of neighborhood recreational facilities, and of other opportunities for rational use of free time. The length of collective farmers' working and leisure time is established by their collective farms. Article 42. Citizens of the USSR have the right to health protection. This right is ensured by free, qualified medical care provided by state health institutions; by extension of the network of therapeutic and health- building institutions; by the development and improvement of safety and hygiene in industry; by carrying out broad prophylactic measures; by measures to improve the environment; by special care for the health of the rising generation, including prohibition of child labour, excluding the work done by children as part of the school curriculum; and by developing research to prevent and reduce the incidence of disease and ensure citizens a long and active life. Article 43. Citizens of the USSR have the right to maintenance in old age, in sickness, and in the event of complete or partial disability or loss of the breadwinner. The right is guaranteed by social insurance of workers and other employees and collective farmers; by allowances for temporary disability; by the provision by the state or by collective farms of retirement pensions, disability pensions, and pensions for loss of the breadwinner; by providing employment for the partially disabled; by care for the elderly and the disabled; and by other forms of social security. Article 44. Citizens of the USSR have the rights to housing. This right is ensured by the development and upkeep of state and socially-owned housing; by assistance for co-operative and individual house building; by fair distribution, under public control, of the housing that becomes available through fulfilment of the programme of building well- appointed dwellings, and by low rents and low charges for utility services. Citizens of the USSR shall take good care of the housing allocated to them. Article 45. Citizens of the USSR have the right to education. This right is ensured by free provision of all forms of education, by the institution of universal, compulsory secondary education, and broad development of vocational, specialised secondary, and higher education, in which instruction is oriented toward practical activity and production; by the development of extramural, correspondence and evening courses, by the provision of state scholarships and grants and privileges for students; by the free issue of school textbooks; by the opportunity to attend a school where teaching is in the native language; and by the provision of facilities for self-education. Article 46. Citizens of the USSR have the right to enjoy cultural benefits. This rights is ensured by broad access to the cultural treasures of their own land and of the world that are preserved in state and other public collections; by the development and fair distribution of cultural and educational institutions throughout the country; by developing television and radio broadcasting and the publishing of books, newspapers and periodicals, and by extending the free library service; and by expanding cultural exchanges with other countries. Article 47. Citizens of the USSR, in accordance with the aims of building communism, are guaranteed freedom of scientific, technical, and artistic work. This freedom is ensured by broadening scientific research, encouraging invention and innovation, and developing literature and the arts. THe state provides the necessary material conditions for this and support for voluntary societies and unions of workers in the arts, organises introduction of inventions and innovations in production and other spheres of activity. The rights of authors, inventors and innovators are protected by the state. Article 48. Citizens of the USSR have the right to take part in the management and administration of state and public affairs and in the discussion and adoption of laws and measures of All-Union and local significance. This right is ensured by the opportunity to vote and to be elected to Soviets of People's Deputies and other elective state bodies, to take part in nationwide discussions and referendums, in people's control, in the work of state bodies, public organisations, and local community groups, and in meetings at places of work or residence. Article 49. Every citizen of the USSR has the right to submit proposals to state bodies and public organisations for improving their activity, and to criticise shortcomings in their work. Officials are obliged, within established time-limits, to examine citizens' proposals and requests, to reply to them, and to take appropriate action. Persecution for criticism is prohibited. Persons guilty of such persecution shall be called to account. Article 50. In accordance with the interests of the people and in order to strengthen and develop the s Wed, 06 Mar 2013 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=88632EA9-155D-D714-402EFF57CD1886EC http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=79B061FB-155D-D7CA-9D602943076765EF Obama during the State of the Union he mentioned over 20 new programs to push the country "forward". In a move that cynically sounds reminiscent to some Soviet style industrial plan. While he pressed on like a Presidential Candidate rather then a President, he proposed that we are halfway through our country's recovery from the so called "Greatest Fiscal Crisis since the Great Depression". Half way there I ask? We are nearly at the same [link=http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate.jsp]U3 (Based on those seeking jobs) [/link]unemployment rate at when he took office at 8% with the [link=http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate_u6.jsp]U6[/link] (Based on entire job force) unemployment rate at nearly 15% from 9%. We can also note that food stamps recipients have grown 15% since Obama came to office and that includes a 4% growth since 2010. So are we recovering? Answer: NO Obama mentioned the “Fix it First Program” which is to fix some 70,000 structurally deficient roads and bridges. Really? What happened to the stimulus? So even after Obama’s $787 Billion stimulus plan was passed with proposed infrastructure improvements, he now asks for more. Even while looking on Obama’s own website for accountability on this stimulus, you will find that only 4% of the Stimulus was spent on Infrastructure and 1/3 of that - $10 Billion - was spent with the EPA State and Tribal Assistance Grants and the GSA federal buildings fund. In the meantime, the federal leviathan is passing regulation after regulation. In fact, in the last 90 days 5993 regulations have been passed with another 1046 slotted for the next 90 days. I have one question. How do you get more of something if you regulate it? At a macro-economic level, the reason why the recovery has been so slow is due to this massive increase in federal regulations. As a country we had negative growth in the 4th quarter of 2012. We should be growing at 4-6% per year but this is not the case. What most people do not realize is that much of the growth we are seeing now is including inflation. What Obama doesn’t mention in his State of the Union address is the massive inflation in our future due to QE. He also doesn’t mention that growth and job creating is the only way to increase revenue effectively. At the rate of government growth, regulatory policy, deficit spending, and inflation on the rise, our future and our children’s future is bleak at best. So this is why his speech was the State of Illusion. Thu, 14 Feb 2013 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=79B061FB-155D-D7CA-9D602943076765EF http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=4D2B50CA-155D-D7CA-9D3C71E77886F6C7 In Soviet revolutionary Leon Trotsky's book "The History of the Russian Revolution", he mentions on page 11 "Slavophilism", which represents "Slavophilia" or Russian Conservatism, in a way that brings to light the historical use of the word "Racism" Leon Trotsky states, [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/trotskyquote.jpg[/img] Translated "Slavophilism messianism of backwardness, has based its philosophy on the fact that the Russian people and their church democratic through and through, and the official Russia - is a German bureaucracy imposed by Peter. Marx noted in this regard: "For just as the Teutonic jackasses blamed the despotism of Frederick II, and so the French, as though backward slaves were not always in need of civilized slaves to pass the required proficiency." This brief comment completely to the bottom, not only the old philosophy of the Slavophiles, but the latest revelations "racists." As you can see in the terms of Soviet dialectics, racism refers not to the race of an individual but rather their belief system. When looking into American political climate, we can see evidence of this type of calls to racism against Conservative ideology. It is important for Americans to understand that racism used with no relevance to the race of an individual or issue, is rooted in Soviet Revolutionary Propaganda. [link=http://books.google.com/books?id=6LEWSpBX5iYC&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=%D0%A1%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%84%D0%B8%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE,+%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BC+%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8,+%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE+%D1%81%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%8E+%D1%84%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BE%D1%84%D0%B8%D1%8E+%D0%BD%D0%B0+%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BC,+%D1%87%D1%82%D0%BE+%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9+%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4+%D0%B8+%D0%B5%D0%B3%D0%BE+%D1%86%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%8C+%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B7%D1%8C+%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%BD%D1%8B,&source=bl&ots=qyKy7EP7Gb&sig=xKuO7dtJ4RgJDdoVRWG8aI2AOrM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=AM0bUciwIsar0AG3-IGADw&ved=0CC4Q6AEwADgK#v=onepage&q=%D0%A1%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%84%D0%B8%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE%2C%20%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BC%20%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%2C%20%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE%20%D1%81%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%8E%20%D1%84%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BE%D1%84%D0%B8%D1%8E%20%D0%BD%D0%B0%20%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BC%2C%20%D1%87%D1%82%D0%BE%20%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9%20%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%20%D0%B8%20%D0%B5%D0%B3%D0%BE%20%D1%86%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%8C%20%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B7%D1%8C%20%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%BD%D1%8B%2C&f=false]SOURCE[/link] Wed, 13 Feb 2013 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=4D2B50CA-155D-D7CA-9D3C71E77886F6C7 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=0C4D8F2B-155D-D714-FB3C39073D096179 When I heard this inaugural address, I was brought to tears. It wasn't due to the mention of collective salvation or the need for collective action. It wasn't for the demonetization of individual success but rather the recognition of it. It wasn't for the sacrifices we all need to make as a country but the sacrifices that our individual brethren have made in the past. It wasn't the projected desire for politicians to provide me a future but rather the promise that the barriers to my future would be lifted. Must I say more? No... I will simply display the words that moved me most... "This is the first time in history that this ceremony has been held, as you have been told, on this West Front of the Capitol. Standing here, one faces a magnificent vista, opening up on this city's special beauty and history. At the end of this open mall are those shrines to the giants on whose shoulders we stand. Directly in front of me, the monument to a monumental man: George Washington, Father of our country. A man of humility who came to greatness reluctantly. He led America out of revolutionary victory into infant nationhood. Off to one side, the stately memorial to Thomas Jefferson. The Declaration of Independence flames with his eloquence. And then beyond the Reflecting Pool the dignified columns of the Lincoln Memorial. Whoever would understand in his heart the meaning of America will find it in the life of Abraham Lincoln. Beyond those monuments to heroism is the Potomac River, and on the far shore the sloping hills of Arlington National Cemetery with its row on row of simple white markers bearing crosses or Stars of David. They add up to only a tiny fraction of the price that has been paid for our freedom. Each one of those markers is a monument to the kinds of hero I spoke of earlier. Their lives ended in places called Belleau Wood, The Argonne, Omaha Beach, Salerno and halfway around the world on Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Pork Chop Hill, the Chosin Reservoir, and in a hundred rice paddies and jungles of a place called Vietnam. Under one such marker lies a young man—Martin Treptow—who left his job in a small town barber shop in 1917 to go to France with the famed Rainbow Division. There, on the western front, he was killed trying to carry a message between battalions under heavy artillery fire. We are told that on his body was found a diary. On the flyleaf under the heading, "My Pledge," he had written these words: "America must win this war. Therefore, I will work, I will save, I will sacrifice, I will endure, I will fight cheerfully and do my utmost, as if the issue of the whole struggle depended on me alone." ~ Ronald Reagan's 1st Inaugural Address January 20th 1981 There is still hope. Lets talk about it. [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/radio.cfm]Arena Radio[/link] Wed, 23 Jan 2013 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=0C4D8F2B-155D-D714-FB3C39073D096179 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=D1FFB84E-155D-D714-FBD109FE5FEA9106 I am finally and officially sick of the political battle on the hill. Yes… I have been focused on the [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/radio.cfm]philosophical discussions in my podcasts [/link] and other endeavors since they are much more honest then Obama’s intention to turn a seemingly guaranteed future recession into a Republican debacle. The problem is that this future recession is now going to be much worse. Let’s dig a little bit more into our current economic condition, this so called “Fiscal Cliff” debate, and the inevitable outcomes. First we must ignore the “Fiscal Cliff” debate or I would rather simply call a “red herring”. Currently we are burdened as Americans with a 16.3 Trillion dollar debt with the fed borrowing. I’d rather write it like this - $16,300,000,000,000 - since it gives a better perspective. How about a little more perspective? If you spent a dollar every second for 12 days you would have a million dollars. If you continue spending at that rate you would have a billion in 32 years. To get to a TRILLION dollars you would have to continue that rate of spending for 31,000 years. Think about it in respect to irresponsibility of our leaders or I would simply like to call spending and wasting children in Washington. After all we support them. [b]So where is the cliff?[/b] Or should I say was? Well in 2006 we began to go downhill and the momentum is accelerating. 2006 is when our debt crisis finally touched the American people. Oh I know…. the liberals love this when we blame any year within 2000-2008 because we can now rest our childish partisan blame on Bush. Not so fast. The economic troubles we experienced were an adverse reaction to over-consumption in the 90’s and the lack thereof in the late 00’s. Yes what we experienced beginning in 2006 synonymous to a massive hangover. There is much evidence to this out there but is often ignored by the media and sadly the American people. In our own 2011 [link=http://lanternsofliberty.us/thevault.cfm?Entry=E218CB96-123F-7491-A4E3482546006792]editorial [/link] discussing the massive debt accumulated over the last decade, we pointed out that Clinton policy created a frenzy of consumption during his second term after he pushed for massive reform in affordable housing policy. In 1995 Clinton made massive and arguably destructive changes to the Community Investment Act (CRA) that provided HUD the ability set rigorous lending requirements on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in order to promote affordable housing or better put – sub-prime housing. Eventually Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would need to be put under conservatorship or full control of the federal government in 2008. There were of course other instigators of this collapse. Back in 1999 Clinton signed the repeal of portions of Glass Steagall, which actually was in part good regulation put into place after the beginning of the Great Depression. The portions that were repealed were sections that existed since 1933 that kept commercial banks and investment banks separate among other things. This mandatory separation was what was removed by the repeal. You can see in the chart below when the housing bubble began after these CRA changes were made. [img] http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/HousingPrices.jpg[/img] It is obvious by this chart that the housing bubble began inflating during Clinton’s term. This doesn’t mean that Bush’s leadership and policy was responsible since the precedence was set and his leadership did make the appropriate changes. Although congressional Republicans were warning of impending collapse as early as 2004, we can spread out the blame since Republicans head majorities in the House and Senate. [b]So how does this continue?[/b] Well the repeal of portions of Glass Steagall still exists and there is no mention from either party of putting those provisions back in to prevent further fiscal calamity. Recently [link=http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2012/06/21/here-are-the-bank-downgrades-morgan-stanley-gets-2-notches/]multiple banks[/link] have been downgraded by Moody’s rating service which could be and appears to be a sign dark clouds on the horizon economically. Let’s focus on Bank of America for a moment. Bank of America, which is an appellative omen in itself, has as recently as 2011 moved [link=http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/sleight_of_hand_uy96iNSbW99JHMRnbxgvfL]$55 Trillion [/link]in derivatives from the ashes of former Merrill Lynch to the retail bank unit. What does this mean? Well… now the taxpayers and depositors are on the hook for $55 Trillion in risky debt if Bank of America were to experience financial trouble. You see banks are insured by the FDIC. So what we are seeing is the Swiss cheese holes are lining up for calamity when the market melts down again. All you have to do is watch the money. [b]So where are we now?[/b] Well let’s start of that you as an American taxpayer owe over $135,000; so much for inheritance when you fail to pay off this debt and hand this over to your children, heirs, etc. So as we debate raising taxes on the top two percent of American tax payers, we spend over [link=http://cnsnews.com/news/article/cbo-feds-borrowing-48-billion-day-fy-2013-so-far]$4.8 billion[/link] per day which in turn we have to borrow. With recent White House proposals, the $960 billion in tax hikes on the top 2 income brackets and investment income as well as $600 billion in new taxes over 10 years will only pay for less than 34 days of federal spending. That is just over a month. This is a penny on your floorboard that should be left ‘tails” up. We will explain that soon enough. So let’s look at the marginal tax brackets. Obama’s proposal raises the 33% rate to 36% and the 35% tax rate to 39.6%. So the second tax bracket for married couples affects those making $217,450 to $388,350. This is small business owners. For example, someone that owns a small plumbing company that has less than 10 employees under a partnership or S corporation will be negatively affected by these cuts and could reduce expenses by laying people off or raising prices on the consumer. Obviously both of these are negative for the overall economy. It could cause a ripple effect to suppliers that provide products and services to these small businesses. The [link=http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_40/b4197030541676.htm]GOP claims[/link] that 50% of small businesses will be affected. This seems exaggerated but could very possibly become a reality if we go into a double dip recession next year. Follow the money… [b]So is it worth the tax hike?[/b] Well in short answer – no. Why would we raise taxes in poor economic conditions on the producers who typically lift us out of poor economic conditions? Obviously we are talking about pennies here. This isn’t a serious discussion. There seems to be zero effort by congressional Democrats and Obama to address spending other than military spending which honestly is a political pander to the left wing base. What is even more [link=http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/824-billion-tax-increase-doesn-t-exist-025335437.html]disingenuous[/link] is that the tax increase that so many Americans will feel the punch from, technically in the eyes of the policy makers is that the tax cut expirations are already fixed into the baseline budget. In other words, current forecasts on government debt and deficit include the hiking of all taxes in 2013. Forecasts include law not assumptions on which laws will be enacted. The hikes are law. So the debate about current debt and deficit is a false one because it is based on the baseline. Technically the tax cuts expiring will fit right into current projections and the baseline projects of raising $824 billion along with the sequestering of military spending. Preventing some if not all from expiration will set the stage for a completely different forecast. You see, Obama doesn’t want a deal. He wants to bury the Republicans politically because the horizon looks bleak economically and his legacy depends on deflecting any blame. Most Americans don’t pay attention to day to day news and will only get the headlines from the mainstream media outlets how the stubborn Republicans thwarted Obama’s desires to fix the debt problem regardless of Obama’s disingenuous proposals. Even [link=http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/271459-reid-says-senate-to-vote-on-obamas-deficit-reduction-plan]Harry Reid[/link] would not take Obama’s proposal to a vote in the Senate. Why you ask? Because there was no chance in it passing even through the Democrat majority. For the Republicans it is check mate. With the 2014 elections, which is being considered their last stand, it appears that the Achilles heel no tax pledge is about to break as the purging of Conservatives has begun due to their lack of capitulation an joining in with Boehner’s curtsy to Obama’s disingenuous and political motivated proposal. Do you trust a government with one party power? Once the taxes go up on all Americans, Obama will propose tax reform on the rich again and double down on his “soak the rich” agenda. He will claim the narrative and implement loop hole reduction or as the Republicans rightly claim as tax deduction reform. After all mortgage deductions are not loopholes. This doesn’t even take into account how Obamacare will change the economic landscape for all Americans. That for another day.[link=http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/12/06/why-america-is-going-to-miss-the-bush-tax-cuts/]This will cripple the US economy[/link]. He will also come out and pledge to lower taxes on the lower income brackets which pay very little in taxes since deductions allow the lower brackets to get most if not all of their taxes back. In the lowest bracket, some actually receive more back then they paid depending on those deductions. This is simply a hard-lined aggression against the wealth creators in the country. Ideologically it is a progressive tax model that would be cheered by Alinsky and Marx as the devils have been pointed out – the Capitalist. Sat, 08 Dec 2012 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=D1FFB84E-155D-D714-FBD109FE5FEA9106 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=C30D45D5-155D-D714-FB6C79D01AB941D5 support our service veterans [link=http://www.gruntworks11b.com/]http://www.gruntworks11b.com/[/link] There has been so much back and forth on the 9-11 tragedy in Benghazi, that we must parse all the moments leading up to the attack, all the available intelligence of what took place during the attack, and all that occurred after the attack to properly gauge what has truly happened. Many pundits accuse people trying determine what took place during the days leading up to the tragedy at Benghazi is a purely political. Trying to find the truth is not about politics. This is about America’s security and whether or not the people in charge of that security are doing their job. The people that were watching this attack take place in real-time work for us. If there is a failure of leadership, there needs to be a change. The approach of this post or even its existence is a product of what has appeared to be a cover up. If the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, or even the President of the United States would have not tried to cover up the true nature of this attack, we would probably have viewed this attack as another group of casualties in the face of terror. As a matter of perspective, this even does show American’s desensitized nature to the death of our brave Americans. I can relate to this because it took my research of the events in order for me to truly understand how heroic our men and women overseas are. I hope to shed light to my understanding of how brave Tyrone Woods and Greg Doherty were during this assault that was clearly showed the odds were against them. [b]Prior to the attack[/b] July 9th 2012: Chris Stevens asked for extension to temporary security personal through mid-September. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/july9th.jpg[/img] [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/july9th.pdf]link to document[/link] On August 8th 2012, Chris Steven's security team left. On that same day, Stevens sent another cable saying that the security has deteriorated in Benghazi with abductions and assassinations. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/August8th.jpg[/img] [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/August8th.pdf]link to document[/link] On September 11th 2012, a cable from Stevens explains the hotly debated and unresolved future of Libya between two Libyan rebel brigade leaders who overthrew Qaddafi. The two brigade leaders were Wissam bin Ahmed (Commander, Libya Shield 1) and Muhammad Al-Gharabi (Commander, Abu Salim Brigade Shield 2). They both claimed to have control of Libya’s armed forces and discussed the future political aspirations, the economy, security and the risk of electing Mahmoud Jabril as Prime Minister. In the same report, Salifists, which are considered the most radical of the Islamists in the Middle East and Northern Africa, had been killed that day in a battle between them and the Libya Shield brigade. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/September11th.jpg[/img] [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ September11th.pdf]link to document[/link] Keep in mind that Wissam bin Ahmed and Muhammad Al-Gharabi support Awad Al Baras, who is the Prime Minister candidate representing the Muslim Brotherhood’s Justice and Construction Party. They are considered a more moderate islamist group then the Saliifists. However it is recorded that in October 2011 after the overthrow of Qaddafi that Wissam bin Ahmed made a declaration stating, “The Islamic shariah is a red line, we will not cede one rule of it, and Islam is the only law-giver and not [merely] the foundation [of the law].” A recent [link= http://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/LOC-AQ-Libya.pdf ]report[/link] even makes close connections between Wissam and Al-Qaeda. What is important to understand in this cable is that Stevens is stating that the security of the area was being disrupted by Abu Salim Brigade run by Muhammad Al-Charabi. The cable explains how there has been an increase in violence, efforts to close radio and media outlets, enforce strict rules against men and women co-mingling at local universities and increasing criminality all linked to the Abu Salim Brigade. The cable also reports that an email sent to the Stevens asserts that Abu Salim Brigade members have undercut the police presence by accusing the police of being loyal to the Qaddafi’s former regime. You see, Wissam bin Ahmed and Muhammad Al-Gharabi saw that the Americans were supporting Mahmoud Jabril, who is considered a centrist and former member of the Qaddafi regime. There is not enough evidence to put the blame of the attack on Ahmed and Al-Gharabi but the escalation and positioning by their forces do show that they were considerably skeptical and even critical of Stevens. They even threated that security of the city could not be guaranteed since Jabril won the Prime Minister election. [b]During the attack [/b] On September 11th around 8:30pm, Chris Stevens wrapped up a meeting with a Turkish diplomat. All was quiet till around 9:40pm. At that time, militants began firing on the American Consulate in Benghazi. Jennifer Griffin of [link=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/cia-operators-were-denied-request-for-help-during-benghazi-attack-sources-say/#ixzz2ARadIwMA]Fox news[/link] reports the following: [i]Fox News has learned from sources who were on the ground in Benghazi that an urgent request from the CIA annex for military back-up during the attack on the U.S. consulate and subsequent attack several hours later on the annex itself was denied by the CIA chain of command -- who also told the CIA operators twice to "stand down" rather than help the ambassador's team when shots were heard at approximately 9:40 p.m. in Benghazi on Sept. 11. Former Navy SEAL Tyrone Woods was part of a small team who was at the CIA annex about a mile from the U.S. consulate where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his team came under attack. When he and others heard the shots fired, they informed their higher-ups at the annex to tell them what they were hearing and requested permission to go to the consulate and help out. They were told to "stand down," according to sources familiar with the exchange. Soon after, they were again told to "stand down." Woods and at least two others ignored those orders and made their way to the consulate which at that point was on fire. Shots were exchanged. The rescue team from the CIA annex evacuated those who remained at the consulate and Sean Smith, who had been killed in the initial attack. They could not find the ambassador and returned to the CIA annex at about midnight. At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood, though, denied the claims that requests for support were turned down. "We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi," she said. "Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate. In fact, it is important to remember how many lives were saved by courageous Americans who put their own safety at risk that night-and that some of those selfless Americans gave their lives in the effort to rescue their comrades." The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours -- enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators. A Special Operations team, or CIF which stands for Commanders in Extremis Force, operating in Central Europe had been moved to Sigonella, Italy, but they were never told to deploy. In fact, a Pentagon official says there were never any requests to deploy assets from outside the country. A second force that specializes in counterterrorism rescues was on hand at Sigonella, according to senior military and intelligence sources. According to those sources, they could have flown to Benghazi in less than two hours. They were the same distance to Benghazi as those that were sent from Tripoli. Spectre gunships are commonly used by the Special Operations community to provide close air support. According to sources on the ground during the attack, the special operator on the roof of the CIA annex had visual contact and a laser pointing at the Libyan mortar team that was targeting the CIA annex. The operators were calling in coordinates of where the Libyan forces were firing from. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters at the Pentagon on Thursday that there was not a clear enough picture of what was occurring on the ground in Benghazi to send help. "There's a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking going on here," Panetta said Thursday. "But the basic principle here ... is that you don't deploy forces into harm's way without knowing what's going on." U.S. officials argue that there was a period of several hours when the fighting stopped before the mortars were fired at the annex, leading officials to believe the attack was over. Fox News has learned that there were two military surveillance drones redirected to Benghazi shortly after the attack on the consulate began. They were already in the vicinity. The second surveillance craft was sent to relieve the first drone, perhaps due to fuel issues. Both were capable of sending real time visuals back to U.S. officials in Washington, D.C. Any U.S. official or agency with the proper clearance, including the White House Situation Room, State Department, CIA, Pentagon and others, could call up that video in real time on their computers. Tyrone Woods was later joined at the scene by fellow former Navy SEAL Glen Doherty, who was sent in from Tripoli as part of a Global Response Staff or GRS that provides security to CIA case officers and provides countersurveillance and surveillance protection. They were killed by a mortar shell at 4 a.m. Libyan time, nearly seven hours after the attack on the consulate began -- a window that represented more than enough time for the U.S. military to send back-up from nearby bases in Europe, according to sources familiar with Special Operations. Four mortars were fired at the annex. The first one struck outside the annex. Three more hit the annex. A motorcade of dozens of Libyan vehicles, some mounted with 50 caliber machine guns, belonging to the February 17th Brigades, a Libyan militia which is friendly to the U.S., finally showed up at the CIA annex at approximately 3 a.m. An American Quick Reaction Force sent from Tripoli had arrived at the Benghazi airport at 2 a.m. (four hours after the initial attack on the consulate) and was delayed for 45 minutes at the airport because they could not at first get transportation, allegedly due to confusion among Libyan militias who were supposed to escort them to the annex, according to Benghazi sources. The American special operators, Woods, Doherty and at least two others were part of the Global Response Staff, a CIA element, based at the CIA annex and were protecting CIA operators who were part of a mission to track and repurchase arms in Benghazi that had proliferated in the wake of Muammar Qaddafi's fall. Part of their mission was to find the more than 20,000 missing MANPADS, or shoulder-held missiles capable of bringing down a commercial aircraft. According to a source on the ground at the time of the attack, the team inside the CIA annex had captured three Libyan attackers and was forced to hand them over to the Libyans. U.S. officials do not know what happened to those three attackers and whether they were released by the Libyan forces. Fox News has also learned that Stevens was in Benghazi that day to be present at the opening of an English-language school being started by the Libyan farmer who helped save an American pilot who had been shot down by pro-Qaddafi forces during the initial war to overthrow the regime. That farmer saved the life of the American pilot and the ambassador wanted to be present to launch the Libyan rescuer's new school.[/i] This terrific reporting of Jennifer Griffin articulates the obvious discrepancies between the CIA and reality. There are only two conclusions to gain from this. Either there is a high level incompetence of behalf of the CIA or an obvious intent to mislead the American people. Both are a dereliction of duty and require immediate action from Washington. These two marines were killed seven hours after the attacks began. That is more than enough time for a response from our military. Yet we had to rely on Libyan militia members to come in a secure the area. What is also interesting to note is Woods and Doherty were sent to Libya to find weapons that disappeared from the former Qaddafi regime’s arsenal. [link=http://www.businessinsider.com/us-syria-heavy-weapons-jihadists-2012-10]The Business insider[/link] notes that Stevens was the official US liaison to Al-Qaeda linked Libyan opposition. He was working directly with [link=http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2011/09/2011920155237218813.html]Abdelhakim Belhadj[/link] who has noted that he along with his pregnant wife was captured by the CIA in 2004 and submitted to rendition. [link=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8919057/Leading-Libyan-Islamist-met-Free-Syrian-Army-opposition-group.html]The Telegraph [/link]reported in November 2011 that he was acting as head of the Tripoli Military Council (FSA) in Istanbul Turkey. On September 14th, [link=http://sana.sy/eng/22/2012/09/14/441552.htm]The Times[/link] of London reported that the largest shipment of weapons had arrived in Turkey to arm militants in Syria. The Libyan ship with a Benghazi native as captain was carrying 400 tons of weapons that included SAM-7 surface-to-air anti-aircraft missiles which would bode well against Syria’s military air attacks. Keep in mind that [link=http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/11/world/middleeast/russia-sends-warships-on-maneuvers-near-syria.html]Russian warships [/link]were reported to have been deployed to the Middle East in July by the New York Times. While it seems that Obama has been unable to act militarily against Syria, it sure does seem like there is a coordinated effort to remove Syrian leaders and open the door for the likes of Al-Qaeda and Russia is not approving. So as the evidence mounts up in this tragedy, it appears that a plausible explanation could be that Woods and Doherty could have been looking for the same weapons that Steven’s brokered to Turkey. After the Qaddafi regime fell, [link=http://en.rian.ru/world/20111019/167846284.html]Hillary Clinton [/link]announced $40 million to aid Libya in recovering weapon stockpiles. Of course this is purely speculative and could offer a number of scenarios but it does show that there is more to this cover-up by the White House then simply a failure of command. It could be more than a national political cover up but rather an international one. Russia could act harshly in the event of evidence showing that the US was aiding Syrian Rebels. After all Assad is an ally of the Russians. [b]After the attack[/b] [u]September 12th2012: [/u] Barack Obama along with Hillary Clinton entered the Rose Garden of the White House where Obama addressed the American people. He would state, [i] “Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.”[/i] And later he mentions the historical event of September 11, 2001. [i]“Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi. As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe. [b]No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. [/b] Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.[/i] It is obvious here that Obama address the historical event of September 11th, 2001 as an act of terror but prefaced that with a comment that clearly tries to put blame of these attacks on the infamous anti-Muslim trailer from YouTube. There is no doubt that from the beginning that this was an effort to steer a narrative. That narrative was as Obama claimed that Al-Qaeda was decimated when in fact this attack proved otherwise as Wassim bin Ahmed has fought under the flag of Al-Qaeda. If the gun running operation is a fact, then this dispute is simply a smoke screen to blur the truth while tying up the polarization of politics outside of determining what truly happened. After this speech, Obama would then fly to Las Vegas to do a campaign event. [u]September 16th 2012:[/u] US Ambassador to the United States Susan Rice goes on television to say the attack on our consulate showed no indication of a premeditated attack. Even though the militants carried out the attack with RPGs and mortar rounds, Rice denied that there was any evidence. Even if there was no video of the attack, evidence received in real-time from Woods and Doherty, and feedback from our Libyan Ambassador standing firm that the attack was in fact premeditated by militants, Rice could has simply cited the use of complex weapons never wielded by protestors in any of the other hot spots around the world. That alone is evidence of more than a protest. [u]September 18th 2012:[/u] White House Press Secretary Jay Carney says that the White House has no indication that the attack was premeditated but adds that the investigation is still underway. On that same night, Obama mentioned on David Letterman in regards to the video, [i]"Extremists and terrorists used this (as) an excuse to attack (a) variety of our embassies, including the one — the consulate in Libya."[/i] [u]September 20th 2012:[/u] Obama states that extremists used the video as a reason to attack our consulate. Clinton also appoints an independent accountability board to study the attack for possible explanations. [u]September 25th 2012:[/u] Obama addresses a United Nations General Assembly and says the attacks were attacks on America. [u]September 26th 2012:[/u] Carney says that Obama views the attack as a terrorist attack. [/u] [u]September 28th 2012: [/u] Spokesman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence Shawn Turner says [i] "As the intelligence community collects and analyzes more information related to the attack, our understanding of the event continues to evolve. In the immediate aftermath, there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo. We provided that initial assessment to executive branch officials and members of Congress. ... Throughout our investigation we continued to emphasize that information gathered was preliminary and evolving. As we learned more about the attack, we revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists."[/i] [u]October 4th 2012:[/u] FBI arrives in Benghazi and leave only 12 hours after being on the ground. [u]October 19th 2012:[/u] The Associated Press reveals that the CIA station Chief in Benghazi sent a report within 24 hours of the attack that there were militants behind the assault. This shows that the White House tried for 14 days after receiving the truth from the CIA to say that this was a spontaneous reaction to a video. [b]Conclusion[/b] Obviously there is more information that will be released as time goes on. It has been 7 weeks since this event occurred and there is still a cloud the covers this event and what to place. Part of the reason this cloud exists is due to the fact that administration officials are dragging their feet to the truth due to the nature of election politics. There is no doubt that there is an obvious failure at some level. Four Americans are dead. There was direct contact with Woods and Doherty during the attack where they asked multiple times for help and were told to “stand down” repeatedly. Reports show that Woods was painting a target with a laser which would not be done unless there was Spectre C-130 gunship waiting for permission to fire. The fact is… the call was not given. CIA spokesman Jennifer Youngblood said, “Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate”. This is an effort by the CIA to clarify that they do not make decisions to engage the enemy. They provide information to the decision makers. The decision makers have failed to save the lives of these 4 brave Americans. So there are only a few people in the White House that have the ability to make the call to engage a threat. The person most responsible for this call is the Commander in Chief otherwise known as the President of the United States. Mon, 29 Oct 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=C30D45D5-155D-D714-FB6C79D01AB941D5 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=181269E1-155D-D714-FB8A56D6E5E840D3 Watching this campaign and the two conventions has been pretty frustrating. There seems to be a lack of detail from both political tickets on the plans that each candidate will offer if they get into office. Regardless of the promises that are being levied by both candidates, I can’t help but look at the history of this current President and realize that even if I was a Liberal Democrat, I would be highly disappointed. Romney may not be the ideal candidate but has not yet failed his constituency. Obama has failed his base as well as the American people. That is why he must be defeated. So during this election, Mitt Romney should site the failed promises and the obvious evidence of his failed ideology as President of the United States. [b]General Motors Bailout [/b] The first big fallacy that we must tackle is the nationalizing of General Motors and its utter failure forced on the American people. During the heart of the financial meltdown in 2008, George W Bush along with the United States Congress passed the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), a $700 Billion bailout for financial institutions; in order prevent a further decay of the financial markets. The highly unpopular bill was littered with controversy considering that [link=http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/42944/20100812/tarp-bailout-banks.htm]43 foreign banks [/link] benefited from the US tax payer bailout. Instead of focusing on bailing out specific institutions, the TARP funds were simply used to flood the market in order to stabilize it. Along with this and the poor tracking of these funds by the Treasury, there is no true and accurate recording of who received these funds. Once again our government failed us. As these monies flooded the market, General Motors and Chrysler began to show that bankruptcy was inevitable. With the American economy teetering on collapse, the Bush Administration decided to bailout both General Motors and Chrysler with TARP funds. First of all, this was highly controversial because the TARP funds were not intended to be used for auto companies. Secondly, the bailouts in general were highly unpopular at the time and compounded the dissatisfaction. Bush along with the his advisors planned to provide a bridge loan along with some re-organization of GM and Chrysler to help them through this tough economic situation. When Obama took office, the plans of how to help GM changed. Instead of continuing the plans to providing the bridge loan and re-organizing GM in-line with Bankruptcy procedures, Obama along with his administration violated the normal bankruptcy processes and nationalized General Motors. During this unprecedented take-over, the Obama administration strong-armed GM bondholders while sweetening the deal for [link=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/25/AR2009052502135.html]United Auto Workers (UAW) [/link]. The UAW received a 39% equity stake in GM for its $10 Billion in claims while the bondholders only received 10% for their $27 Billion. Instead of an independent bankruptcy council overseeing the proportioning and restructuring, the federal government stood in its place with obvious political motivations within its plan. There is no doubt that union contracts would have been renegotiated since salaries and benefits are considered one of the biggest contributors to GM’s failures with being competitive as seen under the US Steel bankruptcy. So now begins the political campaign games… Even though the normal Chapter 11 bankruptcy process results would have re-organized GM, the company would have continued to operate much like Delta, Kmart, Interstate Batteries, Winn Dixie, US Steel, US Airways along with many others. Instead the Obama campaign chose to distort the facts with political spin while saying that Obama has saved 100% of the GM workforce – 1.5 million jobs - by stepping in politically re-organizing GM rather then going through conventional bankruptcy procedures. Despite this unprecedented interjection by Obama and the federal government, GM still had to go through Chapter 11 proceedings. Even after Chapter 11 proceedings the company’s restructuring consisted of discontinuing the Pontiac, Saturn, Saab, and Hummer brands, the closure of 900 dealerships, 13 US plants, and the reduction of 68,400 employees. Since this time, GM has only added [link=http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2012/09/06/fibbing-with-gm-job-creation-statistics-bill-clinton-edition/]4,500 US workers [/link]. As a result, the Treasury is reporting that it is likely that the US will lose $25,000,000,000 dollars on the auto bailout. At the average American income of approximately $40,000 per year, that is 625,000 jobs for a year lost with this bailout. It is a far cry from the 236,000k of automotive industry jobs, not exclusively GM jobs, indirectly created by the bailout. It is obvious that they Bush [b]passed[/b] and Obama [b]executed[/b] bailout was a complete failure. [b]Recession Recovery [/b] Before Obama took office, he inherited the leadership one of the greatest countries in the history of the world. At the time his challenges were to guide the country to a more fiscally responsible path and help stop the bleeding employment rates. He campaigned on being more transparent about the process. He said he would be the champion for governmental change. Instead he has done the opposite. [i]Gasoline [/i] - from $1.79 - $3.59 (100% increase) [i] Food Stamp recipients [/i] - 31million to 47 million (35% increase) [i] Long Term unemployment [/i] - 2.6 million to 6.4 million (146% increase) [i] Poverty rate [/i] - 39.8 million to 43.6 million (9.5% increase) [i] Unemployment [/i] - 11.6 million to 14.4 million (25% increase) [i] Black Unemployment [/i] - 12.6% to 15.8% (25% increase) [i] National Debt [/i] - 10.6 trillion to 16 Trillion (50% increase) / (75% of GDP to 118% of GDP - up 43%) [i] Federal Receipts [/i] – $2.1 Trillion to $2.4 Trillion (up 12%) [i]GDP [/i] – 1.3% to 1.8% (average 1.46%) The Obama campaign has stated that Obama has created 4.5 million jobs which is an absolute falsehood. This calculation doesn’t begin until March 2010. This falls in-line with blaming Bush for the economic collapse which is completely false. Bush can be blamed for adding $5 trillion to our national debt in 8 years but this has hardly the cause for the collapse. If this was the case then how does Obama’s adding of $6 trillion in 4 years affect the economy? The economic collapse was a reaction to bad government policy as discussed on [link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn40ZfE8Fc4 ] Arena Radio [/link] as well as detailed on [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/thevault.cfm?Entry=E218CB96-123F-7491-A4E3482546006792]Lanterns of Liberty [/link]. If we are to buy into the left wing spin of Obama’s results, let’s compare his record to the last President to deal with an arguably worse recession. Reagan started his Presidency also inheriting the greatest nation known to man. He also dealt with challenges that required a leader to help guide and correct. He became a leader with 13% inflation compared to less than 4% inflation under Obama. He became a leader with unemployment as high as 9.7%. So what did Reagan do? He cut the top marginal income tax rate from 70% to 28%. He simplified the tax code, eliminated $30 billion in tax loopholes, and raised the effective corporate tax rate. He also lowered the Capital Gains rate from 28% to 20%. So what were the results? [i]Gasoline [/i] - from $1.40 - $1.00 (40% decrease) [i] Food Stamp recipients [/i] - 22.4 million to 21.62 million (4% decrease) [i] Long Term unemployment [/i] - 9.7% to 5.5% [i] National Debt [/i] - $1,3 trillion to $2.6 trillion (%130 increase)/ (35% of GDP to 51% of GDP - up 16%) [i] Job creation 1981-1985 [/i] - 91,031 to 98,023 (6.9 million jobs) [i] Job creation 1985-1989 [/i] - 96,353 to 108,326 (11.9 million jobs) [i] Federal Receipts [/i] - from $618 billion to $991 billion (up 53%) [i]GDP[/i] - from -0.3% to 4.2% (bureau of economic analysis) (3% average growth) To get to the 4.5 million jobs that the Obama campaign is pitching, we must ignore the 1st 14 months of Obama’s presidency and start calculating in March 2010 which is the bottom of the recession’s trend. In actuality from March 2010 to July 2012, the number is truly 4.4 million jobs where private sector jobs rose from 106.9 million to 111.3 million (4.4 million) in 28 months - 4%. With nearly that same time frame during Reagan’s presidency, from December 1982 to March 1985 private sector jobs rose from 72.8 million to 80.4 million (7.7 million) in 27 months - 11%. So even if conservatives curtsy to the Obama campaign, Obama’s record doesn’t even come close to Ronald Reagan’s record. Keep in mind that Reagan had to work with the Democrats to get this policy passed. Obama had 2 years with a completely Democrat led government. [b]Failed Healthcare promises [/b] We can not mention Obama’s failures without mentioning his signature piece of signed legislation. The [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/thevault.cfm?Entry=B4695E3E-155D-D7CA-587873ACE68B37D9]Affordable Care Act [/link]better known as Obamacare, which was a 1000 plus page bill that narrowly passed through congress, was pitched by Obama to be deficit neutral. It is now estimated by the CBO to cost the American taxpayer $109 billion by 2022. After the Supreme Court ruled that the ACA mandate was not a penalty but a tax, it is now on record to be the biggest tax increase on the so called “middle class” in 50 years. Supreme Court precedence now shows that congress has the ability to force Americans to purchase a service from a private entity which is entirely against the intentions of our founders. [b]Failed energy policy [/b] During the 2008 campaign, Obama promised that his cap and trade policy would necessarily bankrupt the coal industry. After the failed attempts to pass “Cap and Trade” through congress, Obama’s EPA pushed Cap and Trade regulations on the coal industry by putting strict restrictions on carbon emissions. In the process he not only has crippled the coal industry but electricity prices as well as other fuel prices are starting to rise. Coal is the most cost efficient fuel for power plants. By drastically reducing the use of coal, he his regulation has caused the increase in prices of heating oil and propane costs. The result is the increase in electricity costs. The only hope that the country has for stable electricity prices is the recent boom in natural gas extraction through Hydraulic Fracturing. Well that hope is being diminished by new Obama promises. [link=http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/234577-white-house-gas-fracking-rule-on-track-]The Hill [/link] reports that a senior White House official has mentioned increase regulation on oil and gas fracturing. The results of these policies are as follows: [list] [*] 57 coal plants closed due to EPA regulation this year [*] 433 coal generators not planning to add scrubbers (approx. 251k jobs lost) [*] Electricity has gone from 11.51 cents per kilowatt hr in 2009 to 11.79 cents per kilowatt hr in 2012 [*] Heating Oil has risen from $2.42 / gal to $3.94 / gal (62% increase / 20% per year) [*] Residential propane has risen from $2.31 / gal to $ 2.86 / gal (24% increase / 8% per year) [/list] Instead Obama has embraced so called “sustainable green energy” which is highly unsustainable to our economy. Here are some of the recent failures including some that have received taxpayer subsidies. Amonix Solar:– manufacturing plant in North Las Vegas, subsidized by more than $20 million in federal tax credits and grants given by Obama Administration, has closed its 214,000 square foot facility a year after it opened. Solar Trust of America: - Filed Bankruptcy in Oakland, CA, April 3, 2012 – On April 2, 2012 Bright Source: - Bright Source warned Obama’s Energy Department officials in March 2011 that delays in approving a $1.6 billion U.S. loan guarantee would embarrass the White House and force the solar-energy company to close. Lost Billions of dollars but Getting More Money To Keep Trying. Can you say, “This isnt working?” Solyndra: - Obama gave Solyndra $500,000,000 in taxpayer money and Solyndra shut its doors and laid off 1100 workers in August 2011 After Billions in Losses due to failure to make a solar product that works! LSP Energy: - LSPEnergy LP filed bankruptcy protection and a sale of its assets in Feb 2012 Energy Conversion Devices: – On February 14, 2012 Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. and its subsidiaries filed for bankruptcy Abound Solar: - Abound Solar received a $400 million loan guarantee from Barack Obama announced in June, 2012 that it would file for bankruptcy SunPower: – SunPower stopped producing solar cells last year at near bankruptcy restructured only with help of, get this, oil giant TOTAL who owns 60% stake. Irony! Still Beacon Power: – Beacon Power Corp filed for bankruptcy Oct 2011 just a year after Obama approved $43 million loan Government loan guarantee Ecotality: - ECOtality, a San Francisco green-tech company that never earned any money on the verge of bankruptcy after receiving roughly $115 million in two loan guarantees from Obama A123 Solar: -A123 received $279 million from taxpayers thanks to President Obama’sDepartment of Energy loan guarantees and after Solyndra bankruptcy is getting another $500M from Obama and it has lost $400M UniSolar: - Uni-Solar filed for Ch 11 bankruptcy in June 20 this year laid off hundreds got more Obama money still failing but still in business Azure Dynamics: - Azure Dynamics files for bankruptcy in June ter millions in Obama “Stimulus” Evergreen Solar: - Evergreen Solar received $527 Million in Taxpayer money from Obama filed bankruptcy Ener1: received more than $100 million in government funding from the Obama administration filed for bankruptcy January 2012 * [link=http://www.dividedstates.com/list-of-failed-obama-green-energy-solar-companies/]Source[/link] [b]Failed Campaign Promises [/b] [list] [*] Increase the capital gains and dividends taxes for higher-income taxpayers [*] Expand the child and dependent care credit [*] Create a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners [*] Provide option for a pre-filled-out tax form [*] Create a mortgage interest tax credit for non-itemizers [*] Require automatic enrollment in 401(k) plans [*] Require automatic enrollment in IRA plans [*] Create a retirement savings tax credit for low incomes [*] End income tax for seniors making less than $50,000 [*] End no-bid contracts above $25,000 [*] Create a $60 billion bank to fund roads and bridges [*] Repeal the Bush tax cuts for higher incomes [*] Phase out exemptions and deductions for higher earners [*] Sign the Employee Free Choice Act, making it easier for workers to unionize [*] Lift the payroll tax cap on earnings above $250,000 [*] Forbid companies in bankruptcy from giving executives bonuses [*] Allow workers to claim more in unpaid wages and benefits in bankruptcy court [*] Allow imported prescription drugs [*] Prevent drug companies from blocking generic drugs [*] Allow Medicare to negotiate for cheaper drug prices [*] Appoint federal-level coordinator to oversee all federal autism efforts [*] Double federal funding for cancer research [*] Direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct a comprehensive study of federal cancer initiatives [*] Provide the CDC $50 million in new funding to determine the most effective approaches for cancer patient care [*] Fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) [*] Create a National Commission on People with Disabilities, Employment, and Social Security [*] Change federal rules so small businesses owned by people with disabilities can get preferential treatment for federal contracts. [*] Reduce the threshhold for the Family and Medical Leave Act from companies with 50 employees to companies with 25 employees [*] Provide a $1.5 billion fund to help states launch programs for paid family and medical leave [*] Require employers to provide seven paid sick days per year [*] Expand the Family Medical Leave Act to include leave for domestic violence or sexual assault [*] Form international group to help Iraq refugees [*] Work with Russia to move nuclear weapons off hair-trigger alert [*] Close the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center [*] Develop an alternative to President Bush's Military Commissions Act on handling detainees [*] Secure ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) [*] Seek to negotiate a political agreement on Cyprus [*] Reinstate special envoy for the Americas [*] Double the Peace Corps [*] Seek independent watchdog agency to investigate congressional ethics violations [*] Create a public "Contracts and Influence" database [*] Expose Special Interest Tax Breaks to Public Scrutiny [*] Allow five days of public comment before signing bills [*] Tougher rules against revolving door for lobbyists and former officials [*] Double funding for afterschool programs [*] Expand the Employment Non-Discrimination Act to include sexual orientation and gender identity [*] Urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws [*] Sign the Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act into law [*] Allow bankruptcy judges to modify terms of a home mortgage [*] Increase the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour [*] Restore Superfund program so that polluters pay for clean-ups [*] Support tax deduction for artists [*] Re-establish the National Aeronautics and Space Council [*] Support human mission to moon by 2020 [*] Pay for the national service plan without increasing the deficit [*] Reduce the number of middle managers in the federal workforce [*] Strengthen the Age Discrimination in Employment Act [*] Limit term of director of national intelligence [*] Give annual "State of the World" address [*] Reduce earmarks to 1994 levels [*] Work to ban the permanent replacement of striking workers [*] Establish a low carbon fuel standard [*] Enact windfall profits tax for oil companies [*] Create cap and trade system with interim goals to reduce global warming [*] Use revenue from cap and trade to support clean energy and environmental restoration [*] Require plug-in fleet at the White House [*] Require new federal fleet purchases to be half plug-in hybrids or electric vehicles [*] Require more flex-fuel cars for the federal government [*] Mandate flexible fuel vehicles by 2012 [*] Double federal program to help "reverse" commuters who go from city to suburbs [*] Require energy conservation in use of transportation dollars [*] Provide an annual report on "state of our energy future" [*] Devote federal resources to promote cellulosic ethanol [*] Sign the Freedom of Choice Act [*] Allow penalty-free hardship withdrawals from retirement accounts in 2008 and 2009 [*] Give the White House's Privacy and Civil Liberties Board subpoena power [*] Recognize the Armenian genocide [*] No family making less than $250,000 will see "any form of tax increase." [*] Negotiate health care reform in public sessions televised on C-SPAN [*] Create a public option health plan for a new National Health Insurance Exchange. [*] Cut the cost of a typical family's health insurance premium by up to $2,500 a year [*] Bring Democrats and Republicans together to pass an agenda [*] Introduce a comprehensive immigration bill in the first year [/list] * [link=http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-broken/]Resource[/link] Now beware of the Liberals that will try and defend Obama’s record and the give reasons for Obama’s failed promises. The biggest tactic is to try to ignore the 111th Congress. In 2009 and 2010, the Democrats had majority Senate, a majority in the House, as well as the White House. Republican obstructionism seems to be new mantra besides the so called Republican war on women. Obstructionism? Really?? Let’s look at the numbers. In Bush’s last 2 years he signed 460 bills from congress with Democratic majorities. In Obama’s first 2 years he signed 363 bills from congress with a Democratic majority. During this period of time, if he pushed through the previously mentioned 83 failed promised, most likely he would have had most of them pass without issue. Instead he fought with congress to push his signature monument to his presidency – Obamacare. It is obvious that Obama has been a complete failure unless of course you are in favor of crippling the American way of life. Despite the Liberal main-stream media spin, we should be able to simply show Obama’s failed record. When the left tries talk about all the promises that Obama is going to bring to his second term, show them the 83 promises that he left on the table in 2008 and if they are going to believe his current promises. If you are unhappy with what Obama has done in his first term, you can be sure to not like his second when he is a “lame duck”. When you get in a discussion about Obama’s record, you have a list of weapons to use within this post to simply articulate Obama’s record. Tue, 11 Sep 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=181269E1-155D-D714-FB8A56D6E5E840D3 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=E8C0CAD3-155D-D714-FB64BE8C9F347DB8 With the elections less then 3 months away, the American people are going to be listening anxiously for the plans that Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama have in mind to revive our economy. It has been made clear by both of these candidates that there is a clear and defined difference between them. It appears that the campaigns are going to be very ideological in content. So to understand the differences, we should understand the ideologies, where they were derived, and what does their ideal government look like. When you uncover the founders of each of their ideologies that these candidates seem to subscribe to, it is important to realize that theorists or philosophers speak theoretically. To simply label a candidate a name like Conservative or Marxist would be irresponsible without offering the evidence to back up the claim. Of course these labels do not have a set of standards to define a candidate but the ideology under the label does have principles. So I can not pin down either of these candidate within the realm of an ideology without assumptions based on their passed policy as well as what they have said. Neither of these candidates is a purist in their actions for they do have contradictory actions, statements, and polices to those pure ideas of defined ideology. So let’s understand the two ideologies on either end of the political spectrum. [b]Classic Liberalism [/b] – Different then the modern day Liberal of the political left, Classic Liberals believe in a very small centralized government. Otherwise known as Conservatives or Libertarians, Classical Liberals supports the ownership of property, individualism, and personal responsibility. [i]Aristotle [/i] is considered one of the founders of Western Philosophy. His writings encompassing morality, logic, science, metaphysics, aesthetics, and politics defined much of how we think and relate in American society. Aristotle wrote about the laws of nature and defined the differences between them and laws, customs, and conventions. This distinction is an important aspect to understand when comparing Classic Liberalism and Statism. Statism and more specifically Socialists take customs and conventions into consideration when making laws as a matter of Social Justice and negate natural laws. [i]John Locke [/i] is considered to be one of greatest influences of the American founders. Much of our founding documents either model Locke’s beliefs of the ideal civil society, of private property rights, and of individual sovereignty. Locke believed that in the state of nature or the absence of government man exists in a perfect state of freedom. Although absolute freedom is desired, man’s imperfections require civil government and laws to protect the freedoms of others. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness was penned by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence as a direct relation to Locke’s discussion of property which is defined as a persons “life, liberty, and estate” within his hypothesis “Two Treatises of Government”. [i]Adam Smith [/i] is considered to be a direct influence of the founders, specifically James Madison. Within Federalist # 10, Madison explains the role of the free people shaping the society by the independent activity of each individual. This is synonymous with the “Invisible Hand” that Adam Smith described in “The Wealth of Nations”. Adam Smith’s economic theories are directly in-line with the freedom and liberty of the people as prosperity is determined by the virtue of the supplier’s product and the desire of the consumers’ self interest to experience that virtue. [b]Statism [/b] – Is the ideology aligned with the state or a government controlling the economy and/or social society. There are several very different forms of modern Statism which includes Socialism as well as the more extremes of Socialism like Fascism, Communism. Monarchial systems could be considered a form of Statism but are rare in this day and age. Overall the idea of Statism is that the collective population pools resources to support the collective and that pool of resources is controlled by the state. [i]Plato [/i] was considered one of the founders of Western thought but was also considered to be the first statist. Plato’s republic is considered to be the first of its kind laying out a society ruled by Philosopher Kings (the intellectual elite). Within this classic masterpiece, Plato outlines a perfect society. Interestingly enough, some of Plato’s students became tyrants as they tried to fulfill the role of Philosopher Kings. Clearchus of Heraclea, Hermias of Atarneus, and Callipus were all students of Plato’s that became tyrants. [i]Sir Thomas More [/i] wrote “Utopia” which detailed a perfect society ruled by 200 Syphogranti and 1 prince. The society was placed on an island with a defined number of households within a defined number of cities. Private property was considered illegal. All people both men and women must participate in defined trades to produce for the collective. Within this society food is free, healthcare is free, euthanasia is permitted to control population, priests are allowed to marry, divorce is permitted, premarital sex is punishable by a lifetime of celibacy, and adulterers are enslaved. Travel is permitted but only with a passport. If a citizen is caught traveling without a passport, slavery is the punishment for a second offence. Obviously this is similar to many police states around the world. [i]Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels [/i] are the most recent of the utopian statists. Marx and Engels outline in their famous manuscript the Communist Manifesto about the desire to create a “Workers Paradise” free of class division. It explained an approach to class struggle between the Bourgeoisie (merchant class capitalists) and the Proletariat (workers). The Communist Manifesto outlined the ways to redistribute wealth properly to create equality and social justice. Within the planks of the manuscript were items such as a progressive income tax, abolition of property in land, centralization of production and communication within the control of the state, free education, and others. [b][i]ideological summary [/i][/b] It is important to mention that both ideological systems exist within a “democratic” frame work. Arguably the Statist system is not true to its democratic intentions because Statist systems often employ tyrannical methods of influencing the democratic process. Saddam Hussein always won his election with 99+% percent of the vote. I can assure you that 99% of the Iraqi population did not willfully agree with him on everything. So the real question is there a possible happy medium between the Statist and Classical Liberal systems. Well sure there is. It depends on how much liberty and freedom you wish to sacrifice. Government by its nature is force. The purist form of government is tyranny. There is no doubt that the smaller the government, the more freedom the citizenry has. In the most extreme cases above you can see that with free healthcare, free food, and equality comes authoritarian control of the citizenry. Now that we have discussed the ideologies, we can now look at the candidates. [b]Barack Obama – [i]Statist[/i][/b] is largely in favor of the expansion of the federal government. [list] [*]Economic control by the state – Obama’s signature legislation being the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), puts massive regulatory power of one sixth of the United State economy. Although this doesn’t set up a single payer or universal healthcare, [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE]Obama’s ideal system would be [/link]. [*]Class struggle – Obama is also in favor or raising taxes on Americans making over $250,000 per year. He has referred to those making over $250k per year as the rich or millionaires and billionaires. This is class warfare and reminiscent of Marx and Engels’s class struggle. He also continually claims that big corporations take advantage of the middle class and the poor. Obama told “Joe the Plummer” in the 2008 Presidential campaign that he was in favor or wealth re-distribution which is a key to eliminating class struggle in the system designed by Marx and Engels as well as More. [*]Anti-Capitalism – Despite Bain Capital’s 80% success record, Obama attacks Romney’s former company for some of its failures. Obama expects that all venture capital companies should put people over profit within business. This is obviously a distortion of the purpose of a business for employment, healthcare, and pay are bi-products of a successful business, not the purpose of a business. Obama’s belief is that of a collectivist concerned with Social Justice not a businessman interested in building businesses. [*]Agitation – Obama’s experience is that of a Community Organizer and agitator. It is the belief that conflict creates change that is used by the agitator. Obama characteristically speaks to the American people as if they are separated in classes such as rich, poor, women, men, Latinos, African Americans, gays, etc. Socrates even explained within Plato’s “Republic” that class division within socioeconomic classes creates tension and conflict. This tension and conflict creates the desire by people within those classes to seek protection from the government. The result is eventual tyranny or eventual absolute control of the citizenry - Statism. [/list] [b]Mitt Romney – [i]Classic Liberal[/i][/b] is largely in favor of smaller government. Although he has a history instituting some expansive government policy like Massachusetts Healthcare reform which is said to be similar on a state level to Obama’s Affordable care Act, Romney is largely in favor of free enterprise and reducing the size of government. [list] [*]Reduce Government Spending – Romney’s plan is to reform Medicaid, wage alignments, implement federal workforce reductions, and undertaking a major restructuring of government programs and services. He is also in favor of capping federal spending at 20% of GDP [*]Reduce Taxes – Romney isn’t ideal in the Classical Liberal sense with taxes due to his lack of addressing the Progressive Income Tax but does support the fundamental redesign of the existing tax code, the elimination of the death tax, and the lowering of corporate tax rate to 25%. [*]Healthcare – Romney states that he will work with congress to repeal the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). His approach to healthcare reform is to not do it federally. It is more of a federalist approach. He states that he will work to with the states that give them the power to craft healthcare reform specific for the citizens of each state. He also proposed block grants for Medicaid, limiting requirements for private insurance and Medicaid coverage, ensure flexibility for the chronically ill with high risk pools, as well as tort reform. His greatest accent to Classical Liberalism is the promotion of free markets and competition. He plans to cap non-economic damages in malpractice suits, incentivizing purchasing pools for individuals and small business, promoting HAS accounts, and opening up commerce for insurance companies across state lines. [*]Regulation – Romney proposes to reduce all Obama-era regulations that unduly burden the economy, amend Sarbanes-Oxley that puts big business burdens on mid size companies which makes it harder for them to compete with big companies. He will also require congressional approval for “major” regulation which will put the power of regulation back in the hands of the people. [/list] There is definitely a clear contrast between Obama and Romney. There is much to be desired of Romney within the realm of Classical Liberalism but he is vastly different then the “Utopian Statist” that is Obama. To understand the political climate that we are experiencing we have to look at the desires of the Statist and that of the Classical Liberal. The Classical Liberal is a huge minority within the political electorate. This is arguably the reason why favorability rating of congress is in the teens. After all over [link= http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/conservatives-remain-largest-ideological-group.aspx ]40%[/link] of the country is conservative while only 21% is Progressive or Modern Left Wing Liberals. Much of the problems we are facing in this country are due to those that believe they can better control your life then you can. Policies that aim to protect you from failure as an individual are working to cause failure to our country as a whole. There is no perfect society. There is no utopia here on Earth and the prospects of creating a perfect society are zero. A society is made up of people so in order to create a perfect society, one must create perfect people. To create perfect people, failure needs to be eliminated. In order to eliminate failure people need to be guided through every step they take in life. Not only is it impossible and completely impractical, those guiding every step would have to be perfect. Within those impossibilities is the dilemma that all of us are innately different so each of us requires special attention to our differences by this perfect overseer of our lives to address every step that is different. You see there are certain self evident truths in life that we all must realize. We were all created with different faculties. Some of us are more athletic then other simply due to genetics. Some of us are smarter then others. Some of us are more attractive then others. These are all the faculties that make us different. It is impossible to get equal outcomes from people that are so different. To assume so would be to guarantee that I could play basketball with success in the NBA or win the Masters Golf tournament. How interesting would this world be if all humans could realize equal outcomes? Would everyone win a trophy? What would we strive for? The Utopian Statist desires equal outcomes or equal results for all. Instead of promoting success learn from failure, utopians must demonize success and subsidize failure. This is the only way to try and create the perfect equality. Although this equality is absolutely impossible to achieve, they will sacrifice innovation and excellence for mediocrity of all citizens in the name of fairness. There is no denying this. Welfare is a perfect example of this. Despite the good intentions of those that support welfare, the recipient can not receive the subsidy unless they are less successful. Government welfare destroys virtue and dignity because it is a reward for failure. Those on the left that explain that it is way of helping those in need will remove any provision that encourages the recipient to get off of welfare. The obvious choice here is between a false utopia with a segregated society or a system that provides more freedom for all Americans. Do we want a country where people can thrive and have the ability to freely move between the less prosperous layers of society to the most prosperous or do we want to force people to be equal despite their faculties to be innovative and succeed? Do we want to reward virtue and brilliance or subsidize and reward failure? The decision is clear. Tue, 21 Aug 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=E8C0CAD3-155D-D714-FB64BE8C9F347DB8 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=553C02F6-155D-D714-FB10290B3AE14A9F Okay Tea Party, Patriots, and freedom lovers, now is the time to determine if our founders vision and hard work to build a nation upon individual liberty was meant to be. It is now time to determine whether the blood spilled by our soldiers on the fields of Fascism and Communism were in vain. We are faced with a choice. It is a "time for choosing" to quote a great patriot. The greatest threat of freedom, as Reagan articulated and fought against, is right here before our eyes. The little intellectual elite across the river Potomac are trying to determine the ways to which Americans should live their lives. We need to choose and help others choose liberty over tyranny. This passed weekend, Mitt Romney selected Paul Ryan as his running mate for the 2012 Presidential election. There already seems to be hesitation from our side on whether or not to feel good about the selection. I would say, "Feel good compared to what?" Compared to Chris Christie? Or Compared to Tim Pawlenty? Compared to Newt Gingrich? Compared to what? Who is the perfect candidate? I hope no one answered that question with a name because there is no perfect candidate. We might have people in mind that could have better represented our individual beliefs but overall Ryan is a great pick. This is no time to be Conservative or Libertarian purists. We have a hand dealt to us with the current candidates and we must support candidates that can defeat the force in DC that we have witnessed as a threat to our freedom. We must be prepared to debate our Constitutional Conservative ideology and why it works as well as the negative aspects of our candidates. Our conservative or classical liberal principles represent that government is the problem. Why would we think that government is the solution? Our candidates are running for government positions aren’t they? When our Liberal counterparts try to challenge us with Mitt Romney’s or Paul Ryan’s previous big government policies, we must simply explain that we believe in smaller government. There is no denying that our candidates represent smaller government then what we have in DC now. There are going to be disappointments. They are going to be policies that Romney and Ryan support that we will not like. We must be honest to ourselves and our political opponents that we do not agree with policy that goes against our principles. We do not need to have blind faith to our representatives. We must be vigilant in protecting our liberties even to those that represent us the most. What we must do is hold them accountable for bad decisions as well as praise them when they make the right decisions. We must be heard. The American people run this government. We are the people! Undoubtedly we are at a pivotal point in our country’s history. There are no Angels here on Earth that are going to rescue us. Remember we must have firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence as well as pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor. This is our battle cry and purpose! The declaration of our principles set forth what we must do and not it is time to do it. It is now that we must fight for liberty. It is a fight because we all have different views and ideas as well as a love for our country. We have faith in our founding. We have faith in our Constitution. We have a faith in its divine nature. Our weapons in this fight are not guns but ideas. We have to enter onto the battlefield of ideas. To be good warriors for liberty we must be able to articulate what it is that makes our country great. Conservatives or Classical Liberals are not rhetorical beings like our counterparts. We are principled and speak with substance. We must be able to do more then repeat our positions on policy but articulate why those polices work. That is crucial for our success and relevance. We need to take what we have learned these passed four years and put them to work in teaching others and defeating our political opponents. With our principles and positions comes pragmatism. We probably will not rid ourselves of the IRS this election cycle. We may not even get true tax reform. However we must continue to articulate our founding principles with integrity and confidence while influencing our representatives. They need to take our message to DC. The more we articulate effectively, the better chance we have to fulfill the ideas of a free republic that our founders had planned. It is our republic if we can keep it. Paul Ryan is a good candidate because he can articulate conservatism. He understands the importance of fiscal responsibility. He also understands Progressivism and has fought against it. He can debate healthcare, explain why it will fail, and put forth ideas to put us on the right path. That is a huge plus for Romney considering his back ground. He accepts some of his passed votes as less then acceptable which shows that he has character. We do not need another demagogue. I do not believe Paul Ryan sees himself as an elite individual. Before you judge Paul Ryan, understand the man that he is, his character, as well as the positions he articulates. Understand the purpose he must serve. It is the America people that must hold him accountable. Until then we have a choice - Obama or Romney. Seems like an easy choice to me. Romney will slow the bleeding. Obama will open the wound. Enter on the Battlefield of Ideas prepared and ready to fight for liberty. Mon, 13 Aug 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=553C02F6-155D-D714-FB10290B3AE14A9F http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=AA2B882A-155D-D714-FB190DA11BEB60D1 Conservatives, There is no doubt that we need to articulate to Americans that this President is completely out of control. There are a lot of labels for this President. With those labels we must expose him as the failure he is and what his true intentions are, In order to articulate this we must have facts and be able to deliver them. The facts are glaring that he has failed. He knows however that the more that he lies he can frame the debate. Facts do not matter to this President or his advisors. He along with his advisors and members of the mainstream media are spitting out this propaganda because he knows that there are useful idiots that will carry the water of him Why...? because they are Liberals. Liberals believe in modern liberalism before they believe in the truth. That’s why I say that Liberals are Liberals first. It is a faith - a religion - where their heaven or utopia is here on Earth. They believe falsly that under their direction this utopia can be built. Their desires represent the desires of other utopians like Plato, Thomas Hobbes, Thomas Moore, and Marx who all could never piece together the reality of their failed ideas. Despite the failure and pain withness from those that have attempted to build this utopia here on earth, Liberals think they can build this utopia without the misery and destruction witnessed throughout history. So let’s look at how the left tries to spin its failures into false success - the US Auto Bailout. When GM and Chrysler were teetering of bankruptcy, Progressive politicians ran to their aid. Why? The UAW is one of the biggest contributors to the Democratic Party. The UAW donates millions of dollars to Democrat congressmen and Presidential candidates, millions of dollars to Democratic PACs, and millions to other pro-union causes. Here was a crisis that the Democratic Party could capitalize on. There are many complexities to this bailout so we will refer to General Motors first. So why did GM not simply go bankrupt? Under bankruptcy laws, GM would have been forced by a special bankruptcy arbiter to restrict the pensions and contracts with the UAW, restructure their debt, and set up provisions to allow GM to become solvent. That is what bankruptcy is for. Just because a company goes bankrupt doesn’t mean that the company goes away. However bankruptcy would have been a failure for the UAW and the coffers of the Democratic Party. It would however save GM. For the most part, GM would have continued doing business with little change. The most important aspect of this political power grab is to understand not only the facts but the results as well. The American taxpayers invested over $100 billion to GM. To understand the results of that investment we must look at the value of GM. We must look at their stock value or market cap. GM is worth approximately $32 billion. So in essence the investment is a complete failure. What is very interesting is that $23 billion of the total bailout for both Chrysler and GM went to the UAW. With 400,000 active UAW members, this amounts to [link=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303836404577477003432140244.html]$23,000[/link] to each member of the UAW. It was a massive political payoff. Even after this payoff, GM still went through Chapter 11 bankruptcy. With the bailout for Chrysler, the UAW received $4.6 billion in promissory notes at 9% interest while lenders received only 29 cents on the dollar. So instead of paying the people that took all of the risk by purchasing Chrysler bonds, the ownership was filtered to a political crony. The UAW was awarded ownership over 50% of Chrysler. So now we hear from Obama that he has saved GM from the brink of disaster and in only a couple years GM is number one again. Did he save GM or did the American people subsidize them? How many businesses would thrive with a $50 billion bailout? If we are to look at the payoff of our loan to GM through TARP, we will see the massive loss to the tax payer. Only $6.7 billion of the $50 billion owed was paid. This is a huge loss to us the tax payer. How did we benefit from this? If we are to look at the jobs, Obama claims that there were a million jobs saved. This is disingenuous. At the time of the bankruptcy filing in 2009, GM had 91,000 employees. After re-organization under bankruptcy, there were only [link=http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/300075/obama-and-gm-cook-books-john-lott-jr]68,500[/link] employees. That equates to a loss of over $22,000 jobs. So now that we can see the truth and evidence of Obama’s policy, we must understand what Obama wants to do. Recently in a campaign speech, under thunderous applause after he laid out his deception of GM’s success, [link=http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/08/obama-lets-repeat-auto-rescue-with-every-manufacturing-131566.html]Obama states that he wants to perform this type of policy[/link] on all other manufacturers. Imagine the losses that would be realized and the corruption if billions of taxpayer dollars would be delivered to select businesses. America has never seen this type of fascist-like policies. Despite the failures, Obama wishes to use this rhetoric as a promise that could possibly draw corporate support for his re-bid for President. This must be exposed and stopped. Do we think for a minute that these subsidies would not come with government management and oversight? Do we think for a minute that government could now control manufacturing? Isn’t this similar to the desires with the desires of Marx and Engels for their Marxist Workers Paradise? Wake up America! We need to not let this happen to our great country! Fri, 10 Aug 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=AA2B882A-155D-D714-FB190DA11BEB60D1 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=4373B406-155D-D714-FBD3271D7F7AC474 On July 20th, a deranged and confused young man armed with various weapons and suited with a bullet proof outfit, walked into a theater in a small town - Aurora Colorado – and fired upon the viewers of “The Dark Knight Rises”. He killed 12 people and injured 58. Among the dead were a six year old and several that had served in our military. There were also 3 brave men that died protecting their beloved girl friends. All of them entered that theater not knowing that this night was their last. They might not have known that their life and even their passing had a purpose. Yesterday, I walked into similar theater to see the same movie. I bought popcorn and soft drinks as did those that witnessed the horror that night. I walked into the theater and tried to find the best available seat as those did that night. There was no doubt that the victims of this horrible event were on my mind as I sat in the seat in anticipation of viewing one of my favorite fictional characters fight evil. I also thought of my safety and that of my beloved fiancé as the lights dimmed and the movie began. I expected to enjoy the movie. But little did I know that this movie, at this time in my life, would offer me the most profound moment in recent memory. It wasn’t just the story. It wasn’t just the timing. It was the message witnessed at that moment. Without revealing the storyline, there was a profound message that resonated with me. We all have a purpose. It was a powerful message. That message was of what makes America great. It was a message of perseverance despite the odds. It was a message of struggle. It was a message of failure. It was a message of freedom and the desire for freedom in the shadow of tyranny. The message contained heroes and villains. It contained apprehension and doubt. It was about the goodness of men and women. All of these messages resonated with clarity within the film. Despite the horror that took place on July 20th, we woke up the next morning. Despite the horror, we went to work and began our lives again. Despite the horror, I went to a movie – that movie which was so shrouded in darkness began to show some light. We could have allowed the horrible acts of one single American ruin our lives but we didn’t. There is no doubt that it was easier for us to get up the next morning then it was for those directly affected by the actions of this man. But what was important was that we stood up despite the events of one horrible dark night. It is important to recognize that there are reasons for the events that took place in our lives and the lives of others. There was a purpose. I didn’t expect to feel the way I did when I left the theater. It was a blessing that I was able to. I knew that I needed to stand for something. There was more to living then going to movies. Life is about making a difference. Life is about making an impression on society – a good impression. It isn’t about allowing a single man take away the right and ability to make that good impression. Life is about values and upholding values. That is what this movie was about. We all have the power to do it. We just have to want to. This power is not about us. It is about our values and helping to determine what our best values are. So go see a movie with your family and loved ones. I would recommend this movie for those mature enough to take in some of the vivid content. See the message that several Americans died while trying to see. Don’t allow the evils of one individual take away the opportunity to realize that we all have a purpose. It isn’t necessarily this movie. It is the movie that one man tried to prevent us from remembering and to leave a horrible impression. Defy his evil wishes. Remember it for the good message not the shadows that are cast over the Dark Knight. Rise against the evils of one man. Stand up for we are Americans. Sun, 29 Jul 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=4373B406-155D-D714-FBD3271D7F7AC474 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=178F9305-155D-D714-FBBBE5523ABF8EB9 It has now been several days since the dust settled in Denver from one of the most horrific mass murders in American history. So many emotions and feelings have been ignited after this horror that we as Americans have tried to understand. This dilemma brings up a interesting point that will offer a different perspective of the situation surrounding the murders as well as our ways of dealing with it. There are enough people speculating about the motives behind the killer’s actions that there is no need to add another speculation. However it is important for us to learn about ourselves and society as a whole when faced with such a irrational display of animalistic behavior. [b]There is nothing we could have done[/b] – Despite the guilt that those surrounding the incident feel, there is nothing we could have done to prevent this type of mass murder. Could the killer’s parents been better parents? Sure. Could his friends been better friends? Sure. Could the guy at the gun range called the police about the crazy voice mail the killer had on his phone? Sure… what would that have done? The fact is that the freedoms that we have as Americans provide us with the opportunity to do pretty horrific things. Our founders created our government to protect our freedoms but they also proclaimed that we would only succeed under moral guidance, leadership and influence. Without a moral society we could not be free. This is a very important when understanding our willingness to be free. We want to be free but do we want to be moral? We want to have a peaceful society but do we want to judge? There are so many voices on the left that proclaim that we should not judge others or define what is right and wrong for our society. There are so many that fight for the right to say and do foul things in public and speak against the moral teachings of the church. So many will fight for the freedom to do any drug they wish but fight against religion in schools. These are the people that will ignore that the killer was altering his mind to create a persona of perfection. Obviously he was wrong. [b]We are not gods[/b] – The killer was a brilliant boy it seems when looking at his history from an academic perspective. He strived to find discoveries in science by trying to understand the mechanism of the brain. He proclaimed in a speech at Miramar College in San Diego that "temporal illusions" are "an illusion that allows you to change the past". He was fascinated with controlling his mind and with the idea of controlling other minds. Think about that for a minute. From a biological perspective, the human body performs millions and millions of daily actions most of which we are not even aware of. The brain controls all of the millions of actions. When it comes to the “mind”, this references the conscience or an attribute of our physiology. Controlling our mind would be claiming that we could control our physiology. The idea that anyone could control the past, the mind, or their physiology is simply void of reality. The term “god” is often conceived as a deity or entity that has the supernatural ability to do what humans can not do. When humans try to do things that are god-like they often accomplish the inhumane. There is nothing humanly natural about a human controlling his mind or the mind of another person. We can try our hardest to control our mind but ultimately we can only control our reactions to what our mind perceives. If we could control our minds, we would never be sad or angry. Disconnecting our minds from our reactions often result in humans doing mindless things. The evidence is all over the news. To dig into this even deeper, there are a number of different chemicals or a combination of chemicals that pharmaceutical companies have developed that can be used to disconnect us from our minds. In most cases, experiments have to be done on each patient to determine if the drug is right for that person. Is there science behind this? No. The results of the experiment are determined by the patient telling the doctor how he or she feels. How many feelings course through our body in a day? Millions… So why is it that our Western Culture is investing so much more into the idea of chemicals controlling our minds? We have a lust of control of what it naturally uncontrollable. We wish to be supernatural. We also have a desire to disconnect ourselves from our imperfections and the pain from our past that we should be learning from. So I must reiterate that we are not gods. [b]We need to know our limits[/b] – We are not gods but we are explorers searching for the absolute truth. Understanding absolute truth encompasses the understanding of everything or how everything works. Stick with me here. Absolute truth is defined as an inflexible reality. Our perception of the truth is what separates us from gods or God. That is our limit. God or a god has the ability to know the truth or if you are a Deist truth is God. So if we are not able to fully comprehend or realize the truth, we can say that it is impossible to fully comprehend God or the existence of a God. For us to deny God or declare that there is no disputing the existence of God would then disjoin us from the reality that we can not fully comprehend or realize the truth. The idea that truth evolves is irrational. It would be similar to saying the results of 2+2=4 evolve. Those that believe that truth changes or evolves are irrational. Our perceptions of truth are the only thing that changes. To stay within the realms of Aristotle’s dialectics, we as intellectuals try to narrow down our perception of absolute truth within any given thesis to the most perceivable conclusion based on the rational evidence provided to us. So the relevance to the discussion is that changing the past is an irrational concept and methods to disconnect us from our past are no different from disconnecting us from truth. Now it is important to mention that there are some truths that are self evident. In other words they are a part of common knowledge. An example of this is that a quantity of 2 is greater than a quantity of 1. Self evident truths are still apart of the construct of absolute truth but are within the realm of our perception of parts of what makes up the totality of absolute truth. So to understand that we have limits perceiving reality and that we have limited access to all facets of absolute truth are important to comprehend. Disconnecting from our past disconnects us from our founding. Disconnecting from our founding spins us into our own reality. The killer experienced the delusion of his own reality which in turn forced the entire nation to try to understand it. There is no understanding the twisted reality that the killer created for himself. His ego and desire to be great superseded his ability to follow through with it. Instead his imperfections and limited capabilities as a human being to be a god caused his reality to collapse like a house of cards. He warped his own perception of reality to a place that was completely disjointed him from the rest of us. As an America society we have studied and perceived together a view of reality. Our founding fathers based our system of government upon the pillars of natural law which had been studied and perceived by philosophers for centuries. These perceptions have been matured and fixed within the knowledge of enlightened man. Allowing our society to live and breathe through the fixed constant of our Constitution has provided us the ability to pursue, under a stable foundation, what makes us happy. We now have people running our government on philosophies born less then 2 centuries ago. The excitement and vigor of irrational science or irrational philosophy have infected our society because they give us reasons to abandon our morals and ethics. We have been indoctrinated by an ideology that looks to change the truth rather then realize it and conform to it as law. Moral relativity has taken the place of the belief in God as a basis for our morality. We can now justify murder, justify theft, justify sexual promiscuity, and justify the irrelevance of truth. The killer ignored all that makes Americans civil human beings. His efforts to erase his past and the lust for the ability to erase other people's pasts did exactly the opposite of his intentions. While trying to erase his past with drugs and mind altering methods, he distorted his reality in a way to justify mass murder. With that distortion came the infliction of death and destruction of dozens of lives, the cruel shock of a community, as well as the depression of a nation. Now that we have witnessed this horrible event, we should remember this event as it becomes a past memory. We need to never forget. We must learn from this. We are not gods that can control everything. We have limits. We can not control crazy people no more then we can control our own emotions or our own past. To feel guilty or try to put blame on others for this tragedy or inanimate objects for that matter is pointless. There is nothing except your morality and decency that keeps you from doing what this killer did. That is what we must hold on to. We need to hold on to our decency as human beings. Understanding where we need to be as a society requires us to remember our past and learn from it. We should be students of history not re-writers of history. Instead of studying ways for us forget our past; let’s study our past to change our future. Mon, 23 Jul 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=178F9305-155D-D714-FBBBE5523ABF8EB9 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B4695E3F-155D-D7CA-586670C52BC70CBC [link=http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf]The Ruling[/link] There have been many opinions thrusted forth by pundits on both the left and the right. On the left, from an obvious opinion was a sigh of relief to a disgusting display of middle finger flipping. On the right, some of the opinions span from candy coated optimism to out right fatalism. My opinion, while mildly malleable as I listened to the professional legal scholars, was the same from beginning to end as the Supreme Court delivered its opinion on June 28, 2012. It was a mitigated constitutional disaster. So let’s just preface our discussion with some basic background of the debate behind the Affordable Care Act (ACA) - aka Obamacare. The debate to reform the healthcare system was a reaction to the high cost of healthcare and the estimated 30 million people without coverage. There have been hundreds of opinions on how to reform. These opinions range from freeing up commerce within the states offering more competition to a full universal government provided coverage. The Affordable Care Act fell short of a universal healthcare system since it was extremely unpopular but arguably sets up the mechanism to deliver this desired universal coverage. First let’s explain the arguments of the left. The argument for the bill outside of legalities and constitutionality was that we as Americans should take care of our fellow Americans. In other words we have an obligation as Americans to provide healthcare coverage to these 30 million uninsured because good health is an alleged “fundamental right” for all Americans. The arguments against the Affordable Care Act from the conservative right, explain that the ACA’s mandate is unconstitutional. Nowhere in our founding documents does the federal government have the power to mandate that any American purchase a service or product from any private entity. In other words we as Americans should not be forced to purchase anything. Imagine the implications if precedence stood within the law that the federal government could force you to purchase a product or service. Could federal legislation force you to purchase medicine, a specific food, or a vaccine? If the law stood with the precedence of the individual mandate being a “Penalty” it could be possible. To understand the fundamental argument here is to understand one fundamental question, "what is the role of government?" Does the federal government have the power to do things on your behalf? The United States Constitution, which protects us from tyrannical government, separates the power of government. The Bill of Rights establishes our rights as American citizens. Overall our founding documents, specifically the United States Constitution, tell the government what they cannot do. They do not tell the government what they can do on our behalf. The US Constitution is a charter of negative liberties for the government. This is very important for all Americans to understand. Without these protections, government officials can take away our freedoms and liberty for our “better interest” or the “better interest” of the country. So as the arguments about the legalities of Obamacare were shot back and forth from both the left and the right, legal scholars narrowed down the fulcrum of constitutionality at the “Commerce Clause” in the Constitution, which says that federal government has the power to regulate commerce. It is in-arguably by reasonably educated Americans that the federal government cannot force Americans to purchase a product or service. Moreover, the federal government does not have the power to regulate the lack of commerce. Once this argument came to the forefront of debate, the argument pivoted on the definition what the mandate was. The left argued that it was a “tax” in order to avoid the dilemma with the “Commerce Clause” and the right argued that it was a “penalty” for not purchasing a product or service which pulled the mandate back into unconstitutionality. Interesting enough there are provisions throughout the bill that mention the word “penalty” in regards to what happens if an individual or company doesn’t provide healthcare. Clearly the opinion by most legal scholars was that the mandate was going to be thrown out because of the word “penalty”. Obviously words have meanings. The US Constitution has 4400 words that are under constant scrutiny and interpretation. It is important to mention here that there are two different views on the Constitution from those within the political spectrum. There are the “Originalists” who believe in the original intent of the Constitution cemented by our founding fathers. Then there is the “Progressives” that believe that the Constitution is a “living and breathing” document. These two distinct differences interpreting the Constitution are the core fundamental differences between conservatives and liberals within the American political spectrum. To dip into these two distinct ideologies, “Originalists” always get attacked by “Progressives” with the argument that laws written in 1787 are outdated and need to be interpreted differently as time progresses. “Originalists” argue that “Progressives” use interpretation to subvert the Constitution and implement activist laws and policy. As a matter of fact, laws are contracts. If contracts are to be interpreted over time, imagine how things change over a 30 year span in which a mortgage may exist. Could the terms of a mortgage, outside of laws passed, change due to cultural changes or discoveries in science? No. This would pose a severely unstable environment for our society to operate. So for the sake of clarity, “Originalism” otherwise known as “Conservativism” wishes to protect the original intent of our founding documents. Any other interpretation is considered activism. [b]4 defined oral arguments about the Affordable Care Act(ACA) of the Suprem Court on March 26th - 28th [/b] [list][*]Individual Mandate [*]Anti-Injuction Act [*]Sever-ability [*]Medicaid [/list] [b][i]Is the Mandate penalty a penalty or a tax?[/i][/b] Sounds kind of absurd doesn’t it? Well legally the argument is just as absurd. First we must address Roberts Court's ruling. The ruling states that although the mandate is not a “valid exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause” within the US Constitution, it is within the power of Congress to tax. So the ruling was that the penalties under the mandate are actually a tax. Here is Roberts’ comments within the ruling. [i]‘The most straightforward reading of the individual mandate is that it commands individuals to purchase insurance. But, for the reasons explained, the Commerce Clause does not give Congress that power. It is therefore necessary to turn to the Government’s alternative argument: that the mandate may be upheld as within Congress’s power to “lay and collect Taxes.”’[/i] [b][i]Anti-injunction Act [/i][/b] The Anti-Injunction Act states, [i]A court of the United States may not grant an injunction to stay proceedings in a state court except as expressly authorized by Act of Congress, or where necessary in aid of its jurisdiction, or to protect or effectuate its judgments.[/i] So with regards to this ruling, the Supreme Court cannot throw down a tax that has not been implemented or enacted by law. Since the mandate was not currently being enforced, the Supreme Court couldn’t strike down the mandate. In other words, you could not sue for having to pay a tax until you had actually paid the tax. This is where the absurdity continues. Roberts states, [i]“But Congress did not intend the payment to be treated as a “tax” for purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act. The Affordable Care Act describes the payment as a “penalty,” not a “tax.” That label cannot control whether the payment is a tax for purposes of the Constitution, but it does determine the application of the Anti-Injunction Act. The”[/i] So the absurdity is right there. For the sake of the Anti-Injunction Act, it is NOT a tax. So within the same ruling, the penalty for not purchasing health insurance is a tax and a penalty but also explained as neither nor? Does this make any sense? For the sake of continuity within my personal opinion, the assessment of this ruling comes down to the word “label”. Justice Roberts states within his ruling that words do not matter or can have different meanings within the same law. In other words they do not have original intent or consistency. This is the epitome of judicial activism. For the sake of brevity we will not discuss the Medicaid provision or the lack of a Sever-ability provision in detail. In summary, Roberts declared that the siphoning of funds from Medicaid for the purpose of funding the ACA was not in compliance with existing law. The fact that there was no sever-ability clause in the ACA meant that provisions of the law could not be removed without striking down the whole law. Let’s further explain the absurdity in the decision that the penalty was a tax. Within current law, there are 3 types of taxes. There are Direct or Capitation taxes; there are Excise taxes; as well as an income tax. Direct or Capitation Taxes are federal taxes on the individual that are based on the direct proportioning of the state population. Excise taxes are taxes that require action. A sales tax is a type of excise tax. The last is income tax outlined in the 16th Amendment of the US Constitution. Obviously there is nothing similar to these three types of taxes within federal law that represent the ACA mandate penalty that Roberts’ has so confusingly labeled as a tax. Let’s now review some of the commentary from the “right wing” “in the beltway” pundits. Intellectuals like [link= http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_20976596/charles-krauthammer-why-chief-justice-john-roberts-did ]Charles Krauthammer[/link] believe that Roberts acted as a conservative / Originalists by ruling that Obamacare’s mandate is not protected by the “Commerce Clause” or the “Necessary and Proper Clause”. However, he believes Robert’s wanted to show his judicial prudence and deflect any criticism as being a conservative activist judge by upholding the most controversial part of the law – the individual mandate. As Roberts seemed to join the left with his approval of the legislation, Krauthammer seems to believe that Roberts was acting in a bipartisan way avoiding his true conservative or “Originalists” ideology and deflect any criticism of being an judicial activist. To the contrary it is my belief that Justice Roberts went beyond his powers afforded to him by the Constitution and legislated from the bench by striking down the Medicaid provision as well has having 2 definitions within the same ruling for the mandate. Conservatives like [link= http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/what-did-scotus-just-do_647932.html ]Jay Cost of the Weekly Standard[/link] argue that the ruling can be considered a win in some instances for conservatives due to the fact that is considered a tax. He states that the “Commerce Clause” or the “Necessary and Proper Clause” opinion in the Supreme Court ruling is becoming precedence which is false. The fact is, the opinions of the Commerce Clause were that only of Roberts and not of the majority in the court. This nullifies Cost's comments. On the other hand, politically the rejection of the siphoning of funds from Medicaid can now show a substantial increase in the cost of the statute. Now conservatives can blame Obama for the largest tax hike in American history when Obama promised not to raise taxes on anyone making less then $200k per year. This is a huge blow politically for Obama. So politically the energy of the Tea Party as well as the anti-Obama bullet point created by the ruling could bode well for conservatives on November 6th. Although this is an optimistic view of the ruling, the overall precedence here is that a penalty can now be viewed as a tax and penalty for not purchasing from a private entity could arguably be constitutional and the political results of the tax argument are yet to be seen. This is most concerning because the ruling fundamentally changes the US Constitution through precedence. Never before has the Constitution been viewed through prism of positive federal rights. There are some interesting realities with the “tax” label that has been put on the mandate penalty within the ACA. Technically taxes can only be originated in the House of Representatives stated in the Constitution. Could the bill be overturned in those terms? Not likely but good try conservatives. It would have to be overturned by John Roberts. It is unlikely that the other Justices with change their opinion and Robert’s is not going to change out of pure principle of the precedence of his own ruling. There is a small window of opportunity for the political winds to take effect on the July 11th vote that could repeal ACA aka Obamacare. You see tax provisions are filibuster proof. So instead of needing 60 votes with a bill capable of being filibustered, a simple majority is needed to overturn the bill. This will create some political turmoil since some liberal Senators on the fence for re-election have been hiding from Obama’s reckless spending. The most notable Senator that is under fire is Claire McKaskill (D-Missouri) who is up for re-election in November. She has made it public known that she will not be attending the Democratic Convention and avoided all comments on the Supreme Court ACA ruling. It is most likely that she fears the political backlash that could destroy her re-election chances. This vote to repeal the ACA is a win - win for Republicans since it will either politically expose weak Democratic candidates or push a big tax label on those that oppose. Overall the position that we are in as Americans is bleak. If ACA aka Obamacare stands through the election and Obama is re-elected which seems likely, there will be a huge negative economic impact next year. The Affordable Care Act will devastate employers as well as individuals. As the law stands to protect the 30 million uninsured, it will actually force them to purchase insurance so they can give coverage to someone else. It is wealth redistribution. Most likely those that won’t be able to pay for insurance, which is likely to remain highly, priced, will choose to simply pay the penalty. This will simply be a revenue generator for the federal government without the obligation to provide a subsidy. Also businesses will have a huge demand for their services which favors corporations to raise prices as their supply will be limited due to a provision in the statute that limits overhead allocation to insurance companies. This higher cost will drive consumer to the government sponsored exchanges. In turn, insurance companies will slowly but surely lose the battle against the government sponsored exchanges an Americans will be shuffled into a government run universal healthcare system. So when we vote this November, it is critical to recognize the importance of your ballot and the influence you have on others. If we do not want universal healthcare or simply the massive bureaucratic mess known as Obamacare, we need to educate others about this important election. Not only is the Presidential candidate an important picked but so are the individual congressional elections. With Obama as President, we would need filibuster proof majorities in both houses of Congress in order to by-pass Obama’s veto power afforded to him by the Constitution. It is also important to mention that the Supreme Court is weighted between 4 liberal justices and 5 “Originalists” justices. The likelihood of 2 justices stepping down is almost a certainty. If that balance shifts to a liberal majority we could lose our country from the way it was founded for a long time and possibly forever. Sun, 01 Jul 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B4695E3F-155D-D7CA-586670C52BC70CBC http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=CB98B914-155D-D7CA-58B2A767392825A2 The “ism”; it is the suffix to so many words. Usually used to describe an ideology, the “ism” is so often misinterpreted or misrepresented. One of the biggest difficulties of understanding any “ism” is definition of the “ism”. Very often are “ism” defined by referencing other “isms”. The purpose of this post is to simply frame a brief understanding of utopianism. Mark Levin recently wrote a most profound and eloquent explanation of utopianism in [i]Ameritopia[/i]. There is no other book that I know of that so succinctly articulates utopianism and its relevance to the decay of society and specifically America. Levin takes the approach that ideologues or elitists simply reiterating the failed philosophies of Plato’s Republic, Hobbes’s Leviathan, Moore’s Utopia, and Marx’s and Engels’ Workers’ Paradise. While I agree to this notion hardheartedly, my conclusion is a little more rooted in simple elitism or egotism. In my research that has been going on for the last several years for my three part thesis of the evolution of society and the common thread of truth that runs through all societies, the “Law of Nature” will explain in great detail the historical chronology of man’s attempt to understand God and for some to be God. Although Levin’s book is a bit brief of its explanation, it is a masterpiece none the less. My attempts to explain the laws of nature and its unforgiving relevance to the outcomes of man’s existence isn’t intended to get mass approval or exposure but rather explore nature, man’s fight against it, and man’s inevitable egotistical destruction of its society. So to briefly iterate the destruction here, I will explain how man always drifts toward tyranny in search of utopia. To stick with our introduction and the discussion of the “ism”, Levin’s utopianism is perfect place to begin. The definition and etymology of Utopia, as defined in Greek “No Place”, gives us a flash of irony since Greece is caving in economically due to its search for utopia or “no place”. As described in Levin’s [i]Ameritopia[/i], some of the smartest most brilliant men in history struggled with their own view of utopia. All of them were well thought out and bold works but epic failures for the sheer impossibility of their utopias to be instantiated. As an example, Marx and Engels Workers’ Paradise aimed at destroying the class structure experienced during the late 1800’s but led those that believed in the faith of a man’s perfectibility and a glorious man made utopia to enslave the people that Marx and Engels wished to free. While demonizing the Bourgeoisie (rich merchant class) for oppressing the Proletariat (workers), Communists would replace the Bourgeoisie with a ruling class fitted with the political wealth rather than the monetary wealth or property wealth. Despite man’s natural desire to acquire property as a reflection of their hard work and virtue, Communist Utopians thought they were better suited then nature to reward virtue. With the attempts at the Worker’s Paradise, powerful charismatic political elites justified their vile and evil actions as a means to the glorious unachievable ends of Communist Utopia. So how is this relevant now? Ahh... that is the real question that I am constantly asked when conversations shift from current political instances to historical evidence of mass murder and societal destruction in the name of heaven on earth – Utopia. Is there any doubt that Hitler, Stalin, and Mao had, in their mind, the path to peace? They saw a perfect world on the other side of mass murder and death. It was their mirage while they thirsted for the perfect world. It was Utopia that they desired. The relevance lies within the imperfections of man and the will by imperfect men to force their will on other men. Obviously Stalin thought those that opposed him were evil and obstructionists to his vision of the fields of grandeur that flourished in the imaginary Communist Utopia. Despite the vast differences in the methods used to achieve utopia, there are many politicians in Washington that see a similar Utopia that Stalin and Mao saw. Is this Provocative? Maybe… Is it true? Absolutely… Let’s just zip passed the self-proclaimed Socialists, Stalinists, and Maoists that exist or existed in DC and just discuss the ends. Does the big government political class see a perfect society? Yes. As delusional as it is, these elitists see a perfect society made up of imperfect people. How does that make sense? So how do these utopians differ from Stalin and Mao? We can get caught up in the deadly and violent means that Stalin or Mao used to try and achieve their utopia but that doesn’t serve us. They saw utopia and thirsted for it as does the utopians in DC. With this desire, Stalin and Mao were blinded by the reality and the laws of nature. As we try to eliminate our imperfections, Stalin and Mao eliminated their imperfections. Instead of the imperfections being an over inflated ego, their imperfections just happen to be those evil people obstructing them from delivering heaven on earth their people. As Mao’s and Stalin’s power grew beyond the power over themselves as individuals and over all of their citizens, they were corrupted by this unbridled power given to them by those that saw that they knew what was better for them. Could our leaders turn into the evil tyrants like Mao or Stalin? There is no doubt they could when served with the same unbridled power Stalin and Mao were given so ignorantly by their people. The real nature of man is his imperfection and his desire to become perfect. Everything that we do in life is to develop and create our own utopias or models of perfection. Obviously we can never become perfect, but our desire for virtue never subsides as it is a hunger. Whether it is the approval from our earthly father or our heavenly father, we always strive to reach the ideals set forth by those that have defined our morality. Whether it is a nice little house on the country side with the laughs of children or grandchildren, it is utopia that we all desire. Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc. believe that their utopia is not here on earth but in the afterlife. While on earth, most people desire happiness or the pursuit thereof. So much so is this desire relevant to us that so often we have faith in those that influence and represent us to deliver our utopia that some of us ignorantly sacrifice our liberty and freedom in order to achieve it. America was designed by some of the greatest minds known to man not because of their ability to lead us into our utopia but rather to protect us from power hungry tyrants. They saw that individuals could lead themselves into their own self defined utopias or better defined individual pursuits of happiness. I must clarify once again that we all desire perfection and a virtuous life. I can stand confident and say that Stalin desired a virtuous life. While he believed in his self-defined virtue he egotistically believed that he could award virtue. Along with what his own definition of virtue and his own definition of utopia, he was convinced by his own narcissistic delusions that his utopia was the proper path and destination for all Soviets to live. Those that stood in his way, stood in the way of his perfection and the perfection of the collection of Soviets. Belief in this collection or collective salvation is simply the definition of “Collectivism”. Communism is simply the institutionalizing of this belief system. The fundamental question is, “do we know what is best for us or do the little intellectual group of elites in Washington know what is best for us?” Socialist societies empower a little intellectual elite group of politicians to take money from the people and redistribute it the way they seem fit. That is their way to distribute and award virtue. Instead of virtue being rewarded by the success of the individual, virtue is rewarded by a pseudo-democratic political process shrouded in the name of fairness. Despite the fact that all individuals are born with different talents, utopians believe that they have the ability to utilize our talents better than we do in order to provide equality for all. They ignore our own individual desires to pursue our talents and reap the full benefits of the virtue. Instead they steal it and give it to others. The answer to the fundamental question by socialists is “those in DC know better”. This belief has been institutionalized in our country. All you have to do is look at current laws and proposed laws to see the elitism or utopianism bleeding over. Recently [link= http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/01/us-usa-sugarban-newyork-idUSBRE85012N20120601 ]Mayor Bloomberg [/link] of New York proposed a ban on large sugary soft drinks in order to prevent health problems for his constituency. Now we all know that sugary drinks are not ideal and arguably could be considered bad for us. While it is bad for some, it may not be for others. My 80 year old grandmother, who worked at Coca Cola for a short period of time and speaks of Coca Cola as if she was an actor in a television advertisement, has had many wonderful years to enjoy her favorite beverage. By not drinking Coke, could it have allowed her to be a few pounds lighter and live another year longer? Who knows? We do know as a matter of fact that my grandmother loves Coke and it has brought much happiness. Who is Bloomberg to determine what we should or shouldn’t consume? The absurdity behind this is incredible. Think about it. How are they going to enforce it? Okay, McDonalds may have to eliminate its 16oz cups but which police force is going to be sure that McDonald’s patrons are not going to get a refill in their 12oz cup? Are the sugary drink police going to arrest the 17 year old high school counter clerk at KFC that slips her 17 year old classmate a refill secretly after the city bans soft drink dispensers on the other side of the counter? Are we going to criminalize our kids? What if a woman wishes to stay 40lbs overweight because their husband loves his wife’s plump look? Who are we to determine someone else happiness? This is only one example of the absurdity of government overreach into our private lives. There truly is an underground cigarette smuggling problem in New York now that taxes are so high on cigarettes. Taxes put on cigarettes are an easy sell to politicians because they can justify that it is tough love that will reduce cigarette smoking. Do people die from cigarette smoking? Sure. I would like to know how not smoking has prevented someone from dying. Sounds like a silly question but answer it. We have drifted from one extreme to another. Obviously Bloomberg is not Stalin or Mao but do his benevolent actions differ from the intentions of Stalin and Mao? When Mao rallied his people under his Communist initiative called the “Great Leap Forward” in 1958 did he intend to kill up to as many as 45 million people? No. He thought his plans were what was the Chinese people needed to move into the future hence his use of the word “Forward”. With this plan the Communists demanded mass wealth redistribution from the wealthier peasants to the poorer peasants, they demanded crops like opium plants be replaced with rice, as well as the sharing of tools and farm animals. Mao mobilized his people with the intention of creating the greatest populous in the world. His workers would be challenged to produce large amounts of grain. Instead of working on a supply and demand model which eliminates waste and the need for massive oversight by the government, Mao required the different communes that produced grain to report their grain production. Mao’s political rewarding of virtue replaced profits as an incentive. When the people began reporting their grain production, many falsely reported the number of tons of grain produced in fear of Mao while others simply wanted political points and notoriety. The results of this were deadly. Little did Mao and his politburo know that there was not enough food to feed the Chinese people. Mao, with false information, shifted all of his work force to industrial development mostly steel production. With the Chinese people moving away from self-sufficiency to government dependency, farms were neglected and eventually outlawed. When the government was incapable to provide food because of the mass shortage of grain production, food rationing began. The famine was so extensive that cannibalism was reported. Imagine the hell that transpired. Were there equal results in the plans executed by the Communists? Did Mao exist in a different class that Marx said his system would eliminate? Yes. All of this death because a utopian leader thought he knew what was better for his people. This wasn’t the act of a man that wished to kill his people. This was the result of the unbridled power of a federal government and an elite group of individuals that thought they knew better. This is no different than those in DC that think the same. The only difference between this reckless power and the amount of power those in DC have is those in DC are restricted by the United States Constitution. Despite the horrific results of Mao’s failed policy, his Foreign Minister Chen Yi was quoted by Historian Frank Dikotter saying, [i]“Casualties have indeed appeared among workers, but it is not enough to stop us in our tracks. This is the price we have to pay, it's nothing to be afraid of. Who knows how many people have been sacrificed on the battlefields and in the prisons [for the revolutionary cause]? Now we have a few cases of illness and death: it's nothing!”[/i] So it is important that we keep our individuality and not submit to the utopians or their utopianism. Our Constitution is the only thing that stands between us and tyranny. When Barack Obama says that the flaw in or Constitution is that it is a charter of liberties which tells the government can’t do rather then tell the government what it can do in our behalf, think about Mao’s “Great Leap Forward”. When Obama runs his campaign on the slogan “Forward” understand that this idea of progressivism and moving forward is not new. Progressivism is simply utopianism in little steps. Those that espoused true progressivism are simply utopians that either trust their leaders to take care of them or are those that wish to take care of others. Evidence of this ideology is shadowed in millions of innocent people that gave up their liberties for the utopia that they were never to witness. When was the last time you read the US Constitution? Sat, 02 Jun 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=CB98B914-155D-D7CA-58B2A767392825A2 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=37A0D835-123F-7491-A467C835ADE4CE08 The coverage of the JP Morgan’s 2 Billion dollar loss has been somewhat astounding considering the other losses that are not getting covered by the main stream media. So for a matter of perspective, we will take a look at JP Morgan’s loss in detail and compare these losses to government losses.. In December 2011 JP Morgan reported publicly that they had a [link=http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=JPM+Income+Statement&annual]Gross Profit [/link]$26.7 billion. Although the $2 billion loss is substantial; however, we are talking about less then a 10%. It is important to mention the percent because it is easy to get shocked by the simple dollar value without the perceptive of how much money JP Morgan has. JP Morgan reported in December 2011 that they had [link=http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=JPM+Profile]261k employees[/link]. 74% of JP Morgan is owned by mutual funds which in turn are owned by individual investors. So to demonize JP Morgan is to demonize the millions of people that represent JP Morgan as well as depend on JP Morgan’s success for their employment as well as their investments. Now a $2 Billion dollar loss is definitely a substantial loss but it is important to take this loss in perspective in the sphere of influence. First let me preface by saying that since this report, several high ranking senior managers of JP Morgan have resigned under the pressure of this loss. Some are cheering their demise. When I hear this on editorial driven television news programs or read this in blogs, I ask the talking heads, “how has this loss affected you?” The only affect it has on me is the fact that I have spent the time to explain this common profit/loss scenario. Overall, the loss has only affected JP Morgan stock holders and obviously the executives who have resigned. So when I read about this loss and scratched my head trying to wonder why there is such a huge focus on this, I realized that this anti-bank and anti-capitalist tone in our country is really growing. It is also evidence that there is systemic deterioration of the education of what capitalism is. Coincidently this ignorance is being fueled by the very people that are responsible for this type of loss but these losses truly do affect us every day. So let’s review some of these examples. [link=http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/10/us-usa-postal-loss-idUSBRE84914R20120510]On May 10th 2012, Reuters[/link] reported that the US Postal Service lost $3.2 billion of tax payer money in the first 3 months of this year. So are we more concerned about banks or tax funded services. You would think that this is concerning and would be a major news headline and there would be calls for heads to roll in government. Nope. In fact, on [link=http://news.yahoo.com/post-office-near-default-losses-mount-5-1b-210808129.html]November 15th 2011, Yahoo[/link] reported that the US Postal service loss $5.1 Billion in 2011. That came after cutting 130,000 jobs. Any heads roll? Nope. [link=http://xfinity.comcast.net/slideshow/finance-highpaidgovtjobs/postmaster-general/]The Post Master General Patrick Donohue[/link], who is in the top 10 highest position in the government makes $240,000 per year plus benefits, is still at the helm. Is that enough? Nope… On November 12th 2010, CBS reports that The US Postal service lost $8.5 Billion in 2010. Let’s look at another substantial loss of tax payers dollars. Obama came into office with his “Hope and Change” campaign making promises as bold as lowering sea levels with his new “Green Energy” plans. With the stimulus hyped as a monetary boost for the struggling economy aimed at creating shovel ready jobs, nearly a trillion dollars was taken from the private sector and funneled into government run programs. Since the stimulus, [link=http://www.zerohedge.com/news/record-12-million-people-fall-out-labor-force-one-month-labor-force-participation-rate-tumbles-]10 million[/link] Americans have left the work force as well as billions of dollars have been spent on bankrupt business. Solyndra, who spent a large amount of money lobbying and spent time bundling for Obama and his campaign, received [link=http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/30/technology/solyndra/index.htm]$527 million dollars[/link] which disappeared from the tax payer coffers as the solar company filed bankruptcy last year. On top of that, the 20 high level workers received a base salary of $2.49 million before bonuses. [link=http://cnsnews.com/news/article/subsidized-bankrupt-solyndra-managers-got-368500-court-ordered-bonuses]CNS[/link] news reports that one of the executives received $206k salary as well as $30k in incentives, another executive received $189k in salary with $20k in incentives, and a third executive that made $190k and $15k in incentives. This doesn’t include the $300k in bonuses paid in March. This was tax payer money. If that isn’t enough there have been many other examples in the failed Obama Green Agenda. On January 27th, 2012, [link= http://www.investorplace.com/investorpolitics/another-obama-backed-green-energy-company-goes-bankrupt/ ]Investorplace.com[/link] reported that Ener1, which creates electric car batteries and received $118 million dollars from the Obama administration, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Beacon Power, which stores excess electric power, was also a company that received $43 million from the Department of Energy also filed Chapter 11. These examples are striking because of the compounded losses that have been generated while our tax dollars were put at risk. The fact is the federal government doesn’t have to show a profit. Consider as well the massive $15+ trillion in debt. This trillion dollar stimulus will have to be paid on top of the interest that will be accrued. In these cases the stewards of our money did not resign or even receive ridicule from the mainstream. Instead the rationale by the mainstream as well as the White House is that the intentions were good as they move on to spend more of our tax ddollars. No where was it mentioned, outside of talk radio and some conservative publications, that the corporate welfare for political support offered unprecedented risk with little possibility of return. So how does this all compare to the JP Morgan incident. JP Morgan puts their business and reputation at risk everyday investing trillions of dollars in assets. They are experts in this field. On the other hand, Obama has never run a business nor has Steven Chu. They are academics. They are in no way are capable of making decisions on what businesses are viable investments for tax payer dollars. They also have a complacent media which has not held them accountable for these massive failures. JP Morgan is under fire as all banks have been recently. Coincidently most of these banks are huge donors to the Democrat party. [link=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-20/jpmorgan-employees-join-goldman-sachs-among-top-obama-donors.html]JP Morgan as well as Goldman Sachs[/link] are huge donors to Barack Obama. As the left is steadily working up their base for election time by bank bashing, they are slowing scooping up the money. JP Morgan has an interesting position in the tight Senate Race between Scott Brown (R) and Elizabeth Warren (D). Elizabeth Warren, who recently had been caught up in a controversy where she was accused of manufacturing her lineage for college acceptance into Harvard, has been speaking out against [link= http://www.opensecrets.org/races/contrib.php?cycle=2012&id=MAS1 ]JP Morgan[/link]. Interestingly, JP Morgan has donated $54k to Scott Brown. This is a prime opportunity for her to find a weak spot to attack Brown while riding the anti bank energy. It is all politics. It is pretty simple. Businesses take risks everyday. They are no different then so called “speculators” that risk capital to try and build their business for a profit. When we buy car insurance, we take a calculated risk or “speculating” on how much insurance we should buy. If we purchase the wrong amount we pay the price. When businesses make bad decisions, they pay the price. When banks make bad decisions they pay the price. All of these scenarios require a risk of capital which is directly connected to the businesses property. Government officials on the other hand don’t risk their property. They risk their reputation which is often high protected and guarded as well as our property with little transparency. Their failures never get corrected or repealed. Temporary politicians put in permanent policies in many cases that are doomed to fail. Despite the US Postal Service being a complete failure, we continually dump our tax dollars into that bottomless pit of debt. Despite the entitlement state consisting of Social Security, Medicaid, Welfare, continual private sector bailouts, etc. There is no accountability. When conservatives in congress try and correct these failures, they are seen as obstructionists. So the next time you hear someone rambling on with the “capitalism has failed” rant, ask them if they truly know what capitalism is. The next time someone says that more regulation will prevent failure, ask them, “Does any thing great come without failure?” Then next time you hear someone babble on about how speculators are ruining the price of oil up, ask them, “How is the value of a commodity determined?” People that do not understand capitalism or simple value ramble on about evil banks or evil corporations have no understanding how value is determined. They also do not understand how wealth and value is destroyed. The only time that value or capitalism is distorted is when government intervenes. Tue, 15 May 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=37A0D835-123F-7491-A467C835ADE4CE08 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=232810BC-123F-7491-A4DE630CAE7D5C79 Why would Obama reverse his stance on gay marriage? My first comment is to address the supposed turmoil that he has been struggling with. He mentions he is evolving as he is sensitive to the Gay, Lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community while also being sensitive to traditional views. First… I call bullshit. Was he sensitive to traditional views when he was in favor of infanticide as a state senator? Was he sensitive to tradition marriage when he forced Christian Institutions to pay for birth control? Was he sensitive to traditional values when he supports tax funding for abortion? So.... Bullshit. Let’s look at his [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6K9dS9wl7U ]previous stance[/link] which is vehemently opposed to gay marriage. Of course it was in front of a Christian audience during the campaign. He is pandering for votes. So why the switch now? Let’s look at the time line. First the massive disappointment to the official launch of his [link= http://www.mediaite.com/tv/abcs-jake-tapper-to-david-axelrod-are-voters-less-enthusiastic-about-obama-this-time-around/]campaign where there were 4000[/link] empty seats in a 18000 seat arena. In 2003 there were over 23000 people packing the place. The David Gregory from [link= http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/biden-gay-marriage-absolutely-comfortable-men-marrying-men-152035862.html ]"Meat the Depressed"[/link] asks Joe Biden the gaffe machine whether he was comfortable with same sex marriage... OOPS Good Ole Joe slipping up again. Suddenly all eyes focus on a possible shift in the President's position. Was this political calculation or a gaffe? Think about this. 70% of African Americans voted against Prop 8 in California! Politico states that only [link= http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/05/polls-show-a-mixed-picture-for-legalizing-gay-marriage-122984.html ]45% of Independents [/link]support Gay Marriage. So once again why did he release it now? Well now that Biden has put his foot in his mouth right before [link= http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-clooney-obama-20120510,0,5149825.story ]Obama's $40k per ticket[/link] Clooney fundraiser, Obama needed to clear the water of all the speculation to make way for the contributions. Also in the NEWS... [link= http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/against-obama-even-prison-inmate-gets-some-vote/2012/05/09/gIQAXnGFDU_video.html ]Obama loses 41% [/link]of the vote to a prison [link= http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jWQ-cJ-KrSa-U01TruFH5lBTZUQg?docId=eba119f171fb4132a6f875cf8d29a1de]INMATE[/link] in West Virginia which has recently been decimated by Obama's war on coal That my friends is the Blue Color Democrats speaking out against Obama... They are sending him a message. So where is our country while Obama is pandering for campaign cash? A record amount of women - that would be [link= http://cnsnews.com/news/article/324000-women-dropped-out-labor-force-last-two-months-number-women-not-labor-force-hits ]324,000 women[/link] - have left the labor force in the last 2 months. That is after the administration praised the creation of 115k jobs and the decrease of the unemployment rate from 8.2% to 8.1%.... Wait.... Think about this.... 324,000 women leave the labor force while only creating 115k jobs and the unemployment rate goes down??? Ahhh... politics. Obama is failing miserably. Oh... by the way. [link= http://www.zerohedge.com/news/record-12-million-people-fall-out-labor-force-one-month-labor-force-participation-rate-tumbles-]1.2 million people[/link] have left the labor force in 1 month So why didn't Obama stick to the civil unions? Why did he clarify that it was his "personal view" and not that he was going to fight for Gay Marriage? Why all of a sudden has Obama become a federalist with Gay Marriage while he claims it is a equality issue? Wasn't slavery an equality issues? Why isn't abortion a states' rights issue? It it politics! So all of you out there parading around with jubilation that Obama is not "personally" supporting Gay Marriage, ask yourself... when you are unemployed and broke... are you going to be able to afford your marriage? Thu, 10 May 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=232810BC-123F-7491-A4DE630CAE7D5C79 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B7BA899F-123F-7491-A4C7D9432D7B5A98 Recently I have had several discussions and debates over various topics spanning from morality in our laws to healthcare. In all of these discussions and debates, the concept of private property and the protection thereof in the United States Constitution was the central theme. These concepts are so important and relevant to our freedom as US citizens, that I thought it would be helpful to frame the true fundamental stance that was taken as well as what is at the pinnacle of the founding of the United States and its purpose – private property. In the Declaration of Independence, which was the official statement made by our founders detailing our purpose as a country; we find a very profound philosophical statement: [i]”We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. “[/i] So where did Jefferson and our founders that penned the Declaration of Independence get this? One source was from English Philosopher and physician John Locke that it can be read in: “The Works of John Locke: 1714 First Edition”, [i]“Man... hath by nature a power.... to preserve his property - that is, his life, liberty, and estate - against the injuries and attempts of other men.”[/i] The idea of the “pursuit of happiness” was mentioned by of Richard Cumberland who was an English Philosopher and Bishop of Peterborough. Cumberland’s ethical theory of universal benevolence represented the source of moral good. He said: [i]"No action can be morally good which does not in its own nature contribute somewhat to the happiness of men."[/i] Is there any question that based on the words of the very people that influenced our founders and those that outlined our purpose as a country that morality was directly associated with property and/or the pursuit of happiness? The fact that the founders chose “the pursuit of happiness” instead of property puts extra emphasis on morality. To expand on this we dig further into happiness. We can go back as far as Aristotle to see the direct relation to happiness and virtue. In Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle states: [i]“…the function of man is to live a certain kind of life, and this activity implies a rational principle, and the function of a good man is the good and noble performance of these, and if any action is well performed it is performed in accord with the appropriate excellence: if this is the case, then happiness turns out to be an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue.”[/i] Nichomachean Ethics,1098a13 There is no question that morality is necessary in order to create a virtuous country. The pursuit of happiness is activity directly related to the soul and its sanctity. Without the pursuit of happiness and/or the result of that pursuit – property – there can be no virtue. So to inhibit the pursuit of property and happiness can unequivocally be related to the break down in morality. If this is true, can we say that the implementation and enforcement of taxes, which reduces ones ability to acquire property and/or pursue happiness, is indirectly related to the reduction in morality? This obviously is a whole conversation itself but should be recognize as a logical point. So we can even go further in explaining the relevance of property rights and morality. – The Ten Commandments, which can be considered the most influential set of laws known to man, specifically outlines the importance of private property and the protection thereof. I would argue that the Ten Commandments can be considered one of the most prominent statements of property protection in the history of man. When bringing this up in a debate with a socialist, I was accused of stretching the realm of religion to encompass private property protection. This is a typical tactic of the left. We often hear of Christians or Jews were socialists from the left when in fact individual property rights and socialism are diametrically opposed to one another. [b]The Ten Commandments[/b] [list] [*] 1 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me. [*] 2 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My Commandments. [*] 3 “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain. [*] 4 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it. [*] 5 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you. [*] 6 “You shall not murder. [*] 7 “You shall not commit adultery. [*] 8 “You shall not steal. [*] 9 “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. [*] 10 “You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.” [/list] So how do we relate this to property rights? Let’s start from the top and define property and how it is acquired. [b]Property[/b] [list] [*] a quality or trait belonging and especially peculiar to an individual or thing [*] something owned or possessed; specifically : a piece of real estate [*] the exclusive right to possess, enjoy, and dispose of a thing [*] something to which a person or business has a legal title [/list] [i]* from Merriam-Webster.com[/i] So now that we understand the basic definition of property, let’s discuss how we acquire it. Property is a direct reflection of our labor and the virtues thereof. So if our labor is of great value, we shall achieve property equal to that great value. That achievement is a reward for the virtues provided by our labor. Employment is the trade of ones labor for the owner’s property. A contract is an agreement between two parties to trade property and/or labor. So we now can see that labor and property go hand in hand. Labor without proerty is slavery and property without labor is theft. Before we dig into the Ten Commandments, let me preface with our life is our most intimate property. We own our life and can make of it what we wish. When we labor to maintain our health with exercise and a good diet, we are rewarded with the property of a healthy life. Even under the most tyrannical system, we do have the ability to live or end our life. There is nothing more sacred then our life. Life in itself is the purist form of property. The only way to take that from us is to kill us. We can say firmly that all things are property. If we own our life, who or what can we say owns us? One of the greatest mysterious of man’s existence is the existence of a creator. Regardless of your beliefs now, the Israelites believed in a creator and he owned their soul. Desecrating the soul was desecrating God or his property. The intent of first 3 commandments was to emphasize the importance of respecting God the creator - most of all to respect the owner of his property. I would simply ask that if there is no God and we are all property, who owns you? There reason why the “Creator” or his influence is mentioned 4 times in the Declaration of Independence. With the creator being the entity that endows us (endow is to provide property) with our unalienable rights. Only the owner of those rights can take them away. That owner would be us and most of all God. The fourth commandment is a little vague in regards to private property but it could be stated that the Sabbath day is for happiness. God worked for the first six to create the earth and the 7th day is to celebrate the virtue of his labor. It is on this day that we celebrate our achievements and accomplishments from the other 6. It is on the 7th day that we enjoy our property and reflect on our souls which are owned by God. Our parents are the stewards of God’s property until we are mature enough to manage his property and our property. Bat mitzvah, Bar Mitzvah, Confirmation, and other sacraments and ceremonies that represent the right of passage for a child to enter adulthood also represent the point at which children become a man and woman responsible enough to protect his and God’s property. The age of consent represented in current secular law is parallel to these rights of passage. Prior to these milestones the parents are those that represent God and his intentions. The tradition for men to ask the father for his daughters hand in matrimony was simply permission to acquire the father’s property. Children were created through the labor of the mother and supported by the labor of the father through the grace of God. This is a simple explanation “Honoring thy Father and thy Mother” is simply honoring God. Six and eight are pretty obvious. By murdering or stealing, the guilty party would be disrespecting the owner and his property. In number seven and ten coveting a neighbors wife is coveting his property. Committing adultery is stealing property. The mentioning of a woman being man’s property can be considered controversial in today’s political environment. It is however completely relevant today. In the days of the Israelites and even some cultures in the Middle East today, women and children were actually considered the tangible property of the husband or father. This is not what I am explaining when understanding the relevance today. Even in the more liberal mainstream American society where women are equal to men, don’t men and women alike court each other? Isn’t courting a form of effort or can be considered labor? Don’t the efforts of courting one another produce the virtues of an intimate sacred relationship? Isn’t marriage an agreement to merge man and women to become one as sole owners of their mutual property? Can we say that disrespecting the bonds of a woman and man disrespecting the property of both the man and woman? In the 9th Commandment, bearing false witness is lying which is misrepresenting truth. By misinterpreting the truth or simply lying about your neighbor misrepresents the virtue of your neighbor. Virtue is the product of morality and the product of ones labor. Distorting value is therefore immoral and an infringement of property rights. I think it is pretty obvious that the Ten Commandments, even from a secular perspective, can be argued is most relevant in the protection of property. In slavery man is owned by another man. Through the exodus from Egypt, where the Israelites escaped the tyranny of the Egyptians, the realization of private property protection was the number one law and could be argued the whole of the law. In order to prevent the atrocities of slavery and tyranny, teaching about the protection of private property and the protections of individual sovereignty need to be emphaised. The Israelites saw the need to teach this and saw that it was necessary to make these teaching so profound that it would transcend from generation to generation. Despite the imperfections of man and the emergence of slavery through time, Western Culture was born from the Exodus and the Ten Commandments. It was individual property rights, the pursuit of happiness, and their close relationship to morality that provided us the virtues of philosophy, technology, and science. There is no wondering that through the tyrannical regimes similar to the Soviet Union, Communist China, Communist Cuba, and others that no significant innovations or substantial contributions to humanity have been realized. It isn’t through the slavery of the citizen that brings virtue. It is through the freedom and liberty of the citizen to acquire and retain private property that affords humanity the virtues of free men. So how do we bring this defense of private property full circle into the influence of common man in present times? It is pretty simple. We could easily say that removing private property removes morality. If the individual does not have to provide labor to acquire private property or virtue, we could argue that the individual’s will to be happy is corrupted. Once individual private property is transferred to the collective, could we say that the value and the virtue in order to achieve that property have been distorted and destroyed? Let’s dig further into that. Who determines virtue? We as individuals do. We value things based on the wants and desires of individuals. When individuals have a conversation about the latest iPad, the value of the attributes of the technology is discussed. The question on the minds of those discussing the iPad is, “Is it worth the retail price?” That conversation along with the millions like it around the country determines the virtues and the value of the iPad. The government or Apple doesn’t determine the true value or virtues. Apple may set the price but it is determined by the cost to produce and what people are will in sacrifice in labor to achieve the value. The thoughts that go through the mind of the consumer is the amount of money (labor) they are willing to sacrifice in order to achieve the iPad (value). If you remove the labor or sacrifice from the equation, the value goes away. If someone receives something without having to work for it, do they value it? Not really. So on a macro level, the more entitlements that are given to the population without them having to work for it the less they value the entitlement. This value is directly proportionate, through the vast laws of economics, to the sacrifice and labor. Ask yourself this question. You are taxed in order to support local and state provisions for civic services. Do you respect the median of the state highway that you contribute taxes to maintain as much as you respect your front yard? No because the median on the state highway doesn’t reflect you or your virtues. It reflects the collective. If you have servitude next to your property, do you maintain it? You probably do if it makes your property look bad but if has value to you in regards to your virtue you probably ignore it. Does the parish or county employee put as much effort into maintaining the communal property on the servitude or median on the state highway as if it was his own? No. Although we can not all own the property of the State highway, it is a good example of how value and labor go hand in hand. I am not advocating the removal of public property or the complete elimination of public entities that maintain the property. I am simply pointing out the relevance of small government and the relationship between our labor and public property, the value depletion once property is transferred from private to publaic, and the morality associated with the proportion of public and private property. Our founders believed if we were directly connected to our communal property through our federalist system on a local level, that we would be more invested to maintaining its value. We would also be encouraged by the ease in our ability to facilitate change on the local and even state level. A federally centralized government leaves too much distance from the direct range of influence on the federal property. So it is apparent that when the proportion of private property shrinks in proportion to public property, the value of the overall property drops. The value mentioned here is not necessarily relative to monetary value as is the perception of value by the public and the public’s will to protect and maintain it. Of course, monetary value can be a factor as well but it isn’t the point here. So this mentioning of the distortion of value explains how dictatorships with socialist systems decline and how systems that implement socialist policies destroy the value of the systems being converted. In a socialist system, the people are not directly connected public property as they are to their personal well defined property. To expect the citizens to take care of public property would be similar to all Louisiana citizens manicuring their portion of the median on the state highway. The point here is that despite the better interests of the people, politicians giving away property to those that have not labored and sacrificed for the virtue provided by that property are stripping away the virtue and value of the country as a collective. This explains how socialism does not work. In fact it has the opposite results of those intended. All of the dysfunction created by socialism is in direct relation to the people not wishing to sacrifice their labor to provide virtue to everyone else. It goes against the better interest of the individual. So as people are not so willing to work for the collective because it goes against the natural desires to self preserve, acquire personal property, and be individuals, the only way to get people to act against their own interest is to force them. This is why socialism always ends up with an authoritarian dictatorship or a police state. With the destruction of private property under socialism comes the deterioration of morality, the civil society, and its ability to self govern. Responsibilities accompanied with our desire to be successful provide the internal force within us to be moral people. If we have self interests and are working hard to acquire property, wealth, and virtue, immorality can only undermine that. We are unlikely to do business with people that are immoral. Part of that is due to trust. If someone is immoral, they are most likely not able to be trusted in a business partnership. So it is obvious that socialism indirectly promotes immoral activity within the civil society. If morality is no longer a major contributor to success since success or the idea of being successful is frowned upon in socialist society, how does one acquire virtue? It is done politically. We know how the moralities of politics are. Politically, individuals can acquire power which makes the virtues of luxury more accessible. Interesting enough this undermines the ideas of socialism. Under socialism there is no virtue achieved through talent or being smart. Virtue is acquired through political connections. Evidence to this is in a story from my friend Oleg Atbashian of the [link=http://www.thepeoplescube.com]PeoplesCube.com[/link] that grew up as a propagandist for the Soviet Union. You would ask, “Why would someone wish to be a propagandist?” Oleg told me that he had a desire to paint. He had talent that he wished to display. The only way he could buy painting supplies is to be a member of the artist’s union. Once he had become a member of the union he was assigned to the government to be a propagandist. That is how he achieved his virtue. So what must be understood is that property rights are much more then people simply wishing to acquire stuff. It serves a purpose much more important. The right to property is the most important expression of the Declaration of Independence. The United States Constitution is a charter designed to protect our property and the purpose expressed in the Declaration. The United States Constitution, much like the Ten Commandments, is also moral charter. Its channels for the well distributed enumerated powers of the federal government are the veins and arteries that regulate the heart blood of our nation. Destroying or distorting the Constitution despite any good intentions are a direct attack on the people that are government and protected by its words. Pinching off certain veins an arteries reduce the life of this great nation. Our Constitution is the architecture of our living nation. It is our property. If the Constitution outlines the protections that protect our life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (property), killing it is a direct attack on our most sacred property – our life. So when people talk about transforming the country or the constitution for the sake of socialism, they are attacking you and the channels of which you are afforded the right to property. Considering that America is one of the greatest reflections of freedom and liberty in the history of man, killing it could be considered one of the greatest crimes against all humanity. To neglect our part as American citizens in protecting this nation and its future, not only is it irresponsible but is contributing to this great crime. Reagan said that Freedom was one generation away from extinction. That generation has come and gone. It is now that Freedom is being taken away. Stand now with Americans and remove the thorn of socialism that is killing the life blood of this country and the future of freedom. Mon, 19 Mar 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B7BA899F-123F-7491-A4C7D9432D7B5A98 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B2C801BF-123F-7491-A4564AA7D185A586 When ever faced with something I don’t understand, I generally try and dig down to the bottom of it. When I was younger and I tried to understand how a television worked, so I took one apart. It didn’t make my parents too happy but “hey” it was for the science. When I was interested in auto mechanics, I dismantled a motor in order to see how it worked. Reading about it wasn’t good enough. I needed to dismantle it myself to put my hand on it. It was the method of dismantling that gave me the most insight. It was this method that I used to understand modern American Liberalism. American Liberalism used to make sense to me because I could justify anything in the guise of tolerance, diversity, equality, and fairness. I wanted to be fair. I wanted to feel intelligent. I wished to be considered an intellectual. It was these aspects of acceptance of anything as simply an affirmation of the platitude of “who I am to judge”. It was this platitude that allowed me to not stand for anything and to stand for everything. With this stance, anything was acceptable. How great was that!? With the “who am I to judge” came “who are you to judge me?” it affirmed my feelings of wishing to be unique and not a part of the establishment. This rebellion was reflected in my clothes, my hair, and my attitude. I was attracted to miscreants like me. We were rebels fighting the status quo. It was a revolution. F*** you was the motto. I was 18 and without a care in the world because I was going to define who I was. I realized that my parents were stupid and so was the rest of the world. It was this attitude that carried me into my twenties. I enjoyed my friends that shared my views. We would talk about the idiots of the establishment while drinking or other forms of mind altering toxins in order to get the inside scoop of what reality really was. We hated commercials. We hated corporations. We hated religion. We hated America. That wasn’t reality. We were reality. Sadly we didn’t know we were drifting further and further from it. It wasn’t till years later that read “The 5000 Year Leap” that I understood how wrong we were. It wasn’t till I listened to Milton Friedman and Ronald Reagan that I realized how great our American system was. It wasn’t until they turned me on to the founders that created this great country that I understood how unique we are in the long history of tyranny. Locke taught me that I was unique not Nietzsche. Adam Smith taught me that people can’t control other people with their desires not Freud. It was Thomas Jefferson that taught me that we were all created equal and not guaranteed equal things as Marx did. It was this transition in my life that allowed me to understand that standing up for something despite my imperfections was important and it was destructive to simply be tolerant for tolerance sake. I then found the need to understand what it was that attracted me to Liberalism. I saw liberalism and Progressivism as diametrically opposed to American idealism and what has made America great. Liberalism was a disease… at least that’s what I thought. You see liberals believe that nothing bad is a choice but rather it is a disease. I was simply caught in the liberal frame of mind again. When I finally realized that Liberals are liberals first… all came to light. I grew up Catholic and understood that despite my intuition, I was Catholic first. I could not venture too far from my Catholic upbringing for it would uproot me from my founding. It would confuse me. When I broke free of those foundations to become a liberal, I felt liberated and free. It was all great. Little did I know, I would be touting a new set of rules, principles, and attributes. With Liberalism came a new set of “sins”. There were certain things that I could not say. I couldn’t judge people based on my own beliefs. Anyone that judged others was racist, prejudice, intolerant, homophobic, xenophobic, etc. It was through my transition that realized that I was enslaved by false truths for the fear of hurting someone’s feelings or my biggest fear which was the fear of not being accepted. So I began to dismantle Liberalism and Progressivism. The common thread that weaved its way through the liberal mind set was that Liberalism came before anything else. Despite empirical evidence of any kind, tolerance came first. Absurdity was accepted as long as tolerance was present. The more I debated people about my views the more apparent it became. The responses from liberals to empirical data became absurd with flashing lights. I just didn’t understand why. It frustrated me. No matter how much proof I gave for my argument, they always had to discredit it with the same idiocy. I was a bigot, racist, homophobe, xenophobe that thought women needed to go back in the kitchen, shut up and have babies. It infuriated me. Then I found it. It all began to make sense. [b]Progressivism[/b] When doing research for my book, “The Machine: The Progression of Secular Socialism” I stumbled upon more then just the simple emergence of socialism and communism in America. I found the origins of modern liberalism. I say modern liberalism because liberalism used to be more on the lines of Anti-Federalism. Thomas Jefferson was actually more attuned to true classical liberalism then someone like Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. When I researched the League of Nations, Woodrow Wilson, The Fabian Socialists, The Frankfurt Marxists, and John Dewey, I discover Secular Humanism. It was the common thread that I was looking for. You see the Fabian Socialists and the Frankfurt Marxists were looking for a method to make everyone uniform. For people to not go to war against each other, they needed to agree with each other. They needed to be equal. After the horrors of WWI and WWII, there was a mass movement to try and prevent war. On a macro level, the only way to get nations to get along was to connect them and make them dependent on each other. Why would you attack someone that you were dependent on? It was the theory of mutual assured destruction. It would later become a military strategy. On a micro level, the only way to get individuals to get along was to connect them and make them unified as a collective – Communism. Communists realized that the tactics of Stalin were not effective. After his murderous reign, Communists all around the world saw that there needed to be another way to communalize individuals. It couldn’t be through direct force. They couldn’t even use the word Communist or Communism because the word was attached to millions of deaths world wide. The use of force had to be converted into subservience and the willingness of the citizenry to become simple gears that made society work. Instead of killing the dissident, ridicule and polarization would take its place. Instead of gulags and re-education camps, propaganda and public schools needed to be used. It was the birth of Progressivism and political correctness. This movement was led by foreigners like Nakita Khrushchev, Antonio Gramsci, Georg Lukacs, and others. The American movement was led by people like Eric Fromm, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkeimer, Franz Neumann, Karl Wittfogel, Herbert Marcuse, John Dewey, Walter Lippman, Roy Woods, Raymond Bragg, Saul Alinsky, and all of their protégés who are too many to mention. The idea of remaking America was born from this Progressive revolution. Science offered ways to engineer society. The idea of Eugenics was championed by Madison Grant, Harry H. Laughlin, Irving Fisher, Henry Fairfield Osborn, Henry Crampton., and Margaret Sanger. Much of this movement was to try and eliminate not only human imperfections but imperfect races of people that were they believed incapable of contributing to the utopia they desired. Harry Laughlin and Margaret Sanger could be ranked as two of the biggest advocates of sterilization of Blacks and Jews in the American Eugenics movement. The idea of Eugenics was simply the solution of having to kill the indigent. You could simply prevent them from being. This was pure elitism. It explained the idea of liberals that they know better or that the liberals in power know better then the subservient liberal followers. This idea of molding the society and engineering its perfection was paramount in all that I read. These pseudo-intellectuals were trying to create a perfect society. How noble!? Once I realized this, I could then see the connection to Darwinism and Atheism. Intellectuals saw that man was simply evolved animals and had all the attributes of animals. They simply needed to point out the branches of the human species that needed to be stopped from procreating. This was no different then the views of Hitler. He just happened to be a tad bit more vocal about it and a tad bit more violent. The Progressive movement was simply a movement driven by the lust of man to create utopia or heaven on earth. It was their Eden they were looking for. They weren’t satisfied with the idea of a supreme being because the elitist intellectuals preceding them deemed God or a god to not exist. There were no absolute truths in their mind. Truth was simply dependent on the interpretation or person’s experience and feelings. “Who are you to judge a black man if you are not black?” It was this disconnect from the absolute or the lack of acceptance of an absolute truth that unmoored society from morals and ethics. It was the end justifies the means that took its place. It was about revolution. Revolting against old norms and the evolution of truth is what “progressed” society. That was the core to Progressivism. [b]Secular Humanism[/b] Secular Humanism was simply the vehicle of Progressivism. In order for a society to be progressive, it needed to be taught. Secular Humanism consisted of all the mechanisms to plunge society into the Marxist Utopia. These mechanisms were the truths determined by the elites in the movement. It was no different a design then Plato’s perfect society, Hobbes’ Leviathan, Moore’s Utopia, or Marx and Engles’ Communist Workers’ Paradise. It became the new religion. It was a religion based on men not on gods. This would be the foundation of world-wide collectivism. Once all people became humanists, the world would be united. We could all then work together as a collective all traveling through time in the same direction. We would be united as workers in a workers paradise building a tower to a heaven on earth. Secular Humanism was simply a new label to Cultural Marxism. In order to for people to be a collective individual rights needed to be denied and property rights needed to be removed. It all started to make sense to me once I realized this. Secular Humanism, Progressivism, and Liberalism were all Cultural Marxism aimed at progressing society into the Communist Utopia that Marx and Engels desired. As Americans, we have become immune to the dysfunction of socialism because it has been progressing so gradually. We often contribute it to the old fashioned. We saw our parents as old fashioned. This is the realization of the decay and entropy of American morals, ethics, and ideals. As the entitlement state grows and the culture of Americans become more infused with class warfare and political correctness, society steadily progresses toward the unachievable goal of heaven on earth that the engineers of Secular Humanism have designed. Instead we are plunged into darkness, despair and decay. Is there any wonder why the American society and the world for that matter is so dysfunctional? Is there any wonder why society has become so polarized politically? If two people have completely different destinations for the country, is it safe to say they will never agree and become enemies? Americans used to travel in the same direction towards their goal of prosperity and freedom. It is the simple explanations from Adam Smith and John Locke that emphasize the necessity of the protection of the individual that iterate the impossibility of perfection in humanity and the communal utopia desired by Anti-American liberalism. You see, Liberals are Liberals first. There are Liberals that are Christians. Christians oppose abortion. Do you know any Christian Liberals that oppose abortion? Not just for themselves but for anyone. It goes back to absolutes. The liberal law is that abortion should be available for everyone despite its apparent disconnects from natural law and the principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence. Liberals make up their own absolutes. If you sin against their absolute, there is no tolerance for you. They have simply replaced Christianity, Judaism, or Islam for their universal Liberal religion. Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Secular Humanism are all religions set out to better society. Secular Humanism is the only one that denies that it is a religion. Secular Humanism is the only one that doesn’t accept the supreme absolute of a creator. Instead it spouses the desires and wills of what man wants to deem moral and ethical. With that said, we know that man can justify any sin. After all, Hitler, Mao, and Stalin justified the imprisonment, torture and brutal death of millions of people in the name of their idea of heaven on Earth. Despite what the Secular Humanists decide or preach, we are all individuals. We all look different. We are all shapes and sizes. The efforts of the left to make us all the same of a super-society of perfect individuals will never occur. We will never be eradicated from the natural aspects of our individual self interests or desires. The society that makes man-made laws to support the absolutes of man instead of protecting the individual with the natural laws of nature in mind swiftly turns down the path of the ultimate man made absolute that has been responsible for the slaughter of millions of innocent individuals who desired to simply be themselves – totalitarianism. Sun, 04 Mar 2012 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B2C801BF-123F-7491-A4564AA7D185A586 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B4406952-123F-7491-A4AF6AA66B70F000 This is probably one of the most important stories covered by Lanterns of Liberty since its inception. There is nothing more important than the education of our children because not only is it important to parents but most of all important for the protection of the freedoms and liberties of Americans. With that we will dive directly into the highly researched collection of material. What you are about to read is a very brief overview of the Progressive attack on the American Education system and the intentional destruction of Western thought and the Western way of life. [b]The Machine: The Progression of Secular Socialism[/b] [link=http://www.amazon.com/Machine-Progression-Secular-Socialism/dp/0557741157/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1330006179&sr=8-1]The book at Amazon[/link] After much research by many patriots within the Tea Party / freedom movement, Lanterns of Liberty has compiled details of the century long assault and progression of secular socialism. With the rise of Marxism throughout the world with the emergence of murderous regimes like the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Communist China, Communist Cuba, and others in the early 20th century, there was an intellectual non-violent revolutionary movement running parallel in ideology but diametrically opposed in tactics. This movement was made of the Fabian Socialists as well as the Frankfurt Marxists. The influence of the Fabian Socialists and Frankfurt Marxists are still seen today. In fact the actions and teachings have had a direct influence on you culturally, philosophically, and politically. We will not cover the Fabian Socialist in this post due to their minimal actions in education. [b]Frankfurt Marxists[/b] With the rise of Hitler, the students and professors at the Frankfurt school of Marxism saw the inevitable collapse of political Communist influence in Germany after the collapse of the Republic of Weimar. To avoid imprisonment and inevitable execution, the Marxists fled Germany across Europe as well as to the United States. Marxists like Eric Fromm, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkeimer, Franz Neumann, Karl Wittfogel, Herbert Marcuse, and Siegried Kracauer entered the United States education system occupying positions at Columbia University, University of California, Michigan State Univesity, Harvard University and others. All of these Marxists have had a pivotal impact on the undermining of American education but for the sake of brevity, we will mention Herbert Marcuse. Marcuse is considered the father of the “New Left”. In response to the history of the violent tactics of Stalin, Khrushchev sparked a new orthodox Communist movement which implemented a more Trotsky-like approach to revolution. Marcuse was a champion for this method of implementing Communism. Utilizing the tactics of Trotsky coupled with the progressive tactics of Anotnio Gramsci, Marcuse set out to create foundation of a progressive and incremental Marxist revolution in the United States to culturally undermine American values and rugged individualism. Through his teachings and influence at Columbia University, Harvard University, Brandeis University, and University of California, Marcuse along with his Frankfurt comrades molded the intellectual soldiers of American Marxism. These leaders would create the Marxist front groups like the Students for a Democradic Society (SDS) and The Weather Underground with the goal of destroying America. The idea behind this movement was to create the perception that cultural and moral norms were old fashioned and irrelevant. They needed to be reformed or better yet –ridiculed, refuted, and revolted. The disconnection between students and their parents was fully promoted by Marcuse as it was a revolution against the norms. Think about the acceptance of norms that were not accepted by your parents. This is evidence of moral decay promoted by the Frankfurt Marxists or fathers of the 60’s Cultural Revolution. Marcuse would heavily influence the radical 60’s counter culture with books like Eros and Civilization which synthesized Marx and Freud articulating the need to liberate civilization from moral and norms in order to evolve civilization into a peaceful and non-repressive utopia. It was at the heart of the 60’s Cultural Revolution which changed America’s view on morality and family for ever. This highly transformational time was exactly what Vladimir Lenin described when he said, "Give me just one generation of youth, and I'll transform the whole world." [b]Community Organizing[/b] After the failed attempts to created social unrest in the sixties, the members of SDS and the Weather Underground retreated into the education system to carry out the remainder of the progressive tactics of destroying western capitalism and western moral norms through indoctrination and activism. With leaders like George Wiley, Francis Fox Piven, Richard Cloward, Heather Booth, Wade Rathke (ACORN) and Dale Rathke (ACORN), the revolutionary tactics of community organizing were implemented. This was the non-violent revolution that Gramsci, the Frankfurt Marxists, the Fabian Socialists, and leaders like Khrushchev espoused. [b]Cloward and Piven Strategy[/b] Top Down and Bottom up is the best way to describe the Cloward and Piven strategy. The strategy outlined a goal to implement heavy social entitlements that could not be supported by American tax revenue. The architects of this strategy theorized that the overweight and top heavy system would eventually collapse under its own weight allowing the political operatives to blame capitalism for the collapse. From the ruins of the old system a new system, formally created as a [link= http://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Party-Hillary-Radicals-Democratic/dp/1595551034/ref=pd_sim_b_4 ]Shadow Government[/link], would rise up from the rubble and create new socialist utopia. This was obviously an ambitious strategy and needed to be instituted through the mechanism of the US electoral system. To collapse the American Free market and United States Constitution had to be done through the power structure in government. In order to populate government with power hungry politicians capable of class warfare, the progressives would have to garner support from an electorate desiring the false benefits of socialism. This would have to be done with a highly trained organizer. [b]Midwest Academy for Social Change[/b] Heather Booth created the Midwest Academy to accomplish just this. With the use of Saul Alinsky’s "Rules for Radicals", community organizers would be groomed to agitate the disenfranchised Americans – most notably the American Black Community. The Midwest Academy also trains political operatives to work in tandem with community organizers to implement the Cloward and Piven strategy. In the book [link=http://www.amazon.com/Radical-Chief-Barack-American-Socialism/dp/B004Q7E0V8]Radical-in-Chief[/link], author Stanley Kurtz outlines in great detail in a revealing expose of the Midwest Academy and Obama’s background as a community organizer. This is a must read to see the underbelly of the American Socialist Revolution. [b]The Soviet Invasion[/b] To understand the Soviet Invasion, we must understand Communist tactics. For the average American infused with the recognition of absolute truth within the tenants of Western Culture, recognizing the revolutionary and evolutionary tenants of Eastern Culture is extremely challenging. Communism is purely revolutionary. It is a reflection of Darwin’s theory of Evolution as well as Heglian dialectics. The most obvious evidence of this is the denial of absolute truth, a supreme creator, and unalienable rights. Communism at its core refutes all religion. The reason for this is that pure Communism requires a continual revolution to redefine its existence. Communism is in constant metamorphosis because it is void of all absolute principles. It is not defined by the tenants of natural law or the laws of a creator. There are no absolutes. Instead, its goals and tenants are to eliminate all that prevents its metamorphosis. All that interferes is an enemy to the ultimate goal of Socialist Worker’s Utopia. This is why Christianity or all religions for that matter must be destroyed. In order to destroy Christianity and all religions in America, the Marxists needed to promote atheism and cultural / moral decay. Utilizing the methods of Georg Luckacs, who believed that Christianity was a huge hurdle to the implementation of world Communism, the Marxists created organizations to destroy the connection between the child and the parent. Margaret Sanger, a Marxist in ideology and founder the highly protected organization of the left - Planned Parenthood, saw the woman as being repressed by the responsibility of motherhood. She also saw the family is the degeneration of social order. [i]“The marriage bed is the most degenerating influence in the social order,”[/i] [b] Margaret Sanger, April 1933 Birth Control Review [/b] This is perfect representation of the radical revolutionary ideology of the Marxist. By completely denying the sanctity of life, Sanger justified sexual, promiscuity, the irrelevance of the family, and the ability for human beings to design perfect people. Despite any moral underpinnings, the revolutionary must tear down anything that creates a barrier, to molding people into the bricks of Babel that will collectively be stacked in order to reach to the man made utopia that the Marxist desires. The biggest mold for these bricks is the American education system. In order to break down the stone-like defectors of the collective, the child’s foundation must be grinded down in order to create aggregate to be mixed with the Marxist mortar that will be used to make the utopia reality. [b]The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America [/b] [link=http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0966707117/ref=sc_pgp__m_A150OCLKQ7VU7P_1?ie=UTF8&m=A150OCLKQ7VU7P&n=&s=&v=glance=]The Book at Amazon[/link] From http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/pages/author.htm : Charlotte Iserbyt is the consummate whistleblower! Iserbyt served as Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education, during the first Reagan Administration, where she first blew the whistle on a major technology initiative which would control curriculum in America's classrooms. Iserbyt is a former school board director in Camden, Maine and was co-founder and research analyst of Guardians of Education for Maine (GEM) from 1978 to 2000. She has also served in the American Red Cross on Guam and Japan during the Korean War, and in the United States Foreign Service in Belgium and in the Republic of South Africa. Iserbyt is a speaker and writer, best known for her 1985 booklet Back to Basics Reform or OBE: Skinnerian International Curriculum and her 1989 pamphlet Soviets in the Classroom: America's Latest Education Fad which covered the details of the U.S.-Soviet and Carnegie-Soviet Education Agreements which remain in effect to this day. She is a freelance writer and has had articles published in Human Events, The Washington Times, The Bangor Daily News, and included in the record of Congressional hearings. Charlotte Iserbyt was a defector to the collective system. While working within the Reagan administration, Iserbyt uncovered an enormous amount of information revealing the channels used to implement the molding required for a collective society. One of the most shocking things that she found was the utilization of Ivan Pavlov’s and B.F. Skinners’ temperament conditioning and involuntary reflex action techniques. To understand this method and their relevance to the schooling of our children, we just have to look at performance-based, results-based, and outcome-based education. Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” is the epitome of the education system designed by Marxist professors. This program instituted a national system to monitor students development with minimal emphasis on reading, writing, and mathematics but rather on social development. In 1985, Secretary of State George Shultz under Ronald Reagan negotiated the US-USSR Education Exchange Agreement. This was the beginning of implementation of a homogenized culture of collective education and collective consciousness. This included a paradigm shift in education to reflect the following: [b]Beliefs[/b] - from bible based beliefs to earth-centered beliefs [b]Culture[/b] – from western individualism to global solidarity [b]Values[/b] – from bible based values to human idealism (humanism) [b]Morals[/b] – from moral boundaries to sensual freedom [b]Rights[/b] – from personal freedom to social controls [b]Economy[/b] – from Free Enterprise to Socialist collective [b]Government[/b] – from government by the people to an elite autocracy. The biggest barrier in this education system is the parental foundation. In order to eliminate all of these old paradigms, parents will need to be distanced from the child in order to educate or should we say indoctrinate children into the ways of the new collective ideology. If you notice in the current political environment there is an overwhelming attack on the Christian foundation. This is not so much an attack on the Christians as it is an attack on individualism. Remember, revolutionary ideologues see a god as a barrier to their utopia. They wish to be a god or look to a benevolent leader to be their god. This is obvious by the totalitarian dictatorships witnessed in all Communist regimes. Christianity simply is the most prominent religion and the Goliath to take down. The false dogma of separation of church and state has permeated the boundaries of the public school so deep that even the mentioning of God is put under extreme scrutiny. The censorship is even going as far as removing the “under God” from the “Pledge of Allegiance”. This is all evidence of the destruction of all spiritual absolutes. In order to secularize the child and remove as much religious influence from his or her education, the system must promote the education of all the tenants of education that normally would include religious reasons for moral actions. This will synchronize all children into a singular secular outlook of morality. Sexual education is a perfect example for this. Instead of teaching the spiritual significance of sexual interaction and the sanctity of creation, schools are now teaching only the scientific explanation for pregnancy and preventative measures. Sociological equality between men and women is another teaching that refuses to mention the dynamically differing roles between the father and the mother in regards to the family. Instead the teachings simply explain the genitalia and biology. This all undermines the core fundamentals and foundations to American individualism and promotes the collective socialist synergy of the desired unachievable utopia. Charlotte Iserbyt warns most of all of the infiltration of the local schools system with Marxist operatives trying to consolidate schools in the name of fiscal expedience. In the guise of saving money Iserbyt explains that radical operatives will move to combine many schools into a more condensed system distancing the parents from the children. Iserbyt says the goal isn’t fiscal responsibility but rather an attempt to make it more difficult for the parent to directly influence the school’s curriculum. She mentions the words to look for are “consolidation” and “regional government”while citing a direct link to the Communist tactic of “regionalism” in an article by Morris Zeitlin. Zeitlin, who was a writer for Communist Party USA newspaper “The Daily World”, states in an article titled “Planning is Socialism’s Trademark” that regionalism worked well in the Soviet Union for promoting collectivism. Once the parents are distanced from the student, Iserbyt mentions that the schools and curriculum will be run by an unelected council (soviet) form of governance. This type of regionalist system is evident in the United Nations initiatives UNESCO and Agenda 21 (environmental sustainability agenda). Iserbyt says that regionalism is the purist form of Communism being implemented in the American education system. These systems are being initialized worldwide as well and will work together to create the synchronized collective. This is a world-wide revolution. and world is ripe for it as the confidence in the Free-Market system and republican governmental system is weak. So what do we as American Individualists need to look out for? We will reference the good work of Mary Kass of the GNOTP. [b]Vouchers [/b] – Vouchers are handouts by the government being used to attract private schools. Once private schools accept vouchers and become dependent on the vouchers to exist, the government will move in to implement the secular socialist curriculum. [b]School-site management [/b] – This system is promoted by the heavily unionized National Education Association (NEA) for the promotion of vouchers. [b]Educational Choice[/b] – This is the [link= http://www2.ed.gov/parents/schools/choice/choice.html]education voucher[/link] and considered a Trojan horse for the secular socialist system. [b]The Private School trap[/b] – Parents of children in private schools are not only paying tuition for their child to go to school but also participate in paying taxes for public schools. The political way for the secular socialist system to invade private schools is to politically persuade parents to vote for tax credits in the form of vouchers. Once the vouchers are issued, the schools will be dependent as well as the parents. Vote for direct tax credits not vouchers. [b]Charter/Magnet Schools[/b] – These schools are often funded by radical foundations, multination corporations, unions, and institutionalized education research and development change agents promoting the secular socialist agenda. Some of these foundations are the Ford Foundation, The Carnegie Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. So how do we fix the system? [b]1.[/b] We must first learn the benefits and mechanisms of localized, state and federal government as espoused by philosophers like John Locke. We must understand the principles of limited government, individualism, and private property, in order to recognized pitfalls and recognize solutions. [b]2.[/b] We must populate the local government and disconnect the tentacles of the federal leviathan of the US Department of Education represented by radical foundations, multinational corporations, unions, and institutionalized education research and development change agents. [b]3.[/b] We must re-institute the focus of teaching to teach the absolutes of arithmetic, reading, writing, free-enterprise, civics, the US Constitution, American History, World History, and Western Civilization History. We must teach the magnificence of the enlightenment and greatness that surface by its implementation in the United States. Lastly we must teach the importance of the sovereign independent nuclear American family. America, we have a lot of work to do. We still have time to turn this ship around. If we do not, we are destined to become servants of the collective state. Our children will become simple widgets or gears in the massive world-wide machine of a secular socialist system. Thu, 23 Feb 2012 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B4406952-123F-7491-A4AF6AA66B70F000 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=AA93FC73-123F-7491-A4BABD248F988644 The political climate has been very interesting since the Obama administration pushed forward with the dictate to force religious organizations to provide contraception to their employees. If you were to watch the news, you would think that Obama made a great benevolent concession to the sensitive nature of our churches purchasing birth control, condoms, and new aborticide drugs by shifting the cost burden from the religious organization to the insurance company. Instead Obama has achieved his goal of forcing a private entity into providing free contraception to women by changing the means of delivering it. A great Alinsky “ends justifies the means” tactic. Initially, the Obama administration declared a mandatory dictate to religious organizations whether they were for profit or non-profit to provide contraception to their employees despite the religious organizations spiritual teachings. This is clearly a breach of the 1st Amendment. [i]Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, [b]or prohibiting the free exercise thereof[/b]; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[/i] The Catholic Church does not believe in the use of contraception, philosophically right, wrong, or indifferent, this has always been a part of the Catholic doctrine since contraception became available. Let’s forget about the morality aspect of this and simply focus on the constitutionality factor. To force someone to do something that goes against their religion is unconstitutional. This is no different then forcing someone to purchase private insurance from a private company. It is unconstitutional. If we argue that people need health insurance and need contraception, couldn’t the argument be made that people need home protection and must buy a home alarm or a gun for that matter? What is the difference? There is none. Forcing someone to go into a contract with a private entity not only opens the door for other constitutional infringements based on precedence but also opens up the door for massive crony-capitalism or even a fascist government. So back to the issue… Obama’s solution to the concerns of the church is to shift the responsibility from the religious organization to the insurance company. Or should I say the evil insurance companies. Well think about it. Is the insurance company going to eat the cost of the contraception? No. They will raise the price of the policy to cover it and label the contraception as free. If the church pays for the insurance policy which provides the contraception, aren’t they still paying for and providing the contraception? It is simply an ethically questionable accounting ruse. So what Obama has done, much like Carter and Congress did with the Community Reinvestment Act, is force a private entity to provide something that isn’t in there best interest. This will simply artificially inflate (a bubble) the price of insurance. Granted this is worse because it isn’t condoned by the tax payer through their voice in Congress. It is an Executive branch dictate. There is nothing different in this situation then Chavez or Castro dictating private industry in their countries. Sounds extreme? It is. With that being said, is free contraception an issue that requires immediate action? Is contraception, in most cases, not available at the local pharmacy? Heck you can buy condoms for a couple bucks at the gas station or even in the bathroom of some bars. There is not a lack of access or affordability. In fact, in most states people can go to a Planned Parenthood. We are by no way advocates of Planned Parenthood or the distribution of contraception with tax payer money. The point is being made to show all the options already available. Let’s even forget about the constitution for a minute much like our liberal comrades on the left do quite often and look at just the severity of the condition of birth control or rather population control. Couldn’t we say that there are other more important issues to address? How about high blood pressure medication or breast cancer medications? How about cholesterol medication? Is contraception really an issue that needs direct attention? No. It is a pet project of Obama. National Review’s [link=http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/290707/when-obama-voted-infanticide-andrew-c-mccarthy]Andy McCarthy[/link] covered Obama’s infatuation with birth control. His infatuation stoops all the way down to infanticide (killing a baby within 24 hours of its birth) as detailed by his voting history. There is more to Obama’s intentions then simply aiding poor women or un-wanting mothers. It is about Mao-type population control and pandering politics. As a political ploy, there is great potential for a backfire. In the process of trying to gain political strength with women supporters, he has positioned himself to lose the Catholic or even the Christian, Jewish, and Muslim vote. It seems to be a bad political calculation. In the last several years, Obama has gradually lost support from women who were pivotal in his 2008 victory. In this [link=http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/women-voters-buoy-obamas-2012-hopes/]ABC piece[/link] by Devin Deywer, he points out that even after the pandering to women with female political appointees and support for women specific services in the Healthcare legislation, he has lost women’s support. This is why he has tried to pander to them with forcing private entities to provide contraception. Of course there is the possibility that this is a last ditch effort to set the stage for 2012 Presidential debates to focus on social issues rather than Obama’s uncomprehessible economic failures. Regardless, his actions are mostly political, highly radical, and definitely unconstitutional. Seems like Obama is shooting par. Mon, 13 Feb 2012 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=AA93FC73-123F-7491-A4BABD248F988644 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=E218CB97-123F-7491-A4F29145F1E5AEAD I was recently asked to address a chart published by the Atlantic in July of 2011 as well as the [link=http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24sun4.html?_r=2&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss]New York Times[/link] and recently the [link=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/obamas-and-bushs-effect-on-the-deficit-in-one-graph/2011/07/25/gIQAELOrYI_blog.html]Washington Post[/link] detailing the United States national debt incurred by Bush vs the debt under Obama. Before we play ball lets just address the context of the chart and how relevant is the information that is being detailed. 1. Congress controls cost. To blame Bush for spending is to be similar blaming the Drew Brees for the loss of a football game without recognizing the rest of the team. The fact is congress drafted all of the legislation that Bush simple signed into law. In the same respect, we can not blame Obama soley for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Congress also crafted this legislation in which Obama passed. The fact that Bush paraded around on the Medicare reform and Obama did the same with Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is simply politics. the fact is the people that drafted the legislation are temporary politicians act on the demands of the people. 2. Debt is determined by the obligations in relation to the disproportionate amount of revenue to cover the obligations. To simply look at costs without the environment in which the economy was in is simply 2 dimensional and frankly lazy for the sake of being partisan in this example. Bush's tax cuts actually stimulated the economy and generated more revenue for the government. Revenue increased from 32% of in 2003 to 38% of GDP in 2007 prior to the economic downturn which had nothing to do with the tax cuts but rather failed government policies starting with the CRA in 1977 passed by Democratic majorities in both the House of Representatives and Senate as well as signed by Carter. We will get to that momentarily. So now that we stripped apart the irrelevance of the angle that this chart is trying the be used to "Bush bash", lets put the spending and debt into context correctly and unveil the proper culprits of this economic destruction that Obama has inherited as well as disastrously made worse. We must first discuss the cause of the economic collapse to realize the environment that Bush and Obama governed under. [b]The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977[/b] [b]Point 1: [/b]The federal government, through the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (CRA), encouraged banks and savings associations to relocate branch locations into low to moderate income neighborhoods in order to provide loans to less fortunate people. The intention was to eliminate so called discriminatory credit practices by banks. What this did was create a secondary market in banking and undermined the lending system. [b]Point 2: [/b]Banks are in the business of lending money for a profit. With lending money, like any business, provides a certain amount of risk. To deal with the risk, banks create hedges against the risk which are often in the form of an investment vehicle for investors to purchase. With the added risk of the CRA, banks had to create a hedge on the added risk. The banks created “Credit Default Swaps” in order to insure them against loan defaults. In order to receive money for the insurance they sold these speculative instruments to investors willing to cover the risk in order to potentially make a profit. It is no different in a home owner buying an insurance policy with the possibility of a catastrophe destroying their home. The insurance company profits with the money they are using to cover the home owners risk. [b]Point 3:[/b] This created a bubble. The longer this policy existed, the more homes were sold. Many of these homes were purchased by people that would not have ordinarily been approved by the banks in the first place. With a huge spike in home purchases, the value of homes sky rocketed from the increase in demand. Through the great economic times of the Reagan era, there were virtually no repercussions of this careless legislation. During the early nineties the savings and loan crisis was the first sign of a highly inflated housing market. Of coarse there are many reasons for the recession in 1990-1991 but the S&L crisis was at its center. [b]Bubbles:[/b] To understand bubbles, we must understand the capital markets. Bubbles are actually natural in free market economics. Large bubbles are a sign of market manipulation. An example of a bubble is experienced simply by the rise and fall of a stock. Think of a stock as a glass of water. Buying and selling a stock by a number of investors is much like adding and removing water from the glass. The more buying of a stock increases the value of the stock as the more selling decreases value. True value is determined by the individual transactions of all that buy and sell the stock. Below is a chart of Microsoft. You can see that in the late 90’s Microsoft was overvalued. Part of its decline was due stock overvalue of the entire tech sector. Once the market realized that there was too many overvalued tech companies and the Federal Reserve raised interest rates slowing the economy, the value retreated to its true value at a much lower value along with the rest of the tech industry. You can see where the stock value bounced became a trend line. It is this trend line that shows evidence of Microsoft’s value at around $23 per share. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/msft.jpg[/img] [b]Housing Bubble: [/b]So now that we understand the basics behind bubbles, we can now look at the housing bubble which was much more substantial. Let’s take a look a the chart of the housing market since 1970. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/HousingPrices.jpg[/img] Download the data?AS you can see, it is obvious that the market was overvalued at the turn of the century into 2006. So let’s ask why. Well we already mentioned the CRA. Immediately after the passing of this bill in 1977, there was an increase in the buying of homes which increased the value. The market eventually reacted with the fall of housing prices in 1980. At this point the turbulence of the legislation took hold. With the reduction of interest rates and the reduction of inflation, the market began to oscillate more erratically around its true value. In 1995 Bill Clinton allowed HUD through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to join the speculative sub-prime process. By the end of his presidency, Clinton had turned around the slumping housing market through government policy. This created a massive bubble that sent banks running for cover to hedge the unstable housing market. Eventually the market came down in 2006 when the economy slowed. [b]Conclusion: [/b]It is obvious that with good intentions, government market manipulations for the purpose of environmental protection and support of the less fortunate will only damage the environment in which our economy exists. The best way to return the economy is to a less volatile environment is to stop trying to cage it. There is evidence that more government creates more poverty and less environmental protection all around the world. If people think that the way to resurrect the US economy is to allow government to control the market, they are mistaken and absent from historical precedence. There are hundreds of examples of this throughout history. [b]National Debt[/b] To understand national debt, we must understand truly what it is and who the debt is owed to. To make it simple, the debt is owed to the American people mostly. After all thats what truly matters to us. So lets look at debt obligations during the presidencies of Bush and the current presidency of Obama recognized by both the US government and the bipartisan Congressional Budget Office. In this [link=http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12039/HistoricalTables%5B1%5D.pdf]chart[/link] by the Congressional Budget Office, we can see on page 2 the debt held by the American public. During Bush's term, the debt was 34.7% of the Gross Domestic Product in 2000 and increased only to 40.3% That is less than a 6% increase in 8 years. Obama inherited a 40.3% of GDP public debt in 2008 which grew to 62.1% in 2010. That is a 22% increase in 2 years. In this same [link=http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12039/HistoricalTables%5B1%5D.pdf]chart[/link] by the Congressional Budget Office, we can see on page 12 the annual deficits. Bush governed over deficits the worse deficit being $459 billion in the midst of the economic recession in 2008. Obama witnessed $1,413 billion in 2009 and $1,294 in 2010 respectively. Once again another persecutive change from the hack job performed by the liberally slanted Atlantic, Washington Post, and the New York Times... Oh by the way... talk about propoganda... [link=http://www.whitehouse.gov/infographics/us-national-debt] On the White House Website[/link] In this [link=http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/hist07z1.xls]chart[/link] issued by the United States… not the Atlantic, New York Times, and the Washington Post, you can see that the Gross Federal debt under Bush's presidency grew from 57.3% of the Gross Domestic Product to 69.4%. That is roughly a 12% increase in the debt based on the entire economy in a period of 8 years. Obama presidency started with 69.4% in 2008 and grew to 93% in only 2010. That is rough 24%. So we can say that the increase in the debt under Obama was almost double what Bush incurred in only 2 years. Different perspective? So what these figures show is a dramatic and irresponsible Barack Obama as well as the irresponsibility of congressional representatives - Democratic majorities in both houses from 2006 to 2010 - that held the purse strings. During tough times whether it is recessions or depressions, there is an obvious down turn in federal revenue due to the reduced revenues by the private sector. It is completely irresponsible to raise taxes during a recession, as Obama stated in January 2010. If companies are struggling to stay above water and are paying less taxes because of reductions in their own revenue, it makes complete sense that if you support their success, you will achieve a higher taxable income pool for the government. This is no better explained then the [link=http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2004/06/The-Laffer-Curve-Past-Present-and-Future]Laffer curve[/link]. [b]Leadership[/b] The key to economic success for a nation needs a certain and positive environment. Uncertainty is the biggest destroyer of prosperity in our nation. The fact is the poor do not create jobs. This is simple logic. So we can assume that in order to create jobs in an economy, you do not punish the job creators. The so called millionaires that Obama races around the country pontificating about pay over 80% of the taxes. If we are to join in the ridiculous discussion of fairness, how is that fair? How is it fair when 47% of the country doesn't pay taxes to service the debt but hold an equal share of the debt. If we are to argue about democracy, how is that equal and just representation? It isn't. So how do you spur economic growth? Unleash the job creators by showing them a future that is certain and not filled with too may questions. Obama's stance is extremely ambiguous. As his biggest donors are GE and Goldman Sachs, he appears to be a big business crony capitalist but speaks as a big government Marxist. Dividing the country into classes, races, sexes, and whatever other type of boxes you can create on the census form, doesn't bring Americans together. It divides. So when Obama campaigns about the rich paying their fair share, he is creating uncertainty. These millionaires and billionaires are not simply the Warren Buffets and the Bill Gates of the world but rather pizza shop owners that may do 1 million dollars a year in business or the local dry cleaners. Punishing these businesses with higher taxes will only deter their investment in business expansion as well as hiring. So to all that wish to jump into the shallow end head first, take a look at the sources of the data. Tue, 06 Dec 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=E218CB97-123F-7491-A4F29145F1E5AEAD http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=C7117729-123F-7491-A43D9ADA44F74630 Despite the Progressive’s attachment to the theory of evolution as their name suggests, Progressives are anything but progressive. You see the logic that escapes the Progressive is that nature is truly progressive. Nature moves in cycles. The most recognizable cycle is that of the seasons. In the Spring, nature is reborn and flourishes in the Summer. In the Fall, nature begins to cleanse itself as it dies in the Winter. The parts of nature that are the strongest live through the winter to relive the cycle again. So how do we make the connection between nature and capitalism? There is no fairness in nature? Survival of the fittest is the only law. Does the Lion on the Serengeti not kill the weakest gazelle when they hunt for food? Does the weather adjust itself for the poor penguin in the arctic or does the penguin adjust to the weather? Progressives embrace our animal nature only when it is convenient for them. With the natural aspects of man rooted in individualism and competition, Progressives curse the most natural aspects of human nature as some type of disorder. They also are the ones that get to determine what is natural and what is a disorder. Despite their devotion to liberalism which amounts to the tearing down of all boundaries that nature has defined, they feel that achieving a free and fair society is to put up boundaries in form of new laws. You see the Liberal does not wish to pay attention to the weather but rather wishes to become the weather. They wish to determine what the rest of America should adjust to in the name of whatever special interest or unquenchable desire that they wish to somehow quench. So as the pro-choice elitist Liberal/Progressive wishes to decide what the majority of the country should find interest in, should buy, and should eat, they denounce anyone that dares to question the illogical evolution of their thinking. The type of thinking that generates a false consensus that a government similar to China or the Soviet Union could produce a healthy environment. Regardless of the history of Chernobyl and the pollution of the Gansu Province, Fan Jai Zhuang in Anyang City in the Henan Province, the Anhui Province Cihu Chemical Industry District, and the heavily polluted Yangtze River in China, liberals see the authoritarian system as some utopia that can cure all ills. Deep inside it is all about ignoring the laws of nature and defining the laws themselves. It is simply a lust for power and at its roots a desire to be gods. How is it that a group of intellectual elite politicians in Washington DC can effectively determine the desires and wishes of 350 million American’s? Shouldn’t these Americans choose what they wish to purchase or believe? In simple terms, would a politician know how many hot dogs to have ready for all stadiums around the country on Sunday? Or should we trust the individuals wishing to capitalize on their own intelligence running their vending business in order to support their family? Is it necessary for these professional temporary politicians to determine what type of light bulb is right for us? Or can we make responsible decisions? Is it necessary for these politicians to determine what type of shower head to buy? Or can our townships determine what is good for our local environment? It seems to me that the natural evolution of man is not to be herded in a direction by the most popular shepherds in the nation but rather be free to decide what is best for themselves and their family. So now we shift to the politics. You see the Liberal/Progressive’s are not satisfied with the natural progress of man. They only wish to define the progress that they desire. They believe, in there own Ivy League defined world, that they are the only people that can determine what is best for the country. Despite their own natural self interests, they wish to define what Americans should be allowed to have interest in. Evidence is seen almost weekly with the Obamas speaking out against unhealthy eating while pictures are posted all over the internet with them eating chili dogs and French fries. The Progressives claim that man is imperfect and needs to be directed by laws but exclude themselves from this pool of imperfection. Liberal/Progressives wish to protect the middle class but due irreversible damage with their policies which are supported by big businesses and big banks they are destroying the middle class. They deny that the dwindling size of the middle class and growing divide between the so called “wealthy” and the “poor” over the last two decades has anything to do with the increase in government over the last two decades. This post is in no way a call for no government or no laws. Obviously there needs to be a civil government in order to sustain a peaceful society. What this post is about is how an overbearing government can be the cause for an uncivil society. If we are to speak in the terms of the “Occupy Wall Street”; why is it that when the government takes tax dollars from hard working Americans and gives it to “greedy” banks on Wall Street in the form of a bailout It is because they believe they know how to manage the markets of the world. Once again it is the Shepard mentality. There are billions of individuals deciding on which stocks to buy and to sell for their retirement and pensions but for some reason, these elitists believe that they can steer the current of the financial river. In fact they know very little about what the world desires and it is they that have caused the bubbles that have crashed our system. So why is it that the Occupy crowd pickets Wall Street in their anger of banks? Banks only make up a small portion of the stocks traded on Wall Street. Many of these stocks exist in mutual fund portfolios that make up pensions that so many of the protesters demand for Americans. Tearing down Wall Street is not the solution to the countries ills. Getting government out of Wall Street is. These acts of OWS are not evolutionary they are revolutionary. Tearing down Wall Street is the desires of those that hate capitalism. Many have been sold the lie of some grander scheme that will bring a sustainable resource based economy. Instead it is the carrot that will lead them into the prison of tyranny. What we are seeing on Wall Street isn’t progressive by any means. Free speech doesn’t include terrorism on a city or nation by shutting down its economic infrastructure. Although the anger in this movement is justified in some respect, it is pointed in the wrong direction. The government has created laws to benefit big banks and big businesses as political pay offs. Banks don’t create laws. The government has created laws that benefit the so called rich. When you make regulations that make it harder for people to do business, you eliminate competition. The anger should not be pointed in the direction of the law abiders or the law enforcers but rather the law breakers. What is happening on Wall Street is a collection of confused and uneducated people that have been infiltrated by dissidents and malcontents. They too don’t recognize their own self interests. The protesters want more distribution of wealth from the 1 % but do not want the homeless within there ranks. They are provoking the police and trying to create a situation that produces violence. What they don’t know is that they are simple foot soldiers in a movement to march in an authoritarian government. The solutions do not lie in the hands of a select few in government. They should never rely simply on that. The decisions should be in the hands of the American people. Liberating the states from the federal government would allow the people to become more involved in their futures. They would be able to determine what system they wished to have in their state. If California wishes to create a socialist utopia within the confines of the US Constitution, they could try it. It should however not affect Texas which wishes to allow its people to support themselves. The answer is not more control by the elites in DC but less control. Evolution does exist and can be proven. I am not speaking of the “Theory of Evolution” but rather the evolution of the innovations of man. Man doesn’t evolve from force. They are oppressed by force. Laws are force. The more laws we create, the more force on its people is created. When the force is not defined and clear, there is chaos and tyranny. When our temporarily elected officials write 1200 page laws and do not read them, the American people have lost. When man is unleashed to pursue their self interests with the incentive of profit as a reward for their labor, inventions like the automobile, electricity, and the computer can be realized. What we are witnessing in this country are the powerful people around the world not wishing to lose their power. They are now willing to allow the uncontrollable forces of the desires of millions of people to create a demand for what they want and entrepreneurs to provide that. The elite hate entrepreneurs because they are a threat for their claim of the market share. The only way to hold down those that are more innovative is to collude with those that make laws and enforce them. The Occupiers that hate the police are pushing to create a police state. Tearing off the shackles of fascism in order to install the straps of communism isn’t the answers to our ills. We must return to what made our country great. We must rely on the productive American people. It is the ingenuity of American innovation that will bring us sustainable energy. It is brilliance of the American desire for greatness that will lead this world to prosperity. It is the foundation that our American founders that planted the seed for this greatness that will restore America as a beacon of freedom around the world for all to admire. It is this brilliant light that citizens of other countries will envy and work to imulate our greatness in their own. America is innovation. America’s freedom is the incentive for all of those around the world. America is the answer. Thu, 01 Dec 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=C7117729-123F-7491-A43D9ADA44F74630 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=D57FA10C-123F-7491-A4A3A398FE54905B Language is one of the most important bonds that holds a society together. Communicating through words brings people together.If you wish to destroy a society, you simply attack the language or redefine and confuse it. This is evident in many historical texts. It is appropriate to mention the most influential text in history on how language or a societal language is important to retain order and common purpose. In Genisis 11:6 it is noted "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them." If there is any validity to the Bible in this dark day, this verse explains that not just common purpose but language must be similar in order to achieve anything. America has achieved its greatness through this biblical verse. From the 1700's when primitive farming techniques were perfected to merely 250 years later where we put the feet of men on the moon, the greatest achievements of man had been accomplished. In 250 years, Americans accomplished what no other civilization could do in over 2000 years. America began with plowing the fields with wooden tools to putting Americans on the Moon. Now it must be clarified that the language mentioned here is not merely English or Spanish but rather a common purpose. Of coarse purpose isn't independent of phonetics or vocabulary but common direction and purpose is most important. Recently we have heard leaders say that America isn't a Christian nation despite the true history of our founding. In fact, our founding documents reflect mostly scripture - specifically Deuteronomy. Of coarse Deuteronomy outlines the basics of our lawful system, the law itself requires a common language. Definitions matter. In a secular sense, the scriptures provided an outline to a structure that had existed for nearly 4000 years. So if language is the backbone of society, in order to destroy a society, you must distort and re-define the language. A humble society is a great one. Once the society adjusts its focus of the future from a common righteous one to a selfish pompous one, the ills of vanity will task over. This is evident in Genesis 11. "They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.” Instead of working for to reflect God's greatness, those in Babel, decided to try and make a name for themselves. God saw this and punished them for their vanity. "So the LORD scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 9 That is why it was called Babel[c]—because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth." Genesis 11:8 So whether or not you subscribe to the literal interpretation of the Bible or simply see the stories as parables, it is evident that vanity destroys the language and uproots the conduit for communication. The story of Babel is simply an example of a civilization that fell due to lack of a common language. So when those in our society try to distort or confuse the language of our country, they are simply acting in vanity. Dictionaries are the most important books in our society because they define our language. The law is most important because it binds the seams of our society with order. The anarchists or communists come into our society to disrupt our order, they are acting in vanity. It is their arrogance that feeds their ignorance. Their so called "alternate" ideology is simply progressing society into a lawless state. Sadly, the majority of these malcontents don't realize that as they seek to tear down a free society they are being guided by an ideology that will take the power from the people and give it to the state. They are acting as useful idiots as Lenin and Stalin described them. Saul Alinsky in his book "Rules for Radicals" explains how he used the residents of urban housing projects to use disruption in order to agitate business owners. There is a clear purpose in this book that is purely evil as Alinsky intends to organize poor communities to destroy the business establishment. In one example he describes in the book, Alinsky writes of organizing a large group of people to attend a symphony orchestra after consuming a large quantity of beans. During the show, they would begin to flatuate and creating a spectacle. The purpose of this disgusting behavior was to agitate the upper class into submitting to Alinsky's wishes. In another instance, Alinsky targeted Ohare Airport. He proposed organizing a large group of people to occupy all the restrooms preventing the patrons of the airport to use them. The airport's business would be damaged severely. Alinsky simply wanted to cause trouble in order to get the Ohare airport to accept the local union. There is no difference in these tactics then those we are seeing at the Occupy Wall Street protests. Is disrupting businesses and destroying private property intending to create a form of intelligent democratic discussion or is it to hold the occupied cities hostage until the submit in some way? I be so bold to say the latter. Anarchy only lasts as long as the people care to hold onto their withering liberty. Once the society crumbles, those in power will restore order in the way they see fit and mold the citizenry into the bricks to build their utopian society. There are numbers of different instances in history where this occurred. Whether it was the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia 1917 or the burning of the Reichstag in Germany 1933. In both of these cases, the anarchy unvieled led to some of the most evil leaders in history where millions died at their hands. We must work hard to keep our country from being destroyed from within by those that wish to remake our country. The fundamental transformation of our country is taking place. This transformation has not just begun but has been taking place for many years. Without a common language or goal to uphold freedom and liberty, we are doomed to fail as all of the other republics that existed before us. The language that is being mentioned here is not just the phonetics but also the interpretation of the law. Without the dictionary of our society that defines our purpose and our structure, our language becomes blurred and the borders both proverbial and literal will fall. So we must study that which defines America and its language. The definitions lie within the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution. Fri, 11 Nov 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=D57FA10C-123F-7491-A4A3A398FE54905B http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=8DC49334-123F-7491-A437EAF93FA2A50F There has been much debate over the last several years about the direction for the United States. With the election of Barack Obama, many people began to pay more attention to the political process. Many became invigorated because of the historical excitement of our first American Black president as well as those that were skeptical because of his mysterious radical background which is mostly unknown. It seems that there has been much ridicule with little direction to the solutions. As Americans became more invigorated and educated about the landscape of our political process, the problems became exposed. With this exposure came the ridicule. Many Americans knew something was wrong with the political process but were too apathetic and comfortable with the failing system. With the apparent collapse of the world economic system mostly due to the collapse of America’s leading economy, many have woken up to the reality that the sidelines are no longer a place to stand in these dark days. It is pretty easy for many of us to shout out the problems. It much more difficult to look into the multi-dimensional political landscape and point out the true areas that needs to be restored and reformed. So we will lay out some key places to begin this reform. Much of the reform is the reduction of the centralized federal government. The fundamental gripe of Americans on both the left and the right that support free markets with minimal institutional safety nets can be solved the with the reduction of power in the hands of so few in Washington DC. [b]Fundamental complaints: [/b] [list] [*]Political Corruption [*]Income inequality [/list] Both of these problems seems at the surface to be diametrically opposite in political discourse. Many on the right complain about the size of government and see it as the sole problem. Many on the left see a growing divide between the upper class and the middle – lower class and see that huge corporations and banks are taking advantage of the common American. [b]The case for competition: [/b] America has always been a country that supported personal responsibility and competition. There is no coincidence that our founders built our system with these two in mind. Without personal responsibility and competition, we would rely on a central ruler or ruling body to pick the winners and losers as well as define our moral compass. Our founders rejected this when they revolted against the religious monarchy of Britain. The reason why our system is failing is that we have adopted ideas that are foreign to our founding. These ideas are that of equal out comes and centralized moral regulators. Competition has always been the foundation of America’s greatness. Competition reveals virtue. Without virtue a society is dead. Virtues are what lead society out of tough times as well as lead the society into prosperous times. As much as we would like to eliminate tough times, it is fundamentally impossible much like eliminating winter is impossible. America has always been a compassionate country. Removing all safety nets would be irresponsible. It is important however to not allow our safety nets to steal virtue from the backbone of the country as well as the dignity of those that require assistance. American dignity is just as important as American virtue and has always been the biggest challenge for political policy. When American’s lose their dignity, they become narcissistic and get infected with envy. We are now seeing this play out as our empty narcissistic society participates in class warfare as they resent those that have been rewarded virtue. Let me be clear that some of this virtue was not earned by competition but rather by corruption. Can we eliminate corruption? We could if we could eliminate winter. Man is inherently corrupt by nature so corruption is just as natural as virtue. There is no man or women that are immune from corruption… not even politicians. It is important to point out corruption and be sure to uphold the earned justice that is due. It is more important that we don’t allow those that are corrupt to earn the rewards of virtue. If we allow the corrupt to earn the rewards of virtue, it will not be nature that rewards virtue but rather the elite men or women in society. Let’s not deny that the virtuous can recognize as well as choose what they believe to be virtuous. The minute that the virtuous choose those that lack virtue, they will suffer the reduction of their own virtue. When someone purchases a product from a company that lacks virtue or votes for a politician that lacks virtue, that person becomes less virtuous. A purchase is no different then a vote. Democracy doesn’t only exist in our political process but also exists in our economic process. To over regulate the free market is to over regulate democracy. So how does this philosophical discussion translate into practical government policy? We must embolden the virtuous as well as protect the dignity of Americans. We should not punish the virtuous and feed the destruction of American dignity. There is no true American that wishes to be forever fed by the welfare system. There is no true American that doesn’t desire to be in the company of recently demonized top one percent. So to build policy that protects as well as promote true Americans that reinforce competition and protect American dignity is the goal. So how do we do it? Let’s begin. [i]Welfare Reform [/i] – We first must completely reform the American welfare system. Promotion of American welfare as stated by our founding documents doesn’t mean that we are to create a perpetual evolution of dependent Americans for political purposes. Welfare recipients should contribute back to society while receiving subsidies from the government. There should be a menu of community services or internships that those on welfare can choose from in order to receive their subsidy. If the recipient refuses to participate in community service, they are refusing the subsidy. [i]Balanced Budget Amendment [/i] – Americans deserve a target for spending so they can have stable control of revenue requests. Without a stable tax and spend mechanism, our businesses can not properly anticipate the tax environment. Uncertainty is the biggest destroyer of investment. 18% of GDP is a good start. Whatever this amounts becomes, it should not be able to be changed without a constitutional amendment. Reform or remove baseline budgeting methods. [i]Tax Reform[/i] – Repeal the 16th Amendment and create a tax system that is simple and fair. A progressive income tax is not the answer. Income should only be one source of revenue for the government but not the sole source. Someone that owns a billion dollar business that receives a pay check of $1 a week pays no income tax. Most likely he or she receives his benefits from dividends or capital gains which his tax responsibility would be much less then the highest tax bracket. A flat consumption tax accompanied with an income tax should be highly considered. This would encompass all that participate in the economic process including the super wealthy. This tax should be protected by a Constitutional Amendment that freezes the tax percentage unless changed by a two thirds vote from the congress as well as the states. [i]Uptick rule[/i] – Shorting (selling) a stock should be limited to execution on the “uptick” of the stock price. Allowing a free fall condition in our financial markets by allowing hedge funds to put a negative run on stocks is destructive to the purpose of the market which is to evaluate value of companies and commodities. [i]Insider Trading[/i] – Full and transparent investigations of insider trading should promoted. No one serving in political office should be negated from insider trading laws. [i]Congressional Pensions and payments[/i] – Politicians should receive salaries and pensions comparable to the average income of Americans. They are servants of the people and by principle should not receive salaries or pensions higher then that of the people they serve. There service is to promote the welfare and success of the American people and their success should be based on merit not entitlement. [i]Congressional term limits [/i] – Representatives in congress should be limited to a six year term. This will keep politicians from becoming life-time politicians. [i]Social Security[/i] – Social Security should be reformed to instill the “lock box” promise as it was intended. There should also be a portion of Social Security that can be declined by young contributors while allowing then to contribute to an IRA or 401K. [i]Get rid of tax havens [/i] – This would include all entities like churches, political, and charitable organizations. [i]Get government out of marriage [/i] – There is no reason why the government should determine what an expectable civil union is. Marriage should not be a tax haven or determine the benefits of Americans. [i]Unwind the Federal Reserve [/i] – Sound money is the foundation of a sound society. Value of money should not be determined by a pseudo-government conglomerate run by bankers. [i]Immigration enforcement [/i] - Not that immigration laws are more important than other laws but illegal immigrants should not be used as political fulcrums. All illegal immigrants should be deported or properly documented. We should promote legal immigration programs and work permitting of foreigners. [i]Federalism [/i] – We should promote federalism as it was designed by our founders. States should be looked at as experimental entities. This will allow the states to experiment with different policies without affecting other states. If Massachusetts wishes to have socialized medicine, it should not affect Texas. Remember: Taxation without representation? [i]Education department [/i] – Education should be funded by the states if the states wish to pay for it. Citizens of Georgia should not have to subsidize students in California. [i]English as official language [/i] – There is nothing wrong with learning multiple languages but trying to accommodate multiple languages throughout the infrastructure of our culture balkanizes the population and duplicates all legal efforts. [i]Reduce the EPA [/i] – The EPA should be nothing more than a mediator between states with environmental concerns. It should be the actions of the people’s representatives to create regulations and the executive to enforce them. The EPA is acting unconstitutionally by creating regulations while by-passing congress. [i]Repeal 17th Amendment [/i] – The reason why people have become more disconnected with local government is because of the 17th Amendment. Senators should be elected by the state congresses not by popular vote. This will realign the people in directing there desires locally which will disperse the power of the federal government. [i]Repeal Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) [/i] – Eliminate the secondary market of housing. Loan standards should be decided by the free market not the government. [i]Reinstitute Glass Steagall barriers[/i] – The removal of the barrier between investment banks which issue investment securities and corporate banks that accept deposits caused many bank failures during the housing crisis. [i]Repeal Dodd Frank [/i] – [link=http://www.cadwalader.com/assets/client_friend/061311TwoDoddFrankProblems.pdf] There are many problems with Dodd Frank. [/link] Most of the problems exist with a huge increase in the size of the bureaucracy which will increase the potential for corruption. With this increase there is a huge increase in the need for attorneys and added staff to manage banking requirements. This will hurt small businesses and embolden big businesses / banks that can afford the overhead. The link provided will outline other problems with the legislations. [i]Repeal Obamacare [/i] – This huge legislative leviathan is a disaster for business. It will take years for businesses to adjust to the legislation. Small businesses will take the biggest burden of this legislation. Instead of forcing people to buy health insurance, the value of healthcare needs to be realized by the free market. There is a huge separation between the healthcare consumer and the healthcare provider. When a consumer goes to the doctor, he is concerned about his or her individual cost. In most cases, that is a small deductible. If the consumer requires $200 in service or $2000 in service, the consumer is only concerned with a small deductible (ie. $40). If the consumer was required to regulate the expense, they would help bring the cost down through supply and demand. HSA accounts are ideal to reconnect the healthcare consumer to the healthcare provider. Cost containment is due to the lack of competition as well as the discouragement of HAS accounts which Obamacare eliminates. [i]Defund FEMA[/i] – FEMA has become the biggest waste to American tax payer in the last 10 years. States should manage their own disasters. Federal funding is sometimes necessary but management of a crisis has always failed under FEMA. Katrina is evidence of this. [i]United Nations [/i] – Defund the UN. The UN is nothing more then a conglomerate of mostly representatives of tyrannies making policy for failing world policy. The United States always gets stuck with bailing out other countries and subsidizing corrupt coalitions. [i]Military Bases[/i] – A full assessment of America’s military bases needs to be taken seriously. America should not be the policemen for the whole world as well as the financier of failing democracies. What needs to be taken from this is that the massive regulations on the free market are creating massive amounts of corruption and disparity between middle class worker and the upper class business owner. These divisions or classes don’t represent the intentions of our founders and are hardly easily defined. The reasons why these classes are beginning to emerge is the crony-capitalism as well as the elimination of competition by regulation. The question that needs to be asked is, “Why do big businesses support massive regulations?” Regulations eliminate the competition for big businesses who can afford the regulation. Government doesn’t belong in deciding winners and losers. It also has no place in bailing out business or people blindly. Corruption as well as the suspicion of corruption is not healthy for the country. The American people deserve an equal playing field but not equal outcomes. When legislation steps over the line to try and insure outcomes or protect outcomes, it needs to be pointed out. Risk is a part of life and helps determine value. When risk is undermined, reward is undermined as well. Mon, 31 Oct 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=8DC49334-123F-7491-A437EAF93FA2A50F http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=1F35AC33-123F-7491-A4740D4C302F678C For the average person that may not remain plugged in to the everyday news cycle, revolutionary events around the world may seem much like a conglomerate of separate events. However when you begin to look at the people involved in all of the events, you can begin to see how the events begin to coalesce into a loosely linked reaction of events steered by the same people. That is a pretty strong accusation considering the pure size of the world and all the revolutionary events that have been occurring in places like Georgia, Ukraine, Serbia, Tunisia, Egypt, Iran, Syria, and many others. It is however not a conspiracy theory or coincidence that these people are linked. It is a concerted effort to create a globalist utopia void of social injustice. It is a socialist revolution. [b]Gene Sharp[/b] We must first start with the seed of this revolutionary movement. Gene Sharp is a professor at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. His revolutionary pamphlet [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/pdf/FromDictatorshipToDemocracy.pdf]“From Dictatorship to Democracy”[/link] is well known around the world by revolutionaries as well as feared by governments for the powers that it wields. The book explains in 3 volumes the art of non-violent civil disobedience. Sharp’s writings are so influential that they were used by Lithuanian, Latvian, and Estonian governments to separate from the Soviet Union in 1991. The influence of this book has been extremely potent. It has become the source of ammunition for the democracy revolutions around the world. Sharp’s Albert Einstein Institution, which has received much support from socialists [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/pdf/Open-Letter_Academics_Zunes.pdf]Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn[/link], was mentioned by Ukrainian revolutionary Oleh Kyriyenko in a 2004 Radio Netherlands interview as being the source behind a new world-wide revolutionary movement. [link=http://www.modernghana.com/news/345082/1/gene-sharp-and-the-theory-of-soft-and-und.html]Oleh stated:[/link] [i]"The bible of Pora has been the book of Gene Sharp, also used by Otpor, it's called: From Dictatorship to Democracy. Pora activists have translated it by themselves. We have written to Mr Sharp and to the Albert Einstein Institute in the United States, and he became very sympathetic towards our initiative, and the Institution provided funding to print over 12,000 copies of this book for free.[/i] [b]Otpor[/b] Within the last decade the revolutionary movement has become more than just a political movement but rather a business. Otpor, which is Serbian for “Resistance”, is a group of Serbian activists in the business of spreading democracy. Powered by the tactics of Gene Sharp, Otpor effectively organizes citizens of oppressed countries and trains them on rising up against the ruling regime. In an expose on [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBqBSrrTyzo&feature=player_embedded]journeyman.tv[/link], revolutionary affiliates of Otpor reveal that they have received millions of dollars from the United States Federal government to support revolutionary actions. So how does Otpor operate? An article from [link=http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/02/16/revolution_u?page=0,2]foreignpolicy.com[/link] explains how during the Serbian revolution against Slobodan Miloševi? the revolutionaries pushed an oil barrel with down the street Miloševi?’s picture on it allowing citizens to beat the barrel with a club for money. What this did was set the stage for the outrage as the police stepped in to stop the action. The arrests of the Otpor members were viewed on television and became a recruiting tool by showing the police as a brutal anti-democratic force. The Otpor then became antagonists to the police staging a media frenzy which provided a youth-full rock star persona to be projected on the Serbian media. From here the movement boomed as youth all around the country stood in solidarity with their brave dissident brethren. Growing from 11 revolutionaries to 70,000, Otpor became a symbol of democratic power around the world. It had spread to all corners of the world as group leaders Slobodan Djinovic and Davorin Popovic would then create Center for Applied NonViolent Action and Strategies (CANVAS) to educate youth around the world the art of effective revolution. In 2008 the revolutionaries reached out to the Middle Eastern and North African revolutionaries to steer them into a successful revolt. With the help of Facebook and Google, these revolutionaries message spread like wild fire amongst the youth of these regimes and created a catalyst of change. Google executive Wael Ghonim began conducting United Nations Egyptian representative El Baradei’s presidential campaign called [link= http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/24/world/la-fg-egypt-elbaradei25-2010feb25 ]“National Front for Change”[/link]. Has a similar ring to Barack Obama’s Hope and Change campaign. What is a somewhat untold narrative is the true intentions of the revolution. Without any motives but disdain for the current situation in their government, the revolutionaries wander the street with little to no explanation on how to reorganize the government or even the future of the newly freed people. With this confusion creates a power vacuum. It would be ridiculous to think that there isn’t a power structure in place to move the country in a new direction. As the Egyptian regime toppled, an immediate recall of the state constitution was voiced by many of those in the top ranks of the opposition to Mubarak’s soft tyrannical regime. [link= http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFJOE71F0N620110216?sp=true ]Reuters reports[/link] a new constitution was conveniently drafted with help from the George Soros funded Arabic Network for Human Rights Information. So how is this important in the United States? The same movement is being experienced here. The Occupy Wall Street crowd is simply the front-lines of the new revolution in America. After years of recruiting by the likes of the NAACP, ACLU, Apollo Alliance, National Council of La Raza, Code Pink, the World Workers Party, ACORN, and many others including radical Marxist professors from our education intuitions, the time for revolt has never been more fervent with so many people unhappy with the current political and economic environment that the US is currently in. There is no wonder why there is no common theme or message by the protestors. The protestors are simple a collection of mostly young people unhappy with various conditions like social injustice, environmental protection, civil rights, and popular special interests. With the political winds prime for shifting to a more conservative pro-free market direction, the leaders of these activists have decided that now is the last stand for the dreams of their socialist utopia. It is very easy to point out the influence of Otpor within the Occupy Wall Street maelstrom. The images of fists are not only a revolutionary Communist resistance icon but also the logo of the Otpor group. The chanting that is being witnessed at the protests is evidence of Otpor’s method of keeping the crowd busy and collected. It is a collectivist tactic to keep a group in message and unified in solidarity taught by Otpor. The pepper spray event appears to be a staged event that has become a clarion call for the protestors against the police. It has become echoed through the media invigorating the support for the under-dog youth. As the oil barrel was used before in Serbia, it has become a recruitment tool. Lastly we must show the most obvious evidence of the presence of Otpor by the presence of one of its founders [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkM3BBtc7N0]Ivan Marovic[/link] speaking there. So you can see Ivan speaks to kids that have no idea why they are there but the solutions will come. Should ask from where? Could we say that these youthful are filled with ignorance? And can we say that the ignorant can do idiotic things? Stalin and Lenin thought so. They called them Useful Idiots. This solidarity movement against the establishments around the world is supported by revolutionaries that are bringing down regimes with the intent of the democracy of the people. Sadly there is a power structure already in place that has been designed by the socialists. From the UN to front organizations like the Club of Rome, the infrastructure will be implemented as soon as the last pieces fall into place and all obstacles are removed. The biggest obstacle is that of the United States Constitution. There is no coincidence that the most prominent leader of all community organizers, Barack Obama, has pointed to the Constitution as his biggest obstacle as it should be for gaining totalitarian control over the United States. Recently Obama has shifted his position to a more radical position against congress. He has mentioned at several rallies that he would act without congress if he could. He has also taken the Truman stance of campaigning against congress since even the most radical Democrats in congress see Obama’s policy as destructive to not only their political futures but too destructive for the country. What we are witnessing is the rise of an American Dictator. The laws of the Constitution still work against Obama but everything that Obama is gearing up for is pointing towards his past as a community organizer. He has begun the class-warfare rhetoric that has fueled the anti-capitalist Occupy Wall Street movement. There is no denying the resemblance of a revolution here. As this movement grows the more dangerous it will become and the more of a political fuel tank it will be for Obama. As this movement continues to grow, the protestors will not only do the Alinsky-like community organizing for Barack Obama but will also will be used to destroy the political opponents of Barack Obama. As the messages of the protestors become a unified message, Obama will campaign on that message. The message will not be a promise but rather a means to the re-election ends of Barack Obama so he can continue destroying the American economy and the United States Constitution. Sun, 09 Oct 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=1F35AC33-123F-7491-A4740D4C302F678C http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=7FFC613E-123F-7491-A47A43B5B7A2F6FC Anarchy has always been a favorite term of the malcontent youth around the world. As cool and hip as the word seems to the youth, the idea of anarchy is a completely bottomless as the utopian idea of communism. In fact they go hand and hand. Let me explain. Civil society requires a mostly self governed people working together to protect themselves, educate themselves, and promote themselves through a locally elected civic governing body. The intention of local government is to provide organization to people in full view of their community. In a free society, individuals can not be expected to agree on everything. The temporary members of the local governing body are elected to bear the burden of decision making for the local electorate. Amongst the governed their will always be people that disagree. Amongst those that disagree, there will be a small percentage of malcontents. The malcontents disagree with the majority and exist in their own elite world. They often try to manipulate the majority into following their elite view. In most cases the malcontents collect with like minded malcontents. They often provoke others within the civil society that may disagree with the current governing body. These provocateurs are the agitators or the community organizers. This is obviously a simple example of the civil society but it will serve as a good start to our explanation. So how does the anarchist and the communist fit into this? Well in most cases the anarchist and the communist is the malcontent. Similarly they are both discontent with the current civil arrangement. There is a difference and it is very important to note. Defining these two types of malcontents are obvious trying to contain a nebulous entity which is understandable considering they are often principle-less. Let’s start with the definitions from dictionary.com: [b]Communist:[/b] a person who is regarded as supporting politically leftist or subversive causes. A communist system is that of a communal organization. The rights of the people are owned by the state and provided through governing institutions. These rights are determined by a politburo of elected elite. In the perfect utopian vision, a nation or world under communism yields a harmonious hegemony where all people are equal and guaranteed equal results. There is no poverty and all is grand. We all know that equal results are impossible and it is the antithesis of nature considering that no human being is created with all the same attributes. Individuality is evident in nature. [b]Anarchist:[/b] a person who seeks to overturn by violence all constituted forms and institutions of society and government, with no purpose of establishing any other system of order in the place of that destroyed. It would be pointless to outline in detail an anarchist system since they are completely against any type of institution or civic government. Instead they wish for all people to be able to do as they wish. Anarchists often operate in mobs which don’t wish to solve problems but rather to ignore them. These two groups are obviously different but always work together when discontent settles within a society for whatever reason whether it is economic hardship, war, etc. It is important to mention that there are indefinable layers of these two groups. It can be described that Communists exist in a socialist category as the anarchist exist in a libertarian category. In the past we have seen diagrams that have described the scale of ideological nature. Some you may be familiar with. Governing Scale: used to determine type of government [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/governingscale.jpg[/img] Ideological Scatter: used to determine ideology [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/centrist.jpg[/img] You may have not seen the Lantern scale because… well… it is a Lanterns of Liberty concept. Lantern Scale: [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/AnarchyCommunism.jpg[/img] This scale represents the societal ideological balance. Both extremes of anarchy and communism bring about a totalitarian state. Both societal ideological goals are unachievable and require people to be perfect. In the Communist system, the politburo needs to be made up of angelic figures that only serve the people. In an Anarchist system, all people must be angelic in order for society not to break down. We all know that people are generally self serving individuals and they will act accordingly. So how does the Lantern Scale represent societal make up? When society begins to break down, the malcontents rise to the top and bring about the destruction of the civil society. When this occurs, the former civil majority will sacrifice its liberty to achieve some sort of civility. They will then elect any charismatic leader that promises to achieve the peace and civility they desire. Well let’s look at past history for evidence of this? In our early American history, the American people self governed for the most part amongst their local establishments and communities. Once hardship came in the 1920’s and 1930’s charismatic leaders promised protection from hardship. Franklin D Roosevelt utilized the full might of the federal government to ease the people’s concerns after the American economic system began cavitating due to failing Woodrow Wilson and Herbert Hoover policies. Franklin D Roosevelt utilized the malcontents that rose up from the Great Depression. John Maynard Keynes and activist leaders like Harry W. Laidler, Jack London, Norman Thomas, Upton Sinclair, and J.G. Phelps Stokes of the Socialist Labor Party pointed out the ills of the free market system. Along with this group and the migrated Frankfurt Marxists, the American education system was molded into a socialist education system. All of these intellectual elites were invoked by the leader of the socialist revolution at the time. [i]“Give me just one generation of youth, and I'll transform the whole world.”[/i] [b]Vladimir Ilyruch Lenin[/b] Another point in history was the fall of Russia in 1917. Anarchists fought alongside of the Bolsheviks to overthrow the Czar in the October Revolution. Once the government had toppled they turned on each other and the Bolsheviks prevailed. So how is this explanation relevant in our current situation? We are currently seeing a revolution much like that of the Russian Revolution in 1917. There many parallels including the statement by American Communist leader [link=http://www.breitbart.tv/van-jones-promises-october-offensive-against-capitalism/]Van Jones who has promised an October Surprise[/link] reminiscent of Trotsky’s and Lenin’s October Revolution that can be anecdotal but seem all too familiar with Van Jones’ messages which have heavy tones of Communist lingo. The malcontents of the Anarchist movement and the Communist movement have entered the battle ground on Wall Street against the capitalists. Most of these malcontents are students who have been activated by their socialist mentors. The message seems to be the same at the surface but the ideology is diametrically opposed. Above these malcontents is the Progressive/Communist leaders that disguise themselves as union leaders, environmental advocates, civil rights voices, and Hollywood actors are fanning the flames with their propaganda. We have seen Roseanne Barr come out in favor of beheading the capitalists. [i]“I first would allow the guilty bankers to pay… back anything over 100 million in personal wealth because I believe in a maximum wage of 100 million dollars and if they’re unable to live on that amount then they should go to the reeducation camps, and if that doesn’t help, then be beheaded.”[/i] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tB2AUhPDTVc]Roseanne Barr video[/link] We have also seen union leaders in favor of economic collapse. [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/thevault.cfm?Entry=DE3130A1-123F-7491-A4E83DBEAF3D9C9B]Steven Lerner talks about collapsing the Banking System[/link] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnakdRdh7Es]Steven Lerner Audio[/link] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKqHL8eJZO8] Steven Lerner Video[/link] Lanterns of Liberty has also outlined the [link=http://lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/index.cfm?Entry=790A1CE5-123F-7491-A4EC16E4D06C9D8C]infrastructure[/link] that is orchestrating the events around the country. Some of the organizations that are behind the movement are as follows: • AFL-CIO (AFSCME) • United NY • Strong Economy for All Coalition • Working Families Party • TWU Local 100 • SEIU 1199 • CWA 1109 • RWDSU • Communications Workers of America • CWA Local 1180 • United Auto Workers • United Federation of Teachers • Professional Staff Congress - CUNY • National Nurses United • Writers Guild East • VOCAL-NY • Community Voices Heard • Alliance for Quality Education • New York Communities for Change • Coalition for the Homeless • Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project (NEDAP) • The Job Party • NYC Coalition for Educational Justice • The Mirabal Sisters Cultural and Community Center • The New Deal for New York Campaign • National People's Action • ALIGN • Human Services Council • Labor-Religion Coalition of New York State • Citizen Action of NY • MoveOn.org • Common Cause NY • New Bottom Line • 350.org • Tenants & Neighbors • Democracy for NYC • Resource Generation • Tenants PAC • Teachers Unite Most of these organizations are arms of the George Soros Open Society network. This network is trying to deliver a one world government poised to eliminate capitalism. Seems a little extreme? I would like to think that the Russians in 1917 thought they would never see the rise of the murderous Communist regime as well as the Jews seeing the rise of the Nazi Fascists. As discussed in previous posts, the goal of Communism always leads to fascism. The Soviet Union and 1930’s Germany is evidence of this. Although the Soviet Union tight-roped the line of Marx’s planks of the Communist Manifesto and Lenin and Trotsky’s social justice engineering, it led way to the murderous dictatorships of Stalin. Represented as a government run economy, elected politicians ran the institutions rather than business owners or oligarchs. Hitler eradicated the Communists and instituted his delusional murderous false utopian German Reich. So now that we have made some similarities between the Russian Revolution, lets look at some of the demands of the Occupy Wall Street rabble rousers listed on their website [link= http://occupywallst.org/]httpoccupywallstreet.org[/link] on October 5th, 2011. [b]Demand one:[/b] Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending “Freetrade” by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr. [b]Demand two:[/b] Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors. [b]Demand three:[/b] Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment. [b]Demand four:[/b] Free college education. [b]Demand five:[/b] Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand. [b]Demand six:[/b] One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now. [b]Demand seven:[/b] One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America’s nuclear power plants. [b]Demand eight:[/b] Racial and gender equal rights amendment. [b]Demand nine:[/b] Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live. [b]Demand ten:[/b] Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system. [b]Demand eleven:[/b] Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the “Books.” World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the “Books.” And I don’t mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period. [b]Demand twelve:[/b] Outlaw all credit reporting agencies. [b]Demand thirteen:[/b] Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union. We can all see that this is unsustainable. This is the Communist utopia. The anarchists think that the individual citizen will regulate this utopia and the Communist wishes that a powerful central government will. When these demands do not come to fruition, there will be violence. We will see what Roseanne Barr desires as a revolution similar to the French Revolution where people will be executed in the streets. This is it folks. This is the final stand of American that Lanterns of Liberty has been warning about. Once anarchy from the revolution breaks out, the American people will surrender their liberties to bring peace. At this point the first official American totalitarian government will rule under Marshall Law. Thu, 06 Oct 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=7FFC613E-123F-7491-A47A43B5B7A2F6FC http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=E5A0E98A-123F-7491-A474905D1DB007C8 Ok… The taxing ourselves into prosperity or taxing ourselves to build the economy has to be addressed. There has been a lot of chatter on the radio and television that dances around with the typical left wing / right wing talking points that have existed for years. I do happen to believe the conservative talking points, not because by status in our society, but rather my experience, my research and common sense. So let’s address what I know and tie them the talking points. [b]Keynesian – trickle up – economics: [/b] Liberal talking point – Big businesses and the wealthy need to pay more taxes so money can be injected into the economy through the stimulated middle class. [b]Supply Side – trickle down – economics: [/b] Conservative talking point – Reducing the tax rates on businesses will create more investment and growth of the private sector. The added growth will trickle down to the middle class and promote continual economic. [b]Point 1: [/b] There is a simple question that explains the winner of these two economic models. Is wealth created in the private or public sector? To accompany that question, let’s ask another. If you take money from the producers, give that money to the public sector, then redistribute that money back to the private sector; does the value of that wealth increase or decrease? It is obvious that the government bureaucracy will receive that government revenue and take a slice of that revenue for government expenditures. After the government takes its slice they decide who gets that money. All too often they do not pick the best producer of what they desire but rather who is more politically aligned. Whether you are Republican or Democrat we can all appreciate the failure in this practice. [b]Point 2: [/b] Once the government picks the winners, how does the business that receives the money succeed in the business place? Do they succeed with a good quality inexpensive innovative product? Or do they back political policies of the ruling class? What this type of arrangement does is create a secondary market. Now companies in the private sector market place have to compete with those private sector companies that pander the political elite. Those that successfully lobby and pander to the ruling class, succeed not by innovation but rather by gaining from the referees of our once free market system. Now that the government has been fertilized by the crony capitalist, the country fails to produce affordable, quality, and innovative products. [b]Point 3: Free Enterprise method – trickle down: [/b] Once the wealthy retire their homes, cars, clothes, entertainment items, etc, is it safe to say that those items provide a cheaper version of the innovative items that were once brand new? For example; a wealthy business owner purchases a brand new Cadillac and drives it till it has 100k miles. He then trades that car in for a new Cadillac. They create commerce to the new car salesman as well as the used car salesmen. That older Cadillac then becomes owned by a less affluent car owner that wishes to benefit from the quality of a Cadillac. Once the less affluent puts 100k miles on the car, they trade it in for another car. Now that the Cadillac has 200k miles on it, its value is much less and a student can now afford it while they go to school. [b]Point 4: Keynesian method – trickle up:[/b] The government gives subsidies to a car company to destroy environmentally inferior vehicles. With the subsidies, the consumer has an incentive to purchase new and more environmentally friendly vehicles. While that incentive is exciting for the dealerships and the new car consumer, it is only a temporary stimulus. Now the free market has been subverted. The government has become an antigen that causes a huge reaction in the market. Instantly the new car is devalued by the government stimulus. All the people that have contributed to the stimulus have not benefited from the lower car prices. Secondly, the used car salesmen have just lost a huge portion of their products. Thirdly, the affordable used cars for students and young Americans no longer can afford a used automobile since the demand for used cars have gone up along with the price. Sounds familiar? [b]Keynesian – trickle up – economics:[/b] Liberal talking point – Big banks took advantage of poor people by misleading them into loans that they couldn’t afford. Big banks are wealthy enough and need to be regulated in order to make homes more accessible and affordable for the less fortunate. Big banks gamble America’s money away. [b]Supply Side – trickle down – economics:[/b] Conservative talking point – The federal government forcing banks to lower lending requirements to people that can’t afford loans caused the collapse when those loans were not paid. [b]Point 1:[/b] The federal government, through the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (CRA), encouraged banks and savings associations to relocate branch locations into low to moderate income neighborhoods in order to provide loans to less fortunate people. The intention was to eliminate so called discriminatory credit practices by banks. What this did was create a secondary market in banking and undermined the lending system. [b]Point 2:[/b] Banks are in the business of lending money for a profit. With lending money, like any business, provides a certain amount of risk. To deal with the risk, banks create hedges against the risk which are often in the form of an investment vehicle for investors to purchase. With the added risk of the CRA, banks had to create a hedge on the added risk. The banks created “Credit Default Swaps” in order to insure them against loan defaults. In order to receive money for the insurance they sold these speculative instruments to investors willing to cover the risk in order to potentially make a profit. It is no different in a home owner buying an insurance policy with the possibility of a catastrophe destroying their home. The insurance company profits with the money they are using to cover the home owners risk. [b]Point 3:[/b] This created a bubble. The longer this policy existed, the more homes were sold. Many of these homes were purchased by people that would not have ordinarily been approved by the banks in the first place. With a huge spike in home purchases, the value of homes sky rocketed from the increase in demand. Through the great economic times of the Reagan era, there were virtually no repercussions of this careless legislation. During the early nineties the savings and loan crisis was the first sign of a highly inflated housing market. Of coarse there are many reasons for the recession in 1990-1991 but the S&L crisis was at its center. [b]Bubbles:[/b] To understand bubbles, we must understand the capital markets. Bubbles are actually natural in free market economics. Large bubbles are a sign of market manipulation. An example of a bubble is experienced simply by the rise and fall of a stock. Think of a stock as a glass of water. Buying and selling a stock by a number of investors is much like adding and removing water from the glass. The more buying of a stock increases the value of the stock as the more selling decreases value. True value is determined by the individual transactions of all that buy and sell the stock. Below is a chart of Microsoft. You can see that in the late 90’s Microsoft was overvalued. Part of its decline was due stock overvalue of the entire tech sector. Once the market realized that there was too many overvalued tech companies and the Federal Reserve raised interest rates slowing the economy, the value retreated to its true value at a much lower value along with the rest of the tech industry. You can see where the stock value bounced became a trend line. It is this trend line that shows evidence of Microsoft’s value at around $23 per share. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/msft.jpg[/img] [b]Housing Bubble:[/b] So now that we understand the basics behind bubbles, we can now look at the housing bubble which was much more substantial. Let’s take a look a the chart of the housing market since 1970. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/HousingPrices.jpg[/img] [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/housing.xls]Download the data[/link] AS you can see, it is obvious that the market was overvalued at the turn of the century into 2006. So let’s ask why. Well we already mentioned the CRA. Immediately after the passing of this bill in 1977, there was an increase in the buying of homes which increased the value. The market eventually reacted with the fall of housing prices in 1980. At this point the turbulence of the legislation took hold. With the reduction of interest rates and the reduction of inflation, the market began to oscillate more erratically around its true value. In [link= http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/09/AR2008060902626.html ]1995 Bill Clinton[/link] allowed HUD through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to join the speculative sub-prime process. By the end of his presidency, Clinton had turned around the slumping housing market through government policy. This created a massive bubble that sent banks running for cover to hedge the unstable housing market. Eventually the market came down in 2006 when the economy slowed. [b]Conclusion:[/b] It is obvious that with good intentions, government market manipulations for the purpose of environmental protection and support of the less fortunate will only damage the environment in which our economy exists. The best way to return the economy is to a less volatile environment is to stop trying to cage it. There is evidence that more government creates more poverty and less environmental protection all around the world. If people think that the way to resurrect the US economy is to allow government to control the market, they are mistaken and absent from historical precedence. There are hundreds of examples of this throughout history. Wed, 28 Sep 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=E5A0E98A-123F-7491-A474905D1DB007C8 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=E5A3D6EB-123F-7491-A42DC730971CFA93 Lanterns of Liberty has covered extensively in the past the completely corrupt and criminal aspects of this new “green movement”. We have exposed the massive corruption in not only a national political scale but also a global political scale. The “green movement” is one of the massive ruses that the government has put into place to fund the fascist-like political business in Washington DC on both sides of the isle. We must state the obvious that no one wishes for the world to be destroyed by reckless and careless industry pollution. I don’t doubt that there are people that turn an eye to actions by business or individuals that don’t do their duty as stewards of the environment to protect the soil from which we live. That being said, there is a need for laws to protect the environment. With lawbreaking comes fines. For the government to be involved in guiding the path of industry with subsidies and tax breaks is the root of political corruption. As long as we allow the federal government, which is run by self serving politicians, to stack the playing field with their choice of innovators, we will be doomed to fail as all other fascist countries in history have done. So before I go on with the fascism claim, let’s look at the definition as defined by Merriam-Webster: [i][b]Fascism:[/b] often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition[/i] Now we currently are not yet governed by a sole dictator so obviously there is a gap in the fascism claim. However, we can see that social and economic regimentation is apparent in our governmental system. Entitlements have always been regimented to certain divisions of the electorate. These divisions suppress and oppress other members of the electorate whether it is through equal opportunity or through economically through redistribution of wealth. Although we do not have a single dictator ruling over the electorate, the office of the Presidency has taken much power through Executive Order and departmental regulations. Although the EPA is not a single person it operates as an arm of the Executive Branch. Their regulations are not laws passed by the people through the Legislative Branch but operations through the President of the United States. So what is the difference between the EPA shutting down coal plants and Obama doing it himself? It is important to note that the lines of socialism, whether it is fascism or communism, are very blurred and for me to simply state that we are dealing with a fascist state would be irresponsible. However, it is important to note the aspects of our system that have been polluted - if I am to stick with the theme – by fascist-like schemes. As mentioned in past posts, communism is an unachievable utopian goal. The pseudo-intellectual elite that are spoiled by our ideologically driven and confused educational system never enter the real world and try to mold society into these cute little unsustainable and unachievable models theorized by the likes of Marx, Engles, Habermas, Horkeimer, Fromm, Adorno, Dewey, Neumann, Wittfogel, Marcuse and many other academic socialists. Often the result to failed attempts to deliver the undeliverable state of communism is fascism. We are experiencing this now with our failing entitlement system. This is evident with Lenin’s failed attempt as well as the Communist’s failed coup of the Weimar Republic. Our transition happens to be much slower as socialists saw that violent revolutions are not the best method. They rather see a more Progressive incremental approach as a better method of implementation. The gradual destruction of a Republic through statism isn’t new as well. Rome experienced this through the moral corrosion and destruction from within. Failure of the socialist system is evident. The natural desires of a society are to maintain private property and virtuous achievement though the sweat of ones own labor. Only through lies and deception does the socialist create their own reality. To strip down society to a malleable collective, it is necessary to destroy the natural beliefs in nature’s law and the faith in a higher power. Through the “believe in nothing” mantra of people like Friedrich Nietzsche, the elitist can then re-shape and mold the citizenry into the ideological shape that they like. To see evidence of this theory of a progressive communist revolutionary method, read more about [link= http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/thevault.cfm?Entry=1F349DFD-123F-7491-A4AE4935A1B90344 ]Georg Lukacs[/link] Okay so we did get a little in the weeds here on the philosophical discussion but it is necessary to preface the evidence explained in our discussion of the “green ruse”. Despite the magnificence of our solar system and the dynamics of the all powerful Mother Nature, people like Al Gore believe that they can control the climate. Just to get perspective of the insignificance of man, let’s look at nature’s significance. Outside of secular circles, one could make the argument for God by simply witnessing the magnificence of all that surrounds us. As mentioned by [link= http://discovermagazine.com/2011/apr/08-the-sun-temperature-solar-cycle-fuel-supply ]Discover Magazine[/link], the Sun’s temperature fluctuates around 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit at the surface and as much as 27,000,000 degrees Fahrenheit at its center. The corona, which is the atmosphere, often is over 1,000,000 degrees Fahrenheit. These temperatures fluctuate through magnificent ranges. In some instances millions of degrees could be that range. To think that this fluctuation doesn’t affect the earth’s temperature is absurd. What is the temperature fluctuation of the Earth when one side of its surface wanes from direct sunlight? Warming and cooling as well as Solar cycles is natural and normal. Amidst these fears of global destruction due to rising global temperatures, global warming scientists measure the increase of global temperatures by tenths of a degree. The fact that the Sun hasn’t consumed the Earth is pretty amazing and proves to some degree – no pun intended – the significance of man’s ability to exist and something more then just simple chance or some astrological luck. So let’s shift gears and recognize the methods of politicians to use the lie of man-made global warning to fleece the citizenry of the United States. As outlined by [link= http://lanternsofliberty.us/Townhall.cfm?ThreadID=4773C6CC-123F-7491-A42D4D3913E75AB7&ForumName=Corruption%20and%20Greed%20Fleecing%20America&ForumNum=7298E981-123F-75BC-8FF3096D1B0E6697 ]Lanterns of Liberty[/link], the massive ruse trickles down from global UN leaders to the unions of America and those around the world. The scheme outlined below is intended to redirect tax dollars through the Cap and Tax proposed legislation to distribute wealth globally as well as fund Democratic donors and unions. [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/Enviro-Socialism.png][img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/Enviro-Socialism.png[/img][/link] Since the unveiling of this scheme by Lanterns of Liberty and others like Glenn Beck, the system has begun to cave in on the pressure of the truth. It hasn’t eliminated it however. [link= http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/12/new-doe-loans-support-green-obama-backers/ ]The Daily Caller[/link] recently outlined how the Department of Energy has been undeterred with the recent bankruptcy of Solyndra, which received over $500,000,000 of tax payer dollars to fund its green technology. The DOE has recently announced a plan to guarantee 80% - $275,000,000 – of the $344,000,000 of the private loan taken out by SolarCity. This is undeniably providing the company with insurance against failure with tax payer money. Where the problem exists is with the Chairman of SolarCity Elon Musk. [link= http://cqmoneyline.com/pml/search.do?indivLast_0=Musk&matchType_0_indivLast=s&indivName_1=Elon&matchType_1_indivName=c&logic_1_indivName=and&electionCycleId=17&electionCycleId=16&electionCycleId=15&electionCycleId=14&electionCycleId=13&electionCycleId=12&e ]Elon Musk[/link] has donated $35,800 to Barak Obama as well as dozens of Democratic and Republican congress members. The article also lines out how Solexel, which is a solar energy company that received $13,000,000 from the DOE, is financially backed by Steve Weslty who bundled over $500,000 for Obama in the past election and is bundling $100,000 to $200,000 to the 2012 campaign. Steve Weslty also is affiliated with Tesla Motors which received $465,000,000 in 2009, Amyris Biotech which received $24,000,000, and Logos Tech which received $20,000,000. So where does this end? Obviously there is something going on here. This isn’t new inside the beltway but it is obviously wrong. Why do these companies reap the benefits of the full faith and credit of the American tax payer and all other competing companies do not? Why is the green agenda being pushed so hard? These are questions that need to be asked. I would venture to say that these are all political pay backs that have no intention of providing value to the American tax payer. So if these subsidies and loans are paying campaign contributors to Barack Obama and other congressional leaders, is there any wonder why out system and broken and corrupt? How do we as American tax payers determine whether or not these companies are not using tax payer funds to funnel back into the campaign coffers? As lawyer and syndicated talk show host Mark Levin stated in his [link= http://www.marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930# ]September 12 show[/link], I would agree that a special prosecutor should be appointed to review this potential corruption. Tue, 13 Sep 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=E5A3D6EB-123F-7491-A42DC730971CFA93 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=6E6DADDC-123F-7491-A476A335250CD3CD There is many occasions that I have to defend the free enterprise system or what the Marxists call capitalism to those on the ideological left. The argument always leads back to the liberal explaining how big businesses is taking advantage of the people down below. When the left begins to allow logic to slip from their hands while their religion of liberalism is exposed for the ignorance that it is, their faith-like offense becomes the defense by class warfare. At this point the conversation breaks down and often the end is an agreement to disagree. It is always the intention of each side to explain the way they see things in order to influence the other side to stand on their site. What is frustrating about debating a devout liberal is the breakdown in their logic while discussing empirical data, the laws of economics, or even natural law that proves them incorrect. Trying to convince them that the public sector taking wealth from the private sector and giving it back to the private sector doesn’t create wealth is a perfect example of this. It makes no logical sense at all but somehow stealing or what the socialists call wealth distribution does not advance society and create wealth. So I often try to step on their side of the fence in order to explain how their dialectical logic is void of reality. Of course when you jump to their side of the fence there is that pesky little deposit that the puppy left that you step in that forces you to use leftist analogies that you wouldn’t often make with your successful logical friends at the business brunch. So with this in mind, let’s ignore the puppy poop for a minute and logically weed through the liberal garden. We often hear that big oppressive capitalistic businesses like Exxon, Walmart, Haliburton, and Bank of America destroy the middle class with their greed. We often hear that they give huge campaign contributions in order to gain market share so they can conquer the world with their poisonous polluting self interests. We often hear that they muscle out the mom and pop shops with their cheep prices and fancy store fronts. We often hear that the virtues of television are being destroyed by advertisements and that commercials should be outlawed. It is always the big business that is ruining life in America. When this “2 of spades” is played at the poker table of political debate, I always reach for the question labeled the “ace of spades” – logic. What creates big business? Now remember what side of the fence that we are on. I always go back to regulation. Those on the left always see that regulation is the answer to fixing the ills of society as if regulating something creates more of it. It is the old Marxist argument of quality vs quantity and that regulation creates quality. In fact without the environment of pure communist utopia, quality is destroyed by regulation. The environment of massive industry regulation works for liberals until the river that they diverted breaks from its levees and returns to its natural intended route which destroys all that the levees intended to protect. When the levees break like their regulations that failed when the housing market collapsed, they reach out to ridicule and blame the river as if it did something wrong rather then the stupid faulty regulations that they installed. After all what is different between the wants and desires of the millions of citizens in the country and the millions of gallons of Mississippi water that flow into the Gulf of Mexico every minute. There is no difference. The laws of economics are natural as the flow of a mighty river. So back to the question; what creates big business? Let’s use the cable industry as an example. Imagine that you have a cable company that offered a buffet of options. Instead of buying a package 50 stations, you could buy stations individually based on what you wanted to watch. As I remember what side of the fence and what I am standing in I say, “If you didn’t want Fox News you would not have to purchase it. Think about how great that would be as well as how cheap it would be. The quality of the television experience would be ideal for you as an individual. Instead you could simply buy MSNBC like the other four people that bought it.” Well why is it that this can’t be done? Well it goes back to regulation. The [link= http://www.fcc.gov/guides/regulation-cable-tv-rates ]FCC[/link] regulates cable rates because they try subsidize the lack of demand for local affiliates. So while trying to ignore the smell of menacing regulation, it is apparent through the odor that the regulation of this industry has simply made it more expensive to have cable. I just can’t buy MSNBC, now I have to pay more for the channels that I don’t watch like high school croquet matches. So if I was an entrepreneur and had an idea that would revolutionize and innovate television and I wanted to get into the cable business, I would have to abide by the expensive regulations. So the regulations do what they are intended to do. They limit me from doing business without subsidizing the unsuccessful. It is a major hurdle that keeps companies like Cox Cable and Comcast at the top of their game. Is there any wonder why big business donates money to the same people that create massive regulations for their own industry? What better way to defeat your competition then eliminating them with regulation. The regulations are the bouncer at the door, making sure that you are the person that the ruling class wishes to allow onto the playing field of success. So now that the cat is out of the bag, we must ask the next question. What creates lobbyists? Uh oh… We always hear the left screaming about the rich capitalists who send their evil lobbyist to pad the pockets of politicians so they can get preferential treatment in the market place. It is kind of like slipping the bouncer a hundred bucks to let you in the door. If the market was truly free, why would anyone have to pay a politician have to succeed in the market place? If we eliminated the need for lobbyists, wouldn’t the market place be a more equal playing field? At this point wouldn’t the authentic quality products rise to the top in the free market system? Think about it. The left is always talking about favoritism and crony capitalism as if it is the true nature of free enterprise. So who are the cronies? It is the government that makes the regulations. Regardless of party affiliation, the rules of the playing field are influenced by self interests of the politician. Whether it is political self interest or the interests of monetary gain, what is the difference? We can all lie to ourselves and think that all elected officials perform their duties as if they are angels. The fact is, the more rules and regulations that we allow them to make the more power they wield. You can bet they will use this power when an attractable self interest appears before them. And after they are long and gone, the repercussions of their regulation will still be there. It was best said by Reagan that “No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!” So now that we have flipped the liberal’s argument of free enterprise creating huge monopolies, lets look at the most regulated businesses. There are a dozen or so huge oil companies and a dozen or so electric utility companies that we can choose from right? How many electric companies do you have to choose from in your neighborhood? If you got upset with your energy company, what other choices would you have? How many BP and Exxon stations did you have to pass up to get to a station that supplied gas by a company that hasn’t had a major oils spill? Why haven’t these companies converted their primary methods of energy development to more efficient renewable forms of energy? How many regulations does an energy company need to go through in order to produce energy? How many permits do they have to have in order to create energy? How much money would an entrepreneur need to have or raise in order to start up an electrical company? Think about it. Is it the lack of regulations that has kept innovation from coming up with a renewable solution or has regulation not allowed the innovator through the door? I think we have illustrated that pretty clearly. It is apparent through our discussion here that regulations reduces the options available for the consumer as well as creates a wider divide between the big companies and the small companies. It is obvious that the virtues of companies are not determined by good products and good business but rather buy politicians. It is obvious that the lobbyist is created by the need to pay the powerful regulation defining ruling class politicians in order to get an edge in a extremely difficult playing field. It is apparent that free enterprise has been replaced by crony-capitalism. So when you are confronted by the ill-witted liberal that spouts their creed of regulations of the big business, ask them why big business would pay the same regulators that make business more expensive for them. Ask them why would big businesses need lobbyists if politicians have the power over their production. So now that we clear this up, clean off your shoe and return the sanity of “right” side of the fence. Wed, 17 Aug 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=6E6DADDC-123F-7491-A476A335250CD3CD http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=6875E62C-123F-7491-A486527E97A379C1 Those on the left that say conservatives are fascists are misinformed and don't understand that Fascism is national socialism. Many on both sides also don't understand - even the stupid Communists - that Communism is a utopian state that has never been achieved. The desire for a utopian state - or what I like to call heaven on earth - is impossible and will fall as Babel did... Ah.. did those silly Bible scholars describe the oldest evil in the history of man - Statism? Did they write about communal slavery? AKA Communism? The desire for the utopian Communist state by the self loathing drones on the left, will only bring this world to the utopia they desire outlined in the etymology of the word utopia - no place. So to all those on the left that hate Fascists, understand that socialism brings elitism. It brings politburos of corrupt government officials to allow the self interests of the few to rule the lives of the national commune. Communism brings Fascism because a society of equal outcomes is as ignorant a concept as having an ocean without waves. We are not equal because we were not created that way. If true Communism existed, there would be no rich people in China. There would have been no rich people in the Soviet Union. In fact the push to destroy the Bourgeoisie only creates a new Bourgeoisie of Fascists. Fascists use the lie of the utopian state in order to quench their insatiable desire for power over the people. These people use Trosky-ites and people so disillusioned by the Communist lie to absorb all of the liberties of the citizenry as does a greedy hoarder of power. It is this class warfare in a free society that creates 2 classes in the name of creating one. Fascism is simply a combination of crony-capitalism and failed communism which all are a product of big government. So for the people that think the power hungery and corrupt Soviet loyalists disappeared into the night or all of a sudden realized the free market and free society is a better route for humanity, wake up. Soviet subversion is a tactic of illusion which has been used since the beginning of time or the first bite of the apple was taken. Most people believe we live in a free society but in fact we do not. As long as we allow the lie of Babel's success to drive the blind and historically ignorant, we will end up in an enslaved state as did the Egyptians left to worship the monuments of the new pharaohs or future fascists presidents of the world. Thu, 28 Jul 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=6875E62C-123F-7491-A486527E97A379C1 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=1C2DCDAA-123F-7491-A474B156DB3800BE With the debt talks in full swing, there is a perspective that needs to be articulated clearly. Conservatives must take this opportunity to point out how modern day liberalism and progressivism has failed. Liberals and Progressives have tried to mix economics and social engineering unsuccessfully and we are now feeling the pain of these bad decisions. Amidst the meltdown of the global economic system, it is apparent which countries are in the worst shape economically. It is no coincidence that the biggest economies in default and near collapse are the biggest dabblers in socialism. Greece, Italy, and Spain are on the brink of anarchy because steep austerity measures are the only option as these countries have to keep their civil society from melting down completely. Their citizens have been promised benefits by politicians that their economy could not afford for political expediency. Now that the system is devouring itself, politicians are now taking shots at the same businesses that they made deals with to facilitate their delusional utopian socialist dreams. In communist countries, the extremes of corruption of the socialist system can be experienced and recognized. There are promises of socio-economic equality yet there are still billionaires in China as well as massive poverty. If you review Chinese poverty rates, you will see a reported low poverty rate as low as 3% as in this [link=http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2009/04/08/000334955_20090408062432/Rendered/PDF/473490SR0CN0P010Disclosed0041061091.pdf]World Bank report[/link]. What isn’t often mentioned is that this communist country’s poverty line is $0.57 PPP (currently the American Dollar) a day. CNN [link=http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/16/news/economy/Census_poverty_rate/index.htm]reported[/link] in September 2010 that the American poverty rate was 14.3% in 2009 at $21,594 per year which is nearly $60 per day. How is that for the relativity in poverty? Much of this poverty is due to the massive printing of money and continual devaluation of currency in order to entice other countries to purchase its cheep Chinese made products. It must be recognized, as reported by the [link=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703720504575376712353150310.html]Wall Street Journal[/link], that China increased its energy consumption and have surpassed the United States. The difference is that the energy consumption in the United States is based on consumers and the consumption in China is due to government infrastructure expansion. Americans are often labeled as the greedy wasteful citizens while it is obvious by [link=http://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-ghost-cities-2011-5#chenggong-is-building-skyscrapers-by-the-hundreds-1]these pictures,[/link] which show China is building cities that are being labeled as ghost cities by the media because of zero activity, that China is consuming massive amounts of resources for little to no purpose. Why is China wasting all of this money and resources to build billions of dollars of infrastructure and zero activity? This is the result of useless stimulus that serves little purpose other then a temporary economic boost. Now the bill will come due. The evidence is now being seen. [link=http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/08/news/international/china_inflation_cpi/index.htm]CNN Money [/link]reports that the Chinese inflation rate is over 6 percent which will bring more poverty and devaluation of its currency. This devaluation is acting as a vacuum in the world market as China is driving down the value of its own products in order to keep themselves a viable manufacturing force in the world. Socialist and Progressive politicians around the world have promised too much and are now being exposed. Unfortunately the blame expands across generations of socialistic socio-economic policy passed by temporary politicians that will never receive the criticism that the current politicians are receiving. The blame now must be on those that refuse to embrace the economic reality of socialism’s failure. This must be a lesson that socialism is not a viable economic system but rather a political one. Politicians and those absent of virtue are the only individuals that benefit temporarily under socialist system. Socialism, which is a political system that allows men capable of prejudices, is a system of inequality as it rewards everyone regardless of their effort, their hard work, their innovation, and efficiency of their labor. This is the epitome of economic injustice. However a Free Enterprise system prospers independently of race, sex, creed, culture but rather it prospers solely on rewards virtue. Now that a group of Democratic Progressives temporary politicians demand to raise taxes, they ignore the reality that if we confiscated all the wealth in the entire country, we would only be able to pay off one year's debt. After this wealth is destroyed, what do we have? Nothing. Tax increases will do nothing to address the debt. Imagine if we managed our credit card debt by simply paying of that debt with another credit card. We would simply be raising our debt limit. The only meaningful attack on this debilitating debt that will enslave our children and grand children is for us all to make sacrifices now. These sacrifices are with the meaningful reform of the entitlement state. Conservatives must point out the failure of socialism for it is a false promise to all that sacrifice their liberties for temporary security. Once these liberties are sacrificed, you can bet that it will be much harder to convince politicians to give that liberty back. Call your congressmen today and tell them to stop this ridiculous spending and to not raise the debt ceiling. Mon, 11 Jul 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=1C2DCDAA-123F-7491-A474B156DB3800BE http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=A5E329A3-123F-7491-A455758856E82967 The story of Jacob and Esau is very similar to the story of Isaac and Ishmael. We can only speculate on the reasons for the similarities for the Bible is the oldest source of historical documentation of these men. With these similarities we must first look simply at the names. First we must mention Isaac. The story of Isaac, outside of the moment where he was nearly sacrificed by Abraham, is insignificant. Everything mentioned about Isaac is relative to Abraham’s care for him along with the introduction to Jacob. It must be noted that in the bible Isaac’s name had never been changed from the time of his birth. Both his father Abram’s [Abraham] and his son Jacob’s [Israel] names had been changed. Could the fact that Isaac’s name was not changed suggest that Isaac struggled with his faith in God? This is obviously a very controversial statement and is speculative at best. Let’s take a look at this suggestion in more detail. Abraham expressed his concern about Isaac remaining in Canaan. Let’s revisit the concern. [i]3and I will make you swear by the LORD, the God of heaven and the God of earth, that you shall not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I live, 4but you will go to my country and to my relatives, and take a wife for my son Isaac." 5The servant said to him, "Suppose the woman is not willing to follow me to this land; should I take your son back to the land from where you came?" 6Then Abraham said to him, "Beware that you do not take my son back there![/i][b] Genesis 24[/b] Obliviously Abraham wanted to get his son out of the city. We see that the Canaanite women would not suit Abraham’s wishes and most probably his faith. The urgency of the author is unmistakable by the punctuation alone. Isaac’s apostasy could also be represented by his blindness at an old age along with his favor for Esau. Esau is mentioned as a hunter as Ishmael was an archer. He is also mentioned in detail in Genesis Rabbah from the Judaic commentary referred to as the Midrash. [i]Isaac and Rebecca had two sons: Esau and Jacob. Although they were twins, they were far from identical. Even during Rebecca's pregnancy their character difference was visible. According to Jewish tradition, when the pregnant Rebecca stood near houses of study and prayer, Jacob struggled to come out, but when she passed temples of idolatry, Esau eagerly struggled to come out.[/i][b] Genesis Rabbah 63:6[/b] It doesn’t get any clearer then that. So the question must be asked. Why was Esau Isaac’s favorite son? This is unclear. We can only look at the results in the story. God’s will was delivered to Rebekah. [i]Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you will be separated; one people will be stronger than the other, and the older [Esau] will serve the younger [Jacob].[/i][b] Genesis 25:23[/b] So if Isaac was to give Esau his blessing, he would be going against God’s wishes. This explains the deception by Jacob and Isaac’s inability to determine the difference between Jacob and Esau in his last days. Isaac was blind to God’s plan and wished against it. It was God that corrected this. The most important aspect of this story is that Isaac was the deliverer of Israel [Jacob]. He is protected by God because of God’s promise to Abraham. Isaac appears to be protected by God because of his fate to produce Jacob. It is very clear on two occasions in Genesis that Isaac was told that he was being protected because of this promise. [i]2The LORD appeared to him and said, "Do not go down to Egypt; stay in the land of which I shall tell you. 3"Sojourn in this land and I will be with you and bless you, for to you and to your descendants I will give all these lands, and I will establish the oath which I swore to your father Abraham. 4"I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven, and will give your descendants all these lands; and by your descendants all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; 5because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws." [/i][b]Genesis 26[/b] This is a simple mention of divine providence. We can say that divine providence is grace or good fortune due to the adherence to God’s will or to the law of nature. Despite Isaac’s wishes he was guided by the wishes of his father and most of all God or natural law – depending on your spiritual or philosophical beliefs. We look again at a mention of this. [i]24The LORD appeared to him the same night and said, "I am the God of your father Abraham; Do not fear, for I am with you I will bless you, and multiply your descendants, For the sake of My servant Abraham." 25So he built an altar there and called upon the name of the LORD, and pitched his tent there; and there Isaac's servants dug a well.[/i][b] Genesis 26[/b] Isaac is told by God that he is protected because of God’s promise to Abraham. The promise is to give his family great prosperity through the transcendence of God’s teachings and the adherence to his wishes. It is the epitome of faith. Divine providence provided the path of this transcendence through Jacob because Esau had chosen pagan brides against the wishes of Abraham and ultimately against the wishes of God. [i] 34When Esau was forty years old he married Judith the daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and Basemath the daughter of Elon the Hittite; 35and they brought grief to Isaac and Rebekah.[/i][b] Genesis 26[/b] It is apparent that the gravity was still present as Esau saw that his lust was more important than God’s will. It was then that Jacob’s deception became the vehicle of God’s will. Esau had proven that his seed would not bring forth a pure transcendence of God’s teachings due to his pagan wives. Later in Genesis it is mentioned that Esau had relations with Ishmael’s daughter once again solidifying the break in the wishes of Abraham, Isaac, and most of all God. [i] 2Esau took his wives from the daughters of Canaan: Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamah the daughter of Anah and the granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite; 3also Basemath, Ishmael's daughter, the sister of Nebaioth. 4Adah bore Eliphaz to Esau, and Basemath bore Reuel, 5and Oholibamah bore Jeush and Jalam and Korah. These are the sons of Esau who were born to him in the land of Canaan. 6Then Esau took his wives and his sons and his daughters and all his household, and his livestock and all his cattle and all his goods which he had acquired in the land of Canaan, and went to another land away from his brother Jacob. Genesis 36 Jacob's Dream 10Then Jacob departed from Beersheba and went toward Haran. 11He came to a certain place and spent the night there, because the sun had set; and he took one of the stones of the place and put it under his head, and lay down in that place. 12He had a dream, and behold, a ladder was set on the earth with its top reaching to heaven; and behold, the angels of God were ascending and descending on it. 13And behold, the LORD stood above it and said, "I am the LORD, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac; the land on which you lie, I will give it to you and to your descendants. 14"Your descendants will also be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out to the west and to the east and to the north and to the south; and in you and in your descendants shall all the families of the earth be blessed. 15"Behold, I am with you and will keep you wherever you go, and will bring you back to this land; for I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you." 16Then Jacob awoke from his sleep and said, "Surely the LORD is in this place, and I did not know it." 17He was afraid and said, "How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven." 18So Jacob rose early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put under his head and set it up as a pillar and poured oil on its top. 19He called the name of that place Bethel; however, previously the name of the city had been Luz. 20Then Jacob made a vow, saying, "If God will be with me and will keep me on this journey that I take, and will give me food to eat and garments to wear, 21and I return to my father's house in safety, then the LORD will be my God. 22"This stone, which I have set up as a pillar, will be God's house, and of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to You."[/i][b] Genesis 36:2[/b] This is a remarkable moment in the bible as it will define the location where Israel was born. Bethel, otherwise known as 'House of El' or 'House of God', is just north of Jerusalem. Much like the Kaaba, a stone was significant in this story. Interesting enough Jacob anoints the stone with oil which is a ritual common in many cultures during this time and even in some present day cultures. These stones were often known as meteorites . Like the “Black Stone”, this stone that Jacob anointed is known as a Baetylus. In Greek Mythology, the Omphalos was a similar stone that Cronus, the son of Gaia and Uranus, swallowed while thinking it was his son Zeus. Cronus believed that his children were trying to overthrow him and take his power. The stone or one that represents it exists in Delphi and is still to this day anointed with oil. These stones are relevant because of the close relationship between the monotheistic beliefs of the ancient Hebrew and ancient pagan spiritual relics of the day. Pagans believed that the Baetylus manifested the spirit of a god and was often worshiped as an idol. These stones can be considered the link between these two very different forms of worship and must be recognized as such. The story of the ladder - otherwise known as "Jacob’s Ladder" – is an important story because it represents so many aspects of spirituality and reality. The presence of prayer is obvious here. With prayer as a communication through an almost dream state with a higher power, whether through meditation or recognition of the perfection of the engineering of the Universe, the transcendence of grace is represented here as well. It is through the witnessing of this grace, the guidance by realizations of the self evident truths and the searching for absolute truths that brings the soul into alignment with God. It is through the transcendence of this truthful knowledge and the sharing of self evident truths that are represented by the angels traveling up and down the ladder. In Kabbalah the ladder represents the "Tree of Life". It is through the tree that the person meditating and the person praying can achieve enlightenment and alignment with the heavens making the mind and body more open to recognizing God’s greatness. In my research, I have come across a number of explanations of "Jacob’s Ladder" in Kabbalah. This one found on the Internet is exceptional. [b]The Kabbalah four worlds or realms / levels of existence[/b] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/levelsofexistence.jpg[/img] Atziluth: The highest of the four worlds Atziluth is known as the realm of causes. This is a world of pure spirit, unadulterated divine light. It is entirely active and giving and thus is sometimes considered to be symbolically masculine. The three highest spheres, sometimes known as the trinity. Atzilut (Archetypal), also known as the world of emanations, where G-D manifests as the archetypes expressed through the Sefiroth. It is also known as the world of the Sefiroth as this is where they first exists in potential. This Sefiroth are the templates of creation.- Kether, Chokmah and Binah belong to this realm. The various Divine Names of Kabbalah are also associated with this world. Briah: The second highest of the four worlds Briah is known as the realm of Ideas. This is a world of pure intellect, creative, but this should not be considered to relate to logic and rational problem solving and such like. Briahis abstract Intellect, the realm of Platos Ideas, the divine archetypes from which all things are created; in Briah is the Idea of the world, before it is actually created. Briah is composed of the three spheres directly below the abyss: Chesed, Geburah and Tiferet. The Archangels of Kabbalah are associated with this realm, and may be thought of as residing within it just as we reside within the material world. Yetzirah: The second lowest of the four worlds, it is known as the realm of formation, or the formative world. This is the realm of the Astral, of the collective unconscious and the Anima Mundi (world Soul) and such like. It is the realm where specific forms are created. Yetzirah is composed of the three spheres directly below the viel of Parekh: Netzach, Hod and Yesod. The Angels of Kabbalah reside within this world. Assiah: The lowest of the four worlds, Assiah is known as the realm of effects. It is the world of the body and the senses, the active and of all objects and matter. Only one sphere belongs to this realm and that is Malkhut These worlds realized by the person meditating or praying are witnessing the source of knowledge and the origin of absolute truth. In the spiritual light it can be recognized as the creator or a god. In the secular light it can be simply looked at as truth. Regardless of the way we look at it, the focus is on one source of all that is good and all that is true. If we are to back up a bit and revisit the "Garden of Eden", Adam and Eve lived amongst a great and beautiful garden. In the center of the garden was a tree. This tree bared fruit that was tasted by both Adam and Eve. It is this fruit that was the recognition of the center of all that was good. With this knowledge, they could use this truth for good or for evil. As the snake slithered through the branches, it tempted Adam and Eve to use this knowledge and truth to be like God. The temptation was of the lower world – the world of the senses. The stone that Jacob had rested his head upon represented the place where God had manifested his greatness, his knowledge, his blessing, and his truth. It was upon this stone – this rock – that Jacob was to build his temple or pillar to worship God. It is the pillar and the stone that represents strength. All stones are unique – different from all other stones. Unlike bricks it is not manufactured by man and could never be. It is a gift from God. It was created from the fires of his greatness not that of the fires of man. For recognizing this, he would offer a tithing as a sacrifice and symbol of his thanks. [i]22"This stone, which I have set up as a pillar, will be God's house, and of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to You."[/i][b] Genesis 28[/b] To continue to spread and transcend God’s greatness, an investment or sacrifice for the propagation of this truth must be supplied with the fruits of hard word. Without proper food and water a plant cannot grow. Without proper tithing, a church or family can not spread its message. These are self evident truths. It would be from this pillar that the 12 tribes of Israel would be sprouted and a great nation would be created. It can be said that Jacob’s enlightenment was the seed and the blessing from God was the fertilizer that sprung forth the great nation. Whether it was great knowledge that set the tribes apart from everyone else or the hand of God is arguable. Through this gift, Jacob had entered the blood stream of divine providence. With his eyes on the center of all that is self evident and the source of all that is true and good, Israel would be guided into the light of God’s greatness. Sat, 18 Jun 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=A5E329A3-123F-7491-A455758856E82967 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=2950F085-123F-7491-A4E84568A597D9B2 We are standing at a point in history where one day, if we progress in the wrong direction, people around will say how stupid America was for destroying the only true freedom in the last 1000 years. There is evidence of American stupidity everywhere. Much of this stupidity is thinking that liberty and freedom will simply last forever. With the brilliance of our founding fathers that unveiled the plan that God set forth, the common knowledge amongst the founders was that the time for freedom is limited. [i]Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.[/i] [b]John Adams, letter to John Taylor, April 15, 1814[/b] So what was it that our founders knew that seems to be dire prediction? Did they have a crystal ball? Did they have profound knowledge of all things? Or did they have profound knowledge of the right things? It seems to be the latter. You don’t have to be a tarot card reader or a swami in order to understand how things turn out when people are allowed to be free. Freedom can be dangerous. When faced with a culture that bases knowledge on experience rather then principles of nature, it is simple to see that people will try to experience everything. Should we allow people to experience what they wish? Yes. Should we point out the failures when people experiences that cause failure and pose as evidence to the lack of adherence to natures law or Gods law? Yes. These two questions are essential to liberty. If we are to answer “no” to either of these questions, liberty will slip from our hands. If we are to answer “no” to whether we should allow people to experience what they wish to experience, people will be removed from the faculty of failure. Failure is the greatest teacher. Whether it is witnessing failure or experiencing failure, imperfect beings must understand the consequences of actions that do not abide by the laws that govern nature. If we are to answer “no” to whether we should point out the failures of people and/or expose those that are in contempt of the laws of nature, people will not have the ability to recognize the failures that need to be learned from. Whether it is testing someone to assess their knowledge or skill to perform a certain task or talking openly about failed ideologies, actions, and beliefs, there is a responsibility to teach and share the failed experiences of others. Allowing people to fail and teaching everyone about these failures creates a path of virtue. This is the 2 key tenets of western culture. This path of virtue is what determines value or values. Think about how values or a value is determined. In order for something to have value or someone to have values, there has to be a desire to achieve or have something. Stick with me here. Something that is opposed to this desire would seem to destroy the value. In an economic manner, the value of a product is determined by the desires of the consumer and what the people are willing to sacrifice in order to have it. Is there a reason why doctors make the money they do? Could we say that the protectors of life are valuable? Can we say they make great sacrifices to become a doctor? Those people that make the greatest sacrifice for the greater good are considered the most virtuous. Of course this virtue comes with a choice. This choice to experience virtue and to be virtuous comes with sacrifice. In a secular observation of the story of Jesus Christ, he made the utmost sacrifice and became a beacon of virtue for Christians. For those to be most virtuous, they must make the utmost sacrifice by choice. So if virtue comes with a choice, does making a sacrifice without making a choice to experience sacrifice provide a person with virtuosity? In other words, if someone is forced by law to pay taxes in order to support the less fortunate, does this make the act of paying the tax a virtuous act? Could we say that taking disposable income and redistributing it make the people voting for the tax virtuous people? Are they making a personal sacrifice to help others? Hard work and sacrifice is what has made America and Americans virtuous. Charity that enters the hands of the less fortunate from the charitable is what creates virtue. Charity gives value to the citizen and creates a virtuous citizenship. With this public display of charity by its citizenry, the renewal of the foundation of this great country can be strengthened and greatness can be realized. It was never so eloquently put then from one of our founding fathers. [i]Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private, and public virtue is the only foundation of republics. There must be a positive passion for the public good, the public interest, honour, power and glory, established in the minds of the people, or there can be no republican government, nor any real liberty: and this public passion must be superior to all private passions.[/i] [b]John Adams, letter to Mercy Warren, April 16, 1776[/b] So what is it about this path that leads the country to greatness? Virtue is contagious. With great virtue comes great sacrifice and a country wishing to become great must make real sacrifice. So to value life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness has been the purpose of America ever since the declaration of our independent nation. Within the faithful and virtuous people that crafted the documents which were intended to bind Americans to the ability to experience and fail, came an understanding that a virtuous nation is like a field that needs to be cared for. There is great sacrifice that comes with tending to a field in order for it to produce food. The reward of this sacrifice is nourishment which continues to power the farmer to continue producing more food. Our country is like this farm. It is the sacrifice by all of it’s people that will make this country great and allow it to bear the fruit that makes us live virtuously another day. It is sacrifice that will support our children and our children’s children. It isn’t our entitlements that make America great, it is our sacrifice. We must be happy to make these sacrifices. For those that believe in higher taxes, do you feel good and virtuous on April 15th when you deliver your hard earned money to the black hole that is the federal government? Does the person receiving the sacrifice, whether it is a politician or a man stricken by misfortune, that you made thank you for that sacrifice? Are they sacrificing to pick from the fruit that you have worked hard to provide? No. [i]Men must be ready, they must pride themselves and be happy to sacrifice their private pleasures, passions and interests, nay, their private friendships and dearest connections, when they stand in competition with the rights of society. [/i] [b]John Adams, letter to Mercy Warren, April 16, 1776[/b] Western culture is being dismantled by many within our culture. They feel that they can make others sacrifice in order to achieve their virtue. Instead they are destroying the virtue and value of our society. Think about the value that our federal government destroys. Much of it is for the common good. Some of it is insidiously operated by those that wish to destroy our virtuous society in order for them to achieve the power to rule the virtuous-less. With this destruction of the values and virtues also comes the destruction of what represents it – the dollar. The dollar is more than a currency, it is a brand. It is the brand of America. It represents hard work and sacrifice. That is why it is so valuable. Now that we have devalued the dollar by printing more of it needlessly with nothing to back its value, countries around the world - despite their lack of virtuosity and value – have begun to look to something more valuable. They are looking to gold. It used to be what gave our currency value. Do you ever wonder why the eastern culture of communism continually devalues their currencies? They see no value in their brand. Everything is ideological and based on the needs of the powerful. They don’t believe in virtue. How can you believe in virtue when you steal from your people? The closer we get to socialism or communism, the closer to being a society with no virtue. Equally, the less virtue we as citizens have, the closer we get to socialism and communism. There is a reason why Communists wish to tear down religion, morals, and values. Make sense? So in order for our culture to regain its virtue, we need to stop putting people into groups. We need to stop rewarding people for the group they are in and rather by what they contribute. How can we find virtue in society when we treat people differently based on race, creed, or sex? How can we learn what fails if some succeed by merely being politically connected rather then by their hard work and sacrifice? Tyranny removes virtue because it doesn’t give the people the liberty to be virtuous. Tyranny punishes all equally. The Soviet Union didn’t fail because they didn’t have the resources or the people to make the country great. The Soviet Union failed because the elite few in government didn’t allow the people to be virtuous. They stripped the people of their virtue. They stripped the people of the concept of value. Once this happens, people go to sleep and no longer sacrifice because there is no value in it. Why sacrifice if there is nothing to gain from it? So when we hear of our elected leaders say that we must sacrifice with higher taxes to pay for the poor and unfortunate, understand that they are destroying value and virtue. When you hear our elected officials ridicule the producers of the country for being greedy and not being willing to sacrifice, ask yourself the question, “does forcing them to pay make either of them more virtuous?” We must be willing to be virtuous. We can not be forced. Leading with example by being virtuous is how we can lead the country to virtue. Divine Providence is what has brought us to where we are today. It has been the path of virtue. We must remain on this path through sacrifice and hard work not excuses and empathy for failure. In order to remain on this path to righteousness we must adhere to the laws of nature and make a pledge to protect and value life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We must be Americans again. Wed, 25 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=2950F085-123F-7491-A4E84568A597D9B2 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B292E81B-123F-7491-A49B7E7BFF55D1BC Based on a series of reports from the IMF, World Bank, EIA, and the Oil and Gas Journal, I have compiled some valuable information that will give you some insight on why our gas prices are so high. There are a lot of people that continue to use oil and gas prices as a fulcrum in the political landscape. Some of the claims are legitimate and others are out right ridiculous. We must first understand how prices are set in the extremely regulated and barely free market. In order to understand the prices we must understand the market. I have some experience in the oil industry so I will try to mend the information that I have gathered with statistics set by the many organizations that analyze and regulate the oil and gas industry. [b]The Market[/b] [b]Extraction and Refining[/b] If we understand the basics of free market prices, we know that supply and demand is the cornerstone of pricing of any good. There is nothing different in the oil and gas industry. The industry is however much more complicated then most in the ways that oil and gas is extracted, transported, stored, refined, and distributed. In most cases American oil companies purchase oil at the time it is extracted or after it has been loaded into tankers. This oil has been purchased and may not be refined until 3 to 6 months later.That is why there is sometimes a lag in gas price escalation. There are several different types of crude and we will discuss briefly. Brent Crude – Extracted in the North Sea and is used as a bench mark to price 2/3s of the world’s internationally traded crude oil supplies. Heavy Crude – Extracted mostly in Venezuela and Saudi Arabia. This oil is very dense much like a waxy tar. Heavy crude is very dirty and hard to refine. It has many byproducts in order to be refined. Light Crude – Extracted in North America predominately in West Texas. This crude is very clean and low in wax so the refining process is easier and cleaner then heavier crudes. Sweet Crude – Extracted mostly in the United States and Africa. This oil is very low in sulfur and is also easy to refine much like light crude. Due to low sulfur content, this crude is the cheapest to refine but the most expensive to purchase do to lower supply. Sour Crude – Extracted mostly in the Persian Gulf. This oil is highly hazardous upon extraction due to its high level of H2S (Hydrogen Sulfide) which is a deadly gas for anyone exposed to it for even short periods of time. Due to this hazard it is more expensive to refine. It is cheaper oil and a more viable choice for oil companies in recent years due to reduced sweet crude oil extraction in the US. Keep in mind that massive refineries have the capability of refining heavy and light crudes but some smaller refineries do not have that capability. So the supply of certain types of crude drastically affects the price of gas due to refining expenditures and output. An example of this is Exxon Mobil Baton Rouge LA which has 2 large Catalytic Cracking units as well as 4 Coking units. These coking units are essential to handle the byproducts of Sour and Heavy Crude. A refinery like Shell/Motiva Norco only has one Coking unit and is fit to handle more expensive Sweet and Light Crudes. Recently Shell Norco has had little output due to the lack of profitability of refining because the price of Sweet Crude has been so high. This creates a shortage in supply in the region as well as higher prices at the pump. [b]Affects on Prices. [/b] Much like all free market commodities, oil is traded on the commodities exchanges. These trades are made by investors whether they are large oil companies, investment firms, hedge funds, and individual traders. Obviously this market is extremely complicated so we will mention only the major contributors to the setting of prices. Speculation – Let’s get rid of the word speculator or speculative. All investments are speculative. If you are an individual investor and you believe that a company’s stock is going to rise, you may speculate on its appreciation by purchasing shares of the company. Commodities work the same way. People may see that there is a drought in America and decide that Wheat production will be low due to this drought. Investors may buy wheat futures (shares) in order to profit from a possible rising price of the commodity or General Mills may buy Wheat futures as a hedge against possible higher operating cost due to this increase. Those that think the commodity may go down may short (sell) the commodity. This activity determines the value of wheat. Oil commodities work the same way. This trading is necessary to determine what the most viable value of any product is. It is fundamental to our free market system. Supply – Obviously if supply is low and demand is high, people are going to be more willing to pay for the product. Example: If you were in the middle of nowhere and was extremely thirsty, you might pay 5 dollars for a bottle of water at the Oasis Convenient Store. This greed - shall we be so bold - would prompt you to buy the highly valued commodity of water. So why is the Oasis selling the bottle of water for $5? It may be really hard for the convenient store, in the middle of nowhere, to get water. Sales are probably low for the store so they are willing to satisfy this dilemma with higher prices. Do you think that this store owner needs to charge a higher price do to high costs of transport / delivery as well as the lack of customers and lack of competitors? Oil works the same way. It would be nice if we could go in our back yard to get the oil we need to refine into fuel but instead we have to go halfway around the world to get the oil. The United States, through moratoriums and massive government regulation, has put us in the middle of nowhere. Our overseas suppliers see that we are willing to pay a higher price to supply a high demand so what do you think they do? They raise prices. Demand – Despite the overwhelming political climate about climate change and environmental protection, the uneducated politicians (excuse my redundancy) and uneducated electorate have created the massive regulation and raised the prices of oil on ourselves. Let me explain. Despite the desires of most Americans to have cars that get 100 mpg and planes that fly under power of solar panels, the technology has not provided a viable solution to this demand within the value range people are willing to pay. We all want a perfect utopia of energy independence and renewable energy. Due to the high demand and little supply of this alternative energy, the price is high. That is why the Prius is so expensive despite the number of different problems that it has had with the number of newly applied technologies. In 2009, HIS Global Insight, who analyzes products and trends, speculates - there’s that word again - that the electric care market will be 0.6% by 2020. Is this because of greedy oil companies or because Americans don’t see viability or value in this technology in order to increase demand? So who is better equipped to determine this viability and value? Is it better that 300 million people make a decision about the value of this technology or should a couple hundred elite politicians make that discussion? …pretty stupid question. The fact is all of our products are ship by freighters, planes, trucks, and in our cars to our homes. All of these applications are fueled mostly by petroleum. In fact our homes are mostly fueled by oil, natural gas, and coal. Let’s truly look at the reason why gas is highly priced. [b]A Little Humor[/b] Demand – There is a desire to have renewable energy. Some of the people with these desires don’t like the dirty oil companies and see them as greedy cartel leaders. They want their renewables and they want them now. So while stomping their feet, 2 men come up to them and say, what are you stomping your feet for? We want our renewables now! One of the men is a free market guy and the other is a big government guy. The free market guy says, “Well right now we have some products but they are really expensive because not enough people want them. Until there is a greater demand fueling the need for supply, we have this cheep fuel you can use until we get there.” The big government guy looks at the stomping renewable advocate and says, “Don’t mind that guy, he is a greedy oil guy. All he wants to do is screw you by jacking up his prices on oil to make evil profits. If you vote for me, I will make him provide you with the fuel you want. We will make it so hard for him to make money that eventually the high prices will force people to buy renewable energy. This will provide the supply we need.” In the mean-time, this big government guy is wheeling and dealing with big business. “Hey big electric company guy, I am going to push regulation that is going to create a huge demand for your products. I know you are in trouble with a lagging business. We will give you government grants, bailouts, and even give the union bosses pressuring you some money to shut up too. All we ask is you support us in the next campaign. We are going to go after the oil companies as evil big businesses only wishing to make huge profits.” He then goes to his union buddies and says, “Hey big union guy, I see you are struggling with all those ridiculously over valued benefits you are offering and the dwindling union membership so we are going to give a huge bailout to the big electric company guy. You need to go after him for higher wages so you can get more dues. If he refuses to do it, strike and he will fold. He can’t afford a strike. In the mean time, we are going to push green jobs that you are going to head up for me. We will give you billions of tax payer stimulus money to help you. All you have to do is vote fore me and do my bidding. Pass the word to your union members too… They need me.” He then goes to his hedge fund buddies, “Hey you guys, I am going to cut off all drilling for American oil companies and allow some of our South American buddies have a turn at making some profits… hint hint..” He then goes to the American people and says, “America, we are in a dire situation, we can no longer be dependent on foreign oil. We also can’t continue on this path of dirty energy. As the oil is washing up on our beaches and our son’s are dying overseas because of war for oil, we are doing nothing to fix this mess greedy big oil is putting us in. We are going to propose new regulations that are going to demand that these greedy oil companies pay more taxes and follow these new regulations. I know it is going to be tough but we are going to create a new economy. It will be a pretty green economy. We will have rainbows and butterflies make all of our energy. That greedy free enterprise guy is only trying to protect his big oil buddies who make billions and billions of dollars while you pay four dollars a gallon for gas. What he is going to do is get kick backs from the oil profits. Big oil has given millions of dollars to that free enterprise guy. I am different. I care about you. I care about your children. I care about the sea gulls, the whales, and the oceans. We are going to shut down all drilling in the Gulf of Mexico until this guy gets his head on straight. All the free enterprise guy cares about is evil profits.” Supply The big government guy then cuts off the local supplies to the oil company through oil moratorium. The oil company now has to pay more for the crude oil. He will have to use foreign Sour and Heavy Crude which is more expensive to refine. The oil company now is exposed to the turbulence in the Middle East. The investor notices that the big government guy, now running the show, has put an oil moratorium on the Gulf of Mexico, but is going to allow Brazil, Cuba, and Mexico to drill there. So the Goldman Sachs investor invests in Petrobras and buys oil futures because he knows that oil is about to go up because of the new massive regulation. Now the big government raises taxes on the oil companies and makes the permitting process extremely expensive. So now the oil company has to raise prices to absorb all of these costs which he is going to have to pass on to the consumer. Once gasoline goes up, the big government guy stands at the podium and says, “See… I told you they would raise your gas prices.” Not so humorous is it…? So lets look at some facts since they are so hard to come by… oh wait…. we have the internet. [b]The Greedy Oil Profit Myth.[/b] Let’s look at some income statements to gather some perspective. For those that are unaware of what an income statement is, it is a required document for publicly traded companies reporting all of their financial information so investors can evaluate and properly value the stock based on company performance which includes profit. Here are some highlights Exxon – 9.3% profit Here is a link to [link=http://www.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/Files/news_release_earnings1q11.pdf]Exxon’s income statement[/link]. 2010 2nd quarter In millions Total Revenue: $114,004 Operating expenses: $95,087 Gross Profit: $18,917 Income Taxes: $8,004 Net Profit after no controlling interests: $10,650 [b]Profit %: 9.3%[/b] Lets compare this to other companies. Intuit (Turbo Tax, Quickbooks): Here is a link to [link= http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=INTU+Income+Statement&annual]Intuit’s income statement[/link]. 2011 1st quarter In millions Total Revenue: $1,607 Operating expenses: $567 Gross Profit: $1,455 Income Taxes: $302 Net Profit after no controlling interests: $576 [b]Profit %: 36% [/b] Microsoft: Here is a link to [link= http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=msft]Microsofts’ income statement[/link]. 2010 4th quarter In millions Total Revenue: $19,953 Operating expenses: $8,165 Gross Profit: $15,120 Income Taxes: $1,863 Net Profit after no controlling interests: $6,634 [b]Profit %: 33% [/b] Goldman Sachs: Here is a link to [link= http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=GS]Microsoft’s income statement[/link]. 2010 4th quarter In millions Total Revenue: $8,642 Operating expenses: $3,474 Gross Profit: $3,069 Income Taxes: $1,087 Net Profit after no controlling interests: $2,227 [b]Profit %: 26% [/b] So as you can see, Exxon’s profit is well below these other companies. What is interesting is these other companies are huge [link= http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&type=I&cid=n00009638&newMem=N&recs=100]Democratic contributors[/link]. Goldman Sachs contributed $1,053,445 to Obama in his 2008 campaign. Microsoft contributed $836,241, and [link= http://about.intuit.com/about_intuit/press_room/press_release/articles/2011/StartupAmericaPartnership.html]Intuit[/link] contributed $37 million to support Obama’s Start-up America Campaign. Exxon contributed [link= http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000129]$12,450,000[/link] in 2010 lobbying. Goldman Sachs has contributed [link= http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000085]$4,610,000[/link] in 2010. Lastly, I will mention oil price increases due to inflation and the destruction of the dollar through quantitative easing (printing money). [link= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/oilprices/8482960/Obamas-lax-dollar-is-to-blame-for-oils-spike-not-bankers.html]Gary White from The Telegraph UK[/link] spells it out pretty succinctly as foreign press often does. As the dollar is devalued because there is simply more supply – because it has been printed – the exchange rate at which oil is purchased is less in favor of the dollar. White explains, “Commodities such as oil are priced in dollars. When the dollar falls, these commodities – be they copper, wheat or oil – become cheaper in other currencies. This prompts "speculators" to buy. Prices of raw materials have therefore risen on a sea of dollar liquidity – fuelled by cheap money and quantitative easing.” So in order for America to get out of this rut, we need to allow markets to correct by shutting off the printing presses, raise interest rates in order to recall some of this printed money, cut spending by at least a trillion dollars, and reduce the long-term debt liability. The only way to do this is through entitlement reform and the relaxing of regulation. This will intern bring our economy back up to speed and drive more revenue to the government coffers to pay of our ridiculous debt. We need to start drilling our own oil and stop relying on foreign oil. Foreign government owned oil companies hold most of the oil reserves around the world and continually hold us hostage with oil supplies. If we don’t drill the oil in the Gulf of Mexico, others will. I would ask, who is going to be more careful with our shoreline, Cuba or Exxon? So for all of you that bash profiteers and big business, start looking your self in the mirror and ask, “Have been doing your due diligence?” While the real world is spinning in one direction, you are being spun in the other. Those others happen to be profiteers as well. Don’t fool yourself and think that this game is not leading to a destruction of this society. Obama is looking to rake in 10% of the money that Exxon profited for his campaign alone an all of that money will be coming from big business and rich people - not from the poor unfortunate ones. Look at the numbers for what they really are and recognize that Exxon’s money also goes to thousands of employees and their families. Your donation to Obama will go to Obama and his politicians. Mon, 02 May 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B292E81B-123F-7491-A49B7E7BFF55D1BC http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=A8CBC10D-123F-7491-A40ECCE8A3AB24DB [i] "13 Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son. 14 So Abraham called that place The LORD Will Provide. And to this day it is said, “On the mountain of the LORD it will be provided" [/i]Genesis 22 We segue right into the story of Isaac. The passage above is extremely significant as Abraham turns from sacrificing his son Isaac to God and rather the ram. This is one of the most significant moments in the Bible. Instead of sacrificing children, which was common practice in these times, Abraham was instructed to sacrifice the ram. Abraham had been accustomed to the traditions of his recent ancestors as the transcendence of God’s teachings had subsided after Noah’s flood. This event symbolized the moment when the barbaric nature of man was replaced with a new covenant. Apostasy had subsided in this new promise between Abraham and his new single God. Circumcision replaced the barbaric sacrifice of children. The focus then became on procreation and its sanctity. By cleansing the penis by removing the disease prone foreskin, Jews would enter a new age where they would populate the world with a new nation. This nation would be the nation of Isreal. These same sacrificial acts were recorded in the Quran and were viewed as pagan. [i]006.137 [b]YUSUFALI:[/b] Even so, in the eyes of most of the pagans, their "partners" made alluring the slaughter of their children, in order to lead them to their own destruction, and cause confusion in their religion. If Allah had willed, they would not have done so: But leave alone them and their inventions. [b]PICKTHAL:[/b] Thus have their (so-called) partners (of Allah) made the killing of their children to seem fair unto many of the idolaters, that they may ruin them and make their faith obscure for them. Had Allah willed (it otherwise), they had not done so. So leave them alone with their devices. [b]SHAKIR:[/b] And thus their associates have made fair seeming to most of the polytheists the killing of their children, that they may cause them to perish and obscure for them their religion; and if Allah had pleased, they would not have done it, therefore leave them and that which they forge.[/i] You can find evidence of child sacrifice all through the Bible. [b]Purushamedha[/b] It is also a significant moment in the bible as Abraham lived in the “Age of Aries” which is represented by the ram. In Hinduism the ritual called Purushamedha – a Vedic yajna (ritual) – is one that involves the emblematic sacrifice of a human instead of a horse. According to the Shatapatha Bramana: [i]Then a voice said to him, 'Purusha, do not consummate (these human victims): if thou wert to consummate them, man (purusha) would eat man.' Accordingly, as soon as fire had been carried round them, he set them free, and offered oblations to the same divinities[/i] This assumption is very weak considering the Yajurveda, which is the third of the four canonical Vedic texts, was said to be compiled between 1400 BC and 1000 BC. This is purely speculative as well as the birth date of Abraham which is said to be born somewhere around 2000 BC. Of course the ritual could have existed prior to the record of it. We must also look at the significance of the Ram. We discussed earlier about the Age of Taurus being the age of the Bull. This significance of Abram (“Father Ram”) sacrificing the ram also may represent his abandonment of pagan worship. In northern Africa, Ba'al Qarnaim ("Lord of Two Horns") was worshiped in Carthage. The Carthaginians are considered to be ancestors of the Canaanites who also worshiped Ba’al. Ba’al has many implications in ancient Mesopotamia. In most cases Ba’al was considered a local or tribal god. The significance here also points to Abraham’s abandonment of pagan worship since the worship of Ba’al was eventually considered a shame by Jews . As child sacrifices and Ba’al worship was evident in ancient Canaan, the evidence exists in both Carthaginian culture as well as Hindu culture. The separation from this type of worship appears to be represented in the story of Abraham. As discussed in the chapter of Enoch, the transcendence of God’s teaching is the most important aspect of keeping his people in-line with social and political reverence and respect. Isaac represents the receiving end of the transcendence of Abraham’s revelation and conversion to a monotheistic faith. If we are to look at the event with reason, Abraham and the people that surrounded him would have struggled with the immediate transition. The struggle of apostasy would become the common theme throughout the Bible. The gravity of paganism will rear its head throughout all of Abraham’s decedents. In fact, generations will suffer from the gravity of common pagan gods of this day. The importance of this transcendence is evident in this verse from Genesis 24. [i]2Abraham said to his servant, the oldest of his household, who had charge of all that he owned, "Please place your hand under my thigh, 3and I will make you swear by the LORD, the God of heaven and the God of earth, that you shall not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the Canaanites, among whom I live, 4but you will go to my country and to my relatives, and take a wife for my son Isaac." 5The servant said to him, "Suppose the woman is not willing to follow me to this land; should I take your son back to the land from where you came?" 6Then Abraham said to him, "Beware that you do not take my son back there! 7"The LORD, the God of heaven, who took me from my father's house and from the land of my birth, and who spoke to me and who swore to me, saying, 'To your descendants I will give this land,' He will send His angel before you, and you will take a wife for my son from there. 8"But if the woman is not willing to follow you, then you will be free from this my oath; only do not take my son back there." [/i]Genesis 24 The aspect Abraham concern for his son and the ability to transcend God’s greatness is apparent in these verses. In Abraham’s land of Canaan, there was such apostasy that he worried for his son and sent him off to Nahor. It would be there that he would meet Rebekah. Through their love they would create Esau and Jacob. Sat, 30 Apr 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=A8CBC10D-123F-7491-A40ECCE8A3AB24DB http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=69A808B4-123F-7491-A4DAA2F0ACBA96A6 Great article from [link=http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2011/03/feed-your-family-on-10-billion-a-day.html]Iowahawk[/link] Seems like these days I hear a lot of whiney whiners whining about "out of control government spending" and "insane deficits" and such, trying to make hay out of a bunch of pointy-head boring finance hooey. Sure, $3.7 trillion of spending sounds like a big number. "Oh, boo-hoo, how are we going to get $3.7 trillion dollars? We're broke, boo-hoo-hoo," whine the whiners. What these skinflint crybabies fail to realize is that $3.7 trillion is for an entire year - which translates into only a measly $10 billion per day! Mister, I call that a bargain. Especially since it pays for all of us - you and me, the whole American family. Like all families, we Americas have to pay for things - health, food, safety, uncle Dave America with his drinking problem. And when little Billy America wants that new quad runner they promised, do Mom and Dad America deny him? No, they get a second job at Circle K, because they know little Billy might have one of his episodes and burn down the house. So let's all sit down together as an American family with a calendar and make a yearly budget. First, let's lock in the $3.7 trillion of critical family spending priorities; now let's get to work on collecting the pay-as-we-go $10 billion daily cash flow we need. 12:01 AM, January 1 Let's start the year out right by going after some evil corporations and their obscene profits. And who is more evil than those twin spawns of Lucifer himself, Exxon Mobil and Walmart? Together these two largest American industrial behemoths raked in, between them, $34 billion in 2010 global profits. Let's teach 'em both a lesson and confiscate it for the public good. This will get us through... 9:52 AM January 4 Okay, maybe I underestimated our take. But we shouldn't let Exxon and Walmart distract us from all those other corporate profiteers out there worth shaking down. In fact, why don't we grab every cent of 2010 profit made by the other 498 members of the Fortune 500? That will net us another, let's see, $357 billion! Enough to get us to... 2:00 AM February 9 So we're running out of corporate cash, but look - it's Super Bowl time! As we all know, the game has become a crass disgusting festival of commercialism. So let's take all the TV ad money spent on stupid Super Bowl ads, and apply that to government needs. That would be $250 million, enough to fund us for, let's see... 36 minutes. The half time show, at least. But why stop there? Let's take every cent of ad money spent on all 45 Super Bowls, a cool $5 billion, which would cover us until... 2:00 PM February 9 Speaking of sports, why should the players be immune to our pressing public needs? Lord knows professional athletes make obscene salaries for playing a dumb game. So let's take the combined salaries of all players in the NFL, Major League Baseball, the NBA, and the NHL. Hey, they've got endorsement deals, they'll hardly miss it. Throw in the total winnings of everybody on the PGA tour and NASCAR, and we get $9.4 billion, enough to get us through until... 1:00 PM February 10 Okay, it's time to stop messing around. Athletes aren't the only ones greedily raking it in. What about America's rich - those fancy pants fat cats living the high life in the above-$250,000 income bracket? According to IRS statistics, these 1.93% of US households are hogging 25% of US income. And why do they need it? For crying out loud, they probably stole it anyway. I say let's take 100% of every penny they make above $250,000. They can use the rest to pay their state and local taxes. Now we're talking big bucks, brother. How much? Let's see... A: Number of US households: 116,000,000 B: Average US household income: $68,000 (median = $52,000) C: Total US household income (A * B): $7.89 trillion D: Percent of households above $250k income: 1.93% E: Number of households above $250k income (A*D): 2,238,800 F: Percent of national income earned by households making $250k or more = 25% G: Total income of households making $250k or more (C*F): $1.97 trillion H: Total income of households in excess of $250k (G - E*$250,000) = $1.412 trillion Alright! Take that, fat cats! Our $1.412 trillion windfall has us covered for the next 141 days, or until... 6:00 PM July 2 Well, I guess maybe there are a few items we can cut from the budget. Those quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan, for example. Why don't we end all funding for those wars, and bring our troops home to march in the Fourth of July parade? That would save us $105 billion Afghanistan and $159 billion in Iraq, a total of $264 billion - enough savings to cover us until... 4:00 AM July 29 Summer blockbuster season! And of course the biggest blockbuster of all time was Star Wars. To punish George Lucas for those stupid sequels, let's confiscate every penny of revenue generated by the Star Wars franchise since 1977 - movies, TV rights, books, toys, action figures, everything - which nets us $25 billion. Enough to keep the lights on until... 4:00 PM August 1 Well, there's plenty more money in Hollywood to go after. So, for the national good, let's evict everyone in Beverly Hills and sell their homes at current market value. 15,000 homes at $2 million per gets us another $30 billion, paying the bills through... 4:00 PM August 4 The kids will be going back to school soon, so we're gonna have to bring out the big guns and really go after those moneybag plutocrats like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates. Between 'em, those two bastards have amassed a combined fortune of $100 billion. What kind of jerk needs that kind of money? The worst thing is they're shielding it from the public treasury using the oldest trick in the billionaire playbook - by continuing to live. Once they kick the bucket, and after we close the estate tax loopholes, the American public will get the 50% of their ill-gotten loot we so richly deserve. So let's say we arrange a couple of unfortunate "accidents" for Mssrs. Gates and Buffett. Now we've got another $50 billion for the US coffers, enough to get us to... 4:00 PM August 9 Aw, screw it. There are plenty more American billionaires to go after - 398 more to be precise, according to the latest Forbes 400, with a combined total net worth of $1.29 trillion. 398 more "accidents," 398 more estates taxed at 50%, and we've got another $650 billion to tide us through... 4:00 PM October 13 Crap. Okay, let's just kill all the billionaires and take all their money. Add in another 100 or so of the almost-billionaires, and that buys us an additional 73 days until... 4:00 PM December 25 Merry Christmas! Just one more week to go. In the spirit of the season, let's give the surviving conservative wingnuts a few of the budget cuts they've been bitching for, like getting rid of foreign aid. This saves $50 billion - getting us to... 4:00 PM December 30 Only 32 hours to go! To cover the remaining $12.5 billion vital federal program tab, let's pass the cash bucket and demand every surviving American man, woman and child to kick in another another $40 bucks. I'm pretty sure they will, after all those previous "accidents." 12:00 AM January 1 Happy New Year! See? Easy peasy lemon squeezy. Time to do it all again, except this time we'll need to come up with $11 billion per day. I'm sure we'll figure it out somehow. Do you know where we can get some more plutocrats? Entire article from [link=http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2011/03/feed-your-family-on-10-billion-a-day.html]Iowahawk[/link] Mon, 18 Apr 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=69A808B4-123F-7491-A4DAA2F0ACBA96A6 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=462D9F5E-123F-7491-A4379DA65A7165D9 [b]What is a Ponzi scheme?[/b] as defined by the [link=http://www.sec.gov/answers/ponzi.htm]SEC[/link] A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud that involves the payment of purported returns to existing investors from funds contributed by new investors. Ponzi scheme organizers often solicit new investors by promising to invest funds in opportunities claimed to generate high returns with little or no risk. In many Ponzi schemes, the fraudsters focus on attracting new money to make promised payments to earlier-stage investors and to use for personal expenses, instead of engaging in any legitimate investment activity. Why do Ponzi schemes collapse? With little or no legitimate earnings, the schemes require a consistent flow of money from new investors to continue. Ponzi schemes tend to collapse when it becomes difficult to recruit new investors or when a large number of investors ask to cash out. [b]How did Ponzi schemes get their name?[/b] The schemes are named after Charles Ponzi, who duped thousands of New England residents into investing in a postage stamp speculation scheme back in the 1920s. At a time when the annual interest rate for bank accounts was five percent, Ponzi promised investors that he could provide a 50% return in just 90 days. Ponzi initially bought a small number of international mail coupons in support of his scheme, but quickly switched to using incoming funds to pay off earlier investors. [b]Does the SEC investigate Ponzi schemes?[/b] The SEC investigates and prosecutes many Ponzi scheme cases each year both to prevent new victims from being harmed and to maximize the recovery of assets to investors. The majority of such cases are brought as emergency actions, which often seek a temporary restraining order and an asset freeze. During FY 2010, the SEC filed 47 enforcement actions involving Ponzi schemes or Ponzi-like payments. [b]Who is Bernie Madoff?[/b] Bernard L. Madoff, who is currently serving a 150-year sentence in federal prison, orchestrated a multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme that swindled money from thousands of investors. Unlike the promoters of many Ponzi schemes, Madoff did not promise spectacular short-term investment returns. Instead, his investors’ phony account statements showed moderate, but consistently positive returns — even during turbulent market conditions. In December 2008, the SEC charged Bernard Madoff and his investment firm, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC, with securities fraud for the multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme he perpetrated on advisory clients of his firm for many years. The SEC filed emergency motions to freeze assets and appoint a receiver, and worked to return as much money as possible to harmed investors. Madoff had been a prominent member of the securities industry throughout his career. He served as vice chairman of the NASD, a member of its board of governors, and chairman of its New York region. He was also a member of NASDAQ Stock Market’s board of governors and its executive committee and served as chairman of its trading committee. Madoff founded his investment advisory firm in 1960. So if [link=http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/14/taxes-social-security-opinions-columnists-medicare.html]Forbes[/link] is correct in the amount of the unfunded liability of Social Security at $17,500,000,000,000 then how many years should our politicians get for relying on revenue to pay social security recipients. Isn't Social Security simply a big ponzi scheme? Mon, 11 Apr 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=462D9F5E-123F-7491-A4379DA65A7165D9 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=0E8C2BAD-123F-7491-A4BEB8524E93FB71 Obama recently gave a speech on America’s energy policy. It wasn’t very well covered by any news outlets considering that there was nothing substantial mentioned other than some jabs at the oil industry for not using a supposed 70% of the off-shore oil leases even when his own [link=http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/7496741.html]interior department reports that number is only 33%[/link]. So either we have a dishonest President or an ignorant one. Some may simply say both. Despite the interior department’s report, Jack Gerard who is the CEO of American Petroleum Institute states the reality, "To suggest that we're sitting on our hands is a pure distraction". This is in fact true. Many oil leases are speculative attempts to find a commercially viable amout of oil to extract. Oil companies, many of them being small high risk investment explorers, find little to no oil and simply cap the rig as a non-productive site. So what is the Obama administration’s true energy policy? This graphic provided by [link=http://thehill.com/images/stories/news/2011/03_march/weekend032511/api_drilling_graphic.pdf]thehill.com[/link] gives a detailed account of the administration’s policy of stopping oil and natural gas exploration in the United States. This is evidence that the administration is doing all it can to delay any production. This has been very detrimental to the American oil industry as well as the American people. [link=http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/07/02/rowan-rigs-idUSN0222938520100702]Saudi Aramaco[/link] has reported that it will most likely lease two shallow water oil drilling rigs from Rowan Companies, Inc and ship them to the Middle East from the Gulf of Mexico due to increasing US regulations. It is obvious that when these rigs leave they will most likely lay off US workers, reduce revenues for local companies that support the rigs, as well as reduce supply which will ultimately increase oil and gas prices. [link=http://www.nola.com/opinions/index.ssf/2010/09/obama_administration_should_kn.html]Nola.com[/link] reported in September 2010 that the Obama administration should be aware of 12,000 lost Louisiana jobs due to the oil moratorium. The recent lack of production in the Gulf is now catching up to us since refineries are now starting to purchase more expensive crude from across the world rather than American oil. The Washington Times reports that [link=http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/mar/30/gas-prices-double-under-obama/]oil prices have doubled [/link]since Obama took office. Crude has also reached a 3 year high at [link=http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Oil-climbs-to-highest-since-apf-1947152419.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=]$106 per barrel[/link] partially due to the tension over seas. ABC reports that gas prices reached the [link=http://abcnews.go.com/Business/gas-prices-7th-consecutive-weekly-increase-middle-east/story?id=13240889]highest March[/link] ever and 7th consecutive weekly increase. So with all of this news, what is Obama and his administration doing besides blaming the oil companies? They are supporting Brazilian oil. [link=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/8393292/Obama-says-US-to-be-major-purchaser-of-Brazilian-oil.html]The Telegraph[/link] reports that Obama gave a speech in Brazil and mentioned that the United States hopes to be a major purchaser of Brazilian oil. There have been much speculation about the reasons why Obama would support the same deep water drilling which he vehemently opposed in the United States after the Deep Water Horizon accident. For the standard American, it doesn’t make sense to spit in your own backyard and take care of someone else’s. For the American that can read between the lines after reading about Obama’s ideology, it is pretty simple to understand. Obama believes that America is a colonial oppressor of the world and doesn’t deserve any more than the average country. So why is Obama acting this way? Obama is not only a globalist but also a socialist. There is no doubting this after seeing the policies that he has supported and enacted. His policy slip beyond the barriers of the United States Constitution as has been witnessed by his refusal to abide by an order by a federal judge Roger Vinson to discontinue the actions outlined in the Obamacare bill. This doesn’t come as a shock for those that have been paying attention to the political scenery as well as actions of the Obama administration despite the embarrassing coverage by the mainstream media. So knowing that Obama is a globalist, which is outlined in my book [link=http://www.amazon.com/Machine-Progression-Secular-Socialism/dp/0557741157/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1301615539&sr=1-2 ]“The Machine: The Progression of Secular Socialism”[/link] along with many posts on LanternsofLiberty.us, it is easy to see what Obama’s intentions are. He is redistributing the wealth not only nationally but globally. By shutting down all the drilling and supporting drilling overseas, many other countries will benefit from the revenue generated by the rigs that will now be parked off of their shores. Brazil seems to be a likely companion for many reasons including the relationship Brazil’s partially state owned oil company Petrobras shares ownership with many large firms including Obama’s number one financial supporter George Soros. There have been many attempts to link Soros with Petrobras in a type of conspiratorial insider trading deal but it is rather black and white. Soros knew that Petrobras was primed for success with their recent discovery of one of the largest oil reserves in the world. Obama also knew that it would make sense to support his biggest supporter. All of it makes sense. Obama is not interested in boosting American exceptionalism. Rather he is interested in being a world leader divvying up the markets, resources, and wealth that America has for so long held due to freedom, ingenuity, and Free Enterprise. Obama doesn’t wish to allow the American people to lead but rather to be equal to those in other countries. It is simple socialist ideology. With all the vitriol he spouted towards BP for spilling oil in the Gulf of Mexico, he has allowed [link=http://www.offshoreenergytoday.com/petrobras-first-to-use-fpso-in-u-s-gulf-of-mexico/]Petrobras[/link] to drill very close to the same location that the Deep Water Horizon sunk to the bottom and spilled thousands of barrels of oil into the Gulf. All of this information was easily found on the internet through reputable outlets while it remains absent from the American media outside of the Fox News Network. So we are now at the cross-roads where America can continue to lead or simply become another mediocre country ruled by a statist regime. We can go down in history as a failed experiment where it was proved that man was unable to govern himself. We have a choice. The choice is not to scream at the TV or remain apathetic. The choice is to stand or sit. We can allow the big government politicians to destroy the American dream with ridiculous laws and regulations which reward their favorite supporters in order to remain in power or we can stand up to these lackeys and elect responsible representatives to turn this once great country around. So mark your calendars for Election Day 2012 and start spreading the word. Do your research and share what you find. Don’t simply trust what you hear – trust but verify. Ronald Reagan once stated it so eloquently, that “when you regulate something, you get less of it”. When we regulate business we get less of it. When we regulate energy, we get less of it. So if we must regulate, let’s choose to regulate government so we can get less of it. Thu, 31 Mar 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=0E8C2BAD-123F-7491-A4BEB8524E93FB71 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=DE3130B0-123F-7491-A46BEDBB47349165 Featured by theblaze.com [b]SPEAKER:[/b] Steven Lerner. Speaker at the Left Forum 2011 "Towards a Politics of Solidarity" Pace University March 19, 2011 [b]Speaker Bio:[/b] Stephen Lerner is the architect of the SEIU's groundbreaking Justice for Janitors campaign. He led the union's banking and finance campaign and has partnered with unions and groups in Europe, South American and elsewhere in campaigns to hold financial institutions accountable. As director of the union's private equity project, he launched a long campaign to expose the over-leveraged feeding frenzy of private equity firms during the boom years that led to the ensuing economic disaster. [link=http://www.theblaze.com/stories/revealed-the-lefts-economic-terrorism-playbook-the-chase-campaign-for-a-coalition-of-unions-community-groups-lawmakers-and-students-to-take-down-us-capitalism-and-redistribute-wealth-power/]Audio[/link] [b]TRANSCRIPT:[/b] It feels to me after a long time of being on defense that something is starting to turn in the world and we just have to decide if we are on defense or offense Maybe there is a different way to look at some of theses questions it’s hard for me to think about any part of organizing without thinking what just happened with this economic crisis and what it means I don't know how to have a discussion about labor and community if we don't first say what do we need to do at this time in history what is the strategy that gives us some chance of winning because I spent my life time as a union organizer justice for janitors a lot of things It seems we are at a moment where the world is going to get much much worse or much much better Unions are almost dead we cannot survive doing what we do but the simple fact of the matter is community organizations are almost dead also and if you think about what we need to do it may give us some direction which is essentially what the folks that are in charge - the big banks and everything - what they want is stability Every time there is a crisis in the world they say, well, the markets are stable. What's changed in America is the economy doing well has nothing to do with the rest of us They figured out that they don't need us to be rich they can do very well in a global market without us so what does this have to do with community and labor organizing more. We need to figure out in a much more through direct action more concrete way how we are really trying to disrupt and create uncertainty for capital for how corporations operate The thing about a boom and bust economy is it is actually incredibly fragile. There are actually extraordinary things we could do right now to start to destabilize the folks that are in power and start to rebuild a movement. For example, 10% of homeowners are underwater right their home they are paying more for it then its worth 10% of those people are in strategic default, meaning they are refusing to pay but they are staying in their home that's totally spontaneous they figured out it takes a year to kick me out of my home because foreclosure is backed up If you could double that number you would you could put banks at the edge of insolvency again. Students have a trillion dollar debt [i]We have an entire economy that is built on debt and banks so the question would be what would happen if we organized homeowners in mass to do a mortgage strike if we get half a million people to agree it would literally cause a new finical crisis for the banks not for us we would be doing quite well we wouldn't be paying anything.[/i] Government is being strangled by debt The four things we could do that could really upset wall street One is if city and state and other government entities demanded to renegotiate their debt and you might say why would the banks ever do it - because city and counties could say we won’t do business with you in the future if you won’t renegotiate the debt now So we could leverage the power we have of government and say two things we won’t do business with you JP Morgan Chase anymore unless you do two things: you reduce the price of our interest and second you rewrite the mortgages for everybody in the communities We could make them do that The second thing is there is a whole question in Europe about students’ rates in debt structure. What would happen if students said we are not going to pay. It’s a trillion dollars. Think about republicans screaming about debt a trillion dollars in student debt There is a third thing we can think about what if public employee unions instead of just being on the defensive put on the collective bargaining table when they negotiate they say we demand as a condition of negotiation that the government renegotiate - it’s crazy that you’re paying too much interest to your buddies the bankers it’s a strike issue - we will strike unless you force the banks to renegotiate/ Then if you add on top of that if we really thought about moving the kind of disruption in Madison but moving that to Wall Street and moving that to other cities around the country We basically said you stole seventeen trillion dollars - you've improvised us and we are going to make it impossible for you to operate Labor can’t lead this right now so if labor can’t lead but we are a critical part of it we do have money we have millions of members who are furious But I don't think this kind of movement can happen unless community groups and other activists take the lead. If we really believe that we are in a transformative stage of what's happening in capitalism Then we need to confront this in a serious way and develop really ability to put a boot in the wheel then we have to think not about labor and community alliances we have to think about how together we are building something that really has the capacity to disrupt how the system operates We need to think about a whole new way of thinking about this not as a partnership but building something new. We have to think much more creatively. The key thing... What does the other side fear the most - they fear disruption. They fear uncertainty. Every article about Europe says in they rioted in Greece the markets went down The folks that control this country care about one thing how the stock market goes what the bond market does how the bonuses goes. We have a very simple strategy: * How do we bring down the stock market * How do we bring down their bonuses * How do we interfere with there ability to be rich And that means we have to politically isolate them, economically isolate them and disrupt them It’s not all theory i’ll do a pitch. So a bunch of us around the country think who would be a really good company to hate we decided that would be JP Morgan Chase and so we are going to roll out over the next couple of months what would hopefully be an exciting campaign about JP Morgan Chase that is really about challenge the power of Wall Street. And so what we are looking at is the first week in May can we get enough people together starting now to really have an week of action in New York I don't want to give any details because I don't know if there are any police agents in the room. The goal would be that we will roll out of New York the first week of May. We will connect three ideas * that we are not broke there is plenty of money * they have the money - we need to get it back * and that they are using Bloomberg and other people in government as the vehicle to try and destroy us And so we need to take on those folks at the same time and that we will start here we are going to look at a week of civil disobedience - direct action all over the city then roll into the JP Morgan shareholder meeting which they moved out of New York because I guess they were afraid because of Columbus. There is going to be a ten state mobilization it try and shut down that meeting and then looking at bank shareholder meetings around the country and try and create some moments like Madison except where we are on offense instead of defense Where we have brave and heroic battles challenging the power of the giant corporations. We hope to inspire a much bigger movement about redistributing wealth and power in the country and that labor can’t do itself that community groups can’t do themselves but maybe we can work something new and different that can be brave enough and daring and nimble enough to do that kind of thing. Mon, 21 Mar 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=DE3130B0-123F-7491-A46BEDBB47349165 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=CBE04114-123F-7491-A46749D057561C9F Everyday millions of Americans as well as millions of people around the work wake up, walk to their car or motorcycle, drive to work, and reverse this process on the way home. Seems like a very common part of life of working people. Think of all the risks that people take when doing this. Many drive through massive amounts of traffic, some people walk up stairs, some people walk and drive across bridges. We work in buildings that are power by electricity and continually work with electrical equipment. Think of the risks. Now look at some [link=http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx]2009 statistics[/link]. [list] [*]24,474 people died in fatal car accidents [*]4462 people died in motorcycle accidents [*]4092 pedestrians died by motorists [*]28 people died in mining accidents [link=http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb0243.pdf]*[/link] [*]56 people died in mining support accidents[link=http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb0243.pdf]*[/link] [*]47 people died in animal food manufacturing[link=http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb0243.pdf]*[/link] [*]13 people died in oil and gas extraction[link=http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb0243.pdf]*[/link] [/list] Now look at some to date stats on Nuclear vs Wind Turbine Incidents noted by [link=http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/02/wind-vs-nuclear-energy-wind-power-deemed-far-more-dangerous.php]Treehugger[/link]. [list] [*]41 people died while transporting wind turbines [*]39 people died in blade failures [*]110 incidents from turbine fires [*]60 incidents from structural failure [*]24 incidents from ice being hurled from blades [*]0 incidents from the Nuclear industry in 40 years [/list] Now look at the output of energy from [link=http://nuclearfissionary.com/2010/04/02/comparing-energy-costs-of-nuclear-coal-gas-wind-and-solar/]each source[/link]. [list] [*]Renewable energy costs $.15 per kWh [*]Petroleum energy costs $.10 per kWh [*]Natural Gas energy costs $.10 per kWh [*]Coal energy costs $.04 per kWh [*]Nuclear energy costs $.04 per kWh [/list] So based on the stats, I ask the question, what is the more viable source of energy as well as the source with less risk? Could it be nuclear? It seems that since the cataclysmic natural disasters in Japan, the world has begun to lose its common sense. Even with the problems with radiation coming from the nuclear reactors in Japan, must we look at the over all picture? So far the amount of radiation that has escaped the nuclear reactors is approximately 60 millirem per hour. A Cat Scan produces 1000 millirem. So overall the long term exposure to this level of release is not good, the exposure can be managed by the forces working at the site. Keep in mind these reactors were designed to withstand an 8.2 magnitude earthquake and sustained a 9m. It is said that this was the 5 strongest earth quakes in recorded history. This situation is concerning but hardly common. The Chernobyl disaster released 80,000 to 1,600,000 millirem. After assessing the risks, should we ban nuclear power plants or driving? Fri, 18 Mar 2011 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=CBE04114-123F-7491-A46749D057561C9F http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=AA3CF171-123F-7491-A4CDF8175ADA66FE Do we realize at what point in history we stand before? It is quite disturbing that in an age with cameras on every corner, on every computer, and in every phone where YouTube has become the news - without the need for an anchor - that few still wish to realize where we stand. Amongst all of news that surrounds us, it is amazing how little of it is discussed. While standing in front of some very successful members of the industry of which I am employed, I was asked to introduce myself. As several did before me, I explained what my position was and what service that I was going to provide on the upcoming multi-million dollar project for one of the biggest companies in the world. Along with everyone else, I explained my interests. Within the room, my interests paralleled those that mentioned their love for family, activities like fishing, and the love for sports, but one thing I mentioned that seemed to be a bit different from everyone else was my interest in politics. Throughout the all-day session, never was anything discussed about current events. There was no mention of the turmoil overseas. There was no mention of union uprisings all over the country. There was no mention of the state of the union and the precipice we stand before as the world seems to be slipping into chaos. If you look at some of the news outlets, you will see glimpses of what is occurring. In the last two years, I have read some pretty disturbing books and seen some pretty disturbing things. I have witnessed former SEIU President Andy Stern, who has been one of the most visited people to the White House to visit our leader, quote the [i]Communist Manifesto[/i] and state that [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzG0xpkjWrA ]“workers of the world unite is not just a slogan but a way we are going to have to do business”[/link]. I have witnessed the President of the AFL-CIO Richard Trumka state that he [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4NrT2oTQqE]visits the White House as much as twice a week[/link] while Barack Obama has been reported by MSNBC to not have spoken to his closest advisors since his presidency began 2 years ago. Is this news? Actually it was news that MSNBC covered it. Let’s think about this for a minute. One of the most powerful people in the world, who cannot reasonably make decisions about the future of the most powerful country in the world without advisors, doesn’t speak to a half a dozen of his advisors that the American people have nominated and approved. Instead he talks to unelected men that support collectivism and massive distribution of wealth. The same President appoints, former [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh4Z0V0zNQg]Communists like Van Jones[/link] and admirers of Mao like [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCvQ8BSUv-g ]Manufacturing Czar Ron Bloom who says that free market is nonsense and political power comes from the barrel of a gun[/link] as well as Obama’s [link=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCtpLbSIko0&feature=related[/link]Communication Director Anita Dunn who stated that the [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlGNhAnwp_Y&feature=related ]White House is trying to control the media through propoganda[/link]. Where is this in the news outside of quirky accused conspiracy theorist Glenn Beck? It is nowhere. Since the conservative resurgence during the last year, landmarked by the huge shift in Congress, there has been a substantial shift in politics around the world. There are revolutions and political uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Yemen, and Iran. Is it a coincidence that all of these revolutions took place at this time in history? It is hard to say that this is coordinated without some speculation but we can recognize the planning of a revolution doesn’t occur overnight much less revolutions in half a dozen countries. In order to understand what is happening on the ground in these countries now and what has led up to this time in history we must look for what agitated the uprisings or simply look to the [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBNopQXvJoA&feature=related ]agitators[/link]. A 2010 October scrubbed post on the [link= http://www.organizersforum.org/index.php?id=462 ]Organizers Forum[/link] which is run by co-founder of Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 100 Wade Rathke and President of theTides Foundation Drummond Pike states that from September 25, 2011 to September 30, 2011 there is going to be an International Dialogue conference where community organizers, labor/union organizers, and activists will meet to discuss the upcoming elections in Egypt and how they could affect the outcome. It is obvious that the desired outcome is [link= http://theunionnews.blogspot.com/2011/02/where-in-world-is-wade-rathke.html ]socialism or even communism[/link]. Trevor Loudon from [link= http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2011/02/what-did-wade-rathke-know-about-egypt.html ]New Zeal[/link] covered it pretty well as well as [link= http://emergingcorruption.com/2011/02/what-did-wade-rathke-know-about-egypt-that-the-cia-didnt-and-what-will-obama-do-now/ ]Michael Gaynor of EmergingCorruption.com[/link]. The connections to stretch well into the community organizing and union organizing environment. Oleg Atbashian of [link= http://thepeoplescube.com/ ]the People’s Cube[/link], who lived in the Soviet Union as a propagandist prior to its collapse, details in his book [link= http://thepeoplescube.com/ ]Shakedown Socialism[/link] the failed ideology of collectivism and its preachers - the unions. After spending some time with him, he revealed that the ill fate of the Soviet Union is destined here in America if we do not become active against collectivism and its mechanisms. The world is changing and is now vulnerable to the wrong kind of change if the American people do not stand up and show leadership within this darkening age. It is apparent that we are being infiltrated by foreign ideologies with multiculturalism running rampant in America. The importance of assimilation is never as important as now with the founding principles of our country gradually being diluted by millions illegal immigrants that cannot speak the American language to the lack of focus on the founding principles by our school system. Without the focus on true American liberty and the rights protected by the United States Constitution, we are doomed to the same destruction of representative republics that preceded us in history. It is the leftist collegiate system for which foreign collectivist ideology has arrived here in America and is implemented by the unions. It isn’t the everyday worker looking to be secured with his benefits but rather the union leaders that coral their union members to fight against the liberties that were afforded by our founding documents. It is the ploy to achieve massive distribution of wealth and the disrespect for property rights that is eroding our economic system and the entitlement mentality that is eroding our morality. So never has it been more important for Americans to be engaged. The left - right paradigm has shifted to the up and down paradigm as socialists have infiltrated the most powerful seats in our American government. The organizing we see today in America and around the world is no different than the organizing that we saw in Eastern Europe in the early 20th century. The organizing that Lenin and Hitler participated in promised all of the same things that we are hearing from the unions now. Could we be witnessing a [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJE5MqesHlw ]Communist Bolshevik[/link] uprising here in America or a [link= http://archive.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/09/fbi-serves-search-warrants-here-in-terror-probe.html ]Fascist National Socialist Party in the Middle East?[/link] Our present condition never looked so identical to that time. Look around at our leaders and question - are they the people they appear to be? Are they pushing for this hysteria? Are they agitating? The tactics of Communists and community organizers are different but do they achieve the same results? Ask yourselves these questions and be sure to get others to ask the same questions. So I ask again, do we realize at what point in history we stand before? Sat, 12 Mar 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=AA3CF171-123F-7491-A4CDF8175ADA66FE http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=4ED3157F-123F-7491-A40C1215D19375A2 The true colors of our liberal counterparts are beginning to show around the country. After decades of accusations of how insensitive conservatives are while trying to be fiscally responsible, the bill has finally come due and the liberals can not pay. Now it is time to truly expose liberals for what they truly are – all that they claim to despise. It is also important to expose their puppet masters that steer their efforts. In the 2009 National Center for Education Statistics issued “[link= http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2009/2010458.pdf ]Nation’s Report Card[/link], it is reported that two-thirds of Wisconsin public school 8th graders can not read proficiently despite the highest per pupil spending in the United States Midwest. Despite this horrible performance, the public sector unions literally shut down the school system to participate in political protests. During this debacle, doctors have falsified sick notices as an effort to protect protesting teachers in order to prevent them from losing their tax payer funded weekly pay check. Seems to me that there are rather obvious crimes taking place in Wisconsin and the only question that crosses my mind is, “Where are the paddy wagons to round up the criminals?” Amidst all of the vitriol from the union members, their government representatives have left town so they don’t have to face the people that they represent – both union and non-union. As they run away from the democracy that they preach so vehemently to protect, children remain teacher-less and are the ones ultimately being negatively affected. The children continually are punished by the poor representation in government as well as the performance of public sector employees. The children are being punished as the public unions ridicule performance ratings of teachers. And it is the children that will pay the unsustainable burdens that these public unions bargained with politicians. Where are the liberals that worried about lunch programs? Where the liberals that preached democracy as the majority of Wisconsin representation approves of the proposed legislation that will put its fiscal house in order? Where are the liberals that shouted down the greedy when the unions press for more and more and more? Where are the liberals that screamed about campaign reform for campaign contributions which supposedly corrupt elections? It seems to be that these liberals are the Democratic who left town so they don’t have to face their union boss that they made promises to nor the representatives in their state that favor this legislation. Where are the liberals? The bottom line is that they have run from the truth. The truth is that their efforts are all about money not about democracy. The fact is they are not interested in the unfortunate child that struggles in school. The truth is they are not interested in fairness. They are not concerned with campaign contributions – only Republican campaign contributions. The truth is that the union bosses steer their efforts not the people they represent. They are concerned about themselves. The term public service employee has been perverted by public sector union greed. It is now that their intentions are on full display. So ask yourself about the intentions of healthcare that will inevitably become just as ineffective and corrupt as the education system. Ask yourself what the union bosses have to gain by not having to pay out unsustainable lifetime benefits of their members. Ask yourself what are the true intentions of the liberals in congress and who are their puppet masters. Ask yourself where are the bleeding heart liberals. Tue, 22 Feb 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=4ED3157F-123F-7491-A40C1215D19375A2 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=3DDA51BD-123F-7491-A4962C8BA091D5A0 It is important now for every Americans to take a step back and witness the beginnings of a socialist global revolution. Many would call it an exercise in democracy. Others would call it an exercise in solidarity. Whether this movement will retain its virility is to be seen. What is imperative for all Americans to do now more than ever is not just to exist in this historical moment living vicariously through our televisions or peering over hundreds of news articles. We must participate. To echo this assessment, I will detail the events that are currently taking place First I must mention that socialism is a very broad label and contains many categories. Keep in mind that most socialists are revolutionaries and don’t follow a particular decree. They just wish to oppose others’ decrees. Socialism encompasses communism, democratic socialism, European Socialism, global socialism, Fascism, and even the newest threat to Western Culture – Islamo-Fascism. All of these despise and wish to undermine western culture and capitalism at any cost. [b]Destabilization of the Middle East:[/b] The Middle East may seem to be the most unlikely place for a global revolution due to its instability but it is in fact the center of the world’s fight between liberty and tyranny. This fight has been underway since WWII as Israel was established in 1948 by the British Mandate for Palestine. If you back away from the ideology of non-secular governments such as Iran, which operate under a Sharia system, you can see the similarities in Sharia to Secular tyrannies. What must be understood is that most Islamic countries have not exited the first millennium. Ask yourself what is different between the monarchies of the Dark Ages and current Islamic fundamentalist cultures? We have all heard of the stories of women being buried up to their necks and then being stoned for being accused of adultery in Sharia courts. Does this sound any different from witches or secular dissidents being burned at the stake? So you ask why this is the case? It is the result of centuries of tyranny. For the most part, Muslims in the Middle East have accepted tyranny as a sense of normalcy. If you have never witness liberty, how do you know what to fight for? They have embraced one of the most brutal systems - Sharia. As Islamo-Fascist regimes like Iran wish to destabilize and destroy the Western Culture, the prime target is their many neighbors that have been friendly to the Israeli/American presence in the region. As the US government legislates itself out of existence by outlawing the extraction of its own natural resources, the destabilized Middle East has become the most viable place to fulfill the demands of American resource consumption. This destabilization in the Middle East is supported by other anti-western culture ideologies. Most notably the Communist has infiltrated the youth movements in the region with help from social networks like Facebook and Twitter. It is refreshing to see the truth being delivered by western technology but it is disturbing to see who is wearing the revolutionary boots on the ground. You can browse many statements made by members of Communist parties all around the world on [link=http://www.solidnet.org]Solidnet.org[/link] along with other Communist sites. In this post by the [link=http://solidnet.org/index.php/turkey-communist-party-of-turkey/1108-cp-of-turkey-statement-of-the-cc-of-tkp-on-egypt]Communist Party of Turkey Central Committee[/link], it is apparent that the support and involvement of Communist revolutionaries is a substantiated claim. The [link=http://www.cpusa.org/egypt-a-people-s-victory/]Communist Party USA (CPUSA)[/link] recently made a statement supporting the revolution in Egypt. This should be a cause for concern being that Communism will simply remove one form of tyranny for another. [b]Reemergence of Soviet Communism:[/b] Since the fall of the Soviet Union and the illusion of the destruction of Communism, a new Communism has risen from the ashes. In its revolutionary fashion through dialectic process, Communism has subverted Western Culture and slowly begun to erode it from the top down and the bottom up. In the previous post, we asked the question, “Where did the Soviets go?” They simply took off the military garb and replaced it with suits, Hollywood costumes, religious garb, faculty uniforms, and pro-socialist fashion. They became community organizers to progress socialism incrementally as Antonio Gramsci proposed since violent revolution wasn’t a viable way to develop social democracy. Through promotion of moral and spiritual deterioration, the corrosion of Western Culture would eventually succumb to the pressures of the subversive minority that lust for power. This would be the subversive tactic from the bottom up. Also mentioned here in the past was the tactics of Cloward and Piven long with the methods taught at the Midwest Academy. In order to destroy Western Capitalism along with the Republic if the United States, socialists needed to divide the multi-layer melting pot that had become the United States. This was necessary in order to create the balkanized citizenry labeled with Bourgeoisie and Proletariat in order to set the stage for their revolution. This would include creating a huge entitlement burden on the taxpayer which will inevitably kill the middle class. Further action would be implemented to prop up big business while stifling small business. By defeating the engine of American Capitalism – the middle class – eventually the environment would be set to demonize big business as witnessed in the latest banking and housing crisis. Is there any wonder why Socialist Democrats like Barack Obama, who was heavily influence by the Midwest Academy, backed the bailout of huge financial institutions but did nothing to help the hundreds of small banks that have failed since the housing and banking collapse? For more detail about this read [i]Radical in Chief[/i] by Stanley Kurtz. [b]The Community Organizing Front:[/b] Community organizers have been the laughing stock in the American media since the Obama election. Partly because of the [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UOL9Jh61S8]ACORN prostitution scandal[/link] became the staple for community organizers around the country. Little recognition had been given to the breadth of the community organizer. With a label as ambiguous as a community organizer, it is important to understand that this organizer is an agitator and exists and many emanations. They work to provoke the citizenry on a myriad of issues. There are thousands of organizations around the country that represent everything from human rights to environmental rights. All of these groups fall under the misunderstood term Social Justice. As a new emergence of conservatism spreads across the nation, legislators around the country are beginning to defund popular community, state and federal entitlements, the community organizers along with labor unions have now turned up the heat in order to try and maintain the unsustainable status quo. Even [link= http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0211/Pelosi_backs_Wisconsin_protesters.html ]Nancy Pelosi[/link] has stated that she was standing in solidarity with the pro-union [link= http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704657704576150390393461846.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLETopStories ]protestors in Wisconsin[/link]. With Wisconsin being the first, [link= http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=a6jskX_gPvVc] Ohio[/link], [link= http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/14584 ]Michigan[/link] and soon to be [link= http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2011/02/17/could-minnesota-see-similar-union-fights-as-wisconsin/ ]Minnesota[/link] and [link= http://www.idahopress.com/news/article_44f83a1a-3921-11e0-ace1-001cc4c002e0.html ]Idaho[/link] are boiling over with education reform on the table to help curb a fiscal disaster across the country. All of these instances are indicative of pro-socialist agendas. Politico even reports that the [link= http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0211/DNC_playing_role_in_Wisconsin_protests.html ]Democratic National Committee[/link] is playing an active role with its community organizing and Obama created project Organizing for America in the Wisconsin protests. The world is now being faced with a new global initiative fronted by some of the world’s elite individuals and powered by a thirst for democracy. The future will soon tell how the toppled regimes will fare in the Middle East. Without any organized governmental structure to fall back into, the future does seem bleak. Islamo-Fascist and Communists see this development as an opportunity to cripple Western Culture and are actively pursue their socialist goals. With the energy of the revolutions reaching into the United States, Democratic Socialists see a shrinking window of opportunity as an Obama re-election seems grim. Over the next year there will be a growing instability with inflation rising, States massively cutting entitlements, and the [link= http://www.gallup.com/poll/146147/Gallup-Finds-Unemployment-Mid-February.aspx ]unemployment rate remaining at 10%[/link]. The only way that America can survive this global crisis is to embrace what has made America the most free and prosperous country in the world. Fiscal responsibility and support for our republican form of government will be our saving grace. We must become energized and back our legislators with the hard decisions that they need to make within this fiscal crisis brought on by socialist policies and entitlements. If we don’t do this, we will continue to lose our sovereignty to other nations and risk falling under tyranny like so many other countries around the world while extinguishing the last light of hope for true liberty in history. Sat, 19 Feb 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=3DDA51BD-123F-7491-A4962C8BA091D5A0 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=1F461336-123F-7491-A476DCECFF5FEB94 A Timeless Time for Choosing In Reagan’s 1964 Goldwater election speech, he warned Americans of a clear and present danger that was creeping across the globe. So what was this danger? Was it the Soviet Union? Was it Socialism or Communism? Or was it something more dramatic and sinister? Well this is all one in the same. In the beginning of his speech, he made a very profound statement not as a conservative but rather as an individual. He said, [i]“The sponsor has been identified, but unlike most television programs, the performer hasn't been provided with a script. As a matter of fact, I have been permitted to choose my own ideas regarding the choice that we face in the next few weeks.”[/i] This is what Reagan represented. It wasn’t the big business or the Republican Party. It was the individual. In this time we are faced with the same choice. It is more now then ever, since the founding of our country, that the choice has become so critical and clear. In this last hour for freedom, the clear and present danger, which Reagan was targeting as the enemy of freedom, is now at our door steps. This enemy is looming over us and casting its disguised shadow over the “land of the free and the home of the brave”. It is time again to determine if we are in fact the home that we once were. Solidarity is a word that seems to be in the news lately. Since the economic collapse in 2008, the communists have resurfaced and saw this time as their D-Day – C-Day as I wish not to disgrace. They seek to use this crisis as an opportunity to collectively join with those that are suffering and join arms to create a solidarity movement against those in power. The little secret is that the leaders are not brutal dictators but rather, the ill-defined Bourgeoisie Here is a statement from 2008 Russian presidential candidate Gennady Zyuganov who is the central committee chairman of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation: [link= http://21stcenturymanifesto.wordpress.com/2011/02/06/russian-communists-on-tunisia-and-egypt/]article 1[/link] Zyuganov with Medvedev: [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/zyuganov1.jpg[/img] Zyuganov with Putin: [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/zyuganov2.jpg[/img] The key to understanding the struggle in the Middle East is the polarized forces that exist there. The overwhelming presence of communism and fascism is what is most astounding as the republican western world stands by watching vicariously as if the revolution over seas is some type of reality show. This is not a request for American’s to send their armies and navies over into Egypt and Tunisia but rather diplomats to help craft the structure of government that would most benefit the freedom starved people of the Middle East. Where are these patriots? We watch on TV as the protesters waffle with their angst and we forget that most of these 30 something’s were born into tyranny and will most likely remain in it for they do not recognize what true freedom is. It will be the closed fist disguised by Islam or “Red Solidarity”. What these people are revolting against is exactly the same as what America defeated in the 30’s with the National Socialists (NAZI) and in the 80’s with the Soviet Communism. Or did we truly defeat the Communists? To truly defeat communism, you must defeat the ideology. That ideology is socialism and has grown exponentially since 1991 when the Soviet Union fell. It was the Soviet Union that fell, not communism or socialism. If fact more countries have embraced socialism then any other time in history. The defeat of the Soviet Union was simply an economic defeat in the race for military superiority. The Soviets simply could not defeat the economic and innovative engine of free America. In essence America defeated a flag. So what happened to the communists in Russia? Did they just disappear? With a country that held the iron fist over its people for nearly a century, it is hard to believe that the people under its tyranny would know what true freedom was either. So is their freedom an illusion? We can see that prominent Communists still fly their flag as seen with Zyuganov and Gorbachev. Their communism is simply disguised by the “Green Movement” or civil rights. At heart they are still revolutionaries trying to quantitatively equalize the playing field – which brings me back to freedom. The freedom that I speak of is the freedom to fail. When times are hard, who do the people turn too? Do they know not to turn to government services or entitlements? Or are they prone to become enslaved once again by the government? This is the choice that Reagan spoke of. It is the choice to embrace failure. Without falling off or our bike as children, would we have ever know how to proudly ride one? This is the question that we must all ask ourselves. Are we ready to fail? We better be because America must struggle economically in order to defeat the debt that exists over its head. There is no sustaining the burden that currently exists. At this time will we as freedom loving America join in solidarity to overthrow our deficient leaders – through elections of course? Or will we stand in solidarity to defeat ourselves by destroying the economic and innovative engine that has made America great? The failure of business needs to be embraced for the bad skin must shed to reveal the good skin. Bailouts are not American. Welfare in any sense of the word is not American. Charity is the American alternative because it is led by caring individuals not by power hungry bureaucrats. If we choose to accept the breadline, we will accept the shackles of the iron fist. To put into perspective the severity of our situation and the present danger that stands at our door, I quote Reagan’s time for choosing speech once again, [i]’Not too long ago two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, "We don't know how lucky we are." And the Cuban stopped and said, "How lucky you are! I had someplace to escape to." In that sentence he told us the entire story. If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth.’[/i] America is truly the last stand on Earth. The evils of tyranny are salivating at the resources that exist in America. The resources are not coal, or oil, but rather its people. We can become the energy that propels a sickening suicidal ideology or we can be sustainable and renewable resources through our innovation and individuality. We are mere batteries to the communists. They rally us under the Communist Manifesto’s [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzG0xpkjWrA ]“Workers of the World Unite”[/link] as they plug us into the union system to invigorate their lust for power. They are no different they the Pharaohs of Egypt. It is their purpose rather than ours that they seek. So as I conclude, I ask the question, “Are you ready to fail?” and more importantly are “You ready to stand up on your own?” The cross that lies upon our shoulders is that of failure and it is for us to bear. If we turn to our government for protection, we will place the shackles upon our legs and march to their drum beat rather then ours. So stand tall and accept this burden and embrace failure. If we stand together as individuals we will defeat this. I will end with one of America’s greatest Americans, [i]”You and I are told increasingly that we have to choose between a left or right, but I would like to suggest that there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down--up to a man's age-old dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order--or down to the ant heap totalitarianism, and regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.”[/i] Ronald Regan Sun, 13 Feb 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=1F461336-123F-7491-A476DCECFF5FEB94 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=D753D4B7-123F-7491-A4F068B559027595 Recently I responded to a dear Progressive friend that was debating me on the subject of free enterprise and the free hand that Adam Smith mentioned in the [i]Wealth of Nations[/i]. The debate was interesting. I thought it was definitely worthy of sharing here. She Said, [i]You thoroughly express your beliefs and ideas about socioeconomic, political, and philosophical issues daily. I know where you stand and you can choose your path without hindrance anytime. I don't equate capitalism with liberty as you do, b...ut I am only human and we are all vulnerable to the same conditions. Do you see the stratification in society as healthy? I understand seeing the beauty in imperfection, but billions suffering due to unnatural behavior is just blatantly wrong-a symptom of an epidemic. That is because I assume responsibility as a species with higher cognitive capability. I know that seems egocentric to you because, you believe in an invisible hand (deity). However, you keep pitching free will at me.[/i] [b]I responded as follows,[/b] Well there is a lot there in that short paragraph. Capitalism, which I hate to even use the word, is a tiny portion of liberty. Free enterprise as I rather call it, since Marx and his cronies coined Capitalism, is better known as "economic individualism" Adam Smith called it “the obvious and simple system of natural liberty” which better describes what I support rather then the crony-capitalism that you and I hate. Lobbyists and corrupt congressmen are what have eroded our free enterprise system. Not sure where you get the invisible hand as a deity... I don't see a deity controlling people’s desires. If that was the case, we would be perfect... or oblivious animals... depending on the deity. The invisible hand as Adam Smith explained is the individual transactions that millions of people make in self interest that determine value and the market. It is the epitome of the (r)epublican economy. When I see a company, I see hundreds or thousands of individuals acting in self interest to create a better life for themselves. Companies that develop a good quality product or service as well as treat their employees well will succeed. Consumers will buy what they desire. What they can or can't afford may fancy their desire and later they may choose whether or not they can economically acquire what they desire. These are all individual decisions and transactions performed by millions if not billions of people every day. How can some egotistical politician, even those that have never operated in the free market system, have the high intellect or cognitive ability to understand how each of these transactions needs to be engineered? He can't... plain and simple. They can’t prevent desire of the people. When they try to prevent desires they simply channel the desires of the people. They often channel people into a corral that often destroys. Must I mention the Community Reinvestment Act? So when our system collapses, I don't see corporations who have enslaved individuals led by a tyrannical CEO as a collective destroyer of worlds. I see a minority of self professed elite idiots in Washington trying to control, stop or channel what they are incapable of doing. As far as the stratification…. Marxists see stratification... mostly big layers. Marx saw two layers with the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat which was created by collapsed tyrannical monarchies. Ironically, the tyrannical system that he despised - he influenced the same. Not only was his system tyrannical it was murderous. Marxists find it hard to separate Americans into large groups because we are a melting pot. The melting pot and free enterprise system was set up to prevent the balkanization of its citizenry as witnessed by Jefferson, Washington, and the other brilliantly influenced founding fathers. Politicians that group Latinos, American blacks, Irish, Indians and so forth are putting labels on them because they wish to categorize them in order to control them. In the socioeconomic system called free enterprise -that we as a country hardly entertain - the layers are set up by desires, layers of effort, layers success, and if you believe in God – Divine Providence. The proverbial invisible hand sets up these layers. I can be a person with average talent but can work hard and achieve success. I set the tone of my life and where I wish to be. Only in a regulated, bureaucratic, and corrupt system is that not the case. If you look to the billions of unfortunate people that you speak of that are suffering around the world - without me listing thousands of countries -most of them are oppressed by a leader that tries to guide the hand. If we are all creatures or a species - as you call it - that act in self interest, how can this leader not act in self interest? What if he gets lazy with the power that took or mentally ill? We obviously saw this with Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler. They were drunk with the power and destroy the people that got in the way of their plan. I believe economic and environmental destruction comes from the failures of government in most cases. This doesn’t take individuals out of the equation. That is why reasonable laws have been put into place to prevent catastrophes that have been witnessed or proven. If the regulations that our government had put into place to protect our Gulf had been implemented as they were supposed to be, and BP didn’t get a waver to by-pass them, we may not have lost those precious lives and much wildlife. So what does the government do to fix this? Instead of fixing the system it already has, they create a bigger bureaucracy with more regulations. After creating this larger bureaucracy, they shut down production because government can’t figure out what BP, Exxon, Shell and others took a hundred years to engineer with millions of individuals input. How does this make sense? It doesn’t. Our failures as a country are symptoms to the inability for the cognitive intellectuals in Washington to grasp what they were not meant to grasp. All they are is stranglers in the night frustrated at their inability to control all that is natural and all that wasn’t meant to be controlled. They regulate for the sake of regulation tightening down of the ability of our country to produce all that we need and desire. We are becoming like all of the other countries around the world. We are becoming more balkanized, less innovative, less intelligent, less productive, and most of all less free. As this occurs, government defines classes and races in order to prevent balkanization. They regulate, tax, and punish in order to make companies more innovative. They hold smart children back to not leave less intelligent children behind. In order to make our country productive, they shut down or highly regulate production. Lastly they take away our freedom to make choices and fail in order to give us liberty. You speak of my beliefs in free enterprise as if they are separate from the laws of nature. I have used my cognitive intellectual ability to realize that I can not control but only witness the will of man. I realize that I can influence by sharing what I have learned from our forbearers and the great philosophers that have first witnessed these laws – not created them. While becoming enlightened and influenced by these absolute laws and self evident truths, I understand that I could never fully fathom the total absolute. For that reason, I trust the invisible hand. I know that history has been dominated by tyranny and those countries that entertained aspects of free enterprise and aspects of a republic were the most free. The countries that strayed from this were those led by leaders that thought they were all knowing. In the wake of their stupidity were millions of bodies which formally housed the souls of those wishing to be free. They were exterminated because of their interference with the iron fist which was at the end of the arm of the tyrant that didn’t trust or recognize the invisible hand. America has been free because of this hand. As this hand becomes more invisible by the eclipse created by the hands of politicians, the hands become fewer and fewer where eventually one open charismatic giving hand becomes a closed fist. If this happened in America, we become mediocre like thousands of other nations in history. That is what I believe. Sun, 30 Jan 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=D753D4B7-123F-7491-A4F068B559027595 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=CF71D4A9-123F-7491-A47E94D60B969517 What is now happening in the Tunisia, Egypt, and the rest of the Middle East can make or break the United States of America. In the midst of the Obama administration turning away all domestic oil extraction and energy production, it is inevitable that the price of gas, heating oil, and other petroleum products will steadily rise in price. Could it be that our stubborn impotent environmental policies destroy the country? Projections have already been set on the price of a barrel of oil in triple digits. If we remember the housing crisis was preempted by a $140 plus barrel of oil. With oil at these prices, petroleum goods – whether consumables or package for consumables – sky rocketed. $4 per gallon of gasoline had put a huge burden on the majority of Americans. So the important question is not whether or not we will see $4 per gallon of gasoline but what will happen to an already weak economy when the $4 price arrives at the pump? These protests are hardly a refreshing fight for democracy and shows little signs of a positive alternative to the dictatorships that have crippled the economies of the poverty stricken citizen majorities of Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Syria and others. With Egypt being a moderate Islamic state, there has been evidence of radical jihadism that has reared its ugly head as recent as a bombing of a Christian church on New Years Eve. The Muslim Brotherhood, which was a root of Al Qaida, has been rumored to be behind the uprisings in the region. This is disconcerting considering that another Islamo-facist regime like Iran in the Middle East would create a huge disparity to hope in the region. It is important that the United States stand firm with the government in Egypt for the Alies in the region as well as the enemies will see how American foreign policy would fair for them. Obama’s speech on 1-28-11 was an important one with the support for the protesters and President Mubarak. This tone however could be a tell tale to other leaders in the region that America is not completely decided on its stand for the dictatorship of a nation or its cry for democracy. It is imperative that the United States support President Mubarak in the liberation of his people through peaceful means and bold disdain for the rise of radical jihadists in the region. It is a wonder that this same brisk response by Obama was not seen in the Iranian protests in 2009 and 2010. So what should we watch for and what should we expect? The optimist in me would hope to see Mubarak liberate his people with more freedom and less oppression or the rise of a grassroots alternative indicative of the Tea Party movement here in the United States. The pessimist in me expects to see radical jihad give an oppressed people false hope. History has proven that this type of tinderbox of misguided revolutionaries often leads way to the radical opportunists that use the crisis to their advantage. They don’t wish to let the crisis of citizen uprisings go to waste. In the early 1980’s Iran’s people revolted and a refreshing democracy started to bloom. With all doors open for freedom of speech and freedom of religion, the Ayatollah Khomeini step in and immediately started creating his theocratic fascist regime. Within a few years the country began to deteriorate and a new oppressive regime was born which exists till this day in Iran. This sadly seems to be the most plausible future for Egypt. Obviously it is too early to tell the future of Egypt but the odds are against a new republic being formed for the already oppressed people who have been ruled by Mubarak for the last 30 years are likely to look for another charismatic oppressive leader or simply take the one they have back. America be warned that it must realize that the stability of its society depends on its energy independence. Sustainable energy alternatives are important and are needed but regulating the innovators will not shift us away from the foreign powers that dictate the rules in the world of oil trade. In the immediate future, congress with the backing of the already convinced majority of American citizens must push for energy reform and the opening of drilling domestic markets first and then encourage innovation not through grants but though deep tax incentives. Shutting down energy production in America will only make us susceptible to the chaos that is now spilling over in the deserts in the Middle East. It is now that America must lead with the example of republican democracy. Fri, 28 Jan 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=CF71D4A9-123F-7491-A47E94D60B969517 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=99DFAA7F-123F-7491-A415977A7EF12688 Widespread Rejection of Framers’ Constitution. Today most judges and legal scholars march to the sound of a different drum than that heard by the Framers of the Constitution. In fact, in recent years many have had such disdain for the Framers’ Constitution that they have openly ceased even giving the appearance of respecting it. For example, Professor Leonard W. Levy, a highly regarded constitutional scholar and author has written that the Supreme Court is and must be for all practical purposes a “continuous constitutional convention” in the sense that it must keep updating the original charter . . . it simply cannot decide cases on the basis of what the Constitution says. (Against the Law: The Nixon Court and Criminal Justice, by Leonard W. Levy, p. 29-30; Government by Judiciary, by Raoul Berger, p. 342.) That attitude of disrespect for the Constitution and the Framers who drafted it represents a reversal of the traditional American feeling of near reverence for the Constitution and the Founding Fathers. What caused so great a change? In this Introduction it seems appropriate to comment briefly on a few causes that are particularly pertinent to this study. The Reece Committee. After the Second World War many Americans were concerned that the great foundations seemed to be using their grant-making power to undermine traditional American beliefs and attitudes. (It should be emphasized that the comments about the activities of the great foundations do not apply to vast majority of American tax exempt foundations.) In 1953 the House of Representatives appointed the Reece Committee to investigate the question. The committee selected Norman Dodd as its Research Director. The Ford Foundation. In a 1977 interview with Michael Loyd Chadwick, Mr. Dodd told of a conversation he had in November 1953 with Roman Gaither, President of the Ford Foundation. Mr. Dodd quoted Mr. Gaither as saying: Mr. Dodd, we operate here under directives . . . which emanate from the White House . . . . The substance of the directives under which we operate is that we shall use our grant-making power to alter life in the United States so that we can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union. (“Norman Dodd Describes Initial Shock,” by Michael Lloyd Chadwick, The Freeman Digest, June 1978, pp. 4-5.) [p. iii] The great obstacles to such a merger were the Constitution and the American people’s belief in the wisdom of the Founding Fathers. How were those obstacles to be overcome? The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Mr. Dodd also told of an experience he had with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The prior president of that foundation was Alger Hiss who had been sentenced to prison for perjury in denying under oath that he was an agent of the Soviet Union. The new president was a Dr. Joseph Johnson, who did not seem to be as familiar as he might have been with the prior activities of the foundation or the contents of its minute books. He agreed to make the minute books of the foundation available to a member of Mr. Dodd’s research staff for two weeks. (Ibid. p. 5-6.) Altering Education to Discredit the Constitution and the Founding Fathers. The following comments by Mr. Dodd pertain to what the foundation’s minute books showed about the trustees’ objectives after the first World War. They came to the conclusion that . . . they must somehow get control of education in the United States . . . . They then divided the task in parts, giving to the Rockefeller Foundation the responsibility of altering education as it pertains to domestic subjects, but Carnegie retained the task of altering our education as it pertained to subjects beating on our international relationships. (Ibid. p. 6.) They had in mind the discrediting of the American founders and the demeaning of the nation’s Constitutional structure of government. So they approached several of the most prominent historians of that day with this proposition but they were turned down flatly. (Ibid. p. 6.) The Trustees then decided that it was necessary for them to build their own stable of historians. They therefore approached the Guggenheim Foundation which specializes in the awarding of fellowships and said, “When we discover a likely young person who is studying and looking forward to becoming a teacher of history, we will take him to London to pursue his studies.” So they took 20 or so to London and there they were briefed in what was expected of them. This group then returned and eventually became the most active influence in the American Historical Society. (Ibid. p.6) This coincides with the appearance . . . of book after book, the contents of which cast aspersion on the early leaders of the country and relegated their ideas to the realm of myth. (Ibid. p. 6.) [p. iv] The committee reports also document how the textbooks that previously had been used were removed and new textbooks were substituted. Instead of transmitting traditional American beliefs, the new textbooks undermined them. The following are a few extracts from the Reece Committee Final Report on Relations Between Foundations and Education. (Freeman Digest, June 1978, p. 16.) In the field of education it seems clear that foundations have played an almost controlling part in promoting uniformity and conformity on a national scale. (Ibid. p. 18.) The aggregate import of this document financed by the Carnegie Corporation was that our American way of life was a failure; that it must give way to a collectivist society; that educators must now prepare the public for a New Order; and traditional American principles must be abandoned. (Ibid. p. 22.) The story of the Building America textbooks is as good an example as any of the attempt by radical educators financed by foundations to suborn the schools. (Ibid. p. 36.) Mr. Sargent pointed out instance after instance in which the attempt was made to destroy our traditions and to use the schools for political propaganda. (Ibid.) The report of the Senate Investigating Committee on Education of the California Legislature . . . severely condemned these books and labeled them as subtle attempts to play up Marxism and to destroy our traditions. (Ibid.) The books, along with a great amount of propaganda, lampooned some of our great traditional figures such as Lincoln and Jefferson and in contrast exhibited Stalin in friendly light. (Ibid. p. 37.) The evidence forces the conclusion that the movement which resulted in the use of the school systems to change our social order was basically socialistic in nature. Its purpose was to turn educators into political agitators. The term “collectivism” was frequently used by the organs and agents of the movement. That term will do as well as “socialism” if one prefers to use it. (Ibid. p. 39.) The above is only a tiny sampling of a great amount of material that might be presented to show that at the very least the ideas and attitudes absorbed by students going through our public education system need to be reexamined and contrasted with information withheld from them. It is hoped that such a reexamination will result in the development of a sounder understanding and appreciation of our American constitutional freedom system. [p. v] Disrespect for Framers’ Constitution Flows from Different World View. There is another cause underlying the present widespread disrespect for the Constitution in the tradition of the Founding Fathers that should be considered in relation to this study. It is important to bear in mind that a person’s beliefs concerning the nature and function of government and its relationship to the people who live under it are controlled by the person’s world view that is an outgrowth of that person’s faith. This applies even to a person who claims to be an atheist or an agnostic. Such a person may feel he is being rational or scientific, but his commitment is still really based on a sort of negative faith. Influence of Secular Humanist Ideas. The predominant negative attitude toward the Constitution of the Founding Fathers is not surprising since it is a natural consequence of commitment to the secular humanist faith which was so ardently promoted by John Dewey and has become the predominant faith of our educational establishment. Since most of our people are products of our educational establishment, it is natural that many of their ideas are secular humanist ideas. This applies even to many who profess to continue their commitment to Christianity. The success of John Dewey and other secular humanist leaders in inculcating secular humanist ideas into successive rising generations of young Americans is strikingly evident when a person reads the detailed provisions of Humanist Manifesto I and Humanist Manifesto II and the publications of humanist organizations such as the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies and compares those proposals with the “politically correct” ideas that predominate today. These comments should not be taken as a blanket criticism of teachers who in many cases try to be as truthful and fair as they can in a difficult situation. But unfortunately too many fine dedicated teachers are unaware that they are being used as instruments to promote a particular religious world view. The Secular Humanist Vision of Freedom. While secular humanism professes to favor individual freedom, its vision and method of operating are oriented to molding and controlling people through the compulsion of government laws and regulations. In fact, under secular humanism the very freedom that [p. vi] is considered to be so desirable is itself subject to such limitations and contraction as government officials may deem appropriate. The secular humanist concept of freedom to the extent the government deems appropriate is strongly reminiscent of the Russian constitution that guarantees freedom to the extent determined by the government. The similarity to the Russian Constitution is to be expected since Humanist Manifesto I expresses a strong endorsement of socialism and redistribution and Humanist Manifesto II reemphasizes the desirability of society providing for the needs of the poor including a guaranteed annual income. Founding Fathers’ Vision of Freedom. The Constitution arose out of an entirely different world view. It was the Founding Fathers’ conviction that freedom could not survive under a system in which government is empowered to determine how much freedom the people should have. The freedom preserving approach the Framers used in the Constitution was to keep the government small and limited to make it possible for freedom to survive. But if government were kept small and limited, how would order be maintained and societal problems be solved. The approach of the Framers as approved and ratified by the American people was to look to religion and especially Christianity rather than government compulsion to provide the operating power to make it work. This is why John Adams was correct when he made the following statement: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” (The Supreme Court and Public Prayer, by Charles E. Rice, p. 47.) Secular Humanism Against Christianity. This brings us to another reason those oriented to secular humanist thinking are so opposed to the Constitution in the tradition of the Founding Fathers. Secular humanism is strongly opposed to Biblical religion and especially Christianity. For example, Humanist Manifesto I clearly states that one of its purposes is to replace Christianity. In fact, the focus of Humanist Manifesto I is the establishment of a new man-made religion suitable for our modem age. It includes such statements as “modem science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values” . . . . “there will be no uniquely religious emotions and attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in [p. vii] the supernatural” . . . . “we consider the religious forms and ideas of our fathers no longer adequate” . . . . “man . . . alone is responsible for the realization of the world of his dreams.” Similarly, Humanist Manifesto II includes such statements as “traditional theism, especially faith in the prayer-heating God, assumed to love and care for persons, to hear and understand their prayers, and to be able to do something about them, is an unproved and outmoded faith” . . . “we find insufficient evidence for belief in the existence of a supernatural.” The following quotation from a prize winning article entitled “A Religion for a New Age” in the Humanist magazine may help shed light on the use of our educational establishment to proselyte students to the secular humanist religion. I am convinced that the battle for humankind’s future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity . . . . These teachers . . . will be ministers . . . utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level . . . . The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new—the rotting corpse of Christianity . . . and the new faith of humanism. (“A Religion for a New Age,” by John J. Dunphy, Humanist, Vol. 43, No. 1 [January/February 1983], p. 26, quoted in Who Owns the Children, by Blair Adams, p. 11.) Extent of American Belief in Religion and Especially Christianity as the Operative Principle of the Framers’ Constitution. Some may question whether the Framers really looked to religion and especially Christianity to be the operative principle of the Constitution and whether the American people realized it and approved of it. Here is what was reported by Alexis de Tocqueville, a Frenchman who traveled extensively in the United States in the 1830's and spoke to many Americans who were alive during the founding era of our country. “I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion . . . but I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or to a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society.” (Democracy m America, by Alexis de Tocqueville, Vol. I, p. 316.) How strongly the Americans felt about the relationship between religion and freedom is indicated in this statement by de Tocqueville. “The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other.” (Ibid. p. 317.) [p. viii] The Purpose of this Work. The purpose of this work is to discuss the principles and provisions of the United States Constitution in the light of the tradition of the Founding Fathers. That tradition is not only unashamedly religious, but it recognizes religion as an indispensable ingredient for the successful functioning of our constitutional system. Since Latter-day Saints have been charged with a special responsibility to uphold and protect the Constitution, this work includes many references to LDS teachings. It is my hope that all will benefit from this work regardless of their religious affiliation. Jerome Horowitz [p. 1] The Constitution of the Founding Fathers By Jerome Horowitz Tue, 18 Jan 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=99DFAA7F-123F-7491-A415977A7EF12688 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=785AC1C1-123F-7491-A485FF892CE9D8D0 A lot has taken place since the fatal shooting of 6 Arizona citizens along with that of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.). We would like to think that it would be the emphasis on heroes like 74 year old Col. Bill Badger who wrestled Jared Lee Loughner to the ground as well as 61 year old Patricia Maisch, who ripped a full magazine of ammunition away from Loughner which would have been used to deliver more tragedy, mayhem and death. Instead you must be a researcher in order to find the names of these heroes amongst all the political flack taking aim at 2 of the most important Amendments that America has to offer. Today we scan the media and flip through cable and major networks and hear chatter about what caused this young mentally disturbed man to pack a gun with several magazines, scribble a note to friends on Myspace.com expressing remorse for a crime not yet committed, and walk into a crowd of people opening fire and killing 6 and wounding 18 others. Amongst these people analyzing what possibly were going through this man’s head are political talking heads on FoxNews, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and others. All seem to have a political slant. First of all it is tragic that it takes a mentally unstable person such as Jared Lee Loughner to shoot a congresswoman in order for the discussions about the violence in our society. The problem doesn’t lie within the mind of people like Loughner, but rather exists in communities and all around this country that witness killings of similar tragedy daily – maybe not in numbers but in similar situations. Only after a white kid kills and who expresses an interest in anarchism and communism, which are completely opposed ideologically, does the media frenzy begin to target solutions - of course the solution is silencing the oposition. This media frenzy is similar to the frenzy that Loughner is being accused of influenced by only after pure speculation of his ideological inspiration which obviously holds no sensible continuity. Who is at fault, the angry opposition - the Tea Party. To say that Loughner is on the borderline of insanity is easily acceptable by simply watching his YouTube channel. It is easy to see the insanity in our media by simply listening to people like Chris Mathews, Thom Hartman, Randi Rhodes, Ed Shultz, Keith Olbermann, and other left-wing pundits trying to connect this insanity to right-wing political commentators. They have all gone on the offensive with the opportunity to rip into free speech and the right to bear arms. Obviously this crisis can’t go to waste. It is these pundits that will go so far to blame people like Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, and other right-wing pundits for the murder of these innocent people. It is fair to say that all of these pundits are proactive and offer an “in your face” perspective for their listeners and viewers. Besides the content and angle that they come from ideologically, the only thing that separates them is their success in acquiring and retaining listeners, viewers and fans. To take a look at the numbers that show the popularity of these pundits, lets reference [i]TV By The Numbers[/i] at [link=http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2011/01/11/cable-news-ratings-for-monday-january-10-2011/78213]tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com[/link] for January 11th, 2011. [b]At 5pm EST, the number of viewers are as follows:[/b] • Glenn Beck (FNC) – 2.1million viewers • Situation Room(CNN) – 841K viewers • Chris Mathews (MSNBC) – 897K viewers [b]At 6pm EST, the number of viewers are as follows:[/b] • Special Report (FNC) – 2.4million viewers • Situation Room(CNN) – 703K viewers • Ed Shultz (MSNBC) – 894Kviewers [b]At 8pm EST, the number of viewers are as follows:[/b] • Bill O’Reilly (FNC) – 3.2 million viewers • Parker Spitzer (CNN) – 615 million viewers • Keith Olbermann (MSNBC) – 1.4 million viewers So what do these numbers say? It is obvious a perspective of ideological view of the country with the vast majority of the country right of center. It could be said that 55-60% of the country is Conservative based on right leaning and left leaning networks. The radio is a completely different story. Conservative talk radio dominates the airwaves. Based on [link=http://talkers.com/online/?p=71 ]talkers.com[/link], who lists the amount of listeners shows a huge gap made up of many millions of listeners between left-wing and right wing commentators, the top three power houses demand respect with over 39 million listeners weekly. The most notable liberal talk show host is Thom Hartman, Alan Colmes, and Ed Shultz only capturing no more than 2 million weekly each. This doesn’t even mention the in-between conservative commentators. The numbers obviously show that the country is heavily measured in conservative territory. It can be said that these power houses in the conservative arena hold a huge influence over the populous and are obvious targets of the left. With this influence comes responsibility from both sides of the isle. I personally listen to all of these pundits and the rhetoric is equally provocative and inflammatory. Regardless of the rhetoric and its intensity, only the left wishes to silence the right. Without me speculating on motives of each individual commentator, I can only assume that the left practices what they preach. The left-wing commentators continue to advocate massive wealth redistribution and class warfare. As Randi Rhodes ridiculed and spilled over into her vitriolic rant about Rush Limbaugh’s… well… vitriolic rant on today’s show, I sensed frustration from her between her huffs and pants amongst Limbaugh and Beck sound bites. The shame came when she advocated the silencing of Limbaugh and Beck. At that point I decided to silence her by changing the channel. It wasn’t because of her passion or her ideology but rather her hypocrisy. It was my right and ability to turn off what I don't like. The opposing view or ideology is not what offends nor does the class warfare. It is annoying but not reprehensible. The hypocrisy is what mattered to me as she stood on her podium afforded her by the US Constitution and wished to support legislation that would weaken or remove the rights of her successful opponents. It seems that spreading the wealth amongst the radio pundits is on the menu. Although I will continue to visit Randi on occasion, it is hard for me to appreciate speech from someone that wishes for it to not be free. I mean isn’t that what the left wants, everything free? As I switched to Mark Levin, I heard his high pitched political humor and astute Constitutional interpretive commentary. Although his words and delivery were often abrasive, he never wished ills to the rights of the likes of Randi, Thom, Ed, or the others. In fact he spoke of protecting it. Instead he pointed out their hypocrisy. It was interesting to listen to [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6K7PfNJUEI]Ed Shultz[/link] talk about Republicans wishing to make money over our dead bodies and in a following sound clip his tone changes to punching at Limbaugh’s speech. It was borderline cry-baby, "it’s not fair" rhetoric. Regardless of the success of these commentators, I have only heard from Limbaugh, Beck, Levin, Hannity and others that they wished to keep their competitors voices live and well. With some humor, Beck mentioned that at a minimum they offer some laughter and a barometer of the political PH of the country. I mean without Limbaugh, would Mathews have a show? Would the others have a show? It seems that when I switch over to liberal radio or television, there seems to be a barrage of attacks on the right-wing commentators. So how does this point back to the killings in Arizona. Well, it is evident that my dialogue has done much of what our media and pundits have done. They have allowed you to forget the true nature of this tragedy and what the repercussions of the future choices that our representatives will make. Our focus left the tragedy and focused on deciding how much liberty we should sacrifice.[link=http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Emanuel-Recruited-Gifford-113280354.html?dr ]Rahm Emmanuel[/link] stood perplexed as a reporter asked him whether this crisis would offer so opportunities much like he had mentioned the financial crisis did. Of course he said that we should not exploit this crisis. Should we ask whether we should exploit any crisis? In another amazing display of hypocrisy, [link= http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/dem-congressman-who-called-gop-gov-be-put-against-wall-and-shot-n ]Ex-Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-Pa[/link] called for an "atmosphere of civility" even after he called for the former GOP Governor Rick Scott to be put up against the wall and shot. [i]"Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him.”[/i] Where is this being mentioned in the mainstream media? What would have happened if this Governer would have been confronted with the wishes of this idiot. The point is, where is speech going to be regulated? Is politicians going to be censored the same as Rush Limbaugh when they are in the heat of political debate? What words are going to be censored? Is their going to be a contextual clarification clause on these words? Typically the regulation of words will be used for political purposes. Parties in power will be able to silence the opposition. Eventually this will cross the point of no return. There was a reason for the first Amendment. Subjective perspectives of speech are not welcome in the law. What would you say of these questions? [i]"Who is going to decide what words are allowed? Who is going to be gifted with the virtues to be able to determine what we should be saying and in what manner?"[/i] I ask you - the reader - this question, [i]"What politician do you trust to regulate what you say or what you are allowed to listen to?" [/i] I would ask this, [i]"Who do you wish to provide you with the dictionary that you can use – Bush or Obama?"[/i] Ask yourself, [i]"What politicians or political party - if given the ability to utilize the full un-regulated power of the government - would strictly regulate free speech, and take away your ability the purchase protective fire arms for your home?"[/i] Lastly ask yourself, [i]"Did Jared Loughner open fire and kill innocent Americans with the hands of Beck, Limbaugh, and Palin on the trigger?"[/i] It think it is time to focus on the families that experienced this tragedy and leave the Constitution as it was intended. So from Lanterns of Liberty - God Bless the families of the ones effected negatively by this tragedy and the resolved of our currently free and great country. Tue, 11 Jan 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=785AC1C1-123F-7491-A485FF892CE9D8D0 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=5C79DA55-123F-7491-A466FBF974319BAF From the adored economist of the left: [i]Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the Capitalist System was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily, and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security, but at confidence in the equity of the existing distribution of wealth. Those to whom the system brings windfalls, beyond their deserts and even beyond their expectations or desires, become 'profiteers', who are the object of the hatred of the bourgeoisie, whom the inflation has impoverished, not less than of the proletariat. As the inflation proceeds, and the real value of the currency fluctuates wildly from month to month, all permanent relations between debtors and creditors, which form the ultimate foundation of capitalism, become so utterly disordered as to be almost meaningless; and the process of wealth-getting degenerates into a gamble and a lottery.[/i] [b]The Economic Consequences of the Peace (p.235-6) J.M. Keynes [/b] Thu, 06 Jan 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=5C79DA55-123F-7491-A466FBF974319BAF http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=281DF4AB-123F-7491-A4C1DEE9E2555C5A The Holidays are a special time and are often depressing because it is a time of renewal. Whether we look at this from a secular level or a spiritual one, the depression often comes with facing ourselves. During Thanksgiving, we are often reminded of all that we did during the year. It is often discussed with family and friends. Sometimes it is done a the dinner table over Turkey. Time off from work often brings about our recognition of successes and failures. It is important at this time to give thanks for the roots, trunk, and branches of success as they are our foundation. It is equally important to let the leaves of our failure fall to the ground and fertilize the ground which our roots reside. It is the failures that will feed our future success. During Christmas and Hanukkah we prepare for rebirth and enlightenment. Once the winter has arrived and the dead leaves are all removed, we must recognize the material structure that we have built throughout the year and wonder how to cloth it with new growth. Once again the family and friend are important in this respect for they guide us in what is good about us. During New Years, it is about the first step in renewal. There is celebration on the first as it represents the first step. The spring will soon come and it will be important that we take that first step in the right direction in order to produce the fruit that will feed us for the year. So as you relax this Christmas, Hanukkah and New Year, prepare your self for your renewal next year. It will be a busy one. Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, and Happy New Year form all of us at Lanterns of Liberty. Mon, 27 Dec 2010 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=281DF4AB-123F-7491-A4C1DEE9E2555C5A http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=D85CBBA4-123F-7491-A4B0BFDDB8E9CBEE Ishmael is best known as the first son of Abraham who was conceived by the maid servant Hagar. As discussed before there is a rift between the Arab faiths and Judaic faiths rooted in a 4000 year dispute. The heir to the throne of Abraham has been disputed for centuries. Depending on the interpretations there never seems to be a resolution to, "Who is the heir to Abraham?" [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/kaaba2.jpg[/img] Ishmael is considered by many to be a patriarch of the Arab people and the founder of the Kaaba, which is the cube shaped building in Mecca. The Kaaba is a very interesting building as it represents the focal point of all prayers of the Muslim people. It is a requirement by the Islamic faith that all Muslims take a pilgrimage (hajj) to Mecca. This requirement is consistent with one of the “Five Pillars of Islam”. The Kaaba is said to be configured where its corners point in the four cardinal directions of the compass – North, South, East, and West. This is significant with the patriarch’s relationship to Hinduism. The cardinal directions are guarded by deities. These deities are called Lokap?las. They are Kubera (north), Yama (south), Indra (east) and Varuna (west). The Kaaba is a cube shaped masonry structure mostly made of granite said to come from the hills near Mecca. In the eastern corner sits the Black Stone. The eastern corner is represented by Indra. Indra is the “King of the gods” in Hindu or Devas and Lord of Heaven or Svargaloka in Hindu mythology. This coordinate is important and must be mentioned in relation to this configuration of the Kaaba. The Black Stone is said to be the oldest and most sacred stone that links the sacred (heavenly) world to the profane (worldly) . It is said in Islamic tradition that the Black Stone fell from Heaven to the Earth to mark the location for Adam and Eve to build an altar to worship God (Allah) . It is considered to be the first temple on earth. Tradition tells that this location was destroyed by Noah’s flood and was forgotten until Ibrahim (Abraham) found the stone by direction of Jibrail (Angel Gabriel). It was here that Ibrahim order Ishmael to build the Kaaba. The nature of the stone and its color is significant. It was said to originally be a white stone and over the years became black as it absorbed the sins of all pilgrims that touched it. This pilgrimage is otherwise known as the Hajj. [b]Circumambulation[/b] The pilgrimage called Hajj is one of the 5 pillars of Islam. During the pilgrimage, the pilgrim must perform the act circumambulation (circle) around the Kaaba. This ritual act is common among all religions. It is especially important for Hindus to perform circumambulation of their temples or deity images. In Islam the pilgrims walk counter-clockwise around the Kaaba and then kiss the Black Stone for each circumambulation. This is an emulation of the acts of Muhammad. The ritual is to circle the inner sanctum which is defined as a very private or sacred place. The temple of Jerusalem contained a place similar to this called the Holy of Holies. It was said to house the Ark of the Covenant which contained the Ten Commandments. It was only to be entered by the High Priest on Yom Kippur. This day is considered a day of atonement and repentance. It is celebrated with fasting and intensive prayer [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/circumambulation.jpg[/img] On the Jewish holiday of Ushpizin, many Jews recite the ushpizin prayer which symbolizes the welcoming of seven patriarchs of Jewish faith - Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Aaron, Joseph and David. Jewish tradition has it that each night a different patriarch enters the sukkah – a temporary structure built for the festival of Sukkot. Each of the ushipizin parallels the spiritual focus of the specific day in which the prayer was recited. [b]Labyrinths[/b] The act of circumambulation is extremely important in many rituals. Circumambulation is said to be an allegory for introspection, self awareness, and the journey of life. In many faiths including Islam, the circumambulation is an act of devotion, fulfillment of a promise, or as penance. In Chartres Cathedral in Reims, France, the pilgrim to this cathedral could walk this Labyrinth as a method of circumambulation. It is even said to have circumambulation implications in the rituals of Freemasons. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/labrin.jpg[/img] Evidence of circumambulation can be seen an many different cultures. Labyrinths of paths of circumambulation can be seen all through the world. In The Peruvian Nazca Plain, images provide evidence that this type of ritual could have taken place in ancient Peru. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/labrin2.jpg[/img] The famous myth of the Cretan Labyrinth is a great representation of circumambulation. The structure was said to be designed by Daedalus for King Minos of Crete to keep captive the Minotaur – a creature which was part bull and part man. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/minos1.jpg[/img] Legend has it that Minos was supposed to sacrifice a specific bull and instead substituted it for another animal. Poseidon – the Greek god of the sea which holds a triton – was displeased with Minos and instilled an urge for his wife, Pasiphae, to mate with a bull. She then had Daedalus – a Greek artist and craftsman – fashion a model of a cow in which he concealed Queen Pasiphae, so that she could satisfy her love for the bull. From this act was born the Minotaur. Daedalus would then create the Labyrinth to keep the Minotaur captive. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/minos2.jpg[/img] Subsequently, Athens and Crete were engulfed in war. When Athens was defeated, the Athenians were forced to send seven men and seven women every year to be sacrificed to the Minotaur. Legend has it that the Greek hero Theseus challenged to kill the Minotaur. He found his way through the Labyrinth with help from King Minos’ daughter Ariadne. Theseus would then kill the Minotaur. [b]The Number 7[/b] It must be mentioned that this section is not intended to be a numerology lesson but rather to make the connection between nature and the significance of the number 7 in the bible, mythology, and in other faith based lore. [i]Christianity[/i] • Seven days of Creation (Genesis 1) e.g., God rested on and sanctified the seventh day (Sabbath) • Anyone who dares to kill Cain 'will suffer vengeance seven times over' (Genesis 4:15) • Lamech in his "Song of the Sword" claims that 'if Cain shall be avenged sevenfold', he himself shall be 'seventy-sevenfold' (Genesis 4:24) • Seven years of plenty and seven years of famine in Pharaoh's dream (Genesis 41) • Seven days of the feast of Passover (Exodus 13:3–10) • Seven day week and the pattern concerning distribution and use of manna (Exodus 16) • Seven year cycle around the years of Jubilee (Leviticus 25) • The fall of the walls of Jericho on the seventh day after marching around the city seven times (Joshua 6) • Seven things that are detestable to the LORD (Proverbs 6:16–19) • Seven Pillars of the House of Wisdom (Proverbs 9:1) • Seven loaves multiplied into seven baskets of surplus (Matthew 15:32–37) • The Seven last words (or seven last sayings) of Jesus on the cross • Seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom (Acts 6:3) • Seven Spirits of God are mentioned in the Book of Revelation • Seven churches of Asia to which the "Book of Revelation" is addressed • Seven churches, seven stars, seven seals, seven last plagues, seven vials or bowls, seven thunders in the Revelation, the last book of the Bible • The Seven Sacraments in the Catholic faith • Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit • The Seven Joys of the Virgin Mary, of Roman Catholic, Anglican, and other traditions • The Seven Sorrows of the Virgin Mary, of Roman Catholic, Anglican, and other traditions • The Seven Corporal Acts of Mercy and Seven Spiritual Acts of Mercy of Roman Catholic, Anglican, and other traditions • The Seven Virtues: chastity, temperance, charity, diligence, kindness, patience, and humility • The Seven deadly sins: lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, and pride • The seven terraces of Mount Purgatory (one per deadly sin) • In the genealogy in the Gospel of Luke, Jesus is 77th in a direct line • In the New Testament, in Matthew 18:21, Jesus says to Peter to forgive 'seventy times seven times', remembering so the curse of Cain and the song of Lamech in Genesis 4. [i]Islam[/i] • The number of ayat in surat al-Fatiha • The number of Earths in Islamic religion is seven • The number of skies in Islamic religion is seven • The number of circumambulations (Tawaf) that are made around the Kaaba • The number of walks between Al-Safa and Al-Marwah mountains—that is travelling back and forth—seven times during the ritual pilgrimages of Hajj and Umrah • The number of heavens in Islamic religion, i.e. levels in heaven. • The number of hells in hell is also seven i.e. levels in hell. • The number of doors to hell is seven (for heaven the number of doors is eight). • In Verse 12:46 (see Islamic view of Joseph) of the Quran, Joseph (Yusef) is asked to interpret the King's dream where seven fat cows were dreamt to have been devoured by seven skinny cows and seven green spikes, and others shriveled. • The number of the big sins or vices is seven which are from a Hadith of the prophet Mohamed : "Avoid the seven sins polytheism, witchcraft, the killing of the soul which Allah has forbidden except by right, consuming riba, consuming the wealth of the orphan, to escape from the battles and slandering chaste women" [i]Hinduism[/i] • The Sanskrit word sapta refers to number seven. • Indian Music has "Saptak Swaras," seven octats (sa re ga ma pa dha ni) which are basics of music, using which hundreds of Ragas are composed. • Celestial group of seven stars are named as "Sapta Rishi" based on the seven great saints. • Seven Promises, Seven Rounds in Hindu Wedding and Seven Reincarnation • According to Hinduism, there are seven worlds in the universe, seven seas in the world and seven Rishies (seven gurus) called sapta rishis. • Seven hills at tirumala also known as ezhu malaiyan means Sevenhills god • There are 7 Chakras in the basic model used in various eastern traditions and philosophies. [i]Judaism[/i] • A highly symbolic number in the Torah, alluding to the infusion of spirituality and Godliness into the creation. For example: o God rested on and sanctified the seventh day (Shabbat). – Genesis 2:3. "Wisdom has built her house, she has hewn out her seven pillars." – Proverbs of Solomon son of David King of Israel 9:1 o A seven-day purification period is required for one who has become tamei to become tahor. o The Shmita (Sabbatical) year arrives every seventh year. o The Jubilee (Yovel) year comes after 7 times 7 years. o The Counting of the Omer leading up to the Giving of the Torah is expressed as "7 times 7 weeks." o There are 7 days of Passover and Sukkot when celebrated in Israel. o Shiv`a (another pronunciation of the Hebrew word for 7—(Hebrew: ???? ; "seven")), is the number of days of mourning. Hence, one sits Shiva. As in Shiva (Judaism) • The weekly Torah portion is divided into seven aliyahs, and seven Jewish men (or boys over the age of 13 who are considered men; Bar Mitzvah) are called up for the reading of these aliyahs during Shabbat morning services. • Seven blessings are recited under the chuppah during a Jewish wedding ceremony. • A Jewish bride and groom are feted with seven days of festive meals after their wedding, known as Sheva Berachot ("Seven Blessings"). • The number of Ushpizzin (also known as the "Seven Shepherds") who visit the sukkah during the holiday of Sukkot: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Aaron, and David. • The number of nations God told the Israelites they would displace when they entered the land of Israel (Deut. 7:1): the Hittite, the Girgashite, the Amorite, the Canaanite, the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite. • In Breslov tradition, the seven orifices of the face (2 eyes, 2 nostrils, 2 ears, and the mouth) are called "The Seven Candles." • The Menorah (Hebrew: ?????), is a seven-branched candelabrum lit by olive oil in the Tabernacle and the Temple in Jerusalem. The menorah is one of the oldest symbols of the Jewish people. It is said to symbolize the Burning bush as seen by Moses on Mount Sinai (Exodus 25). • The number of times Cain will be avenged by God if he is murdered (Gen 4:15). • The Israelites circled Jericho for 7 days and then the wall tumbled down. • The 7 Sephirot of primary conscious emotion that are attributes of the creator. [i]Astronomy[/i] • The number of daughters of Atlas in the Pleiades (also called the "Seven Sisters") • The number of stellar objects in the solar system visible to the naked eye from Earth – the Sun, the Moon and the five classical naked eye planets: Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, and Saturn. • Messier object M7, a magnitude 3.5 open cluster in the constellation Scorpius. • The New General Catalogue object NGC 7, a 14th magnitude spiral galaxy in the constellation Sculptor. • The number of saints appearing in a constellation called "Saptharishi Mandalam" in Indian astronomy. • The number of main stars in the constellations of the Big Dipper and Orion. • The Saros number of the solar eclipse series which began on -2590 April 8 and ended on -1310 May 16. The duration of Saros series 7 was 1,280.1 years, and it contained 72 solar eclipses. • The Saros number of the lunar eclipse series which began on -2595 July 15 and ended on -1008 February 22. The duration of Saros series 7 was 1,586.6 years, and it contained 89 lunar eclipses. • The Roman numeral VII stands for white dwarfs in the Yerkes spectral classification scheme. The Roman numeral VII (usually) stands for the seventh-discovered satellite of a planet or minor planet (e.g., Jupiter VII). Chemistry • A heptamer is a compound made of seven sub-units • A neutral pH value between acidity and alkalinity • The atomic number of nitrogen • Heptane is an alkane with 7 carbon atoms in each molecule • A period 7 element has 7 electron shells [i]Physics[/i] • There are 7 SI base units. These are a coherent set of units defined to measure 7 basic physical properties: metre, kilogram, second, ampere, kelvin, mole, candela. The 7 SI base units are used to define all other SI units, which are known as SI derived units. • Isaac Newton identified 7 colors of the rainbow – red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet [i]Biology[/i] • Almost all mammals have 7 cervical vertebrae • There are 7 types of virus according to the Baltimore classification • The number of spots on a seven-spot ladybird [b]Age of Taurus[/b] It is important to mention the Age of Taurus here in this book. It can be clearly assumed that the Minotaur (bull), which was worshiped in sacrifice, during the times of Minoan Crete. King Minos was said to have lived during the Age of Taurus. As mentioned in the chapter about Abraham, the Babylonians were an advanced civilization. They were the founders of what we call astrology. This age is said to be between 4300 BC and 2150 BC. Many cults around the time of ancient Egypt, Assyria as well as Crete worshiped the bull due to its recognition and relevance in the sky. 1 When the people saw that Moses was so long in coming down from the mountain, they gathered around Aaron and said, “Come, make us gods[a] who will go before us. As for this fellow Moses who brought us up out of Egypt, we don’t know what has happened to him.” 2 Aaron answered them, “Take off the gold earrings that your wives, your sons and your daughters are wearing, and bring them to me.” 3 So all the people took off their earrings and brought them to Aaron. 4 He took what they handed him and made it into an idol cast in the shape of a calf, fashioning it with a tool. Then they said, “These are your gods,[b] Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.” 5 When Aaron saw this, he built an altar in front of the calf and announced, “Tomorrow there will be a festival to the LORD.” 6 So the next day the people rose early and sacrificed burnt offerings and presented fellowship offerings. Afterward they sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in revelry. 7 Then the LORD said to Moses, “Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt, have become corrupt. 8 They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them and have made themselves an idol cast in the shape of a calf. They have bowed down to it and sacrificed to it and have said, ‘These are your gods, Israel, who brought you up out of Egypt.’ 9 “I have seen these people,” the LORD said to Moses, “and they are a stiff-necked people. 10 Now leave me alone so that my anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them. Then I will make you into a great nation.” 11 But Moses sought the favor of the LORD his God. “LORD,” he said, “why should your anger burn against your people, whom you brought out of Egypt with great power and a mighty hand? 12 Why should the Egyptians say, ‘It was with evil intent that he brought them out, to kill them in the mountains and to wipe them off the face of the earth’? Turn from your fierce anger; relent and do not bring disaster on your people. 13 Remember your servants Abraham, Isaac and Israel, to whom you swore by your own self: ‘I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and I will give your descendants all this land I promised them, and it will be their inheritance forever.’” 14 Then the LORD relented and did not bring on his people the disaster he had threatened. 15 Moses turned and went down the mountain with the two tablets of the covenant law in his hands. They were inscribed on both sides, front and back. 16 The tablets were the work of God; the writing was the writing of God, engraved on the tablets. 17 When Joshua heard the noise of the people shouting, he said to Moses, “There is the sound of war in the camp.” 18 Moses replied: “It is not the sound of victory, it is not the sound of defeat; it is the sound of singing that I hear.” 19 When Moses approached the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, his anger burned and he threw the tablets out of his hands, breaking them to pieces at the foot of the mountain. 20 And he took the calf the people had made and burned it in the fire; then he ground it to powder, scattered it on the water and made the Israelites drink it. Exodus 32 This excerpt could very well be explaining idolatry or more significant the worship of the Age of Taurus. Of course there is much speculation with this conclusion but Moses and Aaron lived in the time of Aries and would have rejected the worshipers under the old age of Taurus. Moses was said to have lived around 1441 BC based on 1 Kings 6:1 1And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the LORD. 1 Kings 6:1 So if the "golden calf" represented the "Age of Taurus". Moses was critical of worshiping the old god of an old age. The "Age of Aries" represents a pivotal point in the history of man. Its relevance is mentioned or symbolized all throughout ancient history. We must then look again at the relevance of Abraham and his name. [b]Ab-Ram[/b] "Ab" or "Ap" means father in Kashmiri. Prototypical Jews could have called him Abram – meaning "Father Ram". One of the three Hindu gods is called Brahma who is the Creator God of Hinduism. Abraham is derived from the Sanskrit word Brahma. Brahma is said to be the father of all men and exalted of all gods. It is said that this is where all beings were generated. This is where we begin the lineage of patriarchs in the bible and the "Exalted Father" . When Abram turned away from polytheism – or arguably Hinduism – his worship left that of the "Father Ram" to the "Creator God". One of the shrines in the Kaaba was dedicated to Brahma which does insinuate that Abraham had Ishmael build this temple as a place to worship the "Creator God". The relevance of the circumambulation and the worshipers of the sky are representations of natural aspects of the Universe or God’s magnificent creation. Circumambulation represents the rotation around and objects that is sacred. The astrolabe and, which was a center piece in ancient worship, was often used by Muslims to find their way to Mecca. It was used in correlation to the worship of the heavens as a way to understand God’s works. Of course in the time of the Babylonians, a god that was c considered to have created this magnificent light show in the sky was Marduk who was considered the "bull of Utu". The bull is also represented in Hindu as Nandi which is the bull that Shiva (the destroyer) rides and the gate keeper of Shiva and the goddess Parvati. Could Ishmael have held on to this ancient Hindu worship of an old age? Could Abraham and Ishmael have had a falling out over a disagreement over what God or gods to worship? There is only speculation and the anecdotal evidence which leaves much for the imagination. In relation to the law of nature, the importance of this information is the emphasis of the natural aspects of rotation in the heavens and on earth. It is the heavens where the ancients looked for the answers. The realization of God and his importance – if I dare to say "he"- is the nature of faith because it gives evidence of his greatness. It is in his works that provide this evidence. Although we the worship of God should be in him and not in his works, evidence is importance none the less. Evidence of these rotations exists in many emanations as we see here: [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/spiral1.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/spiral2.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/spiral3.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/spiral4.jpg[/img] Sat, 11 Dec 2010 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=D85CBBA4-123F-7491-A4B0BFDDB8E9CBEE http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=9E69A5D5-123F-7491-A40D2C8D1E7D14BE It is important to note as our country melts down due to massive debt and incredible deficits that our government is continuing to give billions of dollars to the United Nations for population control. At the 15th Anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton delivered a typical address to the UN detailing the massive amounts of American tax payer dollars that the US Government will be donating for the benefit of global prosperity. She said, [i]This year, the United States renewed funding of reproductive health-care through the United Nations Population Fund, and more funding is on the way. (Applause.) The U.S. Congress recently appropriated more than $648 million in foreign assistance to family planning and reproductive health programs worldwide. That’s the largest allocation in more than a decade – since we last had a Democratic president, I might add. (Applause)[/i] What is the [link=http://www.unfpa.org/public/home/about]UNFPA[/link]? [i]UNFPA, the United Nations Population Fund, is an international development agency that promotes the right of every woman, man and child to enjoy a life of health and equal opportunity. UNFPA supports countries in using population data for policies and programmes to reduce poverty and to ensure that every pregnancy is wanted, every birth is safe, every young person is free of HIV, and every girl and woman is treated with dignity and respect.[/i] This is the progressive policy of eugenics as well as massive wealth redistribution. With the help of prosperous nations, elite UN officials can use huge sums of tax payer money to steer the direction of less prosperous nations. Is America too insensitive to not continue massive funding of this along with hundreds of other UN programs? No. The United States has continually provided the majority of the money that funds the UN. Now that the US is in trouble financially, these programs need to be scaled back. More questions should be asked about how these countries have never developed. My bet it is the result of a tyrannical government. These global entitlements are the beginning of the massive wealth distribution machine that is the UN. Not only will billions of more dollars be given to the UN but we will also ship our jobs overseas by slowing our economic progress for reasons like [link=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/8165769/Cancun-climate-change-summit-scientists-call-for-rationing-in-developed-world.html]Global Warming[/link] and Soviet style environmental penalties like "Cap and Trade" This just the beginning folks. Clinton further explains, [i]In addition to new funding, we’ve launched a new program that will be the centerpiece of our foreign policy, the Global Health Initiative, which commits us to spending $63 billion over six years to improve global health by investing in efforts to reduce maternal and child mortality, prevent millions of unintended pregnancies, and avert millions of new HIV infections, among other goals. This initiative will employ a new approach to fighting disease and promoting health. It will address interrelated health challenges together, for example, by integrating family planning, maternal health services, and HIV/AIDS screening and treatment, so that women receiving reproductive care will also receive HIV counseling, and will be referred to an HIV clinic if they need one.[/i] This all sounds great but where are we going to get the $63 billion? We are going to print it. The United States is going to deliberately devalue its currency - by printing money - in order to afford these global benefits that do not represent the tax payer. It is the epitome of taxation without representation. The massive inflation that we see of the next few years which will destroy American prosperity will be a direct result of Marxist schemes like this. America... buckle up and get ready for the ride. You can see the rest of Mrs Clinton's speech [link=http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/01/135001.htm]here[/link]. Tue, 30 Nov 2010 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=9E69A5D5-123F-7491-A40D2C8D1E7D14BE http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=612F9FBE-123F-7491-A479AFF8B9535A5D What is important to understand about socialism is that it destroys the concept of value. The founding fathers saw that a society without value(s) was one without virtue. Virtue is rewarded with hard work. Value is created by the owner, seller, and buyer. So if no one owns property, there is no value outside of bare necessity. If what I say is true then lack of hard work provides less virtue. Virtue is defined by Merriam-Webster as "a particular moral excellence" So a virtue-less society is a society without excellence and morality. This is a simple explanation why socialism doesn't work. Thu, 18 Nov 2010 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=612F9FBE-123F-7491-A479AFF8B9535A5D http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=2EAE6F8F-123F-7491-A43CACE6FDA54917 The recent elections have taught us one thing. No matter how hard we fight for liberty, there will be some political casualties. But like any political battle, a politician that goes down as a casualty for the right cause and adherence to core American principles is never a bad thing. It can be considered honorable. Of course using the term battle needs to be understood by the simplest terms. Merriam-Webster defines a battle as an extended contest, struggle, or controversy. Ideological battles are no different then battles in warfare. Recently Barack Obama received a lot of flack for calling his political opponents “enemies”. He said, [i]“If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies, and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us’ — if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election — then I think it’s going to be harder. And that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2nd.”[/i] Although it may be a bad choice of words, the fact is ideological opponents are enemies. “Enemy” is defined by Merriam-Webster as a hostile unit or force. We can nit pick the words but would we as conservatives see a socialist policy is that of hostile unit of force against our liberties. The socialist ideology is a hostile force and is foreign to the American principles that our country was founded upon. So we must now define “tyranny”. Merriam-Webster defines tyranny as oppressive power. “Oppressive” is defined as overwhelming or depressing to the spirit or senses. Could we say that a large government bureaucracy is oppressive and depresses our economic viability? Yes. The nature of government is to regulate and oppress. “Socialism” is defined as any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. This definition states simply that socialism means to oppress business by controlling it. Socialism kills innovation which is oppression. We know from history that Great Britain was an oppressive regime that ruled with an iron fist over the American colonies. Our founding fathers rose up and revolted because of the tyrannical regime. How different is the passed colonial enemy and the growing oppressive bureaucracy in Washington DC. The only difference is that we operate today under the same flag and we can revolt peacefully through the ballot. Our founders didn’t have that choice and it is important for us to keep this American privilege. America we are in times that try men’s souls and sadly, some have sold their American soul for that of a foreign ideology. Marxism is an oppressive and tyrannical ideology. It has never worked anywhere it has been tried. America is crumbling under the oppressive socialist entitlements much like our European counterparts are experiencing. American unemployment remains at 9.6 percent two years after Obama promised the stimulus would keep unemployment from dipping below 8 percent. So if Marxism is un-American and those that practice it are anti-American, can we say that they are our enemies? The country is polarized because of this question alone. Do enemies wish to be bipartisan with diametrically opposed ideologies? When the President of the United States and a Democratic majority in Congress works to expand government exponentially and overwhelm a bankrupt system, there can be no doubt that they are in fact the enemy of America. The majority of these representatives are highly educated. For them to not recognize the simple math in our inability to support the massive spending, it is simply negligence and possibly outright destructive. We would be naive to think that this is not intentional. The past election is only a fraction of what needs to be accomplished in 2012. The battles have only begun. When the economy turns even further south with a 10 trillion dollar maturing bond debt to pay off this year, America will grow restless. When the dollar is devalued due to the fed printing money to pay off that debt, inflation will cause further economic peril much like we experienced in the 1930’s. It will be then that the community organizations, the unions, and disenfranchised Americans will look for other means to make ends meet. America it is time to man up and realize that we have people running the country that are enemies to the constitutional principles our country was founded on. To deny that this is a battle for our future is negligent on our part. We must expose the people that lead America down the road of destruction through the strategy of Cloward and Piven and the ideals of Karl Marx. We must expose the community organizing groups that simply wish to bid America farewell for a more bankrupt collectivist system. We have 2 years to get a commander in chief to support American reform. We aren’t going to do it by denying that we are being oppressed by a government which is currently a hostile ideological enemy. That enemy is tyranny. Mon, 08 Nov 2010 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=2EAE6F8F-123F-7491-A43CACE6FDA54917 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=F0092701-123F-7491-A43E688267844478 What is critical thinking? CriticalThinking.org defines critical thinking as, [i]“…the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness. It entails the examination of those structures or elements of thought implicit in all reasoning: purpose, problem, or question-at-issue; assumptions; concepts; empirical grounding; reasoning leading to conclusions; implications and consequences; objections from alternative viewpoints; and frame of reference. Critical thinking — in being responsive to variable subject matter, issues, and purposes — is incorporated in a family of interwoven modes of thinking, among them: scientific thinking, mathematical thinking, historical thinking, anthropological thinking, economic thinking, moral thinking, and philosophical thinking. “[/i] It is important to mention all of this due to the nature of this post. Ironically, the very societal problem that this post attempts to explain could be recognized in this post so it is important to mention the difference between good critical thinking and bad critical thinking. Probably the hardest concept to define is the concept of critical thinking itself. The question to be asked is at what point critical thinking breaks down into bad critical thinking. It is important to dissect the fundamentals of critical thinking and determine where the concept becomes weak and as we will argue a problem for society. For the sake of this post, we must state what attributes of the broad scope of “critical thinking” that we wish to relate to the problem we wish to discuss. Here is a list of the attributes listed from above that we wish to define and discuss. • Clarity • Accuracy • Precision • Consistency • Relevance • Sound evidence • Good reasons • Depth • Breadth • Fairness • Scientific thinking • Mathematical thinking • Historical thinking • Anthropological thinking • Economic thinking • Moral thinking • Philosophical thinking The attributes listed above can be listed as both objective and subjective. Subjective thinking is a problem especially when defining a truth. Defining truth itself is an extremely difficult task. Dictionary.com defines truth as: 1. the true or actual state of a matter 2. a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like In defining the truth, one must adhere to the true or actual state of a matter or a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like. This cannot be done by basing or building the truth upon fairness, moral thinking, or philosophical thinking. On the flip side, fairness, moral thinking, and philosophical thinking should be built on top of truth. It is by truth that we can validate fairness, moral thinking, and philosophical concepts. The problem with critical thinking is there is very little emphasis on absolute truths as critical thinking has become more a dialectic process. CriticalThinking.org sees critical thinking as having 2 components: 1. a set of information and belief generating and processing skills, and 2. the habit, based on intellectual commitment, of using those skills to guide behavior. [b]This is extremely important to dissect in understanding the relevance of this post.[/b] IF a person using critical thinking skills basing his vision of fairness, moral thinking, and philosophical concepts on absolute truth, his beliefs and thought processes will be grounded in absolute truth. The beliefs and thoughts will then be committed to fixed principles in order to guide his behaviors in a way reflecting principle. IF a person using critical thinking skills basing his vision of truth on subjective attributes like fairness, moral thinking, and philosophical concepts, then his critical thinking will mirror a never ending dialectical process. The beliefs and thoughts will then be not committed to fixed principles but rather wavering subject matter which will guide his or her behaviors in a way reflecting a wavering and weak foundation. This is the core problem within our society today and a reflection of the political polarities that we see today. Conservatives tend to stand firm on principles regardless of subjective influence as liberals tend to waver on principle based on subjective issues. A perfect example is the adherence to the United States Constitution. The word constitution as define by Merriam-Webster is: 1. the mode in which a state or society is organized; especially : the manner in which sovereign power is distributed 2. the basic principles and laws of a nation, state, or social group that determine the powers and duties of the government and guarantee certain rights to the people in it In the liberal view of the United States Constitution, it is a “living breathing” document or a wavering subjective document to be interpreted based on the time of its interpretation. In the conservative view, the United States Constitution is a fixed set of principles based on “self evident truths”. The idea of “self evident truths”, which is outlined in the declaration of our American Principles or better known as the Declaration of Independence, is the foundation of conservative views. We must quote: [i]When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. [/i] It is these words that the liberal detests. Clearly the declaration of American principles is based on the laws of nature as God has entitled them. If we see God as the epitome of absolute truth or truth itself, there can be no subjective interpretation of America or its constitution. The truths and principles of America are “self evident” and the nature of God’s laws is the cornerstone to its strength. So what is the core problem with society? The core problem is the undermining of absolute truth and indirectly the undermining of the United States Constitution. It is this undermining that represents the undermining of American morals which are built upon the cornerstone of strength and the self evident truths of God. These self evident truths don’t represent a certain religion or the attributes of one but simply represent the acknowledgement of a Creator as mentioned in our American declaration [b]Hegelian Dialectic[/b] To explain the dialectic process, we must discuss the source of its emanation. The dialectics discussed by Plato in his Socratic dialogues is based on dialogue between two individuals with differing views with the intention to define a truth. The result of the dialogue or the consensus is the truth or a representation of the truth. In dialectic process, the dialectic is continual with the constant evolution of truth. This evolution of truth is to progress the truth in order to provoke continual change. In dialectic process there is no absolute truth. Progressive thinkers are in continual conflict with former truths and are always trying to redefine reality and the truth within that reality. The [i]Theory of Evolution[/i] is a model concept of dialectic process as the animal is forever changing into a new emanation from the previous species. The progression of the truth is defined by there components of the process. They consist of a [b]thesis[/b] - giving rise to its reaction, an [b]antithesis[/b] - which contradicts or negates the thesis, and the tension between the two being resolved by means of a [b]synthesis[/b]. This tension produced by agitation creates a new truth or progressive principle. The community organizer is a prime example of an agitator fixed in the Marxian ideals of dialectic materialism (a form of dialectic process) in order to put tension on the establishment in order to provoke change. It must be known that this principle created by change is temporary and will eventually expire to another principle. Absolute truth is not possible in the modes of dialectic process. If absolute truth can be attributed to God, then God can not exist within dialectic process because God is absolute. It is therefore the goal of those pushing the methods of dialectic process to eliminate the absolute or even eliminate God. One can not aspire to appreciate the absolute truth of God and fall under the continual evolution of dialectic process. [b]Progressive Education[/b] Progressive education aspires to develop children within the modes of critical thinking. To quote progressive educator John French: [i]"The progressive school teaches the child to think for himself instead of passively accepting stereotyped ideas. It keeps always in mind that each child is different from every other, and that what makes an educated person useful in his particular walk of life, what makes him interesting, what makes him an individual, is not his resemblance to other people, but his differences."[/i] Some of the philosophies of a progressive school curriculum are as follows. • Curriculum is strongly influenced by what the children are interested in, and is child-centered rather than adult driven. • Learning is "hands on," experiential, and the emphasis is on process rather than product. Children are "learning to learn." • Learning is deep. Children learn through integrated, theme-based units or inquiry projects and the "theme" often emerges from the children. • The classroom is a democratic community. Children play a role in making and upholding the classroom rules. • Parents are actively involved in their children's life at school and in the classroom. They are also part of a democratic community and have a voice in their children's education. • Assessment is authentic and holistic. Children are well known by their teachers and peers. There are no tests or letter grades. Instead, narrative reports are written about children that cover all aspects of their development: social, emotional, personal, physical, and intellectual. • Classes are usually of mixed ages and no ability grouping is used. Children are able to work at their own pace and cross-age friendships are encouraged. • Progressive schools practice a developmental approach which holds that each child is a unique being unfolding and developing at their own pace according to a specific pattern. At each stage of development there are things that can be learned and things that should not be learned. Respecting a child's development is central to progressive education. As you can see this mode of educating doesn’t teach the child a set of principles to follow. The curriculum is centered on the child rather than the adult that the child should aspire to be. It renders the child incoherent to the roles of an adult. As this curriculum aspires to teach a child to be an individual free thinker rather than conform to certain principles, instead the curriculum perpetuates a predictable result – an unpredictable adult. The fact that progressive education is experimental is extremely dangerous for not all experiments are successful. In fact most experiments could be considered a failure. It was said that Thomas Edison experimented with hundreds of attempts at creating a successful light bulb. Are our children experiments of progressive educators as they search for a utopian child model? The fact that there is no grading of the children’s success, suggests that there can be no model built or recorded. If children seem to rule with their democracy, at what point to the adults teach children how to become adults? This seems to be a psychological nightmare. The intention is for the child to never truly progress into stereotypical adults or we could conclude to never transform into adults at all. Children are viewed as innocent. There innocence is due to their ignorance to judgmental / prejudice behavior. To progressive educators it is ignorance to stereotypical prejudices that adults are said to develop in children by keeping them from following one teacher. If children can be raised in a communal environment working as a collective, they will not see themselves as different but rather as individuals within the collective all serving a purpose to the collective. This communal approach is indicative of the old polytheistic or pantheist model of pre-Israelite fundamental monotheistic ideology. With the child not looking to a leader or center for all knowledge and truth, the child looks inward for his or her own vision of truth or to the shifting truths within their peers. This is the goal of the progressive education system. It is to remove emphasis on a focal point of truth in order to allow truths to evolve. Once the elimination of all absolute truth is realized, the society can then be molded as a collective where men and women are mere bricks in the walls of society. [b]Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder [/b] Jef Gazley. M.S. defines Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) and Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity (ADHD): [i]a result of neurological dysfunction in the prefrontal cortex of the brain. This is the newest part of our tri-brain system in evolutionary terms. It is the part of our brain that performs executive functions. The functions of this brain deal with 1) attention span, 2) perseverance, 3) judgment, 4) organization, 5) impulse control, 6) self-monitoring and supervision, 7) problem solving, 8) critical thinking, 9) forward thinking, 10) learning from experience, 11) ability to feel and express emotions, 12) interaction with the limbic system, and 13) empathy.[/i] ADHD or ADD has been reported in 3-7 % of school age children and between 2-4% of adults in the Introductory to Psychology by James K. Kalat. He mentions that ADD is a trouble controlling shifting of attention. What are important to note in this discussion is the symptoms of ADHD and its similarity to critical thinking methods. Good critical thinkers are able to focus on their observation. The thinker that is diagnosed with ADD or ADHD is seen as unable to critically think because of the inability to control shifting of attention on various topics to come up with a conclusion. Could it be said that those with ADHD or ADD are incapable of being structured into a discipline? Could it be said that they fit the mold of a model child within the progressive education system described before? WebMD.com notes that the following symptoms of realized in those with ADHD. • difficulty paying attention to details and tendency to make careless mistakes in school or other activities; producing work that is often messy and careless • easily distracted by irrelevant stimuli and frequently interrupting ongoing tasks to attend to trivial noises or events that are usually ignored by others • inability to sustain attention on tasks or activities • difficulty finishing schoolwork or paperwork or performing tasks that require concentration • frequent shifts from one uncompleted activity to another • procrastination • disorganized work habits • forgetfulness in daily activities (for example, missing appointments, forgetting to bring lunch) • failure to complete tasks such as homework or chores • frequent shifts in conversation, not listening to others, not keeping one's mind on conversations, and not following details or rules of activities in social situations Hyperactivity symptoms may be apparent in very young preschoolers and are nearly always present before the age of seven. Symptoms include: • fidgeting, squirming when seated • getting up frequently to walk or run around • running or climbing excessively when it's inappropriate (in teens this may appear as restlessness) • having difficulty playing quietly or engaging in quiet leisure activities • being always on the go • often talking excessively Could this be a result of the progressive education system or the modes of critical thinking gone amuck? I would be so bold to say yes. Keep in mind that I am not a doctor or claim to be an expert in Attention Deficit Disorder. My explanation here with the perspective of understanding dialectic process and its similarities to critical thinking. Understanding dialectic process and the shifting truths which are a result match the shifting focus of one experiencing symptoms currently labeled as ADD or ADHD. If a child is in an environment that doesn’t promote the structure of an "adult to child" or "God (absolute truth) to adult" relationship, which in essence is discipline, the child or adult could become susceptible to symptoms described here with ADHD in defining truth. Despite the lack of scientific evidence of ADHD, the medical community still chooses to treat it medically. Their assumptions are that the behaviors of those with ADHD are driven by an undefined neurological dysfunction of the brain in an area identified with the critical thinking area of the brain. If a child is unable to become an effective critical thinker, they are then seen as have brain damage and treated with medication which is often a methamphetamine to stimulate the brain. This approach to behaviors of individuals that are all created differently by behaviorists is a complete abomination. The condemnation of medicine is not the point here but rather the condemnation of the true cause of this behavior - arguably. In fact medication could help correct the behavior developed under a corrupt method of thinking. Couldn't we say that a behavior that is unpredictable and define by ever changing truths a behavioral problem? Instead the condemnation should be directed toward the education system that steers children with little direction and perpetuates self centered-ness and lack of discipline. Dialectic process or critical thinking gone wrong have mimicking results to those that suffer from ADHD. One can substitute either of these as the cause or the effect but it is evident that they are in fact connected by the same symptoms. If the progressive education system is supported by the radical leftist community that all walk the leftist line, it can be said that the progressive education system is slowly but surely producing liberals in large numbers. The evidence of America’s drift toward a more leftist socialist ideological platform could offer weak evidence but evidence non the less of the product of this education system. We must remind ourselves that the socialist or progressive ideology is rooted in dialectic materialism which represents Marx's and Engels' class warfare theory. It would then be a good assumption that if the progressive education system is utilizing the dialectic process which negates absolute truth, then the progressive education system is intending to negate God. It is now that we must decide what America we want to live in. Do we wish to live in an America that looks to God as a source of all truth or do we wish to look at the animal of man as the definer of evolving truth. It is time to decide because the progressive education machine is steadily churning out and grinding down the minds of our young innocent children. Wed, 27 Oct 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=F0092701-123F-7491-A43E688267844478 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=CFDEA395-123F-7491-A4FECA9FBE6C74DE America, We are in an exciting and pivotal point in our country’s history. Over the last 100 years, the Progressives have been slowly infiltrating our individualist American culture and working hard to strip down our values and virtues and replace it with a lock step collectivist culture. Lanterns of Liberty’s book The Machine: Progression of Secualar Socialism details this progression in great detail. It is our duty as Americans to arm ourselves with the [b]truth[/b] and take down this corrosive destruction of the country we love. In order to remove this festering sore in our culture that has become infected by Progressivism, we must look to the source of all of its poison. The school system has become a host for Marxist ideologues who operate through teacher’s unions in order to tear down merit based accountability and simply promote mediocrity rather than excellence. The schools in the hands of the teacher’s unions are the biggest political fuselage for the American progressive political system. In the 2008 campaign season alone, [link=http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=l1300]Open Secrets[/link] reports that The National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) contributed 5.4 million dollars to federal candidates. Despite the huge contributions, this is not the fuel that we are speaking of. The fuel that they are propelling the Progressive system is renewable. It is malleable. It is easily corruptible. It is the students that will eventually run the country. The [link=http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/11/19/US-slipping-in-education-rankings/UPI-90221227104776/]OECD[/link] reports that the American school system which had once become the envy in the world and has now transformed into one that is struggling to compete. Despite my skepticism of organizations that are affiliated with the United Nations, I see validity in the claims for different reasons then the groups recognizes. I see that their progressive solution has been the cause. OECD’s and PISA’s measurements of our education curriculum has become the most respected organization for the ranking of schools and monitoring of school assessments. This in itself serves as a problem since [link=http://www.humanitiesindicators.org/content/hrcoImageFrame.aspx?i=I-1d_20100625.jpg&o=hrcoIA.aspx__topI1]PISA[/link] looks for success in Progressive education models rather then curriculum based conventional education models. The recognition of the failed Progressive school system by education professionals operating within our universities have simply promoted more of the cause of the problem instead of correcting their blunder. It is important to understand that Progressive education models intend for students to be educated less on math, science, and reading but more on the dialectic assessment thereof. So what does this mean? Take a look at this report from a local public school in the New Orleans area. [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/PDF/dialecticreport.pdf] Hold Ctrl and press here to open separate browser window[/link] This report directs the student to develop opinions from what he or she has read based on the students own experiences instead of the literal aspects of what is being explained in the book. This dialectic process in the form of a "Dialectic Journal" is the key to understanding the fundamental problem with the American Education system. Dialectic process can be argued as a primary source of ADHD which can be argued is contributed by the critical thinking lessons of behaviorists and Progressive teachers. ADHD is even treated by Dialectic Behavioral Therapy (DBT) which is said to help the person with ADHD to address their emotions as well as their thoughts separately to help eliminate the impulsive nature of ADHD. As Progressives teachers are trying to teach children how to make opinions based on their feelings and thoughts, the Progressive behaviorists later try to reverse the damage that the teachers have done with DBT. This is the progressive social programming or social engineering cycle. We can call these people “change agents” for they work to program our children to allow their opinions and self evident truths to be susceptible to social programming or even propaganda. Of course I would say the vast majority of our educators are not intentionally programming our children to become drones of the state but are being steered by those that wish to engineer society. The self defined intellectual elite within the university system are not working to make our society more advanced or more intelligent, they are trying to make society equal, fair and perfect. They see that by monitoring and influencing behavior, they can engineer a perfect society. This is why our school system is failing. Our children are not being taught to think for themselves but rather to behave for the collective. School rooms have begun to abandon supporting the individual and began nurturing the behaviors as a collective. This is the core principle of socialism. This model of progressive schooling has been in place since the early 20th century started by Columbia University professor John Dewey. His influence from the Frankfurt school of Marxism was profound. In this [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opXKmwg8VQM]YouTube video[/link], you will get a view of the progressive education system. In the book [link=http://books.google.com/books?id=baIy17SLYk0C&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=progressive+education+fitzpatrick&source=bl&ots=X23JjAl-pb&sig=uGl8RcXTayPZqH8qPWsKj8zhFaA&hl=en&ei=f17ATIiAI4WClAf16oz_CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBcQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=progressive%20education%20fitzpatrick&f=false]Education and Social Mobility in the Soviet Union, Shelia Fitzpatrick[/link] mentions on page five Lenin’s progressive education system inspired by Marx and Engels education model which was declared the antithesis of the academic school’s of old Russia. The practical education system would be center the education system in collective education in order allow students to work within society with skills honed to benefit the state. Students were simply batteries for the Soviet machine. So how do you recognize a [link=http://marcellischool.com/marcelli/?page_id=15]Progressive schools[/link] system? Often you can recognize them with simple visual evidence. [b]The Island Method[/b] is where a group of students sit around a table and learn collectively often working together on a group grade. When your child’s school abandons traditional classroom structure which consists of rows of desks and replaces it with the Island Method you can see the collective education method in play. This attribute of the education system, teaches children that the success of the collective is more important than the success of the individual. [b]Standardized testing[/b] is the monitor that evaluates the level of skills of the collective. Standardized testing grades the students and assesses the schools success as a collective. Very often the public schools that achieve higher scores on the standardized testing, get more government funding. When the standardized test scores like the NAEP test focus 80% of its questions on social behavioral performance rather than curriculum performance, the test simply grades how well the school is molding the children to fit the engineered collective. In short it is the grading of the school performance in behavioral indoctrination. [b]The founding fathers[/b] were individualists and rejected the collectivist methods. If your child’s school is not teaching about the founding fathers or is mentioning them as out dated philosophers with good ideas of their day, this is progressivism at its core. The school may also reject the validity of the US Constitution or even mention it as a living breathing document that can be interpreted differently over time. [b]Howard Zinn[/b] was a left wing activists and a product of Columbia University’s curriculum that considered himself an anarchist or democratic socialist. His education curriculum is in many schools which promote social justice, redistribution of wealth, and anti-military rhetoric. He was even pin pointed in FBI File # 100-360217 of being a member of the Communist Party USA during the McCarthy era. In order to fix this problem in our school system, we must recognize the problems, the causes of the problems, and make it know to other parents of the infected school system. We must get involved and eradicate this corrosive and destructive ideology of Progressivism. The problem that our children are experiencing is the result of behaviorists and progressive educators. Our schools can be saved. Americans need to demand that the system return to merit based education, remove the standardized school system, and promoting absolute self evident truths rather then evolving dialectical truths. Once we remove the poison that is Progressive education, we can restore the country back to the greatness that our founders envisioned. Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=CFDEA395-123F-7491-A4FECA9FBE6C74DE http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=BB9969C8-123F-7491-A4926BF820113CE4 Abraham is said to be the father of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. Obviously he is an important figure in history and the focal point of three of the most prominent religions in all of history. Interestingly enough Abraham may have played a role in Hinduism as well. First we must look at the biblical reference and in the Quran for reference for these resources are the only authentic documented resources archiving the life of Abraham. Keep in mind that the Quran was said to be created between 610 CE and 632 CE so the references of Abraham in the Quran were not witnessed by the author. It would be hard to say that the Bible represents a documented first hand account of Abraham’s life as well since Genesis was said to have been written between the 6th and 5th centuries BCE. [i] 1And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect. 2And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly. 3And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him, saying, 4As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. 5Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee. Genesis Chapter17[/i] Here Abram (Abraham) is asked to follow God. This is a very important moment in biblical history since this is the moment when Judaism, Islam, and Christianity began. [i] 7 I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. 8 The whole land of Canaan, where you are now an alien, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God." 9 Then God said to Abraham, "As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. Genesis 17[/i] To truly understand this moment, we must step back from the bible and look at the time in history when Abram was said to have lived. With the devotion to God by Abraham came a covenant – a promise – between him and God. Circumcision was the mark of this covenant on man. The act has been recorded in much of Ancient Egypt along with Africa as well. Despite the spiritual covenant, the practice has had many reasons including hygiene, Semitic identification, and extramarital sex prevention. With the history of Abraham outlined in the Bible, there are many scholars that have tried to pinpoint the birth date of Abram through various means. It has been a fruitless debate as there really hasn’t been any evidence that can pinpoint this event or its location outside of the bible itself. [i] 27 Now these are the generations of Terah: Terah begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran begat Lot. 28 And Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees. Genesis 11[/i] This states that Haran died in the land of his nativity. One can only assume that Abram was born there as well. Ur is a city in current day Iraq which was called Babylonia in the time of the Chaldenes. The Chaldees lived in the marshy basins of the Tigris and Euphrates south of Mesopotamia near present day Kuwait. [b]Babylonia[/b] Babylonia was an extremely advance civilization. One of the earliest astrolabes found was said to be from the Old Babylonian Period. Babylonians also studied medicine. They created their own medical texts that detailed diagnosis and prognosis. Of coarse the duration of the Babylonian empire is extensive, it is important to mention how advance they were. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/worddocs/lawofnature/images/babylonianastrolab.jpg[/img] One of the most disputed sciences developed by the Babylonians was the often considered pseudo-science of astrology. We can thank the Babylonians for our horoscope readings. It is said that the Babylonians created our current day zodiac. Archeologists have found dozens of cuneiform records detailing eclipse observations. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/worddocs/lawofnature/images/astrology.jpg[/img] Another archeological finding was the Ammisaduqa’s Venus tablet which helped archeologists determine the chronology of events in ancient Babylon. The Babylonian’s took excellent records on cuneiform tablets which have been used as reference to determine the order of events with great accuracy. The tablet detailed the rise times of the planet Venus and its first and last visibility on the horizon before or after sunrise and sunset. As Enoch stated with accuracy: [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/worddocs/lawofnature/images/venustablet.jpg[/img] [i] 2. Observe ye everything that takes place in the heaven, how they do not change their orbits, and the luminaries which are in the heaven, how they all rise and set in order each in its season, and transgress not against their appointed order. Behold ye the earth, and give heed to the things which take place upon it from first to last, how steadfast they are, how none of the things upon earth change, but all the works of God appear to you. Behold the summer and the winter, how the whole earth is filled with water, and clouds and dew and rain lie upon it. The Book of Enoch Chapter 2[/i] The truth is measured with the use of the creator’s engineering. Babylonians knew that the truth existed in the heavens. [b]Abram to Abraham[/b] Abram was faced with a choice by God. God told Abram that if he followed him, he would make him perfect. He would also be the father of many nations. This is relevant due to the pantheon of gods that the Babylonian people worshiped. The Babylonians were a polytheistic society believing in a number of gods. Some of the Babylonian gods were: Anu: the god of the highest heaven Marduk: national god of the Babylonians Tiamat: dragon goddess Kingu: husband of Tiamat Enlil: god of weather and storms Nabu: god of the scribal arts Ishtar: goddess of love Ea: god of wisdom Enurta: god of war Anshar: father of heaven Shamash: god of the sun and of justice Ashur: national god of the Assyrians Kishar: father of earth Much like the gods of Rome and Greece, the Babylonians saw that the powers that could not be explained were in control by separate entities. Abram was told to abandon that way of worship and enter a new covenant with the Almighty God and worship only him. Once Abram had made this change in his spirituality, God named him Abraham. It is important to recognize the names and the meaning behind the names. Obviously Genesis’s author is making issue of the name. Abram means “exalted father” or “my father is exalted” Abraham means “father of nations”. The change of names also represents a change direction in life. The emphasis on the name changes is even more evident in further entries. [i]15 And God said unto Abraham, As for Sarai thy wife, thou shalt not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall her name be. 16 And I will bless her, and give thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall be of her. 17 Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart, Shall a child be born unto him that is an hundred years old? and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear? 18 And Abraham said unto God, O that Ishmael might live before thee! 19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. 20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation. 21 But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year. Genesis 17[/i] There are some very interesting connections to Abraham in the Hindu Culture. Jewish scholar and theologian Flavious Josephus (37 – 100 AD) documented that Aristotle said, [i] “...These Jews are derived from the Indian philosophers; they are named by the Indians Calani." [/i] Clearchus of Soli, a Greek philosopher of the 4th-3rd century BCE and member of Aristotle’s Peripatetic school, was mentioned as well, [i] “The Jews descend from the philosophers of India. The philosophers are called in India Calanians and in Syria Jews. The name of their capital is very difficult to pronounce. It is called 'Jerusalem.” [/i] What is interesting is the similarity of Abraham and Sarah to the Hindu god of Brahma and his goddess of knowledge Saraswati. Saraswati is considered to be the consort to Braham and the mother of Vedas which is a large body of texts representing the oldest scriptures of Hinduism. The texts are written in Vedic Sanskrit which is an Old Indic language. It is closely related to the oldest preserved Iranian language. In the Bible Abraham moved to Negev where he chose to refer to Sarah as his sister in order to avoid her being killed. [i] 1 Now Abraham moved on from there into the region of the Negev and lived between Kadesh and Shur. For a while he stayed in Gerar, 2 and there Abraham said of his wife Sarah, "She is my sister." Then Abimelech king of Gerar sent for Sarah and took her. Genesis 20[/i] The bible also mentions that Ishmael and his descendants lived in India. [i] "...Ishmael breathed his last and died, and was gathered to his kin... They dwelt from Havilah (India), by Shur, which is close to Egypt, all the way to Asshur." Genesis 25:17-18[/i] Another interesting fact is that the names of Isaac and Ishmael are derive from Sanskrit: (Hebrew) Ishaak = (Sanskrit) Ishakhu = "Friend of Shiva." (Hebrew) Ishmael = (Sanskrit) Ish-Mahal = "Great Shiva." In ancient India there was an Aryan cult which was called "Brahm-Aryan." The Aryans were polytheistic which is exactly what Abraham had turned away from. This could be the reason for his name change where he could have become "A-Brahm" - no longer a Brahman. The Aryans called the Asuras "Ah-Brahm." Therefore, we can assume that the fathers of the Indus civilization were most likely Jews. This may also explain much of the history between the Muslim-Aryan culture and the rift between the Jews and the ancient Muslims. The name Iran is a cognate of Aryan, and means "Land of the Aryans". If Ishmael would not convert to the monotheistic form of religion and chose to remain polytheistic, could this be a plausible explanation of the birth of centuries old vitriol between Jews and Muslims? Sarai, which means "contentious", was barren and could not have a child for Abraham. Being barren was a very troubling issue in the days of the Babylonians especially for leaders. For a woman delivering a male heir to her husband was the greatest gift a god or God could deliver. God commanded the name to be changed to Sarah which means “my princess” along with the blessing of fertility. In regards to Ishmael, he was considered the illegitimate son of Abraham. When Sarai could not produce an heir, she offered the maidservant Hagar to Abraham. [i] 3 So after Abram had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian maidservant Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife. Genesis 16[/i] We must mention that Ishmael’s name was not changed hence his banishment and nomadic ways. [i]9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking. Genesis 21[/i] Here lies the beginning of the rift between the Islamic and Judaic people. Who is the real heir to the throne of Abraham? Typically the first child was the heir to the throne but the Bible clearly states that through Isaac, Hagar’s offspring will be reckoned. To understand this we must realize the definition of reckoned which means to count or be counted. [i] 11 The matter distressed Abraham greatly because it concerned his son. 12 But God said to him, "Do not be so distressed about the boy and your maidservant. Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned. 13 I will make the son of the maidservant into a nation also, because he is your offspring." 14 Early the next morning Abraham took some food and a skin of water and gave them to Hagar. He set them on her shoulders and then sent her off with the boy. She went on her way and wandered in the desert of Beersheba. 15 When the water in the skin was gone, she put the boy under one of the bushes. 16 Then she went off and sat down nearby, about a bowshot away, for she thought, "I cannot watch the boy die." And as she sat there nearby, she began to sob. 17 God heard the boy crying, and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven and said to her, "What is the matter, Hagar? Do not be afraid; God has heard the boy crying as he lies there. 18 Lift the boy up and take him by the hand, for I will make him into a great nation." 19 Then God opened her eyes and she saw a well of water. So she went and filled the skin with water and gave the boy a drink. 20 God was with the boy as he grew up. He lived in the desert and became an archer. 21 While he was living in the Desert of Paran, his mother got a wife for him from Egypt. 10 Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac. Genesis 21[/i] Abraham was distraught from his forgiven sin. A great nation was to be built and that nation was Islam. The Arabian people would however hold onto its polytheistic ways. This is evident in the bible with Ishmael’s name remaining the same. Ishmael would not take the same monotheistic covenant as Abraham. This is where the true separation from the early Jews and the early Arab culture began. This can be noted as the most important series of events in human history. The recognition of a single source of all knowledge and truth defines the law of nature. The self evident truth will echo throughout history and throughout the details of this book. Sun, 17 Oct 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=BB9969C8-123F-7491-A4926BF820113CE4 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=74CDE4A6-123F-7491-A4459165C97AF2BF This weekend’s rally in Washington DC in support of the Democrats and Barack Obama’s agenda is a microcosm of the support groups that make up the backbone of Democratic Party. As an anecdote for Glenn Beck non-political Restoring Honor rally, thousands of people were bussed in to represent solidarity for the potent socialistic policy that has been passed by the Congress and signed by Obama. In the passed two years, the Democratic super majority in both the House and the Senate have struggled to rally their majorities to pass these socialist policies. These struggles represent the reluctance by members of Congress to go against the will of the people. Despite this reluctance, they have been successful in passing massive spending bills that redistribute wealth to a growing lower income family base. Here is a list of Obama’s signed policies. • [b]Healthcare[/b] - A Zogby poll reported by the [link=http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/OpEd-Contributor/New-poll_-Health-care-issues-loom-large-for-2010-elections-8275287-60057892.html]Washington Examiner[/link] details that 58% of voters in competitive Senate 2010 races disapprove of a government run healthcare system. 55% appose in competitive House 2010 races. • [b]Nationalization of Banks[/b] – Obama’s [link=http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_lawrence_kudlow/tarp_again]mini-TARP[/link] is intended to allow the United States Treasury to buy up small portions of community banks stocks. This measure to begin the nationalizing of banks is troublesome at best. • [b]Nationalization of GM and Chrysler[/b] – The United States still owns 60% of General Motors despite 2 profitable quarters. There have been talks of General Motors floating an IPO to break themselves away from the government but the movement has been slow. The White House and Congress have been pressuring General Motors to float the IPO prior to the November elections so Democrats can claim the bailout as a victory. • [b]Nationalization of Student Loans[/b] – In recent healthcare legislation, Obama signed into law the elimination of subsidizing banks for [link=http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/obama-signs-bill-on-student-loans-health-care/]federally backed loans[/link]. With the student loan industry already extremely competitive, the federal government will now become the most competitive loan provider with no need to maintain a profit. Much like the insurance companies in the new healthcare environment, banks will eventually not be able to compete and slowly slip away from school loans business. Here are some of the proposed policies that may be passed in the future or even during the Congressional lame duck session after the November elections. • [b]Cap and Trade[/b] – Cap and Trade is a Soviet style top-down industrial policy where government regulations will control the means of production. Based on the theory of man-made “Global warming” or recently renamed [link=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/16/white-house-global-warming-global-climate-disruption/ ]“Global Climate Disruption”[/link] by the White House. • [b]Card Check[/b] – This policy would eliminate the private ballot for union representation. • [b]Immigration Amnesty[/b] – This would legalize possibly up to 20 million giving them access to billions of dollars of welfare assistance and public subsidies. • [b]Expiration of Bush Tax Cuts[/b] – This will be the most talked about policy during the debates headed into the November elections. Democrats will avoid the questions since they are poised to allow the tax cuts to sunset which could cause bring about more economic hardships for Americans next year. • [b]Don’t Ask Don’t Tell[/b] – This is the political wild card of the left in solidifying the support of the far left. So why is this important to mention in relation to Obama socialist ties? We must look at all of the organizations that are appearing on the stage of the Democrats and the White House. The groups attending the One Nation Working together rally is a who’s who of socialist, progressive, and communist front groups. Here is a list of some of these groups. [b]Sojourners[/b] – Jim Wallis, who is the founder of Sojourners and one of Barack Obama’s spiritual advisors, is a spokesman for Social Justice which is a platform of socialist and communist groups. In this article on the Communist Party USA’s website, Social Justice is listed as a plank to the socialist policy. The site is quoted as follows: [i]”We fight for the daily needs of working people both as a matter of social justice and as necessary to be able to advance the struggle for socialism.”[/i] This [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2d--egjByE&p=EA27080BDB9F813F&playnext=1&index=29 ]YouTube[/link] video paints the picture of Wallis’ ideology. We must note that Lanterns of Liberty doesn’t compare Obama’s policies to the atrocities of Hitler and Lenin as the YouTube might suggest. [b]SEIU[/b] – The Service Employees International Union supports rights of workers and has become a fighting force for the Obama administration. Recently the former head of the SEIU, [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzG0xpkjWrA&feature=player_embedded]Andy Stern[/link], was videoed in an interview quoting the Communist Manifesto along with spouting strong armed politics. [b]Green for All[/b] – Green for All was started by self proclaimed communist and former global warming czar serving President Obama [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMa3l23-rRc]Van Jones[/link]. [b]Apollo Alliance[/b] – Formed by [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Bh3jWqiUw0]Joel Rodgers[/link] and new home to Van Jones. Apollo Alliance has been recognized as writing portions of Obama’s $787 billon stimulus bill. [b]Sierra Club[/b] – This environmentalist group is chaired by former SDS member and board member of the Apollo Alliance Carl Pope. Carl Pope also served as managing director of Zero Population growth which favors eugenics to prevent a population explosion. [b]The Green Party USA[/b] – This is another group supporting the anti-war / social justice agenda much like the Communist Party USA. See their site [link= http://www.greenparty.org/index.php]here[/link] [b]Democracy for America[/b] – Founded by Howard Dean, is a political action committee that supports progressive and openly socialist politicians. [b]Planned Parentood[/b] – Receives $300 million in tax dollars while using it promote sex education for children as young as 10 years of age and abortions. [b]Democratic Socialists of America[/b] –[link= http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-international-socialist-connections/]Accuracy in Media[/link] reports that Obama has deep rooted connections and many endorsements from this socialist organization. [b]Communist Party USA[/b] – The [link= http://cpusa.org/why-we-march-and-vote/]CPUSA[/link] has supported Obama’s every step. The CPUSA website states: [i]“Corporate America is doing everything possible to grow fear, hysteria and hatred. They aim to discredit, divide and derail the thing they fear most - the power of the united movement for change led by President Obama. That movement encompasses the labor, communities of color, women, youth, the LGBT community and their many allies, They are stirring up confusion and hatred -- using as they always have -- the twin and vile pollutants of racism and red baiting.”[/i] You can see all of the rest [link= http://www.onenationworkingtogether.org/partners]here[/link]. [b]It is time…[/b] Patriots it is time to draw the line in the sand. We must no longer be afraid to call Progressives – “Communists”. You see Communists and Progressives alike know that once they are exposed they will lose the fight. Communists are forever conspiring to take over the power structure in the name of their thirst for a Communist Utopia. [link= http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/OFA/gGM84X]Barack Obama’s Organizing for America[/link] has supported this rally. It is important to know the difference between Progressives and Communists. True Communists wish for a Communist utopia through the means of violent revolution. Progressives wish for the same Communist Utopia through an incremental approach. Progressive’s work through the system democratically to change the system. Its focus is on Cultural Revolution. The solidarity viewed here is among the groups promoting the entropy of American culture. Is there any wonder why generation after generation experiences the incremental decline in morality and ethics. Consider the following quote: [i]“America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.”[/i] [b]Josef Stalin[/b] It is time… for all Americans to decide. It is time for Americans to expose this radical revolution and renew American principles as they were intended by the founding fathers. We must begin to do the following. 1. Educate – Educate your friends, family, neighbors, teachers, pastors, and priests about where our country is in relation to the founding of the country. 2. Equalize - Equalize as many people as possible about the American truth and the Marxist lie. Expose political media bias. The truth is the common thread through all things. Marxists have entered the country many years ago to progress the country away from the truth and towards the lie. To equalize is to help balance all common sense firmly on the truth. 3. Eradicate – Eradication of the failed ideology of Marxism will take much time. This is done through the previous two steps. We must be missionaries of truth and missionaries of the American Constitution. Illuminating the Truth is not just the motto of Lanterns of Liberty but now a new educational curriculum. Lanterns of Liberty has now unveiled this curriculum. [link=http://lanternsofliberty.us/IlluminatingtheTruth/index.cfm]Click Here to view [/link] Sun, 03 Oct 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=74CDE4A6-123F-7491-A4459165C97AF2BF http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=373EDAA1-123F-7491-A4F3CDC8ED0319F6 Enoch Enoch is best known for being the grandfather of Noah. Up until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls between 1957 and 1956, Enoch was simply one of the many descendants of Adam and Eve. These are a few of the verses that mention Enoch in Genesis. [i]19 And Jared lived after he begot Enoch eight hundred years, and begot sons and daughters. [/i](Genesis 5) [i]21 When Enoch had lived 65 years, he became the father of Methuselah. 22 And after he became the father of Methuselah, Enoch walked with God 300 years and had other sons and daughters. 23 Altogether, Enoch lived 365 years. 24 Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him away. [/i] (Genesis 5) Where did God take Enoch? When the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered there were hundreds of books found including the Book of Enoch. Immediately after the discovery questions rose about its omission from the Canon of Scriptures used by the Jews and the omission from the chosen structure of the bible during Council of Nicaea. Regardless of its omission, the book seemed to open another window into a time with little written history. The time when the Book of Enoch was written is hard to tell. Historians and scientists have struggled with the question. Some say that it was written around 300 BC and others say that it was at the end of the 1st Century BC. It has been known as an apocryphal book [i]2. Observe ye everything that takes place in the heaven, how they do not change their orbits, and the luminaries which are in the heaven, how they all rise and set in order each in its season, and transgress not against their appointed order. Behold ye the earth, and give heed to the things which take place upon it from first to last, how steadfast they are, how none of the things upon earth change, but all the works of God appear to you. Behold the summer and the winter, how the whole earth is filled with water, and clouds and dew and rain lie upon it.[/i] (The Book of Enoch Chapter 2) This verse is absolutely amazing. In a time when there had been no astronomical discoveries, the author notes with great accuracy the orbits of heavenly bodies along with the relevance to the seasons. It is clear that the observation is that of God’s creation. All of this is in order and follows a systematic rule of engineered law and this law is God. The realization of this amazing creation is expressed in wonderment towards the all great creator. [i]1Moreover Azazyel taught men to make swords, knives, shields, breastplates, the fabrication of mirrors, and the workmanship of bracelets and ornaments, the use of paint, the beautifying of the eyebrows, the use of stones of every valuable and select kind, and all sorts of dyes, so that the world became altered. 2Impiety increased; fornication multiplied; and they transgressed and corrupted all their ways. 3Amazarak taught all the sorcerers, and dividers of roots: 4Armers taught the solution of sorcery; 5Barkayal taught the observers of the stars, 6Akibeel taught signs;7Tamiel taught astronomy; 8And Asaradel taught the motion of the moon, 9And men, being destroyed, cried out; and their voice reached to heaven. [/i] (Chapter 8) It is apparent that the author is explaining here that the knowledge of God was being misused. There is a sense of materialism here as the focus of these Dark Angels seems to teach man about using the power of God for their own will and also to look at themselves for the answer. The fabrication of mirrors seems to suggest self worship or narcissism. The paint and dyes seem to suggest the disfiguration or distortion of God’s work and engineering. If the engineering is in fact the Law of Nature, then the distortion of these laws because of mans inability to correctly fathom all that affected by the power of God would assume destruction. [i]1Then Michael and Gabriel, Raphael, Suryal, and Uriel, looked down from heaven, and saw the quantity of blood which was shed on earth, and all the iniquity which was done upon it, and said one to another, It is the voice of their cries; 2The earth deprived of her children has cried even to the gate of heaven…. 5You have seen what Azazyel has done, how he has taught every species of iniquity upon earth, and has disclosed to the world all the secret things which are done in the heavens. 6Samyaza also has taught sorcery, to whom you have given authority over those who are associated with him. They have gone together to the daughters of men; have lain with them; have become polluted; 7And have discovered crimes (11) to them. [/i] (Chapter 9) It is clear in these passages that the powers of God were delivered to man by the angels. Without the ability to fathom the greatness of God and the power that they wielded, man caused massive destruction and bloody conflict. So the knowledge of God’s greatness was realized by man but not intended to be harness or eaten as the book of Genesis explains. God had spoken through Genesis about not eating from the tree of God’s knowledge. Once the power was unleashed there was death. Chapter 24 offers more incite into the tree of knowledge. [i]1I went from there to another place, and saw a mountain of fire flashing both by day and night. I proceeded towards it; and perceived seven splendid mountains, which were all different from each other. 2Their stones were brilliant and beautiful; all were brilliant and splendid to behold; and beautiful was their surface. Three mountains were towards the east, and strengthened by being placed one upon another; and three were towards the south, strengthened in a similar manner. There were likewise deep valleys, which did not approach each other. And the seventh mountain was in the midst of them. In length they all resembled the seat of a throne, and odoriferous trees surrounded them. 3Among these there was a tree of an unceasing smell; nor of those which were in Eden was there one of all the fragrant trees which smelt like this. Its leaf, its flower, and its bark never withered, and its fruit was beautiful. 4Its fruit resembled the cluster of the palm. I exclaimed, Behold! This tree is goodly in aspect, pleasing in its leaf, and the sight of its fruit is delightful to the eye. Then Michael, one of the holy and glorious angels who were with me, and one who presided over them, answered, 5And said: Enoch, why do you inquire respecting the odour of this tree? 6Why are you inquisitive to know it? 7Then I, Enoch, replied to him, and said, Concerning everything I am desirous of instruction, but particularly concerning this tree. 8He answered me, saying, That mountain which you behold, the extent of whose head resembles the seat of the Lord, will be the seat on which shall sit the holy and great Lord of glory, the everlasting King, when he shall come and descend to visit the earth with goodness. 9And that tree of an agreeable smell, not one of carnal odor, there shall be no power to touch, until the period of the great judgment. When all shall be punished and consumed for ever, this shall be bestowed on the righteous and humble. The fruit of the tree shall be given to the elect. For towards the north life shall be planted in the holy place, towards the habitation of the everlasting King. 10Then shall they greatly rejoice and exult in the Holy One. The sweet odor shall enter into their bones; and they shall live a long life on the earth as your forefathers have lived; neither in their days shall sorrow, distress, trouble, and punishment afflict them. 11And I blessed the Lord of glory, the everlasting King, because He has prepared this tree for the saints, formed it, and declared that He would give it to them. [/i] (Chapter 24) [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/WordDocs/LawofNature/images/mtsinai3.jpg[/img] Enoch’s conversation with the Angel Michael is so telling. Michael is considered the prince of Israel. Michael seems to test Enoch as the Angels Gabriel, Raphael, Suryal, and Uriel looked down on the land that was desecrating God’s power. Enoch responds with restraint mentioning Mt Sinai as the place where the law was received. Enoch also mentions the place to the north – Israel – which would be the place where the righteous ones would receive God’s blessing. It would be that the people of God would experience the sweet odor that emanates from the tree which is the knowledge of God. It is apparent that Enoch expresses that no one shall fathom God’s greatness fully for the odor is agreeable and not carnal. Let’s look at this passage again. [i]9And that tree of an agreeable smell, not one of carnal odor, there shall be no power to touch, until the period of the great judgment.[/i] What is interesting about the metaphor of an odor is that its relation to the greatness of God and how it is unfathomable, nebulous, and can not be realized with sight or touch. It can only be realized by one of our weakest senses. This sense represents one that realizes something that we follow without seeing what it is we are following. Interesting enough, smell has been recognized as the sense that triggers the memory the most. Another interesting fact about smell is that olfactory receptor neurons in the nose are different from most other neurons in that they die and regenerate on a regular basis. This would simply represent that our sense of God is hard to maintain and must be reignited continually with the sensing of his glory. The reigniting brings us back to the singularity of the law. The realization is the gravity that keeps us in orbit around his great nurturing power. To realize his glory is to recognize his greatness in our surroundings and realize that they are here for us to realize the law for he is the law. [b]“Son Of Man”[/b] [i]1There I beheld the Ancient of days, whose head was like white wool, and with him another, whose countenance resembled that of man. His countenance was full of grace, like that of one of the holy angels. Then I inquired of one of the angels, who went with me, and who showed me every secret thing, concerning this Son of man; who he was; whence he was and why he accompanied the Ancient of days. 2He answered and said to me, This is the Son of man, to whom righteousness belongs; with whom righteousness has dwelt; and who will reveal all the treasures of that which is concealed: for the Lord of spirits has chosen him; and his portion has surpassed all before the Lord of spirits in everlasting uprightness. 3This Son of man, whom you behold, shall raise up kings and the mighty from their dwelling places, and the powerful from their thrones; shall loosen the bridles of the powerful, and break in pieces the teeth of sinners. [/i] (Chapter 46.) In this excerpt, Enoch mentions the Son of Man. The Son of Man has several meanings. In Judaism, the Son of Man is the point at which a person has achieved the grace of God through spiritual adulthood. It is celebrated during Bat Mitzvah and Bar Mitzvah. The child becomes responsible for their own actions in accordance with the law. It also allow the adult to achieve personal property. It is here that private property is tied into natural law. They are also legally able to marry under Jewish law. In Kabbalah, This is the point where the tree of life extends to the next phase in the family tree. Generation transcendence is the center of all natural law. Since Creation is the most sacred moment in all existence, this mapping or genealogical history is important to see in the cosmological tree of life. At the center of the most sacred bond between man and woman is the creation of a child. It is important to recognize that the creation of a child obviously requires the man and woman to partake in the act of creation. Once the child is created, the child must be taught the law of nature through the parents. In order for the child to carry the tradition of the law down into the next generation, the child must be taught this tradition. It is the responsibility of the parents to carry on this message, tradition, and teachings of the law. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/WordDocs/LawOfNature/images/family.jpg[/img] Once the child has become of age – 13 years old – the child then is granted the responsibility to carry on those teachings. This is extremely important. If the child disgraces his or her parent’s wishes, it disgraces the law of God. Honor thy “father and thy mother” is a natural law that is pivotal to the transcendence of God’s law. When this bond between parents and child is broken or interrupted, there is a separation between God and the transcendence of the law. One of the reasons why abortion is so evil in the eyes of the Judeo-Christian believe system and faith is the destruction of the transcendence of God’s law and the destruction of the sacred aspects of Creation. This denial of life is the denial of God and his law. This mystical bond between generations, the law, and God is the glue that holds society together. As the laws keep the people pure, the family pure and the generations pure, the society will remain pure. When the break down in the family occurs, the society breaks down. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/WordDocs/LawOfNature/images/treeoflife.jpg[/img] To promote the destruction of the family or the community of families is the attempt to destroy God. This concept is crucial in understanding the relevance of the 10 Commandments. The 10 Commandments are the law that bonds this transcendence of God’s grace. The geometry of the unity of man and woman and their creation is obvious in the law. The geometry is so obvious that the symbol of this unity is one of the most recognizable mystical and spiritual symbols known to man. First we must explain the symbol of Creation by explaining its components. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/WordDocs/LawOfNature/images/male.jpg[/img] As mentioned before, the male is the giver. He is the producer of the seed. The triangle represents the phallus of the man. The triangle is the most structurally sound geometric shapes. The triangle in this geometric representation of man demands that the man be strong and structurally sound. As the giver and the provider, the symbol of man is positioned in sturdy foundation not able to be toppled. The symbol of the female is that of the inverted triangle which is also rigid and sturdy. The trianble represents the womb of the woman. She is the receiver of the man and the producer of the egg. The triangle in this geometric representation of woman balancing on the point of her triangle demands that the woman to be flexible in order to nurture. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/WordDocs/LawOfNature/images/female.jpg[/img] It is important to notice that the man needs the woman to nature the child as the woman needs the man to give the child structure and support. This dynamic is represented by the Hexagram or in Judaism, the “Star of David”. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/WordDocs/LawOfNature/images/child.jpg[/img] The child must have the strength of man and the nurturing from woman in order to be able to take on the responsibility of transcending God’s law to his or her child. Catholicism has a similar celebration or goal in its doctrine with the sacrament of Confirmation. This confirmation is when the young adult accepts or confirms their Baptism. At Baptism, the child’s parents accepted God’s grace and forgiveness for Adam and Eve’s original sin on behalf of the helpless child. In Confirmation, the Catholic student picks the name of an angel to represent them. But more importantly this excerpt is a prophecy of the coming of Christ. The Son of Man is mentioned throughout the Bible. In Luke, [i]Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God. [/i](Luke 22:69) The coming of Christ is viewed by Christians as the fulfillment of the law. Christ is recognized as the “Son of Man” and the savior of all of God’s Children. It is also mentioned in the New Testament. [i]Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. [/i] (Mathew5:17-20) We will go into great detail in further chapters. Tue, 21 Sep 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=373EDAA1-123F-7491-A4F3CDC8ED0319F6 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=3634C65B-123F-7491-A490336912B66C47 [b]Do you believe that there is absolute truth?[/b] Why do liberals and conservatives seem to never agree on much of anything? This is a very complicated question. Once you step back from feudal arguments about capitalism and socialism, you begin to see the fundamentals that surround both ideologies. What is important to understand is the foundation that the ideologies are built upon. Conservatism is built on Aristotelian logic as Liberalism is built on Hegelian dialectic. [b]Aristotelian Logic[/b] – Aristotle was one of the greatest philosophers in history who studied logic, rhetoric, politics, ethics, government, metaphysics among many others broad categories of thought. Aristotle is most known for his influence on Western thought as he was the father of Natural Law. Probably the most influential modes of thinking were both his logical process defining absolute truth described through natural law. Aristotle opened the door for mathematical logic with his philosophy of term logic. It sounds complicated but it is very simple. Lets look at the attributes and an example: [b]The Term[/b] – a part of speech representing something that isn’t true or false • All cats are carnivorous [b]The Proposition[/b] – 2 terms that contains a predicate which can be affirmed or denied and a subject which is capable of true or false • Some mammals are cats [b]The Syllogism[/b] – is an inference in which a conclusion follows the premise • Some mammals are carnivorous This is the ground foundation of Aristotelian logic. Upon this foundation other modes of logic were formed which search for conclusion that define truth. Graphically we can see the logic is a spiral drilling down to the absolute truth. The spiral is that of the Golden Sprial. Notice how nature reflects this logic. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/GoldenSpiral.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/GoldenSpiralGalaxy.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/GoldenHuricane.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/GoldenSpiralPlant.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/GoldenRose.jpg[/img] [b]Hegelian Dialectic[/b] – Hegelian Dialectics are not rooted in Aristotelian logic. Although the name references German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, the birth of the dialectics was also recognized by Aristotle and Socrates. Different from the search for truth, dialectics were a method of argument and recognition of contradictions. Two people that held differing views could pursue an agreement with one another. It differs in debate as debate is the process of one person trying to convince another of an opposing position. Hegel simply expanded on the dialectic as a three-fold description outlining the process that things change. The three fold description of change is outlined as follows: [b]Thesis[/b] – giving rise to its reaction • Sharia Law is the sacred law of Islam where woman are not treated equally to men. There are many people in America that are followers of Islam. [b]Antithesis[/b] – a contradiction or negation of the thesis • In America there are many non-Islamic followers that believe women should be treated equally to men. [b]Synthesis[/b] – the resolution as a product of the tension between the thesis and antithesis • America should have respect the Islamic followers and have two sets of laws for Americans and also for Muslim Americans This is the foundation of dialectic logic or dialectic process. Upon this foundation other modes of logic were formed which search for conclusion that define evolving truths. Marx and Engels' Dialectic Materialism was a hybrid of the dialectic process where wealth is redistributed. Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a dialectic process of species. Friedrich Engels on Dialectics and evolution: [i]Dialectics constitutes the most important form of thinking for present-day natural science, for it alone offers the analogue for, and thereby the method of explaining, the evolutionary processes occurring in nature, inter-connections in general, and transitions from one field of investigation to another.[/i] Graphically we can see the logic is a spiral drilling down to the evolving truth. The spiral is that of the helices. Notice that the helices is not a natural shape except when coupled with another helices to form the human DNA diagram. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/Helice.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/Helix.jpg[/img] When looking at the two different modes of thinking, it is clear that the Aristotelian logic is objective while the Hegelian dialectic is subjective. When drilling down into the true fundamentals, I would ask you this question. [b]Do you believe that there is absolute truth?[/b] If you answered “yes”, then you are rooted in Aristotelian logic. If you answered “it depends” or “no” then you are rooted in Hegelian logic. You see facts are based in absolute objective fact or non-fiction. Opinions are based on evolving subjective non-facts or fiction. When you read a non-fiction book, you are reading what has been explained as fact. When you read a fiction book, you are reading what is not fact. They are often interpretations of factual issues and developed into a new truth. Art is an interpretation of what the artist sees. A person viewing the art perceives a view of the artist’s reality or interpretation of his reality. So how does this fit into politics? If you are a liberal, you believe that morals and ethics vary from person to person depending on their beliefs. Lets look at the act of murder. Murder is defined by Merriam-Webster as the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought. Some Liberals believe that America is a colonialist or imperialist country that has been occupying lands around the world. Some Liberals believe that Islamic terrorism is a direct result to American imperialism. Some liberals will argue that the attacks on the World Trade Center where thousands of innocent Americans were murdered by Islamic terrorists were justified because of American colonialism or imperialism. Most Conservatives simply believe that murder is wrong based on the definition or defined absolute truth. Most Conservatives believe that Islamic terrorism is a threat to America’s sovereignty because it unlawfully is killing innocent people in America and around the world. Most Conservatives believe that Islamic terrorism needs to be eradicated in order to restore justice and law. Even deeper into the liberal ideology and the conservative ideology is the discussion about divine providence. Stanford Encyclopedia defines divine providence as follows: [i]Traditional theism holds that God is the creator of heaven and earth, and that all that occurs in the universe takes place under Divine Providence — that is, under God's sovereign guidance and control. According to believers, God governs creation as a loving father, working all things for good. [/i] Aristotle defined that there was absolute truth. This is defined not by a discussion between two ideological arguments – it just is. It is for man to find it. Hegel believed that there is a need for ideological or contradicting forces in order to redefine or progress the truth. To Hegel, there is no absolute truth. For Hegel, my truth is different from your truth because we have had different experiences, therefore, experiences define truth. [b]Law of Nature or the Law of Man[/b] The law of nature is more in tune with absolutes. Everything is absolute. Everything is finite. If truth is forever evolving, there are infinite truths. Is 2 + 2 = 4 or is 2 + 2 = 5? Man could probably justify 2 + 2 = 5. The fact is when you bring 2 items together with 2 other items; you have 4 items not 5. Man can also justify why we should be able to take some ones personal private property and give it to another and not call it stealing despite the fact that the one that owns the property rightfully earned it. Man can also justify why all men should have equal outcomes and should have equal things. Despite the fact that none of us have equal talents and equal skills man can justify that socially we should justify the equalization of all. [b]Progressivism[/b] In our discussion of Progressives, we must put into context that a true Progressive is looking to bring about an authoritarian, totalitarian, or communist state. If a Progressive says that this is not what he or she wishes to have, either they are a Progressive and are simply not detailing their true intentions or they are not a Progressive. They would simply be a liberal. Progressives operate through dialectic process much like liberals in order to distribute wealth and equalize the world. Natural law can’t exist in the world of the Progressive because all people are created equal, remain equal, and are entitled to equal things. In order to progress society into this utopian societal model: • society must eliminate all modes of capitalism which is defined by natural law because it doesn’t promote equality for all. • the metaphysical must be denied and discouraged because you can’t work dialectically with a supreme being. • there must be an elite class of individuals that are smart enough to take care of all the people It must be understood and reiterated that the methods of Progressivism are the progression towards an authoritarian, totalitarian, or communist state. Communism is achieved through the principles outlined above. Obviously there are more planks to this ideology but the progression can not take place towards Communism unless the goal isn’t equality on all levels. Keep in mind that Communism is not a nationalist movement and its members wish to consume the entire world in its ideology and can only accomplish this eradicating and eliminating all remnants of natural law. [i]Natural science will in time incorporate into itself the science of man, just as the science of man will incorporate into itself natural science: there will be one science.[/i] [b]Karl Marx[/b] [b]hold CTRL and click link[/b] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSllsTLkBsw]Andy Stern – former President of SEIU quotes Karl Marx[/link] [link= http://www.theblaze.com/stories/blaze-mix-video-top-20-pro-socialism-sound-bites-of-obama-advisors-allies/]Pro-Socialism] bites from Obama and advisors[/link] [b]Social Justice[/b] Social Justice is a belief that need for equality and solidarity among all people justify the, equality of outcome, redistribution of wealth, property redistribution, and progressive taxation. Despite the individual’s contribution to society, all individuals should receive the same outcome based on Social Justice. Social Justice is simple dialectic materialism describes by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. It is not based on natural law but rather dialectic process. Here is a quote from Friedrich Engels in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific: [i]The materialist conception of history starts from the proposition that the production of the means to support human life and, next to production, the exchange of things produced, is the basis of all social structure; that in every society that has appeared in history, the manner in which wealth is distributed and society divided into classes or orders is dependent upon what is produced, how it is produced, and how the products are exchanged. From this point of view, the final causes of all social changes and political revolutions are to be sought, not in men’s brains, not in men’s better insights into eternal truth and justice, but in changes in the modes of production and exchange.[/i] Some liberal organizations that support Social Justice [i]ACORN Action for Grassroots Economic and Neighborhood Development Alternatives (AGENDA) Black Farmers USA Coalition of Black Trade Unionists (CBTU) California Council of Churches/California Church IMPACT Ella Baker Center for Human Rights Jim Hightower and The Rolling Thunder Down Home Democracy Tour Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy Intertribal Council On Utility Policy (COUP) Green For All Plug in Partners South Carolina Coastal Conservation League Urban Agenda[/i] You see there is no intention for natural law to rule in a natural environment. All of these organizations are mere front groups comprised of people indoctrinated by the Progressive ideological left. They are all funded by the government and other front groups. They act as distributors of wealth. As our tax money is taken to cover stimulus projects, they are distributed to these groups to distribute to willing participants in the wealth distribution scheme. The Apollo Alliance, which is run by Joel Rogers and self proclaimed Communist Van Jones, takes credit for writing the $797 billion stimulus bill and is said to have received $1 billion in funding from the bill. So where is this money getting distributed to? [b]Critical Thinking[/b] Critical thinking is dialectic process. It is taught to our children in school at a young age. Attention Deficit Disorder is running rampant through our society. Often the cause of this disorder is being blamed on the technological gadgets that our kids use. If you have a child, have you ever seen a child more focused then when he or she is playing a video game or watching their favorite cartoon? Dialectic process is the reason for our children being so hyper when trying to maneuver through a simple task. Children are taught to analyze everything taught to them. Teachers are not teaching, they are trying to have children teach themselves. This is Progressive education which is dumbing down the population by the means of hyper-analyzing everything. [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opXKmwg8VQM]Progressive Education[/link] Take a look at this exercise retrieved from our public school system. [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/PDF/dialecticreport.pdf]Critical Thinking Exercise[/link] What is important to understand is that the idea that we want our children to operate as drones and to not think about what they read in a critical way is not what we are trying to communicate. Putting critical thinking at the forefront of reading a book is counter-productive and often damaging to the child. What intense critical thinking does is it takes the focus of learning away from the child and focuses the child on over analyzing the material. Have you ever tried to have an in depth philosophical debate with someone and they picked apart every word instead of looking at the idea that you were debating? Have you ever offered factual evidence to prove your argument and the person on the other side of the debate simply negates the proof without debating the proof? This isn’t critical analysis it is dialectic process and is completely counter-productive and does nothing to offer factual debate. Instead arguments are about meanings of words rather than conceptual understanding of a debate. Critical analysis should bring two parties to a factual vantage point not to a polarized standoff. Americans must realize that we have been infiltrated by a foreign ideology. This foreign ideology is Marxism which has come here through the [link=http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/marcuse/works/reason/ch02-4.htm]Frankfurt School of Marxism [/link]into our colleges and through the Fabian Society of elitists through Hollywood. Liberals and Conservatives alike must be prepared to recognize that the idea that is America is built on Natural Law not the law of man. The laws of nature surpass the intelligence of man. Man can no better fathom all laws of nature and must look to nature to discover it if we are not to simply look to God. Whether you are an atheist or God fearing America, we can all appreciate that a little intellectual elite in far-away Washington DC can not fathom the wants and desires of 300 million Americans. It is for all of these individuals to decide what we all wish to achieve happiness. Tue, 21 Sep 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=3634C65B-123F-7491-A490336912B66C47 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=04093E1E-123F-7491-A4431F5194CDB974 Religious intolerance has been a huge focus in the media lately for many reasons. One would think that with the way the main stream media was portraying it that Americans appear to be simply insensitive and bigoted. Some would say that actions like burning a Quran or a bible are simply expressions of the freedom of speech. Others would say these actions by those wielding the liberty of free speech are provoking and should be ignored or even outlawed. In American history, there have been many expressions that have offended Americans of all makes and models. The KKK has burned crosses to express their hatred as artists have submerged the crucifix in urine in order to rile up the opposition and rally the vile. The true intolerance is not in the actions expressed here but those that wish to act in retaliation in a way that is degrading or simply against the law. The reasons why provocations that are veiled in freedom of speech are so successful is the backlash that ensues following the expression. Provocateurs seek out ways to rustle the feathers of those moored to certain principles. In many cases they are simply doing it to direct attention to their message or their point of view. The measurement of the reaction is often a measurement of the provocateurs success. So the question is whether or not people should react?...Absolutely. Provocateurs bring to the forefront a debate. The reaction should be the point where people of opposing views and those of like views to express their opinions. Those with the stronger principles riveted to the truth shall prevail. In many ways this resembles a dialectic process but the difference is dialectic process unveils a new truth. Aristotelian logic simply defines the truth. Kant and Hegel took Aristotelian logic off the tracks by adding to it. Western culture was founded in Aristotelian logic. Many often never recognize dialectic process when it is being used because it is very similar to Aristotelian logic. For those that are rooted in Aristotelian logic and witness dialectic process, they recognize the dialectic as illogical. One of the reasons that people in America have become so polarized is the introduction of dialectic process into our culture. There is no compromise between those that reason through dialectic process and those that reason through Aristotelian logic. Aristotelians see the truth and those rooted in dialectic logic look for the refreshing new truth. This fabricated new truth is a progression away from the old and is seen as revolutionary. This revolution is the uprooting of the microcosm of truth and the macrocosm of Western culture by means of redefining it or remaking it. Americans have always been revolutionary in terms of individuality but are now being taught to collectively revolt against the American foundational principles. So the criticism does not need to be directed towards the provocateur but rather towards the commentators that wish to pigeon hole the argument in something outside of the truth. In the argument about Islamic advancement on the American culture. The arguments are obviously revolving around the Islamic religion. Those concerned with the Islamic advancement are mostly concerned about radicalized actions from those in the Islamic faith. They are also concerned about the advancement of Sharia law. Instead of the debate being about the aspects of Sharia law and radical Islam, the argument is rather about how bigoted some Americans are because they do not agree with corrosive principles being accepted in our constitutional republic. So why is America concerned about Sharia law in America? It could be because of this quote from Harold Hongju Koh who was nominated and appointed as Legal Advisor to the State Department by Barack Obama: [i]“Judges should interpret the Constitution according to other nations' legal "norms." Sharia law could apply to disputes in US courts. The United States constitutes an "axis of disobedience" along with North Korea and Saddam-era Iraq.”[/i] Some of the principles of Sharia law are: Money is not a commodity that can be traded. Making money on interest is prohibited. Profits should be redistributed. Risks with capital are prohibited. Muslim men are allowed to have up to 4 wives. Alcohol consumption is prohibited Gambling is prohibited. Freedom of speech is limited. Criticism of Mohammed is punishable by death. Sodomy is punishable by death. Homosexuality is illicit. Women are the servants of men. So why would Americans be critical of Sharia law? Sat, 11 Sep 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=04093E1E-123F-7491-A4431F5194CDB974 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=024E02D4-123F-7491-A487405D0B5D81B7 Those that died on 911 in the World Trade Center after Muslim Terrorists hijacked and crashed commercial airlines in an act of Jihad. Remember... Gordon M. Aamoth, Jr. Edelmiro Abad Maria Rose Abad Andrew Anthony Abate Vincent Abate Laurence Christopher Abel William F. Abrahamson Richard Anthony Aceto Jesus Acevedo Rescand Heinrich Bernhard Ackermann Paul Acquaviva Donald LaRoy Adams Patrick Adams Shannon Lewis Adams Stephen George Adams Ignatius Udo Adanga Christy A. Addamo Terence E. Adderley, Jr. Sophia Buruwad Addo Lee Allan Adler Daniel Thomas Afflitto Emmanuel Akwasi Afuakwah Alok Agarwal Mukul Kumar Agarwala Joseph Agnello David Scott Agnes Brian G. Ahearn Jeremiah Joseph Ahern Joanne Marie Ahladiotis Shabbir Ahmed Terrance Andre Aiken Godwin Ajala Gertrude M. Alagero Andrew Alameno Margaret Ann Alario Gary M. Albero Jon Leslie Albert Peter Alderman Jacquelyn Delaine Aldridge David D. Alger Sarah Ali-Escarcega Ernest Alikakos Edward L. Allegretto Eric Allen Joseph Ryan Allen Richard Dennis Allen Richard Lanard Allen Christopher E. Allingham Janet M. Alonso Arturo Alva-Moreno Anthony Alvarado Antonio Javier Alvarez Victoria Alvarez-Brito Telmo E. Alvear Cesar Amoranto Alviar Tariq Amanullah Angelo Amaranto James M. Amato Joseph Amatuccio Christopher Charles Amoroso Kazuhiro Anai Calixto Anaya, Jr. Joseph Anchundia Kermit Charles Anderson Yvette Constance Anderson John Andreacchio Michael Rourke Andrews Jean Ann Andrucki Siew-Nya Ang Joseph Angelini, Jr. Joseph Angelini, Sr. Laura Angilletta Doreen J. Angrisani Lorraine Antigua Peter Paul Apollo Faustino Apostol, Jr. Frank Thomas Aquilino Patrick Michael Aranyos David Arce Michael George Arczynski Louis Arena Adam P. Arias Michael Armstrong Jack Charles Aron Joshua Aron Richard Avery Aronow Japhet Jesse Aryee Patrick Asante Carl Asaro Michael Asciak Michael Edward Asher Janice Marie Ashley Thomas J. Ashton Manuel O. Asitimbay Gregg Arthur Atlas Gerald T. Atwood James Audiffred Louis Frank Aversano, Jr. Ezra Aviles Sandy Ayala Arlene T. Babakitis Eustace P. Bacchus John J. Badagliacca Jane Ellen Baeszler Robert J. Baierwalter Andrew J. Bailey Brett T. Bailey Tatyana Bakalinskaya Michael S. Baksh Sharon M. Balkcom Michael Andrew Bane Katherine Bantis Gerard Baptiste Walter Baran Gerard A. Barbara Paul Vincent Barbaro James William Barbella Ivan Kyrillos F. Barbosa Victor Daniel Barbosa Colleen Ann Barkow David Michael Barkway Matthew Barnes Sheila Patricia Barnes Evan J. Baron Renee Barrett-Arjune Nathaly Barrios La Cruz Arthur Thaddeus Barry Diane G. Barry Maurice Vincent Barry Scott D. Bart Carlton W. Bartels Guy Barzvi Inna B. Basina Alysia Basmajian Kenneth William Basnicki Steven Bates Paul James Battaglia Walter David Bauer, Jr. Marlyn Capito Bautista Jasper Baxter Michele Beale Paul Frederick Beatini Jane S. Beatty Lawrence Ira Beck Manette Marie Beckles Carl John Bedigian Michael Earnest Beekman Maria A. Behr Yelena Belilovsky Nina Patrice Bell Debbie Bellows Stephen Elliot Belson Paul M. Benedetti Denise Lenore Benedetto Maria Bengochea Bryan Craig Bennett Eric L. Bennett Oliver Duncan Bennett Margaret L. Benson Dominick J. Berardi James Patrick Berger Steven Howard Berger John P. Bergin Alvin Bergsohn Daniel Bergstein Michael J. Berkeley Donna M. Bernaerts David W. Bernard William Bernstein David M. Berray David S. Berry Joseph J. Berry William Reed Bethke Timothy Betterly Edward Frank Beyea Paul Beyer Anil Tahilram Bharvaney Bella J. Bhukhan Shimmy D. Biegeleisen Peter Alexander Bielfeld William G. Biggart Brian Bilcher Carl Vincent Bini Gary Eugene Bird Joshua David Birnbaum George John Bishop Jeffrey Donald Bittner Albert Balewa Blackman, Jr. Christopher Joseph Blackwell Susan Leigh Blair Harry Blanding, Jr. Janice Lee Blaney Craig Michael Blass Rita Blau Richard Middleton Blood, Jr. Michael Andrew Boccardi John P. Bocchi Michael Leopoldo Bocchino Susan M. Bochino Bruce D. Boehm Mary Catherine Boffa Nicholas Andrew Bogdan Darren Christopher Bohan Lawrence Francis Boisseau Vincent M. Boland, Jr. Alan Bondarenko Andre Bonheur, Jr. Colin Arthur Bonnett Frank Bonomo Yvonne Lucia Bonomo Genieve Bonsignore, 3 Seaon Booker Sherry Ann Bordeaux Krystine Bordenabe Martin Boryczewski Richard Edward Bosco John H. Boulton Francisco Eligio Bourdier Thomas Harold Bowden, Jr. Kimberly S. Bowers Veronique Nicole Bowers Larry Bowman Shawn Edward Bowman, Jr. Kevin L. Bowser Gary R. Box Gennady Boyarsky Pamela Boyce Michael Boyle Alfred Braca Kevin Bracken David Brian Brady Alexander Braginsky Nicholas W. Brandemarti Michelle Renee Bratton Patrice Braut Lydia E. Bravo Ronald Michael Breitweiser Edward A. Brennan III Francis Henry Brennan Michael E. Brennan Peter Brennan Thomas M. Brennan Daniel J. Brethel Gary Lee Bright Jonathan Briley Mark A. Brisman Paul Gary Bristow Mark Francis Broderick Herman Charles Broghammer Keith A. Broomfield Ethel Brown Janice Juloise Brown Lloyd Stanford Brown Patrick J. Brown Bettina Browne Mark Bruce Richard George Bruehert Andrew Brunn Vincent Brunton Ronald Paul Bucca Brandon J. Buchanan Gregory Joseph Buck Dennis Buckley Nancy Clare Bueche Patrick Joseph Buhse John Edwards Bulaga, Jr. Stephen Bunin Matthew J. Burke Thomas Daniel Burke William Francis Burke, Jr. Donald J. Burns Kathleen Anne Burns Keith James Burns John Patrick Burnside Irina Buslo Milton G. Bustillo Thomas M. Butler Patrick Byrne Timothy G. Byrne Jesus Neptali Cabezas Lillian Caceres Brian Joseph Cachia Steven Dennis Cafiero, Jr. Richard M. Caggiano Cecile Marella Caguicla Michael John Cahill Scott Walter Cahill Thomas Joseph Cahill George Cain Salvatore B. Calabro Joseph Calandrillo Philip V. Calcagno Edward Calderon Kenneth Marcus Caldwell Dominick Enrico Calia Felix Calixte Frank Callahan Liam Callahan Luigi Calvi Roko Camaj Michael F. Cammarata David Otey Campbell Geoffrey Thomas Campbell Jill Marie Campbell Robert Arthur Campbell Sandra Patricia Campbell Sean Thomas Canavan John A. Candela Vincent Cangelosi Stephen J. Cangialosi Lisa Bella Cannava Brian Cannizzaro Michael Canty Louis Anthony Caporicci Jonathan Neff Cappello James Christopher Cappers Richard Michael Caproni Jose Manuel Cardona Dennis M. Carey Steve Carey Edward Carlino Michael Scott Carlo David G. Carlone Rosemarie C. Carlson Mark Stephen Carney Joyce Ann Carpeneto Ivhan Luis Carpio Bautista Jeremy M. Carrington Michael Carroll Peter Carroll James Joseph Carson, Jr. Marcia Cecil Carter James Marcel Cartier Vivian Casalduc John Francis Casazza Paul R. Cascio Margarito Casillas Thomas Anthony Casoria William Otto Caspar Alejandro Castano Arcelia Castillo Germaan Castillo Garcia Leonard M. Castrianno Jose Ramon Castro Richard G. Catarelli Christopher Sean Caton Robert John Caufield Mary Teresa Caulfield Judson Cavalier Michael Joseph Cawley Jason David Cayne Juan Armando Ceballos Jason Michael Cefalu Thomas Joseph Celic Ana Mercedes Centeno Joni Cesta Jeffrey Marc Chairnoff Swarna Chalasani William Chalcoff Eli Chalouh Charles Lawrence Chan Mandy Chang Mark Lawrence Charette Gregorio Manuel Chavez Delrose E. Cheatham Pedro Francisco Checo Douglas MacMillan Cherry Stephen Patrick Cherry Vernon Paul Cherry Nester Julio Chevalier Swede Chevalier Alexander H. Chiang Dorothy J. Chiarchiaro Luis Alfonso Chimbo Robert Chin Wing Wai Ching Nicholas Paul Chiofalo John Chipura Peter A. Chirchirillo Catherine Chirls Kyung Hee Cho Abul K. Chowdhury Mohammad Salahuddin Chowdhury Kirsten L. Christophe Pamela Chu Steven Chucknick Wai Chung Christopher Ciafardini Alex F. Ciccone Frances Ann Cilente Elaine Cillo Edna Cintron Nestor Andre Cintron III Robert Dominick Cirri Juan Pablo Cisneros-Alvarez Benjamin Keefe Clark Eugene Clark Gregory Alan Clark Mannie Leroy Clark Thomas R. Clark Christopher Robert Clarke Donna Marie Clarke Michael J. Clarke Suria Rachel Emma Clarke Kevin Francis Cleary James D. Cleere Geoffrey W. Cloud Susan Marie Clyne Steven Coakley Jeffrey Alan Coale Patricia A. Cody Daniel Michael Coffey Jason M. Coffey Florence G. Cohen Kevin Sanford Cohen Anthony Joseph Coladonato Mark Joseph Colaio Stephen Colaio Christopher M. Colasanti Kevin Nathaniel Colbert Michel P. Colbert Keith E. Coleman Scott Thomas Coleman Tarel Coleman Liam Joseph Colhoun Robert D. Colin Robert J. Coll Jean Collin John Michael Collins Michael L. Collins Thomas J. Collins Joseph Collison Patricia Malia Colodner Linda M. Colon Sol E. Colon Ronald Edward Comer Sandra Jolane Conaty Brace Jaime Concepcion Albert Conde Denease Conley Susan P. Conlon Margaret Mary Conner Cynthia Marie Lise Connolly John E. Connolly, Jr. James Lee Connor Jonathan M. Connors Kevin Patrick Connors Kevin F. Conroy Jose Manuel Contreras-Fernandez Brenda E. Conway Dennis Michael Cook Helen D. Cook John A. Cooper Joseph John Coppo, Jr. Gerard J. Coppola Joseph Albert Corbett Alejandro Cordero Robert Cordice Ruben D. Correa Danny A. Correa-Gutierrez James J. Corrigan Carlos Cortes Kevin Cosgrove Dolores Marie Costa Digna Alexandra Costanza Charles Gregory Costello, Jr. Michael S. Costello Conrod K. Cottoy Martin John Coughlan John Gerard Coughlin Timothy J. Coughlin James E. Cove Andre Cox Frederick John Cox James Raymond Coyle Michele Coyle-Eulau Anne Marie Cramer Christopher S. Cramer Denise Elizabeth Crant James Leslie Crawford, Jr. Robert James Crawford Joanne Mary Cregan Lucy Crifasi John A. Crisci Daniel Hal Crisman Dennis Cross Kevin Raymond Crotty Thomas G. Crotty John Crowe Welles Remy Crowther Robert L. Cruikshank John Robert Cruz Grace Yu Cua Kenneth John Cubas Francisco Cruz Cubero Richard J. Cudina Neil James Cudmore Thomas Patrick Cullen lll Joyce Cummings Brian Thomas Cummins Michael Cunningham Robert Curatolo Laurence Damian Curia Paul Dario Curioli Beverly Curry Michael S. Curtin Gavin Cushny John D'Allara Vincent Gerard D'Amadeo Jack D'Ambrosi Mary D'Antonio Edward A. D'Atri Michael D. D'Auria Michael Jude D'Esposito Manuel John Da Mota Caleb Arron Dack Carlos S. DaCosta Joao Alberto DaFonseca Aguiar, Jr. Thomas A. Damaskinos Jeannine Marie Damiani-Jones Patrick W. Danahy Nana Danso Vincent Danz Dwight Donald Darcy Elizabeth Ann Darling Annette Andrea Dataram Lawrence Davidson Michael Allen Davidson Scott Matthew Davidson Titus Davidson Niurka Davila Clinton Davis Wayne Terrial Davis Anthony Richard Dawson Calvin Dawson Edward James Day Jayceryll de Chavez Jennifer De Jesus Monique E. De Jesus Nereida De Jesus Emerita De La Pena Azucena Maria de la Torre David Paul De Rubbio Jemal Legesse De Santis Christian Louis De Simone Melanie Louise De Vere William Thomas Dean Robert J. DeAngelis, Jr. Thomas Patrick DeAngelis Tara E. Debek Anna Marjia DeBin James V. Deblase Paul DeCola Simon Marash Dedvukaj Jason Defazio David A. DeFeo Manuel Del Valle, Jr. Donald Arthur Delapenha Vito Joseph DeLeo Danielle Anne Delie Joseph A. Della Pietra Andrea DellaBella Palmina DelliGatti Colleen Ann Deloughery Francis Albert DeMartini Anthony Demas Martin N. DeMeo Francis Deming Carol K. Demitz Kevin Dennis Thomas F. Dennis Jean DePalma Jose Depena Robert John Deraney Michael DeRienzo Edward DeSimone III Andrew Desperito Cindy Ann Deuel Jerry DeVito Robert P. Devitt, Jr. Dennis Lawrence Devlin Gerard Dewan Sulemanali Kassamali Dhanani Patricia Florence Di Chiaro Debra Ann Di Martino Michael Louis Diagostino Matthew Diaz Nancy Diaz Rafael Arturo Diaz Michael A. Diaz-Piedra III Judith Berquis Diaz-Sierra Joseph Dermot Dickey, Jr. Lawrence Patrick Dickinson Michael D. Diehl John Difato Vincent Difazio Carl Anthony DiFranco Donald Difranco Stephen Patrick Dimino William John Dimmling Marisa DiNardo Schorpp Christopher M. Dincuff Jeffrey Mark Dingle Anthony Dionisio George DiPasquale Joseph Dipilato Douglas Frank DiStefano Ramzi A. Doany John Joseph Doherty Melissa C. Doi Brendan Dolan Neil Matthew Dollard James Joseph Domanico Benilda Pascua Domingo Carlos Dominguez Jerome Mark Patrick Dominguez Kevin W. Donnelly Jacqueline Donovan Stephen Scott Dorf Thomas Dowd Kevin Dowdell Mary Yolanda Dowling Raymond Mathew Downey Frank Joseph Doyle Joseph Michael Doyle Stephen Patrick Driscoll Mirna A. Duarte Michelle Beale Duberry Luke A. Dudek Christopher Michael Duffy Gerard Duffy Michael Joseph Duffy Thomas W. Duffy Antoinette Duger Sareve Dukat Christopher Joseph Dunne Richard Anthony Dunstan Patrick Thomas Dwyer Joseph Anthony Eacobacci John Bruce Eagleson Robert Douglas Eaton Dean Phillip Eberling Margaret Ruth Echtermann Paul Robert Eckna Constantine Economos Dennis Michael Edwards Michael Hardy Edwards Christine Egan Lisa Egan Martin J. Egan, Jr. Michael Egan Samantha Martin Egan Carole Eggert Lisa Caren Ehrlich John Ernst Eichler Eric Adam Eisenberg Daphne Ferlinda Elder Michael J. Elferis Mark Joseph Ellis Valerie Silver Ellis Albert Alfy William Elmarry Edgar Hendricks Emery, Jr. Doris Suk-Yuen Eng Christopher Epps Ulf Ramm Ericson Erwin L. Erker William John Erwin Jose Espinal Fanny Espinoza Bridget Ann Esposito Francis Esposito Michael Esposito William Esposito Ruben Esquilin, Jr. Sadie Ette Barbara G. Etzold Eric Brian Evans Robert Evans Meredith Emily June Ewart Catherine K. Fagan Patricia Mary Fagan Keith George Fairben Sandra Fajardo-Smith William F. Fallon William Lawrence Fallon, Jr. Anthony J. Fallone, Jr. Dolores Brigitte Fanelli John Joseph Fanning Kathleen Anne Faragher Thomas Farino Nancy Carole Farley Elizabeth Ann Farmer Douglas Jon Farnum John G. Farrell John W. Farrell Terrence Patrick Farrell Joseph D. Farrelly Thomas Patrick Farrelly Syed Abdul Fatha Christopher Edward Faughnan Wendy R. Faulkner Shannon Marie Fava Bernard D. Favuzza Robert Fazio, Jr. Ronald Carl Fazio William Feehan Francis Jude Feely Garth Erin Feeney Sean B. Fegan Lee S. Fehling Peter Adam Feidelberg Alan D. Feinberg Rosa Maria Feliciano Edward Thomas Fergus, Jr. George Ferguson Henry Fernandez Judy Hazel Fernandez Julio Fernandez Elisa Giselle Ferraina Anne Marie Sallerin Ferreira Robert John Ferris David Francis Ferrugio Louis V. Fersini Michael David Ferugio Bradley James Fetchet Jennifer Louise Fialko Kristen Nicole Fiedel Samuel Fields Michael Bradley Finnegan Timothy J. Finnerty Michael Curtis Fiore Stephen S R Fiorelli, Sr. Paul M. Fiori John B. Fiorito John R. Fischer Andrew Fisher Bennett Lawson Fisher John Roger Fisher Thomas J. Fisher Lucy A. Fishman Ryan D. Fitzgerald Thomas James Fitzpatrick Richard P. Fitzsimons Salvatore Fiumefreddo Christina Donovan Flannery Eileen Flecha Andre G. Fletcher Carl M. Flickinger John Joseph Florio Joseph Walken Flounders David Fodor Michael N. Fodor Stephen Mark Fogel Thomas Foley David J. Fontana Chih Min Foo Godwin Forde Donald A. Foreman Christopher Hugh Forsythe Claudia Alicia Foster Noel John Foster Ana Fosteris Robert Joseph Foti Jeffrey Fox Virginia Fox Pauline Francis Virgin Francis Gary Jay Frank Morton H. Frank Peter Christopher Frank Richard K. Fraser Kevin J. Frawley Clyde Frazier, Jr. Lillian Inez Frederick Andrew Fredricks Tamitha Freeman Brett Owen Freiman Peter L. Freund Arlene Eva Fried Alan Wayne Friedlander Andrew Keith Friedman Gregg J. Froehner Peter Christian Fry Clement A. Fumando Steven Elliot Furman Paul Furmato Fredric Neal Gabler Richard Samuel Federick Gabrielle James Andrew Gadiel Pamela Lee Gaff Ervin Vincent Gailliard Deanna Lynn Galante Grace Catherine Galante Anthony Edward Gallagher Daniel James Gallagher John Patrick Gallagher Lourdes Galletti Cono E. Gallo Vincenzo Gallucci Thomas E. Galvin Giovanna Galletta Gambale Thomas Gambino, Jr. Giann Franco Gamboa Peter Ganci Ladkat K. Ganesh Claude Michael Gann Osseni Garba Charles William Garbarini Ceasar Garcia David Garcia Juan Garcia Marlyn Del Carmen Garcia Christopher S. Gardner Douglas Benjamin Gardner Harvey J. Gardner III Jeffrey Brian Gardner Thomas Gardner William Arthur Gardner Francesco Garfi Rocco Nino Gargano James M. Gartenberg Matthew David Garvey Bruce Gary Boyd Alan Gatton Donald Richard Gavagan, Jr. Terence D. Gazzani Gary Geidel Paul Hamilton Geier Julie M. Geis Peter G. Gelinas Steven Paul Geller Howard G. Gelling Peter Victor Genco, Jr. Steven Gregory Genovese Alayne Gentul Edward F. Geraghty Suzanne Geraty Ralph Gerhardt Robert Gerlich Denis P. Germain Marina Romanovna Gertsberg Susan M. Getzendanner James G. Geyer Joseph M. Giaccone Vincent Francis Giammona Debra Lynn Gibbon James Andrew Giberson Craig Neil Gibson Ronnie E. Gies Laura A. Giglio Andrew Clive Gilbert Timothy Paul Gilbert Paul Stuart Gilbey Paul John Gill Mark Y. Gilles Evan Gillette Ronald Lawrence Gilligan Rodney C. Gillis Laura Gilly John F. Ginley Donna Marie Giordano Jeffrey John Giordano John Giordano Steven A. Giorgetti Martin Giovinazzo Kum-Kum Girolamo Salvatore Gitto Cynthia Giugliano Mon Gjonbalaj Dianne Gladstone Keith Glascoe Thomas Irwin Glasser Harry Glenn Barry H. Glick Steven Glick John T. Gnazzo William Robert Godshalk Michael Gogliormella Brian Fredric Goldberg Jeffrey Grant Goldflam Michelle Goldstein Monica Goldstein Steven Goldstein Andrew H. Golkin Dennis James Gomes Enrique Antonio Gomez Jose Bienvenido Gomez Manuel Gomez, Jr. Wilder Alfredo Gomez Jenine Nicole Gonzalez Mauricio Gonzalez Rosa Gonzalez Calvin J. Gooding Harry Goody Kiran Reddy Gopu Catherine C. Gorayeb Kerene Gordon Sebastian Gorki Kieran Joseph Gorman Thomas Edward Gorman Michael Edward Gould Yuji Goya Jon Richard Grabowski Christopher Michael Grady Edwin J. Graf III David Martin Graifman Gilbert Franco Granados Elvira Granitto Winston Arthur Grant Christopher S. Gray James Michael Gray Tara McCloud Gray Linda Catherine Grayling John M. Grazioso Timothy George Grazioso Derrick Auther Green Wade B. Green Elaine Myra Greenberg Gayle R. Greene James Arthur Greenleaf, Jr. Eileen Marsha Greenstein Elizabeth Martin Gregg Denise Gregory Donald H. Gregory Florence Moran Gregory Pedro Grehan John Michael Griffin Tawanna Sherry Griffin Joan Donna Griffith Warren Grifka Ramon Grijalvo Joseph F. Grillo David Joseph Grimner Kenneth George Grouzalis Joseph Grzelak Matthew James Grzymalski Robert Joseph Gschaar Liming Gu Jose Guadalupe Cindy Yan Zhu Guan Joel Guevara Gonzalez Geoffrey E. Guja Joseph Gullickson Babita Girjamatie Guman Douglas Brian Gurian Janet Ruth Gustafson Philip T. Guza Barbara Guzzardo Peter M. Gyulavary Gary Robert Haag Andrea Lyn Haberman Barbara Mary Habib Philip Haentzler Nezam A. Hafiz Karen Elizabeth Hagerty Steven Michael Hagis Mary Lou Hague David Halderman Maile Rachel Hale Richard B. Hall Vaswald George Hall Robert J. Halligan Vincent Gerard Halloran James Douglas Halvorson Mohammad Salman Hamdani Felicia Hamilton Robert Hamilton Frederic K. Han Christopher J. Hanley Sean S. Hanley Valerie Joan Hanna Thomas Hannafin Kevin James Hannaford Michael Lawrence Hannan Dana R Hannon Vassilios G. Haramis James A. Haran Jeffrey Pike Hardy Timothy John Hargrave Daniel Edward Harlin Frances Haros Harvey Harrell Stephen G. Harrell Melissa Marie Harrington Aisha Anne Harris Stewart Dennis Harris John Patrick Hart John Clinton Hartz Emeric Harvey Thomas Theodore Haskell, Jr. Timothy Haskell Joseph John Hasson III Leonard W. Hatton Terence S. Hatton Michael Haub Timothy Aaron Haviland Donald G. Havlish, Jr. Anthony Hawkins Nobuhiro Hayatsu Philip Hayes William Ward Haynes Scott Jordan Hazelcorn Michael K. Healey Roberta B. Heber Charles Francis Xavier Heeran John F. Heffernan H. Joseph Heller, Jr. Joann L. Heltibridle Mark F. Hemschoot Ronnie Lee Henderson Brian Hennessey Michelle Marie Henrique Joseph Henry William Henry John Christopher Henwood Robert Allan Hepburn Mary Herencia Lindsay C. Herkness III Harvey Robert Hermer Claribel Hernandez Eduardo Hernandez Nuberto Hernandez Raul Hernandez Gary Herold Jeffrey A. Hersch Thomas Hetzel Brian Hickey Ysidro Hidalgo Timothy Higgins Robert D. W. Higley II Todd Russell Hill Clara Victorine Hinds Neal O. Hinds Mark D. Hindy Katsuyuki Hirai Heather Malia Ho Tara Yvette Hobbs Thomas Anderson Hobbs James J. Hobin Robert Wayne Hobson DaJuan Hodges Ronald George Hoerner Patrick A. Hoey Marcia Hoffman Stephen G. Hoffman Frederick Joseph Hoffmann Michele L. Hoffmann Judith Florence Hofmiller Thomas Warren Hohlweck, Jr. Jonathan R. Hohmann John Holland Joseph F. Holland Elizabeth Holmes Thomas Holohan Bradley Hoorn James P. Hopper Montgomery McCullough Hord Michael Horn Matthew Douglas Horning Robert L. Horohoe, Jr. Aaron Horwitz Charles Houston Uhuru G. Houston George Howard Michael C. Howell Steven Leon Howell Jennifer L. Howley Milagros Hromada Marian R. Hrycak Stephen Huczko, Jr. Kris Robert Hughes Paul Rexford Hughes Robert Thomas Hughes Thomas Hughes Timothy Robert Hughes Susan Huie Lamar Hulse William Christopher Hunt Kathleen Anne Hunt-Casey Joseph Hunter Robert R. Hussa Abid Hussain Thomas Edward Hynes Walter G. Hynes Joseph Anthony Ianelli Zuhtu Ibis Jonathan Lee Ielpi Michael Iken Daniel Ilkanayev Frederick Ill, Jr. Abraham Nethanel Ilowitz Anthony P. Infante, Jr. Louis S. Inghilterra, Jr. Christopher Noble Ingrassia Paul Innella Stephanie Veronica Irby Douglas Irgang Kristin A. Irvine Ryan Todd Antione Isaac Erik Isbrandtsen Taizo Ishikawa Aram Iskenderian, Jr. John F. Iskyan Kazushige Ito Aleksandr Valeryevich Ivantsov Virginia May Jablonski Brooke Alexandra Jackman Aaron Jeremy Jacobs Ariel Louis Jacobs Jason Kyle Jacobs Michael Grady Jacobs Steven A. Jacobson Ricknauth Jaggernauth Jake Denis Jagoda Yudh Vir Singh Jain Maria Jakubiak Ernest James Gricelda E. James Priscilla James Mark Steven Jardim Muhammadou Jawara Francois Jean-Pierre Maxima Jean-Pierre Paul Edward Jeffers Alva Cynthia Jeffries Sanchez Joseph Jenkins, Jr. Alan Keith Jensen Prem N. Jerath Farah Jeudy Hweidar Jian Eliezer Jimenez, Jr. Luis Jimenez, Jr. Fernando Jimenez-Molina Charles Gregory John Nicholas John LaShawna Johnson Scott Michael Johnson William R. Johnston Allison Horstmann Jones Arthur Joseph Jones Brian Leander Jones Christopher D. Jones Donald T. Jones Donald W. Jones Linda Jones Mary S. Jones Andrew Jordan Robert Thomas Jordan Albert Gunnia Joseph Guylene Joseph Ingeborg Joseph Karl Henry Joseph Stephen Joseph Jane Eileen Josiah Anthony Jovic Angel L. Juarbe, Jr. Karen Sue Juday Mychal F. Judge Paul William Jurgens Thomas Edward Jurgens Kacinga Kabeya Shashikiran Lakshmikantha Kadaba Gavkharoy Kamardinova Shari Kandell Howard Lee Kane Jennifer Lynn Kane Vincent D. Kane Joon Koo Kang Sheldon Robert Kanter Deborah H. Kaplan Alvin Peter Kappelmann, Jr. Charles Karczewski William A. Karnes Douglas Gene Karpiloff Charles L. Kasper Andrew K. Kates John Katsimatides Robert Michael Kaulfers Don Jerome Kauth, Jr. Hideya Kawauchi Edward T. Keane Richard M. Keane Lisa Yvonne Kearney-Griffin Karol Ann Keasler Paul Hanlon Keating Leo Russell Keene III Joseph John Keller Peter R. Kellerman Joseph P. Kellett Frederick H. Kelley, Jr. James Joseph Kelly Joseph A. Kelly Maurice P. Kelly Richard John Kelly, Jr. Thomas Michael Kelly Thomas Richard Kelly Thomas W. Kelly Timothy Colin Kelly William Hill Kelly, Jr. Robert Clinton Kennedy Thomas J. Kennedy John R. Keohane Ronald T. Kerwin Howard L. Kestenbaum Douglas D. Ketcham Ruth Ellen Ketler Boris Khalif Sarah Khan Taimour Firaz Khan Rajesh Khandelwal Oliva Khemrat SeiLai Khoo Michael Kiefer Satoshi Kikuchihara Andrew Jay-Hoon Kim Lawrence D. Kim Mary Jo Kimelman Andrew M. King Lucille Teresa King Robert King, Jr. Lisa King-Johnson Takashi Kinoshita Chris Michael Kirby Howard Barry Kirschbaum Glenn Davis Kirwin Helen Crossin Kittle Richard Joseph Klares Peter Anton Klein Alan David Kleinberg Karen Joyce Klitzman Ronald Philip Kloepfer Evgueni Kniazev Andrew Knox Thomas Patrick Knox Rebecca Lee Koborie Deborah A. Kobus Gary Edward Koecheler Frank J. Koestner Ryan Kohart Vanessa Kolpak Irina Kolpakova Suzanne Kondratenko Abdoulaye Kone Bon-Seok Koo Dorota Kopiczko Scott Kopytko Bojan Kostic Danielle Kousoulis John J. Kren William E. Krukowski Lyudmila Ksido Shekhar Kumar Kenneth Kumpel Frederick Kuo, Jr. Patricia Kuras Nauka Kushitani Thomas Kuveikis Victor Kwarkye Kui Fai Kwok Angela Reed Kyte Andrew La Corte Amarnauth Lachhman James Patrick Ladley Joseph A. LaFalce Jeanette Louise Lafond-Menichino David Laforge Michael Laforte Alan Charles LaFrance Juan Lafuente Neil Kwong-Wah Lai Vincent Anthony Laieta William David Lake Franco Lalama Chow Kwan Lam Stephen LaMantia Amy Hope Lamonsoff Nickola Lampley Robert Lane Brendan Mark Lang Rosanne P. Lang Vanessa Langer Mary Louise Langley Peter J. Langone Thomas Michael Langone Michele Bernadette Lanza Ruth Sheila Lapin Carol Ann LaPlante Ingeborg Lariby Robin Blair Larkey Christopher Randall Larrabee Hamidou S. Larry Scott Larsen John Adam Larson Gary Edward Lasko Nicholas Craig Lassman Paul Laszczynski Jeffrey G. LaTouche Charles Laurencin Stephen James Lauria Maria LaVache Denis Francis Lavelle Jeannine Mary LaVerde Anna A. Laverty Steven Lawn Robert Lawrence Nathaniel Lawson Eugen Gabriel Lazar James Patrick Leahy Joseph Gerard Leavey Neil Joseph Leavy Leon Lebor Kenneth Charles Ledee Alan J. Lederman Elena F. Ledesma Alexis Leduc David S. Lee Gary H. Lee Hyun Joon Lee Juanita Lee Kathryn Blair Lee Linda C. Lee Lorraine Mary Lee Myoung Woo Lee Richard Y. Lee Stuart Soo-Jin Lee Yang Der Lee Stephen Paul Lefkowitz Adriana Legro Edward Joseph Lehman Eric Andrew Lehrfeld David Leistman David Prudencio Lemagne Joseph Anthony Lenihan John Joseph Lennon, Jr. John Robinson Lenoir Jorge Luis Leon Matthew Gerard Leonard Michael Lepore Charles A. Lesperance Jeff Leveen John Dennis Levi Alisha Caren Levin Neil David Levin Robert Levine Robert Michael Levine Shai Levinhar Adam Jay Lewis Margaret Susan Lewis Ye Wei Liang Orasri Liangthanasarn Daniel F. Libretti Ralph Licciardi Edward Lichtschein Steven Barry Lillianthal Carlos R. Lillo Craig Damian Lilore Arnold A. Lim Darya Lin Wei Rong Lin Nickie L. Lindo Thomas V. Linehan, Jr. Robert Thomas Linnane Alan P. Linton, Jr. Diane Theresa Lipari Kenneth Lira Francisco Alberto Liriano Lorraine Lisi Paul Lisson Vincent M. Litto Ming-Hao Liu Nancy Liz Harold Lizcano Martin Lizzul George A. Llanes Elizabeth C. Logler Catherine Lisa Loguidice Jerome Robert Lohez Michael William Lomax Laura Maria Longing Salvatore Lopes Daniel Lopez George Lopez Luis Manuel Lopez Manuel L. Lopez Joseph Lostrangio Chet Dek Louie Stuart Seid Louis Joseph Lovero Jenny Seu Kueng Low Wong Michael W. Lowe Garry W. Lozier John Peter Lozowsky Charles Peter Lucania Edward Hobbs Luckett Mark Gavin Ludvigsen Lee Charles Ludwig Sean Thomas Lugano Daniel Lugo Marie Lukas William Lum, Jr. Michael P. Lunden Christopher Lunder Anthony Luparello Gary Frederick Lutnick William Lutz Linda Anne Luzzicone Alexander Lygin Farrell Peter Lynch James Francis Lynch Louise A. Lynch Michael Cameron Lynch Michael F. Lynch Michael Francis Lynch Richard D. Lynch, Jr. Robert Henry Lynch, Jr. Sean P. Lynch Sean Patrick Lynch Michael J. Lyons Monica Anne Lyons Patrick Lyons Robert Francis Mace Jan Maciejewski Catherine Fairfax Macrae Richard Blaine Madden Simon Maddison Noell Maerz Jennieann Maffeo Joseph Maffeo Jay Robert Magazine Brian Magee Charles Wilson Magee Joseph V. Maggitti Ronald Magnuson Daniel L. Maher Thomas Anthony Mahon William J. Mahoney Joseph Daniel Maio Takashi Makimoto Abdu Ali Malahi Debora I. Maldonado Myrna T. Maldonado-Agosto Alfred Russell Maler Gregory James Malone Edward Francis Maloney III Joseph Maloney Gene Edward Maloy Christian Maltby Francisco Miguel Mancini Joseph Mangano Sara Elizabeth Manley Debra Mannetta Marion Victoria Manning Terence John Manning James Maounis Joseph Ross Marchbanks, Jr. Peter Edward Mardikian Edward Joseph Mardovich Charles Joseph Margiotta Kenneth Joseph Marino Lester V. Marino Vita Marino Kevin Marlo Jose Marrero John Marshall James Martello Michael A. Marti Peter C. Martin William J. Martin, Jr. Brian E. Martineau Betsy Martinez Edward Martinez Jose Angel Martinez, Jr. Robert Gabriel Martinez Victor Martinez Pastrana Lizie D. Martinez-Calderon Paul Richard Martini Joseph A. Mascali Bernard Mascarenhas Stephen Frank Masi Nicholas George Massa Patricia Ann Massari Michael Massaroli Philip William Mastrandrea, Jr. Rudolph Mastrocinque Joseph Mathai Charles Mathers William A. Mathesen Marcello Matricciano Margaret Elaine Mattic Robert D. Mattson Walter Matuza Charles A. Mauro, Jr. Charles J. Mauro Dorothy Mauro Nancy T. Mauro Tyrone May Keithroy Marcellus Maynard Robert J. Mayo Kathy Nancy Mazza Edward Mazzella, Jr. Jennifer Lynn Mazzotta Kaaria Mbaya James Joseph McAlary Brian McAleese Patricia Ann McAneney Colin Robert McArthur John Kevin McAvoy Kenneth M. McBrayer Brendan McCabe Micheal McCabe Thomas McCann Justin McCarthy Kevin M. McCarthy Michael McCarthy Robert McCarthy Stanley McCaskill Katie Marie McCloskey Joan McConnell-Cullinan Charles Austin McCrann Tonyell F. McDay Matthew T. McDermott Joseph P. McDonald Brian Grady McDonnell Michael P. McDonnell John McDowell, Jr. Eamon J. McEneaney John Thomas McErlean, Jr. Daniel Francis McGinley Mark Ryan McGinly William E. McGinn Thomas Henry MCGinnis Michael Gregory McGinty Ann McGovern Scott Martin McGovern William McGovern Stacey Sennas McGowan Francis Noel McGuinn Patrick McGuire Thomas M. McHale Keith McHeffey Ann M. McHugh Denis J. McHugh III Dennis McHugh Michael E. McHugh Robert G. McIlvaine Donald James McIntyre Stephanie Marie McKenna Barry J. McKeon Evelyn C. McKinnedy Darryl Leron McKinney George Patrick McLaughlin, Jr. Robert C. McLaughlin, Jr. Gavin McMahon Robert D. McMahon Edmund McNally Daniel W. McNeal Walter Arthur McNeil Jisley McNish Christine Sheila McNulty Sean Peter McNulty Robert McPadden Terence A. McShane Timothy Patrick McSweeney Martin E. McWilliams Rocco A. Medaglia Abigail Cales Medina Ana Iris Medina Deborah Louise Medwig Damian Meehan William J. Meehan Alok Mehta Raymond Meisenheimer Manuel Emilio Mejia Eskedar Melaku Antonio Melendez Mary Melendez Yelena Melnichenko Stuart Todd Meltzer Diarelia Jovanah Mena Charles Mendez Lizette Mendoza Shevonne Olicia Mentis Steven Mercado Westly Mercer Ralph Joseph Mercurio Alan Harvey Merdinger George L. Merino Yamel Merino George Merkouris Deborah Merrick Raymond Joseph Metz III Jill Ann Metzler David Robert Meyer Nurul H. Miah William Edward Micciulli Martin Paul Michelstein Peter Teague Milano Gregory Milanowycz Lukasz Tomasz Milewski Sharon Christina Millan Corey Peter Miller Craig James Miller Douglas Charles Miller Henry Alfred Miller, Jr. Joel Miller Michael Matthew Miller Philip D. Miller Rob Sat, 11 Sep 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=024E02D4-123F-7491-A487405D0B5D81B7 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=CE57B1B3-123F-7491-A4A5FD4D7ADA26B1 [b]Creation: The Genesis of Adam and Eve[/b] One of the most disputed ideologies in the history of modern civilization has been the debate between creationists and evolutionists. The subject is such an important discussion that entire societies have been engineered behind either of these ideologies. What is important in regards to this fascinating debate is the diametric differences in its laws. Evolution promotes a progression of a species wherein is found no initial moment where the species was created. This theory comes into conflict with faith in God. Evolutionists believe that life was created, by chance, as single-celled organisms. Over the course of millions of years, these single-celled lifeforms evolved into multi-celled organisms, eventually evolving into apes (and, later, into humans). In the eyes of the evolutionist, man is simply an advanced animal. Creationists believe as the bible reads and have been taught that humans were created to rule and manage the Earth as the supreme creation; all of creation (plants, animals, minerals, waters) was subordinated to the rule of men - even the angels, though more powerful, were less free - and mankind was to steward the resources of the earth. At the hands of Almighty God, man was created in His image - as an expression of both His perfection and His majesty. Through the exercise of free will - and in disobedience to God's will - man became separated from the perfect Creator and was required to take responsibility for his own imperfect, mortal life. It is this explanation that suits the laws of nature perfectly. Let us now explore the Scripture and the meaning, which meaning is completely relevant to the laws of nature. [i] 15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die." (Genesis 2)[/i] It is in this passage of Genesis that God commanded Adam not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. At this point, man was empowered with the gift of free will. God’s command was the engineering that is to guide man's perfection and immortality. The creation of woman has always been controversial - especially since it literally reads that woman was created from the rib of man: [i]21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, He took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib. He had taken out of the man, and He brought her to the man. 23 The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called 'woman', for she was taken out of man." 24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. (Genesis 2)[/i] The symbolism here is extremely important. There is nothing more fundamental than the physiological metaphor here, representing the key to one of the most important laws of nature: the law of creation. In a submissive measure, God takes from man’s chest a rib and creates woman from it. The creation of woman, at the hands of God, by the gift from man has powerful implications that span the roles of sexual behavior, the submissiveness of man to the woman's needs as well as the submissiveness of the woman for the man's needs. In the act of making love the courting that takes place between husband and wife prior to the act of creation is an extremely complicated interaction where both male and female becomes submissive to each other. At the time when the couple consummates their love, they become one flesh; man is intended to deliver or give to the woman as she is intended to receive. This law is realized in all aspects of interaction between man and woman. The physical phallic feature of man is evidence of the natural design of man to be the give. The female's vagina is the receiver of the man’s phallus which is necessary to create life. This unity is apparent in all things. Outside of human sexuality, simple engineering reflects this natural law. Bolts fit into nuts, light builds fit into a light socket, an electrical cord plug fits into a socket, etc, etc, etc. The engineering doesn't work without the unification of both items. This is a fundamental in natural law. [i]1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" 2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' " 4 "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." 6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves. (Genesis 2)[/i] This passage is filled with symbolism and allegory. First of all, we must confront the serpent and understand what the serpent represents. At face value, a valid explanation of what the serpent represents is temptation towards sin. Evil corrupts the nature of man and pulls him towards sin. (There is also the symbol of the serpent living in the ground - implying its access to deep and hidden knowledge) But what else is the bible telling us? In Hebrew, there is phonetic similarity between hawah, "Eve," and the verbal root hayah, "to live." It has been proposed that Eve's name conceals very different origins, for it sounds suspiciously like the Aramaic word for 'serpent'. This reference isn’t intended to degrade the woman or relate her to the serpent’s sinful nature in Genesis. It does however represent the model of a woman and her roles defined in the metaphysical role in her relation to man. The gravity of her role to receive is complimentary to man's role to give. This is fundamental in the laws of nature because temptation is the gravity towards the submission to the receiver which can be sacred or sinful. Obviously the purpose of the gravity for the woman to receive is to perpetuate life through the sacred act of creation; the sin is to denigrate it. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/Kundalini.jpg[/img] In Hindu philosophy, the Kundalini - which means "coiled" - is said to be a libidinal force representing self realization coiled at the bottom of the spine in the pelvic area and is released upon meditation, a traumatic physical event, or even sexual activity. It is said to be the residual power of pure desire. In the practice of yogic meditation, the Garden of Eden represents the quiet and blissful destination of the meditator. In order to awaken the inner self, the meditator must eliminate all thought in order to awaken the Kundalini. However, being tempted by the libidinal forces to pollute the purity by the blissful quiet destination with impure thoughts created is fundamental. Thoughts are from the mortal self and are not welcome in the spiritual realm that the meditator has journeyed to. In Kabbalah – Jewish Mysticism – the serpent is represented in the tree of life as it follows the natural ascension to the top of the tree. This tree is said to be the tree of knowledge. As Kabbalah is a Gnostic – knowledge – belief system, the idea of the tree of knowledge is central to its philosophy. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/kabbalah.jpg[/img] The different circles in this diagram represent the sefirot, which is derived from the word Sefirah. Sefirah means “counting”. Kabbalah's mystical spirituality is made up of endless numerical references which act as channels through different vessels of spiritual energy. The tree is the concentration of the ten perceived emanations and attributes of God’s limitless power. Eating, for instance, is a form of satisfying desire - a needful and necessary satisfaction. Lusting for the knowledge from the tree for personal pleasure, however, is sinful - and using the powerful emanations of God to perpetuate personal acts of selfishness and desire is the penultimate sin. Therefore the tree is meant to assist in understanding and realizing the greatness of God - not for attaining to it. The sefirot from top to bottom list as follows: • Keter (supernal crown, representing above-conscious will) • Chochmah (The highest potential of thought) • Binah (the understanding of the potential) • Daat (intellect of knowledge) • Chesed (sometimes referred to as Gedolah-greatness) (loving-kindness) • Gevurah (sometimes referred to as Din-justice or Pachad-fear) (severity/strength) • Rachamim also known as Tiphereth (Mercy) • Netzach (victory/eternity) • Hod (glory/splendour) • Yesod (foundation) • Malkuth (kingdom) It is important to know that Kabbalah is an extremely complex and personal spiritual journey that is more aligned with spiritual meditation than religious devotion. It is not uncommon for a Christian to study Kabbalah, for it is a method of thought, study, and mediation - not a form of worship. As a person realizes God’s greatness in life, he or she can rise to the top of the tree through the center pillar of sefirot of the tree with actions of piety and purity. Monks, Rabbis, Priests, and other devoted pastors that practice extreme devotion to spiritual purity can follow this tough path to spiritual salvation. Most people take the approach differently by traveling up the tree, and back and forth across the tree through all of its sefirot. This path more resembles approaching life through realizing God’s beauty and greatness in the form of knowledge rather than the simple blind faith in natural law's principles. The difference between the two is the simple question of "why". It is through study of natural law and understanding the true relevance to the order of all things in our universe that the realization of God's great power and engineering is witnessed. This path is dangerous, however, because the snake resides there. The snake can easily tempt the student into using the knowledge for selfish means or lustful endeavors - which in turn causes one to commit unnatural sin. 12 The man said, "The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it." 13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." (Genesis 3) All people learn through mistakes in life; it has been said that people only learn through failure - often in the form of temptation, selfishness, self-centered action, or simple actions that don't abide by the rules of natural law. It is the snake that tempts us to look inside ourselves to find God rather than realize His greatness and the greatness in His works throughout the universe. Although this realization is enlightening and fulfilling, mortal man - in his limited understanding and imperfect perception - can never fully comprehend the greatness of God or all that He has engineered. Wed, 01 Sep 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=CE57B1B3-123F-7491-A4A5FD4D7ADA26B1 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=C61D031F-123F-7491-A4FB6688A00EB078 It took a couple of days to let what happened this weekend settle in. Washington DC was the stage for protests and unity rallies. Talk show host Glenn Beck and Al Sharpton were the two leaders calling on activists to Washington on a unforgettable day that has remained in riveted in American civil rights history. August 28th, 47 years ago, Martin Luther King Jr led over 200,000 civil rights supporters to the Lincoln Memorial where he delivered one of the most memorable and arguably one of the greatest speeches in human history. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/1Beck.jpg[/img] Every weekend on the [link=http://www.blogtalkradio.com/hottearadio]RockWorldWide[/link] internet radio show we play portions of the “I Have a Dream Speech”. Every time the speech is played, I think about the relevance of his message and how 47 years later, Martin Luther King Jr’s dream still hasn’t been realized. Instead of the manacles of segregation, the Negro has slowly been enslaved by the shackles of welfare and entitlements. Racism plays the same role today but at the hands of a different master. The federal government now is the plantation owner. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/5mall.jpg[/img] Glenn Beck took the opportunity to bring hundreds of thousands of liberty loving Americans together in a stand for honor. The restoration message not only included message that Martin Luther King Jr. prescribed but transcended the message of racial equality and resurrected the American foundational attributes of “Faith, Hope, and Charity”. For decades these attributes have slowly been segregated from our schools, from our, communities, and from our culture. Our faith has been oppressed, our hope has been bankrupted, and our Charity has been stolen. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/6Beck.jpg[/img] Beck's message was that of honor in order to take back what has been destroyed and defaced. The fundamental transformation of America had taken its toll on the soul and spirit of the American people and all that America stands for. He along with dozens of other true American hero’s, shared stories of honor as to help us refocus on what America’s purpose truly is. Sarah Palin, Alveda King, Albert Puljos, C.L. Jackson, and others introduced us to examples of American honor. They also reminded us who we are as Americans. For so long, our culture has been under assault by Progressive policies and a corrosion of morals which have been acting as a virus eating away our Faith, our Hope, and our will to be charitable. The recognition of our hero’s and the reminder of America’s Divine Providence, has given new light to what will save this last bastion of hope we call home. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/8Jackson.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/4Sarah.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/7Alveda.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/3pol.jpg[/img] As the country argues about the number of people that turned out to the event and the pundits argue that the Tea Party and Republican party has co-opted King’s message, the people that attended the rally and watched on C-Span know the truth. Honor stands up to and stands beyond the childish games of the main stream pundits. Honor stands up beyond politics for in order to be politically successful, one must have honor first. Honor stands up to the evil that wishes to destroy the free world that America tries to protect. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/2mall.jpg[/img] As we restore honor is this great place called America, we must remember that the only true power that Americans have is through the vote. Simply protesting and attending rallies will not turn the country around. Restoring honor to each individual is the first of many steps. Honor will however not fix all of this alone. We must take this honor that Beck spoke of and inspire those to stand up against the destructive methods of the Progressive movement. Honor is the oxygen enriched blood that pumps through the American heart. Without honor, the American organism is dead. Without the heart, the organism will also surely die. We must set examples as Americans not only by teaching but by acting. Words alone with not change the country. It takes hard work, sweat, and tears. It will also take votes. [link=http://www.specialops.org/?page=Make_A_Donation]Make a donation to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation[/link] Mon, 30 Aug 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=C61D031F-123F-7491-A4FB6688A00EB078 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=A7293066-123F-7491-A4493B739AF14C59 [b]Radical: Antonio Gramsci[/b] Antonio Gramsci is known as an Italian Neo-Marxist and member of the Italian Communist Party who was imprisoned by Benito Mussolini’s fascist regime. Gramsci can also be attributed to the creation of philosophic and sociological concept of cultural hegemony. It is very similar to the current political Progressive movement in the United States. Gramsci believed that diverse social classes can be effectively ruled by an elite intellectual class. This theory is the epitome of tribalism or simply communism. [i]Gradualism or Incrementalism[/i] Differing from Lenin and Stalin, Gramsci saw that violent revolution was a contradiction to human logic. He believed that the Communist would have to abandon all Leninist methods of revolution. Instead the Communist would have to get the national consensus through tradition democratic processes. He believed that a more sustainable and successful model for revolution was through a gradual and incremental cultural transformation. Gramsci believed that the Communist must justify any means in order to achieve the desired end even if it meant colluding with the enemy. This idea was the birth of modern Progressivism. [i]Cultural Destruction[/i] Gramsci witnessed the strength of a fortified Christian Europe during the early 1900’s. He rejected Christianity much like his Marxist brethren. He knew that Christianity was the bond that held together all classes. For this reason he knew that in order to achieve the utopian goal of communism, the Communist needed to destroy Christianity. In order to do this he knew that he would not only convince people to have a non-Christian mind but they would have to have an anti-Christian mind. He also knew that the proletariat would have to learn to solve problems without the transcendent aspects of Christianity. Gramsci saw a way to achieve these ends by the use of Liberation Theology. Liberation Theology would not only create a new type of radical revolutionary but would also discourage the more conservative religious follower. Gramsci also believed that Common sense was an illusion. [i]Common sense is not something rigid and stationary, but is in continuous transformation, becoming enriched with scientific notions and philosophical opinions that have entered into common circulation. 'Common sense' is the folklore of philosophy and always stands midway between folklore proper (folklore as it is normally understood) and the philosophy, science, and economics of the scientists. Common sense creates the folklore of the future, a relatively rigidified phase of popular knowledge in a given time and place[/i]. Gramsci led the way for modern day Progressivism. Cultural destruction was imperative for the installation of communism. In order to fundamentally transform the country to the Marxist utopia, a complete cultural transformation was needed. The people would have to reject the intangible and unfathomable greatness of God for the finite knowledge and fallible essence of man. Gramsci’ revolution was not only to destroy humanity but was ultimately a war on God. Tue, 24 Aug 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=A7293066-123F-7491-A4493B739AF14C59 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=7DBDCD05-123F-7491-A46789DE1B52D33E Introduction Amongst the doctrines of religion, philosophy, and science, there is recognition of an unfathomable finite set of laws that govern the universe. The human mind is forever searching for these truths in order to increase man’s imprint on history through innovations and discoveries. There are those that uncover the truth and those that distort truth. When man finds a new truth, the discovery is delivered in many forms. The truth can be used for good and for evil. When Einstein discovered the power of nuclear energy, man’s relevance in history was propelled into a completely new phase of existence. Once this discovery was made, the power of nature was unleashed in many ways. It became a new source of energy as well as a weapon. The dropping of the two Atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were in retaliation to the Japanese empire’s imperialistic attacks on the United States. Regardless of the moral implications of dropping a nuclear weapon on another country, the bombings were a realization of the power of nature that can be harnessed by man. Obviously there is great responsibility needed when handling the power of nature. When used in a negative way, great destruction is possible. Many leaders in history have used the power of nature to control people as well as to kill them. Hydrogen Cyanide is a naturally occurring chemical that comes from apple seeds, cherry pits, apricot pits, bitter almonds and is one of the chemicals responsible for killing over a million Jews in World War II. The Nazi's had unleashed nature as a weapon. The United States unleashed the power of nature with the Atom bomb in the name of preserving liberty during WWII. Despite the reason, the power of nature could and has been used to destroy. As you read these pages, understand that the information detailed has been used and could be used to do wrong. By no means is this book going to detail anything supernatural. It will simply detail the people in history that uncovered natural law, their discoveries, the results of their discoveries, and the effects of their discoveries through history. What is most important and must be taken from the chapters of this book is that “Natural Law” was and is not created by man. It was created from the very core of creation. If you are a God fearing person, it must be understood as God’s engineering. The knowledge detailed here is only a mere grain of sand on the vast shorelines around the world. This outline of natural law is intended to unveil a snippet of the unfathomable equation of creation. What must be understood is that the creation of the most complicated and unfathomable set of laws discovered by science is not a matter of circumstance or a matter of chance. It is a matter of engineering and design. These laws were not created by man but simply discovered. As man uses the gifts that have been endowed by the creator, they simply realize the greatness of all that has been created. Religion and Faith is admiration and devotion to those or to the one that created. To disbelieve in a creator is to disbelieve in creation. All that we know has been created at some point. To take raw material and create a television or a radio is a matter of intelligent creation. A beaver creating a damn is a matter of intelligent creation. It would be foolish to believe that man exists by chance and not by intelligent creation. There has been great credit given to Darwin and his Theory of Evolution; however, no transitional species exists between monkey and man to make his theory true. There has been no creature or animal that has been able to create a watch or an automobile or a spacecraft. Humans have been the only intelligent life form that has been able to advance its species as Darwin would have it. Imagine mans advances in the last several thousand years and specifically over the last three hundred. Has there ever been an animal to do the same? These great advances were realized with the aid of discovery and practice of natural law. The laws that animals follow are simply instinctual obedience to these laws. Although natural law guides their instincts, they do little if anything to advance their species with these defined laws and more or less don’t realize they are their. Man however not only advances with these laws but also has the ability to recognize that they are a part of it. Man is able to understand the laws and follow them to advance their position different from their animal co-inhabitants. With man’s understanding of the laws of nature, there are those that wish to distort them. Those that wish to distort often look inside themselves to find their own laws rather then follow the rules that exist throughout all nature. These people often resort to instinctual behavior or more animalistic behavior due the the rationalization of there own egocentric intincts. This is obvious among the last hundred years as man has been slowly working towards the denial of the Creator. Darwin’s theory has been cuddled as a fact rather than a theory. Those that wish for this simply wish to justify that humans are only animals or mere decedents of animals. This justification would allow us to accept animal behavior from man along with the ability to treat people unbecoming of the defined and evolving man-made moral rules as we would treat animals. Societies that existed in this manner have been recognized as a failure as man can not fully comprehend the laws of nature nor can they fathom the ability to create them. People like Adolf Hitler, Vladimir Lenin, Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, and many other atheistic dictators thought that their insight was supreme and they could create their own defined laws to develop a Utopian society. Sadly this led to millions of deaths. The laws of nature could never be matched by man’s own laws. We can only try to interpret these laws and simply resemble them in our own governing. Only this will lead to liberty and life rather then tyranny and death. At the moment man’s history was recorded, the law of nature was documented. In the Bible there are thousands of references to natural law. As the most popular book in the history of the world, it is a great tool to understand how natural law was explained thousands of years ago. In the Bible it was the hands of God that crafted the law and it was man that was sent to realize and obey it. The Bible is filled with stories how man strayed away from the law and also how man gravitated back. In Period 1: The Age of the Prophets: We will explain how the Bible lead the way to explaining what took thousands of years for science to prove. The stories in the bible were not just a documentation of the philosophies of the day but the explanation of natural law. The laws of nature present themselves often and must be realized. The bible is not only a spiritual book but a philosophical one as well. In Period 2: The Age of the Philosophers: We will explain how philosophers took the next step and began detailing reason, rationalism, logic, mathematics, epistemology, empiricism, and metaphysics. In this period, the study of science wasn’t quite yet born as all things were discussed as in context to these modes of thinking. In this period, the great philosophers made way for science to prove what was debated and discussed during this period. In Period 3: The Age of the Scientist: We will explain how scientists and astronomers began to look into the vast spaces in our universe. The discovery that we are not the center of the universe is an even more humbling discovery as the mechanism that is the universe spins with little sense at this time but is a target for understanding by man’s simple and expanding mind. It was then that the world we once new as small became the universe that was too vast to comprehend. In Period 4: The Age of the Denier: We will explain the entropy of man’s acceptance of metaphysical thought. Despite the grand discoveries of the past three periods, the arrogance of man has drifted into materialism. During this time several bright stars of thought appear as do those of true darkness and death. Amongst the great prophets, philosophers, scientists, and classical thinkers, there is a common thread through all of their discoveries. The common thread is that of the laws of nature. Amongst those great thinkers have been insignificant ideological thinkers that pushed and pulled society away from operating along the lines of natural law and freedom into that of tyranny. The common thread can be explained as the singularity of zero in this Sine Wave chart below. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/sine.gif[/img] Societies that have checks and balances in place based on the law of nature often oscillate democratically around these fundamental principles. Societies that construct their constitution around these fundamentals will succeed. Those that don’t will become balkanized and fail as did Babel. Mon, 16 Aug 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=7DBDCD05-123F-7491-A46789DE1B52D33E http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=48672E0D-123F-7491-A440FFA839819815 In 1859 Charles Darwin published “Origin of Species”. Evolution was the ideology as revolution was its by-product. Darwin’s trip around the world on the Beagle would introduce him to all of the land, which would be the targets for conquer of the revolutionaries that he would inspire. His theory was a radical and revolutionary idea that would be the beginning of the destruction of mankind. Such a bold statement considering the "Theory of Evolution" is an ideology that is taught in just about every school in the United States. In order to validate this bold statement, we must truly understand Darwin core philosophy - "Conflict was the fundamental law of nature". Darwin believed that humans were simply animals that had progressed through conflict. Animals that were inferior to other animals were made extinct. What is principle in this discussion is that Darwin believed that humans were not any different than animals in our ecosystem. We were simply more advanced – not superior. It is important to realize that during his time of study, Hegelian dialectic process and the ancient philosophy of materialism dominated the enlightenment period and heavily influenced Darwin. So what is it that is so destructive about these philosophies and most importantly Darwin’s theory of evolution? If we are to assume by Darwin’s unproved theory that all humans are advanced animals, we must assume that were are equal to animals in the way that we achieve success and survival in life. Animals are instinctual and operate under no moral and ethical means. The ends are the only importance. In nature animals are known to eat their young and kill their own kind in order to achieve success and survive. Is it under the belief of Darwin that it is acceptable for humans to kill our own kind in order to achieve success? Absolutely it is. To explain this statement, we must not look to Darwin but to those that he influenced. As mentioned before, dialectic process and materialism was what heavily influenced Darwin. It must be understood that the marrying of these two ideologies is what has influenced the killings of millions of innocent people. Karl Marx’s and Friedrich Engels’ theory of dialectic materialism was the nucleus to their ideology of communism. They believed that in order for a society to move forward, it must progress through conflict. This would be done through tangible means not through the means of morality and ethics. Those disillusioned by religion and intangible metaphysical containers such as the soul were simply those inferior and not meant to survive the next phase of humanity. Through the conflict of the Middle Ages and through the imperialism that existed in Europe and Asia, Marx and Engels saw that the enslavement of the people was propagated by false beliefs in gods, fear of devils and demons, and the faith in capitalism. Religion and faith in God was simply and opiate allowing us to ignore our animal instincts and conflict. Capitalism, in the minds of Marx and Engels, created the intangible idea of value that could be manipulated. Value was a false evaluation of material or simply a false interpretation of materialism. How often do you hear ridicule of people that are materialistic? It is the lack of appreciation for the individual’s sense of value that produces this ridicule or simply envy for the others material. It is these aspects of the human mind - often identified as Objectification or Alienation - that are the primal instincts that Marx and Engels wished to attack with their fundamental belief of class conflict. So how was the conflict implemented? Revolution is the faith of the communist. In order to progress there must be revolution. Order and peace are simply an allusion. Instead of individual ingenuity and success being used as an engine to propel a society to the forefront of world culture, the communist believes in a collection of elites to use the masses as cogs of the Communist machine. This takes social engineering to do. It is the goal of the Progressive to engineer this social machine which will lead to the intended social utopia known as a communism. Some of the examples of this engineering is evident in the public school system. To the Progressive, the old ideology of capitalism or should I just quote Progressives – “the failed policies of the past” – is the chaotic mechanism that doesn’t control the masses enough. In the American public school system, developed by Progressive ideologues like John Dewey, the method of critical thinking was developed which pushed American culture away from teaching history and math and rather pushed it towards psychology and analysis. This is not intended to disregard the importance of levels of critical thinking and analysis but to base an entire education system on the teachings of looking for ways to critically dissolve fact with personal experience is to replace logic and common sense for the irrational and unpredictable instincts of feelings and emotions. This is dialect process. Herbert Marcuse, an emigrated Marxist from the Frankfurt School of Germany, brought the teachings of Marx, Darwin, and Freud to the forefront in higher education. His publication Eros and Civilization, which he wrote while teaching at Columbia University, explained how the moral and ethical mechanisms of society were simply the repression of our natural animal instincts. He believed that Freud’s vision that these instincts needed to be repressed for a civil society to survive was incorrect. Marcuse believed that in order for civilization to progress, it needed to release the repression and allow animal instincts to create conflict. He believed that the human animal needed to be released from the chains of false intangible morality. Together these two ideological attributes were the incarnation of Marx and Engels in America and encompassed the humanistic agenda and philosophy of the 20th century. This revolutionary philosophy was the epitome of what Darwin’s influence delivered. Instead the philosophy disconnected humans from the truth. The truth is that no man or woman can engineer a society without eliminating the dissidents. The idea that conflict was necessary for societies to progress collectively would be elevated. When you harness the instincts of an animal in order to tame the animal, one must understand the true instincts of an animal. Those instincts are fear and greed. When resurrecting these immoral emotions in man, you will achieve the desired result. These two polar opposites can not exist without the other. When a tyrannical top down authoritarian government wishes to impose its will on its people, not all are willing to be submissive to the government’s policy. It is then when these polar opposites resurrect. In a violent communist revolution by a power hungry government or a power hungry governing power, the struggle then becomes between the fearful dissident and the fearful subservient. The conflict of those that approve of the government and those that disapprove fight each other as the dissident becomes exposed and imprisoned or even executed. In a milder Progressive revolution, the dissident is polarized and ridiculed. This is a Marxian /Alinskian tactic. This polarizing conflict is the conflict that Darwin saw in all species. Sadly these polarities were the cause of the millions of deaths around the world. When Mao Zedong, saw that society was not progressing, he encouraged violence and ridicule. The teachers that were not performing good communism – these were any dissident teachers - were drug out into the streets and ridiculed by the students. In the incredible documentary [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGALXESB61A&feature=related] "The History of Bloody Communism"[/link], you will see evidence of this tactic. Marxists preach that equality is the center of its ideology. What is truly the center of this so-called equality is death. In order to achieve this Utopian equality, there must be none that wish to break from the march of communism. Anyone that sees opportunity to separate themselves as an individual is removed from the collective. In order for the society to be equalized there must be no power amongst the people that could derail the dictator’s or central oligarchy’s influence. The communist is impelled to search for dissidents and eliminate the threat to the beloved communism. Eventually when the leader or leader’s vision fails and the population becomes dissatisfied, the leader’s last resort is to produce mass killings in order to reinstall the fear and remove the threat for the benefit of the collective. Lenin and Stalin did this to great lengths during their regimes killing up to 100 million people. In the documentary [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTb15NTPQ0Y&feature=fvw]"The History of Bloody Communism"[/link] you can see further how this truth rings loudly. So what has American done that has kept the power of the people in the hands of “We the People”? It is the United States Constitution. Our founding fathers drafted a documented that sought to remove all of the power from the government and put it in the hands of the people. It sought to eliminate the ideological and single dimensional ideas of a leading individual and empower the ideas of the mass of individuals under one flag. The founders knew that no single man could fathom the wants and desires of all men and women. The founders also respected all the wants and desires of all men and women by creating a document that would guarantee it. They chose to allow free men and women to choose their future instead of it being engineered and dictated to them by a single leader. Our founding fathers knew that in order for the world to be free, America had to be free. They knew that freedom would prevail as long as we stayed true to the founding of our great nation. It was apparent to them that in order for a small government to exist, we must be self governed as humans separate from animals. In their declaration of our purpose – The Declaration of Independence – our founders wrote, “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor. This is the battle cry of American liberty and freedom. It wasn’t a battle cry of internal conflict but protecting against external conflict. The declaration was that of man’s unity and freedom, not of animal’s greed and fear. They pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor as the eternal freely chosen sacrifice to press forward and truly progress. It wasn’t to destroy property, destroy morality, and to destroy life. Progressivism is Communism. Its followers just walk a little softer. It is incremental in its aims of controlling the people. Progressives claim to be the elite engineers who are all knowing and able to create a perfect utopia. They are in essence trying to build a “Tower of Babel”. They wish to make us all in their image and convince us all to unite as one collective by sacrificing our rights and property. They wish for us to ridicule those that don’t wish to follow in their elite path. They operate to remove the amendments of American exceptionalism which exist in the United States of America for the ideas of the founders are extinct and outdated. They believe that the Constitution is a living and breathing document and is being repressed from its true incarnation of Fabian Socialism or Marxism. It is time America to stop ignoring the foreign European Marxist ideology and speak out publically against it. The word Communism didn’t die with the removal of the Iron Curtain. The removal of the curtain was an illusion painted by the Communists. We now exist within that evil curtain. Has Communism disappeared? Is Hugo Chavez a all loving leader or a tyrannical Communist dictator. Is Vladimir Putin and strong virtuous leader or a methodical tyrant waiting to strike? Is the Communist Chinese planning our demise by enabling our government’s purposeful thirst for debt? America, it is time to turn on the lights and rid ourselves of these destructive ideologies. It is time for a new Declaration or we will succumb to the animal’s appetite for destruction. Now is the time. for further research on the progression of secular socialism read [link=http://lanternsofliberty.us/Publication.cfm]The Machine[/link]. Fri, 06 Aug 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=48672E0D-123F-7491-A440FFA839819815 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=2033B704-123F-7491-A4C4EA98B81E3F6B Magicians often use slight of hand in order to give the illusion or perception of something that simply isn’t true. Whether it is making something seem to disappear or making something seem to change characteristics like color, shape, or size, slight of hand is the skill that the magician must master in order to he praised as a good magician. Could we compare our politicians to magicians? Are we being snookered much like NAACP’s President Ben Jealous claims to have been snookered by the recent firing of Shirley Sherrod? America needs to watch the hands. The ideological liberal left wing in America has always demonized big business. They have always pressured big businesses with wealth threatening regulations and support for union groups. Ideologically the Progressive is to the left of the ideological liberal as we have discussed in the [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/Publication.cfm] “The Machine”[/link]. We have outlined in great detail how the Progressive movement is using a road of socialism through progressive and incremental policy to usurp the liberties of Americans in order to install a top-down totalitarian statist regime. Differing from the ideological liberal, Progressives do not operate under a set of fixed moral or ethical rules. They operate within the ever metamorphosing radical rules of Alinsky or amongst the planks of communism. As the liberal wishes to put pressure on big business, the Progressive wishes to destroy big business and the “Free Enterprise” system that it thrives in. These claims are bold but true. I will explain soon enough. If we are to truly credit the Progressive movement with the methods of Karl Marx, we must understand Marxism. Specifically we must understand the social and economic nature in which Marxism was proposed in European and Asian countries in the early 1900’s. Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto was written during a very turbulent and transitional time in Europe. With the remnants of imperialistic tyrannies and the memories of the dark ages of feudal kings, the “Age of Enlightenment” was offering alternatives to the imperial and theocratic governmental philosophies. Karl Marx recognized that troubled peasants and the working class which he labeled as the Proletariat was being abused by the ruling class or otherwise labeled the Bourgeoisie. Revolution was the only solution that he saw to correcting this social injustice. Progressives see the same injustice; however, the Progressive revolution is a gradual and incremental revolution rather than an abrupt violent revolution. In America the Progressive is faced with a dilemma that Karl Marx was not confronted with. America has a complicated layer of citizens without defined classes. Americans are free through the market system to enter and exit all layers freely depending on the individual’s level of success. Progressives saw the need to develop classes in order to balkanize the American people in order for the communist revolution to occur. They saw that hrough dialectic materialism and dialectic process, this could be achieved. [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/Publication.cfm] “The Machine”[/link] details the entire process as it has been laid out and implemented in America since the early 1900’s. Recently congress passed the “Restoring American Financial Stability Act” which is simply known as the Financial Reform bill. Barack Obama claimed that the bill was the most sweeping regulating legislation since the Great Depression. First of all, the regulations don’t punish big banking institutions that abuse the system. In fact it punishes the smaller banks or any business that offers any type of financing, except for auto dealers. The regulations will implement a mountain of paperwork creating huge staffing burdens on businesses. The bill is said to actually bring the big banks even closer into the circles of Washington’s political bureaucracies. Will this fix the banking system? Do we need more back room deals? Is a fix the intention? Chris Dodd and Barney Frank, who developed this legislation, definitely contributed to the housing crisis. Who is to say they will not do it again with this reckless legislation and a little destructive slight of hand? Margaret S Miller explains in several publications explained in great detail how Lenin allowed the banking system along with the capitalist economy to collapse in order to install the Communist [link=http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119801006/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0 ]“New Economic Policy”[/link]. He slowly seized control of the banks and shut down much of the economic financing. The lack of financing by Soviet banking institutions forced people to trade without currency and forced them to return back to a more primitive form of simple trade. The fundamental aspect of free enterprise (capitalism) is creating and increasing value of private property. If you destroy this mechanism, wealth is diminished and the free market dies. We are experiencing this now in America. On top of this, huge tax burdens will further cripple the middle class. After this is done, the American majority middle class will recess into the minority lower class. This creates the new majority lower class or the Proletariat. The minor upper class is barely affected by financing problems because they are capable of self financing. All along they have been vilified as they are partnered with the major businesses that have been propped up by the shady political deals. They then become the target and the Bourgeoisie. This Balkanizing is fueled by propaganda and eventually ends up in massive destruction of the Bourgeoisie. The only ones to survive economically or even physically in a terrible violent take over are the ruling political class. They then become the Politburo. At this point, America will be dissolved and the United Union of America will be born. All of this will be done by the slick hands of the Progressive Magician. Thu, 29 Jul 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=2033B704-123F-7491-A4C4EA98B81E3F6B http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=E74DA804-123F-7491-A4559CC9DA276CFA Recently, I have been involved in conversations about the future of the Tea Party movement. What was mostly discussed was the pursuit of fiscal issues rather than social issues. What is a social issue? Is education a social issue? Is immigration a social issue? Is Social Security a social issue? Is socialism a social issue? Is racism a social issue? Get the point? It seems that many in the Tea Party movement do not wish to discuss social issues as if they are not relevant or too controversial. This is a completely absurd position. In fact the social issues are intertwined with the fiscal issues. When over $9000 of federal tax dollars is being spent per public school student, I would say that this is a fiscal issue. When untethered multiculturalism drives our companies and government agencies to facilitate multilingual options, which impede productivity and cause incalculable loss of profit, I would say that this is a fiscal issue. When our country is being progressively and incrementally shifted to a more socialist system which makes our country more vulnerable to a totalitarian state where all private property is dissolved, I would say that this is a fiscal issue. When you wish to cherry pick arguments about fiscal responsibility, you leave huge gaps in the point of the argument and your message is incomplete and you fail to recognize the real enemy to American liberty - tyranny. Within the pages of the recent healthcare bill, the fulcrum of the debate was in fact one of the most controversial social debates in American history. Bart Stupak held the future to the bill in his hands with the bill’s abortion language in question. If Bart Stupak truly saw this provision as an unconstitutional and completely unethical policy, we may not be in the fight we are in today to repeal this liberty stealing law. Do we as Americans believe that abortion is something that should not be debated any longer? Does the Tea Party recognize that the Abortion issue was what could have blocked the passage of this un-constitutional healthcare legislation? In talking with many Tea Party members, many say that they are against abortion but want to keep it out of the Tea Party message for it is too controversial. Is this hypocritical? How many times have we Tea Partiers heard that we need to focus on the fiscal issues and then we can debate the social issues at a later date when we have incrementally taken the power back? Isn’t this the same despicable dialectic process that we accuse the Progressives of using in order it install socialism in our democratic process? I would say yes. If we can’t speak freely about issues that are directly connected to the fiscal issues how can we expect to be complete in the message. Without conviction for our beliefs as conservatives we will drift down the path of moderation and political ambiguity. That candidate lost the Presidential election in 2008. Recently there was a great uproar in the media about a Tea Party billboard that feature Hilter, Lenin, and Obama. The comparison was to campaign signs of each leader. All three leaders campaigned on change. The sign also identified Hitler as a representative of National Socialism, Lenin as a member of Marxist Socialism, and Obama as a member Democratic Socialism. In context, these statements are correct. To put this on a billboard with minimal explanation is a little sensational but should not be discredited all together. Could the billboard have forced people to ask questions? I believe what the billboard represented was that all three of these leaders ran on change, all three of these leaders were extremely charismatic, and all three of these leaders denounced capitalism and promoted spreading the wealth of the “haves” to the “have nots”. Now the results of Lenin and Hitler’s policies have been realized and Obama’s hasn’t. It would be irresponsible to assume that Obama would kill millions of people but his ideology has influenced others to kill millions. The billboard was a warning. Socialism is a social issue. It encompasses all fiscal issues and social issues. I have studied socialism extensively and in our book "The Machine", Trey and I detailed how our country is heading down the road of socialism through the methods of Progressivism to the inevitable milestone of communism. In order to achieve communism, there has to be a complete social and economic change. It is a fact that communists and socialists wished to engineer the social structure through eugenics. Abortion is a way to socially engineer society by getting rid of the undesirables. Margaret Sanger, who advocated the infiltration of black churches in order to socially deconstruct and destroy black society, started Planned Parenthood which performed 1.3 million abortions from 2003 to 2008. Much of this was funded by our tax dollars indirectly. Is this a fiscal issue? Do you anti-social issue Tea Party members wish to not discuss these claims? Do you think your fellow black Americans would like to know this little nugget of information about the Progressive left? To all you Tea Party members that don’t wish to discuss social issues, the Progressive left does not operate in the same terms as you and I. They are poltical, social, fiscal, and ethical gorillas. Oh… that isn’t a racist connotation for all you “NAACP members”. It describes their tactics. If you don’t stand behind your values, behind virtue, behind your morals, and behind your God, the Tea Party movement is doomed to become marginalized and completely ambiguous. To be afraid to recognize how the political winds blow as a dialectic dynamic and the relative “so called” social issues that are at the center of attack is to not be completely conservative. Political androgyny will destroy us. Sun, 18 Jul 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=E74DA804-123F-7491-A4559CC9DA276CFA http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=C41FF976-123F-7491-A4D9071B2461E98F Yuri Alexandrovich Bezmenov, who is also known as Tomas David Schuman, worked in the Soviet Union for the Novosti Press Agency. His secret loyalty at that time was to the KGB for whom he answered to. After dissenting from the KGB’s oppressive operations in India, he came to the West to expose the operations of communism with elaborately detailed speeches and books. He would teach how communism would be injected into a society. He simply explained Progressivism. I will detail the 4 steps that he described. [b]Demoralization[/b] Demoralization is the first step which is said to take anywhere from 15 to 30 years to take place. The key to this tactic is to use subversion much like the tactics that Sun Tzu detailed in is masterpiece “Art of War”. In the United States during the 60’s the Vietnam War and civil rights movement, the radical Frankfurt Marxists, Soviet sympathizers, and New Left Communists saw the opportunity to bring rise to the new communist revolution in the Untied States. They would do this through the radical anti-war revolution. In order to anchor the roots of revolution, it was necessary to indoctrinate a whole generation of young adults. As outlined in my book [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/publication.cfm]“The Machine”[/link], the SDS was the revolutionary movement. Within this movement, radical communists and Marxist’s used the anarchy of the rebellion to empower the communist agenda. Your naïve and impressionable minds would become the host to the communist ideology. [i]Propaganda[/i] – Students passed out propaganda throughout the schools to inflame the disenfranchised youth. Through pamphlets, music, festivals, and other social events, the propaganda becomes truth and the battle cry of the radical. [i]Religion[/i] – Religion becomes both a vehicle for transformation and progression as well as the enemy. Radicals infiltrate the religious institutions and spread the principles of socialism through social justice. Radicals also push atheism and self worship amongst the youth. Once the moral and ethical barriers are broken, the foundation is prepared for dialectic process and dialectic materialism. [i]Social Life[/i] – Social life becomes associated with a particular special interest movement rather then family, church, and community functions. The special interests groups simply become front groups for the pushing of radical policy and agenda. The members become slaves to the radical communist leaders. [i]Power Structure[/i] – The political and economic power structure becomes subjects to community organizing group. Businesses becomes the enemy as capitalism is portrayed as the instrument of oppression. Radicals align themselves to influence or participate in the power structure where they can shift the tides of production and protection to corruption and destruction. It is there they can expose the manufactured enemy for which can be vilified as another example of failed capitalism. [i]Law Enforcement[/i] – Law enforcement is attacked as an instrument of oppression and corrupt power. Calling police “Pigs” is a coined term by radicals from the sixties and seventies giving evidence to this method of subversion. [i]Labor Relations[/i] – Labor unions become the protection against manufactured oppression and claimed unfair work practices. This is where a political power structure can be built. In the name of “Workers of the World Unite”, collectivism becomes a powerful force and vehicle for radical policy and vilification of the Free Enterprise system. [b]Destabilization[/b] Destabilization is the destruction of the foundation of the family structure, the destruction of the teacher student relationship, the militarization of the youth, and the radicalization of the youth. This also includes setting up the next stage of transformation and progression through a variety of progressive laws (ie. Community Reinvestment Act – Jimmy Carter, Cloward and Piven strategy) [b]Crisis[/b] Financial Collapse is the prime method of crisis. This comes about through a number of methods including financial system corruption, failed economic policies, lack of proper regulation, national invasion and even civil war. Once the crisis is under way, the citizens will look for a charismatic messiah to save the country. Crisis brings opportunity to the Progressive. It is then that the trusted leader will pass radical legislation to make the current laws and constitutional documents irrelevant. It is then that the messiah takes away all liberties one by one. [b]Normalization[/b] Normalization is the completion of the progression towards communism. Once all of the measures to install communism in the power structure, the special interests or “useful idiots” that helped deliver the radical policies become disposable. Either they are politically discredited or in more extreme cases they could be killed or executed. At this point the true actions of the communist are no longer hidden. No longer is the country free. In conclusion if you follow these steps throughout the history of the United States, you can see that we are within the “Crisis” stage. Currently the White House and Congress are utilizing all the crises in order to devour all liberty and place more and more power within the federal government. They are stacking the deck with regulations and laws that will simply destroy all wealth creation and job creation. They are also destroying the value of the country as its primary value indicator is the U.S. Dollar. As the population becomes more and more dependent on the government, the private sector will shrink and fade away. The middle class will shrink and disappear leaving only the upper class and lower class. This is the creation of the defined Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat as outlined in the Communist Manifesto. It is at this point that the upper class will become the enemy of the state and the reason for the destruction of the middle class. Once this is done we will enter the stage of Normalization. It is at this point that the country will become vulnerable to a radical take over. So for all you out there that are primed for pushing the radical left wing agenda in order to progress your special interest, you better look into the liberties that you are helping to destroy. Whether you are pushing for gay rights, environmental protection, animal rights, anti-war policy, or even some Utopian Zeitgeist resource driven economy, look into what liberties you are going to destroy. There is nothing wrong with being active towards an interest. Just don’t let it become a vehicle for the destruction of freedom. Pursue your interest through the U.S. Constitution and don’t become the “Useful Idiot”. Sun, 11 Jul 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=C41FF976-123F-7491-A4D9071B2461E98F http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=AB190C94-123F-7491-A467557AB5C307BD Currently America is at a cross roads in history where the borders of our country and the sovereignty of our republic are starting to fade. Slowly over the last several decades the radical Muslim has been slowly been bleeding its wrath around the world and through our borders. In Muslim countries, it is a common occurrence that suicide bombers disintegrate themselves and hundreds of others for Allah. It would be careless to assume that all Muslims share this theological misdirection but a good argument could be made that the Koran spreads ambiguous instruction to murder non-Muslim infidels. At an early age many Muslim children are taught to die for Allah as a martyr. In this [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=illF1vt5g1Q&feature=player_embedded]video[/link] it is apparent that there is an effort by radical Muslim clerics and Muslim leaders to indoctrinate children into Muslim radicalism. At an early age, they are taught that Israel and America is the “Great Satan” and must be eliminated. It would be an understatement to say that the tension between Muslims, Jews, and Christians was at a boiling point. With lengthy wars and century old conflicts all over the globe between the world’s super powers and 3rd world Islamo-fascist regimes, the tide seems to be turning as terrorist sympathizers are coming forward in defense of the radical Muslim terrorist. So what does our future hold? Let’s first look at some simple facts. It is a fact that Barack Obama has been heavily influenced by Islam. Both his father and grandfather were both Kenyan Muslims. After Obama’s parents divorced when Obama was two years old, Obama’s mother Ann Dunham married Lolo Soetoro who was also a Muslim. When Obama was six years old, he moved with his parents to Indonesia and studied for two years in a Muslim school under the name Barry Soetoro. During the 2008 political campaign, Hillary Clinton released researched information which detailed that Obama attended an Islamic institution called a Madrassas. There is much evidence that Obama has a heavy Islamic influence to support his empathy and policies towards radical Muslims. So how is this relevant to the political environment today? Obama has shown much effort in repairing relations between Muslims and Americans. This seems to be commendable at face value but has a what appears to be a much more disturbing underlying agenda. Along with Obama’s Muslim roots, he also has a radical Marxist upbringing. [link=http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=56859]World Net Daily[/link] reports that Obama’s mentor at an early age was Frank Marshall Davis who was a good friend of his father and a member of the old Moscow-controlled Communist Party USA. It has been no secret that the [link=http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/5040]CPUSA[/link] has supported Obama and the Democratic Party. Recently [link=http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/293651-1]Sam Webb[/link], the national chair of the CPUSA, shared on CSPAN the great hope in the path that Obama and the Democrats were taking the country as an incremental approach to the goals of American Communism. This information is circumstantial and offers much debate but is important to mention none the less. Recently this video surfaced where [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8WfSMek-bQ&feature=player_embedded ]Dr. Richard L Rubinstein[/link] shared his opinion about Barack Obama’s agenda. What is compelling about Dr. Rubinstein is that he was recently named the Professor of the year at Yale. Rubinstein states that Obama is pursuing the correction of the so called mistake of the Israeli occupation in the Middle East. The claim is highly controversial but is supported by Dr. Rubinstein’s incite on several years of Obama’s inflammatory posturing towards Israel. Within the recent tension between Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, Syria, Turkey, and Israel, the pump is primed for a world wide disaster. Dr. Rubinstein believes that Obama wishes for Israel to fall prey to the radical Muslims of the Middle East without the blood being on Obama’s hands for political reasons. Recently former left wing SDS radical David Horowitz exposed how intense the presence of radical Islam is on our shores. At a convention at UCSD on 5-10-10 which was hosted by Young Americans for Freedom and DHFC. He was confronted by a member of the [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fSvyv0urTE]Muslim Students Association[/link] which is said to be an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. She exposes herself as being in favor of Hamas’ which wishes to annihilate Israel. What is so troublesome about this video is that [link=http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/20/151654.shtml]radical Muslim[/link] terrorists are said to be coming into this country across our southern border. Imagine how vulnerable America is as these radical Muslims enter this country and the Federal government has been unwilling to protect the borders to our south. It is only a matter of time before a massive event in Israel sets off a Holy War around the world between Muslims and America. We would be naive to think that this war would not erupt within our borders. If the chaos of war breaks out within our borders, Obama will initiate Marshal Law. On May 31st 2010, a Israeli special forces unit raided a activist flotilla trying to penetrate an Israeli blockade with the claims that they were bringing aid to the Gaza strip. Despite the availability of other sanctioned channels, the activists provoked the Israeli’s resulting in a melee which resulted in the deaths of six people on board. Immediately word spread around the world misrepresenting the event. Tensions were high as the event unfolded. As the data was collected unveiling the events that took place, it was apparent that the activists intended on a melee with evidence of make shift weapons including knives and spears. Even Reuters [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-lJpEOj0-g]doctored the photos[/link] of the melee to protect the activists and to spread misinformation. As the tensions build, some of the typical criminals of Obama’s past have popped up in the center of the conflict. Former American terrorist from the Weather Underground Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dorhn were sparking up the tensions in Egypt over the aid to Gaza with the aid of terrorist sympathizing members of Code Pink. As noted by [link=http://biggovernment.com/taylorking/2009/12/31/obama-funder-jodie-evans-provokes-crisis-in-egypt-over-hamas-aid-event-obama-pals-ayers-and-dohrn-in-cairo-with-code-pink/] Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com[/link], it seems that the provoking of either side could push peace over the edge. During this time 11 American warships and Israeli ships crossed the through the Suez Canal for the first time in many years. Rumor has it that Israel could be moving forces to prepare for a possible altercation with Iran. Much of the tension being experienced in the Middle East is reminiscent of the tensions before World War II. All hands point to a possible major war between the Iranians and the Israelis which could lead the world into another World War. If Obama truly does have radical revolutionary intentions as some of his associates do have, this could play right into the hands of his revolutionary hands. If the World spirals into war and the Muslim war spark a global Jihad against American and all Western Nations, the only way to tame the chaos in America would be to suspend the US Constitution with Marshall Law. With this suspension, a radical revolutionary would never reinstall it. Obviously this is all speculation and circumstantial but the reality does exist. We are in times similar to that of the Weimar Republic. The world is angry at America while Obama continues to apologize. The economy of America and many countries around the world teeter on the edge of collapse. The United Nations is posturing for more power as it did both as the League of Nations after WWI and the United Nations after World War II. What would be different with World War III? It will take only a little nudge to topple the giant that once was the United States of America and Obama stands with his hands on the handle. Tue, 06 Jul 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=AB190C94-123F-7491-A467557AB5C307BD http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=7A65BAE1-123F-7491-A4E3D793C1D1C6AB Progressivism is a method of gradualism or incrementalism. Gradually and incrementally, the Progressive passes policy in order to gain authoritarian control over the through systematic methods. The Progressive is that of the elitist. They operate as a visionary and believe that they are capable of bringing about a Utopian vision through gradual means to the authoritarian end. They do not favor the free market. Progressives are ideologically Marxists. They believe that the Free Enterprise system oppresses the people through greed so they wish to extinguish the free market system by nationalizing as much of the system in order for them to control and regulate. They believe that they have the ability to stave of greed by refereeing market. So how are the Progressives operating in the current political environment? Crisis is the propellant to the Progressive. They must use crisis as a vehicle. When people panic due to crisis, they are the most vulnerable. After September 11th 2001, Americans were struck with fear. They were willing to sacrifice much of their liberty in order to prevent a similar attack. The Patriot Act was implemented in order to infiltrate the communications of possible terrorists in the United States. This protective measure gave the government the ability to listen to citizen phone calls, view citizen emails, view citizen financial records, and other private facilities. In theory the Patriot Act was implemented to intercept terrorist actions and plots. Under Bush or Obama all intentions could be good but what happens if we get a rogue leader that doesn’t have good intentions. They could use the Patriot Act for what it wasn’t intended for. Recently the phrase “Too Big to Fail” has been a common emphasis on businesses that pose a systematic risk within the economy. I would simply ask what determines and who determines whether a company is too big to fail. It would be like asking who is defined as a terrorist. Could a Tea Party group or member be considered to be a facet of terrorism? Under the Patriot act, the suspicion of terrorist actions gives the FBI, without warrant, the ability to wiretap and hack into the property of the private citizen. If a company is deemed too big to fail could the government subsidize or nationalize the business in order to protect the people? I would say that this is extremely dangerous. I believe that the “Too Big to Fail” label is being used by the Progressive to usurp the free market and install a command and control authoritarian system. Here are the ways they are going to do it: [b]Affordable Health Care for America Act 2010[/b] [b]2009[/b] * 2-year tax credit (total cap of $1 billion) for new chronic disease therapy investments * Medicare cuts to hospitals begin (long-term care (7/1/09) and inpatient and rehabilitation facilities (fiscal 2010)) 2009 [b]2010[/b] * States and federal officials review premium increases * FDA authorized to approve “follow-on” biologics * Increase brand name pharmaceutical Medicaid rebate (from 15.1% to 23.1%) * Medicare payments to physicians in primarily rural areas increase (2 years) * Deny “black liquor” eligibility for cellulosic biofuel producers credit * Tax credits provided to certain small employers for health care-related expenses * Increase adoption tax incentives for 2 years * Codify economic substance doctrine and impose penalties for underpayments (transactions on/after 3/23/10) * Provide income exclusion for specified Indian tribe health benefits provided after 3/23/10 * Temporary high-risk pool and high-cost union retiree reinsurance ($5 billion each for 3.5 years) (6/23/10) * Impose 10% tax on indoor UV tanning (7/1/10) * Medicare cuts to inpatient psych hospitals (7/1/10) * Prohibits lifetime and annual benefit spending limits (plan years beginning 9/23/10) * Prohibits non-group plans from canceling coverage (rescissions) (plan years beginning 9/23/10) * Requires plans to cover, at no charge, most preventive care (plan years beginning 9/23/10) * Allows dependents to stay on parents’ policies through age 26 (plan years beginning 9/23/10) * Provides limited protections to children with pre-existing conditions (plan years beginning 9/23/10) * Hospitals in “Frontier States” (N.D., Mont., Wyo., S.D., Utah) receive higher Medicare payments (fiscal 2011) * Hospitals in “low-cost” areas receive higher Medicare payments for 2 years ($400 million, fiscal 2011) [b]2011[/b] * Medicare Advantage cuts begin * No longer allowed to use FSA, HSA, HRA, Archer MSA distributions for over-the counter medicines * Medicare cuts to home health begin * Wealthier seniors ($85k/$170k) begin paying higher Part D premiums (not indexed for inflation in Parts B/D) * Medicare reimbursement cuts when seniors use diagnostic imaging like MRIs, CT scans, etc. * Medicare cuts begin to ambulance services, ASCs, diagnostic labs, and durable medical equipment * Impose new annual tax on brand name pharmaceutical companies * Americans begin paying premiums for federal long-term care insurance (CLASS Act) * Health plans required to spend a minimum of 80% of premiums on medical claims * Physicians in “Frontier States” (N.D., Mont., Wyo., S.D., Utah) receive higher Medicare payments * Prohibition on Medicare payments to new physician-owned hospitals * Penalties for non-qualified HSA and Archer MSA distributions double (to 20%) * Seniors prohibited from purchasing power wheelchairs unless they first rent for 13 months * Brand name drug companies begin providing 50% discount in the Part D “donut hole” * 10% Medicare bonus payment for primary care and general surgery (5 years) * Employers required to report value of health benefits on W-2 * Steps towards health insurance administrative simplification (reduced paperwork, etc) begins (five year process) * Additional funding for community health centers (five years) * Seniors who hit Part D “donut hole “in 2010 receive $250 check (3/15/11) * New Medicare cuts to long-term care hospitals begin (7/1/11) * Additional Medicare cuts to hospitals and cuts to nursing homes and inpatient rehab facilities begin (fiscal 2012) * New tax on all private health insurance policies to pay for comp. eff. research (plan years beginning fiscal 2012) [b]2012[/b] * Medicare cuts to dialysis treatment begins * Require information reporting on payments to corporations * Medicare to reduce spending by using an HMO-like coordinated care model (Accountable Care Organizations) * Medicare Advantage plans with a 4 or 5 star rating receive a quality bonus payment * New Medicare cuts to inpatient psych hospitals (7/1/12) * Hospital pay-for-quality program begins (fiscal 2013) * Medicare cuts to hospitals with high readmission rates begin (fiscal 2013) * Medicare cuts to hospice begin (fiscal 2013) [b]2013[/b] * Impose $2,500 annual cap on FSA contributions (indexed to CPI) * Increase Medicare wage tax by 0.9% and impose a new 3.8% tax on unearned, nonactive business income for those earning over $200,000 or $250,000 for families (not indexed to inflation) * Generally increases (7.5% to 10%) threshold at which medical expenses, as a percentage of income, can be deductible * Eliminate deduction for Part D retiree drug subsidy employers receive * Impose 2.3% excise tax on medical devices * Medicare cuts to hospitals which treat low-income seniors begin * Post-acute pay for quality reporting begins * CO-OP Program: Secretary of Health and Human Services awards loans and grants for establishing nonprofit health insurers * $500,000 deduction cap on compensation paid to insurance company employees and officers * Part D “donut hole” reduction begins, reaching a 25% reduction by 2020 [b]2014[/b] * Individuals without government-approved coverage are subject to a tax of the greater of $695 or 2.5% of income * Employers who fail to offer “affordable” coverage would pay a $3,000 penalty for every employee that receives a subsidy through the Exchange * Employers who do not offer insurance must pay a tax penalty of $2,000 for every full-time employee * More Medicare cuts to home health begin * States must have established Exchanges * Employers with more than 200 employees can auto-enroll employees in health coverage, with opt-out * All non-grandfathered and Exchange health plans required to meet federally mandated levels of coverage * States must cover parents /childless adults up to 138% of poverty on Medicaid, receive increased FMAP * Tax credits available for Exchange-based coverage, amount varies by income up to 400% of poverty * Insurers cannot impose any coverage restrictions on pre-existing conditions (guaranteed issue/renewability) * Modified community rating: individual or family coverage; geography; 3:1 ratio for age; 1.5:1 for smoking * Insurers must offer coverage to anyone wanting a policy and every policy has to be renewed * Limits out-of-pocket cost-sharing (tied to limits in HSAs, currently $5,950/$11,900 indexed to COLA) * Insurance plans must include government-defined “essential benefits ” and coverage levels * OPM must offer at least two multi-state plans in every state * Employers can offer some employees free choice vouchers for health insurance in the Exchange * Government board (IPAB) begins submitting proposals to cut Medicare * Impose tax on nearly all private health insurance plans * Medicare payment cuts for hospital-acquired infections begin (fiscal 2015) [b]2015[/b] * More Medicare cuts to home health begin [b]2016[/b] * States can form interstate insurance compacts if the coverage with HHS approval (2016) [b]2017[/b] * Physician pay-for-quality program begins for all physicians * States may allow large employers and multi-employer health plans to purchase coverage in the Exchange. * States may apply to the HHS secretary for a limited waiver from certain federal requirements [b]2018[/b] * Impose “Cadillac tax on “high cost” plans, 40% tax on the benefit value above a certain threshold: ($10,200 individual coverage, $27,500 family or self-only union multi-employer coverage) The intention of the bill is to rid the market of private insurance by making it unaffordable for the insurance companies to operate. The Progressives wants a single payer nationalized universal system. When they couldn’t get it in this act, they developed a systematic incremental system to eliminate the private sector participants by making them unable to operate within the government’s regulations. As you can see here they are forcing insurance companies to take in pre-existing conditions which will eliminate the need for people to insure themselves. Why buy insurance prior to an accident or sickness when you can just buy it after? Eventually the insurance companies will fold under the pressure of internal unbearable operating costs and government pressure to hold insurance premiums at the government’s unreasonable determination of what reasonable premium prices are. As the free market dwindles, the government will achieve their single payer system. The tax revenue from insurance companies will disappear and the costs of healthcare will skyrocket. This is where the government will then be prompted to ration your healthcare. [b] Financial Reform[/b] The new financial reform bill being proposed by Congress is bound to be a complete failure and extremely detrimental to the financial system. The bill will set up an enormous bureaucracy who will weigh down the system with regulation and new channels for banks to operate within. It is inevitable that extensive expenditures will increase the operating costs of the banks driving them to pass costs onto the consumer. This will mostly affect the middle class who is more sensitive to finance charges then the affluent and the poor. Staff writer from CNBC writes in his June 21st 2010 article titled [link= http://www.cnbc.com/id/37828216/Financial_Reform_Is_a_Disaster_For_Banks_Consumers_Bove]Financial Reform Is a Disaster For Banks, Consumers: Bove[/link] where he quotes banking analyst Dick Bove saying that the bill should be called the “Anti-American Finance Act” stating that it will cause millions of Americans to lose their bank accounts. He also quotes Bove as saying, "There is no doubt in my mind that in two years, the Congress and regulators will be scrambling to figure out how to undo what they have done with this legislation," he wrote. "Banks need to lend, so money supply can grow. Forcing bank balance sheets to shrink does nothing to aid the United States economy." The bill will also allow the federal government to audit private financials without warrant if the government deems the business a risk to the overall economy. I would say that every business is detrimental to the economy in one way or another. For example if a company that is publically traded on the NYSE and begins to show problems financially, the government can deem that the company is negatively affecting the market. They can then break the company up. This is extremely disturbing and leaves room for too much bureaucratic corruption. This will lead the way for banks to be nationalized under the label of being “Too Big to Fail”. Much like the new healthcare system, these new regulations will strangle the free market forcing government to step in and nationalize the banking industry. [b]Student Loans[/b] Within the healthcare bill, Congress nationalized the student loan program. What is disturbing about this is the way the government can now steer and engineer society through student loan finance. This is a very complicated concept so stick with me. Imagine that Progressives wish to steer students into a certain field of study supporting the Progressive’s vision. The government then can deny or accept loan requests based on a market need or a students testing results. Imagine that you wished to be a veterinarian for small animals but the market was already crowded with this type of veterinarians. The government then allows you to use government funds to go to veterinarian school for larger animals. Even if you didn’t wish to help larger animals your options are gone for optional financing. You are now under the will of the command and control regulations of the federal government. Earlier I mentioned that Progressives operate under the Marxist ideology. It is important to understand how. Dialectic Process is what is used by the Marxist. More specifically Communists use Dialectic Materialism which is more or less the distribution of wealth through the “means to an end” methodology. [b]Quality rather than Quantity[/b] – This is the removal of choices that we all are witnessing. The intention of the Marxist or Progressive is to remove the quantity of uncontrollable options and replace it with a single controllable option (single payer health care system). This single option is intended to be of utmost quality. This is where the Progressive uses his ideological authoritarian ways to implement his engineered perfect system. The regulations are intended to steer the winds of the free market to create the ideal system. Sadly the perfect control is unattainable. The Progressive implements more and more regulation in order to achieve the desired unattainable end which eventually strangles the system completely with the burdens of unavoidability. Where this system fails is without competition, the incentive to innovate is lost and society gets stuck in the rut of complacency. The only way to innovate is for the government to force ti. [b]Unity of Opposites[/b] – Progressives wish for everything to be fair. Their ideology intends to eliminate classes by creating class warfare. The warfare eventually wears down the will of the people. In order for fairness to be achieved, the middle class needs to be destroyed. The middle class is the bridge to the upper class for the lower class. The middle class is the group that is driven by incentive to become wealthy. Without the incentive of one day becoming wealthy, the middle class will give up the free market system. The destruction of the middle class through regulations of the healthcare system, the banking system, and the student loan system will eventually create the Proletariat and the Bourgeoisie class which Marx describes in the Communist Manifesto. Once the middle class is eliminated, then the warfare will increase as the Proletariat will demand the distribution of wealth through more entitlements from the Bourgeoisie. Eventually the Bourgeoisie will be eliminated and there will be a ruling political class and a serving Proletariat. [b]Negation of Negation[/b] – The process described above is relative to the theory negation of negation. Progressive policy models always leave the ability of a system to be negated by a newer system. This is similar to fashion. Fashion is forever changing and fluid. The elite in the fashion movement are those that define it. Once a fashion elitist becomes recognized as a leader in the fashion industry, then they can almost do no wrong. They then become the leader for all to copy. Progressives often do the same. They are forever changing the system to implement new bureaucracy in order to set their personal vision in place. This creates a “Frankenstein” complex of regulation which is unenforceable and crippling to the natural aspects of the free society. So you can see the Progressive is always wishing to grab more of your liberty in order to implement his or her Utopian vision. Over time the system is spoiled by the bastardization of the federal system which will collapse the economy and social structure which the system was intended to protect. What we are seeing right now is the collapsing of that system. It is necessary for Americans to realize the corruption of the system and the necessity to dismantle years and years of failed policy. Once we break the shackles of regulation on the system, then we can acquire freedom and liberty. Sun, 27 Jun 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=7A65BAE1-123F-7491-A4E3D793C1D1C6AB http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=7194B563-123F-7491-A42AB183A2136D07 CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS - as outlined in "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen 1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war. 2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war. [b]Done[/b] 3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength. [b]Done[/b] 4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war. [b]Done[/b] 5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites. [b]Done[/b] 6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination. [b]Done[/b] 7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N. [b]Done[/b] 8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N. 9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress. [b]Done[/b] 10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N. 11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.) [b]Done[/b] 12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party. [b]Done[/b] 13. Do away with all loyalty oaths. [b]Done[/b] 14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office. 15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States. [b]Done[/b] 16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights. [b]Done[/b] 17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks. [b]Done[/b] 18. Gain control of all student newspapers. [b]Done[/b] 19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack. 20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policy making positions. [b]Done[/b] 21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures. [b]Done[/b] 22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms." [b]Done[/b] 23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art." [b]Done[/b] 24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press. [b]Done[/b] 25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV. [b]Done[/b] 26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy." [b]Done[/b] 27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch." [b]Done[/b] 28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state." [b]Done[/b] 29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis. [b]Done[/b] 30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man." [b]Done[/b] 31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over. [b]Done[/b] 32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc. [b]Done[/b] 33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus. [b]In progress[/b] 34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities. [b]Done[/b] 35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI. 36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions. [b]In Progress[/b] 37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business. [b]In Progress[/b] 38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat]. [b]Done[/b] 39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals. [b]Done[/b] 40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce. [b]Done[/b] 41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents. [b]Done[/b] 42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems. 43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government. 44. Internationalize the Panama Canal. [b]Done[/b] 45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike. Fri, 25 Jun 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=7194B563-123F-7491-A42AB183A2136D07 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=64D57B62-123F-7491-A43FFFEE14ACA1CD Tyranny is defined by Merriam-Webster as oppressive power exerted by government. It is easy to point out dozens of oppressive actions that are being exerted by government. The voice of the people is expressed through the Congress in this representative republic we call America. Recently Congress has become irrelevant with various oppressive and out right blatant acts of tyranny by the Obama administration. Through executive order and the use of Alinsky style polarization of companies and individuals, we are slowly being over come by soft tyranny. The full court press of class warfare has been inflamed lately in the typical Alinsky style antagonistic actions by the White House. Those unfamiliar with [link=http://lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/index.cfm?Entry=B2A4AFE8-123F-7491-A4085BBFB993600E]Saul Alinsky’s[/link] “means to an end” approach may need to research Obama’s most prominent mentor from his community organizing days. He has now put Alinsky’s most effective community organizing techniques into full swing in order to implement Progressive measures to achieve the mass distribution of wealth and the elitist utopian globalist agenda.. So how are Obama and his cronies creating class warfare? Obama, like many other political candidates, have utilized big business as a propellant financially in achieving success in the political arena. For a Progressive ideologue like Obama it is hard to operate within the political system without the support of big business and remain true to his beliefs. To justify his actions he operates under the “means to an end” system. [b]Goldman Sachs[/b] – Goldman Sachs has become the biggest enemy in America along with many other banks in the United States since the financial collapse in 2008. Goldman contributed $994,795 to his campaign in 2008. Obama has also appointed [link=http://lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/Enviro-socialism.htm]6 Goldman Sach [/link]alums to his White House Staff. Their relationship seems to be prospering under the Obama administration as Goldman Sachs (GS) stock is up 125% from below $60 per share on Obama’s inauguration day to over $135 per share today. So why is there all of the vitriol towards the bankers and Goldman Sachs? As pointed out here before, Goldman Sachs has huge stakes in the Obama machine. They have huge stakes in the “Cap and Trade” legislation as the Chicago Climate Exchange is owned partially by Goldman Sachs and three former and current Goldman Sachs executives. Goldman will most surely be a big contributor to 2010 Democratic candidates and Obama’s 2012 campaign. As a staunch Progressive with the tendencies to attack so called “greedy” capitalism, Obama can not appear to be aligned with his ideological enemy like Wall Street, Banking Institutions, Oil Companies and any other company that resembles Free Enterprise. If he would, his ideological counterparts would leave him in droves. [b]British Petroleum[/b] – British Petroleum is also a huge contributor and supporter of Obama’s Progressive “Cap and Trade” policy. [link=http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/36783.html]Politco[/link] reports that Obama was BP’s biggest recipient of BP campaign contributions. Receiving over $3,000,000 from BP employees and PAC’s have been highlighted in the media recently since the recent oil spill. Despite all of the criticism that has been dealt to BP over the oil spill, they remain a top political asset to Obama as crisis is the most valuable of all political tactics for the Progressive. BP is also a client of the Podesta Group which lobbies for Progressive policies. The Podesta Group is run by John Podesta who is the former Chief of Staff for President Bill Clinton. He also heads up the Progressive policy developer and think tank Center for American Progress. This injects BP directly into the Progressive machine as a host. British Petroleum is a huge host to the parasites of the Progressive movement as the survival of big business relies heavily on the political winds. In most cases, big businesses lobby on both sides of the aisle in order to hedge their political investments. For a company like British Petroleum, the political pressure is enormous due to its status as one of the worlds biggest oil producers. The threat from radical legislation that could make their business impotent is extremely relevant. To not support a President of the United States with his political agenda could pose disastrous with federal permitting, regulation, and many other restrictive and oppressive policies. With the financial might of a company like British Petroleum, there is a huge potential of political extortion that can bring a Presidential candidate of elected President great currency in maneuvering through the political environment. So how is Obama using these to mega-corporations in the current political climate? In order to understand Obama’s tactics, one must understand the techniques of his mentor. Saul Alinsky was a community organizer who used antagonizing techniques in order to politically extort money and power from the haves in order to give to the have nots. This Neo-Marxist technique is a pretty simple approach. I like to compare it to a spoiled child asking his or her parent over and over for something and wearing out the parents will with an antagonizing barrage of whining demands. British Petroleum and Goldman Sachs have much more to gain from the likes of Obama and his Alinsky-like cronies. The risk verses reward is much in the favor of aligning with Obama then to deny him if you are already invested politically. To defy the antagonist would be to deny the mob as community organizing corals a huge collection of activists that support special interests like green energy, affirmative action, gay rights, anti-war, pro-union, etc. Once these communities are activated, they act in mob-like tactics as did ACORN when they stormed into foreclosed homes reported by [link=http://michellemalkin.com/2009/02/20/this-is-our-house-now-acorn-mob-begins-breaking-into-homes/]Michelle Malkin[/link]. SEIU, which is a political arm of the Progressive machine, protested in front of 2 banker’s homes. One of the homes was owned by a JP Morgan Chase bank executive. [i] Alinsky Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame. (Rules for Radicals, Saul Alinsky)[/i] Andrew Brietbart’s Big Journalism reports that among the SEIU protestors was the liberal group National People’s Action who has received $772,474 from JP Morgan Chase along with a myriad of left wing foundations like the Rockefeller Foundation, Tides Valentine Fund, Public Welfare Foundation, and Center for Community Change. These community groups are simply using Chicago bullying tactics much like the Chicago community activist Saul Alinsky to extort money in the form of donations. [i] Alinsky Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.” (Rules for Radicals, Saul Alinsky)[/i] With a company like British Petroleum, the tactics are the same. Obama and his cronies attack British Petroleum as a means to the ends. The ends being Cap and Trade legislation and the political pay off of people like George Soros as discussed in [link= http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?Entry=4773C69D-123F-7491-A4BE147A89373146]previous posts[/link]. As they attack British Petroleum with threats of [link= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/7734915/Gulf-of-Mexico-oil-spill-BP-faces-civil-and-criminal-investigation.html]criminal investigations[/link], BP executives are seeing the power of Alinsky style persuasion to offer up billions of money to the Obama administration to support left wing causes. Behind Obama are not just his typical community organizing groups of Progressive left wing groups but an agitated American majority. This agitation is magnified through the left wing mainstream media machine which simply becomes a cesspool for misinformation and political spin. As the White House moves the Overton window, described by Joseph P.Overton, and shifts the public perception of “Big Oil” with the agitation of the political climate of this crisis, Washington is priming the pumps for a late year Cap and Trade bill to be passed by a “Lame Duck” Congress after the November mid-term elections. There is nothing new with antagonism in politics. Unfortunately it has reached the White House. It is easy to make enemies of the big oil company that is responsible for oil leaking into the Gulf of Mexico. Most American’s don’t understand what causes the fluctuations in oil prices. Many don’t understand what it takes to extract, transport, and refine oil. Many don’t realize the millions of products that benefit our lives because of oil production. It is easy for the main stream liberal media and liberal politicians to demonize “Big Oil” as greedy tycoons. This demonizing is the divide and conquer strategy that the left has used for years. BP CEO Tony Hayward has been the target of Rule 11 in Alinsky tactical manual “Rules for Radicals”. [i] Alinsky Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame. (Rules for Radicals, Saul Alinsky)[/i] He has been targeted and polarized to the point of ineffectiveness in the eyes of Americans. The liberal media and liberal politicians have vilified the CEO for BP’s inability to cap the leaking well. Class warfare is the antagonizing of different levels of a Free Enterprise society. The antagonizing of the different layers of society begins with creating enemies for each class and social conglomerate. The Marxist needs to demonize the rich or the Bourgoise in order to form the Proletariat. This polarization in classes is done through propaganda, subsidizing failing companies like AIG with tax payer’s money. As the government bailed out the failing AIG, who was simply the holder of Goldman Sachs’ devalued and defaulted assets, the vitriol came from both sides of the aisle. The left hated AIG because of accused risky greedy behavior. The right hated AIG because of the failure that was never realized that would have corrected the “Free Market” system by dissolving an unsuccessful business model. Instead tax payers’ dollars were used to prop up AIG and indirectly prop up Goldman Sachs. This deal oozed with corruption. The result was an angry right wing and an angry left wing. This is intended to form the Proletariat. As described by dialect process which is the tool of the Marxist and Alinsky, the thesis was that AIG should have been left to fail. The antithesis was that AIG was driven by pure greed. The synthesis was a government opportunity to create another bureaucratic regulatory tourniquet to choke off the supply of blood to capitalism which is the institutions that finance capital to propagate capitalism and to eventually nationalize. The government under Bush and Obama bailed out the banks under TARP with no legislature enforcing the transfer of financed liquidity to businesses to ensure economic recovery and the capitalization of businesses wishing to expand. This afforded a huge vacuum in the financial system which created economic stagnation which further propagated the anger of the newly formed Proletariat. By no means should we accept the failures of British Petroleum and AIG. These failures should be models for the success of Free Enterprise as failure necessary in order to refresh the purity of economic growth. Some on the left argue that the conservative movement is hypocritical for suggesting that government has failed after touting the principle of small government. Small government is not the same as no government. Government is needed to step up in times of emergency or in times of war without stepping out of bounds by halting the national economy. This government isn't trying to support the Free Enterprise economy that has become the envy of the world. This government is trying to control it, mold it, and change it to an image of Utopian fallacy. Now that we have laid out the very detailed tactics of the Marxists and how they are operating in our culture now, raise your head and see the climate of our political environment. If you can recognize Saul Alinsky’s rules being implemented and the Marxist’s dialectic process, you can see the direction or the synthesis that is being created by the Marxist community and its front groups. It is then you will see the oppression of the American people. It is then you will see Tyranny. Wed, 23 Jun 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=64D57B62-123F-7491-A43FFFEE14ACA1CD http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=4773C6CC-123F-7491-A42D4D3913E75AB7 Recently I received a bunch of empty criticism from several liberal and Progressive drones about the destructive nature and greedy nature of conservatives and free enterprise. My initial response was to ignore rationalizing the irrational since they wished to argue over semantics rather than the simple principles we were discussing. Later, I felt that it would be important to show them just how wrong they are in a forum where I can empower others to expose such empty accusations. It has been apparent that over the last two years that the White House and members of Congress have been taking cues from George Soros(OSI and Soros Foundation Network), Joel Rogers(Apollo Alliance), Andy Stern(former head of the SEIU), Franklin Raines (Enterprise and Emerald Cities Collaborative), and Goldman Sachs. Of course there is a lot going on between the lines with these relationships but the proof is in the wide open and it is fairly easy to iron out. [b]George Soros[/b] [link= http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/TheMachine/index.cfm?Entry=790A1CE5-123F-7491-A4EC16E4D06C9D8C]George Soros[/link], the multi-billionaire hedge fund manager and quasi-socialist philanthropist, has become one of the most prominent members of the Progressive movement. With his vast [link= http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/TheMachine/sorosagenda.htm]network[/link] of Progressive think tanks and Progressive front groups, Soros has propelled the Progressive movement into the Democratic mainstream as a parasitic poison that has rotted the Democratic party from the inside out. With groups like the Center for America Progress, Media Matters, the Sierra Club, and ACORN, Soros has recruited some of the most radical members of American Progressivism to lead the war against free enterprise and the American republic. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/sorosagenda.jpg[/img] George Soros is most known in the Wall Street Community as the man that destroyed the value of the British Pound on [link= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Wednesday]Black Wednesday[/link] in 1992 by shorting the Pound heavily. For the investor this would not be considered destroying anything. It would be profiting from the foresight of an overvalued currency. Liberals would say that it was criminal. True Progressives would ignore the fact that one of their own did this and chalk one up for the team since the profit is the means to the ends to support their Marxist agenda. Since George Soros probably was instrumental in the collapse of an economy and the destruction of many people’s lives, would he be considered a devil? Progressives would call him a devil if he didn’t support their cause. So to my liberal friends, there is your destruction and greed. [b]Joel Rogers[/b] Many of you may not be familiar with Joel Rogers. Rogers is one of the founders of the Working Families Party (former New Left Party) which is known in political circles as a radical leftist organization filled with a Marxist coalition of Trotskyists, Maoists, and Communist Party USA Members. He is also the founder of the Apollo Alliance which is a front group co-opting the Green Movement to implement Marxist policies with the intent on mass wealth distribution. They are also known for writing the [link= http://apolloalliance.org/uncategorized/recovery-act-information-center-what-you-need-to-know/]$787,000,000,000 stimulus bill[/link] which will provide them with over a billion dollars to fund green projects around the country. These green projects will simply be a government funded work program or what I would simply called working welfare. Of course without any need to show a profit or progress, this money will be poorly managed and inevitably a waste of tax payer dollars since even Joel Rogers believes that there is no way to fix [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Bh3jWqiUw0]Climate Change[/link] without shutting down the entire American economy. So if it isn’t going to work, why do it? It is a business venture for the radical groups that are struggling in the economy that they destroyed. Unions are going broke and real estate prices are tumbling. With this new proposed green economy and cap and trade legislation there is going to be huge regulation on individuals and businesses. With all of these new regulations, there is going to be huge taxes and fines which will fund groups like the Apollo Alliance and self proclaimed Communist [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6xELjQPsuw&feature=related]Van Jones’ Green For All[/link]. They have pooled their resources in a group call the Emerald Cities Collaborative, which will build eco-communes like Common Grounds has done in New Orleans. The [link= http://www.commongroundrelief.org/node/8]Common Grounds[/link] neighborhood was an inner city experiment which is the Progressive future for a de-industrialized world. [b]Franklin Raines[/b] Along with Joel Rogers and Van Jones, Franklin Raines has also joined the ranks within this eco-commune collaborative. Franklin has bee accused by CNN’s Anderson Cooper as the [link= http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/23/culprits-of-the-collapse-2-franklin-raines/]#2 culprit of the housing collapse[/link]. His company Enterprise is also a member of the Emerald Cities Collaborative. He also purchased the patent for Carbon Trading Technology while he was at Fannie Mae before being removed due to manipulating numbers in Enron style to provide him with higher bonus. Later he settled for pennies on the dollar. He was also connected to [link= http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/15/AR2008071502827.html?sid=ST2008071503047&s_pos]Obama as an advisor[/link]. Does it seem that there is a over all plan here? In order to create a green market, they needed to collapse the current one. Of course it is speculation but you must ask the questions. [b]Goldman Sachs[/b] Amidst all of the Cap and Trade talk, Goldman Sachs has appeared to be a primary beneficiary to the new legislation. Using the patented carbon trading system that Franklin Raines anchored in his days of his criminal days at Fannie Mae, Goldman Sachs has a 10% ownership in the Chicago Climate Exchange(CCX) which will trade the Cap and Trade Shares issued to companies all around the world. The CCX is also part owned by Generation. If you are not familiar with Generation, it is owned partially by Al Gore. No surprise right? Lastly CCX is also owned by 3 other Goldman Sachs execs or former execs. So what size market is this carbon trading scheme in? Try a $10,000,000,000,000 market. If you get cross eyed counting, that is Ten Trillion dollars. So now that you can see all the “greedy” capitalist co-opting the green movement by pushing a [link= http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/TheMachine/Enviro-socialism.htm]Cap and Trade agenda[/link], the process has become clear. Several days ago, the Wall Street Journal’ Jonathan Weisman reports that the White House has been taking cues with dealing with the Oil Spill from the [link= http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/06/14/wh-takes-cues-from-liberal-think-tank-on-spill/]Center for American Progress[/link]. So all of connections lead back through the Clintons, John Podesta (Pres. Clinton’s former Chief of Staff), and George Soros. This entire scheme represents the financial investment and political capital invested in destroying the oil driven economy. Could we say that Obama would rather see the disaster continue to amplify another crisis as an Alinsky style strong armed tactic? It may be bold but the way he has strong armed BP to pay $20 billion into a so called independent fund managed by his pay czar would high light his “Chicago Style Community Organizing” sleazy bullying may push someone to consider it. Should British Petroleum pay?... absolutely. Does Obama have the power to seize private capital or strong arm in an almost extortionary manner for a company to forfeit the money… absolutely not. This is pure “Chicago Politics” in the White House. I would speculate that the BP funds will support the Gulf Coast in the same way Fema funded Katrina victims. It will be littered with fraud and crony-capitalism to fund the phony green eco-parasites. Another interesting Fact is reported in the [link=http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/24358]Canadian Press[/link].BP Employs the lobbying firm Podesta Group which is run Soros crony the John Podesta who runs the Center for American Progress.Lobbying records show that BP has been receiving funds from the U.S. Export Import Bank to fund solar projects in Argentina. The [link=http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/Once-a-government-pet-BP-now-a-capitalist-tool-95942659.html]Washington Examiner[/link] also reports on June 9th 2010 that BP has lobbied form tax hikes, greenhouse gas restraints, the stimulus bill, the Wall Street bailout, and subsidies for oil pipelines, solar panels, natural gas and biofuels. BP is in bed with the Obama administration. Don't believe all of this show trial stuff on capital hill. The fact is, we have dirty sleazy politics that are completely destroying this country. It has happened in Chicago which has 11.3% unemployment. It has destroyed Detroit which has had unemployment as high as 50%. Now it is destroying our nation as we idle around 9% unemployment with over 17% underemployment. Obama has said that he would be remaking America. What we are witnessing is its destruction through corruption and greed. You see greed is inherent in all humans. We have a fallen nature. To curse greed is like cursing the darkness. It is futile. Instead, expose it and shine light in the dark corners of all political sides. I would challenge those drones that would rather argue the semantics of greed and sustainable energy to look into the facts of where the true destruction and greed is centered. Thu, 17 Jun 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=4773C6CC-123F-7491-A42D4D3913E75AB7 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=1F349E2B-123F-7491-A40C1AEDA1672A7B Since the fall of the Berlin Wall in the early nineteen nineties, most Americans have ignored the shrinking land of liberty and the silent encroachment of the “Iron Curtain”. Soviet style communism has been masked by various special interests with a Trojan Horse type infiltration One of those Trojan Horses is sexual education. A 2007 article and [link=http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=3386492]video[/link] from ABC explains how Obama and Planned Parenthood will work together to promote sex education to kindergartners. With Progressives like Barack Obama claiming that programs like this are innovating or progressing society, we have another picture to paint regarding sex education. Georg Lukacs, a Hungarian Marxist philosopher and literary critic, believed that Christianity and its moral structure was a huge hurdle in installing communism throughout the world. Unlike other communist revolutionaries, he believed that to install communism, there needed to be a cultural revolution before an economic revolution. He believed that a more gradual and incremental approach to communism was more viable then the violent revolutions of Lenin and Stalin. He knew that in order to get people to accept communism, the people would need to be culturally aligned with Atheism, the irrelevance of the family, the acceptance of diversity, and the tolerance of multiculturalism. In order to achieve this he would need to undermine the Christian family structure by promoting teenage promiscuity and teenage rebellion. After all rebellion and revolution is the battle cry of the communist. Lukacs noted in his literary work History and Class Consciousness the following statement. “There are two aspects of the utopian counterpart to this ontology. The first is seen in God’s annihilation of empirical reality in the Apocalypse, which can on occasion be absent (as with Tolstoy) without materially affecting the situation. The second lies in the utopian view of man as a ‘saint’ who can achieve an inner mastery over the external reality that cannot be eliminated.” As you can see, he believes that humans are unable to avoid the temptations of external realities. This is why Christianity became the counterpart to the Communist’s Utopian fallacy. He along with all true fundamental Communists believed that Christianity is the oppressor to humanity. Much of this may be reactionary to the former feudal tyrannies of Christian Kings and Catholic Popes of the dark ages. To achieve the Communist Utopia, Lukacs launched a graphical radical sex education program promoting free love and promiscuity. Eventually Luckac’s influence along with many other of his peers led to the deterioration of Christian morals and Christian Values and the installation of communism was deemed successful. His use of “Salami Tactics” or divide and conquer tactics to purge the Communist Party from all that opposed to his radical agenda. Today Luckac’s tactics are being used by our current White House administration along with radical groups like Planned Parenthood, the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS), and the Gay Straight Lesbian Educators Network (GSLEN). Kevin Jennings, who was the founder of GSLEN and currently resides as the Safe School Czar for President Obama, has been involved in extremely disgusting instructional programs which are teaching violent sex acts to students. [link= http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/fistgate/index.html] MassResistance.org[/link] reports that during a Massachusetts Department of Education conference for 2000 people including 300 adults and Kevin Jennings as a keynote speaker, this was said, "Fisting [forcing one's entire hand into another person's rectum or vagina] often gets a bad rap....[It's] an experience of letting somebody into your body that you want to be that close and intimate with...[and] to put you into an exploratory mode." Other things that were taught were homosexual oral sex techniques, sado-masochism techniques, girls using “dildos” and rubbing their sex organs together for pleasure, and much more. Americans must realize that Communism is still alive and is creeping into our homes through sexually energize media, television shows, and now our schools. The school system is become overwhelmed by the tactics of Georg Luckacs and other radical gradualist/Marxist ideology. Secular Humanism, which was inspired by Frankfurt Marxists like Luckacs, is infiltrating our society at a rapid pace. Toleration for teenage promiscuity is extremely detrimental to the future of the United States. New United Nations programs are being implemented within our public and private school curriculums which include radical lessons teaching kindergartners sexual material. Currently United Nations Education, Scientific, Cultural Oranization is run by former Hungarian Communist Irina Bokova. If the United States is adopting the UNESCO’s education program, I wonder if Irina Bokova has been influenced by Georg Luckacs? Wed, 09 Jun 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=1F349E2B-123F-7491-A40C1AEDA1672A7B http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=FF147D6D-123F-7491-A42AAFC47725E399 Now that the Cass Sunstein Obama administration is receiving extreme pressure in the alternative media and from talk radio, the plan forward seems to be to try and regulate… or should I say censor those that are exposing the administration for the crimes, Stalinist propaganda, and Stalinist strong arm political tactics. At this time in our history, we have never been so liberated with the freedom to speak through the internet and on talk radio. I have personally never been more liberated with the freedom of patriotic expression. My words have become a flag waving high and proud as I reject in its entirety the recent attacks on our American way of life from the Marxist regime in the White House and in Congress. I am proud to say that my flag is only one of millions that have been raised and fly high. Within the last week, the Obama administration has received numerous questions about the Sestak scandal has become a heated blizzard of confusion by the White House as they try and dodge their accused criminal activity. [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUDUwbrLyk0]Sestak confirms that he was offered a job to not run against Arlen Specter[/link] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOR1iGOFTFI]Watch Gibbs dodge the questions.[/link] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTCIM1drqlA]Watch Axelrod shove the question off[/link] Then there is this. [link= http://www.denverpost.com/ci_15213784]DenverPost.com [/link]confirms that U.S. Senate candidate Andrew Romanoff publically announced that on September 11th, 2009 the White House administration’s deputy of staff Jim Messina describe two possible jobs with the U.S. Agency for International Development and one with the U.S. Trade Development Agency. When has our political system become like the old Politburo of the Soviet Union? In the midst of the Governor Blagojevich scandal, it seems that this President and his administration have been surrounded by political bribes and scandal. During the Healthcare debates, [link= http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/18/nebraska-scores-again-health-care-endgame/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_must-read-stories-today]Sen.Ben Nelson D-Neb[/link]asked for a half a billion dollars for his vote, Sen.Bart Gordon D-Tenn. asked for nearly $100,000,000 for Tennessee hospitals, and Sen.Landrieu D-La asked for $300,000,000 for Louisiana for her vote. This has become common place and should not be tolerated by the American people. It is an outright infringement on the democratic process. I would simply ask, would we have the new Healthcare system if these unethical and possibly criminal actions were rejected or prevented? Along with this, the nation’s most destructive national disaster has continued to wreak havoc on the Gulf Coast with little to no leadership from the man in our nation’s most powerful seat. [link= http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?Entry=6140DE34-123F-7491-A45499CBC656F53A]President Barak Obama has failed[/link] to follow through on his promises and simply used the disaster for political gain and to propose radically destructive energy policy. On June 2nd, the [link= http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/03/us/politics/03obama.html]New York Times [/link]reports that Obama pitched that Congress must move aggressively towards pushing a Clean Energy Bill through into law. What would this be? Well I can tell you that it will be one that includes Cap and Trade. So in typical Alinsky style, Obama uses crisis to benefit his political aspirations of installing a “top down” authoritarian energy policy which will absolutely cripple our energy infrastructure. As you have read this news and watched the videos included, it must be realized that this has been delivered to you not from a national media outlet but from an independent and free alternative media outlet. This is the media that the Obama administration and most of Congress wants to silence. The main stream media is predominately controlled or influenced by the beltway bureaucrats. Due to their inability to expose the truth, the alternative media has risen to the cause. This is the essence of free speech. Without the alternative media you will not get the various perspectives from the left and especially the right. Instead the government will determine what you need to know. I implore you to read this[link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/pdf/FTCAmericorps.pdf] Federal Trade Commission Staff Discussion.[/link] What this discussion shows is that the federal government wishes to get more involved in the every day media broadcasting for a number of different reasons. They cite the recent internet rebellion against the establishment of conventional media. They also cite that regulation is the answer improving the quality of media. What they are doing with regulation is simply eliminating quantity. Does this sound familiar? Within the doctrines of Dialectic Process or Dialectic Materialism professed by the Marxist, you will find Quality rather than Quantity. The Quantity is that of a variety of choices and perspectives. They believe that they can dictate quality. I would argue that their quality simply enforces their policy and agendas. This is the idea behind propaganda. Within this document, you are witnessing the proposal of State controlled media. This is a plank Statism or Communism an will inevitably end America as we know it.. On page 17, the document even states that they will establish a journalism division in AmeriCorps. They say that it will encourage journalism. I would argue that the AmeriCorps members will simply become the “brown shirts” walking our neighborhoods that have been indoctrinated to spread propaganda. Should we have learned our lesson from the Nazi and Soviet regimes? They also try to eliminate news aggregators who compile large portfolios of news from various news agencies. The Drudge Report is a perfect example or even the news on Lanterns of Liberty. How far will this go? Well if I share an article with you, this could be considered a copyright violation. It would be compared to me copying a music CD and giving it to you. The move is to protect the big media and eliminate quantity. This will force you to go to the major news agencies where you will have to eventually pay and the smaller free sites that aggregate the news will be eliminated. They view the aggregators as parasites. Page 6 discusses “Copyright and Fair Use” of the news itself. In other words if you are a news agency and cover a story, that story is copyrighted and can’t be used again by another agency in order to receive profit. This will balkanize the industry of journalism inevitably forcing the litigation process to consume all that exist in it. What this will do is destroy the blogging industry inevitably. Ultimately the state will control the media and you will be subject to the temporarily elected representative’s picture that they wish to paint without further discussion. Bloggers like myself often quote articles and may be unable to do this under these regulations. this will extremely limit my ability to express free speach. Don’t let this happen in America. Spread the word. Thu, 03 Jun 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=FF147D6D-123F-7491-A42AAFC47725E399 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=CD4C7E8A-123F-7491-A44BB4464C24E53D The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico has become a complete disaster in all respects. Most of all the political process has typically become a dog and pony show. On the Monday May 24th Mark Levin show, Mark covered the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 which explains that the President holds dictatorial powers in order to clean up a spill. After reading this act, Mark is correct. You can read the act [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/pdf/oilspill.pdf]here[/link]. So why doesn’t he take control over the situation? I would be so bold as to say it has to be politically motivated. Why not let BP squander the opportunity to fix this? Let’s look at this video of Plaquemines Parrish President Nungesser [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jQUfOZTK-Y&feature=player_embedded] here[/link] where it is apparent that the governmental process is corrupt with political agenda. So you ask me, “what the agenda is?” I would simply say to follow the typical Alinsky/Marxist political tactic of “not letting a crisis go to waste”. [link=http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9FTDV7O1&show_article=1 ]Brietbart[/link] reports that Congress is going to use this crisis to quadruple the taxes on a barrel of oil to 32 cents which will raise 11 billion dollars over the next decade which will inevitably wallow in the slush fund with all of our other tax dollars. In the mean time, while lawmakers make laws instead of demanding results, they are making laws to simply take more money from tax payers. Yes you will pay higher gas prices in order to supplement the oil companies’ higher taxes. Will you blame government or the oil companies for higher prices at the pump? Keep in mind this fund already existed with billions of dollars in it but had not a single boom to manage and mitigate this disaster. It is an atrocity how the federal government has managed this. Is this Obama’s [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?Entry=6140DE34-123F-7491-A45499CBC656F53A ]Katrina[/link]? What is most important to unveil is the reason that we are in this trouble in the first place. Despite the [link=http://serc.carleton.edu/microbelife/topics/deadzone/ ]dead zone[/link] at the shores of Louisiana due to high nutrient and nitrogen levels, environmentalists have driven oil rig permitting and drilling to deeper then ever depths where disastrous potential is extreme. Pushing the rigs into these deep waters drives up cost and risks of drilling oil. As you can see from this disaster, the disaster has greater implications then if the rigs were in a hundred feet of water. If we were drilling in shallow waters, the well head would have been repaired within days of the explosion. Instead, we pay higher prices at the pump and we are crippled by the inability to repair the damage which exists in a realm where we have experience then we do in outer space. Lastly I would like to mention all of the people around the country that are complaining about the oil spill of our shores. Before you complain, ask yourself do you use oil that is drilled in the Gulf. If you do and you continue to complain, drill your own oil or discontinue purchasing petroleum products. It is ridiculous to hear the people around this country that live in a flat Earth reality, that believe that drilling for oil is some sort of sin against their religious deity planet earth. The fact is the result of this idiocy is a failed energy policy driven by environmentalists and the EPA, wars over seas due to economic terrorism and poor foreign policy do to oil deals and oil interests overseas. Do we think that if we do not drill in these waters off of our coast that no one else will? The [link=http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/22/business/fi-china-oil22 ]Chinese[/link] are already eying it up. Do you think that China cares about our coast or has the technological advancements that we do? I believe I covered the way China manages there environment [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/TheMachine/index.cfm?Entry=160C5968-123F-7491-A4007FF8A98C0576 ]here[/link]. So Mr Obama, get your foot off of BP’s throat and get to working together for this country and our precious coastlines instead of posturing for your reckless political career. Mon, 24 May 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=CD4C7E8A-123F-7491-A44BB4464C24E53D http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B33CAD68-123F-7491-A433FBD1199C0471 Radical: Progressivism For months we have laid out the step by step progression to the socialist and inevitable communist end. The United States is unique in that it is the only country founded on freedom and liberty endowed by a supreme immortal creator which is listed within the declaration of its founding. The founders believed that all American’s were gifted with unalienable rights given to us by this creator. The United States’ progression towards tyranny through the deterioration of individual, community, and states rights has been slow and gradual. It has been so slow that most American’s have been unaware of the progression. Understand that it would be fruitless to argue whether or not “The Machine” was an intentional totalitarian take over of the United States. It would also have us posing as naïve to believe that there are people and organizations out there that employ the tactics of Alinsky, Marx, and others that we discussed in order to dismantle American exceptionalism. It is important to realize the seduction and gravity of the governmental power. Human nature provides us with the attribute of resolve where we all wish to fix what appears to be wrong. All too often ideology out performs commons sense. We all wish for things to be better. We look to smart and intelligent people to make life better for us and represent our best interests. Sometimes the intellectual uses his intelligence to disguise his true agenda. Remember that the Communist, Marxist or Socialist has no moral bound to civilization other than his or her own ideological morality. Their morality resides only in their cause reflecting whatever means to their desired ends. Where our elected officials go wrong is when the wants and wishes of a minority of special interests over power the interests of the majority. It is always the majority that has failed to be vocal and active in the political process because this majority is busy driving the economy and innovation. The majority is a trusting people that see goodness in people and do not wish to focus on the faults of these people. It is this trust that has been the heart and soul of the United States and has also been the weakness that has allowed the immoral and unethical to infiltrate and manipulate the status quo to be undesirable and unrecognizable. It has been the actions of those that wish to change the United States to something that wasn’t intended and also wish to cover up the roots and traditions of our founding fathers that violate the trust of the majority. They see the majority as lacking intelligence and a true understanding to what is good for all of us. It is their ideological view seeded with influence from the University system whose many professors have never experienced beads of sweat that have built the United States. It is their ideological belief that is rooted in a utopian idea that exists only as a dream and is if fact unachievable without an angelic metamorphosis of all men or the extermination of all that don’t wish to agree. Within the last 2 years, the majority has slowly awakened from apathy. They see the planks of Marx and Engels that have slowly dissolved their liberties and now see those that hold the chains that they wish to bind them with unconstitutional law. Not only do they see the chief robbers of liberty but also the representatives that are chained to the ideological toil in the name of a political party. Many representatives have become seduced by the cesspool of power that has become Washington and slowly slide into the gutter of self interest. What they may still be unaware of is the vast networks of proverbial communes of ideologically driven drones posing with a cause but acting with the outcome communism. With the recent passage of massive Health Care legislation, which is one of the biggest entitlements in the history of the United States against the will of the majority, America’s majority has become angry and has taken back its trust from their employed representatives. The employer has finally decided to hold the employee accountable. We see on the horizon a gloomy future with high taxes and never-ending laws that restrict freedom for us and generations beyond us. We see the bleeding of our wealth, property, and liberty which will erode our pursuit of our individually defined happiness. We see the erosion of innovation and our will to innovate for the future is ever more uncertain. We see our individuality slowly being smeared in the name of the collective. Most of all we see the America Flag bleeding into a simple shade of red with all 50 stars blending into one. Americans are slowly being corralled by immoral beings wishing to strip away the view of our individual dreams. We are being stolen from in massive ponzi schemes in order to fund our own demise. We are being forced to fund programs that are rejected by our morals for the sake of a state driven morality created by imperfect men. We are told to deny our creator by continual bombardment of the opiate of entertainment while our kindergarten offspring are force fed innocence stealing teachings of [link=http://www.plannedparenthood.org/resources/implementing-sex-education-23516.htm]heterosexuality and homosexuality[/link]. Our children are told from our elected officials and Hollywood not to [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4l3zp3H_gE]listen to parents[/link]. Our history is being distorted and changed. [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdV3l-oYR88&feature=related]Example 1[/link] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJMSKup8q6Y&feature=related]Barack Obama mocks America’s Christian heritage [/link] [link=httphttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1-vpAqFjww&feature=related]Our Christian founding[/link] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsmDmxIUqGE]Racist Claims with sexual innuendoes[/link] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDm9j2s39ww&feature=related]Only a few?[/link] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVzJ2RIlUwE&feature=related]KKK[/link] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj0vzAuHqPk]Republicans were not racists[/link] All of this is to undermine America’s founding. By attacking American history especially the denial of a creator, revolutionaries in our country wish to carve out the pillars of fundamental strength of individual liberty and expose them as not strength but infringements on social justice. The recent immigration problem is an apparent progressive attempt to destroy the America that we live in. As a last mention of “The Machine”, I will quote a speech from Former Democratic Colorado Governor Richard Lamm at a convention in 2004 sponsored by the Federation for Immigration Reform. [i] “I have a secret plan to destroy America. If you believe, as many do, that America is too smug, too white bread, too self-satisfied, too rich, let's destroy America. It is not that hard to do. History shows that nations are more fragile than their citizens think. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and they all fall, and that "an autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide." Here is my plan: 1. We must first make America a bilingual-bicultural country. History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it this way: "The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon – all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with its Basques, Bretons and Corsicans." 2. I would then invent "multiculturalism" and encourage immigrants to maintain their own culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal: that there are no cultural differences that are important. I would declare it an article of faith that the black and Hispanic dropout rate is only due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out-of-bounds. 3. We can make the United States a "Hispanic Quebec" without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently, "The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved, not by tolerance, but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically, and what it meant to be anAmerican , we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together." I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with a salad bowl metaphor. It is important to insure that we have various cultural sub-groups living in America reinforcing their differences, rather than Americans emphasizing their similarities. 4. Having done all this, I would make our fastest-growing demographic group the least educated – I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50 percent dropout rate from school. 5. I would then get the big foundations and big business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of victimology. I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was all the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population. 6. I would establish dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would "celebrate diversity." "Diversity" is a wonderfully seductive word. It stresses differences rather than commonalities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other – that is, when they are not killing each other. A "diverse," peaceful or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together, and we can take advantage of this myopia. Look at the ancient Greeks. Dorf's "World History" tells us: "The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshiped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic Games in honor of Zeus, and all Greeks venerated the shrine of Apollo at Delphi. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty. Yet, all of these bonds together were not strong enough to overcome two factors ... (local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions ...)" If we can put the emphasis on the "pluribus," instead of the "unum," we can balkanize America as surely as Kosovo. 7. Then I would place all these subjects off-limits – make it taboo to talk about. I would find a word similar to "heretic" in the 16th century – that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like "racist", "xenophobe" halt argument and conversation. Having made America a bilingual-bicultural country, having established multiculturalism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of "victimology," I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra – "because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good." I would make every individual immigrant sympatric and ignore the cumulative impact. 8. Lastly, I would censor Victor Davis Hanson's book "Mexifornia" – this book is dangerous; it exposes my plan to destroy America. So please, please – if you feel that America deserves to be destroyed – please, please – don't buy this book! This guy is on to my plan. "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum." – Noam Chomsky, American linguist and U.S. media and foreign policy critic.”[/i] Wed, 19 May 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B33CAD68-123F-7491-A433FBD1199C0471 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=9CD69FC1-123F-7491-A4A6BAE5C945C7A7 I have been watching the debate of the passed Arizona Immigration bill. Unlike other issues in the past, I have waited to comment on this new bill until I have had the opportunity to watch the political atmosphere that surrounds the debate. With this issue, the issue is clear. Illegal means illegal. We are a nation of laws not a nation of relativity. [b] hold CTRL when clicking links[/b] So where does the spin come in? [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiUzJB3nagw] Politicians[/link] profess that corporations are taking advantage of illegal immigrants by paying them lower wages then the American citizen which can not be disputed.[/link] Very often they go over board attacking the corporations whose sole purpose is to profit by keeping its cost as low as possible. Does this justify breaking the law? Absolutely not. It is despicable that someone would break the law in order to achieve personal gain. So does the problem exist with the corporation? No, it exists in the enforcement of the law. This is why Arizona put the following in there law: [i]Sec. 6. Section 23-212, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read: 23-212. Knowingly employing unauthorized aliens; prohibition; false and frivolous complaints; violation; classification; license suspension and revocation; affirmative defense A. An employer shall not knowingly employ an unauthorized alien. If, in the case when an employer uses a contract, subcontract or other independent contractor agreement to obtain the labor of an alien in this state, the employer knowingly contracts with an unauthorized alien or with a person who employs or contracts with an unauthorized alien to perform the labor, the employer violates this subsection.[/i] Still the problem exists in enforcing this law. If the state and federal governments don’t properly enforce the law then the law is meaningless and ineffective. It is with this point that we can see that the problem lies in government. May 11th 2010 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUcxG6j0Jks&feature=related May 13th 2010 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5U4tI_qzyH0&feature=related To ease Mr. Holder’s fears I will quote the bill directly: [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/PDF/HB_2162Signed.pdf]HB2162[/link] section 13.1509 states: [i] C. A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not consider race, color or national origin in the enforcement of this section except to extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution.[/i] If Mr. Holder had read the law before commenting, he would have seen that it is against the law to profile for the sake of determining immigration status. In the parent senate bill [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/pdf/sb1070s.pdf]SB1070[/link] I quote, [i] B. For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the united states, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person. the person's immigration status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to 8 united states code section 1373(c). [/i] The officer must have reasonable and lawful suspicion (profiling is against the law) in order to ask for immigration status. For someone to say that asking for your identification is a form of profiling or racism is absurd. When we are pulled over for a traffic violation or when we use a credit card, we are asked for identification. This is in order to enforce laws and eliminate illegal activity. When travelling to other countries, you will most always be asked to produce a passport for any type of transaction. These are common procedures. I think this is sufficient to back up the point that the issues here in this argument are not law issues but political issues. Let’s look at more political inaccuracy, pandering, and dishonesty. [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYValHENoVo ]Nation of laws[/link]. President Obama makes the comment that we are a nation of immigrants. He is correct. Where he misleads in the comment to follow is that we all immigrated illegally. We colonized in America in a land of Native American’s who most welcomed us here. To my knowledge there was no established government of Native American law that prohibited people from Europe to colonize in North America. In fact the history that I have read states that the Native American culture if the early colonization was lawless. Initially the colonies adopted there own immigration policy. Eventually the Federal Government passed its own law once the United States was formed. It was called the Naturalization Act of 1790. It was a law that allowed a legal process in order to give a path for immigrants to become citizens. This law however was racially biased. It states that immigrants that wish to be naturalized must be “free white persons”. Over many years the immigration law has been repealed and amended. In 1906 it became law that in order to become a citizen, you must be able to speak English. In 1952 the racial bias was removed during the civil rights era. In this [link= http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/lpr_fr_2008.pdf]2008 DHS Immigration Flow Report[/link] it is apparent that the systems in place for legal immigration exist and are being followed by some. So what is it that immigration is such a problem? The laws are not being enforced. Despite dismal efforts to secure the border, the federal government has been unsuccessful and quite frankly unwilling to address the problem of illegal immigration. What has happened is the law of the land has been replaced by politically motivated socially relative arguments. The law has been replaced with polarizing ridicule of those who support current law. [b]What is the overall political strategy of amnesty?[/b] The adoption of millions of illegal immigrants is a political strategy that is pretty obvious. The possibility of attaining the votes of 40 million nationalized immigrants would solidify victory in 2012. The problem exists that this could back fire. The political stage must be set. Inflammatory media coverage, disingenuous political speeches by our leaders, and racial rhetoric set this stage. What is important to understand is that the whole world is watching. Here is a report from [link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4ltqJ8-FG8]Al Jezeera[/link] on the new law in Arizona. Notice that there is no mention of the section of the law that prohibits racial profiling. [b]How is this misinformation fanning the flame?[/b] What this video of a [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGqPo5ofk0s&feature=player_embedded]radical pro revolutionary teacher[/link] represents the extreme edges of the argument using the political environment for creating civil unrest for the sake of overthrowing the government. Here is an example of a [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDlutO0KK7g]woman threatening violence[/link]. All of this has been created by misinformation and the lack of recognition of the true problem. The problem is inefficient and ineffective law enforcement by the federal government. Arizona has simply reacted to the violence like in this Fox [link= http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/03/30/illegal-immigrant-suspected-murder-arizona-rancher/]article[/link] which express the need for law enforcement. [b]Where does the racist rhetoric come from?[/b] Despite the political fanning of the flames, there is a legitimate concern over racism within the immigration argument. Notice I mentioned immigration and not illegal immigration. This however comes from the left. Dr. John Tanton is a left wing activists working through groups like the Sierra Club where radical environmentalism and zero population growth advocacy ferment. Some of his concerns are listed as follows: [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92oeYwxsLoQ&feature=related]Conservation (Planned Parenthood) [/link] [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmIEFN6lqds]Zero Population Growth[/link] [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wuQ6vMReYs&feature=related]COPE[/link] [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htw2b4iXCEc&feature=related]population momentum like Mao implemented in China[/link] So to answer population growth problems, Dr. John Tanton brings up legitimate concerns but cites that Planned Parenthood is a viable solution. Once you enter the conversation concerning Planned Parenthood you are immediately confronted with abortion, eugenics and other radical left wing proposals that would high-light the tragedies of the holocaust and other ethnic cleansing techniques. Must I quote the founder of Planned Parenthood [link= http://lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/index.cfm?Entry=A34D66BA-123F-7491-A4B08CE50CD4B9A3]Margaret Sanger[/link]: Birth control aims: “to create a race of thoroughbreds,” Margaret Sanger, Birth Control Review, Nov. 1921 (p. 2) “More children from the fit, less from the unfit — that is the chief aim of birth control.” (Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12) “…human weeds,’ ‘reckless breeders,’ ’spawning… human beings who never should have been born.” Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, (referring to immigrants and the poor) “Those least fit to carry on the race are increasing most rapidly. … Funds that should be used to raise the standard of our civilization are diverted to maintenance of those who should never have been born.”—Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, p.279. “The marriage bed is the most degenerating influence in the social order,” –Sanger, (p.23) “The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” -Margaret Sanger, letter to Clarence Gamble, Dec. 10,1939. - Sanger manuscripts, Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College. Is Dr. John Tanton a facet of the Nazi Party or other racially biased groups? I would say the chances are slim and quite honestly unimportant. The fact is his left wing opinions can be misconstrued as racist. This leaves other left wing groups to attack him and the immigration argument. The Southern Poverty Law Center has pursued Dr. John Tanton as a part of the right-wing Nazi anti-immigration conspiracy. In this [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpiq1nAK4a0&feature=related]video[/link] Heidi Beirich explains that the leftist Dr. John Tanton with a reaching theory of his position in the middle of a white supremacy ring. No where does this rhetoric mention anything about the illegal immigration issues. In conclusion, clarity that needs to be brought to the debate is the repercussions of illegal immigration. Many of the illegal immigrants are being taken advantage of because of their invisibility to the justice system. The welfare state has become a major burden on many States. [link= http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/immigrationnaturalizatio/a/caillegals.htm]About.com[/link] reports that California pays $11 billion a year for illegal immigration. When California claims that they need $7 billion in American tax payer funds, I would argue, that California needs to cut its illegal immigration by 75% and the State will have it. This is what Arizona has recognized. Despite all of the crime and murders that have been a result of illegal immigrants, the lawless nature of people that are unaccounted for and undocumented cause major issues with governing the people. The language barrier which could be the biggest problem is evident. When driving on the streets or just trying to communicate, language barriers can be proved to be disastrous. Without knowing the English language and understanding the Constitution and other laws, how can we expect immigrants to assimilate in society in a healthy lawful was. This is why we must enforce the laws as they were written. To allow people to just roam the United States without documentation would lend them to predators or temp them to be predators. This would promote anarchy. Sat, 15 May 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=9CD69FC1-123F-7491-A4A6BAE5C945C7A7 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=785CF1E0-123F-7491-A425E33F8025A36F Greece [b] hold CTRL while clicking links [/b] What we have seen in Greece recently is a combination of the resilient freedom loving Greek and the angry entitlement poisoned Greek. This is important to recognize because the motives are completely different. The freedom loving Greek wishes for the government to free the people and wish to pay fewer taxes. On the other hand there are the anarchist and the communist movement who angry because of the lack of entitlements and cuts to programs like social security, welfare, and Union benefits. They are working towards the same result despite their differing ideologies. So why are these groups so angry? What must be understood about Greece is the make up of its government. It is a parliamentary republic. In short this is a democratic government that draws no fine lines between branches of government. Typically the countries with former monarchies moved to this form of government. Countries like Spain, Canada, Australia, India, and many others have a similar government structure to Greece. The country is made up of several parties. They consist of: • New Democracy (ND) 30% - Centrism, Christian Democracy, Conservatism, Liberal Conservatism • Panhellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK) – 53% - Socialism • Communist Party of Greece (KKE) – 7% - Communism, Marxism-Leninism • Coalition of the Radical Left (SYRIZA) – 4% - Democratic socialism, Anti-capitalism, Eco-socialism, Social progressivism • Popular Orthodox Rally (LAOS) – 2% - National conservatism, Christian democracy, Right-wing populism, Euroscepticism, Social conservatism, Greek nationalism You can see that the Leftist, Socialist, and Communist consist of 64% of the Parliament currently and the conservatives are left the minor remainder. Without being partisan, let’s simply look at the obvious. Read this 2009 [link=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8413391.stm]article[/link] from the BBC. It is evident that the Communists and the leaders of the PAME Union are inciting the people to revolt in a choreographed approach against the government What is also interesting is the European Union has a corruption index. First let me mention it is bad when corruption is so bad that you need and index for it. [link=http://livingingreece.gr/2008/09/24/eu-corruption-perceptions-index-2008/]Take a look.[/link] Greece is 5th on the list while the USA is listed at 19th. To quote the article: [i]Corruption in Greece is notoriously rife at all levels of government. State and local officials go unchecked, ministers elected to Parliament enjoy immunity from prosecution while in office, and a lower administrative court can overturn decisions rendered by the Supreme Court. There are countless loopholes and no accountability.[/i] Does this sound familiar? Another article explains that the average Greek pays 1355 euros (currently $1990) in bribes per year. This includes speeding up the wait in public hospitals… Must I mention that this is what the conservatives have been warning about? There is corruption in the private sector. I must also mention that the previous quote explains that the public sector is immune to prosecution. So now that I have painted the picture of the Socialist entitlement corruption and the political make up, realize the view of our future. How can massive government corruption exist if the government isn’t massive? This is what the conservative fears. The entitlement mentality is inflamed when the entitlements disappear do to economic collapse. Sadly the system will collapse do to the massive entitlements. The Greeks are angry for several reasons. The Communists Unions and Socialists Unions are angry because the entitlements are not being supplied as promised by the politicians. This is apparent here in America. [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSh7WUK1GDc&feature=player_embedded]SEIU[/link] It is obvious that the Progressives running our government Nationalized GM to save the Union pensions and entitlements. Despite their loyalties, they have put in the recent Health Care bill, the Cadillac plans of the unions will be taxed only after Obama’s possible second term is this put into effect. The conservative Greeks are angry because the government is so corrupt and spending recklessly. This is also apparent in our country. [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1qdNhqiUzM]Tea Party[/link] With the entitlements ratcheting up the federal deficit, amnesty of illegal immigrants just ads to the tension between the entitlement groups and the anti-entitlement groups. This is evidence that the violence as seen in Greece is coming to our shores. [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn0HdZlIDKQ]violence in Arizona[/link] It must be understood that the reason all of this violence I occurring is because of entitlements. The entitlement system will collapse in America much like it did in Greece. Greece differs in that it is wrapped within the European Union (EU) with the inability to inflate its currency by printing more. Greece must get bail out funds from the EU and is held in a proverbial slavery to the EU. This fans the flames of government corruption and allows all other countries around the world to pay for Greece’s irresponsibility. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) then becomes a slush fund for subsidizing failure. The United States is the biggest contributor to the IMF and is directly affected by the economic failure of Greece. The US will ultimately be negatively affected as the European meltdown continues. This is why May has been the worst month in market history. Greece is the first to fall as there will be more to come. We must end the entitlements gradually and responsibly in order to prevent any further economic destruction. To think that our government officials do not realize the repercussions of the reckless spending would be naïve. It is evident that the rate of spending is out of control and will eventually lead to massive inflation or hyper-inflation. The only way out of this disaster is through the private sector. Minimizing unemployment is the way to correct this. To do this government must be reduced in order to reduce the tax burden on Americans and business. This will spark economic growth which inevitably will make Americans more self sufficient and independent. If this doesn’t happen, the system will collapse. With evidence laid out in the “Machine Chronicles”, there are people in this country and in our government that wish to destroy the current system and install a Socialist system and even a more radical Communist regime. By implementing Cloward and Piven through massive unaffordable entitlements purposely, the current system will collapse. When the collapse occurs, the regulations and systems put into place will control the people and ultimately enslave them. Sat, 08 May 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=785CF1E0-123F-7491-A425E33F8025A36F http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=6140DE73-123F-7491-A432C1159ADE1592 As the disaster in the Gulf unfolds there are definitely some very tragic instances that have taken place. The unfortunate deaths that have occurred are tragic and our prayers are with the family members and those lost souls that worked endlessly to provide a better more technologically advanced society. It is also tragic that there will be so many fishermen, hotel owners, hotel employees, casino owners, casino employees, tourists, beach residents and many others that will be economically stricken and negatively affected otherwise. Lastly the unfortunate environmental affects of this disaster are incomprehensible and could leave evidence of its history for years on our shorelines. The other tragedy that we are witnessing is the political fighting and misinformation that is being spread around on the air waves and on the television concerning this disaster. Let me first say that I do believe BP is responsible for this disaster and should pay for clean up. I will also say that the government has done little to react to this event in a timely manner. I only say this because Obama, Napoliotano, Gibbs and many other government officials have been saying that they acted as early as “Day 1”. [link=http://www.politico.com/largevideobox.html?bcpid=15202024001&bclid=1201016315&bctid=82523507001]This is what you call a barrage of talking points[/link] Since I have trouble with people that lie to the American public I wish to expose them. If I were to ask you what is the agency that should be the first to respond. What agency would that be? I would hope your answer would be the EPA. Lisa Jackson is the head of the EPA. So if the EPA should be the first to respond to the disaster in the Gulf, where was Ms. Lisa Jackson through out the disaster? I will explain I detail: April 21st [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6do4M4q1xg&feature=related] Day 1[/link] April 22nd [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3AvrlYfiJE&feature=related]Day 2[/link] • [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpyWqLWKWUs&feature=PlayList&p=166E7031057441FA&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=47 ]Earth Day 2010[/link] event with “Green for All”, Riverside Valley Community Garden, West Harlem, New York." Four to 5:30 p.m. • [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ho3cNhA1ok&feature=PlayList&p=166E7031057441FA&playnext_from=PL&index=48&playnext=2 ]David Letterman [/link]show taping, Letterman studios, New York, No Press allowed. • No public comments about the Gulf. April 23rd Day 3 • 1:30 p.m. Meet and greet with winners of the Goldman environmental prize, EPA headquarters. • 3:15 p.m. meeting with Norwegian Minister of the Environment Erik Solheim, EPA headquarters, No Press allowed. • No public comments about the Gulf April 24th Day 4 • 12:15 Earth Day attendee address, National Mall EPA tent between 4th and 7th Street Northwest, Washington, DC. • 12:30p.m., meeting with Marina Silva, former environmental secretary of Brazil, National Mall, Washington, DC. • No public comments about the Gulf April 25th Day 5 • 5 p.m., Earth Day concert. National Mall Earth Day, network stage, 8th Street Northwest between Independence and Constitution Avenue. • No public comments on the Gulf April 26th Day 6 • 9:45 a.m., EPA NASA MOU signing, Howard University Middle School of Mathematics and Science, Washington, DC. • 1:40p.m., meeting with Archer Daniels Midland chairman and CEO Pat Woertz, EPA headquarters. • 5 p.m., [link= http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-april-26-2010/lisa-p--jackson]Daily Show taping, Daily Show studios, New York, New York.[/link] • No public comments on the Gulf April 28th Day 8 • 9:30 to noon, House Energy and Commerce Committee, subcommittee on energy and environmental hearing." • 12 p.m., Congressional Club First Ladies Luncheon, Hilton Washington hotel. • 2:00p.m. meeting with health organization leaders to discuss TSCA reform, EPA headquarters. • 5 p.m. Meeting with members of the Connecticut delegation, Hart Office Building, No Press allowed • No public comments on the Gulf April the 28th Day 9 • No public comment on the Gulf April 29th Day 10 • 8:45 a.m., memorial service, Dr. Dorothy Height, National Cathedral, Washington. • 12 p.m. White House press conference, the White House. • 2 p.m. meeting with administration officials, the White House • [link=http://www.wkrg.com/gulf_oil_spill/article/obama-sends-top-aides-to-oil-spill-site/879730/Apr-29-2010_11-51-am/]Obama sends Justice Department and other aids to Gulf[/link] • No public comment on the Gulf April 30th Day 11 • [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpU1NK994Dc] Obama responds to the spill[/link] May 1st Day12 • Lisa Jackson flies over the oil slick and later addresses public for the first time May 1st, 7 p.m. • White House Correspondents Dinner May 2nd Day 12 • [link=http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/05/obama-bp-america-gulf-oil-spill.html]Obama flies over oil slick and arrives [/link] I hope this little bit of info will clarify this for you. Mon, 03 May 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=6140DE73-123F-7491-A432C1159ADE1592 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=56B8FCDA-123F-7491-A46871B6CC663A7A As the stars align for a massive litigation in response to the Deepwater Horizon oil drilling rig accident in the Gulf of Mexico, the political stars are aligning as well. Obama has dispatched his White House aids 8 days after the disaster started. Despite the unfortunate destruction that this rig accident will cause, we must not take our eyes of the reality what the drilling of oil provides for our world. We can all agree that we need an alternative to oil as a source of fuel and component to all of our everyday products. Until we allow innovators to bring the alternative to the mainstream we must do what we can do to innovate the oil and gas industry to prevent his type of disaster from occurring again. To get a perspective of what has occurred with this disaster, listen to this anonymous witness to the explosion on the rig from the [link=http://www.marklevinshow.com/Article.asp?id=1790422&spid=32364]Mark Levin show.[/link] The fact is that what we do in the Gulf of Mexico is truly amazing. For years we have produced clean energy and this event has completely eclipsed the innovation of energy production and product development. Perspective is needed to view this event. Lets review all the products that need oil in order to produce. • Solvents • Diesel fuel • Motor Oil • Bearing Grease • Ink • Floor Wax • Ballpoint Pens • Football Cleats • Upholstery • Sweaters • Boats • Insecticides • Bicycle Tires • Sports Car Bodies • Nail Polish • Fishing lures • Dresses • Tires • Golf Bags • Perfumes • Cassettes • Dishwasher parts • Tool Boxes • Shoe Polish • Motorcycle Helmet • Caulking • Petroleum Jelly • Transparent Tape • CD Player • Faucet Washers • Antiseptics • Clothesline • Curtains • Food Preservatives • Basketballs • Soap • Vitamin Capsules • Antihistamines • Purses • Shoes • Dashboards • Cortisone • Deodorant • Footballs • Putty • Dyes • Panty Hose • Refrigerant • Percolators • Life Jackets • Rubbing Alcohol • Linings • Skis • TV Cabinets • Shag Rugs • Electrician's Tape • Tool Racks • Car Battery Cases • Epoxy • Paint • Mops • Slacks • Insect Repellent • Oil Filters • Umbrellas • Yarn • Fertilizers • Hair Coloring • Roofing • Toilet Seats • Fishing Rods • Lipstick • Denture Adhesive • Linoleum • Ice Cube Trays • Synthetic Rubber • Speakers • Plastic Wood • Electric Blankets • Glycerin • Tennis Rackets • Rubber Cement • Fishing Boots • Dice • Nylon Rope • Candles • Trash Bags • House Paint • Water Pipes • Hand Lotion • Roller Skates • Surf Boards • Shampoo • Wheels • Paint Rollers • Shower Curtains • Guitar Strings • Luggage • Aspirin • Safety Glasses • Antifreeze • Football Helmets • Awnings • Eyeglasses • Clothes • Toothbrushes • Ice Chests • Footballs • Combs • CD's & DVD's • Paint Brushes • Detergents • Vaporizers • Balloons • Sun Glasses • Tents • Heart Valves • Crayons • Parachutes • Telephones • Enamel • Pillows • Dishes • Cameras • Anesthetics • Artificial Turf • Artificial limbs • Bandages • Dentures • Model Cars • Folding Doors • Hair Curlers • Cold cream • Movie film • Soft Contact lenses • Drinking Cups • Fan Belts • Car Enamel • Shaving Cream • Ammonia • Refrigerators • Golf Balls • Toothpaste • Gasoline Can we do without oil? Pretty stupid question I would say. So now the President of the United States suspends [link=http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/gulf-mexico-oil-spill-jeopardize-obamas-offshore-drilling/story?id=10512504]new drilling[/link] until the investigation is complete. Why? It is a political statement. The fact is that this accident was an anomaly that may never be fully explained. We are not dealing with a drunken captain running a super tanker aground. We are dealing with a destroyed state of the art rig that lies on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico a mile under the surface. How long could this take? It could take years. To realize the scope of this disaster, let’s look at the pictures. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/horizon.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/horizon2.jpg[/img] This rig is not connected to the bottom of the Gulf og Mexico. It is considered a ultra-deepwater dynamic positioned column-stabilized semi-submersible drilling rig. Imagine a ship 396 feet long and 256 feet wide. Think of a football field of steel floating over a section of the Gulf 30,000 feet deep with the ability to use satellite global positioning to hover over the drill head with pin-point accuracy. The rig has the ability to house 130 crew members. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/35.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/36.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/21.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/22.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/23.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/29.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/30.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/31.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/32.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/24.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/25.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/26.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/27.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/28.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/33.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/oilrig/34.jpg[/img] Sat, 01 May 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=56B8FCDA-123F-7491-A46871B6CC663A7A http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=45B2123B-123F-7491-A46BF8BD4F738636 2009 * 2-year tax credit (total cap of $1 billion) for new chronic disease therapy investments * Medicare cuts to hospitals begin (long-term care (7/1/09) and inpatient and rehabilitation facilities (fiscal 2010)) 2009 2010 * States and federal officials review premium increases * FDA authorized to approve “follow-on” biologics * Increase brand name pharmaceutical Medicaid rebate (from 15.1% to 23.1%) * Medicare payments to physicians in primarily rural areas increase (2 years) * Deny “black liquor” eligibility for cellulosic biofuel producers credit * Tax credits provided to certain small employers for health care-related expenses * Increase adoption tax incentives for 2 years * Codify economic substance doctrine and impose penalties for underpayments (transactions on/after 3/23/10) * Provide income exclusion for specified Indian tribe health benefits provided after 3/23/10 * Temporary high-risk pool and high-cost union retiree reinsurance ($5 billion each for 3.5 years) (6/23/10) * Impose 10% tax on indoor UV tanning (7/1/10) * Medicare cuts to inpatient psych hospitals (7/1/10) * Prohibits lifetime and annual benefit spending limits (plan years beginning 9/23/10) * Prohibits non-group plans from canceling coverage (rescissions) (plan years beginning 9/23/10) * Requires plans to cover, at no charge, most preventive care (plan years beginning 9/23/10) * Allows dependents to stay on parents’ policies through age 26 (plan years beginning 9/23/10) * Provides limited protections to children with pre-existing conditions (plan years beginning 9/23/10) * Hospitals in “Frontier States” (N.D., Mont., Wyo., S.D., Utah) receive higher Medicare payments (fiscal 2011) * Hospitals in “low-cost” areas receive higher Medicare payments for 2 years ($400 million, fiscal 2011) 2011 * Medicare Advantage cuts begin * No longer allowed to use FSA, HSA, HRA, Archer MSA distributions for over-the counter medicines * Medicare cuts to home health begin * Wealthier seniors ($85k/$170k) begin paying higher Part D premiums (not indexed for inflation in Parts B/D) * Medicare reimbursement cuts when seniors use diagnostic imaging like MRIs, CT scans, etc. * Medicare cuts begin to ambulance services, ASCs, diagnostic labs, and durable medical equipment * Impose new annual tax on brand name pharmaceutical companies * Americans begin paying premiums for federal long-term care insurance (CLASS Act) * Health plans required to spend a minimum of 80% of premiums on medical claims * Physicians in “Frontier States” (N.D., Mont., Wyo., S.D., Utah) receive higher Medicare payments * Prohibition on Medicare payments to new physician-owned hospitals * Penalties for non-qualified HSA and Archer MSA distributions double (to 20%) * Seniors prohibited from purchasing power wheelchairs unless they first rent for 13 months * Brand name drug companies begin providing 50% discount in the Part D “donut hole” * 10% Medicare bonus payment for primary care and general surgery (5 years) * Employers required to report value of health benefits on W-2 * Steps towards health insurance administrative simplification (reduced paperwork, etc) begins (five year process) * Additional funding for community health centers (five years) * Seniors who hit Part D “donut hole “in 2010 receive $250 check (3/15/11) * New Medicare cuts to long-term care hospitals begin (7/1/11) * Additional Medicare cuts to hospitals and cuts to nursing homes and inpatient rehab facilities begin (fiscal 2012) * New tax on all private health insurance policies to pay for comp. eff. research (plan years beginning fiscal 2012) 2012 * Medicare cuts to dialysis treatment begins * Require information reporting on payments to corporations * Medicare to reduce spending by using an HMO-like coordinated care model (Accountable Care Organizations) * Medicare Advantage plans with a 4 or 5 star rating receive a quality bonus payment * New Medicare cuts to inpatient psych hospitals (7/1/12) * Hospital pay-for-quality program begins (fiscal 2013) * Medicare cuts to hospitals with high readmission rates begin (fiscal 2013) * Medicare cuts to hospice begin (fiscal 2013) 2013 * Impose $2,500 annual cap on FSA contributions (indexed to CPI) * Increase Medicare wage tax by 0.9% and impose a new 3.8% tax on unearned, nonactive business income for those earning over $200,000 or $250,000 for families (not indexed to inflation) * Generally increases (7.5% to 10%) threshold at which medical expenses, as a percentage of income, can be deductible * Eliminate deduction for Part D retiree drug subsidy employers receive * Impose 2.3% excise tax on medical devices * Medicare cuts to hospitals which treat low-income seniors begin * Post-acute pay for quality reporting begins * CO-OP Program: Secretary of Health and Human Services awards loans and grants for establishing nonprofit health insurers * $500,000 deduction cap on compensation paid to insurance company employees and officers * Part D “donut hole” reduction begins, reaching a 25% reduction by 2020 2014 * Individuals without government-approved coverage are subject to a tax of the greater of $695 or 2.5% of income * Employers who fail to offer “affordable” coverage would pay a $3,000 penalty for every employee that receives a subsidy through the Exchange * Employers who do not offer insurance must pay a tax penalty of $2,000 for every full-time employee * More Medicare cuts to home health begin * States must have established Exchanges * Employers with more than 200 employees can auto-enroll employees in health coverage, with opt-out * All non-grandfathered and Exchange health plans required to meet federally mandated levels of coverage * States must cover parents /childless adults up to 138% of poverty on Medicaid, receive increased FMAP * Tax credits available for Exchange-based coverage, amount varies by income up to 400% of poverty * Insurers cannot impose any coverage restrictions on pre-existing conditions (guaranteed issue/renewability) * Modified community rating: individual or family coverage; geography; 3:1 ratio for age; 1.5:1 for smoking * Insurers must offer coverage to anyone wanting a policy and every policy has to be renewed * Limits out-of-pocket cost-sharing (tied to limits in HSAs, currently $5,950/$11,900 indexed to COLA) * Insurance plans must include government-defined “essential benefits ” and coverage levels * OPM must offer at least two multi-state plans in every state * Employers can offer some employees free choice vouchers for health insurance in the Exchange * Government board (IPAB) begins submitting proposals to cut Medicare * Impose tax on nearly all private health insurance plans * Medicare payment cuts for hospital-acquired infections begin (fiscal 2015) 2015 * More Medicare cuts to home health begin 2016 * States can form interstate insurance compacts if the coverage with HHS approval (2016) 2017 * Physician pay-for-quality program begins for all physicians * States may allow large employers and multi-employer health plans to purchase coverage in the Exchange. * States may apply to the HHS secretary for a limited waiver from certain federal requirements 2018 * Impose “Cadillac tax on “high cost” plans, 40% tax on the benefit value above a certain threshold: ($10,200 individual coverage, $27,500 family or self-only union multi-employer coverage) Wed, 28 Apr 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=45B2123B-123F-7491-A46BF8BD4F738636 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=40B79520-123F-7491-A41C40B1D2E7A7A6 It is always amusing to watch the left wing politicians, who are so opposed to big business, flounder in their politics and rhetoric. Hypocrisy is at a premium in the Democratic Party as of late with the proposed financial regulatory reform. With a slight of hand, these politicians led the polarized right wing and left wing groups around the country down the road of debate. While effectively deflecting the true intentions of the legislation, the debate didn’t discuss the details of the legislation but whether or not the reform was needed. What is also perplexing is those who participate in the debate and have absolutely no idea how the financial markets operate. Could it be that they don’t understand? Could it be that they are trying to mislead the public with politics? I would say that there is a little bit of both. For a politician or anyone in the public eye to comment that Goldman Sachs is unethical because they are betting against a financial instrument is absolutely absurd and demonstrates the person’s inability to understand a trade and the inability for the media to call them out on it. Let me explain: [b]Selling a stock: [/b]Betting against a stock or any other financial instrument is a simple market principle and half of a market trade. If you own a stock and you believe that the stock is going to go down, you sell it. That is betting against the stock. If no one bets against a stock, you would never have someone betting for the stock. You see you can’t purchase a stock unless someone sells it to you or should I dare say bets against it. So let’s look at the list of ignorance. [link=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/07/goldman-sachs-denies-bett_n_528444.html]Huffington Post[/link] [link=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/07/AR2010040701697.html] Washington Post [/link] [b]Shorting a stock:[/b] Fundamentally shorting a stock is the same as selling. You can actually hold a short position in a stock which is a bet against the stock without actually purchasing it. Stick with me… If you sell ABC stock to a purchaser at $10 per share, it drops to $8 per share and you buy it back at $8 per share, you have gained $2 per share. Make sense? This type of trade occurs daily. If you know that a company is going to have a bad year and you bet against the stock you could make a profit if you sell their stock short and buy it back (cover the short position) at a lower price. In order to bet against the stock, you need someone to bet for it so they can buy the shares from you. It is a neutral transaction like all trades on the investment markets. Who has made profits betting against…? [link= http://www.thestreet.com/story/10564541/squeezing-the-shorts-soros-stocks.html]Geroge Soros[/link] [link= http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=114759]George Soros[/link] [b]Hedging your trade:[/b] Now lets put a buy and sell transaction together. Let’s say you own 500 shares of ABC stock at $10 per share. That is $5000 dollars. Currently the stock is trading at $12 per share but you fear that the stock is going to go down. In order to protect your investment you can sell 500 shares short at $12 per share and no matter what the stock does, you will be at a neutral position. The trades cancel the other trade out. This is commonly known as hedging your investment. Now imagine if you have billions under management in the market and you see a down turn in the market on the horizon. Do you sell which would propagate a further downturn and you probably couldn’t get buyers for all your stock that you wish to sell in time for the down turn. Would it be safe to say that you would hedge? [b]Taking a loss or profit:[/b] People that own a stock or other financial instrument, often say that they lost money or are losing money when a stock goes down. Fundamentally this is incorrect unless they sell the stock. I would say that if you own a stock at $10 and it goes down to $8 and you still have faith in the company, why wouldn’t you buy more? It is cheaper! This is called cost averaging. So to say that Goldman Sachs is unethical in selling short stocks or other financial instruments is a complete disregard to the fundamentals of basic economics and trading. Even if Goldman Sachs shorted financial instruments that their clients were invested in, a hedge would be a good explanation. This was even quoted in the Washington Post article. Consider as well that Goldman Sachs has thousands of investment bankers and brokers that act independently. To think that all of them agree on the direction of a stock would be absurd. Some may buy and some may sell. Is there any surprise that we are in the economic predicament that we are in with the ignorance in our government and media? The fact is that the markets are there to profit from. You can not have buyers without sellers. For Goldman Sachs to be in the financial business without the motivation to make profit or big profits for that matter would be a disregard for the fundamental reason for doing business. So why is the White House and the politicians of the left in Congress vilifying Goldman? Is it because Goldman is big business? Oh… quite to the contrary. It is a dog and pony show. Their threats are toothless and will actual favor Goldman. As sited in a [link=http://lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/index.cfm?Entry=FAA8717E-123F-7491-A44DB960D7B1E25E]previous post[/link] in February, Goldman Sachs owns a huge stake in Obama’s plan to globalize our welfare system with the distribution of wealth through the Chicago Climate Exchange. Only recently has Glenn Beck and others shared this information. No where in the media has this scheme been exposed. Here is how it falls out. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/climateexchange.jpg[/img] One piece of the puzzle that I did fail to mention is Franklin Raines. Raines served under Jimmy Carter as Director of US Office of Management and Budget and under Bill Clinton as Director of US Office of Management and Budget. He is most known for his alleged involvement in the failure of Fannie Mae where he was accused by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight for abetting widespread accounting errors facilitating large bonuses despite Fannie Mae losses. Franklin Raines also loosened loan requirements in order to facilitate lower to moderate income individuals. This act compounded the housing bubble and the sub-prime mortgage crisis as people were allowed to borrow money that they would not be able to repay. This debacle would later lead to the government takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Could Goldman Sachs have been in the loop on an inevitable market downturn? It is speculation but there are many possibilities. So how is Franklin Raines involved in Cap and Trade you ask? [link= http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/Fannie-Mae-owns-patent-on-residential-_cap-and-trade_-exchange-91532109.html ]Barbara Hollingsworth of the Washington Examiner reports [/link]that Raines had a patent approved in November of 2006 while working for Fannie Mae that positioned Fannie Mae, who was not owned by the government yet, to lock in the carbon trading market which gave it a huge stake in cap and trade legislation. Jane Bartels was another person involved in the program was Jane Bartels. Bartels filed for another patent on the software from the Chicago Climate Exchange in 2003, she would later be killed in the 911 attacks. We must understand that this false market is a mutli-TRILLION dollar market which will cripple the American economy while enriching bankers and a handful of political craftsman. You see this is a dog and pony show intended to vilify the banking industry with Goldman Sachs as the primary villain. Despite what one may think, Goldman Sachs along with other banks will benefit greatly from the Cap and Trade legislation and Financial reform legislation. The proposed financial reform legislation in congress now will create a $50,000,000,000 “rainy day fund” which is intended to prevent the future collapse of the backing industry. Barack Obama states that this fund will prevent the American people from having to bail out the bank with tax money. I would simply ask, “Where is he going to get the $50,000,000,000?” This fund will only insure big banks that wish to practice risky business. In essence it is the nationalizing of the big banks indirectly through the rainy day fund as insurance. You would think that the Democrats and socialist leaning Progressive’s would be against all of this criminal crony capitalism. I only have one thing to add. [link= https://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638]Barack Obama[/link] [link= http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/2010/04/goldman-sachs-scandal-figure-r.html] Chuck Schumer[/link] [link= http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Former-Barney-Frank-staffer-now-top-Goldman-Sachs-lobbyist-43914907.html] Barney Frank [/link] [link= http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00000019&cycle=2008 ]Hillary Clinton[/link] Tue, 27 Apr 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=40B79520-123F-7491-A41C40B1D2E7A7A6 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=0BF37018-123F-7491-A4D7FACED7C5E2A6 [b]From: TheCrazyProgressive[/b] Still, you force your theological principles onto me as if I did not have my own mind or will. The idea that what you believe is the only way is very ego-centric. Your suggestion that I research Locke outside of a university is an absurd criticism. An institute of higher education is not good enough?! Should I study justice in Bible Studies inside of a church? Would that be more acceptable to you? I understand your concern though. Something like 72% of those who teach in universities are Liberals. You act as if this country is not secular. If it were not, we would not have freedom of religion. John Locke is the very person who had this idea. Natural Law is not the same as natural justice. These two terms should always be used separately because they do not mean the same thing. An element of natural law would be gravity, or synonymous with the laws of physics. Let's never confuse reality with human inventions such as deities or godly rule on Earth. I do not accept 'Divine Command Theory' because I am not Christian. That is my right. I feel guiltless to work on Sundays, have premarital sex, etc... Because of Rousseau, the feudal political system was crushed and inalienable rights were established. Your "natural law" is not based on religious doctrine either. The essence of its creation was truly to protect us from oppression. Napoleon's reign was subsequent and not a direct result of the French Revolution. Napoleon stated, " "We have finished the romance of the Revolution, we must now begin its history, only seeking for what is real and practicable in the application of its principles, and not what is speculative and hypothetical." He thought of the Revolution as a romantic hypothesis as he took for granted the rights the revolutionaries worked for. You say Aristotle is owed a great lot of appreciation for his philosophy of social justice? I didn't think you were a big fan of distributive justice! Welcome friend! It turns out Aristotle was quite the egalitarian in his day! His idea of inalienable rights were in-line with my own actually...The concept of distributive justice entails what civilization is said to owe its individual members in a proportion:... See More... See More * Resources that are available to the society. This includes financial and market considerations. * Everyone in society will receive equitable access to basic health care needs. (Here is your Wiki fill Scott (;) You say I am un-American? To this I wittingly admit. Americanism (and I love isms) is not necessarily something I aspire to love unconditionally as you do. Not to deny the greatness of this country, but this country's "goodness" is highly contestable. America, from its conception, has contradicted its ideals of freedom and equality through slavery, segregation, McCarthyism, the poverty and ghetto-ization of millions of citizens, the unequal quality of health care and education, and the genocide and displacement of the Native American population. I would also have to argue that Limbaugh and Beck ARE trying to fundamentally transform America through their constant public bashing of environmentalists and our democratically elected government. He directs hate towards his proclaimed enemies daily without regard for truth or reason only desire for rhetoric. He hates the homeless, he hates animals, he hates everything! All this illogical hate and these conspiracy theories seep into the uneducated or unprepared minds of his listeners...creating mass-hate. That, my friend, is fundamental transformation-that is not Christian either (Eliska). In conclusion, I do not argue that Locke is still relevant. Of course he is! He is as relevant as Marx and Rousseau; which is why I have studied them all at the University (: 5 hours ago • [b]My Reply,[/b] While I respect your opinion, I believe you failed to understand my explanation of the facts. It is a fact that John Locke was one primary influence to our founders. Adam Smith is another who influenced our economic structure. They are synonymous in their philosophy; that meaning similar and not the same. Your ideas of natural justice are profoundly incorrect. Natural Justice doesn’t relate to social justice in any terms. In no way are there implications of distribution of equal property in natural justice in fact we see a glimpse of natural justice in our founding document that states our American purpose quite clearly. We se it in the statement, “We hold these truths to be self-evident,…”. This simply means that the truth is not created by man but are thrusted upon us by nature and what does the next few words say??? It says, “…that all men are created equal”. This is profound and must be understood by all Americans, not by only true conservatives. We are not equal but are only created equal and this is self evident by natural justice or simply by nature, God, or whatever you wish to name it. Our founders understood the basic fundamentals of nature and the laws that govern it. Understanding now that Social Justice is not natural justice, we must separate the activist nature of law from the blind interpretation of the law that has no influence by race, gender, or lack there of (must state that in this day in age). We are simply Americans and must be treated as such. Our judicial system must be blind of cultural labels such as African-American, Italtian-American, Native-American, and all the other classes that the Left seems to categories the social fabric. These categories are meant to separate and divide. That is how our country has been perverted by Social Justice. Social Justice implies that all categories should receive calculated reparations for the in-justice of passed people that didn’t follow our profoundly rooted fundamental that all are created equal. Once again the perversion is destructive on both sides of the in-justice. So who determines the in-justice? Well that is where it gets all grey and fuzzy. That is why Social Justice will in fact destroy all that it is said to protect. It is un-natural to distribute justice by means of human calculation. Who can truly calculate and govern fairness? What is fairness? Is it unfair that hyenas or lions eat the weakest gazelle of the pack? Well lets look at this scenario of nature. Lets imagine that we could govern the lions to where they could only eat the fastest most “socially privileged” of the gazelle pack. How would this benefit the society of gazelles or the lions? Could we possibly bring Darwin into the conversation? In respect for your liberal view I will. Darwin believed in the survival of the fittest. The most powerful lion will eliminate the weakest gazelle. The lion survives and this propagates the gazelles to be innovative in their ways of protection. This wasn’t designed by gazelles or lions. This was developed by nature or must I say natural law. Does nature care if it is fair that the weakest gazelle feeds the fastest lion? No… it is simply law. So to get into further detail about Rousseau would purely speculative without detailed explanation. I can appreciate your opinion on his relevance to the French Revolution and your belief that his philosophy didn’t have anything to do with the rise of Napoleon. For me to debate this would require another forum for the discussion. I can only detail to you the fact that Locke and Adam Smith influenced our founders profoundly. I can only detail to you the fact that Rousseau influenced the French to revolt. I would just ask for you to realize that America became the most prosperous and innovative nation on earth because of natural law. France did not. If you wish to try and engineer nature or put your faith in those that are so arrogant and believe they can, you will be sadly disappointed. The University is a great place to understand nature, not to try and engineer it. Liberal Universities pervert the education system by preaching Social Justice instead of teaching natural law. Teaching natural justice is not teaching religion. Although religion is a way of interpreting the functions of nature in a spiritual manner, all religions still refer back to nature law. In fact, God as a judge acts blindly not by race, gender, or eye color. No matter how you wish to define nature or its laws it is still law. For us to fathom nature or God, is simply arrogant. We can learn from God and nature and try to model its relevance and be one with them not fight them. Thu, 22 Apr 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=0BF37018-123F-7491-A4D7FACED7C5E2A6 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=9B7C9B08-123F-7491-A46D649EFFE0FF51 Radical: Progressivism Now that we have laid out the organism we must now explain the environment that the organism exists in. All around the world socialism has been slowly being implemented. The United Nations has been gobbling up sovereignty in order create a global economy and also a global welfare system. We have lined the steps of the [link=http://lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/index.cfm?Entry=CF520FD9-123F-7491-A471E2FAC9D4C85E]United Nations [/link]in detail here in the “Machine Chronicles”. With the complete failure of all communist systems and socialist systems around the world, the people around the world would not willingly accept the radical ideology of massive wealth distribution, socialism, and ultimately communism. The ideologues that drive these philosophies have dwelled within there narcissism and decided that against the will of the people that they are going to redistribute and destroy wealth. Never in this long documentary about the progression towards communism did we ever say that the range of ideologues discussed were unintelligent. In fact they are very intelligent in most cases. Sadly their narcissism and ideology drove them to do very evil things or influence really evil people. The collapse of the United States economy is a perfect example. This was implemented through government policy with the passing of the [link=http://lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/index.cfm?Entry=3E6435E5-123F-7491-A4A85C5F0BFE39C7]Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977[/link] during Carter’s Presidency. To not anticipate that this law would be a disaster is a complete absurdity. The environment has been set for years. The world has waited on the United States to turn the corner to socialism. The United Nations has waited to greet the United States at the door of one world government patiently as it has consumed Europe with the creation of the European Union. Slowly politicians that believe that this is the best route for the future of humanity have passed legislation as pieces of the puzzle towards this ends. It was the means to the inevitable end. The only thing that stood in their way was the United States Constitution. So as the organism of the Progressive movement is morphing with the help of the many organs of the Progressive movement, we can clearly see that the progression is that towards socialism and the abolition of the United States Constitution. With the morphing Progressive legislators have begun to remove the rights of individuals, the community, the State, and ultimately they will surrender our federal sovereignty. Below is a diagram of the progression. Globalist – Progressive Progression [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/themachineprogression.jpg[/img] [link=http://lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/TheMachineProgression.gif]expand[/link] We are now in the stage of federal powers trumping all State powers. An example is the struggle between the States and the federal government with the passing of Socialized Healthcare in the United States. The idea that if a state passes legislation that is failure the bleeding of citizens to other states will be a good indicator that the reversal of the legislation. With massive federal legislation that punishes industry and business, it is obvious that without a state to escape the damaging legislation that they will relocate to another country that will not punish them. Once this occurs, where is the tax revenue going to come from with the bleeding of jobs and businesses? This is where [link=http://lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/index.cfm?Entry=953D6A58-123F-7491-A4820F95EB1301A9]Cloward and Piven’s[/link] theory of [link=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/26/cbos-2020-vision-debt-will-rise-to-90-of-gdp]collapsing the system[/link] from the inside comes in. The lack of revenue will drive more and more people to the unemployment benefits and for the federal government to aid in the welfare rolls. This will inevitably result in a total collapse. The role of the Progressives is to make sure that the collapse is captured by a new government for the current system to collapse into. The passage of Socialized medicine is one of these governmental mechanisms in place to capture people after the collapse. Any wonder why the benefits were suspended until after 2014? The Communist’s believe it is a huge victory. [link=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2479272/posts]Communist paper[/link] [link=http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Cuban-leader-applauds-US-apf-124808403.html?x=0&.v=1]Castro approves [/link] [link=http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE62N5AU20100324]The United Nation approves [/link] So as the United Nations global economy was envisioned to prevent countries from going to war with each other in fear of destroying their economy, the result is a cataclysmic collapse of the entire world’s economy when the dominoes began to fall after the United States economy went into recession. The European Union is in the midst of a fiscal meltdown with tensions between the countries in the union intensifying. [link=http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2010/03/23/eu_considers_loans_imf_aid_for_greece_as_germany_balks_at_bailout/]Germany and Greece’s [/link] relationship has become tainted by the woes of the financial collapse and the EU’s problems have become amplified. So as the world teeters on the edge of collapse, the United Nations eyes up its biggest prize and its last frontier. The United States is slowly succumbing to the gravity of global government. This gravity is being powered by Progressives in the country through community organizing, liberation churches, welfare programs, propaganda networking, propaganda media, and the entertainment industry. As the apathy grows with the continual encroachments of the federal government, legislators are able to pass bills that are setting up the demise of the capitalist free market system that has made the United States the envy of the world. Fri, 26 Mar 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=9B7C9B08-123F-7491-A46D649EFFE0FF51 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=88B9F0D4-123F-7491-A4E0FBBF445C0878 Radical: Progressivism In the last post we discussed the brain behind the Progressive movement and the outlining agenda. George Soros has become one of the most influential people in American politics over the last 20 years. We also outlined that the Progressive movement is an organism that has many organs that work in its behalf. In this post we will discuss several of the key organs of the organism. [b]American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)[/b] – Founded by Roger Baldwin – Only a quote is needed here. [i]“I am for socialism, disarmament, and, ultimately, for abolishing the state itself... I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.”[/i] [b]America Coming Together (ACT)[/b] – This group is dedicated to influencing elections with get-out-the-vote campaigns. This group is affiliated with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). They make up the union affiliation of the Democratic Party. ACT was featured in an [link= http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/6/23/171443.shtml]Associated Press article [/link]during the John Kerry campaign for hiring convicted felons to sign up voters. On August 8th 2003 the [link=http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/08/us/foes-of-bush-form-pac-in-bid-to-defeat-him.html]New York Times[/link] listed the key founders of this group which are common names that you will see throughout the Soros foundation structure in a number of different roles. [i]Steven Rosenthal[/i] - president of the labor-backed Partnership for America's Families [i] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzG0xpkjWrA]Andrew Stern[/link][/i] - President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). [i]Carl Pope[/i] - Executive director of the Sierra Club. [i]Cecile Richards and Gina Glantz[/i] - America Votes’ Cecile Richards is the current President of Planned Parenthood [b]Planned Parenthood[/b] – Was started by radical Margaret Sanger. It is now managed by Cecile Richards who has been Board Member of NARAL Pro-Choice America, Deputy Chief of Staff to Nancy Pelosi, Director of a national pro-choice ID project for the Turner Foundation, and the President of Pro-Choice Vote. This group receives over $100,000,000 annually from tax payer subsidies in the name of family planning. Planned Parenthood is known as the biggest provider of abortions in the country. [b]Urban Institute[/b] – This group is an advocate for socialized healthcare and the advancement of the welfare state. Initially the group was created to monitor Lyndon Johnson‘s Great Society programs. It has now progressed into a social justice organization. [b] Millennium Development Project[/b] – This United Nations group is set on ending poverty throughout the world not by means of education and free market solutions but through massive wealth distribution. Read about the group [link= http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/goals/index.htm] here[/link]. [b]Progressive Legislative Action Network (PLAN)[/b] – This group was created with the [link= http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/12965 ]influence[/link] of Andy Stern of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the AFL-CIO, and the Center for American Progress. Their goal is to promote Progressive Social Justice Initiatives. [b]Apollo Alliance[/b] – This group sprouted after the 9/11 attacks as a clean energy advocate. AA is a project of the Tides Center which is a Soros funded extension of the Tides Foundation. Some of the members of Apollo’s team consist of. [i]Gerald Hudson[/i] – International Executive Vice President of the SEIU. [i][link= http://lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/index.cfm?Entry=2F0F4EAE-123F-7491-A485AA1CF0C95833]Van Jones[/link][/i] – a self proclaimed communist who has dedicate his life to the [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh4Z0V0zNQg ]“Green Movement”[/link] [i]Joel Rogers[/i] – The Fonder of the [link= http://www.conservapedia.com/New_Party]New Party[/link]. [i]Carl Pope[/i] – Chairman of the Sierra Club which is dedicated to environmental rights and zero population growth. [i]Jeff Jones[/i] - A director of the New York chapter who was a [link= http://lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/index.cfm?Entry=D6EF3503-123F-7491-A47778C555AAD2D3] “Weather Underground”[/link] Communist radical. This group of radicals was said to have contributed to the development of the $787,000,000 [link= http://apolloalliance.org/programs/full-proposal/]stimulus bill[/link] passed by Congress and Barack Obama in 2009. To think that the radical agenda of such radical Marxist leftests will not effect the future of the United States would be naive. This is only a short list of the hundreds of groups that receive money from the Soros organizations. All of these organs operate as separate entities with a common goal in wealth distribution and Social Justice. As you can see there is a common thread through some of these groups. These members of the radical left not only run these organizations but support numerous organizations around the world with similar functions. They operate under the guise of environmentalism, equal rights, and anti-war but ultimately support a socialist agenda under the direction of Soros and his radical cronies. To understand the agenda’s of these people you must simply listen to their words. Through the plotting and calculated Progressive Alinsky and Marxist tactics you will see glimpses of the Progressive Agenda. Mon, 22 Mar 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=88B9F0D4-123F-7491-A4E0FBBF445C0878 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=790A1CF5-123F-7491-A4C051BD2A7031AD Radical: Progressivism Now that “The Machine” has been theoretically realized, we must now discuss the implementation of the organism that is “The Machine”. The reason why it is described as an organism is that there are many components to the organism that are necessary for the product to be delivered to the American people. So let’s discuss the organism, the components, and the product. First we must examine the organism. If any of you took biology in school, you know that the director of the organism is the brain. Without this feature of the organism, there is no direction or control of the organism. Within the organism there are organs that function within the organism to produce individual products. The products from the organs work together to produce the product of the overall organism. This is of fundamental importance to the understanding of what we are about to discuss. Through the prism of the production delivered by the media and political pundits, the overall view of the organism is skewed, distorted, and often ignored. The existence of the organism is a shadowy figure or body in the room that no one wishes to mention in the fear of being viewed as conspiratorial. Some fail to mention the organism in fear of being isolated, unfunded, or polarized by a mass collection of organs fighting for the existence of the organism. So now that we understand the explanation of the organism it is important to note that the organism must live in an environment. This environment can be explained as a fluid environment with all countries around the world existing in this environment. All are affected by this organism and eventually will be a part of the organism in one way or another. In order to operate, the organism must have fuel in order to become mechanized. This fuel is obviously money. In order to propagate the organism’s agenda, there needs to be the resources available. If you follow the resources, you can find the organs within the organism, the vehicles that the resources travel in, and the director of the resources. So let’s take a look at the organism that is “The Machine”. [b]The Director[/b] Radical: George Soros George Soros is an important figure within the organism. He is the director of the Progressive agenda which has slowly infiltrated the Democratic Party within the last 20 or 30 years. George Soros with the likes of the Clinton’s have redefined the dynamics of the Democratic Party. With a personal investment of over 5 billion dollars, Soros rivals all of the corporations around the world with influencing the political process. It is important to understand that Soros is very vocal about his personal beliefs. 1. Advocate of America’s disarmament 2. Believes America is an oppressive nation 3. Believes America military is guilty of criminal actions 4. Advocate of open borders and mass immigration 5. Advocate of social welfare 6. Advocate of socialized medicine 7. Advocate of wealth distribution 8. Advocate for radical environmentalism 9. Advocate of globalist agenda 10. Advocate of Affirmative Action George Soros achieved his status and wealth through his myriad of financial and philanthropic endeavors. Separate from his political involvements he is a shrewd leader in the world of investments. His actions in financial markets can be linked to the destruction of economies and currencies around the world. Here is an [link=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2773265/Billionaire-who-broke-the-Bank-of-England.html]article[/link] that explains his massive profits by speculating on the devaluation of the British Pound. George is much like [link= http://lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/index.cfm?Entry=FAA8717E-123F-7491-A44DB960D7B1E25E]Maurice Strong[/link] as discussed in an earlier post. He uses capitalistic means to fund his socialist agendas. In another [link= http://lanternsofliberty.us/CRBlog/Townhall.cfm?ThreadID=E215D1B8-123F-75BC-8F965FB88DBC0D72&ForumName=Corruption%20and%20Greed%20Fleecing%20America&ForumNum=7298E981-123F-75BC-8FF3096D1B0E6697] post[/link] we outlined his coziness with South American oil ventures and used Barack Obama’s political powers to benefit greatly from it. There is no wonder why Soros is not only the most feared financial profiteer in the world and the most fear political figure in the world with his tentacles of power reaching far while manipulating political and corporate figures around the world. Soros’s beliefs drive his desire to steer the political winds into the waters of Socialism. With his vast influence throughout the world, Soros stacks the deck in a strategic chess game moving his agenda along with hundreds of organs in the organism. Each organ has a personal interest in the overall outcome of its agenda. All of the organs are weak and penniless without the likes of Soros or his massive amounts of resources. The organs work within their symbiotic roles being guided by Soros. The chief arm of Soros is Hillary Clinton who has partnered with him in the political side of the process. Together they have worked with Morton Halerpin, Harold Ickes, and John Podesta to create and manage the Center of American Progress. This think tank is funded by Soros’s Open Society Network, Rockefeller Family Fund, the [link= http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/index.cfm?Entry=FAA8717E-123F-7491-A44DB960D7B1E25E]Joyce Foundation[/link], the Irving Harris Foundation, the New York Community Trust, the Overbrook Foundation, the Peninsula Foundation, the Robert E. Rubin Foundation, the San Francisco Foundation, the Bauman Family Foundation, the Nathan Cummings Foundation, and the Philip Murphy Foundation. After coming together in 2003, they developed which has been called “The Shadow Party”. This Party was intended to infiltrate the system and use Alinsky tactics in order to fundamentally change America from the Republic it once was to a socialist utopia. The Center for American Progress has over time developed a system of slowly changing the fundamental structure of the United States by not only infiltrating the federal government but also through corporations and the schools. By focusing on progressive issues, they recruit radical foot soldiers to front organizations that press the many facets of the Progressive Agendas. With the power of major financial contributions, they are able to influence the political process by working around the [link= http://www.fec.gov/info/appfour.htm]Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA)[/link] with the use of “Soft Money” Contributions. In short what Soros and his many groups were able to circumvent the campaign contribution laws and fund dummy organizations that support issues rather than candidates. They are also able to gain shelter under [link= http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=103480,00.html] Section 527[/link] on the Internal Revenue Tax Code by having very little obligations of transparency to the source of their funding or their expenditures. The organizations in turn directly are influenced by the passions of the individuals involved which work as organizers in the political movement. Whether the groups are environmentalists, pro-abortionists, or globalists, they are all funded and work as the organs in the organism using the issue as a front to the overall Progressive political agenda. [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfUEPeO2_pc]ACORN [/link]is a prime example of one of these organizations. Their cause is for representing minorities in poverty stricken districts around the country. Their cause is intended to help the unfortunate but instead they use the unfortunate to do the workings of the Progressives. They are simply a means to the ends. The end is a political Saul Alinsky style transfer of power from the capitalist to the politician. The Sierra Club is another group that uses the guise of environmentalism and the green movement to propagate a worship of nature. To better illustrate this, I have included an [link= http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=13323] article from FrontPageMag.com[/link]. People like Carl Pope preach the lore of sixties radical environmentalism to the youth of today to capture their passions to progress the agenda of mass wealth distribution globally. Pope has expressed his views on globalization, wealth distribution, and population control which is ultimately his agenda. Through these goals he will achieve de-industrialization he will achieve all of these along with his sustainable vision as a sacrifice to his God… Earth. Along with organizations like these are the media arms that spread the propaganda of the groups through different media outlets. Media Matters monitors the media and develops rebuttals to what they claim is a radical right wing agenda. Media Matters chops up talking points so that they can be delivered as edited partial versions of the truth. Media outlets like The Huffington Post feed off of the talking points making them ammunition for political fodder within their blogs and news reports. This misconstrued message is delivered to an often biased and polarizing reader base. This is not to negate that this biased reader base doesn’t exist on the right but it is important to mention that the Huffington Post outside of MSNBC is the hive for the left. As the Huffington Post and other Progressive media groups invigorate their base in anti-capitalist sentiment, they promote the agendas of Soros’s groups. All acting separately within the vehicles of self interests with no focus on the constitutionality of a more progressively proposed legislation, the group’s members seem to be clueless to their ineffectiveness within their true agenda. They are instead working towards the liberty stealing agendas of the Progressive wealth distribution machine. Below is a diagram that will describe the Soros agenda and the mass network of special interests behind the scenes. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/sorosagenda.jpg[/img] To view an interactive diagram [link= http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/sorosagenda.htm]click here[/link]. Fri, 19 Mar 2010 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=790A1CF5-123F-7491-A4C051BD2A7031AD http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=595D0189-123F-7491-A4574900B696FD3B Radical: Walter Lippmann Radical: Sigmund Freud Radical: Edward Bernays [b]The modern intellectual elite[/b] In a day when information is at everyone’s finger tips, the freedom of speech in America is more magnified then in the past. In the America of our founders this would be an incredible achievement. In today’s America it is a threat to those in the ruling class. Over the last eighty years with higher education looming like a parasol over everyday Americans, it isn’t the reign of the enemy in foreign lands that they protect us from, they wish to protect us from our blind wandering as Plato warned. The intellectual elite try to protect us from being the “great beast or a bewildered herd”. [b]Radical: Walter Lippmann[/b] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/walter-lippmann.jpg[/img] The founder for the elite media In Walter Lippman’s “Public Opinion” he assesses that our democratic process leaves us floundering in our own communities hyper focused on our own neighborhoods rather than focusing on the proper direction of the country or the world. He claimed that the self serving irrational social perceptions kept society from progressing towards a better world. He also claimed that the individuals of the majority represented in a democratic society were incapable of making good decisions relative for the collective majority. It was the bewildered herd in this individual majority that needed to be steered by the governing or ruling class and the media. In Walter Lippman’s too big and too complex world, he believed that intellectual elite were necessary to control its people and keep them in the boundaries of progress. He was a communist sympathizer and expressed that a need for respect of the Soviet Union was imperative to progress. He opposed the views of those of his time that the communist regime was expansionist and that the communists wished to spread its power grabbing tentacles across the world. In short he believed that communism was a viable form of governing. Later Lippmann would write his critically acclaimed book, “The Phantom Public” which detailed that the public exists merely as a myth or an illusion. He also writes that the public perception of the public as a whole is one of a type of “mystical notion of society” which is a false one. He also states that the public is incapable of determining the right direction of its future without a crisis. The public is only able to address problems that are at hand and not those that are on the horizon. He states, “Public opinion is a rational force … It does not reason, investigate, invent, persuade, bargain or settle”. [b]Radical: Sigmund Freud[/b] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/Sigmund-freud.jpg[/img] The father of sexual psychoanalysis Sigmund Freud was an explorer of the human psyche and subconscious. Sigmund Freud revealed to the world his theories of the inner workings of the human mind. In a time when the study of psychology was taking hold in the intellectual realm, Freud became well known in Europe for his study of the human ego, super-ego, and id. I won’t dig into his theories with great detail but will state that they are in fact fascinating and disturbing at the same time. Freud describes his theory of the Oedipus Complex that the young child has an subconscious sexual desire for his mother and an subconscious jealousy of his father. These series of subconscious desires were mere reflections of the life and death drives of every human being. What is necessary to understand is Freud’s in depth analysis of the human mind and its beautiful complexity and his inability to express a source to all this human engineering. It is also important to understand that Freud studied as a scientist and believed that all of these mechanisms of our instinctual animal nature were normal functions of the human mind and correctable by men. This science seemed to negate that the thoughts of sexual perversion and actions of primitive instincts as immoral mechanism and more as a simple natural part of us for us all to understand. With this understanding opened the door to sympathy to the psychologically misaligned and the tolerance for sexual perversion and primitive instinctual behavior. [b]Radical: Edward Bernays[/b] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/Edward_bernays.jpg[/img] [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dA89CBBOC0&feature=related]The Century of Self part 1[/link] Sigmund Freud’s nephew Edward Bernays was one that would seek to use Freud’s theories to manipulate the public. In his book “Propaganda” published in 1928, Bernays expressed that Propaganda was necessary for democracy. He believed that scientific ways of manipulating the public was necessary to keep society from spinning into chaos. He believed that the forces that can utilize the best practices in propaganda could be effective in governing the body of the people. During Woodrow Wilson’s presidency, Bernays was utilized to spread propaganda throughout the world including at the Paris Peace conference at the end of World War I. This propaganda was needed over seas after the fears of American occupation and also at home in America after Woodrow Wilson ran his Presidential campaign on peace. Wilson’s slogan during his presidential campaign was "He kept us out of the war". Wilson would need Bernays’ propaganda to repair his image. Sadly others would see propaganda as a useful tool. It was from Bernays that the Nazi’s would learn propaganda. [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awO2gvQSJRE&feature=related]The Century of Self part 2[/link] [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V-XgaM7zf8&feature=related]The Century of Self part 3[/link] [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdGwjI73Fmg&feature=related]The Century of Self part 4[/link] [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUya_lMBsUE&feature=related]The Century of Self part 5[/link] [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUeJjhNi4bk&feature=related]The Century of Self part 6[/link] Adam Curtis’ documentary about this elitist movement is quite disturbing. It seems that Freud discovered the instinctual inner workings of humans and detailed it to the world. The engineering of the instincts that humans had sought to control for thousands of years through faith and religion had been revealed. Through the gradual decay of the moral society and the degradation of the society of faith, the fears of man’s evil abilities were showing through. Instead of trying to correct the moral atrocities through reinforcements in morality and faith by promoting the focus on the creator, these men worked behind the scenes to bring our focus elsewhere. It was to distract us collectively. As the intellectuals of “The Machine” steered the focus towards them rather than focus on the creator, they sought to perfect man instead of reminding us of our imperfections. Despite the flourishing fields of psychology and psychiatry, this past century was one of the bloodiest and most destructive in history. It seems that if man was able to be perfected through these measures of science that we would have arrived at our utopia already. The fact is that man is not perfectible. For those that believe that man is perfectible, they must study those that believed that they could. One must study Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, Mao, and Castro. These leaders thought that the people of their nation were too stupid and could not determine what is right for them. They believed that the public was a bewildered beast that needed to be tamed by intellectual means and intellectual people. They believed that propaganda could be used through the media to control the masses. They believed that the animals astray from the herd and those that wish not to follow the democratic majority should be left to die or killed for they were a mere disruption to the overall will of the collective majority. They believed in governmental command and control economies and observed their people like kids do ant farms as some kind of experiment. Ultimately they believed the people were stupid. This collective mentality is a promoter of tyranny and eventual enslavement to the cause of a tyrant and his vision. Keep them happy and they will follow is their motto until all have sacrificed their liberty. So when you sit in front of your television and relax, remember that there are many out there that wish to keep you there for they fear that you will disrupt their progress. They wish that apathy will reign so they can implement what they believe is right for you. So through the all the forms of media, the intellectuals wish to steer the public with propaganda. This propaganda is to fulfill the wishes of men not of man. All is fine as long as the leader is one looking out for the best interest of the people and doesn’t fool the public. All it takes is for a really well spoken leader to lead the herd to slaughter. So I would ask you, “who is your shepherd?” Sat, 13 Mar 2010 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=595D0189-123F-7491-A4574900B696FD3B http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=2F0F4ECD-123F-7491-A4F223579E461298 Radical: Van Jones (b.1968) Watch this video [b]hold CTRL button and press link[/b] [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo885sTZRSI&feature=related]Radical visionary[/link] Seems like a reasonable vision? Van Jones recently received a lot of press during his brief membership to the Obama administration’s list of Czars. Residing in the position of Green Czar, Van Jones was valued by the administration as a visionary within the realm of sustainable energy. Not until he was vetted by the media was he exposed for his radical ideological beliefs and belief that Bush prompted the 911 attacks did Jones resign from his post at midnight on Labor Day weekend. Jones sites after being arrested for rowdy protesting during the riots after the Rodney King verdict and a brief stint in jail he commented, [i]"I met all these young radical people of color -- I mean really radical, communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.' I spent the next ten years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary. I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th, by August, I was a communist."[/i] Jones has embraced the ideas of revolution but like many progressives; see an opportunity in the green movement as a vehicle for this social change. Under the green cloak, Jones wishes to couple pollution and exploitation of the polluters as a new civil rights movement. This rowdy self proclaimed Black Nationalist and communist lawyer is the founder of the non-profit Ella Baker Center which focuses its efforts on low income criminal justice issues, has in the past said that police in the San Francisco Bay Area were deliberately killing black people. His claim was, "Willie Brown's Police Commission is killing black people." Jones also was one of the founders of Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM). This group followed the ideology of Lenin, Stalin, and Marx, which dreamed of the multi-racial socialist utopia. The group was opposed to the Gulf War and saw the war as an opportunity to resurrect the radical anti-war movement of the 60’s counter-culture. On Page 36 of a [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/pdf/storm.pdf]STORM memoire[/link] published in the spring of 2004, the Revolutionary politics was described as follows: [i]”While many people in our generation dismissed Marxism as inherently white and sectarian, we looked towards the revolutionary traditions of Third World communism and found valuable and inspiring models for revolutionary change.”[/i] Let’s stop for a moment and think of what is inspiring about communism. Must we revisit previous posts outlining the atrocities and massive destruction of human life brought about by this ideology? With this in mind it is extremely concerning that Van Jones and his cronies find inspiration within this dark pool of Marxism. STORM eventually failed after infighting over government grant money. Yes the government issued tax dollars to this organization. Let’s listen to a recent audio clip of Van Jones as he explains the weakness of Progressives. Jones explains that the weakness of the modern Progressives is that they lack “maximum goals” which include complete wealth distribution. He explains the goals of the green movement as a revolution much like that of the civil rights movements of the 60’s. Eventually the whole society will be transformed. [b]hold CTRL button and press link[/b] [link= http://lanternsofliberty.us/CRWeb/YouTube.cfm] Van Jones audio[/link] As people argue about whether man-made Global Warming exists and the sustainable energy, the communists of the world are high-jacking the issues and using them to transform our Republic into a radical communist regime. If these words are hard for you to digest, remember that a President of the United States seeks advice from him on sustainability and environmental protection. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/vanjones.jpg[/img] So where is Van Jones now? He was quickly [link=http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dc/2009/09/obamas-ex-green-jobs-czar-land.html]picked up by President Clinton’s fourth Chief of Staff John Podesta[/link] at the [link=http://www.americanprogress.org/]Center for American Progress[/link]. Center for American Progress was formed by Hillary Clinton and Podesta after discussions between [link=http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/p/john_d_podesta/index.html]George Soros and Morton Halerpin[/link] on how to push Progressive agendas. So I ask, how common is this ideology in the Progressive movement? I think we have laid this out pretty clearly in the Machine Chronicles… Fri, 05 Mar 2010 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=2F0F4ECD-123F-7491-A4F223579E461298 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=160C5987-123F-7491-A4D678C3A5E57B76 Radical: Enviro-Socialism Conclusion A clean environment is extremely important to all of us. Recently I had a very engaging debate with a dear friend that is ideologically aligned with the Global Warming and Environmentalist community. I learned many key aspects about the polarized arguments and fears from both sides. The issues that we unite on are the sustainability of the environment but the methods and science are opposing. Global Warming or the newly named Climate Change discussion is completely riddled with pitfalls in the argument. Too often, the acceptors of the science and deniers of the science have no proof to back their cause. They rely on numerous articles that support their cause or beliefs. What is extremely distressing is the science for Global Warming has recently been unraveled by a series of scandals involving the leaders in the Pro-Global Warming agenda. Sadly the Pro-Global Warming crowd has declined to acknowledge the scandals at all. What one must understand is that there is no perfect system to bring a pure environment. It is a fact that human beings create waste in all that we do. It is a dynamic of science that we will never be able to avoid. To achieve a sustainable healthy environment, there needs to be an awareness and cultural change that is not driven by government policy, politics and regulation. It needs to be driven by Americans that recognize the threat of a deteriorating environment. Could America clean up its act? Sure it can. There is much room for improvement in everything that we do. Could we afford a more sustainable energy policy? Of coarse we could. Solar Panels, Wind Generators, Tide Generators, and other alternative energy sources are viable and achievable but must be achieved through a gradual shift from fossil fuel energy sources. To think that the world will melt down in a matter of a couple of years because of carbon dioxide is an absolute absurdity. The urgency is based on politically driven urgency because of the majority in Congress. There must not be a bureaucracy created to regulate all energy sources. This gives too much power to the political class. There is enough proof that government bureaucracy fails at everything it does because of political pay offs. There is a new generation of ideologically driven individuals that put full faith in the philosophies of Mao, Staling, Castro, and Lenin. They choose to deny the incredible failures and massive death that was caused by this ideology. Influenced by the intellectual class, this group subscribes to the platform of Marxism that has been taught in schools for the last 80 years. Many of these individuals are children of those who participated in the 60’s counterculture / counter-revolution. This Counter-Revolution was engineered by Progressives that diametrically oppose to the first American Revolution that occurred in 1776. Enviro-Socialism must be understood that it really is just a product Marxism. The environmentalism that exists in this movement is simply a means to the socialist ends. Never has there been a country that has been so friendly to the environment. This fact is completely ignored by those that subscribe to the Enviro-Socialist doctrine. The feel good doctrine ignores the facts and omits the existence of massive environmental atrocities that exist in Socialist regimes. Lets look at a couple: [link= http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://top-10-list.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/Moscow-Russia-Pollution.jpg&imgrefurl=http://top-10-list.org/2009/08/04/&usg=__nGBo0X1oehTUpBdiiE_EWn1LZ64=&h=276&w=460&sz=29&hl=en&start=3&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=bPJ_l8DosANijM:&tbnh=77&tbnw=128&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpollution%2Bin%2Brussia%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26tbs%3Disch:1]Most]Polluted Cities[/link] [b]China[/b] These photos are from [link=http://nppa.org/news_and_events/news/2009/10/smith.html]Lu Guang[/link] who was a factory worker in China who started a freelancing photography project to expose Chinese environmental conditions in this Socialist regime. Yellow Sea coastline [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaAnhui.jpg [/img] Industrial sewage of Zhejiang Xiaoshan Industrial District in Qiantang River. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaAnyang.jpg [/img] Sewage in Anyang River [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaGuangdong.jpg [/img] Hebei Province Shexian Tianjin Iron and steel plant [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaHanchen.jpg [/img] Haimen city, Jiangsu province Chemical Industrial District sewage treatment Plant [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaHebei.jpg [/img] Yangtze River bank [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaHenan.jpg [/img] Hanchen city, Shaanxi Province [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaJiangsu.jpg [/img] Jiangsu province coastal industry district [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ ChinaJiangsu2.jpg [/img] Ma’anshan, Anhui province [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaLasengmiao.jpg [/img] Guiyu, Guangdong province [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaNingxia.jpg [/img] Heilonggui Industrial District, [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaPeople1.jpg [/img] 64-year-old Wang Baosheng became ill in 2003. His festering sores force him to sleep face down. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaPeople2.jpg [/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaPeople3.jpg [/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaPeople4.jpg [/img] Deficiency babies in Shanxi Province abandoned by parents. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaPeople5.jpg [/img] 15-year-old boy from Tianshui, Gansu Province, dropped out of the school after 2nd grade, followed his parents to Heilonggui Industrial District. He earns 16 yuan a day. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaPeople6.jpg [/img] Fan Jai Zhuang in Anyang City, Henan province [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaQiantangRiver.jpg [/img] Anhui Province Cihu Chemical Industry District [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaShanxi.jpg [/img] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaYangtzeRiver.jpg [/img] “Black Dragons” from the Lasengmiao Power Plant [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaYangtzeRiver2.jpg [/img] Sewage Pumped intoYangtze River [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaYangtzeRiver3.jpg [/img] Industrial wastewater flowing into Yellow River [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaYangtzeRiver4.jpg [/img] Wastewater discharged into Yangtze River [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaYangtzeRiver5.jpg [/img] Soil by Yangtze River [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaYellowRiver.jpg [/img] Shizuishan Industrial district in Ningxia province [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/ChinaYellowSea.jpg [/img] [b]Russia – former Soviet Union[/b] [img] http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/RussiaPollution.jpg [/img] [link=http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-11390.html]Water pollution[/link] [link=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3007228.stm]Baltic Pollution[/link] [link=http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Pollution_In_Far_East_Russian_River_30_Times_Above_Norm.html]Amur River[/link] [b]India[/b] [img] http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/IndiaPollution.jpg [/img] [img] http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/images/IndiaPollution2.jpg [/img] The picture has been painted as a reflection of true reality around the world. These countries have been developed under the regimes with very little to no representation from its people. The people of these regimes are slaves to the will of the government and industrial interests of the elite political class. So how do we influence these countries to provide more environmental awareness? It is by example. The success of the United States is a beacon of hope for not only the world but also the Earth. Representation from the people will correct any wrong doings within these regimes. Our republic is a ideal system that allows for governing by the people. Experimenting with socialistic policies will only head us in the direction of these polluting regimes. It won’t be through the reduction of regulation but rather all of our industry going to more polluting countries. Eventually our economy will struggle enough that regulations will slack in order to help boost a struggling economy. Special interests will spill into our country to develop energy with no regards for the wishes of the people. Sun, 28 Feb 2010 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=160C5987-123F-7491-A4D678C3A5E57B76 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=FAA8719D-123F-7491-A434D2CDA32149E6 Radical: Enviro-Socialism – Part 4 Al Gore – born 1948 Barack Obama – born 1961 Maurice Strong – born 1929 [b] The New Feudalism [/b] What is occurring with Global Warming or what is now being called Climate Change is the development of an entirely new economy. Sadly the economy is driven by unproven science that has been riddled with corruption. Driven by a new hybrid of capitalist, they focus on shutting the door on the middle class in order to prop up an elite class of politically driven feudal group. Much like the old Communist regimes, they use Progressive policies to position the leaders of the new economy into a position to make massive profits in order to perpetuate socialist agendas. Maurice Strong, Al Gore, Barack Obama and many Progressives in the federal government are leaders of this new socialism. To understand this specific mechanism within “The Machine”, one must ignore the message or means to their goal or desired ends. To reiterate the fundamentals of the new economy we start with the desired ends or goal. It is a society of an elite political class much like the socialist nations of the Soviet Union and China. Imagine a Wall Street exchange that forces you or your company to invest or pay penalties based the compliance to government mandates. Imagine that this Wall Street exchange is owned by one of the biggest banks in the world whose influence stretches all throughout the federal government. Sounds pretty radical? Well it already exists. [b] Chicago Climate Exchange [/b] The [link=http://www.chicagoclimatex.com/] Chicago Climate Exchange [/link]is owned by a number of investors and businesses. 10% of the exchange is owned by Goldman Sachs and 10% is owned by Generation Investment Management (GIM). Generation Investment Management was founded and chaired by Al Gore and was co-founded by former Treasury Secretary of George W Bush and former Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson. Barack Obama was pivotal in the launching of the exchange as he used the “Left Wing” Joyce Foundation to direct grant funds towards the exchange developers. Lastly Maurice Strong is on the Board of Directors of the exchange. The mechanism is in place to take massive amounts of money from corporations all around the world in order to pay environmental reparations to third world countries. When this takes place, trading fees are paid to the Chicago Climate Exchange which benefits Goldman Sachs and Generation Investment Management. Here is a good [link=http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/9629]article[/link] to read for more detail. Once the United States federal mandates and/or even global Kyoto type mandates on all industrialized countries around the world are approved, the massive wealth distribution machine will begin to turn plunging the industrialized world into world-wide socialism. Here is a diagram of how it will work. [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/climateexchange.jpg[/img] here is a more detailed view - [link=http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/enviro-socialism.htm]click here for larger more interactive view[/link] [img]http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/themachine/enviro-socialism600.jpg[/img] So how far does this scheme go? Well look at Obama’s biggest supporters. General Electric is bound to make huge profits on its “Green” ventures. General Electric has huge market share in [link=http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10286278-54.html]smart grid technology[/link]. They also have huge investments in alternative energy. What is even more concerning is GE’s recent [link=http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obama-helps-strengthen-General-Electric-Putin-ties-59644627.html]promotion[/link] by Obama to Russia. Obama’s [link=http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-02-02/pfizer-exxon-would-lose-ge-amerigroup-win-under-obama-budget.html]$3,800,000,000,000 [/link]budget will benefit GE as well. This is the same President that vowed to eliminate crony capitalism in Washington DC politics and mentioned that he would work to eliminate lobbyists influence during his campaign. So if this is the case why is he rewarding GE so much? General Electric owns MSNBC who is the network that shares huge bias towards the “Left Wing” political machine and its policies. To further explain General Electric’s web with the Obama administration read this [link=http://www.examiner.com/x-9100-Boston-Conservative-Independent-Examiner~y2009m5d16-Obamagate--The-tangled-web-of-Obama-GE-Immelt-Cap--Trade-GE-Healthcare-and-Daschle-part-I]article[/link]. So does it end there? No. Hank Paulson saw the huge housing bubble bursting and knew that this elaborate house of cards could fall. AIG became a dumping ground for all of his former company Goldman Sachs’ bad assets and touted that AIG was too big to fail in order to prop up his friends and the construction of the new green economy engineered partially by Goldman Sachs and Generation Investment Management. Paulson later pushed the TARP bailout passed by congress and signed by George W. Bush. Paulson’s successor Timothy Geithner also supported the TARP program and helped manage the funds that were appropriated by Congress. What is interesting about Timothy Geithner’s past is that he attended Peking University, where Maurice Strong heads up his environmental movement, and worked within the Council of Foreign Relations. He was also a director of the Policy Development and Review Department at the International Monetary Fund. With this experience, Geithner contains a vast amount of knowledge on the mappings of a possible world government. So what is the intention of this agenda? Well we can see that it isn’t protecting the environment with the latest news showing that the Global Warming claim is a complete falsehood. [link=http://mensnewsdaily.com/sexandmetro/2009/12/01/top-global-warming-scientist-resigns-over-allegations-he-overstated-the-case-for-man-made-climate-change/]Mensnewsdaily.com[/link] has a great article detailing the Climate-Gate scandal. Phil Jones who was one of the head scientists in the Global Warming study, has recently expressed in the [link=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html]UK’s DailyMail.co.uk[/link] news site that the data for Al Gore’s famous “Hockey Stick” graph depicting the escalation in global temperatures as disappeared. What is one of the most important aspects of the hoax is how Phil Jones received funding. It was from massive government funding from grants. The funding reached [link=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6735846/Climategate-professor-Phil-Jones-awarded-13-million-in-research-grants.html13,700,000 pounds[/link]. The article also lists numerous other grants that helped fund Phil Jones’ So even though the hoax has been exposed, politicians still see that the science has already been proven and wish to move forward towards a global socialist regime. Remember that the Global Warming is simply a vehicle of means to this socialist ends. You can see the urgency in [link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5coeQek9uU&feature=related]Obama’s speech at Copenhagen[/link] as he tries to press the members of the UN to sacrifice their sovereignty for this socialist agenda. In the midst of the crumbling argument of Global Warming science the urgency is fundamental in understanding the desperation to finally achieve the century old globalist agenda with the opportunity called Global Warming disappearing. So in closing, we must understand that the methods used by these “hybrid socio-enviro-capitalist” are the same methods used by feudal kings with God’s will in order to control people and take their wealth. They rule in fear and falsehood. People like Obama, Gore, and Strong see great political and economic opportunity in funding and spreading fear to propagate mass wealth distribution and capturing of power. Taking tax dollars to fund science through grants is an absolute corruption filled culture that offers careers to scientists that wish to profit rather than prove. Rather than prove science they create political vehicles. To solve this we need to move to private individual funding of science rather then government funding. We then need to understand that change starts at the community level not at the federal level. Community awareness is the key to state and country-wide environmental awareness. Tue, 23 Feb 2010 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=FAA8719D-123F-7491-A434D2CDA32149E6 http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=EC115BFE-123F-7491-A4347A0C27EFACCC Radical: Enviro-Socialism – Part 3 Al Gore – born 1948 Barack Obama – born 1961 Maurice Strong – born 1929 [b] The New Feudalism [/b] When Karl Marx and Frederick Engels wrote the “Communist Manifesto”, Feudalism was still a familiar memory. Kings and Queens still existed. Former feudal nations had removed their feudal governments and replace them with a new capitalistic system where the former feudal land owners held all them power and property. Capitalism didn’t have a chance. It was still a hybrid of the feudal societal structure of the past. Karl Marx’s vision was a revolutionary utopian vision that gave the power of the state to a new feudal hybrid. Instead of the power being distributed among the wealthy, it was distributed amongst the political elite. This was a small step away from Feudalism. It still was not an improvement from the brilliance expressed in the United States Constitution and the writings of Liberty documented by the American founding fathers. What was diametrically different was the origin of human rights. The American founding fathers expressed within the Declaration of independence that all inalienable rights were gifts from our Creator and could not be taken away by any man or government. Marx and Engels expressed that all rights were property of the governing party distributed equally through society. The failure that Marx and Engels ignored was their faith in the perfection of man. They believed that if perfection was realized that all would prosper. They were mistaken as proven by the drunken power of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Castro. No man can hold the power of the Creator without being corrupted by this power. Over the last several decades a new Neo-Marxism has been developed as a Progressive movement. This is the “Globalist Movement”. The agenda of the Globalist is to promote the prosperity of all people around the world with one all powerful government. The Socialist model has been envisioned since Woodrow Wilson during the era of the League of Nations. It was later realized by the creation of the United Nations under FDR. This Progressive model was intended to be the new feudal governing agency with a world wide agenda. Since this model has been adopted, the world has experienced WWI, WWII, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Iranian and Iraqi conflict, the Cold War, the Gulf Wars, and now a War against Islamic Terror. Never has there been so much conflict around the world in history. Amongst this new feudal system called the United Nations, there is a new elitist society emerging as the new royalty. This society is that of the intellectual elitist. Made up of mostly highly ideological members of the intellectual university class and of the extremely wealthy, the new royalty wishes to separate themselves from the serfs in the lower tier of societal evolution. In the mind of the elitist, this lower tier is uneducated and unable to survive without aid from the royal intellectual society. They see the crude means of the industrial world as an infringement on the intellectual world in which they live. To this new intellectual class they see that the uneducated grip the wheels of dirty oil as crutch to the moving forward. The intellectual class sees that world is years behind their brilliance as an ideal world could be attained only if the stupid oil hungry rough neck can be forced to realize the ideal. [b] Maurice Strong [/b] One of the heads of this royalty is Maurice Strong. You may have never heard of Maurice Strong but be assured that in some way or another he has impacted your life and could possible affect it in the future in a dramatic way. Revered as one of the most dangerous men in the world by many – including the wacky conspiracy theorists, Strong claims that he is a “socialist by ideology and capitalist by methodology”. Make no mistake that this Strong is making moves in his entrepreneurial endeavors to implement his socialist plans. So who is Maurice Strong? Maurice Strong is a Canadian who currently lives in the Peoples Republic of China. He currently holds the position of President of the Council of the United Nations' University for Peace. This university is the only one like it in the world. It is in fact a United Nations University which can issue master degrees and doctoral degrees. He also is a professor at Peking University in China and the Honorary Chairman of its Environmental Foundation. Strong’s United Nations involvement stretches back to 1947 where all of his efforts were headed up in the name of environmental efforts. In 1971, Strong delivered a report to the UN Stockholm Conference that he co-authored with Rene Dubos and Barbara Ward to the UN labeled “Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet” where they detailed the state of the environment around the world. It is important to mention the late Rene Dubos briefly as well because of his efforts on the “Social Evolution” of our planet and a World Order to manage it. This is where environmentalism became an effort of the United Nations. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) was then formed and headed up by Strong. It was located in Kenya where it became the first United Nations agency to be located in the third world. This is where the first motions towards man-made climate change began. Maurice is most known for his oil endeavors in Canada where he became one of the most successful oil tycoon. By the young age of 35 he became President of the Power Corporation of Canada. This is where Strong showed his myth-making skills and political clout. He had mentioned that when he left he forfeited a $200,000 a year salary when in actuality it was only $35,000. It was a narcissistic attempt at overvaluing himself. He would continue to use his tactics all the way to the top of the United Nations where he would contribute to both Democrat and Republican parties so he could use both to advance his position. His most notable friend is that of [link= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oN-flYaXNLQ&feature=related]GeorgeGeorge H W Bush [/link] who helped Strong keep his position at the 1992 Rio Conference “Earth Summit”. Maurice Strong must be understood a political anomaly playing both sides of the ideological duality. He pushes his power seeking agenda by subsidizing business ventures which seem to be completely opposed to his environmentalist efforts within the United Nations. His most notably unethical implication was the 2005 “Oil for Food Scandal”, where he endorsed a check for nearly a million dollars written to himself. It was delivered by a South Korean businessman by the name of Tongsun Park who was involved in the “KoreaGate” scandal and was implicated in conspiring to bribe UN officials to favor Saddam Hussein in the Oil for Food program. [link=http://www.afn.org/~govern/strong.html] Read more about Maurice Strong here [/link] Sat, 20 Feb 2010 06:00:00 GMT http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=EC115BFE-123F-7491-A4347A0C27EFACCC http://www.lanternsofliberty.us/chrispilie.cfm?thread=B58516DD-123F-7491-A42D7745E077439B Radical: Enviro-Socialism – Part 2 Al Gore – born 1948 Barack Obama – born 1961 Maurice Strong – born 1929 [b] The New Socialism [/b] Socialism fundamentally takes all the rights away from its people. It is the grasping of all power by a totalitarian government or dictator. In previous totalitarian governments implementing socialism, a bloody revolution was conducted much like that of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, the Nazi Revolution in Germany, the revolution led by Mao, and the revolution led by Castro. In all of these cases massive failures prompted by elitist leaders led to over 200 million deaths. Modern Socialists, Communists, and Progressives believe that other than the massive deaths experienced under these regimes, the socialist agenda is a valid and successful system. Fabian Socialists, Frankfurt Marxists, apostles of Saul Alinsky and those that have been brain washed by the radical progressive university curriculum, have moved away from the radical revolution to the radical views on evolution. This evolution is not exclusive to the teachings of Darwin but rather evolution of humanity. Progressives believe that their progression is more relative to an evolution. It is more of an evolution of individual freedom to that of individual sacrifice for the sake of the whole American population and even the world. This progression is led by the education of the population from the radical progressive teachings of members of the intellectual elite. It is a progression away from the intangible God to the more tangible human intellectual as a source of inspiration. [b] The Radical University Professor [/b] What has occurred with this new worship of intellectualism is the college professor. The experience of teaching the desiring thirsty student gives the professor a power like no other. This power is rooted in molding young impressionable minds regardless of the message. The teacher-student relationship is scared and fundamental aspect in the Gnostic circles that we call university. Sadly these circles have been infiltrated by professors who teach subjective discussion rather than objective reasoning. Understand that this is in no means condemning all college professors for they are valued and needed. This is an attempt to simply expose subjective curriculums rather than objective ones. These subjective discussions are separated from the realities of everyday life and rooted in ideological circumstantial perfection defined by the professor. The professor dwells within his own theoretical ideal world that he created and spills his thoughts and beliefs to the student as some form of proverbial mental masturbation. [b] The Radical Media University [/b] After Cronkite changed the way news was delivered to the public with the injection of subjective discussion, the new university was realized. More and more people purchased televisions. It became a huge influence on the American people. It became not only a source of entertainment but eventually became a source of education. Later it would be a vehicle for propaganda. Intellectual elitists entered journalism. They viewed the media as not just an avenue for news but also a way to educate the public. The majority of the public was not educated with college degrees. The idea of mass media as a way to educate was great in theory until subjective discussion became the focus rather than objective discussions. It wasn’t long before Cronkite began speaking out against the Vietnam War in a populist move which Lyndon Johnson later stated that he had lost Middle American when he lost Cronkite. So how does environmentalism fit into this argument? The public has become so trusting of the media that it doesn’t question the stories that it covers. The majority of the public for so many years has taken for granted that the news that they were watching every night was fact. They began to enjoy the personalities they say like Rather, Brokaw, and Jennings. These media elitists took the baton from Cronkite and delivered the news in the new and improved subjective way. Environmentalism along with Global Warming became a new Vietnam War as the public took all of the news agencies claims as fact. The news then became drama as the public became riveted by the tragic destruction that the media was painting or should I dare say spinning. The large cultural quilt that the media agencies were weaving was intended to bring the people together in unity. The intentions were good. Everyone trusted Cronkite, Rather, Brokaw, and Jennings until cable news and independent internet media began to expose the other side. The corporate juggernauts then began investing in media agencies to help propagate future endeavors. Most notably, General Electric purchased 80% of MSNBC with Microsoft owning the other 20%. These two companies have used the news agency as a pulpit for market influencing propaganda including the Global Warming / Climate Change agenda as it has huge amounts of money at stake in alternative energy and smart grid technology. By no means are the other media agencies innocent in their biased media delivery. NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox News, CNN, and CNBC are all heavily influenced by the corporate world and do take considerati