One usually thinks of the early immigrants to North America as being those who came to this country as fortune hunters but that phase of the immigration to this country came after it had proven to be the land of the free and home of the brave. Even then the immigrants were sorrowful to be leaving their native country and families in order to find opportunity and freedom.
In the very beginning of the European immigration to North America the people were coming to escape persecution in politics and religion. The extreme conflict and sorrow that drives men to separate themselves from home and country was a very real experience for these pilgrims. Many died on their way here or lost loved ones who were coming with them. And once here, it was very hard to survive and establish one’s self in a somewhat comfortable manner. Some of the first pilgrim colonies did not survive as all of the pilgrims died.
With almost 2000 years of recorded history, our forefathers had a great deal to learn from history. Plus they had a pretty clean slate to start with and as a result they could do whatever they needed to establish this new country.
The people had made it clear that they were free and that is the way they intended to stay. The job was to frame a government which would serve the people and not anyone else. Not only in the present but future peoples and organizations were to be held in check so that the people would remain free. Free to do as they wished as long as they did not infringe on someone else.
It was obvious from history that there would always be people and organizations with ambitions and that those people would work to take control of and run the government to their own benefit and to the demise of those who stood against them. The main character in the movie about the Revolutionary War ‘The Patriot,’ put it something like this: “Why would you trade one tyrant a thousand miles away (King George) for 10,000 tyrants close at hand.” With their recent history those patriots knew what to expect of King George but they knew little of what to expect from their own neighbors.
The background of these Colonials was very diverse not only in religion but in financial and ethnic backgrounds. By the time the duty came of framing the Constitution this nation had all sorts of individuals and businesses shaping up to serve this country. The problems in-time and expense with shipping, made it imperative that this new country supply itself with whatever products it needed.
These States had a good deal to look forward to but they were very spread out and as was said, they were very diverse. If there were to be a number of different countries there would be shortages and division. It was very important that they all stick together so that they could quickly become a formidable, strong and vibrant nation. The pressure was on to make sure that the rights were protected in order to get all the States to bind together.
These men knew that governments naturally deteriorate and give way to other forms of government. The longest lasting and strongest form of government was that of a monarchy but how could these men establish a monarchy? Being so diverse there was not the opportunity to establish a bond to a monarch.
Democracy was the best known form of government and had a very bad historical reputation. Democracies had always given way to other forms of governments and did so very violently since the struggle for control gave way to the most violent of times. The framers of The Constitution knew that in establishing a Democracy with a constitution they were merely giving a little more time of survival to that government since a majority could change The Constitution and then do as it wished.
Our forefathers knew these things. That is why James Madison said, “….democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property, and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.” And Samuel Adams said; “Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself.”
The framers of our Constitution were very aware of the Roman Republic which lasted a long while and accomplished great things but in the end gave way to mobs wanting welfare and bureaucrats buying votes. In reality it gave way to Democracy which quickly gave way to a form of dictatorship. Our forefathers knew all of this and were interested in establishing safe-guards which would keep the state a rule-of-law.
The forefathers had their work cut out for them. They obviously had to create a Constitutional Republic which would have the safeguards to protect it from becoming a Democracy.
Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University.
Hillary Clinton blamed the Electoral College for her stunning defeat in the 2016 presidential election in her latest memoirs, “What Happened.”
Some have claimed that the Electoral College is one of the most dangerous institutions in American politics.
Why? They say the Electoral College system, as opposed to a simple majority vote, distorts the one-person, one-vote principle of democracy because electoral votes are not distributed according to population.
To back up their claim, they point out that the Electoral College gives, for example, Wyoming citizens disproportionate weight in a presidential election.
Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. But this can’t be done alone.Find out more >>
Put another way, Wyoming, a state with a population of about 600,000, has one member in the House of Representatives and two members in the U.S. Senate, which gives the citizens of Wyoming three electoral votes, or one electoral vote per 200,000 people.
California, our most populous state, has more than 39 million people and 55 electoral votes, or approximately one vote per 715,000 people.
Comparatively, individuals in Wyoming have nearly four times the power in the Electoral College as Californians.
Many people whine that using the Electoral College instead of the popular vote and majority rule is undemocratic. I’d say that they are absolutely right. Not deciding who will be the president by majority rule is not democracy.
But the Founding Fathers went to great lengths to ensure that we were a republic and not a democracy. In fact, the word democracy does not appear in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or any other of our founding documents.
How about a few quotations expressed by the Founders about democracy?
In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wanted to prevent rule by majority faction, saying, “Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.”
John Adams warned in a letter, “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet, that did not commit suicide.”
Edmund Randolph said, “That in tracing these evils to their origin, every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.”
Then-Chief Justice John Marshall observed, “Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.”
The Founders expressed contempt for the tyranny of majority rule, and throughout our Constitution, they placed impediments to that tyranny. Two houses of Congress pose one obstacle to majority rule. That is, 51 senators can block the wishes of 435 representatives and 49 senators.
The president can veto the wishes of 535 members of Congress. It takes two-thirds of both houses of Congress to override a presidential veto.
To change the Constitution requires not a majority but a two-thirds vote of both houses, and if an amendment is approved, it requires ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures.
Finally, the Electoral College is yet another measure that thwarts majority rule. It makes sure that the highly populated states—today, mainly 12 on the east and west coasts, cannot run roughshod over the rest of the nation. That forces a presidential candidate to take into consideration the wishes of the other 38 states.
Those Americans obsessed with rule by popular majorities might want to get rid of the Senate, where states, regardless of population, have two senators.
Should we change representation in the House of Representatives to a system of proportional representation and eliminate the guarantee that each state gets at least one representative?
Currently, seven states with populations of 1 million or fewer have one representative, thus giving them disproportionate influence in Congress.
While we’re at it, should we make all congressional acts by majority rule? When we’re finished with establishing majority rule in Congress, should we then move to change our court system, which requires unanimity in jury decisions, to a simple majority rule?
My question is: Is it ignorance of or contempt for our Constitution that fuels the movement to abolish the Electoral College?
The main point of this blog “What Democracy” is that this country is suppose to be a Republic and that the people as a rule believe this is suppose to be a Democracy so they elected officials who act and react like a Democracy. The way you control a Democracy is through extreme events. Like the 9/11 attacks on the world trade center. Which then brought about the government meddling in private affairs and the loss of personal liberties. A larger out of control government.
A video produced some 25-30 years ago named: No Place to Hide, The Strategy and Tactics of Terrorism, very will showed the different terror attacks at that time and interviewed a number of terrorist along with the review of the terrorist manuals to show that: The Action is in the Reaction. That is that the purpose of organized terrorism is not to kill maim and destroy but is rather to stampede the target country into actions which will weaken that country. The 9/11 attacks caused more lose of our freedoms than what we have seen in this country sense the founding of the Federal Reserve and Income Tax.
The way you control a Democracy is by actions which cause mob rule. In a country which understands it is a Republic and how a republic works terrorism brings about a resolve which goes against the terrorist not towards mob rule. So lets watch our reaction so we truly counter the enemy and not promote him and his purposes.
So remember The Action the terrorist is looking for is in the Reaction.
Why is it That Most Totalitarian Governments are Communist ?
Forms of government can range from a Constitutional Republic which can guarantee freedom to its people to a totalitarian government which takes all the freedoms from the people and holds them totally to the state. North Korea’s dictatorship is an example of a total totalitarian government which holds all the power to itself. The same was true of the old Russia. But today Russia claims to be giving its people freedoms but in reality Russia is just granting the rights, like a franchise, to different persons who then operate as a Mafia under the protection of the government. The arrangement is something like a franchise granted unofficially by the government to the different Mafia heads. There is no need for a formal agreement because noone is to regulate the agreement just the government and there is no arguing with the government. At its lest whim the Mafia head is arrested for tax evasion or what ever and the franchise turned over to the new head man quite often the one prosecuting the former owner-franchise-Mafia head. The main point here is that all the Mafia heads can be demoted to give total control and ownership of the government. The system works very well in convincing outsiders that the government is not really of any real control or possibly is even total inept and therefore is not to be worried about.
A dictatorship can establish communism as its financial system and quit often does. But that does not mean that a dictatorship has to establish a communist economic system or that a communist country has to be run by a dictatorship. But it works best for a totalitarian type government to have communism as its financial system. That away they can steal, in total, all of that within the state. And another issue comes in and that is religious freedoms the same with political freedoms. A totalitarian government doesn’t have to be totally totalitarian as it may be advantageous for looks to tolerate some things at least officially so as to foster good publicity or to keep the enemy states and people confused as to what is going on and where the state and its bureaucracy is at and especially where they are going.
Communism has never worked and will never work as an economic system for any length of time. But it has worked very effectively as a economic system to support a totalitarian government for a short period of time. With the stealing of all the resources of the state the state can reallocate the resources and appear to be prospering as long as one looks at only those industries important to the state. Even the people are the resources of the state and so they are the slaves of the state which are exploited as the state sees fit. Quit often a system of extortion is set up as a means of controlling the people.
Lenin went into Russia with millions of dollars of gold on the train with him to take control of Russia and set up a totalitarian state with communism as the economic system to justify to the world the atrocity of stealing the total value of Russia for the financing party’s. With those stolen resources the Lenin regime could foment revolution and destruction of target states and take them over. Sound enough of an idea except that communism is not a system that can support itself let alone support other country’s. It can take the resources of the first targeted country and use those stolen goods and services to carry out its operation for a while but after a while the state runs out of resources and needs to find another victim to take over or convince someone to give them aid. Russia worked this program by getting the United States to sell them wheat on borrowed money. And by selling arms to those countries they were targeting to take over.
Russia was able with the help of the United States to take over a good deal of eastern Europe after World War II and with that move had all the resource of those countries to feed upon for a number of years until they ran out of resources again.
We are told that communism in Russia failed as of course communism always fails as an economic system but the government did not fail. Even though they had murdered millions of people no one was prosecuted or even effectively demoted as butchers or anything of the sort. It has been in resent years a matter of changing the coat and hat so as to portray a different idealism. Little more than a play for the unwary. These plays are very common in a totalitarian state. The enemy within the state are those seeking freedoms. By stating that the state has changed its policy towards freedom fighters a good many of the freedom fighters are brought out in the open along with there sympathizers. Shortly the enemy’s of the state are rounded up and prosecuted. It doesn’t matter what they are prosecuted for or that they are guilty. The name of the game is not cat and mouse but a reign of terror. This process doesn’t need to be repeated very often for the people to understand when to cheer and when to cry as we see in North Korea. When Russia showed, by way of there dissidents in Ukrainian, that they wanted to take back parts of the Ukraine in order to establish a land bridge to southern Europe (to the Pope in Rome) the people right a way fell in line as they knew what was going to happen and that no help was to be expected from the United States as Obama was implementing a totalitarian state in the United States.
In Hitler’s Germany the totalitarian government failed and the allies hunted down the administration, tried, convicted, and executed them for their crimes. In Russia those of the fained previous government were not prosecuted but rather were given rights to run rough should over who ever the needed to take control and steal the parts of the economy that they wanted. They kept the old power, that is the control of the state, but changed parts of the economic system to the benefit of a few at the top. Once the situation changes, such as the taking over of a new country in which to steal the wealth of, or even, once its own mafia capitalist portion of the economy becomes prosperous enough under a thinly disguised free enterprise system to make it worthwhile to return to communism and steal all the resources which had been created by the franchised Mafia free enterprise, we will probably see a return to the old communist economic system. The real point here is that those who were in control before are still in control they have just changed the way they function in the economic system. But lets not get confused. The crew who was in control before are still in control they have just changed to a system where those in control have given, like franchise rights, to different persons to control different industry’s or areas.
The real essentials have not changed. The totalitarian state is still in place and the controlled so called free enterprise is allowed and encouraged as long as it is within control of the state or those in control of the state.
People visiting Russia say that it is so good that communism failed and that the people are free now. But that it is to bad that the Mafia took over. When in reality the Mafia has always been in control but only with different coats and hats on.
When “Russia failed” there was no purging of the government of the mass murders. No trials. They even had previous Mafia heads murdered when new control was established by some one. Even going to South America to kill a possible future contender. But there was no cleansing when the staged Communism failed. A very critical position as those in control would not want to give up there life. Simply the changing of hats and coats and of course the associated lies from our leaders and the news media that Communism was dead and the biggest proof they gave was that the Berlin Wall came down.
Today we see Russia reestablishing the empire simply by cohesion, plus a little. For there previous mass murders leave a permanent mark in the slaves conciseness. And the number one state they move into first? The one who had the most outrageous amount of people killed. Russia moved all the food out of the Ukraine “The Bread Basket of Europe” and starved 7,000,000 of the people to death about 25% of the population. Is it surprising that when Russia let it known that it wants to take back the Ukraine that Russia was able to find the supporters to back a takeover? There are always those who think treason to nation, family, and God is easier than fighting the establishment.
So the real point is that these totalitarian states are nothing more than Mafias who have taken over governments. The most profitable and the least likely to be prosecuted of all Mafias as they claim to be independent states with rights to exist as independent states.
Submitted by Richard L. Cure -Precinct 1002
Background info. from tisaboutfreedom.wordpress.com
Whereas, The Obama Administration has by-passed Congress and acted without due process of the law as evidenced by the actions listed below:
a. Bypassed Congress and instructed the EPA to advance Cap-n-Trade (carbon tax). (source #1)
b. Made four Executive Appointments while the Senate was NOT in recess, which the Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional, yet the appointees still remain. (source #2)
c. Did not get Congress’s approval for Obama’s war in Libya. Article I, Section 8, Impeachable under Article II, Section 4. Obama falsely claims UN can usurp Congressional war powers. (source #3)
Whereas, The Obama Administration has repeatedly denied Constitutional rights as evidenced in the actions listed below:
a. Obama Care requirement to provide birth control which restricts freedom of religious belief. (source #4)
b. IRS denial of right to quick process and the targeting of politically opposing organizations. (source #5)
c. Use of drones on American Citizens. (source #6)
Whereas, The Obama Administration has used Executive Privilege in the following incidents:
a. Fast and Furious-gun running to drug lords where a border patrol agent and many others were killed. To be named specifically in this fiasco is Attorney General Holder. (source #7)
b. Obama Care sold by the Administration as ‘not a tax’ in Congress then went to the Supreme Court and claimed it was a tax thereby keeping the unconstitutional law from being thrown out. (source #8)
c. In the Benghazi fiasco the Ambassador and supporting troops were killed because the Obama administration, at best, did not act or react responsibly. Specifically to be named in this wrong doing is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. (source #9)
d. Forced legislation through for the allowing of ‘gays’ in the military which weakened our Armed Forces. (source #10)
e. National Labor Relations Board, to which Obama had illegally appointed 3 members, was used to stop Boeing from building a $750 million Dreamliner plant in right-to-work South Carolina. (source #11)
f. Appointed more than two dozen “czars” to federal agencies without the “Advice and Consent of the Senate.” (source #12)
g. The prosecution of Snowden for his patriotic act of disclosing the unconstitutional action of our government spying on its people. (source #13)
Whereas, The Obama Administration has made repeated stands against the Congress’s right to know as evidenced in:
a. Benghazi fiasco, along with the associated cover-up and denial involving, especially, the President and the Secretary of State (source #14)
b. Investigation into the discrimination of IRS in processing of filings for tax exempt status. (source #15)
Whereas, The Obama Administration has used Executive Orders to bypass and negate Congress and the Constitution as witnessed by the following incidents:
a. 23 Executive Orders on gun control – an infringement on the 2nd Amendment especially involving Vice President Biden. (source #16)
b. Executive Order bypassing Congress on immigration – Article 1 Section 1, All Legislative power held by Congress. (source #17)
c. Executive Order 13603 – NDPT – government can seize anything. (source #18)
d. Executive Order 13524 – Gives INTERPOL jurisdiction on American soil beyond law enforcement agencies, including the FBI, which gives power to a foreign power. (source #19)
e. Executive Order 13636 Infrastructure Cyber Security – Bypassing Congress Article 1 Section 1, All legislative power held by Congress. (source #20)
Whereas, the Obama Administration has, through its oversight of governmental agencies, allowed or caused the loss of Constitutional rights as witnessed by the following incidents:
a. Attempted to tax political contributions of the opposing party – 1st Amendment. (source #21)
b. Later caused IRS to hold up tax-exempt status on organizations which opposed Obama. (source #22)
c. Allowed spying on the American people through a program, code named Prism NSA and the FBI’s tapping directly into the servers of 9 internet companies to gain emails, video/audio, photos and documents. NSA is also collecting data on all phone calls in U.S. These actions are violations of the 4th Amendment. (source #23)
Whereas, The Obama Administration has disregarded laws on the books thereby negating the Laws of the Land as witnessed by the following incidents:
a. Directed the Department of Justice to ignore the Constitution and separation of powers and to stop enforcement of the Defense of Marriage Act. (source #24)
b. Has continued to neglect to enforce existing immigration laws while creating its own. (source #25)
Whereas, The Obama Administration has given its cronies, rights outside of the law making the law a personal privilege thereby making a farce of the law, evidenced by:
a. Healthcare waivers – Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s home state Nevada received a blanket waiver from Obama Care. Nancy Pelosi’s district received about 20% of the waivers. No president has dispensing powers. (source #26)
Whereas, The Obama Administration has acted in the capacity of a foreign power and plans to do so in the future as witnessed by the following acts:
a. Obama took Chairmanship of UN Security Council – Violation of Section 9. (source #27)
b. Plans to sign U.N. Firearms Treaty, which infringes on our Constitutional 2nd Amendments rights and gives the power to a foreign body, which could be argued as a clear case of treason.
Therefore be it Resolved, That our representatives take up this call to action to prosecute the Obama Administration for various crimes outlined above to include but not limited to the Impeachment of President Obama. We ask our Texas Federal Representatives Senator Ted Cruz, Senator Cornyn, and Congressman Michael Burgess to pursue immediate correction of the violation of powers by the Obama Administration. And to press for changes in Homeland Security, FEMA, and to the Amended (Sept. 2009) Defense Production Act of 1950 (source #29) which is used as the basis for many of the presidential orders which undermine our Constitution. Our State Representatives are asked to lend support in the above matters. We here set forth the Impeachment Articles of Michael Connelly, J.D. Constitutional Lawyer as an example of what we expect to be brought before Congress. (source #28)
18) http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-order-national-defense-resources-preparedness Department of Homeland Security is made #1 with all agencies including FEMA under Department of Homeland Security. March 16, 2012.
Previously we have shown, in this blog (www.whatdemocracy.net), that this nation is founded on the ideals of a Republic which is a form of government based on law. (see also www.squidoo.com/whatdemocracy). After years of undermining the citizens’ understanding of the ideals of a Republic, and as the result of no serious efforts to keep the citizen informed of his duties as a citizen of a Republic, the Republic naturally gives way to a Democracy. (www.whatdemocracy.us/archives/11 Don’t Curse the Darkness Flip the Switch) And, eventually, that Democracy naturally becomes a Dictatorship ( www.whatdemocracy.us/archives/4 What Difference Does it Make, Republic or Democracy?) The decay of our country is not at a natural rate because the enemies of freedom have been working for many years to undermine and destroy our Republic and put themselves into total control. This is a little much for most Americans to swallow in one bite so let’s go over the pieces of the puzzle to see how it all fits together and what we are going to have to do to stop this masquerade and save our country and the lives of patriots.
Our Constitution and Bill of Rights are the basis of the government of our Republic and the safeguards of our rights. Our government is intended to function under these governing rules of law. All men are to be ruled by the law. A good percentage of people do not understand the form of government by which our country is to be ruled nor their duties as citizens and as a result they elect officials who do not understand their duties as elected officials. (www.whatdemocracy.us/archives/7 The Conservative Winds of Change are Blowing) The news media and those advocates of Democracy pushing for Democracy and Socialism (www.whatdemocracy.us/archives/13 Democracy and Socialism are Siamese Twins) have pushed to make the public believe this is a Democracy and in that confusion the people elect officials who believe it is their duty to do what the people want as opposed to doing what is right by law. The citizens have turned against the law in that they have voted for persons who will act against the law in order to give them what they want.
If the people believe this is a Democracy then they will elect officials who will not respect the law but public opinion and when this takes place the country will respond as a Democracy and not as a Republic. Read again as it is key. (www.whatdemocracy.us/archives/4 What Difference Does it Make, Republic or Democracy?)
Democracy is not a rule by law. It is rule by majority. A country ruled by those who believe this a Democracy become ruled by events and demagogues who are willing to use events to take more power. Events can be created in order to give the excuse to rule. In times past events had to be extreme to bring about extreme change but as time goes on and technology becomes more advanced, men become overwhelmed by all the propaganda put out by our bipartisan news media (Laugh). Mountains can be made out of mole hills. The law of the land is swept aside as the law isn’t as important as public opinion in a functioning Democracy.
A recent poll stated that Congress has a lower popularity rating than a cockroach. Congress is composed of those whom we have elected so how can that be? One reason is because the citizens have elected representatives who believe it is their duty to do what their constituents want them to do. Yet the representatives hear speeches which inform them that it is their duty to follow the law and to do what is right. So they become confused. And the news media constantly pushes the socialist totalitarian line of thought thereby brainwashing the citizens and the representatives. The media has gone on and on with the idea that the Fiscal Cliff is because of Congress who will not act on it. When you have a Congress which is divided on basics such as Republic or Democracy how can you get along when one side knows the law has to be preserved and the other side believes opinion is the ruling matter? Those pushing for Democracy are: #1 undermining their country #2 showing disrespect for the law (Constitution) #3 preparing the way for a Dictator. Those who know this is a Republic know they can not compromise the Law and are therefore an unmovable force. If the two sides are nearly balanced in number then nothing meaningful can be done.
One can see that as the Republic deteriorates the law means less and less. We have seen, in this country, a man elected president who was not legally a member of this country and therefore has no right to be an elected official. He is circumventing the law with presidential decrees to bring about a totalitarian state and it is only a matter of time until an event will allow him to declare himself totally above the law. He will then be Dictator.
So how do we stop this chain of events? #1 We have to understand that this is supposed to be a Republic. That should be simple enough. Just say the pledge of allegiance or look at where the constitution says that it guarantees to the states a Republican form of government. #2 We have to understand what a Republic is and how it is intended to function. Simple understood that one is not to elect an amoral man because he will not serve the law and will serve himself. #3 We have to educate the citizens as to the two above facts. What four basic points to teach. It will take a few times being told for a number of them but a good number will fully understand quickly. #4 We have to convey these understandings to our elected officials so they can act as Representatives of a Republic. #5 We have to demand that the law be obeyed. #6 And if we are going to succeed we are going to have to pray as if it were totally up to God. (www.whatdemocracy.us/archives/6 So,What Should We Do?)
Political parties have, over the years, evolved to become much like corporations in that they seek to benefit themselves.
There is a grass roots group within each political party which is very interested in the issues and as a result this group will work very hard on the party’s platform in order to make a statement as to beliefs and purposes. These platforms are pretty good gauges as to the grass-roots movement of the party and shows the direction that the party is moving.
When it comes down to the rank and file members of a party, they generally do not hold to the party’s platform and are very interested in keeping the status-quo of the party organization. This is the group that presses the idea that to vote a straight party ticket is the duty of every member of the party.
In a Republic, the guide for the voter to use, as a primary point of decision, is that he wants to find the man with the best morals and therefore the strongest backbone. But if men are persuaded to vote for the man who represents any given party simply on the basis of the party he belongs to, not only does the proper selection process of a Republic go out the window, but (possibly worse) along with the straight party ticket goes the idea that ‘if he is of my party he can do no wrong’ or at least the one under question will not be opposed in what he is doing. This is a partial explanation of why, even though we elect new people and even change the parties which are in control, we have no real change in the direction we are going but only a change in how fast we are going in that direction because parties will not ‘police’ their own people. The political parties have become social parties where social etiquette dictates what is expected so as to keep everyone smiling. The result is that the turn-coats or traitors are backed by their party when they should be removed by their party.
Many times one finds that, after all due diligence is taken, all the right candidates are from the same party. This is not uncommon in a polarized society.
To vote straight party ticket as a matter of standard procedure is to put the party above faith and country. What results can come from such an idea, other than disaster?
In today’s manipulated world many people do not feel that their vote really matters. But in the last few months we have seen some actions and reactions which have shown just how outrageously important the electorate’s vote is.
The #1 issue for this election, from the beginning, has been the economy. If the socialists could get the economy to look good they could possibly win the election. As the people would not believe that there is something wrong with the direction the socialists are taking us.
There are ways to make an economy look good and there are ways to make an economy do well for a short period of time. We have seen times in the past when the economy has been manipulated but not as drastically as it has been this time. I will give a couple of examples from the not too distant past.
In the 1980’s the Hunt brothers understood inflation and the silver market and they invested in the silver market, not just passively or just aggressively but to the point that they and their friends and associates controlled the silver market. It was said that they ‘cornered’ the silver market.
The Hunts were not just conservative but very supportive of right-wing causes and candidates. Enter Armor Hammer, a Russian agent (he bought and sold for the Russians) who stepped into the silver market with a lot of financial backing and shorted the silver market, breaking the silver market and many of the conservatives who were in the market. The Hunts had to sell their vast holdings of land and businesses.
Then during the Reagan administration there was a massive correction in the economy which was the result of historic inflation which caused the voters of California to pass Proposition 13 which basically said “We the people will not put up with inflation and we hereby restrict the increased size of government in order to control inflation”. The massive correction in the economy which followed would have been a depression but those in control of the economy took one industry at a time and crashed it to historic losses and then they moved to the next industry and did the same thing with it and on through a good part of the economy. All during this episode the news media kept quoting different ones as saying “We hope this does not spread to other industries or we will have a depression.” It didn’t spread (because they had such control of the economy) and they were able to play out the “disguised depression” one industry at a time. They even had to invent a new term to describe what was going on. They called it “Dis-inflation”. But of course it was portrayed to the public as having been a natural course of things and not controlled at all.
On the morning of the Iowa caucus I was headed out to the farm to do chores and turned on the radio to get the slant which the news media was putting on the events taking place and about to take place. The stock market had been having fits going up 2-3 hundred one day and down a few days later a similar amount. It was enough to set any half-wit ill at ease. Greece had been in the news, along with a number of what they called PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece, and Spain) as they are bankrupt but haven’t declared so yet. But on this morning of the Iowa caucus the news media declared that the stock markets all around the world and including our own had been up 2-4 % because the problems in Greece had been solved. Along with this bit of news there was a bunch of other misinformation about the economy which, as a whole, said that the economy was in excellent shape.
Go to this site to see a chart of the Dow Jones Averages for the time period that is being talked about from Jan 3, 2012 the date of the Iowa Caucus, and Mar 6, 2012 especially: http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/quickchart/quickchart.asp?symb=DJIA&insttype=Index or any other such charts.
Now several months later we can see that Greece was not OK nor any other part of the economy. But we no longer have the extreme ups and downs of the stock market and the stock market has kept moving up. The part of the news this last month that I would like to bring to your attention is involves the bank started by the #1 man who was the main participant in the secret meetings on Jekyll Island to bring about the Federal Reserve so as to control the economy of the United States. That man was JP Morgan the founder of JP Morgan Chase Bank which is in the news because of the losses they sustained in world-wide trading out of the branch in England to the tune of 4-5 Billion Dollars somewhere around the time of the contrived manipulation of the markets before the Iowa Caucus.
The first announced winner of the Iowa Caucus was Romney, then Santorum, there are those who believe that Ron Paul was the winner of the Iowa Caucus. Ron Paul is the man that has been heading up the move to audit the Federal Reserve and therefore would be throwing an exposing light on JP Morgan.
The 4-5 billion is only a tip of the iceberg because some of the trades would have to have made big bucks as they knew what direction the markets where going to go. So, yes, they went to all this trouble and a great deal more just to influence your vote.
How much is your vote worth? When it comes to the freedom of your family and that of your children’s families, what is your vote worth to you?
While doing some research, I came across a website which was touted as a Democracy – Republic web site. Interestingly, the name of the blog was Left Blog at www.leftsolutions.wordpress.com. The point is that on this liberal blog they had a survey as to what their readers think the form of government for this country is – a Republic, Democracy or Democracy/Republic. They had thousands who answered the survey of which 60% said Republic, 9% said Democracy, and 31% said both Republic and Democracy. Leave it to a liberal site to confuse a simple issue.
What an interesting survey! It shows that even the liberal understand that this country is supposed to be a Republic. The problem is in the understanding of the two systems and how opposed they are to one another. Also the liberals can’t seem to grasp the concept of a Republic having elected officials and not being any part of a Democracy.
Our job is to forge the understanding that a Republic is a form of government where “The Law” reigns supreme. Our (USA) Republic was set up under “The Law” of the Constitution with a Bill of Rights which states that the people were given rights (stated as inalienable rights – rights given by God to all men and for which no-one has any right to infringe upon for any reason). “The Law” (the Constitution) sets up a ‘checks and balances’ system so that the people can elect officials to represent them. These officials can only work within a set frame of laws which protect the “inalienable rights” of men.
On the other hand, we have the idea of a Democracy which could have a constitution but which would be worth less than the paper it was written on because as soon as the people became so inclined they would vote to change the constitution and go ahead and do as the whim of the day suggested regardless of whose rights were done away with, inalienable or not.