Thursday, January 23, 2014

Why the United States has gone to _ _ _ _? Just a few of the reasons why.

          They say why complain?  They say you don't have it bad in your country, you should see what it's like in other parts of the world.  Well you know what I say I don't live in those other parts of the world I live here.  So the experiences that have molded my point of view are from growing up in this society.  And for the most part I think we have a pretty good society here in the US that is if you leave out the politicians, the bankers, #WallStreetBrokers, hedge fund managers, judges, lawyers, greedy corporate CEO's, rapists, murderers, pedophiles, corporate owned media and most corporations.  If I left any groups out please feel free to comment.  I sometimes forget about some of the pariahs and blood suckers that we have roaming around in our society.  You see it is my opinion that something started to go seriously wrong in this country in the years following World War II.  Now at first it wasn't so obvious to the average person since these were times of great prosperity.  As a matter of fact if we would have kept many of the good things that were occurring during the 50's and 60's we wouldn't be in the state we are in now.  Without going into great detail about everything that has contributed to the mess we are in I will just mention some of them.
          In 1961 Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us about the growing Military-industrial complex and how the defense industries quest for profits would influence foreign policy among other things.  Here is a link to a great article from the Times. You see during WWII the defense industries in this country profited tremendously.  They saw expansion and profits beyond their wildest imaginations.  After the war  they feared that their profits would be cut and their industries would shrink.  Now they couldn't have that and they wouldn't stand by while their billions of dollars disappeared during times of peace.  Needless to say wars were invented, conflicts created, and a state of fear was put into the minds of the people.  This has progressed more and more as each decade passed until during the 90's we were watching our military drop smart bombs on Iraq live as if it were a hit Hollywood blockbuster.  We have been desensitized to war and the negative effects it has had on other nations and peoples.  News reports are usually not allowed to show caskets of our soldiers being brought back from overseas.  You very rarely see video of our bombs hitting innocent civilians including children.  Well at least the American Media shies away from this type of coverage I can't say the same thing about international news.  Now I could probably write a 1000 page book about this topic and still not cover every issue.  I will move on to another topic and that is about money.
         To say that this country was built on greed and upon the backs of the poor would be an understatement. When we are younger and in grade school we rarely hear about the struggles of the working class man but rather we are inundated with stories about the Robber Barons, the industrialists, bankers, and others who supposedly built this great nation.  They lead us to believe that if it wasn't for families like the Rockefellers,  the Rothschilds, and the Morgans among others we would not have made any progress on our own.  You see these gentlemen with several other power brokers got together long ago and deviously planned out the future of the United States when they created the Federal Reserve.  If you haven't heard how much about the formation of this private organization I suggest you read the book, "The Creature from Jekyll Island". Some may call it a conspiracy theory but those are usually the ones who don't want you to know the truth. 
         Moving forward to the Early 70's we have the decision by Nixon to remove the gold standard from the American Dollar.  Check out this article it really does a good job of highlighting the negative impact that this decision has had on our economy. No there are some economists who will say that tying the dollar to gold prices is foolish since gold is a volatile commodity.  Additionally they say that if the price of gold spikes like it has over the last couple of years it would be impossible and very expensive for the USA to keep that much gold on hand.  I have to disagree with these hypothetical arguements.  If the dollar had continued to be pegged to gold the prices of gold would never have went out of the roof like they did.  Gold prices would rise gradually as would the value of the American dollar.  The mighty dollar would not have lost its respect and value.  The fed wouldn't have to be printing money non-stop in order to keep inflation at bay.  These fake and over inflated valuations of companies and stocks prices would not occur.  There would be a natural order to things in the financial arena.  A check to the balances.  A way to regulate inflation in a more organic way. 
         Unfortunately the writing is on the wall and the American Dollar is failing.  Currently 60% of all currency reserves in the world are in US dollars.  However a shift is beginning to happen.  Countries like China and Russia are making a move away from the US dollar.  Here is an article that discusses this further.  When the rest of the world begins turning its back on our dollar we are really going to be in deep doo doo.  But don't worry the bankers and the fed will still be saying there is nothing to worry about as they print more and more dollars.  Artificially keeping inflation at bay.  Putting another plug in the dyke that is propping up our economy.  Eventually the dyke will break and as usual the middle class and the poor will be holding the short end of the stick.  The rich and super rich will be off on some island where they have been stashing their ill-gotten gains for years and years.  Too me the US economy is like one huge ponzi scheme and the last one in the game is the loser.  But don't you worry now just remember that Corporations are now considered people and they will surely save us all.  If you have a problem with that one go HERE and do something about it.  #corruption #greed #banksters #wallstreet #federalreserve #revolution



Obamacare: There is no way to half-socialize healthcare

Healthcare for everyone. Universal Healthcare. These are two phrases and terms that have been thrown around in the public for many years now.  This has also been President Obama's mission since getting into office.  With the roll out of our Universal Healthcare system this year people have been crossing their fingers and hoping that it will work out well for them.  Those who do not have health coverage are hoping that they will be able to get an affordable plan on the so called "open market place". That is if they can get the website to work for them.  Those that already have decent insurance are hoping that nothing changes with their plans. As was promised by Obama and his administration.  Those who have poor coverage hope that the coverage will get better.  The lower class hopes that their government subsidized health coverage improves and allows them access to better healthcare providers and facilities.  There are also those people out there that hope the plan fails miserably whether or not they have health insurance.  Then there are people like me who wonder, "How can you have half-socialized national healthcare?"
          I am not sure how we can some people in this country with their own private insurance and then some people with other plans.  Or wait maybe this isn't really like the socialized medicine we see present in countries like Canada, England, or France. By definition Socialized medicine is a term used to describe and discuss systems of universal health care—that is, medical and hospital care for all at a nominal cost by means of government regulation of health care and subsidies derived from taxation.[1]  
         So as many of the talking heads sit there on there cable TV shows and radio shows and bash and or support the program no one on either side has come up with any alternatives.  It is my belief that the people that bash Obamacare are the ones that are getting money from the side that is losing out as a result of the new health regulations.  Look to who is losing the money and you will find a money trail leading to lobbyists and PR firms that are out there putting funds behind the bashers.  Politics is all about money and if you do not see this you are truly living with blinders on.  I never heard so many people complain about something that is supposed to help people.  But then again I could understand some of the complaints.  Since nothing the government really does works out well. 
           

Monday, November 18, 2013

Hello I'm Back.........

Hope no one missed me... Wait that doesn't sound right.  I can see from my many followers that many of you have been wondering where I disappeared too? Well I am back so no need to worry.  Its time to get this blog going again and spread the word.  Feel free to share this blog with your friends, coworkers, family, and pets.  Like the blog title says I want to encourage people to Stop Being Sheep.  I find that there are too many people in this world who would rather follow the heard than venture off with ideas of their own.  I also find it amazing that people are willing to accept the way our society has been taken over by big business and special interest groups.  More so the latter than anything else.  The influence of corporations on our government is shameful.  Lobbyists who represent corporations and special interest groups are pretty much dictating policy and laws in Washington.Check out this LINK for more information on Lobbyists and the money chain in Washington politics.    Most politicians out there have no choice but to play the game otherwise the risk not being re-elected.  Maybe the title of this blog should be "Bought and Sold: The Corporate Influence Over Gov't".  Well I guess that is an idea for the next blog.  Right now I am going to leave this post short and save some of those ideas for another time.  I'm glad to be back and hope to be posting more frequently from now on. 


Monday, February 22, 2010

HSBC SUCKS for screwing their customers with crazy interest rates

I am writing to you so for assistance and so you can possibly shed some light on a horrible practice banks are undertaking. I recently looked at the interest rate on my HSBC line of credit (overdraft account) and it was raised to 17.99% APR. I was never notified of this change. I called the bank and they stated they notified me in December of 2009. How convenient just 2 months before the new governmental regulations go into effect for banks and credit cards. When I asked them to lower the rate they said no. They told me this was the floor rate prime plus 11 something percent. They also told me that this was not a credit card and could be treated differently. I said it is linked to my debit and credit atm card so it sure is a credit card. They refused to lower my interest rate to a fair rate of 11.99 percent. I am struggling to get out of debt and I am on limited disability income. The banks and credit cards are making it difficult for anyone to get out of the wholes they are in. The government knowing we are in a recession is allowing them to take advantage of consumers. I hope someone there at your station will help me and take a stand against the banks who are destroying our country once again.

Thursday, June 18, 2009

A revolutionary???

Ron Paul's 2008 Presidential Campaign will not likely be forgotten soon. His supporters are amongst the most dedicated and intense in the political field. I can certainly claim so as I am a supporter of Ron Paul and were amongst those who donated money to his campaign on both record breaking days in November and December of 2007. It is without doubt that I will continue to spread the message of limited government and free markets. I had always believed in these ideas. What Ron Paul brought for many people, like myself, is a name and place of gathering for these ideas.

It is a forgone conclusion that John McCain will be the Republican candidate but, Ron Paul's campaign will continue long after we vote for the lesser of the two evils in November. His latest book, The Revolution: A Manifesto is an excellent beginners resource to the views and ideas that he has been talking about all throughout his campaign. The Revolution is a perfect book to introduce or re-introduce the traditional American ideals to our friends, families, and loved ones.

Paul eloquently puts forth his views on a non-interventionist foreign policy, our Constitution, economic freedom, civil liberties, and money. He also includes a reading list for those who want to get an even deeper understanding of the topics. There are few men or women in politics who are as well read and knowledgeable as Ron Paul; his reading list clearly shows us why that is. In The Revolution, Paul has managed to condense his knowledge of these subjects into 167 pages and made it easily accessible to the masses.

I was already convinced of Paul's message long before I read The Revolution: A Manifestoand with that in mind, I must say that there is still much to take away from this book. Where 30 or 90 second soundbites fail to capture his ideas in debates or television interviews, this book brings together a much more thought out and well prepared argument for a return to the ideals of our Founding Fathers.

The most fitting comparison that can be given is a comparison to Thomas Paine's Common Sense. Our circumstances are not identical and the problems at hand are different but the principle is the same and that is what really matters. Where Paine argued for American independence in a style that ordinary folk could understand, Paul argues for a return to a Constitutional form of government in a style that ordinary people like you and I can understand.

Ron Paul has been called the Thomas Jefferson of our time. I am sure that Jefferson along with Washington, Franklin, Adams, and the rest of our Founding Fathers would be pleased with the ideas brought forth in The Revolution: A Manifesto.

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

WHY AMERICANS HAVE NO RIGHTS

If one can ignore the incessant propaganda that bombards us from what passes as "news" on TV, movies, and even music, one might ponder why Americans no longer have Rights over themselves, their children, and their property.

In the pre-socialist days prior to 1935, the Common Law based upon justice, reason, and common sense was the Law of the land. Since the Common Law is a prerogative of sovereigns, the servant government had no lawful authority to enact nor prosecute Common Law offenses. Many judges agreed that the Common Law was too harsh for a democracy. And they were right because Americans were promised a Republic form of government wherein the People (not citizens) were the sovereigns. Since property and sovereignty are inseparable, only those who absolutely owned property could rely upon the promises in the organic documents that instituted America's governments at the Federal, State, and Local levels. In the original instrument, the Declaration of Independence, it was clearly stated that governments were instituted among men to do two things: help secure property rights, and govern by consent.

What are property rights? The absolute right to own ourselves, our labor, the fruits of our labor, and that for which we choose to trade our labor. Private property is defined as land, houses, and chattels (property other than real estate). Real estate is not private property. If two or more persons have a claim it ceases to be private property and devolves to estate. Estate is held with qualified ownership. It's no surprise to me that State constitutions only list "real and personal property" as subject to taxation and regulation. Private property is sacred, and exempt.

Before the politicians (poly from the Greek, meaning many; and tic, an ugly bloodsucking parasite) sold out America, a sovereign who owned private property was the supreme authority and absolute monarch over his domain. An example of the absolute power to decide and act (sovereignty) was the landlord's right to defend his property from trespass with deadly force. If capital punishment without benefit of trial isn't evidence of individual sovereignty, I don't know what else will suffice.

To retain the status of private property, only one individual can own said property, therefore, coverture was essential. Coverture was the transfer of the wife's property to her husband for the duration of the marriage. This made the man the sole authority over the property insuring that servant government had to respect the family's property rights in all things. There were very few problems as long as men loved their wives and treated them as equal partners. Historical revisionists would lead one to believe that men "owned" their wives and children, not unlike slaves, and that it was a bad thing (as if collective ownership by "Big Brother" is superior).

If one will recall, though men had the rights of ownership, they also had the sole duty of support and defense of their family. As the saying goes, "women and children first" into the lifeboat. Men were obligated to lay down their lives, if necessary, in defense of their family. Was it a burden that women and children had to obey the man of the family in exchange for his lifelong obligation to them? I don't think so. Even the Law recognized that only the man could be held legally liable for failure to support his family. A wife who was forced by circumstances to "work outside the home" was tantamount to giving notice that the man was either unable, or worse, in violation of the Law, unwilling to support his family. At the very least, it was an insult to the manhood of the husband.

All this changed with the institution of national socialism in 1935. Known as the Social Security Act, or Federal Insurance Contribution Act (F.I.C.A.), this treacherous enactment was the final nail in the Grand Old Republic's coffin. The ground work had been laid in 1913, giving control of America's money to a privately held loan shark operation known as the Federal Reserve; and in 1916, the creation of the Fed's collection agency, the Internal Revenue Service. It took the Fed less than 25 years to totally bankrupt America. The wealthiest nation in the history of the world was brought to her knees by the "Great Depression", and had desperate Americans demanding that the government "do something", which led to the destruction of individual property rights. For the truth about the Federal Reserve (which is no more "Federal" than Federal Express), read FOURTH REICH OF THE RICH by Des Griffin and SECRETS OF THE TEMPLE: HOW THE FEDERAL RESERVE RUNS THE COUNTRY by William Greider. Find out who owns your Representative and Senator at OpenSecrets.org.

Unknown to the gullible participants, enrollment into "Social Security" (I call it socialist insecurity), had dire effects. First, it changed their status as Free men to paupers eligible for charity from the public treasury. Second, it eliminated their private property Rights to own, and thus have a domicile, in exchange for a residence. Third, it obligated them to pay the claims made upon the bankrupted United States of America (upper and lower case spelling), replaced by a bankruptcy trustee, the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (all capital letters, a clever legal deception), and made the federal debt into their "national debt". Fourth, it made it legally impossible to object to the worthless federal reserve notes. Fifth, it was prima facie evidence that a national socialist security number made them wards of the government and status criminals without the former protections accorded Free Inhabitants. Sixth, it made men (and women) subject to, and object of, administrative bureaucracy without constitutional restrictions. Seventh, it made them co-signers on all the loans the politicians borrow (present tense) from the Federal Reserve and foreign banks. China and Japan hold over 40% of America's debt. Every penny confiscated from American workers' paychecks goes to pay just the interest on the "national debt".

When Americans were reduced to bleating paupers, hands out for a share of their "entitlements", the government could rightly ignore the centuries of Law based upon securing private property rights, and shift to policy based on voluntary consent. Without Common Law rights, the Common Law evaporated from public awareness (with a little help from public schools). In its place the strict rules and regulations of "civil law" have become the standard, Instead of natural and personal liberty, those birthrights of free Americans, we now have civil and political liberty as permitted by our master government. Contrary to popular belief, "Civil Liberty" is not freedom, but license (permission). Who needs permission (license) to own a dog, marry, build a house, travel public roads, carry a gun, and so on? Not a Free Man. Who needs to pay a tax for the privilege to live, work, or hold property? Not a Free Man!

Since 1935, Americans have surrendered their Republic form of government, guaranteed by Article 4, Section 4 of the constitution for the united States of America, and the promise to the Free Inhabitants of the Land from Article IV of the Articles of Confederation, in exchange for the mob rule of democracy. If you think democracy is something fine and good, you have been brainwashed, programmed, and indoctrinated with ANTI-AMERICAN propaganda. If you think it's good that American lives and property are being used to make the world safe for democracy, your ancestors are spinning in their graves in outrage. Patrick Henry would spit on you. George Washington would turn his head from you. Ben Franklin would kick you in the arse.

All Law is for the protection of life and property. All else is mere policy, and policy requires fully informed consent. And though involuntary servitude was outlawed, there is no restriction on voluntary servitude, howbeit by fraud and deceit. Why do Americans keep re-electing the same politicians year after year? None of them ever honor their oath of office to defend and protect the constitution, and restore the Republic.

In answer to the question why Americans have no rights, national socialism is to blame. However, our continued consent to national socialism is the mechanism that has locked the chains of tyranny upon us. He who consents can't complain... can't bite the hand that feeds you... beggars can't be choosers... you get the idea.

Death Penalty ... for or Against? I say kill em all

Public opinion is sharply divided over the death penalty or capital punishment. According to critics death penalty is just like a legalized murder. It does not prevent crime. It is barbaric and reflects that we are going backward to more brutal time. While the supporters believe that it eliminates worst criminals from the society and is a step forward to safer society and greater justice.

Arguments For Death Penalty:
The death penalty is morally, ethically and constitutionally right. The society has a moral right and duty to take the lives of others who kills others.

The death penalty permanently eliminates criminal from the society and thus it acts as a deterrence to further crime as dead criminals cannot commit any further crime, either within the prison or after escaping from the prison.

The money which is spend on long term imprisonment of murderers, rapists etc can be spend for the old, the young and sick people.

The main argument for death penalty is that once executed the person will never kill another victim and thus is acts as a deterrent to crime and criminals.

Arguments Against Death Penalty:
Capital punishment opponents believe that death penalty is morally wrong. They believe that by legalizing executions the society puts itself on the same low moral level as those of criminals.

In too many cases it was found death penalty is unfairly applied and wrong and innocent people were executed. The jury decision is unfairly influenced by race and money. The people who are wealthy manipulate evidences in their favor and are less likely to get death penalty than poor.

Finally death penalty does not deter crime it actually increases crime and violence .Statistical data shows that crime rate is higher than in states without it.