Friday, October 17, 2008

Socialism? What Happened to the Constitutional Republic?

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas, American socialist
How the Democratic Party Went from Thomas Jefferson to Karl MarxNationalization, the Welfare State and Bureaucracies to control every aspect of human behavior
By Daniel Greenfield Tuesday, May 12, 2009
“That brought us to our essential difference, the difference of the Evolutionary Collectivist and Marxist, the question whether the social revolution is, in its extremity, necessary, whether it is necessary to over throw one economic system completely before the new one can begin. I believe that through a vast sustained educational campaign the existing Capitalist system can be civilised into a Collectivist world system;” - H.G. Wells, Russia in the Shadows
This quote comes from H. G. Wells’ conversation with Vladimir Lenin. Wells was highlighting the difference between Lenin’s radical revolutionary program and Wells’ own “Open Conspiracy” evolutionary collectivist program.
What that means is that Lenin and H. G. Wells didn’t disagree on the final destination, a collectivist world system… socialism on a global scale applied to everyone and every single country. What they disagreed on was how to get there.
Lenin favored a violent overthrow of the existing free market capitalist systems, putting an end to democracy and individual freedoms by armed force, and replacing them with a revolutionary people’s government that would administer social justice.
As a Social Liberal, Wells favored a slow gradual takeover from within, using every cultural and political tool available to shift society over to a socialist system. He called this the “Open Conspiracy”, because social liberals would openly work to end capitalism and replace it with socialism.
Bill Ayers, Obama’s close associate, is a good example of Lenin gone Wells, or a revolutionary socialist becoming a social liberal. The difference is that the revolutionary socialist plants bombs, the social liberal works from within the system to achieve the same ends over a longer period of time.
The major shift from classical liberalism to social liberalism, required redefining government power
In the United States, Social Liberalism took over the Democratic party in the early 20th century. That fundamental shift can be seen by comparing Grover Cleveland to Woodrow Wilson and FDR.
As the last Classical Liberal Democratic President, Grover Cleveland was a firm believer in controlling the size of government, cutting taxes and vetoing most spending bills. He worked to reform the Federal government when needed, had little liking for unions or socialists and believed the Federal government should stay out of most affairs. This did not make him unusual, but in line with classical liberals all the way back to Thomas Jefferson.
A mere twenty and forty years later, the next two Democratic Presidents, Wilson and FDR, were enthusiastic about expanding government and using its power to bring about social justice. The newly transformed Democratic Presidency believed that government should be in the business of regulating everything and poking its nose in everywhere. By the time FDR was using government regulation to control the price of meat and putting unions in the driver’s seat, socialism was well and truly here.
The Democratic party had gone from being classically liberal to socially liberal. Where the classical liberal thought that big government should leave people alone, and treated rights as freedom from government tyranny… the social liberal thought that government should control people to enforce social justice and disdained rights as “negative freedoms”, instead favoring “positive freedoms” that would involve government abridging rights to create social and economic equality.
The major shift from classical liberalism to social liberalism, required redefining government power. Where classical liberals saw government power as a tyrannical force that needed to be controlled, social liberals saw government power as a benign tyranny that could be used to check the greater danger of unregulated social and economic systems.
Classical liberals believed freedom came from ending government intervention that created inequality. Social liberals believed that equality was more important than freedom, and that it could only be achieved by curbing anything that prevented equality.
FDR’s New Deal and LBJ’s Great SocietyThe Social Liberal takeover of the Democratic party was not complete with Wilson or FDR. It isn’t complete today either, as there are Classical Liberal Democrats still in Congress and in various state governments. But with Obama, the Social Liberal takeover has reached almost revolutionary proportions.
The two great Social Liberal moments in the 20th century came as political opportunities resulting from crises. FDR’s New Deal and LBJ’s Great Society were agile exploitations of an economic and social crisis that enabled them to push through a Social Liberal agenda that fundamentally altered the relationship between Americans and the Federal Government.
Obama’s ascension to power represents the Third Wave of Social Liberalism in America, exploiting the so-called economic crisis to execute an equally far reaching Social Liberal program. What the Marxists in Russia or Latin America have tried to do in a matter of years, Social Liberals in Europe and America have waited decades and even over a century to push through.
With a free market economy and a long tradition of stubborn individualism, America represented the Social Liberal’s greatest challenge. The Open Conspiracy has slowly worked to undermine that, emphasizing the security of government collectivism, pushing community over country, class and race over citizenship, and collectivization based thinking over individualism. Meanwhile America’s cultural values and national standards have been chipped away at, making it possible for the vulgar adolescent charade that was the 2008 election to take place.
By embracing social liberalism, the party of Jefferson broke down the “wall of separation” between government and the individual that served as the Constitutional guarantee of civil liberties against a tyrannical government. Social liberalism meant the end of individual rights and the beginning of civil rights with government authority placed above all else. And by doing so the Democratic party replaced individual freedoms with an all encompassing bureaucracy, and liberty with socialism, and now with Obama, America stands on the verge of closing the gap between Wells and Lenin, between the Evolutionary Collectivist and the Marxist.
Nationalization, the Welfare State and Bureaucracies to control every aspect of human behaviorNationalization, the Welfare State and Bureaucracies to control every aspect of human behavior are just some of the building blocks of the emerging “Great Society”, the socialism with a human face that Social Liberals have aimed at for well over a century. Unlike Lenin’s revolutionary overthrow of capitalism, our transition to a Marxist system was meant to be gradual and seamless. Like a lobster in a pot of boiling water, the temperature was being turned up slowly and gradually. Even now when banks are being nationalized and major automakers turned over to union ownership, it is mainly people over 40 who are even noticing that anything is wrong.
The Revolution as it turns out will not be brought to you by Coke, but by Pepsi. Flags will be waved, even though they are no longer American flags. A new symbol has been created, a new seal has been set and a new America is being planted over the protesting remains of the old. But the struggle remains the same.
The question is, will we choose to be free or slaves. Will we protect our freedom from government, or give up our freedom to government. Will we come out of the shadows of Obama and the Social Liberal revolution of 2008, or will a new Iron Curtain rise over the land of the free and the home of the brave.

The Birth of American Socialism
President Obama is taking steps to formally possess America`s financial institutions.By Timothy Birdnow
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Many of us on the right were very wary of the TARP bailout money, and with good reason; the government would hold the strings, we argued, and the banking system would come under Federal control.
Poppycock! we were told by the Media and other Liberal institutions; there will be no ownership of stock from the government. This is just a way to float loans to the banks. That changed almost immediately, and now the government holds “preferred” stocks meaning they get paid first, but do not hold a voting interest in the company.
Now that`s going to change as Our Savior, the Most Merciful Barack Hussein Obama has quietly announced that he`s changing the stock from “preferred” to “common”, making the United States Government the majority shareholder of over 500 financial institutions in America.
In short, with the stroke of a pen we have become a socialist entity. Government control of private businesses is socialism, and with the One essentially nationalizing the banking industry it will be impossible to get a loan for any business (and all business done in the United States requires borrowing at some time) without government strings as to how those dollars will be used. This means that a Lutheran school will have to abide by anti-discrimination laws, requiring them to hire openly homosexual individuals as teachers, for example. It means that Catholic hospitals will have to perform abortions. It means that Hillsdale College will likely cease to exist in it`s current form, since Hillsdale refuses government money, but all money will be government money henceforth.
Many of these institutions see the writing on the wall and are trying to give the TARP money back, but the Obama Administration is calling for a “stress test”, something that will allow Obama to decide who is fit to survive. In other words, Obama wants to grab the banks and those who will not be lured with honey will taste the government vinegar; BHO simply will not allow them to reject his “gifts”.
Isn`t it time the courts stepped in? There is no way any sane person could not see the blatant unconstitutionality of this attempt. Of course, our government is largely insane, and that includes the Supreme Court, but this is exactly what that institution is SUPPOSED to be there for; they act as a check on the other branches of government. If the Courts say Obama cannot do this he will have to back down. Of course, it`s always a crap-shoot as to what the current Court will say.
This clearly violates the 9th and 10th Amendments.
If this is allowed to come to fruition, history will declare this the moment when America became a socialist state, and likely will call this the Fall of America. Doubtless the exterior shell of what had been the United States will continue for an indefinite period of time to come, but the essence of America, that spark that made for American exceptional ism, will be gone, swallowed by the rising tide of social democracy. We have been systematically chipping away at what it means to be an American for decades, with each “progressive” step removing another underpinning of our Republic.
We`ve had the rise of Democratization, with the vote extending to an ever-widening circle despite the Founding Fathers disapproval of universal suffrage. We`ve had the 14th, 15th, and 19th Amendments to the Constitution-all put in place with the best of intentions, but ultimately making the voting public easy prey to demogoguerie and what Aristotle called the tyranny of special interest. When the Republic was founded only landholders had the vote, on the theory that someone entrusted with such a solemn obligation had to have an important stake in the outcome and should be informed and educated on the issues. Democratization has made the process of elections into a farce, purely a popularity contest. Deficit spending and big money programs are a direct result of Democratization, because the career politicians sway elections by raiding the treasury.
As John Adams put it;
“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself.”
or as Benjamin Franklin put it;
“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”
That is why the Founders created the system that we have. The Electoral College, for example, was intended to act as a brake on pure democracy. The Courts were intended to likewise act as a brake by granting the authority to interpret what the law says rather than allowing mob rule.
But we`ve been working systematically toward mob rule, and the result is Barack Hussein Obama; he promised everyone the most. But remember; the Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away, and that is just as true of our New Messiah. TARP money was given, and a terrible price must be paid for it. America elected this guy knowing his promises, and did not care because they were upset about a minor recession.
While we have been opening the door to mob rule, we have been systematically dismantling the protections of Federalism. Does anybody really see the States as having any power at all? Power was SUPP0SED to have resided in the states;
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Amendment 10”
Yet the United States has swallowed the authority of the individual states, and they are forever genuflecting to the bloated Mandarin in Washington. We are living in a centralized system, one that has now absorbed our free market.
There is a powerful effort underway to eliminate the Electoral College and move to direct democracy.
Meanwhile, we have allowed our “fourth estate” to be hijacked by statists, putting forth a steady stream of lies designed to advance the power of the central authority. Ditto our educational system, and the empty skulls radiating from these venerable institutions are easy prey for those journalists who themselves are either empty skulls or worse.
That, coupled with open hostility to our Judeo-Christian faith and heritage has severed Americans from any understanding of how our nation came to be, how it rose to exceptionalism, and why it is necessary to fight to preserve it. America has come to mean to entirely too many of our citizens simply a meal ticket, the road to a guaranteed living at the expense of someone else. America has become a gargantuan ATM machine, dispensing whatever amount of money desired. It cannot last.
We are adrift in dark waters.
And, of course, all of this prosperity that Americans enjoy is a direct result of our forefather`s distaste for centralization and government control. It is as if we had a machine that transmuted lead to gold, and have tossed it out the window in favor of a printing press to make paper money. Gold has value, paper money is ultimately worth only what people agree it is worth. With BHO spending what can only be called astronomical amounts (there are only 100 billion stars in our galaxy while Obama will end up spending at least three trillion, or a thousand billion) the value of that paper will soon drop to zero. How many more businesses will he be able to absorb when THAT chicken comes home, to rooossst (as Jeremiah Wright would say).
So, as this latest power grab goes largely unnoticed at present, America will continue to slumber as she continues to waste, exhaust, and murder herself. It may well be that historians in some future time will note this little-remarked on action by Obama as the dividing line in American history. Historians mark the coronation of a German as Emperor of Rome as the moment Rome fell, even thought it appeared to the people of the time as if things continued as they always had-and always would. From the perspective of history we know better.
What will the perspective of history have to say about this moment in time?
Just 53% Say Capitalism Better Than SocialismScott Rasmussen
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Only 53% of American adults believe capitalism is better than socialism.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 20% disagree and say socialism is better. Twenty-seven percent (27%) are not sure which is better.
Adults under 30 are essentially evenly divided: 37% prefer capitalism, 33% socialism, and 30% are undecided. Thirty-somethings are a bit more supportive of the free-enterprise approach with 49% for capitalism and 26% for socialism. Adults over 40 strongly favor capitalism, and just 13% of those older Americans believe socialism is better.
Investors by a 5-to-1 margin choose capitalism. As for those who do not invest, 40% say capitalism is better while 25% prefer socialism.
There is a partisan gap as well. Republicans - by an 11-to-1 margin - favor capitalism. Democrats are much more closely divided: Just 39% say capitalism is better while 30% prefer socialism. As for those not affiliated with either major political party, 48% say capitalism is best, and 21% opt for socialism.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls.) Rasmussen Reports updates also available on Twitter.
The question posed by Rasmussen Reports did not define either capitalism or socialism
It is interesting to compare the new results to an earlier survey in which 70% of Americans prefer a free-market economy. The fact that a “free-market economy” attracts substantially more support than “capitalism” may suggest some skepticism about whether capitalism in the United States today relies on free markets.
Other survey data supports that notion. Rather than seeing large corporations as committed to free markets, two-out-of-three Americans believe that big government and big business often work together in ways that hurt consumers and investors.
Fifteen percent (15%) of Americans say they prefer a government-managed economy, similar to the 20% support for socialism. Just 14% believe the federal government would do a better job running auto companies, and even fewer believe government would do a better job running financial firms.
Most Americans today hold views that can generally be defined as populist while only seven percent (7%) share the elitist views of the Political Class.
Learning the Free Market Lessons about BailoutsBy Tom DeWeese
February 25, 2009
My first reaction, when I saw the article, was of utter horror. It was entitled, “Obama Imposes Pay Cap on Executives.” Obama intends to dictate salary caps to American executives of private companies. We should all be very frightened of a government that seeks such power. It’s pure communism. The only result of such a situation can be that corporate executives and CEOs become mere employees with no incentives to build the business and increase profits. When that happens, there is no business.
In a free market, the CEO is free to take advantage of earned profits and pay himself accordingly – assuming the board of directors go along – presumably they too are profiting. All is well. But in a free market there is also the very real risk that the company can fail. Most, in fact, do fail. It’s a rare company that succeeds and actually makes a substantial profit.
In a free market, businesses do not exist to serve the common good – they exist to produce goods and services in order to create a profit. Society is served because there are products to buy and jobs created. But when a business loses site of that fact, acting more like a government agency living off taxpayer money, they are a business no more.
Taxpayer money is not produced voluntarily – it is usurped from unwilling participants at the threat of jail. It is not profit. Companies who get on the gravy train of such money have no incentive to create a profit. As a result, there is no quality or variety of products. Who cares? Who is watching? No need? These are the very reasons communism has failed and will never work.
And that is the reason why I actually agree with Barack Obama’s actions in this particular case – to a very specific point. CEOs can’t have it both ways. They can’t expect to take money from taxpayers, thereby accepting government’s security over market risk, and still expect to be free to put their unearned money in their pockets and call it profit. Such practice is not free enterprise. It’s theft.
So, companies now taking the bailout money are, in truth, companies that should have failed. That failure more than likely is the result of bad company policies brought about under the leadership of their CEO. These companies chose to make a deal with the Devil – the government. And they did have a choice not to take the taxpayer money. They could have chosen to try to make it on their own like so many companies before them. But this was easy money – no risk, no oversight, no control – so they thought. But that is not free enterprise – that is the “power of pull” – big-brother cronyism – based on knowing the big boys in the government. Now the Devil, Barack Obama, is coming to collect his due. He owns the companies now – not the board of directors. And so he has a perfect right to set the level of compensation.
The real message here is a warning to companies – if you want to set your own rules as to how your company is run and how much of the profits you get to keep – don’t take the government’s poison candy.
Hats off to the Ford Motor Company, which understood this lesson and refused the hand out. They’ll go it alone, take the risk and survive as a real company – not as government agency. And Ford’s CEO will be free to set his price as Henry Ford did – not Barack Obama. May the rest of the looters burn in Hell.
Putin Warns Us About Socialism
Russian Prime Minister Vladamir Putin has said the US should take a lesson from the pages of Russian history and not exercise “excessive intervention in economic activity and blind faith in the state’s omnipotence”.
“In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state’s role absolute,” Putin said during a speech at the opening ceremony of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.”
Sounding more like Barry Goldwater than the former head of the KGB, Putin said, “Nor should we turn a blind eye to the fact that the spirit of free enterprise, including the principle of personal responsibility of businesspeople, investors, and shareholders for their decisions, is being eroded in the last few months. There is no reason to believe that we can achieve better results by shifting responsibility onto the state.”
Putin also cautioned the US against using military Keynesianism to lift its economy out of recession, saying, “in the longer run, militarization won’t solve the problem but will rather quell it temporarily. What it will do is squeeze huge financial and other resources from the economy instead of finding better and wiser uses for them.” Putin’s comments come in sharp contrast to Russia’s own military buildup and expansion.
Putin also echoed the words of conservative maverick Ron Paul when he said, “we must assess the real situation and write off all hopeless debts and ‘bad’ assets. True, this will be an extremely painful and unpleasant process. Far from everyone can accept such measures, fearing for their capitalization, bonuses, or reputation. However, we would ‘conserve’ and prolong the crisis, unless we clean up our balance sheets.”
“The time for enlightenment has come. We must calmly, and without gloating, assess the root causes of this situation and try to peek into the future.”
By NewsGuy
February 11, 2009
Democracy = Socialism, i.e. Communism (The Perestroika Deception)February 21, 2009
By Jon Baker -
Without going into background on Trotsky in this article and the overthrow of the Tzar of Russia by the International Bankers - just know this: The Soviet Union was established by the same people who own the Federal Reserve and virtually every other central bank in the World. The Soviet Union was created to be an antithesis to capitalism (thesis). Besides making tons of money over the eventual conflict these two opposing dialectics would have on each other, they are the pro-genitive elements that would eventually lead to the preconceived "New Order" for the world. A synthesis of Capitalism and Communism, the China model if you will.
If the singular source of funding is not enough of a factor to sway your cognitive reasoning, then you perhaps should look at the fact that the New World Order is set to be a global socialist totalitarian form of government. That organizations like the SI (Socialist Internationale) and the United Nations embody such principles and promote them on a global scale. Never-mind that most of the U.S. delegation who signed the U.N. Charter in San Fransisco on October 24, 1945 were later found to be communist spies or have communist ties (i.e. Alger Hiss, FDR's personal attorney present at the Yalta Conference. - Never-mind that FDR took over the entire presidential platform of a gentleman and union icon named Norman Thomas who unsuccessfully ran for President on the Socialist Party ticket 6 times.) Never-mind that the U.N. Charter is virtually identical section by section of the old Soviet constitution. Never-mind that the Constitution for the United States of America, Art. 4, Sec. 4 guarantees a republican form of government, not a democracy. Never mind that mainstream media constantly reinforces that we live in a "Democracy" when that is not true.
Yes, we're being played as pawns (and fools) in a global chess game, and it's ugly and nobody wants to face it. Excuses and rationalizations run the gamut; "It's too hard to understand, " or "That's just the way it is," or the infamous "There's nothing you can do about it." These are all cop-outs and evasive maneuvers. Yes, socialism sucks.
The reason the use of the word "Democracy" is used ad nauseam is because in the Socialist community it is well understood to be a "code-word" for "Socialism" and is therefore more palatable for the "masses."
In Mikhail Gorbachev's book Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country AND THE WORLD on page 32 he lays it out in the open:"We will now firmly stick to the line that only through the consistent development of the democratic forms inherent in socialism and the expansion of self-government can we make progress... It is exactly because we place emphasis on the development of socialist democracy that we pay so much attention to the intellectual sphere, public consciousness and an active social party... In the West, Lenin is often portrayed as an advocate of authoritarian methods of administration. This is a sign of total ignorance of Lenin's ideas and, not infrequently, of their deliberate distortion. In effect, according to Lenin, socialism and democracy are indivisible."
And on page 34, ibid:"Perestroika means mass initiative. It is the comprehensive development of democracy, socialist self-government...But in principle I can say that the end result of perestroika is clear to us. It is a thorough renewal of every aspect of Soviet life; it is giving socialism to the most progressive forms of social organization; it is the fullest exposure of the Humanist nature of our social system in its crucial aspects - economic, social, political and moral... The essence of perestroika lies in the fact that it unites Socialism with Democracy and revives the Leninist concept of socialist construction both in theory and in practice."
And on page 36, ibid:"...we are conducting all our reforms in accordance with the socialist choice. We are looking within socialism, rather than outside of it, for the answers to all the questions that arise. We assess our successes and errors alike by socialist standards. Those who Hope that we shall move away from the Socialist Path will be greatly disappointed. Every part of our program of Perestroika - and the program as a whole, for that matter -- is fully based on the principle of more Socialism and more Democracy...
More Socialism means more democracy... We will proceed toward better socialism rather than away from it. We are saying this honestly, without trying to fool our own people or the world. "Any hopes that we will begin to build a different, non-Socialist society and go over to the other camp are unrealistic and futile."
V.I. Lenin set the definition of peace to mean the elimination of all forms of opposition to socialism. Peace = Socialism. This is a form of Orwellian newspeak, but you have to understand their language they use to communicate to each other.
Also on page 147, ibid, one interesting statement: "A third world war, if unleashed by imperialism [Bush Doctrine], would lead to new social upheavals [global economic collapse, terrorism] which would finish off the capitalist system for good, and this would spell global peace [socialism]."
Now, as to clarify the United States position on this policy, let's refer to Presidential Documents (AE2.109:25/47) "Administration of George Bush," November 22, 1989, page 1822: "Off the island nation of Malta [Knights of Malta], Mikhail Gorbachev and I [President George Herbert Walker Bush] will begin the work of years... I will assure him that there is no greater advocate of Perestroika than the President of the United States."
As if that weren't enough, in the Los Angeles Times, April 1993, in an article entitled "The Peace Dividend: Gorbachev Pro-Democracy [a.k.a. socialism] Foundation Opens Office at Bay Area's Presidio," subtitled "The Former Head of the Russian KGB takes over a U.S. Military Post in S.F.," it details how the keys to one of the most hallowed military posts was turned over to Gorbachev to set up a pro-socialism office on the oldest continually operating military base in the United States. Gorbachev was the first applicant granted permission to move onto the post. The article went on to say "Gorbachev gave this assessment of the moment to the crowd of dignitaries shivering in the San Francisco fog: 'This is the symbol of our irreversible transition from an era of confrontation an militaristic insanity to a New World Order, one that promises dividends for all.' At the close of the ceremony, Gorbachev was joined via satellite by singer Billy Joel, who announced a June benefit concert to raise money to immunize children in the United States and Russia."Thanks Billy Joel, the Founding Fathers would be proud. But seriously, if you haven't gotten a glimpse of the bigger picture, that this is not about Capitalism vs. Communism or East vs. West; this is about International Strategy by International Organizations with No Allegiance to Any Nation. These people don't have a homeland yet. They are transforming the World to make one. These events are being implemented by agents of International Socialism, which is being pushed through think-tanks, academia, non-governmental organizations, and All international organizations. Socialism fools people with idealism that never transpires into individual freedom - it's always going to make all the promises that it will save the children from cancer, clean the environment, give every worker a fat check, etc., etc. The truth is this is always a mirage. It is smoke and mirrors - and the idealism is what attracts people. You have no individual unalienable rights in socialism - only collective civil rights that can be repealed by the whim of a politicians. Why would anyone fall for that trap? (Stupidity?)
Gorbachev Foundation North AmericaInternational Socialist OrganizationSocialist InternationaleCommunist Party U.S.A.World Socialist WebsiteUnited Nations Organization
Socialism is the vehicle to integrate the world, but it is not the driving philosophy, for that is the shiny pinnacle of the pyramid known as Mystery Babylon -- but that's an entirely different article. If you're asking how or why, then you obviously don't know about that. That's your answer above all answers.
So to the Perestroika Deception By Anatoliy Golitsyn
Diehard fans of the theory that Communism is dead will not like this book, whose stated goal is to help such people recover from their blindness. The Perestroika Deception describes with unmerciful clarity the confusion and errors that have been engendered in the world and in the Church by the deceitful Communist strategy of perestroika, under whose reformist guise rebellions and wars have been promoted, and the Church persecuted, in order that the Communist goal of world domination is finally achieved. In other words, what it unintentionally depicts are the very events prophesied by Our Lady of Fatima if the Collegial Consecration of Russia is not done.
Anatoliy Golitsyn's 1984 book, "New Lies for Old," forecast, with 94% accuracy, all the recent changes in the Communist Bloc, including the economic and political reforms, the rise of Solidarity, the removal of the Berlin Wall, the reunification of Germany and the collapse of the Soviet Union. "The Perestroika Deception," with extensive documentation, reinforces his contention in New Lies for Old that all the changes were meticulously planned years in advance. It explains how they fit into the devious Leninist strategy for achieving with Western cooperation a one-world Communist government or New World Social Order, run by the Russians and Chinese, by 2000 A.D. It also analyzes current events up to the Chechnya struggle and forecasts and developments.
Golitsyn was a high-ranking KGB official involved in espionage and counter-espionage who defected to the United States in 1961. Convinced that Western interpretations of developments in the Communist Bloc were seriously flawed, he combined his study of Soviet long-range strategy with his inside knowledge of KGB and Leninist thinking in New Lies of Old. For over thirty years he has submitted memoranda to the CIA, in which he has provided very accurate analyses and forecasts of Bloc developments. "The Perestroika Deception" is a collection of dated memoranda covering the years 1984 to 1995.
Will the U.S. embrace global socialism?
By Henry Lamb
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Reports from the recent World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, suggest that most of the world’s leaders are convinced that the current crisis is the result of inherent flaws in capitalism, and are eager to impose new international rules to save the world.
Australian Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, is calling on President Obama to join him in creating a new economic system. “Simply tweaking the old system won’t do,” he says. He wants “A system of open markets, unambiguously regulated by an activist state, and one in which the state intervenes to reduce the greater inequalities that competitive markets will inevitably generate.”
World leaders will meet again in April, hosted by Britain’s Gordon Brown. This meeting of the so-called G-20 is a follow-up of the November meeting hosted by President Bush. The growing consensus among these leaders is that capitalism must be brought under control. More importantly, it must be brought under the control of an international authority.
This new system seeks to utilize the creative power of the profit motive while using the authority of government to direct production and distribute profits.
This is not a new idea. Bill Clinton referred to it as “The Third Way,” a combination of capitalism and socialism. Advocates of this government-controlled capitalism often point to China as an example of its success. China’s economy began to expand dramatically when the government began to allow private entrepreneurs to profit from their own energy and investment.
China’s economic growth is the result of loosening government control; tightening government controls on the global economy will inevitably diminish growth. If the controls are held by an international authority, growth can be suppressed in developed nations, and expanded in developing nations. This has long been a primary goal of international socialism and of the United Nations.
As the President and Congress work to enact legislation to cure the current crisis, it’s hard to miss the giant steps toward socialism. A major portion of the banking industry has been nationalized by the exchange of stock for infusions of public funds. With the infusions of public funds across private industry, comes the inevitable “strings” that put government in control of the recipient industry.
President Obama and the Democrat-led Congress appear eager to apply this socialist principle by taking control of private industry in exchange for the public funds they are redistributing.
Acquiescence to Kevin Rudd’s call for a new global system of democratic socialism will destroy America’s prosperity, and relegate the United States to a position inferior to the new global economic authority. The international community first proposed its New International Economic Order in the 1970s, and never abandoned its dream of controlling the global economy. Advocates now appear to be on the brink of realizing this goal.
Until now, the United States has been the primary obstacle by refusing to participate, or even recognize a new socialist global economic authority. The new Obama administration, however, is sending many signals that it will look more favorably at socialist policies, both domestically and internationally.
For example, President Obama has emphatically endorsed the Employee Free Choice Act of 2007. This legislation does away with secret-ballot elections for employees to choose whether to be represented by a union. This legislation authorizes the imposition of a union upon any business in which the majority of employees simply sign a union card.
By removing supervised, secret-ballot elections from the process, this bill paves the way for union thugs to show up at an employee’s home, or en route to work, or at the local pub, and demand a signature to prevent a broken leg – or worse. Those who imagine any other scenario simply have no experience with labor unions. This election-less process for unionization has long been a dream of the Socialist Party.
Democrats in Congress have long threatened to take over management of the oil industry, or impose “windfall profit” taxes, and impose a variety of other socialist measures on U.S. industries.
President Obama has gone out of his way to assure the rest of the world that America’s position in the world will change with him in office. He apologized for America in Berlin, and in his first televised interview with the Arabian press. He has promised to rejoin U.N. initiatives that the U.S. has previously avoided. He has consistently blamed “greedy capitalists” for the current economic crisis rather than acknowledge government’s market intrusion as the cause.
With its current leadership, America may be ready to embrace global socialism.
Socialism is Coming to America
By Cliff Kincaid
September 27, 2008
In his classic 1932 book, Toward Soviet America, Communist Party boss William Z. Foster wrote about how “The United Soviet States of America” will come about. As a result of various capitalist crises, the national government would assume more and more control over the economy. “In finance,” he wrote, “it will mean the nationalization of the banking system and its concentration around a central State bank…” Foster is dead, but the Wall Street financial “bail-out” plan offered by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, in coordination with the Federal Reserve, will bring about a socialist America.
It would be an exaggeration to say that we are getting close to anything resembling the Soviet system. But it is also a big mistake to call this a “bailout.” It is socialism. Why are so many in the media afraid of using this term?
Over at Political Affairs Magazine, a publication of the Communist Party USA, writer John Case is gloating. His article about the crisis is headlined, “A Dose of Socialism to Forestall Disaster.” He thinks that Paulson and Federal Reserve Board chairman Ben Bernanke have been reading the works of closet Marxists.
But none of this is secret. At a time when many pieces of legislation before Congress take up thousands of pages and do their best to hide pork barrel spending, Paulson’s three-page plan for Wall Street socialism is straightforward and simple. If passed by Congress, Paulson would assume the dictatorial power and authority to designate financial institutions “as financial agents of the Government” and order them to perform “all such reasonable duties related to this Act as financial agents of the Government as may be required of them…”
The bill gives Paulson automatic access to $700 billion and raises the limit on the public debt to $11.3 trillion. He gets the power to issue regulations, hire people, establish various financial “vehicles,” and take other “necessary actions.”
Conservative Senator Jim Bunning is brutally honest, saying that “…the free market for all intents and purposes is dead in America.” He said Paulson’s plan “will take away the free market and institute socialism in America. The American taxpayer has been misled throughout this economic crisis. The government on all fronts has failed the American people miserably.”
“After reviewing the Administration’s proposed bailout plan, I believe it is completely unacceptable,” said conservative Senator Jim DeMint. “This plan does nothing to address the misguided government policies that created this mess and it could make matters much worse by socializing an entire sector of the U.S. economy. This plan fails to oversee or regulate the government failures that led to this crisis. Instead it greatly increases the role for Secretary Paulson whose market predictions have been consistently wrong in the last year…”
Every newspaper in America should print a copy of his plan. Every news anchor and commentator should read it out loud to the American people. The American people have a right to know that President Bush and Congress are officially creating a socialist America.
Over at the “conservative” Fox News Channel, however, some commentators think this is just great. “I love it,” Fred Barnes of the “conservative” Weekly Standard said of the temporary market rise in response to the anticipated Paulson plan. “Look,” Barnes said, “when I keep hearing this is going to cost a trillion dollars, and so on, it may not cost anything.” The U.S. may “come out ahead” in the long run, he confidently predicted. He praised Paulson and Bernanke for acting “boldly.”
Another “conservative,” Charles Krauthammer, was almost giddy. “It took FDR a decade to put in place all the institutions of the New Deal,” he commented. “Paulson and Bernanke did it in ten hours. I mean, in one night, they created a whole new world.”
However, on the September 21 edition of Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace pointed out that Paulson has already been caught making reassuring but false statements about the crisis. In March, also on Fox News Sunday, Wallace had asked him, “Are more Wall Street firms in danger, at risk, of going under? Paulson replied, “I’ve got great confidence in our financial market, our financial institutions. Our markets are resilient. They’re flexible. Our institutions, our banks and investment banks, are strong.”
And this is the guy being entrusted with virtual dictatorial power over Wall Street? Rather than praise him for his intellect and ability, why aren’t Barnes and Krauthammer demanding that Bush fire him?
The liberal media are, of course, also trying to keep the American people in the dark about what is happening. The Washington Post deceptively calls it a “rescue plan.” [Read entire article at:]

The Sad Road to Socialism
By John Loeffler July 23, 2008
“But if the government undertakes to control and to raise wages, and cannot do it; if the government undertakes to care for all who may be in want, and cannot do it; if the government undertakes to support all unemployed workers, and cannot do it; if the government undertakes to lend interest-free money to all borrowers, and cannot do it; if .... ‘The state considers that its purpose is to enlighten, to develop, to enlarge, to strengthen, to spiritualize, and to sanctify the soul of the people’ -- and if the government cannot do all of these things, what then? Is it not certain that after every government failure -- which, alas! is more than probable -- there will be an equally inevitable revolution?” --Frederic Bastiat, “The Law,” June, 1850
It’s been more than 150 years since Frederic Bastiat wrote his treatise, The Law, a small work, challenging the ravages of failing socialism thrust upon France as a result of the French revolution.
In that unique pamphlet, Bastiat points out that when the law of any country supports the moral belief systems of a people, defends the rights of said people and their property, the law is perceived as being moral; a defense against evil and those who flaunt it as being immoral. Payment of taxes and civic obligations are perceived as a virtue and those who flout this as criminals.
However, when the law becomes a source of plunder or pits itself in opposition to the morals of the people, the people perceive the law to be immoral and widely despise it. Indeed, in those times, flouting the law is extolled as virtue.
Another book by contemporary author Hernando Desoto, The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else, points out much the same thing, that the security of ownership of private property guaranteed by law for the lower and middle classes has been the essential ingredient resulting in the prosperity enjoyed by many western countries. Without this security, where the state becomes an impediment to commerce or property ownership, the people are forced to operate their economies outside of law, which is once again perceived as evil, rather than a force for good.
In essence, when a government goes from being a protector of private property to a plunderer of it, it places itself on a course of chaos, economic ruin and its own ultimate self-destruction.
The Three Steps of Socialism
Socialism is the mechanism which transforms government from its noble role as a protector into a predator and, since the citizens of our fine country seem determined to plow through socialism to its bitter end, we should examine the territory through which these three sad steps lead. The core result of socialism is the destruction of private property and wealth.
The events described in this piece are a composite of the ravages of socialism experienced in other countries. While each country does experience all the events portrayed, all socialist countries follow the same miserable path. The U.S. doesn’t have to go down this path, but it seems determines to do so.
We’re Off to See the Wizard
One of the great dangers of any government by the people is that sooner or later their politicians discover they can vote largess from the public trust. Their first experiment at this bold new adventure invariably revolves around social programs enacted in the name of morality and the public good or even solving some current crisis. Who could oppose that? “After all,” it will be argued, “don’t you care about people, or the welfare of the country, or the environment?”
The lure of this argument has been absolutely irresistible from the Roman Empire to the French and Bolshevik revolutions to Socialist Parties (D) and (R) in the USA today. [Read entire article at:]
Socialism and the Nanny State
By Debra Rae
October 31, 2007
As a little girl, I humored myself with the fantasy that I had morphed into a fully-grown “Mommy.” This I accomplished with a dab of lipstick and a dollop of rouge. Having donned my Mom’s hat, cape, sunglasses and gloves, I felt satisfied that my charade was reasonably convincing—that is, until a couple in the car parallel to ours pointed and laughed as if to say, “Look at that funny little girl playing dress-up!” With that, I slid in embarrassment to the floor. No matter how grown up I tried to appear, the “real me” could not be camouflaged.
In The Liberal Mind, board-certified forensic psychiatrist Dr. Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr. systematically analyzes yet another dress-up sham. An adult by all appearances, the fully grown man succumbs to the Nanny State’s unremitting invitation to childlike dependency. So disposed, the welfare junkie is reduced to a babe, perpetually nursed by his Nanny State. In effect, radical liberal collectivism infantilizes people and “parentilizes” Big Government that presumes always to know what’s best.
By undermining civilized liberty, arguably the West’s most notable achievement, the “man-child” masquerade bypasses “cute.” Sadly, those who choose to be victims and to remain ignominious wards of the State forfeit individual autonomy with freedom to pursue life, liberty, property and happiness. All too often, when an alleged victim’s poor judgment bites back, government demands that productive, tax-paying adults bail out complete strangers—this, at considerable cost to their own well being. Forced altruism cannot help but shrink incentive to perform, reduce capital to invest and demoralize those who themselves have embraced the daunting responsibilities and accompanying risks of adult competency.
Even more, the dysfunctional collectivist family spawns societal ills—for one, economic irresponsibility by encouraging adult overdependence on the parental State. This troubling arrangement promotes moral laxity as time-honored values—e.g., personal autonomy and integrity—acquiesce to ever-evolving progressive insights that are adjudicated by supremacist judges. When the dysfunctional “man-child” kowtows to crippling dependency and the competent adult is coerced into indentured servitude, class conflict between the “have’s” and the “have-not’s” ensues. [Read entire article at:]
Hillary Quotes
“I certainly think the free-market has failed.”
“It’s time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...... And to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity.”
“(We) ....can’t just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people.”
“We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own turf in order to create this common ground.”
“I think it’s time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched.”
Veterans must Fight, or Die Homeless
By Andrew C. Wallace, October 18, 2008,
Man your canes, walkers and wheel chairs. We defeated the communists and fascists once, now we must do it again by voting them out of our own government. These socialist ghouls infiltrated everything, and are usurping our government while stealing the assets that we earned to finance benefits for our final days. While physical activity now may be painful, contemplate your agony with no benefits, if you don’t do something on November fourth to prevent a communist takeover.
Demand that your family and friends go to the polls with you and defeat the traitors who voted for the Bailouts, Amnesty and Free Trade. You can overcome resistance from your socialist indoctrinated children or grandchildren by telling them you will lose all your benefits and have to move in with them if the criminals are not defeated.
We must honor the solemn oath we took long ago, and answer this final call to defend our country by defeating the traitors at the ballot box. We cannot die, and surrender our country to a ruthless Communist-Fascist government. A criminal cabal of government and corporate officials of both parties has usurped our government, passing countless unconstitutional laws allowing them to enrich themselves and to destroy us. Phony Free Trade Laws, exploited illegals, and ten different worker Visa programs took our jobs. Using the private Federal Reserve Bank, owned by private banks gave them ability to cause the Great Depression, and now this Greatest of all Depressions when they reduce us to poverty and slavery. with the bailouts.
The American People objected to the unconstitutional bailouts by a ratio of about 95 to 1, as did hundreds of independent Economists, but legislators ignored the people and gave the money to their corporate benefactors who caused the Meltdown with their criminal greed. These traitors must be defeated.
We allowed this to happen by permitting our schools, institutions and government to be taken over and run by greedy power mad Socialists (communists and fascists) who were too good to work, and too cowardly to serve their country as we did, they chose instead to undermine it. Our Constitution describes the actions of Leaders of both political parties, a majority of congress and many government officials as Treason, pure and simple.
Those of us who now fight for our country are in an untenable position because most people resent those who deliver bad news, even if true, and the traitors would like to do us harm for telling the documented truth. You are as uninformed as a box of rocks because the mainstream media is controlled, and refuses to report anything that would reduce the greedy profits of their fascist owners and the power of communist traitors in government.
As an Economist, I can tell you that if we can defeat the criminal socialists in government, terminate the unconstitutional private Federal Reserve bank, institute a constitutional currency, end Free Trade deals and other treaties that limit our sovereignty that there is a chance for our Republic. It will require a long difficult and painful period of rebuilding, but if we fail to defeat the communists on November fourth, our people’s pain will be so great that a bloody civil war will result in the near future.
I am already a more or less infamous writer, so it will cause me little additional harm to tell you to obtain some gold and silver coins, guns, and ammunition, long term food supplies and related items. Gold Currency now costs three times as much as it did in 2000 and is very difficult to buy. Our media does not report it, but we have active war zones all over this country because of illegals and ongoing treason by government officials in all levels and branches of government. I can’t tell you when all paper money will be worthless, just that it absolutely must occur. This can happen in a day, or in several years, but I think sooner rather than later. You cannot issue endless quantities of money with no backing and expect your currency to retain any value. Those of you with stock have noticed that you have been, and will continue to be sacrificed by communists in government to protect their fascist elite benefactors who control the corporations.
Your physical freedom is at risk; look at those who have been framed. Government ignores the Constitution that is the basis for their authority to govern. The result is unconstitutional laws, loss of the Rule of Law, and your God given, and Constitutional Rights. Our government is being usurped by Communists in partnership with Fascists because the controlled media keeps the people ignorant.

Please take this link to my last article that has a list of the criminals in congress who voted for the bailout and must be defeated. You could benefit from detailed and documented information not available in the mainstream media by going to and reading articles written by Devvy Kidd, Alan Stang, Frosty Wooldridge, Greg Evensen, Jim Schwiesow, Jon Ryter, CJ Graham, Edwin Vieira, Lynn Stuter, Dave Daubenmire, and Lowell Becraft to mention a few. [Read entire article at:]
Financial Crisis Leading to One World Socialism?
By NWV News Director, Jim Kouri, October 19, 2008, ©
The finance ministers of the G-7 countries met in Washington last weekend and many conservatives found their discussions disturbing. In one of his updates for the news media on Friday, President George W. Bush revealed his true feelings regarding "internationalism." "Secretary Paulson, Secretary Rice and I just had a productive discussion with finance ministers of America's partners in the G7 -- Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, and Japan. I'm pleased to be with Prime Minister Junker of Luxembourg, who is the President of the Eurogroup of countries, Managing Director Strauss-Kahn of the International Monetary Fund, President Zoellick of the World Bank, Chairman Draghi of the Financial Stability Forum," Bush said. President Bush says he's confident The Group of Seven nations will be able to act together to defuse the global economic crisis, but some economists aren't enthusiastic about coupling the US economy with the economies of other nations some of which are socialist or quasi-socialist."It is not too extreme to say that the outcome of these meetings could redefine how the financial markets work, certainly for months and perhaps for a generation. While American leaders are arguing that intervention and bailouts are a viable solution, other world leaders, like the British, are arguing for what in effect would be the nationalization of financial markets on a global scale. In other words, Socialism with a capital 'S,'" says political strategist Mike Baker.
"What these internationalists refuse to admit is that underlying this political pressure is a sense that the financial class, people who run global financial institutions, have failed to behave responsibly and effectively, and have therefore lost their legitimacy," adds Baker. Appearing outside the White House on Saturday, flanked by the leaders of the six other nations that comprise the G-7, Bush encouraged the world's advanced economies to "not wall themselves off and work hand-in-hand to craft a coordinated response to the accelerating meltdown of global stock and credit markets."
"I'm confident that the world's major economies can overcome the challenges we face," Bush said.
"There have been moments of crisis in the past when powerful nations turned their energies against each other, or sought to wall themselves off from the world. This time is different," he added.
Meanwhile, US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told The New York Times that Friday's meetings were positive because the US, Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Canada and Japan have committed themselves to five principles, ranging from preventing the failure of important banks to protecting the bank deposits of savers.
But a hoped-for coordinated G7 strategy of injecting government capital directly into key banks in return for ownership stakes failed to gain a consensus observers said, mainly because of opposition from Germany.
"It seems the internationalists have found a new approach to instituting the New World Order: economic turmoil," warns Baker. [Read the entire article at:]
Ron Paul Warns of Great Shift Toward Global Government Under Obama
Steve Watson Wednesday, Nov 6, 2008
Texas Congressman and 2008 presidential candidate Ron Paul has warned that the euphoria surrounding the election of Barack Obama combined with the overwhelming fear of major international crises could facilitate a cataclysmic shift toward a new world order.
Appearing live on the Alex Jones show earlier today, the Congressman spoke of a feeling of dread surrounding the change of guard both in the White House and on Capitol Hill:
“I do feel it but I don’t think it’s brand new, I didn’t wake up with it, I’ve had it for a while, I don’t think the election was a surprise, but the rhetoric is getting pretty strong and they are getting very bold.” he commented.
Speaking on the stage management of the election, and calling it a “huge distraction” from real issues, the Congressman outlined how both candidates were pre-positioned by the elite interests with the knowledge that either would satisfactorily serve their agenda:
“I think McCain was obviously a back up candidate in case something happened where Obama didn’t win, they’d have been satisfied with McCain, but they have been positioning Obama for a long, long time.”
“This started even before he announced he was running. Anybody who would have gotten that much favorable coverage for so long, you know that the plans are laid for him to be the individual that’s going to be taking care of the corporate elite.” the Congressman continued.
Paul also warned that Democrats gains within the House and the Senate make for a particularly worrying situation of absolute power, similar to that held by the Republican party eight years ago.
“Just as a Republican Congress wouldn’t say boo to a Republican Congress, you know that the Democratic Congress is NEVER going to stand up.”
“I think it is very dangerous and the first year is going to be the most dangerous year.” Paul stated. “Just think of Bush’s first year, he also had the 9/11 thing that he could use to scare everybody to death. And Obama will use the financial crisis, which will get worse, and there will be more military skirmishes around the world.” Paul asserted.
The Congressman also warned that many Republican representatives may go along with Obama just to win favor with the electorate and be seen to follow popular opinion.
Commenting on the much touted “International crisis” that luminaries such as Colin Powell, Joe Biden and Zbigniew Brzezinski have all guaranteed will occur within weeks of Obama entering the White House, the Congressman stated that he believes it may be a catalyst for a shift toward world government:
“I think it’s going to be an announcement of a new monetary order, and they’ll probably make it sound very limited, they’re not going to say this is world government, even though it is if you control the world’s money and you control the military, which they do indirectly.”
“A world central bank, worldwide regulation and world control of the whole system, of all the commodities and all the natural resources, what else can you call it other than world government?”
“Obama wouldn’t be there if he didn’t toe the line, and when the meeting starts on November 15th for the new monetary system, this could be the beginning of the end of what’s left of our national sovereignty.” Paul said, also warning that the global media are already hailing Obama as the world’s leader.
With Obama having previously announced that he will shift military attention to Pakistan, the Congressman also warned that the president elect will, thanks to the previous administration, have the necessary precedent to escalate the war on terror:
“It’s the philosophy of the Bush doctrine, which was that we have the right to preemptively strike anybody and then he even expanded that recently by saying we don’t have to invade and conquer, but we have the right to go in and bomb anybody without their permission, and that’s why we go into Pakistan and Syria, which are acts of war. So they have the tools to do it and the sentiment and most Americans are oblivious to what is happening.”
Paul also suggested that any escalation could be facilitated by false flag events such as Gulf of Tonkin style incidents.
Urging listeners not to lose faith in the campaign for liberty and the quest to restore and the Republic, Ron Paul spoke of reason to look ahead:
“We have to look for sources of optimism… ultimately though all that happens to us is a result of philosophy and beliefs and convictions and that is where I think we have made some inroads. We have drawn attention to the importance of monetary policy, the importance of the central bank, the importance of how government causes so much problems, it’s just that we’re in the minority.” Paul said.
“We have to continue to do what we are doing, you are in the business of passing on and spreading information, that, to me, is most crucial, getting more people engaged, more people understanding what the issues are, nothing else is more important than that. Then when you see an opportunity we have to turn this into political action.” the Congressman concluded.
A Marxist tsunami cannot quench the flames of freedomBy Henry Lamb Sunday, November 9, 2008
It is not just a victory for the Democrats; it is a Marxist tsunami. The principles that have guided President-elect Obama to this point are deeply rooted in Marxist philosophy. He is now in the position to infuse government with this philosophy through his appointments and legislative agenda. Democrats Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Frank, and others with recognizable names are only the face of what’s in store. Behind this face is a force teaming with the power to obliterate the U.S. Constitution and the machinery of self-governance it created.
The God to whom our founders prayed for guidance has been thrown overboard by the modern Democrat Party. For at least a generation, Karl Marx has provided both inspiration and guidance to the people who are now in control of America. Republicans have not just been out-maneuvered and out-campaigned; some Republicans have been willing participants, joining the Democrats in the worship of Marxist ideals.
This Democrat tsunami is not only a defeat of Republicans; it is a defeat of freedom.
Freedom, as defined in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, cannot exist when government ignores the limitations placed upon it by the Constitution.
Government, led by both Democrats and Republicans, started ignoring these limitations long ago, and has now grown into a people-management machine that would make Karl Marx proud.
This transformation has been possible only because the people have allowed it. Now, a majority of people expect it, and even demand it. When this tsunami settles across the land, the federal government will truly be the people-management authority of the United States. And what’s worse, Democrats are likely to welcome the global central bank to be discussed at a global economic summit this month, which would transform the United States into an administrative unit of the global people-management authority – the United Nations.
Those people who have been called to carry the torch of freedom will not jump ship and move to another country, or throw in the towel and shrink into the shadows. Freedom lovers will survey the losses, inventory the resources, build a new strategy – and go to work.
The losses are not limited to the White House and Congress. Freedom has been defeated in the school house, as well as in the court house. To be successful, a new strategy must recognize this reality, and design ways to retake these foundational institutions.
Try as it may, the Marxist tsunami cannot extinguish the flame of freedom. Freedom lovers are not without resources. In every state and every community there are people who still believe in the principles of freedom set forth in the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution. These people, and their faith, are a powerful resource, against which even the gates of hell cannot prevail.
It took the advocates of Marxist theory several generations to convince people that government should manage all human affairs. It will take time for the advocates of freedom to convince a new generation that individual freedom spawns free enterprise that produces prosperity and a far better way to live than can be realized under a Marxist people-management regime.
The Russian people welcomed the Marxist tsunami early in the 20th century. By the end of the century they were crushed by it. Americans who refuse to recognize that the current ascendency of the Democrats is a Marxist tsunami will be swept up and eventually crushed by it, whether they recognize it or not.
Those who are called to carry the torch of freedom into the 21st century will find one another and begin anew to free the nation from this latest threat of tyranny. Ironically, this new strategy will include many of the tactics used to build the Marxist tsunami. For example, community organizing is a tool widely used by those who teach and advance Marxist ideas. This tool works equally well for freedom lovers. Already, in communities across the country, small organizations are working to teach the principles of freedom and how they can be incorporated into local ordinances and state law. Already, there are organizations working to get the principles of freedom restored to the institutions of education and returned to the text books used at every grade level.
Those who are called to carry the torch of freedom will find these organizations – get involved and go to work. Success will come, and freedom will be restored only when everyone who enjoys the fruits of freedom shares the burden of defending it. The champions of this Marxist tsunami will dance and drink and celebrate their great victory, ignorant of the giant they have awakened. From every corner of the country, regular Americans are feeling the call and rising to find fellow patriots who are not about to let freedom die. The pending tsunami may damage the pillars of liberty, but it cannot quench freedom’s torch. Together, in a thousand ways, in ten-thousand communities, the flame of freedom raised by each individual will light the way and chart the course to reclaim the school house, the court house, the White House, Congress and the future.
The coming economic collapse of the United StatesBy Michael Hampton
Posted: March 7, 2007 11:58 pm
The Great Depression will look like a small blip compared to the economic collapse the United States is about to suffer, according to several experts. But Congress refuses to listen and do what’s necessary to stave off disaster.
Worse, Congress has been warned year after year since at least 1992, and perhaps before that.
“The federal budget is structurally unbalanced. This will do increasing damage to the economy and is unsustainable in the long term. Regardless of the approach chosen, prompt and meaningful action is essential. The longer it is delayed, the more painful it will be.”
Those were the words of the General Accounting Office (now the Government Accountability Office) 15 years ago. Reporting on the long-term fiscal outlook of the federal government, GAO reported then (PDF) that Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security would grow out of control and that “the path of ‘no action’ is unsustainable.”
It also warned that “a major effort to strengthen the economy must be completed by 2010,” when the Baby Boomers will begin retiring.
We all know what happened in the intervening 15 years: absolutely nothing good. The entitlement programs are still here, larger than ever, and draining ever larger percentages of the national economy.
Last month, GAO reported again to Congress on the nation’s long-term fiscal outlook. It’s only gotten worse.
“GAO’s current long-term simulations continue to show ever-larger deficits resulting in a federal debt burden that ultimately spirals out of control,” GAO reported (PDF). Even under the best-case scenario GAO studied, “the risks to the Nation’s future financial condition are too high to be acceptable.”
And again, the problem is government entitlement programs — and Social Security, bad as it is, isn’t even the biggest one.
In the succeeding 2 decades America’s population will age dramatically, and relatively fewer workers will be asked to support ever larger costs for retirees. . . .
Although Social Security is a major part of the fiscal challenge, it is far from our biggest challenge. Spending on the major federal health programs (i.e., Medicare and Medicaid) represents a much larger and faster growing problem. In fact, the federal government’s obligations for Medicare Part D alone exceed the unfunded obligations for Social Security. Over the past several decades, health care spending on average has grown much faster than the economy, absorbing increasing shares of the Nation’s resources, and this rapid growth is projected to continue. For this reason and others, rising health care costs pose a fiscal challenge not just to the federal budget but to American business and our society as a whole. — Government Accountability Office
Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke last week also warned Congress, but of course, most of them refused to listen or even acknowledge that the problem exists.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke could not have sounded the alarm any clearer if he had carried a bullhorn and a gong. “This expansion of debt would spark a fiscal crisis. . . . The U.S. economy could be seriously weakened. . . . This is sort of like a snowball rolling down the hill. . . . This can really get out of control.”
Other lawmakers struggled to wrap their arms around the crisis Bernanke was describing. “We’re just, kind of, whistling past the graveyard?” asked Rep. Marion Berry (D-Ark).
“Yes, sir,” said the chairman.
“And hoping that the tooth fairy comes and bails us out of this deal?”
“I don’t know about the metaphors there, Mr. Congressman,” Bernanke replied.
Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.) had a different metaphor to run by the chairman. He asked if “we are debating how to mop up six inches of water in the stateroom of the captain of the Titanic when we should be focused upon the gaping hole in the hull of the ship.”
“The heart of the problem are the entitlement programs,” Bernanke affirmed. — Washington Post
“Federal deficits will grow to unsustainable levels in as little as two decades,” says David M. Walker, the comptroller general of the United States, “At that point, without significant policy changes, federal deficits could reach 10% or more of our economy.”
As head of the GAO, it’s Walker’s responsibility to sound the alarm. Not at all satisfied with Congress refusing to listen, he’s taken his message directly to the people, appearing on CBS News’ 60 Minutes television program on Sunday, and touring the U.S. “We are the world’s largest debtor nation, and time is working against us,” Walker said in an article for The Futurist magazine.
Indeed, the American welfare state is growing out of control, with tens of millions of Americans receiving some form of government handout.
The number of families receiving cash benefits from welfare has plummeted since the government imposed time limits on the payments a decade ago. But other programs for the poor, including Medicaid, food stamps and disability benefits, are bursting with new enrollees.
The result, according to an Associated Press analysis: Nearly one in six people rely on some form of public assistance, a larger share than at any time since the government started measuring two decades ago. — Associated Press
“This story only looks at the welfare state for the poor,” writes Cato Institute vice president David Boaz. “Far more than one in six Americans are dependent on such government programs as Social Security, Medicare, unemployment compensation, and so on. . . . And how long can a nation remain free if half its citizens are dependent on government hand-outs?”
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), who is running for President in 2008, also sounded the alarm.
When it comes to Social Security and Medicare, the federal government simply won’t be able to keep its promises in the future. That is the reality every American should get used to, despite the grand promises of Washington reformers. Our entitlement system can’t be reformed — it’s too late. . . .
The politicians who get reelected by passing such incredibly shortsighted legislation will never have to answer to future generations saddled with huge federal deficits. Those generations are the real victims, as they cannot object to the debts being incurred today in their names.
The official national debt figure, now approaching $9 trillion, reflects only what the federal government owes in current debts on money already borrowed. It does not reflect what the federal government has promised to pay millions of Americans in entitlement benefits down the road. Those future obligations put our real debt figure at roughly fifty trillion dollars — a staggering sum that is about as large as the total household net worth of the entire United States. Your share of this fifty trillion amounts to about $175,000.
Don’t believe for a second that we can grow our way out of the problem through a prosperous economy that yields higher future tax revenues. If present trends continue, by 2040 the entire federal budget will be consumed by Social Security and Medicare alone. The only options for balancing the budget would be cutting total federal spending by about 60%, or doubling federal taxes. To close the long-term entitlement gap, the U.S. economy would have to grow by double digits every year for the next 75 years.
The answer to these critical financial realities is simple, but not easy: We must rethink the very role of government in our society. Anything less, any tinkering or “reform,” won’t cut it. — Rep. Ron Paul
In summary, the welfare state that the socialists built here from the 1930s (after they destroyed the money supply and created an artificial depression) is going to do the same thing it did when they built it in the Soviet Union. And if their example is any guide, it won’t take until 2040 for the nation’s economy to collapse utterly. It will be sudden and unexpected. It will be horrific. Millions of Americans will die, never knowing what happened. But if you’ve read this far, you will know why: In a word, socialism.
Socialism sounds good, because it plays on the emotions, not because it’s good fiscal policy. It’s terrible fiscal policy. For that matter, it’s also terribly damaging — psychologically and financially — to those who it ostensibly would help.
Maybe this time around, we will actually remember the lesson. Maybe this time around, we’ll remember what real money is, and reject the worthless paper our overlords have given us in its place. Maybe this time around, when millions of Americans are starving in tents, we will look not to government for a “solution” which makes economic slaves of us all, but where we should have looked in the first place: our neighbors, our communities and within ourselves.

The presidential campaign with Obama and McCain is a total fraud, both are controlled by the same people who are out to impoverish and enslave us.