“Words have meanings” is a common political football of a phrase. Nobody knows this better than the party of a thousand verbal disguises. Ronald Reagan made one of the best references to this phenomenon when he criticized JIimmy Carter for saying that the US was not in a recession because of the very technical definition of the word that Carter fished out of a textbook. “Millions of Americans are suffering and Jimmy Carter chooses to hide behind a dictionary.” That’s not an exact quote but it’s close enough I don’t feel like looking it up.

Most people will be familiar with many of these ploys. Take for example “illegal immigrants” who are now “undocumented workers” much as I was an “undocumented pharmacist” many years ago. Not only is the attempt to shift public opinion by infusing the label with excessive nuance, it’s also an attempt to shift the debate by changing the definition. If “illegal immigration is a problem, we look to the LAW and IMMIGRATION to formulate a solution. If we like our law, then the solution to illegal immigration is to enforce immigration law. If the problem is “undocumented workers” we’re talking about people who are working (supposedly but irrelevant) who lack “documentation” (something that is in the left’s wheel house – more bureaucratic busy-work we can use to funnel taxpayer money into the hands of ivy-league pencil pushers with law degrees).

I was in an argument with your average twitter liberal/nihilist troll yesterday in which I was maintaining that Barack Obama was a War Criminal. He called me a liar. My response was thatCongress had debated about whether or not the President had violated the War Powers act and, in a bipartisan vote, decided that he had. So I argue, he broke a LAW concerning WAR – hence he was found “guilty” by a jury of his peers, or as close as you can come to it. Simple, really, but NO…we had to debate whether or not this was a formal charge. We didn’t even get into the President’s ridiculous claim that he was in the clear because bombing Libya didn’t constitute “hostilities.” SRSLY?  If you buy that line of crap, I feel like I can take all your stuff and argue it wasn’t theft. Words may have meanings but that hardly matters to the ideology and attached political party that has brought you such classics as “Well it depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is.”

Obviously racist statement: “The Obama administration is ruining America.”

Racist code word: “The”

Explanation: the definitive article “the” performs the grammatical function of singling something out. This is different than the article “a/an” which simply identifies it’s object as part of a set or series (group). This can be used as a racist statement in two ways. The first is that since “the” defines a singular object, its use by a member of the majority or dominant ethnicity puts it at odds with uses by minority ethnicities. When this conflict occurs, the “the” used by the majority takes precedence, creating a  grammatical tool for dominance which discredits minority views. White me says “the administration” which because of my status makes black you’s “the administration” a weaker statement. Oppression through the use of articles.

Secondly, using “the” draws more intense attention on the object of the article. Why focus on “the” Obama administration? Obama is black. (actually, he’s mixed half white and half black, roughly, so his use of black as a way to self-identify is an example of “hypodescent” which identifies people of missed backgrounds automatically with minority culture, an analogy would be to say that whiteness is like pure water and anything else makes it dirty – the President equates his black heritage with a contaminate). So if he’s black it’s as if the statement reads “the black man’s administration is ruining America.” I cannot single out Obama, even by using a definitive article, without some tinge of racism. Why point out that Obama is ruining America? By identifying “the” Obama, I have set him apart to describe him negatively, therefore, simply putting “the” in front of his name is a way to encode racist speech.

Do I believe the word “the” is racist? Absolutely not. But I do think this is a good way to illustrate how ridiculous the race card has become and as a way to combat the most incredible uses of attacks on “racist conservatives.” Arguably, though, since the explanation is that the statement is racist “in context,” it can similarly be said that the charge of racism is racist because it continuously leveled at white people who are “assumed” to be racist because of their skin color. Oh “the” irony.

We’re doing it again this year and I’m asking for a fresh round of volunteers. If you’re interested, you can DM on Twitter or just direct it to me if I’m not following you so that I can get an email address to send a list to. I certainly understand most of us wouldn’t want that in the public timeline. I will also send you a link to this post which contains “THE RULES:”

1. No matter what else you do with the names I give you, remember to include the tag #NeverForget on each one.

2. Don’t start until 9/11. Some people had to start very early. I started when the first plane would have taken off from Boston.

3. I kindly request that you abstain from any confrontational discussion on that day. Obviously I made a bit of a name for myself being a confrontational loud mouth but, on that day, I will not let my desire to “be me” get in the way of what was a beautiful ceremony last year.

4. Some names may overlap lists and some of you may want to tweet your lists a few times. This is fine. Repitition is perfectly within the spirit of the event and you will be RT’ed, anyway…

Again, if you’re interested, DM me your email address and I’ll send you a list with 100 names, one on each line so they’re easy to cut and paste. Thank you all in advance, both our returning volunteers and the new additions.

…Never Forget…

When Sarah Palin challenged ObamaCare with the power of Facebook, she did so by putting a name to one of the “unintended consequences” of the bill that may very well have been intentional. Cass Sunstein, John Holdren, and other Obama advisors have called for a form of eugenics in the past which involved selectively rationing care to certain groups of people. Along comes the bill and, low and behold, there are a number of “efficiency measures” which sound a lot like their plans for “decreasing the surplus population,” to quote Dickens. Sarah calls them “death panels,” the left reacts with strident denial, and congress silently moves to eliminate a number of the questionable sections.

In Arizona, on the other hand, the left is so eager to find incidences of racism that they have made exactly the same mistake they accused Governor Palin of. I have read Arizona Senate Bill 1070 one time each for Janet Napolitano, Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and Felipe Calderon, none of whom have read it at all. Where I can cite specific provisions of the border control act that are meant to discourage, prevent, and punish racial profiling in the enforcement of immigration laws, I am witnessing more and more each day a sincere hope by liberals and the Democratic Party that race-card spaghetti sticks to the walls of the immigration debate. So many times have they played the card and so many times been disappointed.

But now there’s word that even a majority of Americans with Hispanic ancestry (notice I didn’t say “Hispanic-Americans”) support Arizona’s attempt to “do the job the federal government just won’t do.” I am sure the left is frustrated by this development even more so than by the overwhelming support of Americans of all backgrounds, as many as 10% of whom don’t think Arizona is doing enough. I happen to think the law is just about right. Nobody gets asked for “papers please” until they are otherwise detained or questioned by authorities. Guess what, whitey? When you go to jail in Arizona, you too have to provide proof of status to be released. The law also has a specific provision against a national ID or “Real ID” card. My libertarian side loves that, the kid in me likes the frosting.

So to help my liberal friends understand the debate on Arizona, let’s just say that there are no “Race Panels” in the bill. Not only do they not exist, but Arizona did something that the DC left completely neglected in the health care bill by explicitly forbidding the activity that they would be accused of. Rewriting the bill for public consumption and to make it a sort of “how not to discriminate in law enforcement for dummies” grew the bill from about ten to seventeen pages in length. Even so, this greatly inflated length means there isn’t much room to hide “unintended consequences” with quite the same impunity as in a 2800-page anti-market manifesto.

Congress quietly and without direct mention “apologized” to Sarah Palin by attempting to remove her argument in revision. I doubt conservatives, moderates who favor a functioning national border, the people of Arizona, or the majority of the American people will get the same from the Professor-in-Chief or the rest of the lecturers who are currently holding speaking engagements in our nation’s capital. In the spirit of leadership and in keeping with the goals of an ex-leftist, let me extend the olive branch, first. To liberals and the left, I am sorry, but Race Panels are a myth.

1. It is racist to assume that police and other law enforcement officials will discriminate against minorities simply because the cops are white.
2. It is racist to assume that legislation meant to curb illegal immigration or deport those who have already violated the border of the Sovereign State of Arizona is targeted at Hispanics or any other minority because that assumes minorities are more likely to violate that border.
3. It is racist to lower the standard for proper immigration so that Hispanics can form a permanent slave underclass, providing cheap labor, shoring up bankrupt liberal entitlement programs, and exchanging social spending promises for votes.

And there you have it. Racism comes in many colors.

There are matters of policy and there are matters of decency. Agree or not with the Vietnam War or President Obama’s “radicalism on rails,” Americans of all stripes cherish the right to civil and open dissent. There is something altogether sinister, then, to the American spirit when the powerful remove conversation from the shaping of the country’s direction by answering words with force. Forty years ago, today, Ohio Guardsmen shot into a crowd of Vietnam War protesters on the campus of Kent State University, not ten miles from my house, killing four, wounding nine, and ending any notion that civility would trump amoral ambition.

I don’t blame the Guardsmen. I have trouble fixing an inordinate amount of blame on President Nixon, either. Some witnesses testify to harassment of the young men in uniform, some as young as eighteen, surrounded by a sea of angry faces and having balloons popped near them to keep them on edge. Nixon, in continuing a war started by his political rival Kennedy and continued by his predecessor, Johnson, was attempting to manage what he knew was a bad situation. The drumbeat that turned “suits” against “long-hairs” had been coming from the media for quite some time. The names you know and connect to Kent State have the blame for their individual parts. The responsibility for the storm, though, falls heavily on the media and their rain dance.

What do we learn? If we fail to absorb the tragedy, we’re setting ourselves up for another one. Conservatives and libertarians have taken the mantle from the peaceful left that comprised the bulk of the protesters at Kent State. Nearly every day in this country, a Tea Party serves as a place where people gather to protest big government, closed-door deals, and oppression. In other words, while the targets have changed, the critique is very much the same. It’s no accident that you’ll find people who protested Nixon’s invasion of Cambodia 4o years ago carrying signs to protest Obama’s bureaucratic overreach, today.

What has changed and become, in many ways, much more insidious is that the media is no longer at odds with our would-be masters. Instead of stirring up tensions between Nixon’s “silent majority” and hippies, the mainstream media is now carrying the President’s water in demonizing dissent and amplifying the “post-partisan” divider-in-chief’s calls to violence. When Obama says “if they bring a knife, you bring a gun” or “punch back twice as hard,” the media excuses his rhetoric. When Homeland Security calls defenders of the constitution and pro-life demonstrators potential terrorists or the military trains to deal with Tea Parties, they are silent. In a world where objective reporting is impossible, those excuse the instigators are accomplices. There is no better evidence of this culpability than how the left has adopted the language and stance of the administration. Notice they’re not planning to question those corporate dollars they complain about fueling the protests (still waiting for my check) but instead they plan to “crash the tea party.”

The events of May 4^th, 1970, may have done much to turn the tide of the national discourse on the Vietnam War. Not long after, Nixon began to draw down the conflict before soon calling for total withdrawal. In much the same way, the Obama administration is one tragedy away from having to hem in the failed “war on poverty.” With a complicit media to run cover for the White House and “rebel left” being a sad joke, anymore, there are few guarantees as to how such an incident would play out. With Oath Keepers in practically every military unit we have, there are few guarantees that even a direct order to shoot Tea Partiers would be followed. Nonetheless, even victory over religion of the state would not wash away the blood that our President is edging closer to drawing.

Stay strong, keep the volume up, and pray for both our victory and safety. To borrow from another song of the era, “I hope Neil Young will remember…” that with God we are never “on our own.”

I agreed with that assessment for quite a while. I bought it for so long, in fact, that my heritage is really more of a footnote in my identity than something tangible. I had a question, though. Why, if German heritage was relegated to a condition and Jewish ethnicity was not elevated to a matter of pride in the national consciousness? It’s a religion, it’s a race, and it’s an ethnicity but it’s never been something the Jewish community seemed to broadcast anywhere but in the self-promotion capital of the world in Hollywood.

Historically, the Jews have every right to keep their heads down and who could blame them? From the Old Testament or Torah, call it what you will, we know that the Jews have never been terribly popular with their neighbors. There has been a pattern for at least 4,000 years that, whenever a dictator would come to power and he could find a Jew somewhere on the same continent, he would blame them for whatever his shortcomings produced and promise their destruction. It’s as true today as it was when Moses took a long walk and I don’t think I need to provide much evidence to that effect. All have failed. Where Germans in America are reminded of their fascist failures, Jews should be proud that practically every other race in Europe has tried to kill them and they can’t.

There is a visible disconnect between American and Israeli Jews, though. In trying to understand this, I came up with a crazy theory and it’s one that I’ve gone over in casual conversations for a few years, now. How, if one were so inclined, would you actually create a “master race” as Hitler sought to do with the Aryans? His plan was slow. It would require total military victory over all of Europe and then a number of generations to weed out anything the Nazi eugenicists viewed as a weakness. If you wanted to do it quickly and the number of lives destroyed in this pursuit was no object, here’s a plan:

1. Pick a race with a history of surviving genocide (this narrows down the field and replaces theory with empirical evidence of survivability )
2. Gather them in a few central locations
3. Starve, beat, torture, and otherwise attempt to demoralize every single member of that race and let disease spread in these “ghettos” and “camps”
4. Take the small percentage of those who survive and nurse them back to health
5. Take those survivors and put them in an arid piece of land smaller than New Jersey and surrounded by cultures who have sworn to exterminate them.
6. Watch a successive parade of invasions, attacks, and insurgencies forge the resolve of this race into a weapon of their own defense as powerful as any technology
7. To keep the heat up, encourage the dissemination of theories that paint their leadership as a conspiratorial cabal bent on world domination through financial manipulation even when their people are almost entirely absent from the organizations that are “responsible.”

That’s the Jews. There’s a reason that Israel has fought two wars called the “Seven Day War” and the “Forty Day War.” It took them less than two months to fight off Syrian and Egyptian invasions and defeat them so badly that at least Egypt thought it would be easier to continue as something of an ally.

So what’s the relevance? America, I believe, does not properly understand what an ally we have in Israel and just how deep the bonds of loyalty are from a people for whom promises are a matter of life and death. We have elected a President who listened to anti-Semitism from his preacher, his professors, and his confidants before bringing a cold shoulder to bear on the Jewish state. With Joe Biden as the errand boy, the Obama Administration won’t “meddle” when Iran promises a nuclear weapon and makes not-so-veiled threats about using it to “wipe Israel off the map.” The President, though, is completely willing to meddle when Israel plays the “dangerous game” of building apartments in their capital city.

Allies are valuable. Allies that know how to persist in the face of a world arrayed against them are invaluable. When the lives of you and your loved ones is on the line, who would be foolish enough to turn their back on the master race?

Underdogs

“Why are you guys cheering for them? Do you even know anyone from Iowa?”

“In fact, I do,” I replied. “But people are cheering for them because Americans love an underdog that won’t back down.”

Northern Iowa, a tiny school compared to Big 12 giant and basketball juggernaut Kansas, pulled off one of the most memorable NCAA Tourney victories I have ever personally seen, beating the heavy favorite in what was essentially a home game. One Jayhawk player was so distraught by the loss that he lay prostrated on the court, inconsolable as all the other players and coaches left the floor. We were once again reminded that the do-or-die consequences are what make the college basketball championships so dramatic and utterly, utterly American. I could not help but feel in watching their victory that great things were impossible even when you had been counted out and you were little more than an afterthought in most people’s brackets. As a conservative and Tea Party “whatever,” this was a sign that we can make things happen. We can change Washington. We can restore our founding vision.

And then, Northern Iowa lost in the next round.

In 1992, “conservatism was dead.” Every time Democrats (or liberals of any stripe, for that matter) win an election, the media can be counted on to repeat the premature obituary for opposition to statism in the name of Liberty. Thankfully, Bill Clinton wasn’t interested in governing as the centrist he campaigned as until he and his wife’s health care plan gave rise to what would be called, brilliantly I must add, “The Contract With America.” In just two years, the Clintons squandered their defeat of George W. Bush and a Republican majority took both houses of Congress for the first time in decades. That majority essentially lasted for twelve years and, if it happens to another ideologue who promised to rule from the middle, my guess is that it’s mileage would be half as long, six years, at best.

Like the plucky underdog represented by the small rural school who boldly dismisses the mighty giant, we conservatives and libertarians have not learned the thing that separates the underrated teams that make great news headlines and the ones that become a regular story. First, you must prove you belong at the top. Then, you must forget you were ever an underdog as quickly as possible. Know you belong. Know you must stay. Do not even let the thought that participation is enough enter your mind. Demand of yourself victory and then demand that you return to that summit.

It’s My Fault

Why did the victory of ’94 fade in less than a quarter of the time that the Democrats controlled the legislature? I’m sure there are numerous reasons. I’m sure that people who are actually paid to write articles like this have talked about it, publicly and privately, and have a myriad of theories and many of them with a strong element of truth. There is no simple answer unless you pay attention to the thing that drives sporting champions and Born-Again Christians, alike: it’s our fault. Most of all, it’s my fault. The champion does not complain to the referee when a call does not go his way. The Christian knows that he is a sinner for whom there is no excuse, only salvation. We’re in this mess because I didn’t do all I could and I imagine a great number who read this will have had this same thought and the same, accompanying sickening feeling.

Liberals who love the “club of angry nihilists” aspect of their philosophy more than the misguided compassion side of it constantly make the mistake of equating Republicans with Conservatives. It happens often enough that they at least resemble each other so our mistake in doing the same thing is understandable. In 1994, I was 17 and had grown so disaffected with politicians that I shifted hard to the left. Then, feeling betrayed by Clinton’s crony empire, I saw the flaw in Marxism only as someone who climbs a mountain sees its peak. Statism of any flavor requires that at least one individual somewhere in the halls of power act selflessly. That mortal does not exist. I was then on to anarchism as a way to prevent this dilemma. Then I didn’t think much about it until I had two beautiful kids. It was an odd realization that anarchism, libertarianism, and conservatism are in many ways analogous. An anarchist calls for consensus and personal responsibility to replace the state and a rotating group of enforcers for the most violent and awful matters. Libertarians and conservatives call that “civil society” or constitutional governance through the rule of law.

In this transformation, it occurred to me that our servant government was a firm which essentially fulfilled one half of Kant’s social contract while the people performed the other. In 1994, we hired a new group of employees to clean up the mess made by the last bad batch. I have realized, though, that my mistake was to think that it was only fair to let the replacements stand on their original set of promises as if they did not owe me adherence to the principles for which I backed them. It was, again, MY FAULT that I did not watch them, correct them, and demand that service every time I noticed that they were falling victim to the same trap as the original violators. Sure, the job has a natural tendency to corrupt those who take it, even those who begin with the best of intentions. Without punishment, though, reward can have no meaning.

Sean Hannity spoke from the Reagan Library a few days ago to Michael Reagan who said that the difference between liberals and conservatives is that when conservatives win elections, they quit. I don’t want to get too involved in politics, honestly. I love to run my mouth: to my family and friends. The constant drumbeat of online conversations, strategy sessions, meetings, congresses, conferences, and all that has begun to wear on me. But not paying attention is no longer an option. Looking over the horizon, the ridiculous behavior of the liberal “majority” has to result in big wins for the Republicans. There is now a distinct lead for them in the polls, reasonable projections of at least slim majorities in both houses, and most people haven’t heard that Obama’s next big project, Cap and Trade, is a plan from ex-Enron CEO and thief of billions who died in prison right around the time fake climate data was being circulated to support the claim of global warming for the noble cause of procuring more grant money for elitist professors. BUT WE WILL TELL THEM.

I Worry About the Constitution

The point of this article isn’t what will be. It’s about what was and what is. We still must fight hard to shift the balance of power in Washington this November and two years hence for our house, the White House. But November is now close enough that we must begin to plan for eventualities. Most of us know about Nullification efforts and plenty more are aware of citizen-based initiatives like the one I helped write. (http://articlesoffreedom.us) But we’re not planning for the possibility that we might really win this thing. We have won victories in New Jersey, Virginia, Massachusetts, and even Doug Hoffman’s narrow 3^rd party loss in New York is positive. And still, we are acting like the underdog, staring down the people that doubted us instead of our competition. Corruption is our competition. So are greed, envy, apathy, and contempt for the rule of law. If our analogy is sports, then our playbook has to have an answer for everything that thrown at us. If our analogy is the contracted firm, this current crop is in breach and our responsibility to it is not to honor the offenders but to offer that contract to a new firm but this time we will make our conditions more precise and our list of duties long enough that there’s no time in the shift for screwing around.

Plenty of people are working on different versions of something like a “Contract From America” that hopes to capture the spirit of ’94 with a condition to Republicans that we will help put you in office but the price will be stern and fair. I have three concerns with most that I have seen. The first is that so many of these statements are vague that even those who wrote them will have trouble judging the compliance of our new employees. The second is that many of these statements sound as if they’re being made in a spirit of cooperation with our servant-government-to-be. The third and biggest problem, in my opinion, is that the lists are conceivably achievable in four to six years. I realize that Mr. Hannity’s heart is in the right place but “Conservative Victory 2010” is a poor, poor choice of words. If we can tear down this monstrosity and replace it with a Constitutionally-bound iteration of the federal government in ten years, we will be truly blessed. If the GOP wants victory, they may very well have it but they have to be in it for the right reasons and they have to stay for those same principles. I think “Conservative Victory 2020” is an objective that gives us something to work for, ambitious goals to direct us, and a constant test of politicians who contract to take us there. This isn’t a formal declaration; it’s a series of ideas around which there seems to be consensus in the dedicated Tea Party movement. I’ll just start listing and give credit where it’s due to some great friends and Patriots who saved me some time in getting these ideas together.

Greg W. Howard starts out simply enough:

“Our first plan of action once a conservative majority is in place is to DEFUND the entire Obama agenda. We won’t be able to repeal due to lack of veto proof majority, but taking away all funds can be done by Congress.”

From Pete Fleckenstein’s blog: “OK Obama, Let’s Not Take Baby Steps”

“I’m taking Obama up on his offer. Let’s not take baby steps. Let’s do it right.

• Permanently cut government spending by 50%.
• Permanently reduce the Corporate Income Tax across the board to 15%
• Implement a consumption “flat” tax across all income levels.
• Eliminate the Estate “Death” Tax. Permanently.
• Allow health care insurance to be sold across state lines using no Government Run Exchange.
• Repeal the anti-trust exemption for insurance companies.
• Abolish Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Convert to wholly publicly traded company.
• Abolish the Department of Education. It’s done nothing for our children.
• Abolish the Department of Commerce and spin off “divisions”.
• Bring the average federal employee salary of $75,000 down to the $50,000 avg salary of private sector.
• Repeal the remaining ARRA stimulus package and veto the 2nd Stimulus (jobs) bill..
• Eliminate all earmarks in any future bills permanently.
• Mandate all members of Congress fly commercial. No private jets for anyone.
• Have Congress convene for only 6 months out of every year. Cut their salaries in half.”

And again in: “America The Beautiful”

“There is no need for the signing of the Mount Vernon Statement or any other statement for that matter. We already have what we need. Our Founding Fathers saw to it with their wisdom and prescience. It is not the right of Obama and his mob of Statists/Progressives or any President or Congress to abolish our government. It is the right of the people.”

Katy in Indy writes:

“We need to push for a dismantling of the Fed Govt 51% takeover of our economy, including healthcare & impeachment of Obama.”

“Used up the 140 characters; after dismantling of Fedzilla & impeachment of Obama, hunting down & putting on trial all Democrats”

“We had to send a warning to future generations of Marxists, Socialists, Communists Democrats we will not tolerate this in USA”

Notice how Katy includes the word “trials.” Even when demanding justice, we adhere to the rule of law. Yes, there must be punishment as honor is not a guide of the statist. If it were, the entire Administration would have resigned ten minutes after we told them what we thought of reporting our neighbors to flag@whitehouse.gov.

AlinskyDefeater taught me to never stop studying the left. Read his blog here

@Jenevalynne responds: “wow. how much time you got?” Good question. She continues: “repeal a whole bunch of things…drill baby drill. water California. Goodbye lobbyists. ..take real good care of our military. Gitmo open for business. Ask England for Churchill’s bust back. goodbye mandatory volunteers. Goodbye Fed. Give GM back. Give Poland, Czech Rep and Israel their defense systems. Goodbye FDA. Goodbye Unions. Goodbye EPA. we can dream, right? #1 : US is Sovereign. No Global agreements on anything not in best interest or unconstitutional.”

I ask about leaving the United Nations, the World Bank, the Internation Monetary Fund and other international “agreements.”

She responds: “that i would have done anyway.”

God taught me that theft is wrong, even if 99 conspire against one to deprive him of Liberty through the misapplication of law.

For my own part, I have priorities:

1. Repeal, defend, or effectively nullify the health care bill. It is not the biggest of our concerns in the long run but it’s certainly the most likely to cause real harm if something isn’t done and soon.
2. Eliminate the Department of Education and the FCC. If we do not take quick measures to break the hold of the statist on the education of our children and the unconstitutional regulation of public airways, we will fight this battle to restore a lawful republic every twenty years as a new generation of usurpers will attempt to defy history and wisdom by repeating failed socialist experiments.
3. Repeal the 16^th Amendment. Every other ill of the welfare state is based on the same progressive scheme that is reinforced but what was meant to be a temporary measure and for which the means of its ratification are suspect, at best. No flat tax or “fair tax,” both of which are constitutionally sound alternatives, can ever really exist without first ending progressive, arbitrary, and patriarchal/matriarchal enforcement against legal, protected liberties.
4. End the Federal Reserve, its fiat currency, and replace it with constitutional money printed by the Treasury alone. By definition, then the people and the states would regain their 9^th and 10^th Amendment rights to trade in minted metals because a thing that has intrinsic value cannot be counterfeited.
5. It might not be as widely held as some of the other demands but, in my world, driving on roads you pay taxes and tolls on should be a right and the ability to end the life of the unborn should be a privilege of only those who are in grave danger, themselves.

That ought to keep them busy. Nonetheless, I will be adding more as they come in. If you don’t see it in this list, post it in the comments. The longer the list, the stronger will be the shackles of tyrants.

UPDATED: hat tip to @danielvgarner – MSM claims Tea Party protesters threw brick through a Democrat’s office window… on the 30th floor http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/03/oh-brother-lib-media-claims-rock-was-thrown-through-reps-office-on-30th-floor/

UPDATED: Andrew Breitbart of http://biggovernment.com offers a $20,000 bounty for proof of racial slurs at DC rally. Good news for Mr. Breitbart is he’ll be keeping that cash.

UPDATED: Jewish Republican House whip Eric Cantor has bullet shot through office window.

We’ve had the “race card” with us for quite a while. It is typically a knee-jerk reaction to conservative opposition to any liberal sacred cow and normally doesn’t require much analysis, precursor, or evidence. Jimmy Carter played it when it became increasingly clear that most Americans were opposed to the then “health care bill” fraud which has now become law, pending several court cases, state legislation, nullification, and something of an ideological civil war. The basic idea is to tie up conservatives defending their own record on race so that liberal proponents of socialism are free to spend their time rewriting history or taking white-out to the Constitution.

But it’s not so simple, anymore. With the growing sentiment that continual use of race as a wedge and distraction is akin to the boy who cried wolf, it’s not enough to simply claim that opposition to egalitarian “social justice” is racist without some incident. To facilitate the continuation of this divisive narrative, something bad has to happen to minorities and, if the right wont’ oblige them by committing such acts, the left has decided to step up to the plate and fake them. There are two recent stories about racial slurs being shouted at Representatives entering the House for the health bill vote and there’s the noise about threats of assassination of President Obama. Ex-KGB agent Yuri Bezmenov provided an excellent history of leftist assassinations in this clip: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dE38dLxapVo) and it should be no surprise that most leftist leaders are killed by other leftists. It’s also not uncommon for leftists to do things like burning down the Reichstag and then calling for martial law.

Here is a list of liberal hate-crime hoaxes:

-          Transgendered Anarchist Smashes Windows at CO Dem HQ, Dems Blame Conservatives http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=29d_1261633848&c=1

-          Hate Crime Hoax, Democrats/Media fabricate fictional account of racial slurs and spitting: http://cofcc.org/2010/03/hate-crime-hoax-democratsmedia-fabricate-fictional-account-of-racial-slurs-and-spitting/

-          Who Painted the Swastika Outside David Scott’s Office? Probably a Liberal http://rightwingnews.com/mt331/2009/08/who_painted_the_swastika_outsi.php

-          GWU student journalist admits hate crime hoax http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/05/gwu-student-journalist-admits-hate-crime-hoax/

-          Trinity International University student indicted for hate crime hoax http://michellemalkin.com/2005/04/26/faking-the-hate/

-          ObamaCare Protesters ‘Racist’ Including Black Gun-Owner http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2009/08/18/msnbc-no-mention-black-gun-owner-among-racist-protesters

-          Who’s Behind the Obama-As-Hitler Posters? http://www.mediaite.com/tv/whos-behind-the-obama-as-hitler-posters/

-          Sarah Palin Leaker Outs Himself…and Turns Out to Be a Hoaxer http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/10/sarah-palin-leaker-outs-himself

-          Noose found on Columbia professor’s door;

-          2003 Ole Miss racist graffiti written by black students;

-          2005 College of Wooster anti-Semitic graffiti written by leftist student group;

-          2007 anti-Muslim posters distributed by “Iraq Veterans Against War”;

-          Black students admitted they hung black doll in effigy at Duke, 1997; all at http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_20071022/ai_n21112435/

-          Liberal professor spray paints her own car with sexist and racist messages http://www.isteve.com/Hate_Hoax.htm

-          The Tawana Brawley Hoax http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id315.htm

-          2006 racist fliers in Virginia circulated by black woman to “shock young black people in the area”;

-          2006 two black firefighters in Florida may have put nooses on their own equipment;

-          2006 black family spray paints “white power” on their home;

-          2004 University of Louisville black students spray painted and distributed fliers with racist language; all at http://vdare.com/bradley/070213_crime.htm

-          ADDED (hat tip to @danielvgarner): Duke Lacrosse rape hoax (although it did not seem to be politically motivated at first, faculty and liberal reaction make this another case of staged “hate”) http://www.lawweekly.org/?module=displaystory&story_id=1790&edition_id=72&format=html

-          ADDED: Census worker hangs himself in apparent attempt to incite fear of anti-government sentiment http://themoderatevoice.com/54131/the-census-worker-suicide/

Laird Wilcox compiled a list in 1995 entitled “Crying Wolf: Hate Crime Hoaxes in America.” I have not read and can’t endorse this book but here’s a link if you’re interested: http://www.amazon.com/Crying-Wolf-Crime-Hoaxes-America/dp/0922915180

Assassinations:

-          Che Guevara killed by Fidel Castro (likely) http://laht.com/article.asp?CategoryId=14510&ArticleId=326351

-          JFK killed by Marxist Oswald (or at least shot at) http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/organ1.htm

-          RFK killed by leftist/Islamist Sirhan http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2009/10/oswald-sirhan-and-ray-assassins-of-past.html

-          Sandanista leaders had other resistance leaders assassinated http://www.iwp.edu/news_publications/detail/tropical-chekists-the-sandinista-secret-police-legacy-in-nicaragua

-          Maurice Bishop (Grenada) ordered killed by extremists in his own party http://repeatingislands.com/2009/09/07/men-responsible-for-maurice-bishop%E2%80%99s-death-to-be-freed/

-          Afghanistan president attempts to have his prime minister Amin killed, ends up in Amin’s supporters hands and dies soon after of a “serious illness” http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ad09

-          Rahman (Bangladesh) and 21 family members killed in leftist coup http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/210112.stm

-          ADDED (hat tip to @JacksonianLwyer): Harvey Milk, gay San Francisco politician, killed by a Democrat http://jacksonianlawyer.wordpress.com/2009/09/17/statist-nancy-pelosi-wants-obamacare-critics-to-curb-their-enthusiasm/

-          SOMEONE mentioned the Unabomber and I concur – the ex-professor turned liberal snail-mail terrorist definitely qualifies. Link will be added, someday.

This site (http://www.tobydials.com/td/node/336) also contains a pretty comprehensive list of successful and failed assassins of American Presidents and their political views.

To be fair, the article listed for RFK’s assassin Sirhan also mentions that John Wilkes Booth who killed Lincoln and James Earl Ray who killed Martin Luther King Jr. were both Democrats but Lincoln and King are both, at least arguably, conservative.

If I’ve missed something, let me know. I’ll try to update this list and make it “reasonably complete.”

There are to simultaneous goals at work in the force to centralize and socialize the American economy. The first is the ideological and academic notion that all people are entitled to equal outcomes of wealth. This ridiculous notion has volumes committed to its critique but suffice it to say that any scheme which has sought to implement the philosophy of “social justice” has invariably injured the very people to whom it has promised the most. Yes, the rich get poorer in these systems but, alas, the poor do as well. There is no counterexample that can be given for any period greater than the socialists’ ability to borrow money to continue the illusion of their utopia.

The second goal is as disingenuous and evil as any plot of the fascist or communist and that is perhaps best described as the “Cloward-Piven strategy.” The duo were Columbia University professors who wrote in a 1966 paper about the idea of overwhelming the welfare mechanisms of a social democracy to bring about economic collapse, followed by social chaos, and ultimately conditions that would allow for a true leftist counter-revolution. This “secondary goal” has become part of the discourse on modern American politics precisely because it is becoming increasingly likely that is in practice by liberal politicians in high positions of power. In short, it is morally bankrupt because it would trade real suffering for an ideological victory. There are few more crystalline examples of “the ends justify the means” than contributing to violent conflict in hopes that it will lead to socialist government. If that same philosophy was at work in Weimar Germany, the proponents may well have received just the socialists they earned.

I have a new proposal, though. I, like Moody’s credit rating service, believe that it may already be too late to turn back the tide of the Cloward-Piven decay. Moody’s published a paper last week which suggested that the United States’ credit rating would be downgraded unless cuts in spending were made which “would test social cohesion.” In other words, entitlement programs like Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, welfare, and the new national health care plan would have to see massive cuts that would force the dependent of this nation to revolt. The alternative is to keep spending, eventually leading to a debt crisis which would trigger a loss of borrowing credit and economic collapse, which also would tend to “test social cohesion.” If it is inevitable, then let it be. The collapse of the dollar being the logical end of this, it is better than it happens now before globalists and liberals can create enough propaganda to make a global currency popular. If it happens now, the resulting unrest could very well result in a return to the principles of Liberty and limited government. Why are we spending so much time trying to avoid the collapse of the (ahem…unconstitutional) Federal Reserve note when that plays into the hands of those who are our ultimate enemies? Why do large central banks and wealthy financiers like George Soros back socialists and social democrats? It is because their slow slide into mediocrity requires borrowing to delay the eventual result of a public who finds their promises broken. Of course, the co-conspirators would love nothing more than if socialist Chinese and American regimes centralized the borrowing and did in with a global fiat currency under their control.

So what to do? I started out this blog looking for a common sense approach to health care reform. I have since reached the obvious conclusion that such was never the intent of the liberal elites and their money changers so I’m calling them out. There is still need for solutions, though, and here is what I have.

1. Accept that Cloward-Piven economics have run their course and that we are too far in the process to save the dollar as we know it. We have two logical alternatives – a global currency or a return to metal standards and other “honest money” and I think you know I want the latter.
2. Large banks are both complicit in the socialist takeover of America and “single points of failure” that allow for manufactured economic “crises” that are used to sell centralized control. Take your money out of large banks and put it into local operations or credit unions.
3. Begin converting some of your money to a diversified cache of precious metals. Even if circumstances will lead you to accept a global currency, trade-in rates for precious metals are likely to be far better than a devalued and dying fiat dollar.
4. If you have to ask, you are not prepared to fight the IRS in court. There are ways to oppose it, though, which are entirely legal. Efforts like the Third Continental Congress (http://articlesoffreedom.us) seek to provide a legal method in historical context for a nationwide coordinated tax protest. Filling out W-4 forms as “exempt” also gives you an opportunity to starve the beast while potentially earning interest on what you keep during the year, even if you were to have to pay it at the end of the year. Payroll contributions only require you to have reasonable grounds for believing you may be exempt in order to file that way with your employer. Pending economic collapse is as good a grounds as any.
5. Learn to farm. It is unlikely that coming social unrest will disrupt food production. On December 6^th, 1941, it was unlikely that Japanese planes would be seen over Hawaii the next day.
6. Learn to defend yourself, physically, for the same reasons listed above.
7. Join a church or become more active in your current church. Before there was big government and in regimes that provide only repression and handouts, the church becomes the center of a community living either independently from the state or housing its resistance. If you don’t find one you like right away, don’t give up. Churches were social networking before Face and Book were words in the English language.

I literally can’t wait for the first leftist to call me crazy. Nothing I have told you about their plans and the results are untrue and documentation is readily available. Nothing I have offered as a solution is anything other than sound advice that would work in any economic environment. Be prepared and pay attention to those things which make you independent in all aspects of your life because the time is coming when social institutions will not be capable of providing those functions for you. This is a civil war that is already pitting individualists against collectivists, progressives against conservatives, patriots against socialists, and so on. It is best to be ready when it pits our trusting and dependent qualities against our ability to support ourselves. I have children so I know which side I’m on.