Rate The Debate

While there are many analysts who think that Trump and Jeb Bush were the big winners in last Thursday night's FoxNews debate, to anyone who viewed this two-hour farce, it is plain to see that the stand out and stand up presidential hopeful was Senator Rand Paul (R-KY).

From the very start, Paul challenged Trump's integrity and it was downhill for the Donald from there. Forget the Megyn Kelly issue because she is not running for office.  If Trump thinks she was tough on him, then he better drop out now because that was still minor league compared to what lies ahead.



Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio were both articulate and calm n their performances as was Dr. Ben Carson, who seemed a bit apprehensive at first but settled in and gave some very good answers and a few good humorous lines that grabbed the audience momentarily.

For me it was Rand Paul who stood out among the losers and the wannabe newbies. His lambasting of Christie was a classic in a patriotic display of what liberty and freedom is what this nation was founded upon. Christie so much as called the founders' Bill of Rights ridiculous, lending to his stance in favor of unconstitutional infringements on Individual Rights for the sake of national security. Rand shouted out louder than Christie, "Get a warrant!" and that tipped the scales on the FoxNews approval meter.




By the time the "post-game analysts" began their assessment, the media had already lashed out against Fox for they treated poor rich boy Donald Trump, totally ignoring the fact that they gave him twice the air time of any other candidate on the dais. Charles Krauthammer wasted no time in making Rand Paul a nonissue, and for me, that is the telling of how FoxNews operates. Certainly not the fair and balanced network they project themselves to be. They are establishment lackeys, same as the rest of the privately-owned major media.

The real winner of this debate is the American People. They were able to witness how the media manipulates opinion to produce a desired outcome, in this case, making Trump a victim while ignoring the command performance given by Senator Paul. 




Rand Paul demonstrated why he must be the next American President. He was the only one who was ready to present a plan to reduce taxes, balance the budget, and audit the Federal Reserve. It will be that latter issue that will be the reason opposition will rise and use any despicable means to attempt to destry his character.

I will not be fooled again. 

The Great Debate?

Fox News will host a GOP candidate debate this Thursday, August 6, 2015. The hype is no less than that of a heavy weight boxing match on pay-per-view. 

According to the spin, Donald Trump leads the field of contenders. Why? Is he that 'refreshing' that the public sees him as a serious Presidential hopeful? Allow me to elaborate why he cannot win.

In all of the polls it seems that most Republicans favor Trump over the rest of the field. Well the Republican voter will not decide the vote against the Democratic candidate. That was demonstrated in 2008 and again in 2012. It will be the Independent Voter who will decide the next President. 

In the early part of the year, the talking heads were saying that the GOP nominee should be a governor, because a governor has 'executive' experience. Then it was military experience that was needed to combat the terrorism threat against Americans. 

For me the choice comes down to one thing:  The Constitution. Freedom from government intervention in every aspect of my life. Adhering to the First Amendment and not forcing the will of government on religious beliefs. Obeying the Second Amendment instead of making excuses as to why the government must pass 'common sense' gun control laws. The latter is an oxymoron and only a moron uses that lame excuse to attempt to take rights of the People.

The (un) Affordable Care Act demonstrates how inept government involvement is. Most candidates want to 'fix' it, but that is not really possible. The real push is for complete control by the government. Donald Trump has been for 'universal health care' for decades, believes that abortion is about women's choice, and thinks that bully tactics against China will somehow fix the economic issues we face today.

Karl Rove (who should have been charged with high crimes and misdemeanors) said it best when he stated that this 'debate' is more like a campaign speech limited to about 8 minutes per candidate.

The panel of 'inquisitors' from Fox News will ask questions, some of which will be questions submitted by viewers. So far, none of the questions ask how they will accomplish anything, only what they will do if elected. Each will thump about Iran, immigration, abortion, blah, blah, blah.

The exceptions are the senators, Cruz, Paul, and Rubio. Each of them have voted for or against these issues, so we know where they stand. Each has demonstrated by their voting record where they stand.  In the blog post Last Stand:  Freedom or Serfdom I pointed out how only Rand Paul has voted along constitutional lines even when the majority succumbed to popular opinion.

There really isn't more than can be said. America stands to lose its sovereignty unless we elect a President who will follow the Constitution. Rand Paul does just that, always.

Immigration and Border Control

The way I see it, the immigration 'problem' can be handled quite simply and it will save tax dollars.

First, you must remove the incentives that attract foreigners from coming into the U.S. illegally. You do that by removing ALL federal benefits for education, food, health care, and shelter. If you arrive here from anywhere else with proper documentation, you are free to come to America to find a job or start a business. Or if you have promise of employment a work visa may be obtained expeditiously when proper background checks are made to both the employer's and the government's satisfaction regarding that clean record in one's background. That person will pay taxes at a rate slightly higher than a U.S. citizen since a job here means that an American is not employed.

Next, you must seal the border. With joint cooperation between the state and federal governments, a plan that serves the best interests and capabilities of each border can be implemented. If funding is required to build fences or walls, depending on the necessity of the local terrain, it can be found in the savings from ending funding to foreign nations, starting with the ones that are most hostile toward the United States. Troops can be redeployed from around the world to provide temporary security until the border crossings are in place and the entire length is secure in the manner that serves the requirements of the local terrain. No additional taxes or borrowing will be necessary to fund the endeavor.

These fine members of our armed services will no doubt make excellent law enforcement officers if they so desire, in both state and local governments, protecting their family, friends, and community.In fact, they still will be serving to protect the nation as deputy sheriffs and police officers. A secure border is not about keeping illegal immigrants out, rather it deters foreign enemies from coming to the United States as spies and saboteurs. They can now cross the border as easily as a good man seeking work and liberty for himself and his family.

Many politicians will try to convince us that we cannot forget that many of these illegal and undocumented workers must have a path to legal status and citizenship. Well they do! If they are here illegally, the path will lead back to their country of origin. There they will make application just as so many other foreigners have and do. We cannot reward them for breaking the law by moving them ahead of those who are waiting in line with legal application documentation.They broke the law so they get deported. When Americans break laws they go to prison so I don't see a problem here.

Many will also tell us that children who were born or brought here guiltless victims if their parents are deported. Really? And how about all the homeless American citizens with children that can benefit from the aid given to foreigners illegal or legal? How can you possibly justify so many Americans in need when foreigners are given so much?

Simply a case of a shortage of common sense and logic when the government is put in charge of solving a problem that they (the government) created in the first place!

Why Are We Targets of Terrorists?

Everyday we are bombarded with media from all parts of the world regarding terrorism, and much of it seems to be targeting Americans.  Aside from the issues in the Middle East, much of it is also against America's ally Israel; we still do not have an answer that addresses the true reasons why.

The most recent killings of Americans in Benghazi was blamed on a video. I doubt that anyone with an ounce of intelligence will believe that. It seems far-fetched to assume that such a production can be responsible for such atrocities when there is no connection between the two other than Islam and American clashes in ideology and propaganda. Both sides are equally guilty of their own atrocities, one in the name of Allah and the other in the name of freedom. 

Neither Allah nor freedom can condone the murder of innocent people whose only crimes are difference of ideology or religion. The war of words is more inflammatory than what the so-called diplomats are willing to admit.

The finger pointing is not correctly targeting the real culprits in all of this. The banks and the manufacturers of weapons of war are the ones who always profit no matter who wins. It is they who profit from war no matter who wins.

"All men are created equal..." as quoted from the American Declaration of Independence, however they do not all find equal station in life. Some are content with a simple yet charitable life, while many others feel the temptation of greed and power to be more appealing to their wants.

The Constitution for the United States makes it clear that the founders of this once great and prosperous nation felt that above all, liberty of the individual was the most relevant issue of any union of States in forming a nation. The laws which govern the People, were by and large, those which were based on the simple rule that we all our accountable for our own actions, and those actions must not infringe upon the rights of others in order that they be permissible in a civil society.

The very idea that any one people is more relevant than others is arrogant in the least and detrimental to the well being of all others. In the original words, it was, "the inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" which was changed to include the right to property. Property is subject to interpretation which does not necessarily include land ownership. That concept was brought to these shores by feudal systems of Europe where owning lands was an elevation to one's station in life. The many nations of North America had no concept of owning the land. They were merely using it and left it as their needs dictated, and mostly did what they could to return it to its original pristine state when they moved on.

When World War II ended and a piece of land in the desert was designated as the new home of the many survivors of the Nazi death camps, Great Britain was the "owners" of the lands they called Palestine. It was also the British who armed the nomadic tribes they called Arabs to try and keep the Jewish state from forming, in spite of the efforts of many other allied nations and the United Nations to make it a reality.

The Nazis themselves had polluted the minds of those nomadic tribes to prevent many Jews from escaping to a safe sanctuary instead of facing death in the many camps built to exterminate them. Perhaps religion does play a part in all of this.

The Holy Roman Church probably did more to hurt the nations of Islam in their Crusades than all of the Israeli Jews did. And while I cannot simply condone retribution as just cause for killing innocent people, it does seem that a workable solution can be had if both sides can be made to own up to their own atrocities and agree to live with each other in harmony and peace.

After all, we in the United States have grown because of our acceptance and tolerance of the many immigrants who came here to find a new life of peace and prosperity. Tolerance only needs to be acceptance of the differences without changing one another's beliefs in regards to religion.

Homelessness in America

About 11 years ago, I became homeless when my wife had medical issues that were not being properly treated by her doctors. Bipolar disorder forced me to seek temporary shelter until such a time as my wife emotional state was stabilized. That took over one year of medications and therapy.

I am now homeless again, due to my inability to perform the work required by the employers I have contacted and interviewed with. I am still seeking work but have not had any success at all. Shall I blame the economy or the government? No, the fault lies with all Americans.

The problems of homelessness are issues that affect many both directly and indirectly. Your tax dollars that are used to house criminals are now being used to release prisoners onto the streets or into homeless shelters. This puts additional strain on  the resources that these shelters provide.

I am awaiting a disability hearing next month, and will gladly find a small place when I start receiving benefits. My physical and mental health have been in decline since I have arrived here. Conditions here will never improve to the point that I will feel comfortable in this environment. Now with the announcement that 35 additional inmates will be released into the general population, beds here at the shelter will become scarce.

Fortunately, I do have a bed on a first floor because my condition and surgeon's orders keep me from climbing stairs. I also take the ramps and elevators in public buildings because of the pain associated with lifting my legs and placing bearing weight on them.

For a man that has been so physically active most of my life, this is really a strong blow to me emotionally.  I fight depression on a daily basis, and force myself to do some exercise of my arms and upper body to compensate somewhat for my lack of leg mobility. I have not taken any pain medications yet, but lately it has occurred to me to do so, because it is becoming stressful and keeping me from getting a good night's rest.

I do notice that there is a difference in being homeless now than there was over a decade ago. Perhaps it is due to the depressed economy, but donations are down and hence less is available to those in need. Of course there is some federal government services available, but they are restricted to women with children and families. Here in Oregon, basic medical services are being rationed by lottery. If you are a single male, getting dental and/or vision care is not likely.

I have not had my vision checked in over 15 years and I am also in need of dental work. Unless I get approved for Social Security Disability, I will be stuck in the same place for quite some time.

But I am not sulking and feeling sorry for myself. While there are a number of men here who are quite content on being homeless, many others like myself are looking to better their positions in life and only need a bit of support to get them n their way.

Since being widowed back in 2010, my physical health has deteriorated along with my emotional well being. That has not stopped me from being positive and looking for a few hours work when it is available.  It is my physical condition that prevents me from doing much of the work that I am most qualified to perform.

With all of the promises made by Congress and the President regarding the Affordable Patient Protection Act, none of those promises have had any positive impact in the health care of anyone that I have met and spoken to. I do encourage others to speak out as I do and not let the majority of the public think that everything is okay. It's not!

Perhaps a change in administration will have a positive affect. But so long as the government keeps spending more and more in being the world's police force and offering aid to nations who don't even like us, we will remain in dire straits.

Blessings and thanks to those who read my blog and have made some small donations to support me in what I am doing. I trust that when I do get my benefits, I will be able to do the same for others. There are always those worse off than I am so I will always be charitable, even while I am in need myself. It just seems like the right thing to do.

Happy Birthday U. S. Constitution: Rest in Peace!

 As I sat down to write another post for the blog, it occurred to me that what really is troubling is the fact that most Americans relish the division in political party rhetoric. The travesty is that most are totally unaware of the divide and conquer plan that the global elitists have created and are about to see the fruits of their evil labors come to be realized.

Since the very founding of America, the bankers of Europe have tried to take this nation down. To control it completely it was necessary to first control the monetary system. What was once the People’s Money soon became the banker’s money.  Twice they failed but the third time was the charm.

With the creation of the Federal Reserve System, they finally rested complete control from Congress, who was mandated by the Constitution to be accountable and responsible for the monetary system. Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 5 of the Constitution states, “To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;” and that should never have been abridged through an Act of Congress. It was a blatant violation of the aforementioned Article, Section, and Paragraph of the Constitution.

Einstein once stated that, “The epitome of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” It has never been more obvious than it is today in the face of the Federal Reserve’s QE3 or Quantative Easing round three. The results of the last two attempts only caused more recession and devaluation of the dollar. Why would this time be any different?

In addition to the monetary crisis we now face, we are also being threatened by Islamic extremists who are being coddled by the usurper-in-chief now occupying the White House. Well, he occupies it when he is not campaigning for re-election, playing golf, or apologizing to our enemies.

I don’t think there are many sane people in America who will want four more years of abomination in an Obama Nation, however they are backing a third place loser to unseat an incumbent President. It has never happened before in history and it cannot in all probability happen now.

I wrote in a previous post about how Obama’s backers were doing all they could to keep Ron Paul off of the ballot. (See: Obama Issues "Kill Order" Regarding Ron Paul and Russia Prepares for Nuclear World War III) Even as early as 2010 they realized that Dr. Paul was the most serious threat to another term. Based on the way the Republican Party played into their scheme, the plan worked! And yet they were not satisfied, knowing that the independent voter would not back Mitt Romney nor Obama, so they got Gary Johnson, whose early exit from the GOP nominees to run instead of Ron Paul as the Libertarian Party choice.

The privately-owned major media pounds the two parties’ candidates daily into the minds of the American People, so that they have come to believe the lies as the gospel. When demonstrating this to them, I too am ostracized and ridiculed as a ‘Paul-Bot’ or ‘Paulite’ much the same as Dr. Paul himself was treated by that same media and his own Republican Party. Yet only Dr. Paul has demonstrated his honor and integrity in all of his years in Congress by always voting against bills that violated constitutional law.

Further, of all of the candidates past and present, only Ron Paul put forth a plan to reduce government spending, reduce the size of government, eliminate foreign aid, and build the nation’s defense while reducing the military presence in foreign lands. (See: Ron Paul’s Plan to Reduce the Cost of Government)

I was disappointed in how Dr. Paul was treated in 2008 by the GOP through all of the debates, and really thought that America would see through the farce and demand that he get equal time in 2012.  Why did they allow the persecution of this honorable statesman to continue?

Perhaps it is embarrassment to admit that they have been fooled for so long. It is hard for many to admit they have been duped. Soon they will realize that they have been had but it will be too late.

Who Wins?

With all of the media coverage of the 4th rate candidate Willard “Mitt” Romney as the favorite son of the Republican Party for 2012, it begs the question as to why that is so. After all, he finished behind eventual winner John McCain AND Mike Huckabee in 2008. So how can Americans support him now?

In a previous post titled, “Obama Issues Kill Order on Ron Paul” it would seem apparent that the Obama team is not concerned about Mitt Romney at all... in any way. Why not?

The answer may be as simple as this:  They are so much alike that people would rather keep what they have than take a chance on another with the same ideologies. Now most people who listen to him will disagree with that assessment, although their opinions generally are based on what they get from the privately-owned major media. Romney admits that he "just had to" bend to the left because while Governor, he felt pressured when dealing with a Democratic majority in the State Assembly. But now he wants all of us to trust that he will be a conservative President regardless of pressures, as if the president is under much less pressure than the Governor of the state of Massachusetts. While most of the media still supports and praises Barack Obama, Rupert Murdoch-owned Fox News spins the “party backed conservatives” as somehow being conservative and so it has adopted Romney and Santorum as their favorite sons.

Rick Santorum has made some remarks recently that demonstrates he is unfit for service to this country. His lack of concern for the needed characteristics of a President is evident. He told a questioner that, “If you want a conservative President then vote for Ron Paul.” and then recently, he lashed out at a NY Times journalist saying, “That's bullsh!t!” which of course made the network news. What the privately-owned major media did not report on was Santorum's lack of concern over his decisions and actions that cost American Veterans, here at home, to loose their lives. Santorum also has admitted that he voted for bailouts and supported unprovoked undeclared unilateral warfare, military actions, even though it was not approved by Congress until after the fact. Santorum stated that he “is a team player” and that is why he voted with the party. He also voted in favor of the unions and again used the excuse that it was good for his Pennsylvania supporters. What he didn't say was which supporters he was referring to. It is evident that it was the unions and not the workers. Maybe what is really  needed in American politics is someone who is not a team player, after all it has been the team players that have caused most of the problems in America.

Newt Gingrich, the self professed socialist, is quick witted with words of the moment and has lots of his own ideas about how to fix America, but he lacks integrity as his past shows. Infidelity in marriage and questionable ethics while Speaker of the House. Not that either of the other two aforementioned candidates have shown much more integrity or honesty in public service.

 Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich all truly believe, just as the Bush's did and Obama does, that unprovoked undeclared unilateral warfare is smart and right, that casualties of war are to be expected and by implication there are no innocent bystanders. Tell that to the more than one million dead Iraqi children. Tell that to a people, a culture, a world heritage, a country that lays destroyed. And now they are pounding the war drums with intentions of doing the same thing to Iran. Is it any wonder that America is the most feared and hated country on the surface of the Earth?

Now we come to why Ron Paul is silenced by party backed conservatives. Simply put, because he can and will dismantle much of the unconstitutional bureaucracy in government and return many of the decisions to the States where they belong. The left has ignored Dr. Paul by either saying he is unelectable or by saying he is too radical. His 35 year record of being elected speaks differently in volumes and to the ever more socialist left, radical means anyone that is a conservative. The privately-owned major media is under executive order not to mention or to make negative mention of Dr. Paul.  Dr. Ron Paul can easily win the RNC nomination and presidency in November, if RNC will stop rigging the vote all across the country and if Citizens will listen to facts and not the hyperbole being spewed out by the privately-owned major media.

He has pledged to cut spending by $1 Trillion in his first year and have a balanced budget by his third year. He vows to eliminate 5 cabinet departments, abolish the TSA and corporate subsidies. He will stop foreign aid and foreign wars. As he has stated many times, as President, he will seek the approval of Congress before committing troops to combat and will consult with the military leadership to create a strategy to decisively win a war if we become involved in one. He will bring home the troops from the Middle East rather than have them moved from Iraq to occupy a nearby foreign country.

Because of Dr. Paul's policy against the U.S. policing the world militarily, his detractors say he will destroy our military defenses by not being the lap dog for United Nations and NATO Globalist policies, and turn us into an isolationist nation. Obviously they either did not listen to him or they are just spinning it to suit their own agendas. Ron Paul will reinforce the national defenses and start by securing our borders. Standing armies are prohibited by the Constitution so there would be fewer troops required in times of peace.

The problem has been that we have not had times of peace at all since World War II. Besides Korea in the 1950's and Vietnam in the 1960's we were also in a 'cold war' with the Soviet Union until its demise in the 1980's, but by then we had established military bases around the globe, “protecting America” from foreign invasion. It seems to me this strategy is failing, just as is the case with the “war on drugs,” the “war on poverty,” and the “war on terrorism.” When there is no hostile enemy one is created in some false flag operation. Dr. Paul will stop that from happening again.

Opponents also claim that Ron Paul will allow the enemies of our ally Israel to develop nuclear weapons and destroy that nation. There is a problem with that logic because one of Islam's most holy sites sits right along side of the ruins of Solomon's Temple. I doubt that Iran will nuke it when that would draw the wrath of Muslims world-wide

The only weapons of mass destruction that the Bush Administration claimed that Saddam Hussein had were biological weapons given to him by Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush during their terms in office. Reagan and G.H.W. Bush also supplied the mujadeen (the Taliban) with Stinger missiles which they used against the Soviets during their occupation of Afghanistan.

It would seem on the surface that these groups hate us because of our liberties,  our Judeo-Christian ideologies, and our secular government. But they are angry because they have been exploited to no small degree. American corporations with State Department and CIA support, created dictatorships where there were valid democratic elected governments. Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi in Iran, and Manuel Noriega in Panama to name just a few.

 Given the short time that he had to address the questions about Islamic extremists during the debates, Ron Paul could not fully articulate what he meant when stating that these people were attacking Americans because we interfered in their nations. All of the war-mongers jumped on that as did the media, denouncing Ron Paul's foreign policy as dangerous to America and especially toward Israel.

Ask Israelis what they think about Ron Paul. Ask Iraqis, Iranians, Pakistanis, Libyans, Egyptians, Palestinians, Somalis. Ask our allies, Australia,  Canada, and the Scandinavian nations about his foreign policy. See if they concur with all of the Ron Paul detractors here in America. You may be surprised to hear or read what they have to say.

 I have been making these inquiries myself and was quite amazed at how many nations are looking toward this November's election and praying for Americans to elect Ron Paul. They love him!
And I do too.

A Challenge to Voters

Tuesday March 6 is being called Super Tuesday. Big deal. Most Americans just follow the analysis they get from the privately-owned major media, who obviously are controlled by people that have a major stake in the outcome of the election. And yet, as if by cue after all is said and done, the voters prove by the tally that they vote the party favorite most of the the time. Which is to say, they vote what they are told is best regardless of what is true.

According to others, when it comes to military defense and foreign aid, something must be wrong with Dr. Paul's thinking; but, has anyone seen how much of the military actually supports him? The graph is real and says it all. Only Ron Paul stands alone in not supporting undeclared unilateral preemptive warfare, but instead, favors diplomacy and commerce.

It would appear that when you actually see who the troops support, it is none other than Ron Paul! Now aren't you just a little surprised? I'm not. And that is because I have been listening to and following his spoken thoughts and his actions throughout the decades in Congress and while he worked around his medical practice. His dedication to the US Citizens is further demonstrated by keeping his oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution. His voting record in the House of Representatives proves that he truly practices what he preaches as a true conservative. He is a Statesman, the likes of which we have not seen in our lifetimes.

What is remarkable about Dr. Ron Paul is his ability to smile and laugh-off quite a bit of what his detractors say, while still maintaining his stand on the principles upon which our nation was formed. It is important to keep in mind that the reason the Constitution itself was written, was to allow the federal government a limited set of powers and those powers were to be divided into the three branches of government and keep them separated by a system of checks and balances. There were also very specific rules to establish the candidates and eventual choices for the Executive Branch.

If the security of the nation is at risk, as Dr. Paul says, there will have to be defenses in place to protect the American people which is a mandatory part of the national security requirement of government. But having military bases scattered all around the world, even in nations that are allies, is as Dr. Paul states, "Just plain wrong!"

All the other candidates from the GOP make Ron Paul out to be the one that is weak on defense. I lived through the war protests of the sixties; although, today's sentiments are similar, no one truly is willing to place the nation in harms way. The current furor has been whipped up and channeled through media spin and paid protesters. The Occupy Wall Street protesters and all the other occupy sit-ins that have been spawned from the media blitz are funded by the backers of continuous wars to gain profit.

So, lets summarize some of the solutions he stands by and then on to my challenge: Ron Paul is the only candidate who will cut the budget by $1 Trillion dollars in his first year in the White House. He will cut spending in areas that will have little or no impact on those that are on Social Security and Medicare and will return control of other welfare programs back to the states. He will defend America including its borders, but most of all, he will repair the economy starting with sound money that is based on asset values such as precious metals but not limited to just those.

There is no other candidate who understands that it is paramount to restore liberty to the States and to the Individual. There is no other candidate that can protect our sovereign rights as a nation and restore the U.S. Constitution.

So here is my challenge: To all the voters that will be choosing a candidate on Super Tuesday. I challenge you to make it a real Super Day by making Ron Paul the winner in all states, and really blow the media pundits out of the water. This proposed win for Dr. Ron Paul would be the best thing for all Americans that love life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Send a message to the rest of the country this Tuesday and make a revolutionary stand for freedom.

Process of Elimination: Newt Gingrich

It should not be a surprise to anyone that Mitt Romney is no longer the top pick of the GOP. His third-place finish behind John McCain in 2008 indicates that he wasn't the  party favorite then either. So now they, along with the privately-owned major media are pushing former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich as the one to beat Obama in 2012. But I question his integrity and so should you.

Infidelity with his first wife, asking her for a divorce while she was recuperating from surgery, and he was living with his third wife (Callista Bisek) in his apartment in DC at the time, and not paying bills for his wife and children. Can he be trusted to be faithful to We the People? I don't think so.

Gingrich also has to answer for his book deals with Rupert Murdoch's Harper Collins publishing company. Was it a $2.5 million or $4.5 million deal? Seems that Murdoch offered multi-million dollar book deals to other politicians in China and Great Britain, where he needed legislative support. Newt Gingrich is among that group that includes former British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. Seems that NBC complained about FOX TV being owned by a foreign national which is against US law. Newt also was criticized by his GOP peers and he dropped the lucrative $4.5 million advance in favor of a still quite generous royalty arrangement.

Gingrich claims to be a "hawk" regarding the US military, but he did not serve in the armed forces, instead obtained deferments to avoid the draft and service during the Vietnam War era. Remember that his current rival Ron Paul served as a Flight Surgeon in the United States Air Force, and Paul is opposed to much of the militarism that Gingrich supports.

And let us not forget those ads with Nancy Pelosi about global warming. As President, will he reduce taxes on profits only to add taxes to carbon emissions? I am not willing to elect him to find out.  Having a bit of "handicapping" experience, it serves the best interests of all concerned to pass on Gingrich, and look at why Ron Paul will make the best President for all Americans.


More on Newt Gingrich can be read here at http://www.realchange.org/gingrich.htm#adultery .

Democracy or Republic? Your Choice!

Parallels are being drawn in the media between the Tea Party Movement and the Occupy Wall Street mobs. So I thought I would do some research myself and see where these parallels are. What I find is quite contrary to what is portrayed by the privately-owned major media.

Where does the First Amendment end and public nuisance and disorderly conduct laws begin?  I cannot see where freedom to speak out has any bearing on defecating in public. Regardless of your opinions of the law enforcement department, those vehicles are paid for with tax dollars and not private investors funds.

Some of the banners are downright humorous. So long as the owner is cleaning up after his protesting canine, I see no problem here. But there are things that really are immoral and treasonous being done and I don't see the President or any Democrats speaking out. Most of them are praising these protests as the demonstration of democracy, the "American People" protesting against the "fat cats."

So tell me then how defacing the flag of America is a patriotic thing? Explain to me how this act demonstrates anything American? Because from where I sit this looks anti-American and that is without judgement about the person standing on our symbol of liberty. I would like one of those analysts or commentators to explain this action as anything else than what it truly is.


But they insist that these OWS protesters somehow have something in common with the Tea Party Movement protesters. Perhaps I am not aware of something that these analysts know?

So I went looking for Tea Party protests and found some interesting photos. In the very first photo I came upon, I saw a woman with an umbrella that had a sign on her abdomen.  She was protesting high taxes in Washington, D.C. not on Wall Street. The next photo I saw involved the U.S. flag. It demonstrates a contrast from the OWS protester that was standing on a flag.

These Tea Party protesters were carrying signs that protested the President and Congress. This one was calling for liberty and Constitutional law.  Again, it is a contrast to OWS not a parallel at all.  

Americans will have a choice with elections this month and again in 2012 when they must choose a President. These elections more than any others in this nation's history will be more important to the lives of every single individual that calls himself/herself "American." These election will determine whether we will restore the republic to a free and sovereign one, or will be surrender to the takeover and enslavement that economic collapse will produce

If the media is pushing a candidate I won't support that candidate. If the media is ignoring a candidate I will research that candidate and see if he or she is worth supporting based on their ideology but also on their record.  This is true for all levels of government, not just the federal government.

Like the Templar Knight said in the film, Indiana Jones: The Last Crusade, "Choose wisely!"

If Things Were Right

In the vision of our founders as is demonstrated by the careful word crafting in the documents that we now call Founding Documents, the explicit limits to federal government are plain. In all of them the rights to all were equal, not that all are equal. One who works for wages or starts their own business or trade is not equal to someone who feels those businesses and trades and workers all must pay support for them because they are entitled. Charity is voluntary not mandatory.

Freedom is something you must both earn and and pay for if you are to keep it. The rights of others cannot be infringed upon by you as you would have your rights not be infringe upon by others, without your wanting and willingness to take action to defend those rights. What right did you give to the federal government to use your tax dollars to give to foreign nations? And at what point did you feel obligated to fund "entitlement" programs for people that are not citizens or plain and simply lazy Americans who use excuses instead of brains or physical dexterity to at least earn their own keep?

Somewhere in our not so distant past we began to lose our rights. Property rights, individual rights, privacy rights, and most Constitutional rights were all systematically taken away and there wasn't hardly a heated public debate to defend those rights. The right to determine where our tax dollars are spent was something that was much simpler to understand when the Constitution limited taxation with apportionment and a budget had to be approved by the Representatives and the People of the many States were heard through the voices of those elected to that post of service. They aren't our leaders at all, they are our followers. If they are not following our lead then we need to remedy the problem.

If things were right in this country, our currency would be stable regardless of what other nations currencies are worth. It would based on a standard weight of tangible asset whose worth is based on real industrial value and not a formula that requires a four-year degree in Economics.

If things were right we would think $100.00 as a weekly wage was doing pretty good. Fuel prices would be less than 25 cents per gallon and a brand new American built automobile would cost less than $5,000.00 with all of the optional extras.

If things were right, schooling would be the total responsibility of the parents and not the state. Home schooling, charter schools, and eventually no schools at all. All the-libraries in the world made available on DVD and online for the world to gain knowledge. The classics as told be those who wrote them and not just the opinions of those teachings written by others. Discussions and debates can take place at meeting places or online since that enables communications across the continents.

If things were right we can easily transition from fueled vehicles into electric powered vehicles with technology that even today is making that possible but at a premium price that few can afford to pay.  Sound and stable currency, lower taxes and easing of regulatory obstacles that add unnecessary fees and certifications to manufacturers would make employment opportunity always there for a younger generation to go out into the world to seek their dreams and their goals.

If things were right I would have work to do and would be self-sufficient instead of desperately trying to produce the rent for this month. I also would be typing less and talking more as the host of an online talk show. But reality is not the same as being right.


If things were rights there would be simple treatments to cure cancer and other illnesses that are so often fatal. If only things were right.

It is the right and the patriotic duty for all American sovereign individuals to voice their grievances to those who represent them in government for remedy. And that remedy begins when we cast our ballots to choose just who will represent us and carry forth our wishes to a compliant and not a complacent federal government.

Democrats and Republicans as political parties have taken away out ability to be fairly represented. Those who do not embrace  and expound the party ideology are removed from candidacy with support by the privately-owned major media, who spoon feed the public with the party choices while they ostracize the nominees who do not toe that party line.

I have worked for and have been involved with government at all levels and feel there is no level that is not corrupted by lobbying and funding from special interests. While the media will point fingers at individuals, groups and corporations, the problem gets worse and never better.

The next presidential election in 2012 will be noted as the most important one in the history of the United States of America. It will determine whether America will rise from the ashes like a phoenix, or crash and burn and become absorbed by the global elitist who have been taking over the world through their banks and the corporations they created.

If we keep voting the same party people into office, we will lose our sovereignty and become slave labor to the statists.

Charitable: Government: With Other People's Money!

Has it ever occurred to you that if you didn't have such high taxes, you can afford to donate to the cause(s) that you have the most compassion for? Instead of sending money to foreign countries (who mostly hate us anyway) you and your neighbors could get together and help that family in your neighborhood that faces eviction or foreclosure? As a child I witnessed such kindness in my hometown.

With all of the political rhetoric from both dominant parties who say they want to take care of Americans in need, why are so many more Americans  in need, without jobs or homes? Maybe it's because our elected Representatives send all of those dollars to Afghanistan, Egypt, Iraq, Pakistan, and on and on. Add to that the "charity" called bailouts and stimulus given to banks and corporations that are "too big to fail.

If that money was  distributed evenly to every American citizen, everyone would have a decent home and drive a new American automobile,  could afford college tuition for our children, provide health care for all of our families and have a retirement account that  Congress won't pilfer.

Many of my friends tell me that there is nothing we can do about that except "hope" that a new administration and Congress with make the "changes" to our mutual benefit. As I recall, the last Presidential Election , won by Barack Obama on a platform of hope and change a promise of openness and transparency is how we arrived here in the present.

Well, I hope you are all happy with that change. Just remember that it will take more than change to pay all of your bills. You will need dollars too.