MISSION STATEMENT

While most Blogs are nothing but a vent for the frustration of right thinking Amiricans, this is not my cause. I am building a link to help gather resources and take a proactive stance against the tide of socialism. My posts are meant to inform you and, when possible, help you better explain and defend our principles. We are all leaders, we are all FREEDOM FIGHTERS!

Our goal is to help coordinate as many local political groups as possible in order to create a strong and organized local movement. We would suggest that you either start a meetup group or join one that's already in place. For help go to http://www.meetup.com/ or 912 Project USA.com / For The Sake of Liberty! . With your effort and support we can become a strong force against the socialization of our great nation. If you have a suggestion or want information, please e-mail me at flounders70@aol.com .

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Stuck in the Middle Again

The Left wing mantra, as constantly drilled into our heads by every single self proclaimed “progressive” with a microphone, is wrapped around the “rebuilding” of the middle class. The goal, as I understand it, is to create a nation of laborers so that we (America) can take the throne as the international leaders in industry. If you call yourself a progressive then I would love it if you would either tell me how I am wrong or explain how this works.

Based on my understanding of the progressive goal, I have some questions, accompanied by comments, for you lefties…

1. How do you intend to expand the middle class? The only way to force the expansion of the middle class is to either give money to the lower class or take money from the upper class, or both. This leads to the next question..

2. Who has the right, or power, to force the expansion of the middle class? Having read the Constitution, several times, I can tell you that the official answer is: Nobody! However, obviously the progressives have shown little respect for that particular document. This being the case, the only entity with the power to force an expansion of the middle class is the Federal Government (through the IRS).

3. Why would you want to expand the middle class? I have an answer for this question as well: Power! Other than that, creating a massive middle class makes no sense to me at all. It seems to me that you would want to help raise middle classers up to the upper class, thus expanding the upper class. If the majority of Americans are rich, they would have much more money to dedicate to charity. This would also offer more jobs so that the poor would have more opportunities as well.

4. Why would you want a nation of laborers? I can make $10 an hour building widgets, or I can sell 10 widgets an hour and make $20 an hour without the physical stress. Meanwhile, I can be providing jobs for the 10 guys who are doing the labor in some poverty stricken country, thus helping to create a burgeoning economy where there was none. Where is the evil in that?


You see, the widespread belief is that the right supports the rich and the left stands for the little guy. I am willing to accept this premise, are you? Well, both parties desire power, right? Logic then dictates that, in a Democratic Republic, those who gain power through the support of the little guy would necessarily need the majority to be little guys. Adversely, the group whose power depends on the support of the rich would need a majority of rich people. As one who has spent 40 years as the little guy, I am ready to try that rich thing now, therefore, I will be supporting those who need me to get rich.

We right wing not jobs would love to clear this whole mess up, therefore, I invite you, my political opponents, to explain where I am wrong. More to the point, I would love some justification for your political support.

KEEP IN MIND. This is the arena of ideas, politicians under every label have proven time and time again that they do not adhere to ideology. In this arena, there are no parties, just individuals seeking social cohesion.

Friday, October 22, 2010

Don't Blame Obama, Blame the Idiots We Elected in 2006

It’s time I set the record straight for our myopic liberal friends. You morons keep claiming that the mess we are in is because of Bush and that Obama just hasn’t had enough time to fix it. If you are one of these part time, media informed, Dems, I understand your ignorance, but, If you are perpetuating this nonsense then you are a complete dirt bag.

The hard facts only serve to prove just how dangerous it can be to give the left wing nut-jobs control over our media and our economy. While it is true that the economy started its downturn during the Bush era, he only had a small part in the problem. The truth is that the Democrats took over both houses back in 2006 and the president does not write laws, nor does he control the pocket book.

The toughest thing for the left to choke on is the fact that this entire recession happened under their control. I challenge you to look up ANY economic, social or political graph and watch the upward climb shift to a downward collapse upon the election of 2006. Let me give you a couple of examples..

During the republican era, one dollar worth of gasoline got Americans farther than ever before. The price averaged less than $2.00 per gallon and cars had reached new levels of efficiency. Since the Democratic era, gasoline has averaged $3.00 per gallon with marginal increases in fuel mileage.

While the Republicans were in charge, unemployment broke modern era records. After Clinton explained that his unemployment record was perfect, since 5% of Americans would simply never work, the Republicans got the level down to 4.7% by the 2006 election. The following year, after the Democratic congress took control, unemployment began to rise, only to reach levels near 10% (more than twice the worst of the Republican era).

The Republican era also held the record for home ownership at more than 70% but averaged 69%. Since the election of 2006, home ownership has fallen steadily to 66%. The left wing attempt to recover this loss by making credit easier for those who did not earn it was, in fact, mostly responsible for the credit collapse that led to this recession. Their other responses, borrowing money from Americans to give money to Americans, have served as the driving force for the continued collapse of our economy.

This goes on forever, the facts do not lie. I admit that things are a bit more complicated than I’ve explained but I am willing to debate the details if you dispute me. So, as for you lefties, you have tried your ideas for four years, since things were actually good, and you have screwed up everything. Just take some friendly advice and SHUT THE HELL UP!

The other thing I get a kick out of is the “Progressive” mentality that the right is trying to knock America backwards 100 years. For you progressives, this seems like the opposite of progress so you think it would be horrible. Well, let’s look at things 100 years ago compared to what you’ve done to us today.

During the beginning of the 20th century, immigrants were flooding into our country at a rate of roughly 20% per year. Almost 2,000,000 legal immigrants entered in 1909 and we, as a nation, still maintained 3% unemployment. Now the number of unemployed is 300% higher.

GDP was on an unbelievable incline during the early 1900s and has only fallen during periods of total Democratic control; including the great depression and our current recession. There were no income taxes during that time and America became the only country in the world to farm millionaires, that is, more were made here than in the rest of the world combined. Today, the Dems have created a tax system that punishes that kind of success and they proudly work toward forcing anyone who is successful back down to the middle class.

The truth is that left wing ideology has failed everywhere, and every time, it has been tried. Just look at Europe, Canada, South America, and the rest of the world who has run out of other people’s money to spend and are looking at us for help. In fact, look at the Democrats in control who have done exactly the same thing.

Friday, October 15, 2010

SERIOUSLY?

Today I decided to risk my sanity and subject myself to a full day of left wing talk radio. I tuned in to American Left on my satellite radio, duct taped my head, and began to work on a few of my projects. Needless to say, my neighbors frequently felt compelled to remind me that the morons talking on the radio could not hear my arguments, regardless of how loud I was.

Since I was unable to convey my ration, reason, and logic to the intellectually challenged elitists who preached their common senselessness, I’ve decided to vent my grievances here. If I have learned anything, however, I have a better understanding of how the libs feel when Rush glosses over the in-depth explanations of his ideology.

There were many statements made that made my skin crawl but one penetrated me like no other. There was a long conversation about the new Tea Party movement and the rise of neo-conservatism. These self proclaimed progressives were convinced that the right wing surge was a “NAZI-like” build up of “fascist socialism”. Yes, the leftists think that Republicans are like Hitler and that they crave socialism. HAVE THESE IDIOTS BEEN PAYING ATTENTION?

It’s not as if their own literature is loaded with socialist propaganda or anything, wait, it’s just like that. Well, it’s not as if the progressives have ever shown any appreciation for Marxism, in fact, they are rooted in the writings of Marx and take pride in being “anti-capitalist”. So clearly the Republicans favor the Hitler campaign agenda which included; nationalized public transportation, heavy federal funding for education, single payer health care, renewable energy, abortion rights, tax increases for the rich, strong labor unions, and social justice.

Seriously, how can these so called intellectuals profess that the right wing is working toward fascist socialism with a straight face? It is freedom, liberty, and opportunity which we crave, not fascism and defiantly not socialism.. morons!

So if you call yourself progressive, liberal, independent, or even conservative, I challenge you to explain and defend your ideology against me. After all, if you support Obama and his agenda, you may have very good reasons for this, but, you are very much un-American! If, on the other hand, you call yourself conservative, you need to know why and be prepared to defend that stance as well.

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Food Stamps: Setting the Record Straight

I understand (and share) the commonly held level of disrespect for those who live their lives as wards of the state. That is, those who refuse to pull their weight as they collect welfare, food stamps, and even child support. I also share the desire to force welfare recipients to pass the same drug tests that working folks are subjected to in order to receive the desired benefits. For that matter, I agree that WIC recipients should be held to a certain level of nutritional value as they are being partially supported by taxpayer funds in order to feed their children.

Where I differ from those who I would otherwise agree with is in the area of food stamps. Currently there is a movement towards forcing nutritional value on food stamp recipients. The first step is to ban the purchase of “sugary soft drinks” on the IBT card. I feel that this attempt to control the diets of food stamp recipients is asinine.

In order to support my case I must first explain something that most people do not understand about food stamp distribution. For a great number of the food stamp recipients, the stereotype of “ward of the state” applies, however, this is not nearly universal. Food stamps are also allocated to disabled veterans. In cases where a veteran is in the process of rehabilitation and unable to work, the state provides food stamps as part of the package.

Think about this; for roughly twenty years I was paying into the tax base, handing a portion of my meager earnings to the government as part of the huge safety net. At one point I was making better than $60K annually while paying one third of my income into taxes and one third into child support (neither by choice). The remaining pittance covered my basic needs and left virtually nothing to put away for a rainy day.

As the government ripped one third of my check out from under me, I was given no power over what they did with the money. I could not tell the IRS that certain expenditures were potentially hazardous to our economy or even our collective health. They invested poorly and grew an unprecedented level of debt.

Meanwhile, I enlisted in the military, was seriously injured, and was medically separated. My injury prevented me from working in any field where my skills and experience would provide an opportunity. As a result of this disability, I am enrolled in the Voc-Rehab program and currently working toward an engineering degree. Once I have achieved this degree I intend to re-enter the workforce and once again become a contributor. In the mean time, I am receiving state food stamp benefits in order to help the ends meet.
Is it fair that the government can store my earnings, against my wishes, and when I need some of that money back they can tell me how the money can be spent. Had I been allowed to invest my own money and build a nest egg, I would not need food stamps and I would be able to eat as I choose. So how long will it be before our government decides to take everyone else’s money and allocates their own idea of a healthy diet to you?

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Latteral Blast

For most of America, politics is something that other people worry about. The changes in laws and policies, as laid out by our governing body, have a very gradual effect on normal people. So gradual is this effect that most people cannot identify these changes other than by expressing how different things were when they were young. Much like the tremors that emanate from deep inside the Earth along various fault lines, political tremors usually get some amount of public attention but only for a very short time.
These subtle shifts take place as political tectonics create pockets of pressure and then release only to temporary settle until pressure rebuilds. As with our continental plates, the political landscape bears the scars of generations of social upheavals and powerful opposing forces. Where our nation holds the evidence of this constant geographic struggle in the form of mountains and fault lines, our people also carry with them the results of every decision ever made on a governing level.

You see, rarely does one generation get to actually witness the creation or destruction of a mountain. This is a slow and constant process that seems nearly invisible to the untrained individual. Scientists, on the other hand, know what to look for and are watching carefully as the Earth changes shape right before their eyes.

Politics work the same way. For those who know not what to look for, things do not seem to change much. For those who are tuned in, things seem to be changing relatively rapidly. In fact, the minor tremors and subtle shifts seem to be hitting at a record pace.

When Mt Saint Helens erupted back in the 1980s, it had been dormant for quite some time. As the eruption approached, the tell tale tremors and the burps of smoke suggested that something was about to happen. Suddenly the signs began to slow down significantly and volcanologist David A. Johnston was sent to investigate. With Johnston on the mountain, the massive volcano gave way to the pressures beneath it and the giant mountain blew itself apart. Mr. Johnston’s camera was found and pictures of the approaching pyroclastic flow were developed but as for David Johnston, well, “Vancouver!, Vancouver!, this is it!” were his final words and his body was consumed by the Earth.

So the question is: Do you want to be David Johnston and have a building named after you? Or do you want to be the guy that sees this thing coming and pushes others out of its way? The tremors will slow, the smoke will thin, and the noise will fall silent just before the landscape undergoes a catastrophic change that will alter the political landscape forever. Please spread the word, let your friends know that something is brewing and things may soon be different. Pay attention to the signs but may more attention to the signs that seem to go away!

Monday, October 4, 2010

My Dictionary

We hear a barrage of terms thrown at us like FREEDOM, LIBERTY, CONSERVATIVE, LIBERAL, REPUBLICAN, DEMOCRAT, and many others, but do we really understand what they mean? One of the big ones is “anti-American” and this term is embraced by all side every political debate as a weapon against the others.
Having spent a short time sitting at a bar debating with the lovely young lady sitting next to me, I realized just how muddy political terms really are. I feel compelled to try to filter (or at least skim) some of this mud out of our political pool. Please allow me to define, in my own words, some mainstream political jargon..
These definitions are strictly traditionalist and do not apply to the bastardidation perpetuated by our current political parties.

REPUBLICAN: A government in which a constituency chooses a representative who will make government decisions on behalf of the people, regardless of the popularity of said decisions. This is an outcome based system where the representative is given the benefit of the doubt during his term but is held responsible for his decisions during the elections. This is how most corporations are operated as the boss makes executive decisions but can be deposed if the company shows a loss.

DEMOCRATIC: A government in which each decision made must be done so with popular approval so that everyone takes part in running things. One problem with democracy is that only the majority gets the power. I have never heard of a successful business that is run as a democracy. Imagine if the employees of your company had the right to vote for the rules, the pay would be high, productivity would be low and vacations would be long, but the profit would never be made and the place would collapse.

FREEDOM: If you think you are a liberal then you totally misunderstand this principle. Freedom means that you get to choose how you want to live as long as you do not impede the freedom of someone else. You are not guaranteed the freedom from insults, failure, homelessness, poverty, illness or ignorance. You have the freedom provide a service for whatever price you and the consumer agree on without a portion of that money being taken from you to provide for any other citizen. You also have the freedom to be as useless as you might choose to be.

PATRIOTIC: No, dissent is not the highest form of patriotism. Your forefathers gave their lives to give you the freedom to screw up your own, it is far from patriotic to give up that freedom in the name of security. Patriotic means loving all that your country is made of and working to keep it that that way. Progressives need not apply, you are far from patriotic.

UNAMERICAN: To be “Americanistic” you must be willing to get your hands dirty but eager to find an easier way. You must be willing to accept that score must be kept or the game is not worth playing. You must know that companies are not greedy, consumers are. No company can force you to buy their product without government involvement and the American government is not supposed to have that much power. You must acknowledge that no amount of money is “too much”, and that we all have the same chance to go get that money. You must see that you have no right to anything that must be provided by someone else, that includes health care. If you disagree with any of these premises then you are probably UnAmerican.

CONSERVATIVE/LIBERAL: Conservatives want to make laws telling you what you cannot do, Liberals want to make laws telling you what you can, and must, do.

LIBERTERIAN: These folks just want to be left alone. I lean that way but I feel we need a small amount of governing to keep things working.

LAWYER: One who cannot add 2 and 2 so they have the second two stricken from the evidence and win by default. These guys usually become Democratic politicians.

Feel free to ask about any other definitions in which you may not be clear.
 
Custom Search