A while back I was involved in a Facebook war with a very strong supporter of Bernie.

I tried unsuccessfully to communicate that when it came to the “Rich” and “Big Business”, the group that he strongly had an issue with, that I agreed with him. I called them “Corporatists.”

I used a different name, but it was the same enemy.

I think it is important to use clear terms for a group to make it easier to identify the underpinnings of the problem.  In that way, we can arrive at solutions.

Conflating the Rich with Big Business and declaring them the enemy of the little guy does not really lend itself to what is going on.  What “Rich” do you mean?  How much do you have to make to be “Rich”? Is everyone that makes more than you “Rich”? And what is the problem with “Big Business” anyway?

What Rich?

As an example, on the Forbes 500 Bilionaires list for 2016, 221 or 44.2% that were on the list last year are off it now.  198 new people joined the list that were not on it the year before.  I am only trying to point out that the group changes. Things happen in a dynamic world. So what Rich? This year’s list?  Last year’s list? All of them? Does it matter?

How Rich?

The top 1% of income earners pay about 45% of all taxes.  The top 20% pay about 85% of all taxes.  The bottom 80% of income earners pay about 15% and the bottom 60% will pay about 2%.  Approximately 45% of Americans pay 0 tax.

How much do have to earn to be in the top 1%? $450k. Top 20%? $112k. So if you make $45k and marry someone making $70k, combined are you now the rich? Now do you hate yourself?

My point is this: What rich are you mad at?

Does all Big Business suck and stick it to us?

If you are looking at your iPhone while you should be reading this ask yourself does Apple or Google suck? Apple’s market capitalization was about $495B and Google about $498B.  Are they Rich? Too Rich?

For me, the problem is not about the “Rich” or “Big Business” but about the system that allows business to inbreed with the government by using lobbyists and money to get favorable treatment and government funds back into their own pockets at the same time the politicians get rich. Members of Congress make about $175k a year (top 8%), yet, they leave office millionaires.

And how does government earn its money? It doesn’t. It takes it from people who do earn it through taxes and gives it to others.

These corporatists are the real enemy.  Von Mises would call what they do “Interventionalism”, a system that interferes with the free market system (which we can get into later) and spawns socialism.

The thing to remember is that governments have the power of Coercion and Control and combined with the corporatist system, it is the real enemy to all of us.

Common ground.

The Democratic party is a party of tyranny.

They want power above all else.  Why?

Because they want to control you.  Why?

Because they are ideologues and if they control you they control everything.

You will become a tool for them.  And a fund raiser.

It is your tax dollars that they are after.  Why?

Because it will go into their pockets and into the pockets of their friends.

Just ponder for a moment how HRC and Bill, who do not have jobs, have such a high net worth, as much as $31.3 million.

(As an aside, does that put them among the “wealthy” and are they paying their “fair” share? Has HRC actually been contributing more to taxes because she is not paying enough to fund our military, etc.? Has she in fact been following the tax rules but “feels” saddened because she is not paying enough? Unlike the mean Trump who is not contributing to our country? Hmm.)

We have all heard Bill speak and unfortunately, we have all heard Hillary speak.  Would you pay $250k to $500k to listen to either of them?

Put another way, when was the last time a foreign government gave you a MILLION dollars on your birthday? When was the last time a foreign county asked you to speak for $12 MILLION dollars?  (I get it if you don’t speak Moroccrian or is that Arabic?).

So it may be influence pedaling.

Ideologues will stop at nothing to get what they want.  No matter how trivial it may same, everything is part of a plan.

Take ducks for instance.

At Trump rallies, back in August “people” appeared in Donald Duck outfits to stalk and taunt him about his tax returns.  Here. And also here.

All dutifully reported by the MSM.

Where did this come from? HRC of course! (thank you for the head’s up Project Veritas.)

It is all deceit and plunder.

It is all about power, and all of us will suffer.

Think about it! We are running out of time.

 

 

O boy!

Worse than I thought.

Video Part II

 

“Q:  … I’ve read reports in Colorado — and you’ve seen these before, I’m sure — dead people voting, and ballot box stuffing, and people voting for family members, and people who are not eligible to vote somehow casting ballots for years.  How concerned are you about this?

MR. EARNEST:  Not at all.”

Hmmm.  Dead people voting?

Well not really.  Unless you count the 19 in Virgina.

Or the 265 in California.  And some get to vote year after year.

Or Colorado.

But, Mark that is not very many. So what?

Ok, lets add run-of-the-mill voter fraud.  (Fake names, dates of birth, addresses, etc.)

In Indiana, the Indiana Voter Registration Project, funded in part by a Democrat led group, Patriot Majority USA, has been closed down and an investigation is ongoing in 56 of the 92 counties.  Of course, after 45,000 folks have been registered.

Texas? Texas.  Mail-in ballots.

Florida?  Well, you know Hillary said hurricane Matthew was so bad because of climate change. And if Hillary said it, it must be true.

So before any landfall, her campaign started pushing for an extension of voter registration.  It wouldn’t be fair otherwise.  So an Obama appointed federal judge is telling the state they have to extend.  As the article notes, “…a victory for Florida Democrat party…”

Democrats.

Are they done?  Sadly, the party of tyranny is never done.

Felons? Yup.

People that should be deported?  (Oops! My bad, no fingerprints!  We made them citizens instead.  O well, I guess they vote!) Only about 1,800 though.

New citizens?  Lets just work overtime and process as many as we can before the election. Go Team!

Already have a green card? Go Team!

All Democrat initiatives to flood as many Democrat voters into the system as they can, by whatever means they can to ensure HRC gets elected.

Democrats.

Is this what we need?

 

In  a recent post, I said, “Progressives always lie”.

That is becasue they are interestested in only one thing: Power.

I don’t think most people realize to what extent they are willing to go to acquire it.

If Wikileaks over the past week has not clued you in to their cesspool, then check out this video:

 

Video from Project Veritas

Wilson – Woodrow or Dick?

SJWs please note – Before you dismiss Wilson as one of those old dead white males you have heard so much about remember that he is on your side so it is ok.

The Declaration of Independence is the foundational document of our country. The Constitution was erected from the bedrock of this document and formed our system of government.  Never in the history of the world was a government formed like ours, born from revolution a government from the consent of the governed: American Exceptionalism.

But what if you don’t believe in American Exceptionalism?  What if you don’t like that the Constitution established a system of government based on a separation of powers? What if you want power that is not constrained? What would you do?

As  I mentioned in an earlier post, you would: “Begin at the beginning, and go on till you come to the end: then stop.”

For Wilson, the beginning was a thought that government inefficiencies could be cured by study of the new science of administration.  People were spending too much time thinking about “constituting” governments and not enough time on running them.

In July of 1887, as a college professor he wrote a dreadful essay on the topic. The link is here, but please drink a lot of coffee before reading.

Long story short, he advocated for science to develop more efficient methods of instituting laws, using smooth professionals to administer it. He believed that “…in the oversight of the daily details…and means of government, public criticism is of course a clumsy nuisance, a rustic handling delicate machinery.”

Why a rustic?  Because back when the Declaration and Constitution were written things were simple.

Why delicate machinery? Because now things are complex.  So complex that old documents no longer apply.

Where he is getting all of these great inspirations?  Socialist Europe (primarily Prussia and France).

In his thinking to fully implement this “administration” you need professionals, experts; people who were highly educated and skilled in science and who could understand the complexities of the world and administer laws without the cumbersome dictates of the Constitution to slow them down.

But you could not administer laws by moving around checks and balances provided by the Constitution directly, the clods in the public may not like that. Instead, you should start by kicking the legs out by attacking the Declaration.

In 1911, President Wilson, gave  a speech  where he stated: “If you want to understand the real Declaration of Independence, do not repeat the preface.”  Because the Declaration “…as I recollect, did not mention any of the issues of the year 1911.”  It really is just a listing of grievances against King George which no longer apply and the preface is just not relevant. Individual rights are for simpler times, but we are now in complex times.

Indeed, the Declaration is a problem for Progressives. To Progressives there is no higher power than government, and only it can bestow rights.

If in the “preface” the Declaration talks of rights provided to us by God, then it has got to go.  To Progressives God is competition!  This can be seen currently in the undermining of the 1st Amendment and it flows from Wilson.

If you toss out the “Preamble” of the Declaration and disregard the old list of grievances that no longer apply, what do you have? Nothing really.

And if you have a Constitution built on nothing, then these so-called checks and balances established in the systemic construction of our government are built on – well, air.

And if you don’t really have checks and balances, then it is easier to increase the power of the rulers by using a mechanism of administration.

And if administrators can make the rules, enforce the rules and review conflicts with the rules – well that is the very definition of tyranny.

This is what Wilson was about, and why he is the father of the Progressive movement.  He is the starting point of our 100 years of crap (cutting TR some slack for the moment).

He is not done however, because for Progressives it is never done, but for now lets say:

Wilson – 0                 Dick – 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On this day in 1787 the Constitution was signed. While it would still take time for it to be ratified, this document, setting out a new form of government, giving rise to the term “American Exceptionalism”, was truly amazing.

So Happy Constitution Day!

But, we can not yet leave the topic of the Declaration of Independence which is the rock upon which the Constitution was built.

One of the pervasive criticisms I hear about the Declaration and the Constitution is that they were written a long time ago (O, and by slaveholders so it is all trash, but I will get to that topic later).  The world has changed, technology has changed, words have changed so these documents by old, dead, white men no longer has any relevance to our times.  Quaint and all but really, lets just move forward.

That logic is the bait for the trap the jaws of which we now find ourselves in.

In answer to that criticism I submit the following:

“About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceeding restful. It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well disregard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter.”

“If all men are created equal, that is final.”

“If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final.”

“If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final.”

“No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backwards toward the time where there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. ”

“Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress.  They are reactionary.  Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient. than those of the Revolutionary fathers.”

I wish I had said that, but it was Calvin Coolidge in a speech for July 4th in 1926.

The enemies of the Declaration and the Constitution pervert the meanings of words and call themselves Progressives.  But as the above excerpt shows they are really reactionaries.

They are not interested in liberties, they are interested in power.

They don’t say, “Hey everybody, we want to go back to a time where we control you by using coercion and compulsion.” Instead they say,”We are Progressive. We want to move forward and away from these old ideas written by men, who owned slaves, who did not let women vote and who are basically super moldy. Things have changed, we need new answers to new human problems and these guys are, well, just a drag.”

Progressives.

Well, if you ever checked out Ecclesiastes (and if you haven’t you should it’s short) you will know that there is nothing new under the sun.

The principles in the Declaration and the Constitution are timeless.  They don’t change because a few years go by. Your IV amendment rights to be secure in your “…papers, and effects,…” don’t go away because your “paper” is now electrons and your “effects” are now computers.

Their real purpose is reactionary control so they have told a lie.

And Progressives always lie.

They have to.

But to show that takes time, so next time we will try to answer the related question:

President Wilson: Woodrow or Dick?