Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Fourth Reich

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    This sums it all up. Ive been saying this for years...

    Some people have the vocabulary to sum up things in a way you can
    understand them. This quote came from the Czech Republic. Someone over there
    has it figured out, we have a lot of work to do.


    "The danger to America is not Barrack Obama but a citizenry capable
    of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier
    to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the
    necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to
    have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more
    serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming
    the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
    fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barrack Obama,
    who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude
    of fools such as those who made him their president.
    Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

    "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

    (more comments in my User Profile)
    russbo.com


    Comment


    • #77
      Treat people like you would like to be treated, and get rid of the political correctness climate. This alone would solve a number of issues.

      As the saying goes "five percent more intelligence and the World would be a better place"

      Comment


      • #78
        Deer Uwe, didnt Georg Freidercih H"egel said that the ethics of nointerference is not enough and that trough the negation of the isolation of the individual we can by the mean of the dialetic reach the living universal concept of law.

        For instance with Anima L, ethics is not enough and we have to legislate. A step where Austrria might be bit further, though...
        Namo Guan Yin Pusa / Dont create suffering / Dont harm animals!

        Comment


        • #79
          Some of Hegel's followers interpreted him to be left wing liberal, and eventually spawned into the concept of Marxism. We all know where that got the world. And some of us can see how Obama is leading us back to it.

          Good post Liu. Finally, something appropriate. As for the animals, well, I think the French treat their animals better than the Austrians. They allow them into their restaurants...
          Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

          "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

          (more comments in my User Profile)
          russbo.com


          Comment


          • #80
            I was talking to Maestro the other day about George Soros, and his potential involvement in the election of Obama. I had also mentioned to him about Soro's purchase of a large amount of shares of a Brazilian oil company, which occurred a few days before Obama granted an oil exploration and drilling lease in the Gulf (which was a few months after he had stopped all leases to other companies after the major oil spill down there). Lots of shady stuff, but for me to write about all of his nonsensical and dishonest dealings, would require another website and far too much work for me to even desire to do.

            Here's an email (source unknown) which does explain some of the Soros / Obama connection. I post this for Maestro's sake, as we had discussed this at length just a few days ago.

            This is very interesting material. Glen Beck has been developing material to show all the ties that Soros has through the nation and world along with his goals. This article is written by Steve Kroft from 60 Minutes. It begins to piece together the rise of Obama and his behavior in leading the nation along with many members of Congress (in particular the Democrats, such as the election of Pelosi as the minority leader in Congress).

            Interesting read on George Soros

            If you have wondered where Obama came from and just how he quickly moved from obscurity to President, or why the media is "selective" in what we are told, here is the man who most probably put him there and is responsible. He controls President Obama's every move. Think this is absurd? Invest a few minutes and read this.. You won't regret it.

            Who is Obama? Obama is a puppet and here is the explanation of the man or demon that pulls his strings. Its not by chance that Obama can manipulate the world. I don't think he knows how to tie his shoe laces. After reading this and Obama's reluctance to accept help on the oil spill you wonder if the spill is part of the plan to destroy the US? "In history, nothing happens by accident. If it happened, you can bet someone planned it."/ Franklin Delano Roosevelt

            Who Is George Soros? He brought the market down in 2 days. Here is what CBS' Mr. Steve Kroft's research has turned up. It's a bit of a read, and it took 4 months to put it together. "The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States . "George Soros"

            George Soros is an evil man. He's anti-God, anti-family, anti-American, and anti-good." He killed and robbed his own Jewish people. What we have in Soros, is a multi-billionaire atheist, with skewed moral values, and a sociopath's lack of conscience. He considers himself to be an elitist World class philosopher, despises the American way, and just loves to do social engineering and change cultures.

            Gy?? Schwartz, better known to the world as George Soros, was born August 12, 1930 in Hungary. Soros' father, Tivadar, was a fervent practitioner of the Esperanto language invented in 1887, and designed to be the first global language, free of any national identity. The Schwartz's, who were non-practicing Jews, changed the family name to Soros, in order to facilitate assimilation into the Gentile population, as the Nazis spread into Hungary during the 1930s.

            When Hitler's henchman Adolf Eichmann arrived in Hungary, to oversee the murder of that country's Jews, George Soros ended up with a man whose job was confiscating property from the Jewish population. Soros went with him on his rounds.

            Soros has repeatedly called 1944 "the best year of his life." 70% of Mr. Soros's fellow Jews in Hungary, nearly a half-million human beings, were annihilated in that year, yet he gives no sign that this put any damper on his elation, either at the time or indeed in retrospect" During an interview with "Sixty Minute's".

            Steve Kroft, Soros was asked about his "best year."

            KROFT: My understanding is that you went out with this
            protector of yours who swore that you were his adopted godson.

            SOROS: Yes. Yes.

            KROFT: Went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of
            property from your fellow Jews, friends and neighbors.

            SOROS: Yes. That's right! Yes.

            KROFT: I mean, that sounds like an experience that would send
            lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many, years.
            Was it difficult?

            SOROS: No, not at all. Not at all, I rather enjoyed it.

            KROFT: No feelings of guilt?

            SOROS: No, only feelings of absolute power.


            In his article, Muravchik describes how Soros has admitted to having carried some rather "potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood, which I felt I had to control, otherwise they might get me in trouble." Be that as it may. After WWII, Soros attended the London School of Economics, where he fell under the thrall of fellow atheist and Hungarian, Karl Popper, one of his professors. Popper was a mentor to Soros until Popper's death in 1994. Two of Popper's most influential teachings concerned "the open society," and Fallibilism.

            Fallibilism is the philosophical doctrine that all claims of knowledge could, in principle, be mistaken. (Then again, I could be wrong about that.) The "open society" basically refers to a "test and evaluate" approach to social engineering. Regarding "open society" Roy Childs writes, "Since the Second World War, most of the Western democracies have followed Popper's advice about piecemeal social engineering and democratic social reform, and it has gotten them into a grand mess."

            In 1956 Soros moved to New York City, where he worked on Wall Street, and started amassing his fortune. He specialized in hedge funds and currency speculation. Soros is absolutely ruthless, amoral, and clever in his business dealings, and quickly made his fortune. By the 1980s, he was well on his way to becoming the global powerhouse that he is today.

            In an article Kyle-Anne Shiver wrote for "The American Thinker" she says, "Soros made his first billion in 1992 by shorting the British pound with leveraged billions in financial bets, and became known as the man who broke the Bank of England . He broke it on the backs of hard-working British citizens who immediately saw their homes severely devalued and their life savings cut drastically, almost overnight."

            In 1994 Soros crowed in "The New Republic", that "the former Soviet Empire is now called the Soros Empire." The Russia-gate scandal in 1999, which almost collapsed the Russian economy, was labeled by Rep. Jim Leach, then head of the House Banking Committee, to be "one of the greatest social robberies in human history. "The "Soros Empire" indeed. In 1997 Soros almost destroyed the economies of Thailand and Malaysia .. At the time, Malaysia 's Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohammad, called Soros "a villain, and a moron." Thai activist Weng Tojirakarn said, "We regard George Soros as a kind of Dracula. He sucks the blood from the people."

            The website Greek National Pride reports, "Soros was part of the full court press that dismantled Yugoslavia and caused trouble in Georgia , Ukraine and Myanmar [Burma]. Calling himself a pilanthropist, Soros' role is to tighten the ideological stranglehold of globalization and the New World Order while promoting his own financial gain. He is without conscience; a capitalist who functions with absolute amorality."

            France has upheld an earlier conviction against Soros, for felony insider trading. Soros was fined 2.9 million dollars. Recently, his native Hungary fined Soros 2.2 million dollars for "illegal market manipulation." Elizabeth Crum writes that the Hungarian economy has been in a state of transition as the country seeks to become more financially stable and westernized. Soros deliberately driving down the share price of its largest bank put Hungary's economy into a wicked tailspin, one from which it is still trying to recover.

            My point here is that Soros is a planetary parasite. His grasp, greed, and gluttony have a global reach. But what about America? Soros told Australia 's national newspaper "The Australian." " America, as the centre of the globalised financial markets, was sucking up the savings of the world. This is now over. The game is out," he said, adding that the time has come for "a very serious adjustment" in American's consumption habits. He implied that he was the one with the power to bring this about."

            Soros: "World financial crisis was "stimulating" and "in a way, the culmination of my life's work."

            Obama has recently promised 10 billion of our tax dollars to Brazil , in order to give them a leg-up in expanding their offshore oil fields. Obama's largesse towards Brazil came shortly after his political financial backer, George Soros, invested heavily in Brazilian oil (Pet rob ras).

            Tait Trussel writes, "The Pet rob ras loan may be a windfall for Soros and Brazil , but it is a bad deal for the U. S. The American Petroleum Institute estimates that oil exploration in the U S could create 160,000 new, well-paying jobs, as well as $1.7 trillion in revenues to federal, state, and local governments, all while fostering greater energy security and independence."

            A blog you might want to keep an eye on is SorosWatch.com. Their mission: "This blog is dedicated to all who have suffered due to the ruthless financial pursuits of George Soros. Your stories are many and varied, but the theme is the same: the destructive power of greed without conscience. We pledge to tirelessly watch Soros wherever he goes and to print the truth in the hope that he will one day be made to stop preying upon the world's poor, that justice will be served."

            Back to America. Soros has been actively working to destroy America from the inside out for some years now. People have been warning us. Two years ago, news sources reported that "Soros [is] an extremist who wants open borders, a one-world foreign policy, legalized drugs, euthanasia, and on and on. This is off-the-chart dangerous."In 1997, Rachel Ehrenfeld wrote, "Soros uses his philanthropy to change or more accurately deconstruct the moral values and attitudes of the Western world, and particularly of the American people. His "open society" is not about freedom; it is about license. His vision rejects the notion of ordered liberty, in favor of a PROGRESSIVE ideology of rights and entitlements."

            Perhaps the most important of these "whistle blowers" are David Horowitz and Richard Poe. Their book "The Shadow Party" outlines in detail how Soros hijacked the Democratic Party, and now owns it lock, stock, and barrel. Soros has been packing the Democratic Party with radicals, and ousting moderate Democrats for years. The Shadow Party became the Shadow Government, which recently became the Obama Administration.

            DiscoverTheNetworks.org (another good source) writes, "By his [Soros'] own admission, he helped engineer coups in Slovakia, Croatia, Georgia, and Yugoslavia. When Soros targets a country for "regime change," he begins by creating a shadow government, a fully formed government-in-exile, ready to assume power when the opportunity arises. The Shadow Party he has built in America greatly resembles those he has created in other countries prior to instigating a coup."

            November 2008 edition of the German magazine "Der Spiegel," in which Soros gives his opinion on what the next POTUS (President of the U. S.) should do after taking office. "I think we need a large stimulus package." Soros thought that around 600 billion would be about right. Soros also said that "I think Obama presents us a great opportunity to finally deal with global warming and energy dependence. The U. S.. needs a cap and trade system with auctioning of licenses for emissions rights."

            Although Soros doesn't (yet) own the Republican Party, like he does the Democrats, make no mistake, his tentacles are spread throughout the Republican Party as well.

            Soros is a partner in the Carlyle Group where he has invested more than 100 million dollars. According to an article by "The Baltimore Chronicle's" Alice Cherbonnier, the Carlye Group is run by "a veritable who's who of former Republican leaders," from CIA man Frank Carlucci, to CIA head and ex-President George Bush, Sr.

            In late 2006, Soros bought about 2 million shares of Halliburton, Dick Cheney's old stomping grounds. When the Democrats and Republicans held their conventions in 2000, Soros held Shadow Party conventions in the same cities, at the same time. In 2008, Soros donated $5,000,000,000 ( thats Five Billion ) to the Democratic National Committee, NC, to insure Obama's win and wins for many other Alinsky trained Radical Rules Anti-American Socialist. George has been contributing a $ billion plus to the DNC since Clinton came on the scene.

            Soros has dirtied both sides of the aisle, trust me. And if that weren't bad enough, he has long held connections with the CIA. And I mustn't forget to mention Soros' involvement with the MSM (Main Stream Media), the entertainment industry (e. g. he owns 2.6 million shares of Time Warner), and the various political advertising organizations he funnels millions to. In short, George Soros controls or influences most of the MSM. Little wonder they ignore the TEA PARTY, Soro's NEMESIS.

            As Matthew Vadum writes, "The liberal billionaire-turned-philanthropist has been buying up media properties for years in order to drive home his message to the American public that they are too materialistic, too wasteful, too selfish, and too stupid to decide for themselves how to run their own lives."

            Richard Poe writes, "Soros' private philanthropy, totaling nearly $5 billion, continues undermining America 's traditional Western values. His giving has provided funding of abortion rights, atheism, drug legalization, sex education, euthanasia, feminism, gun control, globalization, mass immigration, gay marriage and other radical experiments in social engineering."

            Some of the many NGOs (Non-Government Organizations) that Soros funds with his billions are: MoveOn.org, the Apollo Alliance, Media Matters for America, the Tides Foundation, the ACLU, ACORN, PDIA (Project on Death In America), La Raza, and many more. For a more complete list, with brief descriptions of the NGOs, go to DiscoverTheNetworks.org.

            Poe continues, "Through his global web of Open Society Institutes and Open Society Foundations, Soros has spent 25 years recruiting, training, indoctrinating and installing a network of loyal operatives in 50 countries, placing them in positions of influence and power in media, government, finance and academia."

            Without Soros' money, would the Saul Alinsky's Chicago machine still be rolling? Would SEIU, ACORN, and La Raza still be pursuing their nefarious activities? Would Big Money and lobbyists still be corrupting government? Would our college campuses still be retirement homes for 1960s radicals?

            America stands at the brink of an abyss, and that fact is directly attributable to Soros. Soros has vigorously, cleverly, and insidiously planned the ruination of America and his puppet, Barack Obama is leading the way.

            Above information researched by CBS Steve Kroft
            Believe what you will.
            Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

            "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

            (more comments in my User Profile)
            russbo.com


            Comment


            • #81
              Why Obama is going to win the next election:

              "He who warned the British that they weren't gonna be takin' away our arms by ringing those bells, and makin' sure as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed." Sarah Palin.

              Good lord.
              Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

              "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

              (more comments in my User Profile)
              russbo.com


              Comment


              • #82
                lol, what a joke.

                interesting article on soros, he sounds like dr evil from austin powers lolo
                "did you ask me to consider dick with you??" blooming tianshi lotus

                Comment


                • #83
                  I really don't like to pollute this forum with politics; if I had, there would have been some sort of anti-Obama blurb just about every day, there's just so much about this guy that I find egregious. But, I couldn't pass posting this one. I did not write it. BTW, written by a black man.

                  Three significant historical events have been eclipsed by Obama: 1) Jimmy Carter will no longer be looked upon as the worst president in American history; 2) Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton will no longer be recognized as the greatest liars in presidential history; 3) Clinton's stain on Monica's dress, and what that did to the White House in general and the office of the president specifically, will forever pale in comparison to the stain and stench of Obama.

                  I need not spend much time on the failure of Obama as president. His tenure has been a failure on every measurable level. So much so, in fact, that some of the staunchest, most respected liberal Democrats and Democratic supporters have not only openly criticized him - some even more harshly than this essayist - but they have called for him to step down.

                  Richard Nixon's words "I am not a crook," punctuated with his involvement in Watergate, and Bill Clinton's finger-wagging as he told one of the most pathetic lies in presidential history, in the aftermath of Obama, will be viewed as mere prevarications.

                  Mr. Nixon and Clinton lied to save their backsides. Although, I would argue there are no plausible explanations for doing what they did, I could entertain arguments pursuant to understanding their rationales for lying. But in the case of Obama, he lies because he is a liar. He doesn't only lie to cover his misdeeds - he lies to get his way. He lies to belittle others and to make himself look presentable at their expense. He lies about his faith, his associations, his mother, his father and his wife. He lies and bullies to keep his background secret. His lying is congenital and compounded by socio-psychological factors of his life.

                  Never in my life, inside or outside of politics, have I witnessed such dishonesty in a political leader. He is the most mendacious political figure I have ever witnessed. Even by the low standards of his presidential predecessors, his narcissistic, contumacious arrogance is unequalled. Using Obama as the bar, Nero would have to be elevated to sainthood.

                  As the stock markets were crashing, taking with them the remaining life saving of untold tens of thousands, Obama was hosting his own birthday celebration, which was an event of epicurean splendidness. The shamelessness of the event was that it was not a state dinner to welcome foreign dignitaries, nor was it to honor an American accomplishment - it was to honor the Pharaoh, Barack Hussein Obama. The event's sole purpose was for the Pharaoh to have his loyal subjects swill wine, indulge in gluttony and behavior unfit to take place on the property of taxpayers, as they suffer. It was of a magnitude comparable to that of Tyco CEO Dennis Kozlowski's $2 million birthday extravaganza for its pure lack of respect for the people.

                  Permit me to digress momentarily. The U.S. Capitol and the White House were built with the intent of bringing awe and respect to America and her people. They were also built with the intent of being the greatest of equalizers. I can tell you, having personally been to both, there is a moment of awe and humility associated with being in the presence of the history of those buildings. They are to be honored and inscribed into our national psyche, not treated as a Saturday night house party at Chicago 's Cabrini-Green.

                  The people of America own that home Obama and his wife continue to debase with their pan-ghetto behavior. It is clear that Obama and family view themselves as royalty, but they're not. They are employees of "we the people," who are suffering because of his failed policies. What message does this behavior send to those who today are suffering as never before?

                  What message does it send to all Americans who are struggling? Has anyone stopped to think what the stock market downturn forebodes for those 80 million baby boomers who will be retiring in the next period of years? Is there a snowball's chance in the Sahara that every news program on the air would applaud this behavior if it were George W. Bush? To that point, do you remember the media thrashing Bush took for having a barbecue at the White House?
                  Like Nero - who was only slightly less debaucherous than Caligula - with wine on his lips Obama treated "we the people" the way Caligula treated those over whom he lorded.

                  Many in America wanted to be proud when the first person of color was elected president, but instead, they have been witness to a congenital liar, a woman who has been ashamed of America her entire life, failed policies, intimidation and a commonality hitherto not witnessed in political leaders. He and his wife view their life at our expense as an entitlement - while America's people go homeless, hungry and unemployed.
                  Mychal Massie is chairman of the National Leadership Network of Black Conservatives-Project 21 - a conservative black think tank located in Washington, D.C. He was recognized as the 2008 Conservative Man of the Year by the Conservative Party of Suffolk County , N.Y. He is a nationally recognized political activist, pundit and columnist. He has appeared on Fox News Channel, CNN, MSNBC, C-SPAN, NBC, Comcast Cable and talk radio programming nationwide. A former self-employed business owner of more than 30 years, Massie can be followed at mychal-massie.com.
                  Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

                  "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

                  (more comments in my User Profile)
                  russbo.com


                  Comment


                  • #84
                    the older i get the more i seem to become politically inclined...does that mean im gonna start to loose my sex drive to!?!? my gf would disagree to the last part, shes still sore....

                    anyway, what exactly can be sited as examples of what is written here, something i can research and find solid evidence of.
                    "did you ask me to consider dick with you??" blooming tianshi lotus

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Well, it's been pretty obvious that Obama has been self serving and dishonest. God, if I had just written down everything over the last two years, it would have been one hell of a long thread. The Operation Fast and Furious is the latest debacle. The White House vegetable garden was another. I can't think of any others right now, not because there are too few of these episodes, but because there's just too damn many of them. Every day another thing rears its ugly head. What, are you becoming an Obama lover now? What Kool Aid are they feeding you out there? Or is your girlfriend a die hard liberal? A lot of young single women tend to be.
                      Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

                      "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

                      (more comments in my User Profile)
                      russbo.com


                      Comment


                      • #86
                        lol, no i just want to judge for myself what exactly this guy has done, i want to go over the facts for myself, im sure hes a doosh or however thats spelled, i never liked him although like i told you in the pool i liked him more then a blundering idiot ex crack smoking bush jr
                        "did you ask me to consider dick with you??" blooming tianshi lotus

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          You just have to read the news every day, and try to weed through the bullshit. You'll see.
                          Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

                          "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

                          (more comments in my User Profile)
                          russbo.com


                          Comment


                          • #88
                            An understanding of the US Constitution, with regards to current day political thinking:

                            Two hundred thirty-six years ago this Fourth of July, 57 men signed the document that created the American republic. They represented a people of about 3 million grouped in a series of 13 colonies along the eastern seaboard of the United States. They were all wanted men, sought by the commander of the British forces in North America for sedition and treason. He had behind him the resources of the greatest military power on earth. They had behind them the bare beginnings of a government, hardly anything of an army, but something mighty in the way of an idea.

                            This nation had therefore a desperate beginning. Who but the boldest could believe that the signers of the Declaration of Independence were laying the foundation of the greatest constitutional republic in history? Now that republic has spread across the continent, and its influence reaches around the world. Its population has increased a hundredfold. Its Constitution has provided government to a free people constantly growing in size and territory, each new state joining the union as an equal, its citizens never subjects, its people ever free. There is no story close to it in the history of man.

                            Statesmen and thinkers have attributed the strength and goodness of the nation to the principles in the Declaration. Many others have denied this. Statesmen and thinkers have proclaimed the Constitution a just and beautiful implementation of the principles of the Declaration. Many others have denied this. These denials are more common in times of crisis in our country. They are very common now.

                            It is a sign of our time that the sitting chief executive of our country eschews the permanent meaning of the Declaration and the idea of fixity in the Constitution. In the “Audacity of Hope,” Barack Obama writes: “Implicit in [the Constitution’s] structure, in the very idea of ordered liberty, was a rejection of absolute truth, the infallibility of any idea or ideology or theology or “ism,” any tyrannical consistency that might lock future generations into a single, unalterable course. …”

                            Obama has stuck to this theme during his presidency. This May at Barnard College, he proclaimed the great virtue of the Constitution to be its openness to change: “It allowed for protests, movements, and the assimilation of new ideas that would repeatedly, decade after decade, change the world—a constant forward movement that continues to this day.” There is neither form nor firmness. All is fluid, according to Obama, and this liberates us to do whatever we will.

                            America has gone very far down the trail that Obama is blazing. Right now, the expenditures of all government—state, local and federal—exceed 40 percent of the gross domestic product. If trends continue, the public sector will soon grow larger than the private sector, and then the government will have more resources than those it governs.

                            Moreover, it governs increasingly without authority from the branches that are elected by the people. The new Dodd- Frank finance law creates something called a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. This agency does not get its budget from Congress. Rather, its money comes from a guaranteed percentage of the budget of the Federal Reserve, which gets its money from its operations as a bank. Congress is even specifically forbidden in the law to hold hearings into the budget of the new CPFB. And it has wide examining power over every form of consumer finance in the nation. In unfettered scope of authority, and in near perfect separation from popular control, it is different from anything before it in America.
                            Because we have come so far from the founding institutions, it is worthwhile to remind ourselves what they are. This anniversary of the Declaration of Independence provides a splendid occasion, because both the principles of the nation and its institutions are summarized beautifully in its 1,300 words. Let us then read it for a moment.

                            Notice first of all how remarkable it is that the document should begin universally. The authors were obviously mindful of the fact they were wanted men. They conclude the Declaration with a solemn promise, made to each other in the mood of soldiers facing battle: “In support of this Declaration we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor” (emphasis added). The particularity of this commitment, each man speaking for himself in promise to the others in the room, is what one might expect of legislation passed on the eve of a war, legislation that is itself a written act of treason.

                            If these men were in a situation urgent unto death, how can we account for the abstract and universal nature of the beginning of the Declaration? It begins with an “absolute truth” (to use the president’s term) expressed in words that have rung around the world: “When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them …” (emphasis added).

                            Notice that this quotation refers to no particular time, but to any time in the course of human events. Notice that it refers not to the American people, but to “one people,” meaning any people. It is a very absolute and universal way of talking. It issues immediately a proclamation of truth: “We hold these truths to be selfevident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.”

                            Just as the Founders did, so may anyone look for his rights under these “laws of nature and of nature’s God.” Anyone whose rights are denied will feel their weight. The Jew rounded up by the Nazis, the black slave held in Mississippi in 1840, may both look to this document as the charter by which he can advance. Thomas Jefferson, a slaveholder, was aware of this and wrote that indeed, “I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just.” These principles place every man and woman deprived of their rights in the same place that the Founders occupied on July 4, 1776: they may appeal to an absolute truth, written in the nature of man and in the nature of things, against any power that will offend their rights. Perhaps they cannot find the strength to overcome their oppression. Never mind: their cause is still the just one. They will see, and even in moments of clarity their oppressors will see, that the great self-evident truth that all men are created equal means nothing more nor less than that all men are men. It means nothing less than that no one may rightly govern another except by his consent. It means that the purpose of government is to “secure these rights”: “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

                            These are the principles of the United States. The fact that they were announced at the onset of its revolution, and the fact that the revolution proceeded in their name, seals them in the blood and the history of this land.

                            The Declaration is not only about principles; it also describes institutions, the kind of institutions best adapted to protect the rights of a people. These institutions are expressed in the middle section of the document, the section in which the specific crimes and injustices of the king of England are described. The three broad constitutional principles that he violated form the backbone of the later Constitution of the United States. The first step in understanding that Constitution is not to learn its details, although they are relatively few. The first step is to understand the grand arrangements of government necessary to constitutional rule.

                            The first of these three principles is representation. The king is said to have interfered with the representatives of the people in their attempt to pass laws “most wholesome and necessary for the public good.” The Declaration recognizes that human beings are made to live under law, and they have a right for those laws to be passed by people who represent them. This right is not to be interfered with by any force. Any force doing so interferes with the consent of the governed and cannot rightfully claim obedience. Violation of the representative principle is, by itself, cause for revolution.

                            The second of these principles is separation of powers. At the outset of the American Revolution, the king and his governors were the executive branch. By interfering with the legislature, the king violated not only the right of the people to representative government but also the necessity for separation of powers. He violated this necessity also by making “judges dependent on his will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.” God is named four times in the Declaration, once as each of the three branches of government, and once as a founder. The lesson is simple: God may well be the maker of the laws of nature and of nature’s God, and He may well be at the same time the Supreme Judge of the world, and He may also be Divine Providence. But no man or small group of men may rightly combine in their own hands all the powers of government. That is for God alone.

                            Finally, the Declaration calls for a limited government. The king was taxing America’s forefathers without their consent, and he was using the money, among other things, to pay for a hired army to oppress them. He sent many officials to make sure that his will was followed on all occasions, whatever the commoners may wish. The Declaration charges him with erecting “a multitude of new offices, and [sending] hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.” In other words, the king offended against the principle of limited government. He was building a structure too strong for the people to manage.

                            The modern bureaucratic state reproduces many of the features that led to the writing of the Declaration of Independence and that gave shape to the Constitution of the United States, which follows these three basic principles in its entire structure. Go before the bureaucracy and see that it is arranged both to make and enforce its own rules, and if one objects he must appear first before a judge who is employed by that same bureaucracy. And now a bureaucracy has been created that operates on a budget outside the control of the Congress.

                            This Fourth of July, we might well remind ourselves of the beauty, the greatness and the long serviceability of our constitutional institutions and of the principles from which they flow. This Fourth of July is a great time to recall these things, because the Declaration gives the Constitution its cause and also its basic form and function. We Americans may choose to discard this legacy and give up our birthright. Let us at least know what we are doing.

                            Celebrate the Declaration, and also remember its meaning. It is what a citizen does on the Fourth of July.


                            Larry P. Arnn
                            President, Hillsdale College
                            Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

                            "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

                            (more comments in my User Profile)
                            russbo.com


                            Comment


                            • #89
                              A synopsis of George Soros, allegedly the financial man behind Obama:

                              The term “euphemism” refers to the substitution of a vague or milder term for one that may be considered harsh, offensive or blunt.
                              Example:

                              George Soros is a “philanthropist”.

                              If by “philanthropist” we mean one who creates chaos, destruction and financial ruin for his own personal gain, it’s a perfect fit. Calling Soros a philanthropist is rather like referring to the Nazi block wardens as Neighborhood Watch.

                              Soros certainly gives lots of money away. But a philanthropist acts to improve the human condition. Soros acts solely to improve the Soros condition. Despite the lofty sounding rhetoric about an Open Society, Soros’ objective is to wreck the United States. Actually Soros never really defines his Open Society. The concept arose in the 1930s with the notion of a moral code based on “universal principles”. After tweaking the concept to suit his own purposes, Soros adopted his own version of an Open Society which would be one in which the US has no power.

                              Soros was born in Hungary in 1930 to non practicing Jewish parents. His father, a lawyer was able to hide their identities and young George was recruited by the Judenrat to hand out flyers deceptively directing Jews to turn themselves in for deportation to the death camps. Soros later said he found the work exhilarating. Later passing himself as an official’s godson, he accompanied his benefactor confiscating valuables from innocent Jews. (David Horowitz and Richard Poe, The Shadow Party. 2006).

                              Soros would later tell Steve Kroft on 60 Minutes that he had no remorse about what he had done.

                              In fact, Soros doesn’t have remorse for much, if anything. In The Shadow Party (David Horowitz and Richard Poe, 2006), Soros is quoted as saying that conscience clouds an investor’s judgment.

                              Soros amassed his fortune by speculating in the currency markets. He got a lot of attention for tanking the British pound in 1992. More than once, Soros has used his status as an investor to manipulate markets. According to Horowitz and Poe, the great patriot Soros likely sold short after 9/11 when the rest of the nation was being urged to take whatever they could afford and buy some shares of their favorite stocks. Lots of patriotic Americans did exactly that.

                              To further jeopardize our national security, Soros told CNN that the market would react negatively if the US were to invade Afghanistan knowing his words would cause a global market reaction. Soros has stuck his nose in governments all over the world claiming a philanthropic motive. Yet like day into night, once he’s done, the local economy is in a shambles and Soros is richer.

                              The Clinton administration allowed Soros to run wild in the dying Soviet Union. The results were entirely predictable. Working in tandem with Strobe Talbott, “Russian Policy Czar” they set about playing games with government funds. Soros reveled in having so much access to the Clintons and fancied himself part of the “Clinton Team”.

                              According to journalist Anne Williamson, Soros appeared before the House Banking Committee in September, 1999 attempting to explain to stunned congressmen exactly how so many US taxpayer dollars had evaporated in Russia. The Clintons managed to shut that scandal down quickly thanks to their expertise in scandal control.

                              Soros was actually convicted of insider trading in France. His opinion moves markets. He is one of the most powerful people in the world entirely due to his ability to get other people to part with their money. His tentacles are everywhere. He uses numerous foundations and associations to keep money flowing and spread around. It’s no secret that George Soros is fond of deceit and subterfuge. He is a radical in the mold of Saul Alinsky. For all of the nonsensical blathering he does about how he can make the world a better place, he has no real plan to do any such thing. Soros loses interest in a project after the demo phase is over. According to Horowitz and Poe, Soros candidly admits he finds destruction easier than creation.

                              Thus it makes perfect sense that Soros is the de facto head of the Democratic Party in America now that it is a foaming-at-the-mouth rabid left wing Democratic Party. As Horowitz and Poe put it: “Soros and his Shadow Party did not invent the politics of demagoguery and racial division. They are merely practicing and expanding the politics familiar on the Democratic Left.”

                              In 2004 Soros made it his personal mission to defeat George W Bush. Not only did Bush not share his moral relativism and radical ideology, Soros was outraged about Afghanistan and Iraq. Soros opposed Bush’s War on Terror and provides funding to pro terror groups. Worse still from Soros’ point of view, after enjoying easy access to the Clintons, Bush was not equally impressed and failed to seek out his wise counsel on foreign policy.

                              John Kerry’s loss in 2004 was gasoline on the fire. “This is the Sorosization of the Democratic Party”, say Rachel Ehrenfelt and Shawn MacComber (Frontpagemagazine.com. October 28, 2004). “As we will see, this idea of “scruples” being for the other guy has been central to Soros’ philosophy in business, philanthropy, and foreign policy”.

                              Although Soros had a mutually beneficial relationship with the Clintons, he knew enough to hedge his bets in 2008 and back more than one candidate. The type of revolution Soros wants requires a charismatic figure that can create a mass movement. Soros himself actually dislikes publicity. Good oratory skills and personal charisma are what he needs. Soros himself prefers to stay below the radar and work his subterfuge behind the scenes. After all, “Soros’ main concern is that somebody be elected who is indebted enough to him to pick up the phone when he calls” (Ehrenfeld and MacComber).

                              Just the other day, I attended a speech by Peggy Noonan. The topic was presidents. She told funny stories and shared her insights into Presidents Bush, Reagan, Clinton and Obama. Noonan talked about Clinton’s personal charisma, “it was impossible not to look at him”. And his speeches were well delivered but remarkably lacking in substance. Is anyone seeing a pattern here? Noonan sees Obama as more like Clinton than anyone else, not only in his policies, but his presentation.

                              Is it possible then that Bill Clinton was supposed to fulfill the role of George Soros’ cult leading Messiah but simply failed at it?

                              Soros can’t wreak his havoc alone. He needs his cult leader.

                              It’s important to understand that George Soros doesn’t want to “change” America. He wants to destroy it. America in its current state is anathema to Soros. The current Oval Office Occupant is not particularly fond of America either. His association with America hating radicals should be enough for most people but let’s not overlook the fact that his very first sit down interview after becoming president was to al Arabyia News Channel. Obama took the opportunity to share his views with the Muslim world that America has behaved very badly and we can be expected to change our ways so our relationship with Muslims will be like it was “twenty or thirty years ago”. This is a bit perplexing unless Obama either knows less about history than we thought or he longs for the days when Islamofascists led by Khomeini were holding 52 American hostages. I daresay the Muslim world was cheered to learn that our new president plans to take us back to the happy halcyon days of the Carter Administration. Soros is actually working toward a plan to completely overhaul the US Constitution.

                              When Soros gets hold of power in any government, he makes money. It is difficult to find examples of Soros invasions that leave the target country better off. But that is not Soros’ concern. Obama’s monstrous “Stimulus Bill” (euphemisms again) fits neatly into Soros’ paradigm. You can read Soros’ economy recovery plan on the Huffington Post (February 12, 2009).

                              For all the posturing Soros does about creating his Marxist Utopia there is no actual plan to create a new social order, an open one or otherwise. Soros, for all of his rambling hasn’t thought it through that far and he is not going to. His interest begins and ends with his potential to exploit whomever he can to grab money and power. He actually makes garden variety dopey liberals rather endearing by comparison. At least some of them believe in their unrealistic vision of socialism.

                              Keeping in mind that Soros will always act in ways that provide maximum benefit to Soros what are his plans for Obama? It’s clear he found the cult leader he needed. Obama is performing correctly with his daily catastrophizing and power grabbing. But what would benefit Soros more: a successful Obama presidency or a failed one? Success would give Soros four to eight years to work in the Shadows to destroy America and grab what spoils he can. But a failed presidency could offer even more. Obama and his Ministry of Propaganda have managed to create fear and panic in the population. His policies, if implemented cannot but lead to economic trouble and eventual shortages and rationing. Nobody knows more about how to destroy a currency than Soros. We have assumed that the peculiar short selling patterns and over hyped economic “collapse” were staged to get Obama elected. If an inept, inexperienced and radical president has his way, which Obama surely will, the net result is pretty predictable. Is that kind of social and economic chaos designed to open up a power vacuum that a guy like Soros just can’t resist?

                              JOY TIZ
                              Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

                              "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

                              (more comments in my User Profile)
                              russbo.com


                              Comment


                              • #90
                                A lesson from the world of fungi!

                                Cheating Favors Extinction, Yeast Study Finds: Feedback Between Population and Evolutionary Dynamics

                                Apr. 30, 2013 — Cooperative behaviour is widely observed in nature, but there remains the possibility that so-called 'cheaters' can exploit the system, taking without giving, with uncertain consequences for the social unit as a whole. A new study has found that a yeast colony dominated by non-producers ('cheaters') is more likely to face extinction than one consisting entirely of producers ('co-operators').
                                ________________________________________
                                The findings, published April 30 in PLOS Biology by A Sanchez and J Gore from MIT, are the results of the first laboratory demonstration of a full evolutionary-ecological feedback loop in a social microbial population.
                                The researchers found that while a cooperative yeast colony that survives by breaking down sucrose into a communal supply of simple sugars can support a surprisingly high ratio of freeloaders -- upwards of 90 per cent -- a sudden shock to its environment is highly likely to result in catastrophe.

                                "One of the main things we were interested in was the idea that natural selection can have an effect on the ecology of a population, so that as a population is evolving, natural selection affects the ecological properties," said Dr Sanchez.

                                The researchers studied a cooperative species, Saccharomyces cerevisiae or 'baker's yeast', focusing on two strains: one which had the SUC2 gene that produces the enzyme invertase (the co-operators), and one lacking SUC2 (the cheaters) making it unable to produce this enzyme. Invertase breaks down sucrose in the environment to liberate glucose and fructose that can be used by all yeast cells in the colony.

                                "We were very surprised by the fact that the total population size for the mixed group (consisting of both co-operators and cheaters) was about the same at equilibrium as the total population size in the absence of cheaters (i.e. purely co-operators). We didn't expect that," Dr Sanchez explained. "If it weren't for the fact that the co-operators and cheaters were labelled with different colours, it would have been very hard to tell whether the population contained any cheaters or not."

                                This was the case when the environment was benign. But when those stable populations were suddenly exposed to a harsh environment, all of the pure co-operator populations survived, while just one of six mixed populations adapted to the fast deterioration in conditions, the researchers found.

                                Benjamin Allen, Assistant Professor of Mathematics at Emmanuel College and Martin A. Nowak, director of the Program for Evolutionary Dynamics at Harvard University, co-authored an accompanying Primer in PLOS Biology, "Cooperation and the Fate of Microbial Societies."

                                "The experiments of Sanchez and Gore beautifully illustrate the central dilemma in the evolution of cooperation. The yeast society depends on cooperation, but if cooperation is plentiful, 'cheaters' can exploit the generosity of others. This leads to cycles of cooperation and exploitation," said Dr Allen.

                                The researchers found that an eco-evolutionary feedback loop links changes in population size, and their effects, with changes in the frequency of specific genetic types in the population. During the competition for survival between co-operators and cheaters, they showed that if the population starts off with sufficient co-operators then the social properties of the yeast spiral towards a final equilibrium position that comprises a stable mixture of co-operators and cheaters. However, if the initial population density, or the initial proportion of co-operators, is too low, then not enough simple sugars are produced, and the colony dies out.

                                http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0430194259.htm
                                Experienced Community organizer. Yeah, let's choose him to run the free world. It will be historic. What could possibly go wrong...

                                "You're just a jaded cynical mother****er...." Jeffpeg

                                (more comments in my User Profile)
                                russbo.com


                                Comment

                                Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
                                Auto-Saved
                                x
                                Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
                                x
                                x
                                Working...
                                X