Archive for October, 2011

From:  HerBunk  Aug 9, 2010  A Retired Veteran.  Great video   Reminds me of  JibJab


The people who voted for Obama in 2008 are beginning to realize their mistake. Uncle Sam, representing those people, sings that “Obama’s Gotta Go”. The song was written and sung by Jesse Goldberg. Visit Jesse’s website at

Sons of Liberty: Patriots or Terrorists?.

Free Stuff |

Posted: October 28, 2011
1:48 pm Eastern

By Steven Wyer           >  YELLOW FONT MY EMPHASIS  “X”<
© 2011

Let me begin by acknowledging that I have an admitted distrust of government. I believe there is compelling evidence to suggest that our online activity is of far more interest to Uncle Sam than might be considered healthy.

Don’t you find it quite odd that foreign countries have undertaken criminal litigation against Google over privacy issues surrounding Google’s Street View while here at home we have basically taken a “no harm-no foul” position?  If that’s not enough to get your antenna up, here’s another bit of news that most people missed.  In April 2010 it was announced that every 140-character snippet you have ever posted on Twitter has been committed to the U.S. Library of Congress.

The Library of Congress and our friends at Twitter have agreed to archive every single tweet since its inception on March 21, 2006, when the first tweet was launched.  It is now estimated that together we send a billion tweets a week – and all of it is be preserved forever.  It does not seem to me that there is such a big jump from the retention of this information to the dissection and analyzing of such data and then ultimately the utilization of what is learned.

The purpose (according to a blog post by Library of Congress communications director Matt Raymond) is to document “important tweets” as well as gather information about the way we live through the sheer masses of tweets on the site.   Some find great comfort in the fact that only tweets from public Twitter feeds will be included, not those that have been set as private.

Think quickly for me – are your tweets set to be private?  Do you really understand that every tweet you post is intrinsically designed to be searchable?   We must understand that Twitter was always designed to be searchable.Find out what you can do to protect yourself from cyber-abuse — read one man’s horror story and subsequent advice in “Violated Online”

In fact, it’s essential that we recognize the possibility that at some point in the future our government, either overtly or covertly, could attempt to match this information with other user information archived in federal databases.  By simply “taking the pulse of the country,” any sitting administration could easily 1) craft public policy, or 2) pander to the current tide of public sentiment in any election year.

Perhaps at this point you are thinking, this guy is seeing shadows and that perhaps writing “Violated Online” (the book) has made me a little wonky.   Allow me to present another piece of evidence.

In September of this year it was reported that the Federal Reserve put out to bid an RFP (Request for Proposal) detailing its plans to monitor Facebook, Twitter and Google News.   According to the document, the Fed is evaluating bids for a social media analysis system that will mine data from Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, blogs and web forums – beginning in December 2011.   In order to “handle crisis situations” and “track the reach and spread of … messages and press releases,” the project will also identify a number of what they call “key bloggers and influencers” to target with their outreach, and presumably monitoring, efforts.   This is all being done in the name of “public relations.”

Based on the parameters provided in the RFP, it appears that the Fed is not just interested in what is being said here at home but also abroad.  Vendors considering the submission of a proposal are required to provide a process for monitoring multiple languages as well as international traffic and social-media content.   Clearly, social media has become more than social.

Without jumping to completely Orwellian conclusion I believe that it is fair to say that many parts of our government are now attempting to gauge positive and negative sentiment by tapping into the immediate empirical data that is delivered online everyday.   Most of us keep our heads down, work hard, care for our families and enjoy our newfound connectivity.   Without sounding the alarm, let me suggest that we look up once in a while, take note of what is happening and keep our eyes fixed on our most basic rights.   Privacy is core to all we stand for as a nation – the right to our own opinions and convictions, privacy to express those opinions while standing on the First Amendment and freedom from fear regarding that expression.   Lets commit to keeping our antennas up as we move forward into a digital unknown.   Regret after the fact does little to secure our future privacy.


Obama Wants to Inject U.S. Children with Anthrax

Gold font my emphasis  “X”

October 28, 2011 


The Obama administration is considering injecting American children with an anthrax vaccine in an unprecedented scientific experiment that bioethicists say will unnecessarily endanger the youngsters’ lives and health. The National Biodefense Safety Board (NBSB), will vote todayabout whether the pediatric vaccinations should go forward. A smaller working group comprised of a whopping eight members endorsed the vaccinations in September.

Since 1998, more than a million people have been vaccinated, mostly servicemen stationed overseas. The vaccinations were temporarily halted by court order but continue today.

Following the 2001 Anthrax infections on Capitol Hill, which resulted in 18 infections and five deaths, then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who is also a physician, said:

There are very real and potentially serious side effects from the vaccine and anyone who elects to receive the vaccine needs to be made aware of that. I do not recommend widespread inoculation for people with the vaccine in the Hart Building. There are too many side effects and if there is limited chance of exposure the side effects would far outweigh any potential advantage.

Bioethicist Art Caplan of the University of Pennsylvania said he is opposed to testing. “We may get, sadly, to that point some day,” he said, “but I don’t think we’re there yet.” Dr. Joel Frader of Northwestern University agreed, “It would be difficult to justify testing it on kids simply on the hypothetical possibility that there might be an attack.” Dr. Meryl Nass was more outspoken. “With this, you’re putting children at risk for no clear scientific or medical benefit,” she said.

Post Continues on

Respects to sincere persons of Arabic heritage, who have converted to Christianity; (check out Act For America tab above my logo)

1) Arabs hate  the Jews.

2) They hate them with a vitriol which will not be resolved until Christ sets up His kingdom on Earth. [We know there will be a false peace, and the Faithful will have been removed before this happens.]

3) They don’t want “Democracy”. Wake up and digest this. They want Islamic -Sharia- law. In every country, the  rebels fighting against their governments; including Egypt, Lybia, and the others, won’t set up a cozy “Democratic” government. They ALL without exception are joining the ranks of people like Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Excerpt from Wikipedia:     He ( Ahmadinejade) took a religious hard line, reversing reforms of previous moderate mayors.[11] His 2005 presidential campaign, supported by the Alliance of Builders of Islamic Iran, garnered 62% of the runoff election votes, and he became President on 3 August 2005.

I gave the discription of this individual, since he has stated in no uncertain terms that he would see Israel wiped off the map.

4)  There are two factions within Islam, Sunni and Shiite, who don’t like or trust each other; “the differences between the believers are not only seen as important by the communities but now, as they have for centuries, rest at the core of bloody political struggles”. * When they are not trying to kill as many Jews as possible, allied in their hatred of God’s people, they are continually warring amongst themselves.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            *Excerpt from the Christian Science Monitor

In 1990, we, with the support of the U.N., drove the Iraqi Republican Guard out of Kuwait, after they had invaded that country, to ” restore Kuwait’s sovereignty”. (and restore the oil everyone is addicted to) Did we go right into Baghdad, and depose Hussein as we should have done while we had this support? NO.

After 9-11, with erroneous intel, President Bush proceeded to invade Iraq.  Here we are, some EIGHT years later; as of May 1st.  There is  no real evidence of success that Iraq can stand on its own, any more than South Viet Nam could. In Vietnam, we  invested ELEVEN years,  58,169  killed and 304,000 wounded out of 2.59 million who served. (Stats from Wikipedia)

SO HERE IS THE BEGGING QUESTION:  Below is an insightful political cartoon. With the world economic situation, OUR present economic situation, which is the better course of action; Bring the troops home, with an uncertain job market, rampant unemployment, and other issues? If we do, will we use some to guard the 1,200 mile border which our government refuses -so far- to do, in view of the drug cartels and immigration situation?  Or do we take the position, as indicated by Mr. Ramirez, that it would be a waste of our fallen troops efforts to leave now? Do I hear “Catch 22”? Anyone? God help us all.

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

By Michael Ramirez – October 28, 2011

$2 per gallon gas

ACT! for America
October 24, 2011“Achieving $2 Gas”—and protecting our
national security at the same time

You can help stop sharia law in
your state. Please click here to read and sign the support petition!
Join the over 16,000 who have already signed. Soon we’ll start posting total
number of signers from each state.


Robert Zubrin recently penned a compelling column (see below,
highlights added) about how we can get back to $2 a gallon gasoline.

This has enormous implications—for our wallets, our economy, and our
national security.

It’s why the Open Fuel Standard Act is one of our
high priority pieces of legislation in Congress. Because, as Zubrin notes so
well, there currently is NOT a truly free, competitive market for oil.

We believe in pursuing EVERY option, from “drill baby drill” to
alternative fuels such as methanol, in order to break the back of the OPEC
cartel. Small wonder the Saudis are vigorously opposed to the Open Fuel Standard

Break the OPEC cartel, and we’ll have a free market in
transportation energy. A truly free market will reduce the cost of energy,
drastically reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and cut funding for terrorism
and stealth jihad. Great for us. Bad for Saudi Arabia, Iran,


Robert Zubrin

Achieving $2 Gas
It’s possible, with
the right policy.

Republican presidential contender Michele Bachman has said that if she is elected, gas
prices will fall to $2 per gallon. Such promises have understandably been
greeted with considerable skepticism. But $2 gas is exactly what America needs.
The question is, how can we get it?

We can’t do it just by
expanded domestic drilling. In order for gasoline prices to fall to $2 per
gallon, oil prices must be cut to $50 per barrel. And oil prices are set
globally, with the dominating influence being the OPEC oil cartel. Since 1973, this cartel, which controls 80 percent of
the earth’s commercially viable oil reserves, has refused to expand production,
thus keeping petroleum prices artificially high. While, with a more
pro-business government, the United States might conceivably be able to expand
its production by a million or two barrels per day, OPEC could easily counter by
cutting its production to match, or more likely, by simply continuing its
non-expansion policy and letting increased Chinese demand take care of the

If we are ever to get $2 gas, the power of OPEC to control oil
prices needs to be broken. The United States Congress could do this with a
stroke of the pen, simply by passing the bipartisan Open Fuel Standard bill
(H.R. 1687). This act would effectively destroy
OPEC by requiring that all new cars sold in the USA be fully flex fuel, able to
run equally well on gasoline, ethanol, and — most important — methanol. This
latter capability is critical because methanol can be, and is, made cheaply in
large quantities from coal, natural gas, or any kind of biomass without
exception. The United States has only 4 billion tons of oil reserves, but
we have 270 billion tons of coal, vast amounts of natural gas, and an enormous
capacity to produce biomass. By requiring that all cars sold here (and thus all
cars made worldwide) be compatible with methanol, the act would force oil to
compete with a fuel whose sources are not controlled by the cartel, and that we
and our allies possess in abundance.

Methanol has only about half the
energy per gallon as gasoline, but is 105 octane, which means it can be burned
more efficiently. Taken together, these two factors make methanol’s current spot
price of $1.38 per gallon roughly competitive with $2 gasoline.

course, the passage of the OFS bill would not cause gasoline prices to crash
instantly. While it would no doubt hit oil futures hard, and thus cut the
speculative premium on petroleum prices, the most immediate result of allowing
methanol to compete against gasoline in the vehicle-fuel market would be to send
methanol prices up, perhaps by as much as 60 percent. This situation would not,
however, last for long. Methanol can be made and sold profitably today for $1.38
per gallon. At a 60 percent markup, its manufacture would be super-profitable,
and massive amounts of capital would rush in to expand production. This would
drive the price of methanol down, dragging gasoline and oil down prices with it,
until methanol reached a price point where its production offered no greater
profit than that prevailing in the economy at large. The fact that methanol
would reach this price — what Adam Smith would term its natural price
follows from the fact that the sources to make methanol are plentiful and
diverse, so that no cartel can artificially limit its production.

This underscores the key issue. There is not a free
market in oil. Adjusted for inflation, the price of oil has increased eightfold
since 1973, but OPEC production has not increased at all. In a free market, such
a price increase would spur increased investment, with subsequent expanded
production driving the price right back down again. That is why the
inflation-adjusted price of coal, and nearly every other industrial commodity,
has not risen in four decades. But because of the cartel, oil production has not
responded to price increases in the way that it should in a properly functioning
capitalist economy. In order for the free-enterprise system to do its work and
deliver the cheap fuel the world needs, the ability of this cartel to limit the
world’s liquid-fuel supplies needs to be broken. The Open Fuel Standard bill
would accomplish that.

High oil prices are wrecking our economy.
Since the United States imports 5 billion barrels of oil per year, the current
price of nearly $90 per barrel will hit us for $450 billion this year alone, a
huge tax on our economy. As a result, millions of jobs and thousands of
businesses are being lost. If this wealth-draining process is allowed to
continue, fiscal necessity will require us to withdraw the military forces
protecting our national interests abroad, without a shot being fired.

Instead of seeking to exploit this catastrophe by placing its blame on
their opponents, or posing with empty promises of salvation contingent upon
their promotion to higher office, politicians need to take action. Two-dollar
gas is not just a nice idea for inclusion in a campaign speech. It’s a critical
necessity for economic recovery.

Either we break the cartel, or the
cartel breaks us. The Open Fuel Standard bill needs to be passed.

Robert Zubrin is a member of the Board of Advisors of Americans for Energy and author of Energy Victory: Winning the War on Terror by
Breaking Free of Oil

 By Leslie Burt “Allen West knows the Enemy”

Group Blog Entry in The Allen West Republic Blog

by Leslie Burt


Follow Leslie Burt on twitter: @LeslieBurt

Allen West Knows the Enemy
Executive Summary

Radical Islamism is on the rise across the globe and within the United States. Our policies to deal with the threat have been inadequate through several administrations. The problem lies in the liberal philosophies political correctness and appease m e n t. The refusal to recognize that Islam is more than a religion has blinded us to the threat we face. As a result, we are more vulnerable than ever to Islamic terrorism and the more gradual but even more dangerous civilizational jihad. The Obama administration has taken us on the wrong course. We need new leadership at the top to reset our policies back to the conservative approach of peace through strength. There is only one leader in our midst that understands the enemy and is courageous enough to go against a tide, which may be politically correct but is most assuredly factually wrong. His name is Allen West R(FL-22)

Radical Islamism Defined

Radical Islamism is one of greatest long term threats to our national security. While portraying itself to the West as merely a religion, it is much more than that. It is a totalitarian theo-political, social and economic system that guides every aspect of the believer’s lives through a system of jurisprudence called Sharia law. Sharia law is completely incompatible with our values and freedoms set forth in our constitution. It mandates intolerance to other religions, prohibits freedom of conscience by mandating the death penalty for apostasy, orders the death penalty for homosexuality and discriminates against women in a most brutal and dehumanizing way. It is a threat because the openly stated goal by both mainstream clerics and terrorists is a global Islamic caliphate, subject to Sharia law.

The Threat is Real

The threat is from both violent and civilizational jihad. Civilizational Jihad is perhaps the greater threat due to its stealthy nature and the ability to hide behind our anti-discrimination and freedom of religion laws.

Andrew McCarthy, author of “The Grand Jihad- How Islam and the Left Sabotage America” explains in this interview with FrontPage that “The Grand Jihad is an effort to dig deeper into what that national security challenge is, and in particular, to stress that terrorism is only a small subset of it. Islamists consider themselves to be in a “civilizational jihad” — their words, not mine — against the West. They use terrorism to great effect, but the battle proceeds on every conceivable front in our society: the media, the academy, and our politics, law and culture. And their aim is nothing less than the “destruction of the West” — as Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual guide (and probably the most influential Sunni cleric in the world), puts it, “to conquer America” and “conquer Europe.”
The Proof

The link below is the bone chilling, incredibly detailed original document authored by the Muslim Brotherhood discovered by the FBI during the Holy Land Foundation trial and submitted as evidence. Scroll past the Arabic section to get to the translation:

An Explanatory Memorandum On The General Strategic Goal for The Group In North America 5/22/1991:…ts/misc/20.pdf

The Obama Doctrine

The elusive Obama Doctrine is founded on appeas****t, multilateralism, globalism, internationalism.

From the Wall Street Journal:

“This is the Obama conception of the U.S. role in the world—to work through multilateral organizations and bilateral relationships to make sure that the steps we are taking are amplified.” —White House National Security Council spokesman Ben Rhodes, March 10, 2011, as quoted in the Washington Post “Whatever else one might say about President Obama’s Libya policy, it has succeeded brilliantly in achieving its oft-stated goal of not leading the world. No one can any longer doubt the U.S. determination not to act before the Italians do, or until the Saudis approve, or without a U.N. resolution. This White House is forthright for followership”.

“When the U.S. fails to lead, the world reverts to its default mode as a diplomatic Tower of Babel. Everyone discusses “options” and “contingencies” but no one has the will to act, while the predators march.”…095426116.html

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air: Over three weeks ago, I asked whether anyone could identify an “Obama Doctrine” in foreign policy that covered the triggers and limits for American intervention. One intervention and a prime-time speech later, most of us are still wondering.…bama-doctrine/

Charles Krauthammer
for National Review: “Obama thinks anti-Americanism is a verdict on America’s fitness for leadership. I would suggest that “leading from behind” is a verdict on Obama’s fitness for leadership.”…es-krauthammer

Here is the National Security Policy of the Obama administration. I dare you to get even halfway through it. We are in trouble:…y_strategy.pdf

Where Obama’s Policies Have Gotten Us

The consequences of Obama’s foreign policy have been disastrous. By projecting weakness he has emboldened our enemies. It started with the Cairo speech, where he invited the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood to be guests in the audience thereby lending them legitimacy and support. Today, Egypt is set to return to Islamic fundamentalism with the Brotherhood at the helm and they are forming new alliances with Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.

Obama’s inaction in Iran during their green revolution and reliance upon diplomacy for nuclear nonproliferation has emboldened Iran. Iran could be as close as two months away from having a nuclear weapon. Our traditional allies in the fight against terror and advancement of democracy have been thrown under the bus. Israel, in particular, has been put in grave danger due to Obama currying favor with Islamists.


The misguided Muslim outreach program here at home is also dangerous and self-defeating. It has put in place policies that make us blind to stealth jihad. We have put Muslims of questionable loyalties to our country in sensitive and powerful positions at all levels of government according to Paul Sperry, author of “Infiltration: How Muslims Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington”

Steve Emerson
of the Investigative Project on Terror, testified before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on Terrorism Non-Proliferation and Trade. In his testimony he documents the ill-advised partnerships with Islamists. Here is the link to the complete text:…timony/357.pdf

Whitewashing Islamic Jihad

President Obama has surrounded himself with people who are trying to whitewash Islamism.
John Brennan, the Counterterrorism advisor to the President said in a presentation to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, “We are not at war with Islamic Jihadist’s”. Below is a video of that presentation, via Right Scoop.…mic-jihadists/
James Clapper’s incredible mischaracterization of Muslim Brotherhood: Via Hot Air, In response to questioning from Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.) about the threat posed by the group, Clapper suggested that the Egyptian part of the Brotherhood is not particularly extreme and that the broader international movement is hard to generalize about.

“The term ‘Muslim Brotherhood’…is an umbrella term for a variety of movements, in the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence and has decried Al Qaeda as a perversion of Islam,” Clapper said. “They have pursued social ends, a betterment of the political order in Egypt, et cetera…..In other countries, there are also chapters or franchises of the Muslim Brotherhood, but there is no overarching agenda, particularly in pursuit of violence, at least internationally.”…rgely-secular/

Peace Through Strength

The conservative approach to national security and foreign policy has always been to maintain a strong military and be willing to act alone militarily if necessary when in our national interest. Conservatives also believe in providing strong US leadership in forming international coalitions. In contrast with Obama’s attempted use of diplomacy and multilateral dialogue in dealing with nuclear proliferation, the conservative approach would be a much more hardline carrot and stick approach.
In the present political climate, with the influence of the economic downturn, the rise of the tea party movement and war weariness on the part of the American people, the Republican Party is beginning to move away from the idea of costly and ineffective nation building.
What conservatives are looking for in a leader is a person who believes in American Exceptionalism, unapologetic of our role as the world’s number one superpower.
In the coming 2012 elections, voters will want to know where the candidates stand on radical Islam and national security.

Allen West, a Leader For Our Time

The most knowledgeable and outspoken candidate is Congressman Allen West R(Fl-22) who is running for reelection to his seat. There is a growing movement to draft him to run for president.

Allen West’s insightful, well researched views on Islam, jihad and domestic foreign policy have put him in the spotlight and his interviews on the subject have become youtube hits.

The West doctrine was expressed in his CPAC speech;

  • Peace through vigilance, through resolve, through strength.
  • He mentioned the famous Edmund Burke quote, one of my personal favorites: “All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”
  • He quoted Sun Tzu: “To know your enemy, and to know yourself, and to know the terrain or the environment, in countless battles, you will always be victorious.”
  • And then he made the most important statement of the night: “Peace begins with courageous leaders who are willing to identify and define our enemy, and their objectives, because political correctness has no place in our national security strategy.” (the crowd screamedand another standing ovation ensued)
  • He said he was appalled that the Fort Hood shooting was treated like workplace violence.
  • He said “A new America, a secure America, means that we can ill afford to have a twenty-first century Sir Neville Chamberlain moment.”
  • He said “And yes, yes I do have a problem with granting American Constitutional rights to terrorists while we attempt to and have imprisoned our own warriors for killing terrorists.” (another standing ovation – there were so many during this speech)
  • Here’s another money quote: “The dawn of a new America means this: Secure our borders and enforce our laws. Recognize the emerging threats on the Korean peninsula. Recognize the threats that are coming out of South and Central America. And confront the radical Islamic non-state, non-uniformed belligerents who transit freely across borders, killing and promoting a seventh century ideology that is anathema to the values of America and to Western civilization.”
  • He said that we must never forget that Israel is our greatest ally in the Middle East, and vowed that “I shall never let Israel down.”Hat tip winteryknight

The Video of Allen West’s famous CPAC speech can be found here:…peech-at-cpac/

Allen West
further outlines his strategic vision for the US role in the 21st Century Battlefield at the Heritage Foundation:…y-battlefield/

Allen West knows himself, he knows the facts and he knows the enemy. He has a strategic vision for the United States of America. Were he President, he would not let political correctness overshadow the harsh reality of the threats facing America today. Allen West, as the oath of office commands, would always put America first, protecting her from enemies both foreign and domestic.

Written on October 28, 2011 at 6:00 am by Joel McDurmon


People have no idea how much freedom we’ve lost, how far we’ve gone.

It is no stretch to say that America is not what it used to be. Many lovers of our country will readily identify with the sentiment. What needsto be pushed, however, is a reminder about how and in what ways we have changed. The program we have followed and where we have ended up needs commentary.

Not so long ago, Christians and conservatives in this country defined themselves politically by opposing the great threat of Communism. We hear hardly anything of this today. The idea that Communism was a real threat not so long ago, yet is almost forgotten today, presents a classic example of the American public’s short memory. Mention Marxism in a conversation today and you will almost definitely be hearing crickets in a short time. No one cares: it’s history. The wall fell, we won, move on.

Yes, the Berlin Wall fell, but it fell in our direction. No one talks about this. The Soviet Union fell, but Marxism and Socialism have long flooded all of Western and Eastern Civilization. America is no exception. Marxism is history, yes, and yet the influences of Marxism and various ideas of socialism have never been more dangerous than now, when it stands ready to expand further into every office of government, and when we are yet asleep to it.

So let me briefly state my problems with America as it has come to be. First, we pride ourselves on free-market economics and private ownership of property, but these ideas have been phantoms as long as there has been property tax, which is little more than rent paid to government. If you disbelieve that, then try to go a year or two without paying your property tax, and you will learn who your landlord is. You will be fined, jailed, or “your” property will have a lien filed against it, or it will be confiscated. We don’t own so much as rent from the government. That we have a free-market is likewise ridiculous to defend in the light of recent events. If the Federal Reserve can “print” money at will, and the U. S. Treasury can buy stakes in bank shares, then the market is not free of either State manipulation or intervention.

Second, we have a heavy progressive (or “graduated”) income tax. For the few who may not know, “graduated” means that those who make more money should not only pay more tax based on equal percentage of tax, but should also bear the added burden of an increased percentage. Greater wealth is disproportionately taxed, which penalizes and discourages financial success. The graduated system is unfair, arbitrary, and unbiblical. The United States instituted the graduated income tax by the Sixteenth Amendment in 1913. It has been increased—again disproportionately—many times since.

Third, we have strong anti-family laws, including inheritance tax. In other words, when you die and leave wealth to your children or other designees, the government grabs anywhere from 18–55% of the amount for itself. This is a denial of the sacredness of the family as a unit, and the rights of families to determine the use of their own wealth. It is also a double tax on property, and a blatant attempt to again penalize wealth. It diminishes successful families’ strength in that it detracts from parents’ ability to advance their children’s future. Thus, it is an attack on the traditional family structure and leadership in society in general.

Fourth, following almost immediately on America’s 1913 imposition of income tax, was America’s less obvious 1913 Inflation Tax, which came in the form of the Federal Reserve. America’s first central bank was proposed by Alexander Hamilton and created in 1791. It was closed twenty years later and continued off and on due to mass opposition until the covert form emerged into law in 1913. . . . With recent events, the fall of many banks has left primarily only a few big banks standing. This “crisis” and the mindless and immoral actions of Congress to go along with the various “bailouts” have pushed our central bank closer to an exclusive monopoly.

Fifth, we have many, massive, subsidized government programs. These are all transfers of wealth based on factors other than the market. There are too many to name here, but farm subsidies come to mind: farmers are paid in various ways in order to manipulate crop prices across the board. Ethanol alone has been subsidized to the tune of $10 billion. This diverts corn from other markets into an otherwise market-doomed purpose (ethanol would never brew in a free market); not only does the public get hit with the $10B, it also suffers a rise in the price of meat and other products that require otherwise market-rate corn. These billions are a miniscule part of the overall government subsidy equation, which from 1995–2010 equals about $262 billion.[1]

Sixth, and finally for now, we have compulsory public education regulated at federal, state, and local levels. “Compulsory,” because even if we home school or privately school our children, we are still compelled to pay taxes for public schooling. “Public,” because the taxes are used to fund government-run schools. This tax-funded schooling is presented as free, of course, but it is only free to those who don’t pay property taxes. Our government spends about $700 billion per year on public education, just for primary and secondary levels. The State determines whether, when, and what you will teach your kids. If people want to participate in this system, that is fine with me, but do not compel me to pay for it. This is a robbery of freedom. Also, when schools function legally as “in place of the parents,” the State has again usurped the role of the family.

Why the Concern?

The concern over these particular aspects of modern America—and believe me there are many others—is that they are all innovations imposed upon America in direct contrast to the original American way of life. More to the point is the historical source of these points of discussion:

I have lifted them all from the Communist Manifesto of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.

The reason these points are un-American and anti-biblical is that their source was anti-American and anti-Christian in principle.

What I have described above cover roughly seven of the ten “planks” of the Communist Manifesto. I could probably work to show others, but have neither the time nor necessity. The relevant points are these (1, 2, 3, 5, 7/9, 10):

(1) Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

(2) A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

(3) Abolition of all right of inheritance.

(5) Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

(7) Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state . . .

(9) Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries . . .

(10) Free education for all children in public schools.

The historical connections are clear, too. For example, the springs of the graduated income tax in America flow directly from Marxism. The connection is direct and unmistakable. The first group in American history to advocate the graduated income tax was the Socialist Labor Party, a dedicated collection of Marxists founded originally as the “Workingman’s Party of America” in the People’s Republic of New Jersey in 1876. Their 1887 platform unashamedly declared “we strive for the acquisition of political power.”[2] Among their many “Social Demands” is “Progressive income tax and tax on inheritances; but smaller incomes to be exempt.”

The short-lived Populist Party followed in 1892. Their platform decried “a vast conspiracy against mankind” to demonetize silver and monopolize gold in the hands of a few, among other things. The document contains classic Marxist verbiage, accusing “bondholders” of wanting to “decrease the value of . . . human labor,” and to “fatten usurers, bankrupt enterprise, and enslave industry.”[3] The party died out quickly but had a lasting impact, much of its platform being picked up by the Democratic Party the following election year.

It was then in 1896 that William Jennings Bryan gave that most famous political speech in American history: the “Cross of Gold” speech. Bryan adapted ideas of the former Marxist groups to please American ears and persuade American hearts. Already two years prior he had argued in favor if the income tax, and was now calling it “a just law” and further pushing for the inflation of the money supply. The success of his speech derives from his successful weaving of Marxism and Christian language. Lines like “[tarrif] protection has slain its thousands the gold standard has slain its tens of thousands,” echoed to the religious mind unreligiously bent on envy of other people’s wealth. He called his crusade a “righteous cause” and “holy.” It was brilliant political propaganda. Unequally yoking Marx and Christ (2 Cor. 6:14–18), Bryan argued that the gold standard would be a crucifixion of the “producing masses” and the “toiling masses.” The famous concluding lines leveraged the suffering of Christ for the Marxist agenda: “you shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.” Christians by millions bought into the rhetoric. Tens of millions still do.

And lest we forget the fundamentally anti-religious nature of this plank of Socialism in the country, the Socialist Party platform of 1887 demanded “Separation of all public affairs from religion; church property to be subject to taxation” (note the irony here: the church cannot get involved in public affairs, but the public treasury should benefit from the church’s property). What the Socialist Party could not accomplish with its explicitly anti-church platform, Bryan and his Democrats accomplished by appropriating biblical language to say the same thing.

Likewise, the socialization of education stems directly from the work of early socialists in America. The “Father of the Common Schools” was Massachusetts lawyer and politician Horace Mann (1796–1858). He predates Marx, and thus is not dependent on him, nor was Mann an atheist like Marx, but an enthusiastic churchgoer. His theology, however, was suspect, as he embraced Unitarianism in its early days when it was mission-minded—presenting itself as the culmination of Protestantism and ready to lead the direction of the natural order. Mann rejected orthodox Calvinism and believed strongly in the “perfectibility of man.”[4] This naturalistic belief was, however, couched in religious language: public education would eliminate ignorance, poverty, and crime. In his system, the State replaced both the church and the family: “Society, in its collective capacity, is a real, not a nominal sponsor and god-father for all its children” (classic political salvation).[5] Rushdoony summarizes, “Mann’s work was two-fold, first to secularize education, and, second, to make it the province of the state rather than the community and the parents.”[6] The story of the socialization of education, then, is the product of unbiblical theology. It results in an unbiblical view of education and society that abolishes the role of church and family.

Fall and Recovery

Why do I rehearse these aspects of American history specifically, and why should they bother you so much? Simple. These changes in the American system directly reflect the famous Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto. We have witnessed a gradual progression into a Marxist America, all the while boasting ourselves champions of freedom. Well, the “land of the free, and the home of the brave” has become, in fact, the “land of the Fed, and the home of the slave.” We no longer live in the America that fought for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but in the America which will fight tooth and nail for government funding and special-interest politics. America today is more Marxist than anything, and a large portion of the voting public wishes to make it even more so.

I say these things realizing that many will pelt me with tomatoes and bricks, call me un-American, an America-hater, and most definitely unpatriotic. But here’s the catch: it is only because I absolutely love and adore the America of the Pilgrims, the Declaration, the Bill of Rights, the Founding Fathers, etc., that I point out how much we have lost. This is not the same country. It has been flooded with socialism. Envy, greed, and subsequent lust for political power have raped lady liberty, ravaged our land, and stolen the inheritance of the American Dream. It is not patriotism to keep saying “America, America,” when the America of our fathers is all but gone. It is ridiculous to sing “America the Beautiful” when socialists and statists have marred the cheeks of her once-free and optimistic smile. The America that remains is but a shell filled with Prussian and European-style Socialism, wrapped in red, white, and blue. This is not true patriotism.

No, the true patriot loves freedom, family, and property. The word “patriot” literally means “of the fathers.” A true patriot, therefore, conserves the good his fathers built and passed down. He loves vast horizons untaxed by cold marble institutions in distant Capitols, unfettered by radicals in black robes. A true patriot loves the land, and his Father is God not “the State,” and not “the People”; his land is protected by law, respect for law, and as a last resort, the right to defend, not progressively taxed away by politicians wanting to “spread the wealth around,” neither rented from the State as a privilege to live under its almighty watch.

Is there a way to stop, even reverse the godless trend of the past 150 years? As pessimistic as this all may sound, change is possible. It begins with mentally and spiritually reclaiming our founding principles of individual freedom and enterprise. We must make up our own minds and hearts that these principles are worth defending. And unlike those spineless Congresspersons who, after voting “no” on the bailout, sickeningly caved and voted “yes” after some of the loot was thrown to their pet projects and districts. We must never compromise our principles.

Once we secure these convictions, we must pass them to the next generation. This means maintaining a strong biblical view of the family and of education. Education should be compulsory (in the sense that Deuteronomy and Ephesians command us to educate our children), but this is compulsory before God and not the civil State; and education should be costly (in personal time, money, and effort), but no one should ever be forced to pay for someone else’s education. This seemingly simple tax for public education violates nearly every sacred boundary known to man, especially when the content of that education begins and ends with blasphemy. Unless we recover education as a distinctly family- and church-oriented mandate, we will continue to watch society slide into secularism.

Further steps include continual effort to secure public debates and discussion in churches and public forums. Debates should center on America’s Christian history and the necessity of Christianity as the foundation of social order. Marx consciously erased this foundation, claiming it was but an abstraction of the real problems of mankind. He said that any objections to his system from a religious standpoint “are not deserving of a serious examination.”[7] But he was too self-consciously opposed to Christianity for his dismissal to carry any truth. Christian freedom, God-given rights, and law-protected family and property all posed the ultimate threat to his man-centered takeover of the world (and thus of other men). His program of abolishing property, abolishing the traditional family, socializing education, and socializing sex were all contrived precisely as anti-biblical ideas. It was the institution of his system that Marx saw, not as the product of, but as the means to abolishing religion itself.[8] He saw his program as the economic and social counterpart to Darwin’s work in nature: an explanation of social order that does not require God.

Perhaps the most unfortunate aspect of Marx’s success was the fact the he only succeeded because Christians refused to get involved to begin with. Marx always kept this in mind and exploited it. Reporting on the socialist Hague Congress of 1872, Marx made this unfortunately true remark:

One day the worker will have to seize political supremacy to establish the new organization of labor; he will have to overthrow the old policy which supports the old institutions if he wants to escape the fate of the early Christians who, neglecting and despising politics, never saw their kingdom on earth.[9]

This “neglecting and despising” of politics by Christians has continued in modern American history, and America has since followed the anti-Christian program of Marx and abandoned that of the Bible. This blind following has included many Christians. The reversal of this trend will require bringing these issues into the open as worldview issues. The church must allow and encourage political and economic discussion, and the public must be made to know that we have the answers. The transformation will not happen overnight, but it can happen.


  1. This number has been updated from the figures available for the book in 2009. []
  2. “The Socialist Labor Party of North America Platform,” 1887;, accessed October 16, 2008. []
  3. “National People’s Party Platform”;, accessed October 16, 2008. []
  4. Quoted in R. J. Rushdoony, The Messianic Character of American Education: Studies in the History of the Philosophy of Education (Philipsburg, NJ: Prebyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1963), 19. []
  5. Quoted in R. J. Rushdoony, The Messianic Character of American Education, 24. []
  6. R. J. Rushdoony, The Messianic Character of American Education, 27. []
  7. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, “Manifesto of the Communist Party,” Basic Writings on Politics and Philosophy, ed. Lewis S. Feuer (Garden City, NY: Anchor Books, 1959), 26. []
  8. Karl Marx, “Capital, Book I,” Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels On Religion (New York: Schocken Books, 1964), 136. []
  9. Karl Marx, “On the Hague Congress,” Karl Marx, Frederick Engels: Collected Works, 50 vol. (New York: International Publishers, 1988), 23:255. []

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez


The Clockwork Conservative

All wound up about politics, history, culture... lots of stuff.


at the Re-Birth of America!

ON MY WATCH - the writings of SamHenry

A Writer's Take on Global and National Issues with Background Information and Humor As Needed

Once Written

A Political Blog

Welcome to the Right Central

Warning: Not your average conservative newsletter. Viewer discretion advised.

purveyor of space kablooie stories.

Truth in Palmyra

By Wally Fry

Truth and Shadows

Following the white rabbit

Pacific Paratrooper

This site is Pacific War era information


The best in WWII aviation history

BUNKERVILLE | God, Guns and Guts Comrades!

God, Guns and Guts Comrades!

Aces Flying High

An Aussie's travels to air shows, aviation museums and related events around the world, with a bit of aerospace history along the way!

Eyes on Europe & Middle East

Des regards croisés sur l'Europe et le Moyen Orient

Doc Baize

Give me liberty or give me death!



Chastisement 2014

He is ready to separate the chaff from the wheat with his winnowing fork


The Take Down Of America

The Dangers of Allah

Confused about Islam, Muslims, Taqiyya, Kitman, The Islamic State, and Sharia? I've spent 14 years studying these confused beings.  They are not at all what they want us to believe, especially those who are ruled by al Qaeda , ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood as well as those who commit overt and covert Jihad while practicing Sharia tortures upon women

Treason Among Us

A blog by Guido Volante Author of "Treason Among Us; Secrets of the S.E.C."

The Counter Jihad Report

News ~ Resources ~ Activism

Documenting the Islamization of America

Digestible Politics

Politics Made Easy!

A Conservative Christian Man

Stand for Your Belief or it is Not a Belief but an Excuse

sharia unveiled

illuminating minds

We Moved > Go To:


%d bloggers like this: