The coup that made America a socialist nation while you slept or panicked.
The American government now intends to manage Banks and Corporations by government decree. That is not the government that our founders set up under the Constitution of the United States. We are now under socialism. Socialism is where government owns and runs corporations.
Nevertheless, our government has proven that it cannot even manage itself. If it could it would not owe over $10 trillion with $50 trillion of unfunded liabilities bills coming due. So would any rational person think that the government will now manage corporations and banks better than the free enterprise system?
Basically we have just had a socialist coup in this nation. Whether you know it or not while you slept or were panicked by the news media you went from a free enterprise system to a form of state socialism.
.
Oh the CEO of Bank of America went on 60 minutes and said he thinks we will go back to some form of capitalism after the debts are paid back to the government in 3 to 5 years. That is wishful thinking. The debts will never be paid back to the government because the institutions run by the government will be regulated, restricted and forced to do costly stupid things like giving out loans to people who will never pay them back. Government regulation requiring the giving of loans to unqualified people is really part of the reason why we had this crises to start with. They will now continue to lose money and the government will keep spending more money and taking more control. In addition, you are electing socialists politicians that will now spread socialism to every aspect of our society. Karl Marx has taken over America from his grave. Now it looks like the American free enterprise system will join him there.
Make no mistake any return to constitutional government and the free enterprise system will not happen before the next American revolution. When the next crises hits (and it will) your personal liberties will also be taken from you by government decree. Our Constitution means nothing when nobody enforces it.
Also read what Joe Farah just said on this issue. He apparently sees the socialist take over of America just as I do.
Don’t count on stock market rally
Corporate, personal and government debt totals, over the last two decades, have reached unsustainable levels. When a small portion of the debt known as “sub prime” went from the milk and honey of the money changers to toxic waste, the whole system froze and revealed just how vulnerable it was and continues to be.
There is no doubt we may have, for the moment, avoided a second great depression but at what price? And equally important how can any of the corporations being bailed out generate the profits necessary to pay back the borrowed money?
How can companies founded on a free market business model now survive, no less flourish, under government-controlled financial socialism?
They can’t. And most honest economists know it. But the citizens of the world don’t want to face the truth behind the systemic problems. They want and demand unbridled, uninterrupted growth and accumulation of personal wealth. Wealth that is created, in many cases, without work. Wealth that is guaranteed to never drop in value.
So the government has been assigned the task by many uneducated citizens of making everyone in the world rich.
Soon we will witness what any society that subscribes to the belief that wealth without work or risk is a birthright … inflation. That is the only formula that will perpetuate the welfare state. And now that state includes Wall Street bankers and investors.
The demand for continuation of the game will cause governments worldwide to print money faster than it can be spent. Helicopter Ben Bernanke will be loading the chopper with $100 bills dropping them over the population at large. Many will think it’s great! I can see the masses in the streets getting their “fair share” of the wealth. Even Sen. Barack Obama wants to “spread the wealth around.”
But $250 billion of the $805 billion ($105 billion added pork) TARP program will now buy direct equity in American banks and possibly banks around the world. The government is now an investor with the taxpayer as the guarantor. Soon government will be in health care, automobiles, aircraft and Lord knows what else.
If these new government investments happen to fail who will save us then? The taxpayer will have already been bled dry from stopping the current failure. Has anybody planned ahead for if and, more likely, when this occurs?
If any American at this point doesn’t see the lunacy of the current plan to “save” the system then they deserve the socialism they will receive. I for one have taken steps to protect my family from the government mismanagement that is sure to come. They have done such a good job running the country that we are now placing private business in their hands? Have we reached that level of irrational panic?
Liberty was sold this week for the promise of wealth and prosperity. Apparently two cars, a home, a fat 401k and a life of ease are much more important than freedom and liberty. Liberty is based on personal responsibility and Americans want all the reward without any responsibility. Wall Street fat cats included.
Your government has replaced the greatest free market capitalist system in the world, one based on risk and reward; with a completely socialist financial system with the government at its foundation. There is only one question left to ask. Who will have the power to pick the winners and losers?
Date posted: Monday, October 20th, 2008 1:44 pm | Under category: American patriot topics, Danger to the US, economy
RSS 2.0 | Comment | Trackback
Well, in constrast to Bush’s insistance on a continued respect for the rules of free market capitalism, did you hear what the president of the European Commission, Barroso, remarked before the press after his meeting with Bush and Sarkozy last weekend? He was talking about the need for a so-called “new economic order”. So there you have it. Straight from the mouth of that former Maoist rebel from Portugal. The capitalist free market economy is said to be dead and no longer viable. As one could have expected, we are now going toward a new economic system that I suspect will involve a new global bureaucratic system with a global central bank. The real problem is that free market capitalism has been hindered by gov’t interference and suffered from the consequences of gov’t mismanagement for decades. That is one of the main causes of this crash, along with moral and cultural decadence. These problems will not get solved by more government intererference and more rebellion against God, pushed for mostly by - guess who - government. And what they call “free market” in the EU is not and has never been true free market capitalism in the first place but a perverted mix of capitalism with socialism, similar to Third Way, corporatist economics.
I think the elite were just waiting for this inevitable crises. They helped to create it by exploiting the weakness of human nature through easy credit and promotion of risky transactions (gambling). Now they will use this crises by promoting fear and establishing what they wanted all along. That is a socialist bureaucratic one world economic system. We are not quite there yet but we soon will be. This is just one leg on the three legged stool to world governance. The other two legs being a new one world political order and a new one world religious order.
I do think this is the end of free market capitalism now everything will be increasingly controlled by the state. I think every future crises in the world will now be used to gain more power for this Beast even if they have to come up with bogeymen like global warming. However, I am sure they will find enough real monsters that they will also use for their world system of total control through the enlightened elite.
Quote from http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Oct17/0,4670,EUMeltdownNewEconomicOrder,00.html :
“But the political pendulum, at least in Europe, is swinging decisively in the direction of tighter control and supervision, away from the laissez-faire economics that fueled a colossal global boom and appear to have enabled an equally dramatic bust.”
I don’t think I’ve ever read bigger crap than this. Laissez-faire economics? In the EU? You got to be kidding me! This is really bad. If even FOX News thinks this way, then we are headed for some serious trouble. It’s almost as if everybody’s smoking crack these days and got their heads up high in the clouds. We have not been having laissez-faire economics since the early 20th century. And no, that so-called “neoliberalism” does not qualify as laissez-faire.
Don, you’re absolutely right about that. Also, people just don’t get what free market capitalism is really about and they don’t even bother getting their facts straight. They just swallow whatever their so-called representative tells them or what the media feeds them or they turn to utopian “alternatives” to the free market that eventually will bring in tyranny. And as you can see, Europe remains the frontrunner of collectivism and tyranny. With the U.S. sadly in 2nd position these days. It used to be otherwise; it used to be that the U.S. championed freedom and was an example to the old world. Now the EU is championing its old statist rhetoric once again, and a great deal of the American public is following. Sick.
The worse the crises gets the more they will push for a new world economic order. I do not know if Gorden Brown will succeed at this time but you see where he is trying to take the world. Just like Tony Blair is trying to establish religious based socialism through a pluralist religious network through the foundation he set up where all paths lead to Rome. Blair also intends to be the first head of the EU. Britain is now the surveillance capitol of the world and the big brother nanny state of the world. One of biggest pushers of man caused global warming in the world and restrictions on man is Prince Charles. We all know the Royal family is somehow involved in establishing globalism. So why is all this coming out of Britain? Me thinks Britain is being used to set up global governance but they will find out that there are even more powerful people in the wings. I am starting to sound like a conspiracy book
We will not be in second place behind Europe long with Obama and his all Far Left government. Even Hillary said that her goal was to make the U.S. more like Europe and Obama, Polosi and Reed are so far Left of Hillary they really should be called Marxists. Yet, these people will be running our government. Who would have even believed the nation would move so far left so quickly? Ronald Regan is spinning in his grave.
Yes, and I know a whole lot of other people that must be turning in their graves as I write this. I don’t know how Britain got like this. It seems like they’re run by a modern elite that just won’t go away. I don’t think most people actually approve of it, but then again most are probably too dumbed down to even be well aware of what’s really going on. Electing a conservative isn’t going to change much either. After all, in our modern democracies, you just get elected to solve the mess your predecessor left and the fact is you just can’t possibly do that in a matter of three to four years. Not to mention that it is really the EU that’s pulling the strings for us these days. Why even bother voting?
In the U.S. it now turns out that politicians claiming to be conservatives are centralist and liberals are Marxists. People forget, but in some ways even Ronald Regan was not a true conservative and Bush senior was so far left of Him that he ran against Him from the liberal end of the Republican party. After Regan, Bush Senior claims to have seen the conservative light and runs as a conservative for president but acts like a liberal in office and loses conservative support and the next election. Then the next politician elected as a conservative was George Bush Jr. but he has been a centralist on most issues. Now McCain is running as a conservative but he is liberal much like George Bush Senior. So the Republican leadership is now centralist at best and the Democrats are controlled by socialists. America keeps moving more left because most major media and the educational systems are controlled by the Left and most people have been brainwashed and dumbed down by them.
I am starting to sound like a conspiracy book
Don! Say it ain’t so!
Actually, to an increasing degree, we will see open conspiracy develop as we get closer to the Beast Government (and those left behind will see it come to fruition in the Tribulation).
I’m afraid true intellectual conservatism as a political philosophy is dead. What they call conservatism today, whether in the U.S. or elsewhere, really has just become a fixed set of fallible, man-made doctrines. Or in other words, an ideology. Neoconservatism is an example of that. But before I give anyone the impression that the neocons are evil bastards that are part of a global NWO conspiracy, I should add that I think “Paleoconservatism” with its far-fetched isolationism and tendencies toward mercantilism and oftentimes racialist viewpoints, is ideological in nature as well, and is not a viable alternative to the course the current Republican Party is going.
Ron Paul and his [paleo] libertarian movement has it right on several issues, but he’s incredibly naive on foreign policy and I often find myself in agreement more with the neocons on foreign policy issues than with anyone else. I think in some respects he’s just utopian and I don’t consider him a conservative. True Conservatism is rooted in tradition and customs; it champions virtues and propriety and discourages vices and lawlessness. It cherishes the values of nobility and chivalry. It sees in the past a source of wisdom. It opposes tyranny where ever it emerges and defends man’s liberty and God’s truth in the face of the evil and lies arising from the foolishness and fallible thinking of mankind. It values commerce and hard work, it respects the various civil institutions of society, starting with the family.
Now can someone give me just one good example of such a Conservative in this age, please? It seems they’ve all gone statist.
El Nasrani
Actually Ron Paul is a strict state rights constitutionalist and he believes in very limited role for Federal government. Since his beliefs come from the very writings of our founding fathers he certainly is a conservative by any true definition of the word. All the names people call conservationism today are just handles put on people who do not fit any true definition of a constitutional conservative.
Ron Paul’s foreign views might not be so naive had we stayed true to our Constitution and not gotten into foreign wars unless Congress made a formal declaration of war as required by our Constitution. Instead the government fights countless wars in the name of some idealism with a mercenary army so that most Americans will not feel the pain. However, since Americans never paid the bills and instead passed the cost of the wars on to their children they have bankrupted their own kids.
Ron Paul is right that we should not have sailed this battleship but when the ship is in the battle taking fire and lives of many are dependent on winning the battle is not the time to tell those firing at you that you intend to expose your backside. Had we left Israel deal with the situation in the Middle-East unrestricted we would not have had to go to Iraq and now we are making the same mistake again with Iran.
After the economic collapse and the social Revolution (if it can succeed) I can see America returning to a constitutional government and Ron Paul’s way of thinking. We really will have no choice. I guess that would mean that Europe and everyone else would have to fight their own wars unless someone was stupid enough to directly attack America. We our now finding out that all these governments we saved for democracy soon make a mockery of it anyway.
I hear too much talking from him about the market and not enough about the need for moral values. Okay, he opposes abortion. Why is he so soft on gay marriage? What about the issue of drugs? Just allow all these things? I believe in national sovereignty, the free market but also in the need to preserve decency and virtues. To me, adherence to the U.S. Constitution is more of a modern-day American definition of what conservatism constitutes. Weren’t the Founding Fathers divided on several issues later on? Thomas Jefferson was not George Washington and neither was Washington a John Adams. I respect Ron Paul and think he’s right on several issues, but I don’t agree with such simplistic views on foreign policy. I think the fight against Naziism was legitimate and the world that was shaped after this devastating war changed the landscape for good. If you hadn’t competed with the Communists or fought them, would you really have been better off now? I don’t think so. If Israel hadn’t had U.S. military support, it would probably never have become an independent state. So you shouldn’t have supported Israel just to avoid having the Muslims hijack your planes? I think that is laughable. The U.S. supported Afghan rebels (the darn Taliban) in their fight against the USSR - and then they turned against you. The fault of the U.S.? Or could it be that these Muslims are opportunistic backstabbers that would turn against you regardless of your foreign policy? After all, U.S. pop culture and its leading economy are enough reason to a billion people on this globe to hate you, us, or Christian converts. You just can’t undo what’s happened and that’s why I think you simply have to deal with things the way they are now. A sudden return to isolationism is pretty much inconceivable and wouldn’t necessarily change things for the better. I think we should revalue Western civilization and defend its Judeo-Christian heritage by showing us as morally superior instead of turning a blind eye to movements, religions and nations that seek to destroy us. How is the Constitution against that?
Ron Paul is a dedicated Christian He is not for the things you mentioned. He just thinks that these are local issues not federal issues. Historically states and local communities had the laws against certain sexual practices. Paul just thinks that the Federal government is limited to the areas specifically defined in the Constitution. Which say that all power not given to the Federal government by the States is retained by the States. This nation was designed to have limited federal government and now federal government is running just about everything.
While it is true that you have to address the issues as they are today. Paul says if we do not get back to the constitutional government the nation will be bankrupt and we will not be able to anything in the world anyway. That is true. If major nations stop buying our debt because they believe we cannot repay we are finished. Within four years we will be 15 to 20 trillion dollars in debt and going further in debt by 2 trillion each year. Work out the interest payment of 18 trillion at 5 to 10 percent. And 10 percent is not unlikely in the next four years due to inflation. That would be almost 2 trillion a year out of 4 trillion budget. Half of our Federal budget will be going just to pay the interest on our national debt. And none of that includes the $50 trillion of entitlements debt that is coming due a little bit further down the line. There is no way out of this now without radically limiting the role of the Federal government and that was what Paul was trying to convey to the nation.
Drugs are a national security issue so the Federal government would have some role there.
People have been defining and redefining the meaning of the words of our Constitution throughout our history yet the words do not change. It is like the Bible some see the same words one way and others see it another way. That is why we have a Supreme Court to decide which view is Constitutionally correct. Of course if the court is going to redefine truth like many now do with the Bible you have no real Constitution you just have 9 people making things up as they go along. They call that a living Constitution meaning they can change it anyway they want to fit the needs of today. However, within our Constitution there are already ways to change the Constitution. Amendments and a constitutional convention if necessary. We do not need political appointees to do it for the States.
I do not know what Ron Paul’s views are on the second world war. That is the last time congress actually declared war in accordance with the Constitution.
There is no sense arguing about what would have been in the world if we did not takes certain specific action. Fates of nations really are really decided by God not the will of man.
I do not think Paul argues that Islam would love us if we were not involved in the Middle East perhaps some of his supports do but he gets Liberal libertarians as well as conservatives. Should we be the moral policeman of the world when we are not moral ourselves? We have tried but it bankrupted us and is the world truly a better safer place? Frankly, I do not think Ron Paul turns a blind eye to Islam. He is not against the fight against terrorists that attacked us. He makes it quite clear that he would use deadly force against any nation that attacked us. He may be wrong about Iraq but that story is not over. What we are now setting up might be worse than the cure. Right now secular warlords are staking out territory with the help of the U.S. It very much looks like we are setting up the groundwork for the creation of another Saddam.
Israel indeed might be better off without us. God can protect Israel instead they put their faith in us and we betray them and become a hindrance to them and that is Paul’s position. Every time Israel fights a major war God gives them more of there own land. It is us who pressure them to give the land back with a false promise of peace. Israel today still only has a small fraction of the land promised to them by God and the Balfour declaration. Bill Salus in his book “Isralistine” claims that Israel will get all of this land in the next major war of Pslams 83 and that is how they will achieve peace through conquering their Arab enemies. They will have peace until the time that Russia and Iran and other allies come against Israel. God will deal directly with that army. I am not saying Salus has it correct, I am still reading the book, but he may. Think of the implications of Israel taking over much of the Middle East..
It does not matter what anyone wants anyway the U.S. is bankrupt and it will become more isolationist because of it. We are lucky if we can get out of this economic crises with our union intact. If our economy collapses all that we did in the past will not mean a hill of beans to those living in the world in the future. Anymore than England rules the seas of yesterday means anything to anyone today.
First, I don’t have the intention of bashing Ron Paul. I entirely agree with his assessment of the economic situation and I’m fully aware that the U.S. Constitution limits the powers of the federal government, in favor of the individual states. If as you say, he is opposed to gay marriage and civil unions, that’s great. However, so far I haven’t seen him addressing this issue. His reasoning against abortion reminds me more of a libertarian way of thinking than that of a conservative.
As for Israel, I understand the argument to leave things up to Israel. It’s more or less the same in education with gov’t subsidies. But why would this necessarily have anything to do with the insistence to create a Palestinian state? I think that has more to do with administration’s policy than with the fact that the U.S. provides military support to Israel? However, the real beef I have here is that they make it look as if support to Israel is to be abolished entirely because it would somehow cure all the problems the U.S. is facing and that the U.S. should never have supported Israel in the first place. I think that’s revisionism and doesn’t help anybody. I’ve heard Ron Paul talking about terrorists (= Mujahedeen doing allah’s will) and it doesn’t look like he’s very convinced of the fact that Islam is the real threat.
I think pure isolationism is impossible. Not that I have a problem with non-interventionism per se, but I wonder just how long you’re going to be able to stay out of trouble if you no longer support Israel militarily or financially, get the troops out of Iraq immediately, let Iran build a nuclear weapon’s arsenal, allow Russia to crush your allies and support rogue regimes, let the jihadis to take over Pakistan and Latin America going socialist. How are you going to maintain peaceful free trade relations with nations that hate you and your Constitution regardless of your foreign policy or keep on charging high tariffs on anything you export to them?
The U.S. can no longer be a moral policeman because too many of its people have gone immoral and so has its government. What I’m saying is that Western civilization as a whole should return to its Judeo-Christian heritage and most importantly Christ. I do not for a moment believe that in the U.S. case, simply a return to the Constitution is going to solve everything. If anyone actually believes so, they are mislead.
In howfar is an American a political Conservative for adhering to the U.S. Constitution? Ron Paul and others may be “conservative” in the sense that they wish to preserve the original principles of the U.S. Constitution, but how does that make anyone a true Conservative? There are Libertarians who say they uphold to the U.S. Constitution just as much and based on the same document they are willing to support gay marriage, gambling, prostitution and so on. The Founding Fathers were divided on certain issues as well. Jefferson and Thomas Paine were not quite conservatives back in those days. They supported the French Revolution, for instance, while conservative Founding Fathers like Hamilton did not. That was really my point. Does that make Ron Paul my enemy? Not at all. I just think that based on his platform, the man is really more a Jeffersonian and a Libertarian than a political Conservative. I think the likelihood that his views more or less become a reality is indeed high. At some point the U.S. will go isolationist but not because it really wants to but because it will be forced to. At least, that’s what I think.
All of this is really getting off topic. Ron Paul is not in contention for any major office in this country and all is said just because I mention that he is a Conservative. The definition of the word is very subjective even in the dictionary. You obviously suggest a political meaning of the word that may not be the meaning of many who call themselves conservatives in America.
I will only say this about what you said. Evil is going to happen in the world no matter the U.S. Foreign policy. The U.S. will not be able to shape or save this evil world even though it may die trying. Whatever actions we take in the world in the future will lead to further serious reactions that most likely will not favor this nation. Perhaps when the world’s Messiah comes he will change the world so everyone will favor our worldview (Obama). However, more likely our worldview under Obama will change to that of the world consensus.
Fair enough, this is off-topic. It was not my intention to hijack this threat or to attack Ron Paul, all I did was mention him and his movement along with paleoconservatism which I don’t see as an alternative (anymore). Then we got into a discussion over what conservatism as a poltical philosphy is in an American context. Is it just adhering to the U.S. constitution or is it something more? I contend it really ought to be more than just that. As a last off-topic response, I never said the U.S. gov’t should prevent all sorts of evil in this world. Rather that Western civilization should return to its foundations in order to be a moral example. But obviously that’s never going to happen, especially when people like Obama get elected. In that I agree with you.