Sam Weaver
Socialism vs. capitalism: Part V
By Sam Weaver
Every presidential election year, some pundits — primarily Liberty-loving conservative commentators — proclaim that this is the most important election of our lifetime. Every presidential election year, countless grassroots, Liberty-loving patriots bemoan the fact that this is yet another choice between the lesser of two evils.
This series of articles has been about socialism and capitalism; but really, it has been about much more than that. Ultimately, this series is about tyranny vs. Liberty. Let's take a look at the two concerns expressed above in the context of tyranny and Liberty. Please allow me to examine the second concept first.
This election is yet another choice between the lesser of two evils.
This has always been true. I have often lamented this sentiment over the past three decades. What truly drives this sentiment today? Ultimately, there are two things.
First, we all have our own unique worldview perspective. Many of us believe that our worldview is absolutely right — good, just, fair, etc. — and that anyone who doesn't agree with us virtually 100% on every issue probably should not be president of the United States or hold elective office at any level of government. We demand near perfection in our elected "leaders." We must realize that not one person in this world thinks exactly like we do. Not one person in this world is even anywhere near perfect.
Second, for better or for worse, the United States has developed and employed a two-party political system. Generally, the platforms of the two major parties, respectively, have coalesced around the two dominant worldview ideologies/philosophies. The Democratic Party platform embodies the modern liberal worldview, and the Republican Party platform embraces the American conservative worldview. Sadly, far too many Republican politicians are influenced/corrupted by "culture" (i.e., media, Hollywood, public education) by lobbyists and by outspoken voters. Far too often, they lack both the courage and the will to stand up for the fundamental principles and ideas of the conservative (American) worldview philosophy.
Nevertheless, the two-party system did not cause this phenomenon of forcing American voters to choose between the lesser of two evils. This phenomenon really began during the height of the "Progressive Era" and shortly thereafter; when powerful bankers were put in charge of America's economy (Federal Reserve Act), and when "social (or, domestic) policy" was unconstitutionally placed under the jurisdiction of the federal government (FDR Administrations). In other words, it started when We, the People, generally began to abandon the basic principles of (especially, economic) Liberty and began accepting some of the tenets of socialism. It began to solidify the very moment that we, generally, started to see our representatives (politicians, including presidents) as "leaders" rather than as servants of the people and upholders of the constitution. Meanwhile, it gained a powerful foothold when "progressives" (and, ultimately, teachers' unions) took virtually absolute control of public education in the largest and most concentrated districts throughout America.
When we — the rich and the poor — began to see that we could consistently get stuff (favors, benefits, supplemental "income," education, etc., etc.) from the federal government, the "deal" (New Deal?) was sealed.
This is the most important election of our lifetime.
This, too, has always been true — at least since 1912. In my lifetime up until now, probably (arguably), it had never been more true than in the election of 1980. Does this mean that everyone who has made this claim since 1980 was merely crying wolf? Is it just a hyperbolic statement uttered for propaganda purposes? Not at all. This statement is rooted both in a thorough knowledge of history, strategies, tactics, aspirations, objectives, patience and perseverance of "progressives," and in a genuine love of Liberty.
Rush Limbaugh, love him or hate him, made a statement on his radio program a few months ago that went something like this:
"The United States of America can withstand and overcome four more years of Barack Obama as president. But it cannot and will not survive for long under an electorate that would consistently vote for people like him."
Immediately, some on the "Left" feigned outrage:
"Aha! We all knew that Limbaugh is a racist! This just proves it! 'People like him?' Rush Limbaugh hates Black folks!"
Which of those two statements qualify as "bigoted?"
Rush Limbaugh is standing in the gap against the tyranny of modern "conventional wisdom" — the man behind the curtain. Rush knows that the poor and minorities are disproportionately susceptible to this tyranny. He sincerely desires Liberty and Justice for all. The "people like him" reference in Rush's statement denotes "progressives" — modern "liberals," socialists, Alinskyites, Marxists.
Having said all that, I tend to disagree with the first part of Limbaugh's statement. I do not want to sound alarmist or hyperbolic, but I seriously doubt that Liberty and Justice — the American Ideal — can survive four more years of Barack Obama as president. I could cite many reasons for thinking this way, but here are three:
First, if Barack Obama is re-elected, the most egregious parts of ObamaCare that have not yet taken effect will be fully implemented. After that, it will be all but impossible to repeal ObamaCare. ObamaCare is the basic framework for nationalized healthcare. Nationalized healthcare has been a (if not the) primary goal of socialists everywhere since the turn of the last century. Once government has control over your healthcare, it has virtually absolute control over you.
Second, the power and control of the Federal government and its vast bureaucracies/agencies will be enhanced and strengthened. The already out-of-control EPA will have the "freedom" to double down on regulations that are even now crushing businesses large and small. HHS will use the vague regulations and authority given to it under ObamaCare to gain unfathomable degrees of power and control over the relationship between you and your doctor. Through programs such as SNAP and disability, to policies involving immigration, more and more voters and potential voters will become dependent upon federal largesse; further expanding an already substantial bloc of loyal Obama voters. The "'evil' rich" — business owners, job creators; those who even now pay more than 40% of all income taxes in the U.S. — will be "asked" (forced) to pay "their 'fair' share." How fair is "fair?" Is it 50%; 60%? Even God Himself only asks for 10%; and He does not force anyone to give that! [NOTE: The 40% figure expressed above represents the share of all federal income taxes that the top 1% of taxpayers sends to the federal government. It does not indicate a share of individual income. However, before you say that this statement is misleading, consider the fact that virtually everyone who pays federal income taxes gives at least 10% of their income if not substantially more. Also consider this: The top 10% of taxpayers pay about 90% of federal income taxes, and most of them are business owners.] Every $40,000.00 that the IRS takes from a business is a job that was never allowed to be created. Rather, it is $40,000.00 that goes to empower the tyranny of bureaucrats and to create dependency — and loyal voters!
Third, it is possible if not very likely, that one or two seats on the Supreme Court will be opened for replacement in the next four years. Under an Obama presidency, this will almost certainly tip the balance further away from Liberty and much more solidly toward tyranny for decades to come.
None of the three reasons above (again, just three of many that I could cite) even touch upon the most important role (and one of the very few limited and specific constitutional roles) of the federal government: national defense and foreign policy. The ability of the man behind the curtain to shield the childish naïveté and the gross incompetence of Barack Hussein Obama in this crucial role is both amazing and horrific. Four more years of President Obama could very well destroy virtually every vestige of American power and influence throughout the world.
Beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt, 6 November 2012 does indeed represent the most important election of my lifetime. Jimmy Carter was a "progressive." He was an incompetent commander in chief and was clueless about economic Liberty. Yet, Carter has nothing on Obama. Carter did not spend his formative years being mentored by Marxists such as Frank Marshall Davis. He did not spend almost 20 years in a "church" whose "pastor" regularly condemned "white" America. He was not steeped in the radical Marxist ideas, tactics and strategies of Saul Alinsky.
Barack Obama is not the old "progressive" in the mold of Woodrow Wilson, FDR, LBJ or Jimmy Carter. He is a Marxist, and he wants Marxism established immediately — not in small steps and pauses. A second term will give him the "mandate" to do just that. Because of Amendment XXII, he is constitutionally barred from seeking a third term. This means that he does not have to be careful about pleasing anyone. Moderates and independents, beware! He will double down on the implementation of his ideology. If the situation is "right," he may even go so far as to declare Marshall Law and suspend elections near the end of a second term.
The election of 6 November is vital to the very survival of Liberty and Justice — of the American Ideal and of American Exceptionalism — on another level as well. Mitt Romney is far from perfect. For me to say that he ever even approached my idea of an ideal presidential candidate would be an outright lie. If the voters do choose him over Barack Hussein Obama to be the next president of the United States, what would Romney do to preserve and enhance Liberty and Justice? Does he even fully understand the concept and the Source of Liberty and Justice? This is why it is absolutely crucial that everyone who does not take Liberty for granted — everyone who reveres the Ultimate Source of Liberty and Justice — must vote at every level of government in this election!
If Obama wins a second term, the flame of Essential Liberty and True Justice may very well be quenched forever. If Romney wins, at least a dying ember will remain. One short-term breath of air may keep that ember glowing for a time. One long and steady wind will reignite and sustain the flame.
The breath of air
This election is crucial for the preservation of Liberty, Justice and American Exceptionalism. It is important at the presidential level. However, it is equally important at the congressional level. It is vitally important that We, the moral, educated and informed People, elect members of the U.S. House and Senate who will relentlessly hold the next president's feet to the fire. We must have a Congress that will boldly and unremittingly stand up for Essential Liberty, True Justice, Rule of Law and American Exceptionalism, and against tyranny in every form and to every degree.
The long and steady wind
Moral, educated and informed people understand and profoundly appreciate Liberty and Justice. They abhor authoritarianism and socialism. What good is served by those who love Liberty and despise tyranny, but are not actively and passionately engaged in preserving Liberty & Justice and fighting against charlatans and wannabe tyrants?
As Americans, it is a duty of ours to vote for representatives who will work — and, if necessary, fight — to uphold Liberty & Justice and to crush the aspirations of every would-be tyrant. We elect members of Congress to check and balance the powers of the executive and judicial branches. Obviously, over the past many decades, this has not worked out well. Both We, the People, and our representatives in Congress have failed miserably in our duties. It is the duty of Congress to hold the feet of both the president and the federal courts to the fire. It is the duty of the people to hold Congress' feet to the fire.
The one and only hope for preserving and sustaining Truth, Liberty and Justice rests in the millions of moral, educated and informed patriots becoming actively and passionately engaged in efforts toward that end. This hope is embodied in the Tea Parties. Tea Party patriots became politically and socially active — many for the first time in their lives — as a passionate rebellion against the tyranny (mostly economic) of the man behind the curtain. As their numbers grow and their ideas spread, modern "conventional wisdom" will begin to lose its grasp on the American people.
If Liberty is to survive, it is imperative that Barack Obama be defeated on 6 November. Just as crucial, if tyranny and the wiles of tyrants are to be kept in check, patriots must vote. More than that, however, patriots must work hard to keep all of their elected representatives honest and informed. Patriots must unite and form a great army to recapture the institutions — public education, media, bureaucracies and courts — that "progressives" have had near complete control over for decades.
Only then will the United States of America remain an exceptional nation.
© Sam Weaver
October 29, 2012
Every presidential election year, some pundits — primarily Liberty-loving conservative commentators — proclaim that this is the most important election of our lifetime. Every presidential election year, countless grassroots, Liberty-loving patriots bemoan the fact that this is yet another choice between the lesser of two evils.
This series of articles has been about socialism and capitalism; but really, it has been about much more than that. Ultimately, this series is about tyranny vs. Liberty. Let's take a look at the two concerns expressed above in the context of tyranny and Liberty. Please allow me to examine the second concept first.
This election is yet another choice between the lesser of two evils.
This has always been true. I have often lamented this sentiment over the past three decades. What truly drives this sentiment today? Ultimately, there are two things.
First, we all have our own unique worldview perspective. Many of us believe that our worldview is absolutely right — good, just, fair, etc. — and that anyone who doesn't agree with us virtually 100% on every issue probably should not be president of the United States or hold elective office at any level of government. We demand near perfection in our elected "leaders." We must realize that not one person in this world thinks exactly like we do. Not one person in this world is even anywhere near perfect.
Second, for better or for worse, the United States has developed and employed a two-party political system. Generally, the platforms of the two major parties, respectively, have coalesced around the two dominant worldview ideologies/philosophies. The Democratic Party platform embodies the modern liberal worldview, and the Republican Party platform embraces the American conservative worldview. Sadly, far too many Republican politicians are influenced/corrupted by "culture" (i.e., media, Hollywood, public education) by lobbyists and by outspoken voters. Far too often, they lack both the courage and the will to stand up for the fundamental principles and ideas of the conservative (American) worldview philosophy.
Nevertheless, the two-party system did not cause this phenomenon of forcing American voters to choose between the lesser of two evils. This phenomenon really began during the height of the "Progressive Era" and shortly thereafter; when powerful bankers were put in charge of America's economy (Federal Reserve Act), and when "social (or, domestic) policy" was unconstitutionally placed under the jurisdiction of the federal government (FDR Administrations). In other words, it started when We, the People, generally began to abandon the basic principles of (especially, economic) Liberty and began accepting some of the tenets of socialism. It began to solidify the very moment that we, generally, started to see our representatives (politicians, including presidents) as "leaders" rather than as servants of the people and upholders of the constitution. Meanwhile, it gained a powerful foothold when "progressives" (and, ultimately, teachers' unions) took virtually absolute control of public education in the largest and most concentrated districts throughout America.
When we — the rich and the poor — began to see that we could consistently get stuff (favors, benefits, supplemental "income," education, etc., etc.) from the federal government, the "deal" (New Deal?) was sealed.
This is the most important election of our lifetime.
This, too, has always been true — at least since 1912. In my lifetime up until now, probably (arguably), it had never been more true than in the election of 1980. Does this mean that everyone who has made this claim since 1980 was merely crying wolf? Is it just a hyperbolic statement uttered for propaganda purposes? Not at all. This statement is rooted both in a thorough knowledge of history, strategies, tactics, aspirations, objectives, patience and perseverance of "progressives," and in a genuine love of Liberty.
Rush Limbaugh, love him or hate him, made a statement on his radio program a few months ago that went something like this:
"The United States of America can withstand and overcome four more years of Barack Obama as president. But it cannot and will not survive for long under an electorate that would consistently vote for people like him."
Immediately, some on the "Left" feigned outrage:
"Aha! We all knew that Limbaugh is a racist! This just proves it! 'People like him?' Rush Limbaugh hates Black folks!"
Which of those two statements qualify as "bigoted?"
Rush Limbaugh is standing in the gap against the tyranny of modern "conventional wisdom" — the man behind the curtain. Rush knows that the poor and minorities are disproportionately susceptible to this tyranny. He sincerely desires Liberty and Justice for all. The "people like him" reference in Rush's statement denotes "progressives" — modern "liberals," socialists, Alinskyites, Marxists.
Having said all that, I tend to disagree with the first part of Limbaugh's statement. I do not want to sound alarmist or hyperbolic, but I seriously doubt that Liberty and Justice — the American Ideal — can survive four more years of Barack Obama as president. I could cite many reasons for thinking this way, but here are three:
First, if Barack Obama is re-elected, the most egregious parts of ObamaCare that have not yet taken effect will be fully implemented. After that, it will be all but impossible to repeal ObamaCare. ObamaCare is the basic framework for nationalized healthcare. Nationalized healthcare has been a (if not the) primary goal of socialists everywhere since the turn of the last century. Once government has control over your healthcare, it has virtually absolute control over you.
Second, the power and control of the Federal government and its vast bureaucracies/agencies will be enhanced and strengthened. The already out-of-control EPA will have the "freedom" to double down on regulations that are even now crushing businesses large and small. HHS will use the vague regulations and authority given to it under ObamaCare to gain unfathomable degrees of power and control over the relationship between you and your doctor. Through programs such as SNAP and disability, to policies involving immigration, more and more voters and potential voters will become dependent upon federal largesse; further expanding an already substantial bloc of loyal Obama voters. The "'evil' rich" — business owners, job creators; those who even now pay more than 40% of all income taxes in the U.S. — will be "asked" (forced) to pay "their 'fair' share." How fair is "fair?" Is it 50%; 60%? Even God Himself only asks for 10%; and He does not force anyone to give that! [NOTE: The 40% figure expressed above represents the share of all federal income taxes that the top 1% of taxpayers sends to the federal government. It does not indicate a share of individual income. However, before you say that this statement is misleading, consider the fact that virtually everyone who pays federal income taxes gives at least 10% of their income if not substantially more. Also consider this: The top 10% of taxpayers pay about 90% of federal income taxes, and most of them are business owners.] Every $40,000.00 that the IRS takes from a business is a job that was never allowed to be created. Rather, it is $40,000.00 that goes to empower the tyranny of bureaucrats and to create dependency — and loyal voters!
Third, it is possible if not very likely, that one or two seats on the Supreme Court will be opened for replacement in the next four years. Under an Obama presidency, this will almost certainly tip the balance further away from Liberty and much more solidly toward tyranny for decades to come.
None of the three reasons above (again, just three of many that I could cite) even touch upon the most important role (and one of the very few limited and specific constitutional roles) of the federal government: national defense and foreign policy. The ability of the man behind the curtain to shield the childish naïveté and the gross incompetence of Barack Hussein Obama in this crucial role is both amazing and horrific. Four more years of President Obama could very well destroy virtually every vestige of American power and influence throughout the world.
Beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt, 6 November 2012 does indeed represent the most important election of my lifetime. Jimmy Carter was a "progressive." He was an incompetent commander in chief and was clueless about economic Liberty. Yet, Carter has nothing on Obama. Carter did not spend his formative years being mentored by Marxists such as Frank Marshall Davis. He did not spend almost 20 years in a "church" whose "pastor" regularly condemned "white" America. He was not steeped in the radical Marxist ideas, tactics and strategies of Saul Alinsky.
Barack Obama is not the old "progressive" in the mold of Woodrow Wilson, FDR, LBJ or Jimmy Carter. He is a Marxist, and he wants Marxism established immediately — not in small steps and pauses. A second term will give him the "mandate" to do just that. Because of Amendment XXII, he is constitutionally barred from seeking a third term. This means that he does not have to be careful about pleasing anyone. Moderates and independents, beware! He will double down on the implementation of his ideology. If the situation is "right," he may even go so far as to declare Marshall Law and suspend elections near the end of a second term.
The election of 6 November is vital to the very survival of Liberty and Justice — of the American Ideal and of American Exceptionalism — on another level as well. Mitt Romney is far from perfect. For me to say that he ever even approached my idea of an ideal presidential candidate would be an outright lie. If the voters do choose him over Barack Hussein Obama to be the next president of the United States, what would Romney do to preserve and enhance Liberty and Justice? Does he even fully understand the concept and the Source of Liberty and Justice? This is why it is absolutely crucial that everyone who does not take Liberty for granted — everyone who reveres the Ultimate Source of Liberty and Justice — must vote at every level of government in this election!
If Obama wins a second term, the flame of Essential Liberty and True Justice may very well be quenched forever. If Romney wins, at least a dying ember will remain. One short-term breath of air may keep that ember glowing for a time. One long and steady wind will reignite and sustain the flame.
The breath of air
This election is crucial for the preservation of Liberty, Justice and American Exceptionalism. It is important at the presidential level. However, it is equally important at the congressional level. It is vitally important that We, the moral, educated and informed People, elect members of the U.S. House and Senate who will relentlessly hold the next president's feet to the fire. We must have a Congress that will boldly and unremittingly stand up for Essential Liberty, True Justice, Rule of Law and American Exceptionalism, and against tyranny in every form and to every degree.
The long and steady wind
Moral, educated and informed people understand and profoundly appreciate Liberty and Justice. They abhor authoritarianism and socialism. What good is served by those who love Liberty and despise tyranny, but are not actively and passionately engaged in preserving Liberty & Justice and fighting against charlatans and wannabe tyrants?
As Americans, it is a duty of ours to vote for representatives who will work — and, if necessary, fight — to uphold Liberty & Justice and to crush the aspirations of every would-be tyrant. We elect members of Congress to check and balance the powers of the executive and judicial branches. Obviously, over the past many decades, this has not worked out well. Both We, the People, and our representatives in Congress have failed miserably in our duties. It is the duty of Congress to hold the feet of both the president and the federal courts to the fire. It is the duty of the people to hold Congress' feet to the fire.
The one and only hope for preserving and sustaining Truth, Liberty and Justice rests in the millions of moral, educated and informed patriots becoming actively and passionately engaged in efforts toward that end. This hope is embodied in the Tea Parties. Tea Party patriots became politically and socially active — many for the first time in their lives — as a passionate rebellion against the tyranny (mostly economic) of the man behind the curtain. As their numbers grow and their ideas spread, modern "conventional wisdom" will begin to lose its grasp on the American people.
If Liberty is to survive, it is imperative that Barack Obama be defeated on 6 November. Just as crucial, if tyranny and the wiles of tyrants are to be kept in check, patriots must vote. More than that, however, patriots must work hard to keep all of their elected representatives honest and informed. Patriots must unite and form a great army to recapture the institutions — public education, media, bureaucracies and courts — that "progressives" have had near complete control over for decades.
Only then will the United States of America remain an exceptional nation.
© Sam Weaver
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
