Friday, December 16, 2005

Renewing the "Patriot" Act? Let's renew our freedom instead

At this time deliberations are ongoing concerning renewal of the Patriot Act to aid in securing our country against Terrorism. While I'm all for security and against Terrorism, for success in Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and other places we may send our armies; while I'm all for increase and (earned) spreading of wealth and the capitalist system; while I'm all for "peace on earth", especially in this Christmas season; I'm also for FREEDOM! Read carefully:


1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
this is called eradication of private property - supported by the U.S. Supreme Court and many "conservatives" and "liberals". some call it emminent domain - I call it Oligarthy.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
we call this the IRS in the U.S. - supported by almost all politicians.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
to rid ourselves of princes and kings installed by birthright - a good idea - until it applies to your inherited wealth, which it does, BTW.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
ever hear of the police being able to confiscate your property when you commit certain crimes?.

5. Centralisation of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
we call this one, The Federal Reserve (supposedly a private institution, but controlled by the Feds).

6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
otherwise known as the FCC, PBS, Federal Trade Commission, etc.

7.Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
our Department of Interior has control over almost every aspect of your land use; if you didn't know.

8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
in our country we call this "welfare" - we also refer to these as "government workers" - and sometimes, "illegal immigrants". (strangely supported by the republican President).

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
government supported corporate farms, the "burbs".

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.
public education has been free (by taxation) for a long time now - child labor laws are in place - a college degree is now intended for the labor force, not for "education".

... this is a short list. Where did I get it? Did I make it up? Why no, of course not. It's from the Communist Manifesto.

... can you begin to understand why Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are actually Liberals? And why Democrats are already communists?

... buy guns while you can ...

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

The biggest threat domestically is coming from the left. When I was in high school, a required course was "Americanism versus Communism." But even that course didn't inform me about the strength of the Communist Party in the United States prior to WWII. Also, I just recently learned that the American Nazi Party was much larger than you would have thought.

I think it's worth pointing out, that it was the liberal wing of the Supreme Court which upheld the confiscators in the Kelo decision.

As far as property confiscation in criminal matters. I could never understand how such an abomination has been allowed to stand. For too many years now, law enforcement has been allowed to take private property with little or no justification.

To see how the Constitution and Bill of Rights have been perverted to promote a leftist socialist agenda is sickening.

Tiger said...

Yes, Kelo was perpetrated by the Leftists, but what has congress done to repair the damage? They don't understand, the power resides in their hands to make things better, but, they hesitate for some reason - what would that reason be?

Also, I do believe in allowing our government to protect us with legislation, like the Patriot Act, but do we want to make it permanent? President Bush does. Can you imagine the Patriot Act in the hands of President Hillary Clinton?

... frightening!

FOXNEWS, last night, illustrated the lack of awareness in Washington. The Beltway types don't understand why the American people have a problem trusting the government. WHAT!!!!!!!!

... what abject stupidity!

Toad734 said...

2: So are you saying you would like to see a regressive tax structure? If the wealthier you are, the more resources you use, as evidence by the US and its consumption, shouldn’t you pay more? If you drive a big hummer that creates more pollution, uses more fuel and is harder on the roads, shouldn't you pay more, or should someone who takes the train be forced to pay more?

3I would like to point out that no one reading this blog will have their inheritance confiscated as the only people who pay an estate tax are people with estates over 1 million dollars. Less than 2% of the population is subject to an estate tax and they’re all dead. If we can't tax dead rich people who can we tax, the poor living?

4 If you kill someone with a gun I would hope the police would take it away from you.

10 Oh no, free education, that’s just terrible. We should allow parents decide whether or not their kids go to school and what they will learn and make them pay for it. Those with money go to school, those without, stay home and stay dumb. Even better we can force one parent to stay home and educate their own kids and allow them to indoctrinate them with anything they like. Of course the earth is only 10000 years old, of course Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church every Sunday, of course Jesus hates poor people.

You can't say that there aren't flaws in Capitalism and even a democratic Republic. For one in a democratic republic senators and laws can be bought by the guy with the highest bid. The people's vote ultimately doesn't matter (see if your vote counts if you are a Democrat in Alabama or a Republican in Illinois).

You can't say that there aren't some good things about communism, especially in theory. As you pointed out a progressive tax, free education, estate taxes are all essential to the success of the US, although I would hardly call those communistic. The fact is that the state does not own production, agriculture, or the media; they regulate it and set guidelines. You are acting as if there should be no regulation on business, communication or agriculture at all and what that gets you is undrinkable water, unbreathable air, dangerous ingredients and chemicals in your food, no sanitary regulations in food preparations etc.

Trust me, you wouldn't want to live in that world.

Tiger said...

Here ya go, TOAD:

2. No, not Regressive or Progressive system. A flat tax would be nice with the TAX equally distributed. Right now, the wealthy pay the most anyway, so you should be happy ( http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/reports/factsheetwhopaysmostindividualincometaxes.update.pdf ). You may think I come from a point of view of the wealthy? I don't. I've been working since age 5 (started in the fields), I'm 49 now and still working. As far as consumption goes, I tend to agree with you, in a moral sense. Overdone consumption is a moral question. America, as you may know is the leading consumption country. We have work to do in this area.

3. Point taken (concerning the upper limit), but you've missed the fact that when my father-in-law died (he was already taxed on "his" money) and when he left a little to his daughter, we also will be taxed on it when we use it (again). Also, sorry to bring up morals again, but do you really believe that hard working Americans should be taxed on inheritance? It's an abomination! A tax on consumption - sure! Inheritance though? No way. You want to spread wealth? Not taxing inheritance is a terrific way.

4. Taking away a murderers gun doesn't solve anything. Placing him in prison for life, or taking away his life does. Making the "man" more moral does affect a positive change in society. Blaming an object for a crime shows a lack of realization that the PERSON has a MORAL problem and PERSON needs help. Think about a government that makes almost everything a crime and proceeds to take away all of your possessions to, "help the needy". This the ultimate in control of the people.

10. Free Education. OK, I'm not against educating people in a public school system. What I'm against is government influence. Education should be local, in my opinion. Right now, the NEA and Washington are so intertwined in public education that no education is being accomplished. My wife has been a public school teacher for almost 30 years now. She (and I)have seen public education go down downhill for decades. When I was in the 10th grade Florida schools were in the top 2 percentile of schools. Now, we are near the bottom. We integrated when I was in the 11th grade. You may think I was against integration - I was not - and still not. But, I can tell you, every rule concerning; academics, dress code, behavior, and almost anything else you can think of was halted because of governments "concern" for the black kids. This caused the system to go down quickly. I not against "bettering" people through public education, I'm against government involvement. There is truth to the old saying, "Good intentions pave the way to hell".

Capitalism: sure, there are problems with it. It is, however, the best system we humans have come up with yet. Wealth is shared, people are allowed to go into business for themselves, hire people (make their lives better), etc. Capitalism without morality is a bad thing just like Communism can be. Is Communism good "on paper"? Sure, it is very well meaning and "looks" great. But, it ignores human nature. Communism assumes that people will be moral and good. It assumes that the folks in charge will do what's right concerning the populace. The U.S.S.R., China, Vietnam; all of Communisms history has proven that this won't happen.

I used to work with a fellow that was one of the air traffic controllers fired by President Reagan. I actually recommended we hire him. (we worked in Engineering/CADD) He was a union member of course and he used to argue that a trash man should make as much as an M.D., one of those arguments of equality put forth by communism. This idea flys into the face of reality - the realty that a guy who works so hard through medical school will be happy with the same salary as the trash man. Wow! This didn't even happen in the U.S.S.R.! Scientists and Engineers had better apartments, more food rations, a better car, etc. You see, government control reduces wealth, optimism, ingenuity; all those positive human attributes.

In the end, TOAD, you and I want the same things. I believe it should happen with morals and, "doing the right thing", and with FREEDOM. You want government to force it. History has proven this way doesn't work!

Toad734 said...

I would say the verdict is still out on raw capitalism. Clearly the business community is merging, paying fewer taxes and getting more powerful in the process. Left to its own this could result in what I call corporate communism where production isn't owned by the state but the state own production and pushes laws that favor them, not the people, the consumer, their workers or the environment.

As far as inheritance goes all I hear about from conservatives is fat welfare moms getting something for nothing and how evil and unfair it is; what do you think an inheritance is? Why don't these same people complain about the 14 billion dollar per year farm subsidy? It's all something for nothing and again, if we can't tax dead rich people who can we tax? Do you think Paris Hilton deserves her money? Do you think she is an innovator or a job creator? You said people are already taxed on their income so it doesn't make sense to tax that money again; ever hear of sales tax? If fact there is no limit to how many times something can be taxed. I can pay income tax, buy something and pay sales tax, sell it and pay capital gains or alternative income tax that is what is paying for all these wars and all the weapons to fight these wars.

# 4 wasn’t a second amendment comment; you said it was terrible that criminals are deprived of their property when they used it in a crime. So would you rather the criminal pay for his own prosecution by taking his car he ran drugs with or would you rather us raise your taxes to prosecute him? And if someone kills someone else shouldn't we take their weapons away from them?


Schools apparently don't have enough federal regulations on them. Why is Kansas allowed to teach mysticism as science? Why do poorer areas get less money for their schools? That is one area where I am 100% socialist. Every school should have the same student/teacher ratios depending on the size of the communities and every student should get the same money from the state. Even the most conservative capitalist can agree that you can't punish poor kids for now working harder to earn more money to get a better middle school.

Don't kid yourself that thinking every successful person just worked hard and every poor person is lazy and has made bad choices. You know very well that Bush isn't president because he worked hard at it; he is president because his dad was rich, his dad was president, got W into Yale, was able to pay Yale’s tuition and was handed several companies to run and when he got in trouble with those companies and with the law, he had someone there to pull strings and clean up the financial mess.

A poor black kid would be broke, in jail, and have his credit ruined if the didn't have a powerful rich father to look after him.

I can say that I am self made and worked through college, paid some of my own way, and worked hard at my jobs for advancement and that if I can do it anyone can do it but that is simply false. I was supported by my parents through college, when I was out of money I didn't have to rob a liquor store to make rent I simply called home. Not to mention I always had a car that worked, had someone to help me with resumes, teach me how get good credit etc. If your father is dead, your mom is in Jail and you grew up in the projects you don't have that kind of support. Bush, Kerry,Paris Hilton etc. are not self made and the only way to even the playing field for the poor kids I just described is to force these people to work, and make them realize how good they have it and that they are not special or entitled to anything just because of their last name. Raising the inheritance tax would boost the economy because it would force these people to be the innovators you make them out to be and would give someone from the bottom of society a chance to compete.

Tiger said...

Yes, of course the verdict is still out on Capitalism. I said it's the best we've created so far. Only GOD has the best system. Your "corporate communism" has already been named many, many years ago. It's called an Oligarthy; government run by business. I too am concerned about this. Unions and such are indeed required, at specific times in history. Years ago (early 1900's up to about 1930's + or -) they were needed desperately. Now, they bring down corporations via union greed. Is corporate "fusion" a problem? Sure it is. This to must be watched. However, don't ever believe that only conservatives love corporations. What political group receives the most financial donations from large corporations? Democrats.

Fat welfare moms. Let's see, we left my dad when I was 6. He was a drunk, a beater, and an adulterest. My mom (with her 6 children) worked hard. In the sixties, when the REPUBLICANS passed many welfare laws (the Dems refused) my mom realized she could stay at home and do nothing, instead of work. To my dismay, she became lazy and worthless. My oldest brother left school at age 14 to work. However, despite all the troubles most of the children worked their way out of poverty and became a success, yes, thanks to that safety net. Please remember, Democrats would not pass the Civil Rights Act, nor support those early saftety nets, Republicans had to act.
Paris Hilton? One of those Liberal types from hollywood? Careful, you're hitting close to the Democrat home.
As I stated before, not just dead rich people are unfairly taxed. My father-in-law was not rich. He simply worked hard. His tax bracket never came close to the "legal limit".
These Wars? In WW2 the GDP spent a full 80% on the military under Roosevelt. Today, it's less than 20%. The other 80% is foreign and domestic social programs, mostly domestic.

#4. Yes, I understand you weren't commenting on the Second Amendment. By definition, a murderers gun will be taken from him. I'm saying we treat the person, not the thing.

Schools. Most States base their education taxation on LOCAL property taxes. This is why some schools have more money than others. Again, this is a local issue. The FEDS don't do this part. As far as money per child spent, we spend more than all other countries. The successful schools in other countries, Japan, "Scandia", etc. spend much less per student. The government is not the answer. You know why the youth of today has more health problems than ever before? The FEDS have demanded monies to be spent on things other than Phys Ed and the like. When I was in public school I had P.E. in grades 1-12. My son had perhaps half of that. Government intereference has been the reason. If Kansas wants to teach "New Age Dog Eating" (joke) and the locals say OK. That's their business. I won't live there, but others might.

Punish poor kids? As I've illustrated by my own story, the poor are not created by the "haves". Generally, (yes, there are exceptions) the poor are generated through their own devices. Even Christ said the poor will always be with us. The FACT that a poorer child has to work harder to make something of himself, than a richer child, is life; not a punishment generated by someone else. Do we feel for these children? Of course we do!

Bush, BTW, isn't the only one who had advantages. Envy of the rich is considered a sin, you know. GOD wants us to be ourselves. Bush will have to answer to GOD as we will also. I don't begrudge his wealth and connections. This kind of attitude is classic class warfare; right out Lenin's book.

"A poor black kid would be broke, in jail, and have his credit ruined if the didn't have a powerful rich father to look after him." - his problems will be his own, none else. Do you think I have emulated my dad? No, I've tried all my life to make it better for mykids than he did for me - not repeat the sin of the father! Understand? You see the difference, TOAD? I'm for self respect and a "you can do it!" attitude. You assign blame and tell people they can never do it. How defeatest that is!

Gee, you had mom and dads help and I didn't, but we both did well? You need to tell people they CAN do it TOAD, not tell them they're stuck on the plantation.

Here's an old southern "truism" concerning the downtrodden, esp. blacks.(my wife is from Chicago, BTW and she agrees with me).

"Up North they love 'em but hate 'em; down South we hate 'em but love 'em".

Strange isn't it? I grew up with blacks - went to school, the fields, and church with them. We live in the same neighborhoods, to this day. Up North you guys segregate into ethnic communities and dare the other to come in. Even now, in 2005, Chi-town is the most difficult place for blacks to find a home.

Your intentions are good, TOAD, but misplaced.

Anonymous said...

Toad said:..no one reading this blog will have their inheritance confiscated as the only people who pay an estate tax are people with estates over 1 million dollars. If we can't tax dead rich people who can we tax, the poor living?

I think the threshold is actually higher but for the sake of argument...Do you realise how many people that could effect? Many more than 1% Many people could approach the million dollar level simply with the equity in their homes. BTW - Who pays the tax? It's not the dead rich guy. It's his family members.

Anonymous said...

Toad said:...as far as inheritance goes all I hear about from conservatives is fat welfare moms getting something for nothing and how evil and unfair it is; what do you think an inheritance is? Two Totally different issues; One involves redistribution of wealth with money taken from one group and given to another group via taxes. Inheritance is wealth accumulated by families.


Why don't these same people complain about the 14 billion dollar per year farm subsidy?

Many conservatives do complain about farm subsidies. We should get rid of them. Pay those farmers to grow ethanol crops.

Do you think Paris Hilton deserves her money?

Whether she deserves it or not is up to her parents to decide, not us.