Phil Elmore writes about the great contrasts in what the "Occupy Wallstreet" movement groups want. The contrast is that the very people that all of this social upheaval is focused on are the ones that provide not just the jobs, but the very technology that the revolutionaries depend on. So, lop off their heads, you revolutionary mobs, and then watch not just the Blackberries, but the IPhones and everything else quit working.
What we have to worry about, I guess, is that Phil is right. Notice I didn't say, "IF he is right." And can I throw in one more point? Anyone that think it is the rich that are greedy is sadly mistaken. It is those that aren't willing to actually work to get ahead, that want more in return than they are worth, or willing to give, that are greedy. That pretty much defines most of those that want to disrupt life for the rest of us. It's just about greed.
* * * *
Occupy Wall Street and Madame Guillotine
 |
| PHIL ELMORE |
By Phil Elmore
October 12, 2011 ~ 1:50 pm Eastern
© 2011
As the Internet and social media help increasingly well organized Marxist protesters bring their "Occupy Wall Street" mobs to cities across America, the sense that history is repeating could not be more keen. Not since French peasants dragged nobles to the guillotines have so many been so excited about emptying the pockets of so few.
In Glorious Leader Obama's America, this is not a fad, and it is not a passing trend. This is, instead, a cultural shift that sees whining entitlement, peevish jealousy and naked covetousness become the public norm for the liberal left and the Democratic Party in America.
A hilarious image posted online sums up the hypocrisy of the protesters, who snarl and growl about "evil corporations" while clothed in, decorated by, transmitted across and connected through the products of the capitalist industries they mindlessly condemn. Amusing as this may be, there is nothing funny about the proliferation of "occupy" protests. These demonstrations are blooming like fungus throughout our beleaguered nation. They are a threat to every productive citizen.
READ MORE on WND.com

There's an irony in the fact that Marx and Engels believed capitalism was necessary in order to create more wealth disparity. The irony I'm referring to is that capitalism also creates more wealth for those on the lowest rung of the income ladder than any other system, so income and wealth disparities, while interesting phenomena for academic eggheads to ponder, are irrelevant. The only thing that's relevant is how well off each individual is in absolute terms – not in comparison to others.
The bottom line is that without capitalism, there is no such thing as prosperity for the masses. Capitalism is freedom in its purest form. Thus, without freedom, capitalism, by definition, cannot exist, because it is nothing more than a subcategory of freedom – the freedom to trade one's goods and services with others without interference from government.
If you agree with most of what I've said in this article, you should make it a point to vote only for those office seekers whom you are convinced truly understand that the main threat we face is our loss of freedom. My pessimistic vision of the future would change substantially if pro-freedom types were able to win the presidency and overwhelming majorities in both houses of Congress in 2012. The optimistic side of me hopes it will happen, but my realistic side keeps reminding me that history has not been kind to those who put their trust in politicians.
Spread the word, avoid distractions, and keep it simple: We are losing our freedom!
I'll be right up front with you today. This blog entry was close to being scrubbed. I almost didn't post this. Why?
I probably could easily say that I've had ego issues. There are times when I felt that my posts deserved more recognition than they received. Okay, ego... Apparently not possible, because I am writing this despite that issue.
Or could it be that I didn't want to trouble myself any longer with writing about politics, and troubling folks with motivation to read it? And there is nothing that troubles me more than self-promotion. Bingo...
Really? No. Here is another plausible reason: Is it too late? For what I read in Robert's column, and then in the related stories linked below, it seems to be a valid question. As far down the road to serfdom that we have gone, I'm not sure there is a way to turn people around before that proverbial edge of the cliff is reached. Honestly, I've had to consider the possibility that the cliff was already reached by the masses.
I would really hate to blame Robert Ringer for giving me any reason to give up hope, and just quit writing. Or just quit trying. It's just that the situation we are faced with seems to be getting more and more bleak. It wouldn't be all that hard to say that freedom is doomed. Well, it would be, if we all just gave up. But some of us won't:
And for the support of the Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Really? Yes, for sure. Capitalism is under attack, and that is just one of the offensives the enemy has taken on to eradicate Freedom. I'm just sayin'...
RELATED STORIES:
* * *
Capitalism: The purest form of freedom
 |
| ROBERT RINGER |
By Robert Ringer
July 07, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern
© 2011
Americans are easy prey when it comes to political distraction debates. The NLRB's outrageous attempt to block Boeing from opening a new plant in South Carolina is a distraction. Proposed card-check legislation is a distraction. Our obsessive meddling in Middle Eastern countries is a distraction.
All these are important issues, but they are merely subcategories of the foundational issue that Americans should be focused on: loss of freedom. In a truly free society, none of these issues would even arise, because they are outside the scope of human freedom.
Unfortunately, instead of freedom, we are being cleverly engineered into social-justice automatons by left-wing zealots who run Atlas Shrug-like bureaucracies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Labor Relations Board and the Department of Education, to name but a few of our worst enemies from within.
The antithesis of freedom is communism. Karl Marx and his lackey benefactor, Friedrich Engels, firmly believed that violent revolution was the only way to bring about pure communism, and that such a revolution was possible only where capitalism existed. Capitalism, they insisted, was a necessary ingredient for creating a wide financial disparity between workers and the privileged class.
I'm still baffled as to why Marx and Engels would want to increase the income disparity between the classes, only to rectify the disparity through violent revolution. Sounds like angry, left-wing mischievousness to me. Perhaps it was based on their knowledge of the utter failure of the French Revolution, which had led only to mob violence, unthinkable human carnage and, ultimately, a Napoleonic dictatorship.
But the fact is that there has never been a communist revolutionary threat in capitalistic societies such as Japan, Taiwan or (pre-China) Hong Kong. The most notable communist revolutions have occurred in Russia, China, Vietnam and Cuba, none of which could have been considered capitalist countries at the time. Thus, Marx and Engels would have considered the United States to be a perfect crucible for testing their convoluted class-warfare theories.
Of course, only naïve dreamers believe in the communist fairly tale that under communism, the state will eventually "wither away" because there will be so much of everything for everybody that government will no longer be necessary. But I do believe that Marx and Engels were on to something with their belief that socialism would precede communism. In fact, they referred to socialism as a "transitional stage of society" between capitalism and communism.
Nevertheless, here in the U.S. we have long suffered from the delusion that "European-style socialism" is a nice, peaceful, cradle-to-grave compromise between capitalism and communism. Elitists on both the right and the left have come to believe that European society is static, and that so long as European countries keep their redistribution-of-wealth policies finely tuned, capitalists will go right on producing enough to support the parasitic masses.
What they have not taken into account, however, is a crucial factor known as human nature. Homo sapiens – particularly its progressive subspecies – is, by nature, an avaricious creature. Worse, the more goods and services he acquires without work, the more avaricious he becomes. In fact, the human appetite for wealth without work is insatiable.
READ MORE at WND.com

What worries me about this attitude is that when food shortages hit on a long-term basis or when unemployment spikes beyond the government's ability to provide, hungry folks will listen to anyone who claims to have the ability to solve their problems and blame others for causing the hunger.
If money is worthless and food is hard to come by, how long before we react with fear and anger? How long before we're willing to blame anyone and anything? How long before some charismatic leader assures us that he can solve all our problems? How long before violence erupts?
Can't happen here? Don't fool yourself. Hunger has no nationality. It doesn't belong to any skin color, language or culture. Buy food now – because when the pantry is truly empty, it's too late.
Patrice points out the fact that various events could result in a crisis right here in America. Yes, it can happen right here. Agricultural failures, economic crisis, or even a fuel shortage could change things in a short amount of time. Once again, as she has written before, Patrice stresses the point that we need to be prepared.
Connecting the dots to anarchy
 |
| PATRICE LEWIS |
By Patrice Lewis
February 19, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern
© 2011
Last year here in north Idaho, my garden failed. Miserably.
Not from lack of trying. But after having the "winter of no winter" (very little snow), we also had the "summer of no summer." Well into the third week of June, the cold and rainy conditions made it nearly impossible for vegetables to grow.
It was a harsh lesson in some ways. Right now a garden's failure is merely an inconvenience. But in times past, a garden's failure could be catastrophic. After all, the French Revolution was triggered in large part because people were starving. Some say the recent riots in Egypt were fueled by surging wheat prices.
Keep this in mind for a moment as we review some recent headlines:
- A leading U.K. scientist warned about a threat of food riots around the world unless research into increasing crop yields is stepped up.
- A severe drought is threatening to destroy China's wheat crop. Emergency measures to divert water for irrigation are leaving nearly 3 million people short of drinking water. "China's grain situation is critical to the rest of the world – if they are forced to go out on the market to procure adequate supplies for their population, it could send huge shock waves through the world's grain markets," said Robert S. Zeigler.
- Global food prices have hit "dangerous levels" that could contribute to political instability, push millions of people into poverty and raise the cost of groceries. The USDA predicted last week U.S. corn farmers will have 675 million bushels of corn at the end of August, before next year's harvest begins. That's just an 18-day supply.
Of course it's not just food that's an issue. What about debt?
- President Obama's budget, released Monday, was conceived as a blueprint for future spending, but it also paints the bleakest picture yet of the current fiscal year, which is on track for a record federal deficit and will see the government's overall debt surpass the size of the total U.S. economy.
British columnist Andrew Simms isn't afraid to state the obvious: "This year is the 10th anniversary of the fuel protests [when protesters blockaded British oil refineries, bringing the supply of fuels to gas stations to a halt], when supermarket bosses sat with ministers and civil servants in Whitehall warning that there were just three days of food left. We were, in effect, nine meals from anarchy. Suddenly, the apocalyptic visions of novelists and filmmakers seemed less preposterous. Civilization's veneer may be much thinner than we like to think."
Are you connecting the dots yet? This is the elephant in the room that everyone refuses to see: We're not as secure in this country as the government and mainstream media would like us to believe. There are sporadic news reports about dire possibilities, but few people are willing to connect the dots on the individual level. And yet it's well-documented that America, too, has a mere three day supply of food in stores, thanks to just-in-time deliveries and the efficiency of modern-day transportation and manufacturing systems. America itself remains a mere nine meals from anarchy.
READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

King Obama-The-Great has spoken. YOU'RE FIRED!!! However he will bestow extra "blessings" to his subjects if they begin to take their court jester duties more seriously.
read more |
digg story ~ Submitted by obamanation