Wednesday, September 16, 2009

The Plan for Re-Taking the Republican Party

George Soros took over the Democrat Party through his activities. It took years and hundreds of millions of dollars but through his many leftist organizations, especially the Center for American Progress, MoveOn, MediaMatters etc etc, he did it.

Neutralizing the Republican Party was much easier.

Open primaries and willing liberal Republicans were all that he really needed. The establishment of the GOP was more than willing to help. As a matter of fact John McCain was the candidate Soros wanted to be nominated, McCain was willing to fulfill this role. Did you know that John McCain spoke at the Soros-sponsored shadow convention in Philadelphia?

The Republican Party today is two parties. There is the McCain faction that cannot wait to compromise and then surrender to the leftists... and then there is the average GOP voter who is shocked at what his own party is doing.

Conservatives have rightly grown not to trust their own party, if the Republican Party can be said to be theirs. There is a light at the end of the tunnel, though, and that is Sarah Palin. Let me explain.

It has become quite clear that conservatives must form a party-within-a-party if they are to wrest control of the GOP from the idiot faction. They need to form their own local councils, state assemblies, national council and hold their own conventions. They need to set up their own fundraising arms and online media outlets. These things need to be kept completely separate from the Republican Party itself.

The conservatives must recruit and fund their own candidates for every race on the ballot. They must run candidates against established RINO's after selecting their candidate through an internal pre-primary. Everything from state legislature to the Presidential primary must be done this way. No need to have multiple movement candidates splitting the vote running against a RINO in an open primary where ACORN voters can make the difference.

This conservative faction must be able to communicate with its membership online as well as set up its own media outlets. From press releases to online radio to online television will be an important part of keeping members engaged.

An online TV "channel" with multiple newscasts per day, opinion pundits and pro-conservative programming is a must. It could be set up sort of like the Christian Broadcasting Network has theirs set up. Note they have separated CBN News Channel and CBN-TV and also have a spanish-language channel.

I would expect there to be an online radio system, with feeds from different regions that focused on state and local politics, not just national. But its not just politics is it? It's the culture, its the family and everything else thats being countered by the far left. We must respond.

So which conservative has the support, the charisma and the "can do" attitude that could actually get this done? The only one out there working tirelessly to counter and even ridicule the left and those in power is Sarah Palin. She even makes other conservative "leaders" look lazy.

Of course it needs to be done no matter who leads it to getting done. It will not mean we have support them for President, we can still support them for conservatism.

Sunday, September 13, 2009

Death of Big Media is a good thing

I do not lament the death of big media in this country, in fact I applaud it. It is not only technology that is hastening the downfall of the newspaper or the big television networks, it is their ideology. The business model of the newspaper does not work anymore, news is more efficiently delivered online-even if its paid for.

The New York Times could save a bundle of money by giving all of its subscribers a free Kindle and stop printing the paper edition. Think about that. What if your big local paper announced it would give you a Kindle or a Netbook for your subscription dollars. Newspaper companies don't even want to consider this right now, but it makes sense.

Then there is their ideological bias. The newspapers in this country, especially the largest ones, have become so leftist that they are downright socialist in outlook. The recent Thomas Friedman column is an example of that rampant tyranny gene growing.

Of course if you get a Kindle or Netbook from your local big daily who is to say you wouldn't also get e-editions of the National Review or the Washington Times? You can bet that when millions and millions of people start paying for news to get these devices that conservative and libertarian alternatives will be offered.

Even satellite and cable television networks are finding that the internet is part of their competition. Google and Youtube are going to start selling movie downloads, something Netflix already does. Who is to say that pro-freedom media groups won't form to offer online television "channels"?

Broadcast is becoming widecast. Soon you will have dozens or hundreds or thousands of online viewing options. Some of them will be big studio productions and some of them will be home-made. They will have about as level a playing field as anyone can imagine.

Imagine a day when the biggest news scandals are ignored by the "mainstream" media but everyone knows about it. Those who still depend on the old media for news were scratching their heads last week when Van Jones resigned amid "weeks" of scandal. New York Times readers found out about it 3 days later.

I think we should all be looking forward to the day when conservative and libertarian internet TV channels reach millions of viewers.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

I am a freedomist

I have no political party. I am a political orphan in a land of dying dinosaurs.
It does not bother me that I might be alone. Individualists should not really complain about being alone, they're supposed to enjoy and thrive on it.

Government is the most inefficient and unfair means of wealth distribution possible. It would be impossible to come up with a worse way to do it, even blind chance would be better. Giving power and money to government should be considered a sign of mental health problems.

Anyone who thinks they can trust a politician is literally too stupid to breathe.

The Crisis

Healthcare crisis, housing crisis, environmental crisis, flu crisis.... etc etc

Government creates a crisis
media fans the flames, celebrities spout off
Schools teach kids to worry about it
Kids bug parents to worry about it
Government offers a solution
Dissenters are called names, crisis deniers!

Apparently higher taxes, poorer us, and more government employees is the answer to every single crisis.

The Right to Respond

Let us say, objectively speaking, that we are citizens of a nation that is falling. Times are getting tough and will only get worse and we want the politicians to hear our voices. We, most of us, feel our voices are being heard because there are voices we agree with on the radio, on TV and in the press. We always have the power to write our opinions online.

What happens if the state begins to restrict those rights? Will more and more people begin to rise up and protest? How many will shut up completely?

If the government of a country totally bans opposition voices from the media, censors the Internet and bans protest marches... what is left? How should the people react? Should they hold their tongues and go about their lives? Would not this simply encourage the government to stomp on them again and again?

At what point do the people of a country have the moral obligation to pick up rocks and hurl them at the limousines? To take down power lines and cellular phone towers? To do what they can to disrupt the operations of the state that has silenced them.

At what point do the citizenry have the duty to form their own army and attempt to drive the tyrants out?

Friday, August 14, 2009

Pure Evil

When a man claims the right to dispose of another mans life (thanks Ayn Rand). That is pure evil.

I would have to agree with this.

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Tell me when its over

Cities burn to the ground, fighting has erupted from coast to coast. The police and the military are split. A battle between those desiring liberty and those desiring chains tears the nation asunder.

Which side are you on?

Running gun battles on ruined streets sided by burned out buildings and broken storefronts long out of business wreak havoc on those cowering in their bleak apartments. Roving gangs beat and rob and kill and rape those it finds wandering the streets no matter the time of day. Government agents are not delivering aid or security they are hunting down those with the wrong views.

The real fighting happens outside of the major cities, the real tragedy happens in the suburbs when the inner-city masses flee the trouble and cause more where they head to. Out in the country groups of citizens band together to defend their lands, their food stocks their families from those they will call "zombies", "ravagers" and "enemies".

When America finally starts to rebuild will they look for a system of government that has power over the people or one that is based on liberty and justice? Or will America never recover as a single entity from such a tragedy?

Scenarios and thoughts on this happy Tuesday morning.

Ridiculousness of Being S.....(ilenced)

Sssshhhhh! I will be using the S-Word a lot, please do not report me to the White House snitch line okay? Thanks!

I just hope Nancy and Steny don't read this and start calling me disloyal and un-American, they might even hold hearings and a show trial like they are threatening members of the Bush administration with if this whole socialized healthcare thing blows up in their faces, which seems more and more likely. Once upon a time they hunted the commies and now they hunt those who love the Constitution and call them "un-American".

Terrorists? Nah David Ayers and Bernadine Dorhn are simply college professors, the media would never say a bad word about them. No it those hooligans holding signs and speaking out against Dear Leader who they will label with words like "terrorist".

What do you mean you have a video from 2007 that shows Obama saying he supported a single-payer system? That is pure 100% disinformation, your not allowed to see those tapes, they were ordered destroyed when the official history books were rewritten last week. Yes, the words of the President before he was President is now disinformation. Amazing.

These people can deny it all they want. They are socialists. National Socialists!

Monday, August 10, 2009

"Questioning our Patriotism" - Return of HUAC?

For the last 8 years George Bush was called every hateful name that could be dreamed up from chimperor to Bush-Hitler. The left held huge rallies, they got loud, they broke windows, they shut down debates and they always scolded those who questioned their patriotism in kissing up to the worst kinds of terrorist and dictator scum.

In St. Louis a conservative handing out small flags was beaten to the ground and kicked in the head by 4 paid union thugs. He was hospitalized while HHS Sec Sebellius thanked the SEIU for their good work in a teleconference and said "keep it up". Meanwhile the left blamed the dissidents for the violence that the left was doing, the SEIU claimed to be a 'victim'.

During the last 8 years we were told that dissent is patriotic, indeed the very highest level of patriotism. Today we are tolds that dissent is un-American.

The left howled and raged when terrorists were spied on. Today the ACLU sees nothing at all the matter with a White House asking people to turn in their neighbor for his thoughtcrime of opposing government-run healthcare. Where does this hypocrisy stop?

Why does a government declare its own people to be their enemies? Why does a White House claim a video of a Barack Obama speech is now "disinformation"? I suppose they have airbrushed that speech out of the official history books.

Just look at the real history of the world and ask yourself, what happens to a country when its government declares its people to be the enemy?

I guess Nancy "Nazi" Pelosi and Harry Reid will soon be holding hearings on these "un-american activities". They probably have the stationary already printed up: The House Unamerican Activities Committees.

After everything we have seen the government do in the past 6 months, why would you doubt it?

Sunday, August 9, 2009

Criminal Government

Imagine a government that controls the medical system but decides that some of its citizens who are suppose to be treated equally under law deserve healthcare more than others. Imagine that you get sick and find out you have cancer but the authorities refuse to cover an expensive new treatment, offering instead to pay for the medicine to kill you.

This happens in Europe and North America all the time. Now Obama wants to make it national policy in the United States.

Imagine a government that encourages its citizens to report on those who do not agree with those in power. Imagine a government that believes it should know the physical address and names of every IP on the internet, no more anonymous comments online. Your government wants to know if you are thinking incorrect thoughts.

Imagine a government that says showing a video of a statement by the leader is "disinformation" because its outrageous. Imagine a government that launches smear campaigns against citizens who dare to criticize or even question them. Imagine a government that expects never to be held to account, never to be held to its own stated standards or even questioned.

It is very hard to think this could happen in America.

Imagine a world in which an extremist group can beat a man for his opinion and then be praised as "brothers and sisters" and told to "keep it up" by the person in charge of Health & Human Services. You and I can see where such a policy would head, apparently those in the government do not care.

Imagine a country where legislators hold "Town Hall" meetings not to hear the views of citizens but to tell them whats going to happen. Dissent is considered disruption. A thoughtcrime you could say. No, this could never happen people will say.

But these things have already happened.

I believe this government is criminal. Their encouragement of violence against those who protest against them will only get violence returned. This is what they want in order to justify shutting down the freedom to organize and protest and the freedom of speech in the US.

Friday, July 17, 2009


What, my fellow humans, constitutes a right?

Does a person have a right to another mans property? Does a person have a right to another mans wealth? Do your rights cost other people? Does your happiness have to retract from someone else's happiness?

No. I posit that everyone has the same rights and these rights cost nothing to others.

You have a right to free speech but not to make others listen. You have the freedom of religion but you do not have the power to force it on others or punish those who convert. Because they have the same religious freedom, including the right to convert or drop it entirely.

You have the right to assemble and to associate with whom you please but without the power to force others to assemble and associate with you. Again your rights do not cost or infringe on the rights of another person.

You have a right to own property but not to steal it. You have a right to buy it and not with the coersion of a government agency. It is the same with other properties such as a gun or a vehicle.

So then how does one come to believe in the fantasy of something for nothing, or the ideology of theft by state. People are taught they are somehow "entitled" to another persons income, they are somehow entitled to have others pay for their things, their food, their housing, their cell phone or their medical care.

This type of ideology is like a cancer, the number of demands continues to always increase and never decreases. The ideology that says a person who has wasted all their own money on MP3 players and concert tickets can then demand that the state force those who work for a living to keep them in comfort.

Yes, there are truly needy people in our world, a world that does not reward hard work but punishes and one that rewards those who do not. The truly needy are the ones being hurt the most by the culture of entitlement, which encourages people to do as little as possible.

An entitlement is not a right, it is loot.

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Courts of a United Citizens Nation

One of the first questions people always have about a libertarian-type government proposal is, inevitably, courts. What would such a system do to enforce contracts and to mete out justice?

The answer is quite simple. Everyone will want to subscribe to a court/arbitration/dispute resolution agency. This will help them protect their own business and contracts from anyone who decides, for whatever reason, to not live up to the deal. These courts will not be run by any government, they would actually be operated like competing co-ops.

The Court Panel would be made up of 5 citizens, 3 of them chosen at random and one chosen by each the complainer and the defender. Both sides would present their arguments and evidence and the contract would be studied by the panel as well. The panel would only need a 3-2 vote to decide the case.

In Contract cases if the accuser lost he/she would pay court costs and a nominal amount for the time/lost business of the defender. If the accuser wins, the defender must live up to the terms of the contract or agree with the accuser on a settlement amount (although we expect all contracts would spell out what happens if they are broken).

Oh, you ask, what happens if the defender refuses to abide by the judgement? Who is going to make him, who even has the power to make him in your libertarian-type UCN?

All members of the courts, just about everyone, will likely defend the system because it is in their interest to do so. The community will likely boycott the business of the non-compliant person, shun them and the like until they make some kind of resolution to the case.

OK. What about criminal cases? What about a murder case?

If the evidence proves substantially that a person is guilty of murder that person could be declared "outside the protection of the law". A vengeful family could theoretically kill the guilty man with no reprisal against themselves. This is an extreme example and we think that banishment or forced restitution is a more likely example for lesser crimes than murder.

The people of a United Citizens Nation will not be forced to bear the cost of keeping criminals locked up, fed, cared for and whatever. If there is some kind of incarceration system the families of the inmates would pay for much of it, and their meals and other things.

What about traffic tickets? Well, we would expect the roads to also be owned by shareholders in a consortium, funded by user fees and insurance and such. The consortium will have to enforce its own traffic laws and since it is owned by citizens we would expect it to not be too lenient or too strict.

I realize that to some people this might seem harsh, especially to those who were taught that criminals have "rights" to be comfortable and pampered. This "right" will not exist in a United Citizens Nation. Obey the law or suffer the penalty, it is that simple.

The United Citizens Nation would like to reach out and invite all of our readers to tell us what you think, anonymous responses have been activated.

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

What is a United Citizens Nation?

A United Citizens Nation is a country where no-one has a claim on another man, his time, his blood or his sweat. A country where property rights are inviolate. A country where the signed contract is the basis of all business and is honored.

How many of our present problems would be solved through the establishing of a UCN?

There would be no tax burden on the people or on the economy, for make no mistake taxes also tax the economy. There would be no government deficits or debts, for whatever minimalist agencies we create through voluntary agreements will be paid for by the users and stakeholders.

There would be no worry that government might take over banks, auto companies, insurance companies and put the masses trillions into debt. Not that any sane person thinks that would ever happen, right?

A United Citizens Nation would have parents who control and direct the education of their children, without worries that agents of an uncaring bureaucracy would teach them lies and perversion. A country where each person would choose their own health care coverage without mandates forcing them to pay enormous sums for coverages they do not need or want. From insurance companies, hospital groups and other competing providers.

In short, a UCN is a country where one person cannot use agencies of government to his own ends and to punish or coerce others to do what he wants. A country without the tyranny and the conditions of state slavery where half of your money is stolen to support those without work ethic. No politicians living high on the hog, with chauffeurs, private jets at your expense and the power to force you to do their bidding.

Yes, a United Citizens Nation will have a "police" force. It will have a police force that works for those paying the bills, you. It is the same with fire departments and libraries and parks. As long as people are willing to give their money for the services voluntarily, the services will be there.

It is high time to end government as we know it and replace it with a real system for a free people.

The United Citizens Nation is a dream that can only come true if those who wish to be free will simply step up and be counted.

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Who owns you?

Brothers and sisters, lend me your ears!

Who owns you? Who owns what you produce? Who owns your income? Who owns your very life?

Does the government own you? Does the government get to make your choices for you, are you too unenlightened to make your own? When you recieve a pay check at the end of the week or the end of a job, does the money belong to you? Do you make the choice to eat a healthy diet or not? Do you make the choice of whether to smoke or go jogging?

Or should the government do it for you?

Can the government spend your money better than you can? Can the government live your life better than you can? Do you believe that raising your children is a job for the government? Feeding them? Teaching them a difference between right and wrong?

Or maybe you think you should work for nothing and the government should provide you with the basic apartment, meals and health care?

The government and the people in charge of it certainly think they own you. They certainly make policy from the belief that they own you, your labor, your income and your very life. The politicians and the bureaucrats have very good reason to think we, the people, are too stupid to live our own lives: we let them stay in power.

The time has come, my fellow citizens, to stop allowing them to assume this power. The time has come where we must begin to deny them owership of us, our lives, our income and our minds. Join with me and throwing off the shackles of their repression, throw off the chains and the yokes that we have voluntarily given them the reigns to hold. It is time to declare our personal independence from government ownership.

We must become a United Citizens Nation, where we own our lives each and every one of us, where we teach our children how to own their lives as well. We must throw off their bonds and never allow them to be re-established again.

The time has come, let the fight begin!

Welcome Comrades!

At this particular point in human history and especially the history of the United States you might be aware of the dangers that await to befall us. This government has started down the road of destroying the very foundations of this country and could take down the entire world with it.

Surely you will say, the United Citizens Nation should support the fall that is certainly coming because of these horrendously evil policies? Doesn't the UCN support and call for the destruction of the state itself?

The United Citizens Nation does not want to see a nation of more of 300 million plunged into abject poverty and a monolithic authoritarian state to rule it as if it were some third world backwater. We believe in the fall of the state and the rise of the people, this course is going in the extreme opposite direction.

This government has started on a road that will probably triple or quadruple the national debt in ten years. In a decade, if this happens, this country will hardly be able to pay the interest on that debt. It will almost guarantee three generations or more of state slavery. This is the most evil part of this plan, and we believe it is a plan for this could hardly be an accident or just a series of really bad idea.

The United Citizens Nation supports neither political party and does not support the formation or continuation of any type of government. Government is a tyranny by its very nature and the UCN stands for not having any government at all. We believe that citizens can organize themselves better than any government can and by pursuing their own lives and their own self-interest will benefit the society as a whole.

So please consider joining us and becoming a part of the United Citizens Nation!