Showing posts with label government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label government. Show all posts

Sunday, February 3, 2013

It’s Coming: The Government Wants to “Help Manage” Retirement Accounts

- Mike Krieger
One more way the government can seize our hard earned money. - Freedom First

Many people, including myself, have discussed this threat over the past several years. The obvious concept is that when the government runs out of money, or they face a drying up in interest for its debt, they will come for the $19.4 trillion in American’s retirement accounts. It seems that day may be finally drawing near.

I stopped contributing to my 401k back when I worked at Bernstein, and I will probably now have to give more serious consideration whether I want to take the penalty and move the funds out of my retirement account entirely. I haven’t made any decisions, but will be watching closely.

I’m sure the government is just trying to protect your retirement account from terrorists.

From Bloomberg:

The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is weighing whether it should take on a role in helping Americans manage the $19.4 trillion they have put into retirement savings, a move that would be the agency’s first foray into consumer investments.
“That’s one of the things we’ve been exploring and are interested in in terms of whether and what authority we have,” bureau director Richard Cordray said in an interview. He didn’t provide additional details.
The bureau’s core concern is that many Americans, notably those from the retiring Baby Boom generation, may fall prey to financial scams, according to three people briefed on the CFPB’s deliberations who asked not to be named because the matter is still under discussion.

Is It Time To “Reset” The United States Of America?


Declaration of Independence SC Is It Time To Reset the United States of America?

- Tim Powers

If you look at our Declaration of Independence, a valid argument for a full reset emerges. From the Declaration:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.
As our fundamental rights, given to us by God and protected in the US Constitution, are trampled on daily by such acts as the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act), strict gun control legislation, controlled free speech zones, forced health care mandates, and a government driving us into a fiscal catastrophe, a full RESET of the US Government is becoming more necessary.

For more of the article go to: http://www.westernjournalism.com/is-it-time-to-reset-the-united-states-of-america/

Saturday, December 29, 2012

Is it time to consider civil disobedience?


author-imageby JOSEPH FARAH

Americans can sit by and watch government ignore the Constitution and all the principles that made the country great.

Or they can take action, like they did in 2010.

Americans can get out into the streets and let the government know, in no uncertain terms, they will not accept the imposition of Obamacare, they will not accept the endless spiraling debt, they will not accept unlimited government, they will not accept intrusions into our personal liberties, they will not accept rogue government doing what it pleases, when it pleases and to whom it pleases.

In fact, it might be time to resort to civil disobedience in defense of the Constitution.

For instance, I am not going to participate in Obamacare. I’m not going to do it as an individual, and I’m not going to do it as an employer. I would like to be joined by thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of others – maybe even millions.

While I’d like to see millions of tea-party activists back out in the street as we saw in 2010, perhaps we need to do more than hold placards and sing songs. Maybe we need to stage sit-ins like Martin Luther King did. Maybe we need to submit ourselves to arrest by the tens of thousands, overwhelming the injustice system.

Washington has become unresponsive to the people and the rule of law. Elections are manipulated, and the turnout in 2012 suggests tremendous disillusionment with the choices Americans are being offered.

Why shouldn’t they be?

As you read this column, Democrats and Republicans are conspiring to find a path to business as usual – endless borrowing and spending, raising taxes on the productive class of society, while creating more dependency on government by the rest.

Government acolytes like to talk about “unsustainability.” They use the term to suggest that levels of a natural component like carbon are going to destroy us all, magically raising sea levels and bringing about catastrophic events. At the same time, they seem oblivious to the real problem of unsustainability – endless borrowing and spending and taxing, even in an economy that is sputtering at best.

We’ve got to recognize what makes America special is the rule of law and the will of the people, a Constitution that limits the power of government and protects the rights of individuals.

Everything is upside down and inside out.

Before our very eyes, government is empowering itself to exceed the strict limits the Constitution places on it. And when government does that, it naturally infringes on the rights of the people.

The founders of this once-great nation struck a delicate balance between government authority and the rights of the people.

Today’s leaders – Democrats and too many Republicans as well – have tipped the scales in favor of oligarchy.

The tea party accomplished much during 2010. But it wasn’t the kind of long-lasting change we expected. Even the tea party was co-opted by politicians and those chasing the almighty dollar. But it began with all the best intentions as a grass-roots movement free of self-interested leaders. Those who did the hard organizational work simply wanted to save their country from the abyss.

As the author of “The Tea Party Manifesto,” I want to see the excitement we all experienced in 2010 re-ignited.

We had Washington running scared in 2010 – and the elections that year reflected the numbers mobilized by the tea-party movement.

However, those politicians who were the beneficiaries of that vote have betrayed us.

The man who was made speaker of the House as a result of that election is now clearly part of the problem.

That’s why a renewed, reinvigorated tea-party movement needs to recognize simply electing a new set of politicians is not enough. Politics isn’t something we do every two years. It’s a 24/7, 365-day activity that never ends. Once politicians are elected, they need to hear from you. They need to see you. They need to fear you.

That’s where we failed after the 2010 election. And the disillusionment so many of us felt after that experience drove too many to become less active.

If you love America, it’s time to get back out into the streets. It’s time to organize your neighbors in your own community. It’s time to challenge the media as we did in 2010 – even when they disparaged us or ignored us.

Maybe we even need to declare a national strike to make our power felt.For more of the article go to: http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/is-it-time-to-consider-civil-disobedience/#7kBjHYjkkhbGlpqJ.99 

Don’t tell Me What I Need, Or Don’t Need!

- J.D. Longstreet


Staring down at me from a photograph atop the computer monitor directly in front of me is the determined visage of John Singleton Mosby.  His Confederate officer’s uniform is resplendent.  The brass is sparkling, the leather is polished, and his black knee boots are spit-shined to a high gloss.  His left hand is resting on the hilt of his cavalry saber.  Mosby’s left foot is slightly forward giving the optical impression that he is leaning forward ready to do battle.  And he was.
John Singleton Mosby is probably best known as “The Gray Ghost,” the leader of what would today be a detachment of special forces/special ops troops for the Confederate Army or, when under orders from General Robert E. Lee, the Army of Northern Virginia.
Nobody wanted to tangle with Mosby.  He was a pain in the butt to the officers over him and even during times of relative calm.  In battle, he was rabid.  If he had any fear it was never apparent.  His ability to stay a step or two ahead of the enemy was a testament to his reasoning ability and his strategic and tactical thinking.
As a lad, growing up in the American south, surrounded by the poetry of “languidity” (owing to the hot, humid, climate before air conditioning) one had time to dream.  And I did.  When not in school, I was in the fields hunting with my dog and my shotgun or rifle, else I was hidden away in some quiet place with my nose pressed against the pages of a book.
I had two heroes:  Alexander the Great and John Singleton Mosby—The Gray Ghost.
I think it was their self confidence that drew me to them.  They did their own thinking, came to their own conclusions and acted on them in their own way and they didn’t give a damn what anyone else thought about it.  Of course, that spoke of another quality they both possessed in abundance:  courage.

Glancing up at Mosby’s stern visage today, I feel as if he is challenging me to pour everything I have into the fight to preserve the individual freedom of the American civilian to keep and bear arms.
I’m convinced that if Mosby were alive and healthy today he would be in the fight and he would give a hell of an accounting of himself in doing so.
See, Mosby did not take kindly to others, even his superiors, telling him what to do, or what he needed—or didn’t need.  In fact he tended to respond rather aggressively toward those who did.  THAT is how and why he was pushed out of the regular ranks and into what we call “guerrilla” warfare today.
And that brings me to the crux of this commentary today. 

I’m having a “Mosby Moment.”

I’m having a “Mosby Moment.”  I, along with a few million other Americans, have a whole slew of elitist Americans assuming a right they do not have.  They have taken it upon themselves to tell me what I need and what I don’t need.
I am referring, of course to the ongoing harping from the political left about controlling my right as a legal gun owner in America to keep and bear arms. 
Oh, they’ll deny they want to abolish the Second Amendment, but that is a a bald-faced lie.  That is EXACTLY what they want to do and they are on the verge of an all out push to do just that ... if we gun owners allow the nose of that camel under the tent.
Not one to buy into the malarkey of Moral Relativism, or as it is known today “political correctness,” I have a strong sense of what is right and what is wrong.  And for me, anyone trying to tell me what I need and/or what I don’t need crosses the line.  You have strayed into hostile territory and you will be met with resistance commensurate with that behind your effort—and then some.
One of the lessons I learned in the US Army as an artilleryman was that one should not necessarily celebrate when the enemy is found to be in range of your guns.  Why?  Because that means you are also in range of HIS guns!  Victory usually means getting the first accurate rounds down range and then maintaining a continuous barrage until the enemy is destroyed or driven from the field.
That is, I feel, exactly where we are in these opening moments of the fight over gun control in America. Unfortunately,  we allowed the enemy to fire the first rounds and they are pouring it on.  (But—they apparently forgot the old saw about “range”  noted above!)
Those of us in the New Media have been fighting what amounts to a “trip wire” or “speed bump” action while our main forces were preparing to engage.
Honestly, now that those main forces have engaged, I can’t say that I am impressed with what they have brought to the battle, at least so far.
Yes, this IS going to be a slog.  The so-called gun grabbers are going to throw everything, including the kitchen sink, at gun owners, they are going to play on the emotions of the American people any way they can.  Plus, you can be sure another nut will go off and kill more people because he wants to be a part of the story, a part of the narrative, and go down in the history books along with preceding murdering nut cases.  It is the way of sick minds.
At the beginning of this debate there was some small degree of hope—on my part—that there would be at least a slight degree of civility upheld in the admittedly heated debate.  That went right out the window within hours and so far (at this writing)  the low point has been a member of the TV media calling his very own program guest “stupid.”  (A petition has been filed on the White House website asking the President to deport that particular foreign journalist who only works for an American cable news outlet.)
And it will get decidedly worse.  There are recorded instances of fisticuffs on the floor of Congress as the result of long past heated debates—and we may yet see more such outbursts in the weeks and months ahead.
We should all be wary, however, of the maneuvering BEHIND the scenes THAT WE DO NOT SEE.  That is where the gun grabber’s mischief will be most creative and most effective.
We can expect Presidential Executive Orders limiting our freedom to be issued out of the Oval Office with little fanfare.  There have been hints of such EO’s dating back months, long before the Newtown Massacre.  There were reports that such EO’s were already prepared and awaiting the “right time” for the President to sign them.
At least one Senator has declared her intent to introduce legislation to ban so-called “assault weapons” as soon as Congress convenes in January.  It is well to note that the assault weapon ban did absolutely nothing to thwart gun violence while it was in effect the first time.  Plus, you might find it interesting to note that the state of Connecticut, has its own assault weapon ban.  It sure helped ... a lot ... didn’t it!?
Expect the United Nations Small Arms Treaty to be approved by the US Senate.  That does not require any input or approval by the US House of Representatives.  It will,undoubtedly be challenged before the US Supreme Court and depending upon the way the court rules, that UN treaty could effectively wipe out the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.
(One should keep in mind that Obama will likely have the opportunity to appoint two new justices to the Supreme Court in the next four years.  There is absolutely no reason to think those appointees will be fans of the Second Amendment!)
       
I fully expect the approach used by the gun grabbers will be incremental in nature—in the beginning.  They will insist they only want “reasonable” gun control.  You know, things like civilians ought not own such things as machine guns, the modern Gatling guns, rocket propelled grenades, surface-to-air missiles, things like that. 
It’s a con game.  What they really want is your guns—and they are definitely coming for them.
If you are a gun owner and you want to keep your gun(s) along with the RIGHT to keep your gun(s), then you MUST join the fight.  You MUST raise your voice in protest.  Simply put—IF you DON’T raise your voice in protest, you will lose the RIGHT to do THAT once the Second Amendment is out of the way. 
The black flag of “no quarter” has been raised above the camp of the political left on gun control.  See, they have finally had an epiphany.  They have finally realized that the Second Amendment was not intended to provide protection for the guns of sportsmen and hunters.  They now know it was intended to insure the ability of the American citizen to maintain weapons with which he can resist efforts to strip Americans of their freedom and liberty and enslave them under the jackboots of a tin horn dictator.
Here are a few thoughts on the necessity of Americans keeping and bearing guns: 

“The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good” ... George Washington
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government” —Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
“One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms.”—Constitutional scholar Joseph Story, 1840
“The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.” —Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story of the John Marshall Court
“To disarm the people… was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”—George Mason, speech of June 14, 1788
“Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in our own possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the *real* object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?”— Patrick Henry, speech of June 9, 1788
America is now engaged in a fight to decide if we will remain free or become slaves to the state.  THAT is the bottom line.
I vote for freedom ... period!