REMEMBER …

The Obama administration told us if we didn’t act quickly and pass a stimulus, our economy would collapse … yet the Democrat-controlled government spent billions of dollars for each of several stimulus plans, most of which you never heard about and rather slowly I might add, for NOTHING (except to allow the Democrats to create giant slush funds to pay back there supporters).

Don’t believe me? Can you sat Sol-lyn-dra? You better be able to because you paid $530 million for it (again for NOTHING).

They told us if we didn’t act quickly and pass ObamaCare, people would die … it was estimated to cost north of $980 billion, BUT new estimates put it at $1.7 trillion, an increase in cost of 45%.  And, as a result, the government created a de facto increase in the average health care insurance rate of $2,400 per year (Obama claimed his socialism would decrease the average rate by $2,500 per year)!  Hey, but what is only a difference of $4,900 per year, and that is “close enough for government work.”

And now, they are using homeland safety to whip us into a frenzy so they can slip freedom-crushing legislation down our throats…once again!

The Internet is not any one “entity” that can easily be taken over by the government. Our representatives know that. So, they are looking at ways to control each and every Internet component, and every online activity.

Plus, they are going after PRIVATE companies that provide access and placing burdensome restrictions on them. Don’t be fooled. PRIVATE COMPANIES should be in control of their Internet systems, NOT the federal government!

The Obamanation is intent on putting EVERYTHING…every single industry…under the umbrella of the State (we call it socialism, and socialism is a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism. (Karl Marx).

This issue is especially important right now. The Internet is full of voices who disagree with the Obamanation. Passing legislation in the name of “cybersecurity” makes it possible for the Obamanation to control information flowing online. Control information and you control the people. Don’t believe me? Just ask Mao, he controlled information and killed about 40 million of his own people “for the good of the nation.”

If the new Obamanation bill is passed, “There are almost no restrictions on what can be collected and how it can be used, provided a company can claim it was motivated by ‘cybersecurity purposes.’ That means a company like Google, Facebook, Twitter, or AT&T could intercept your emails and text messages, send copies to one another and to the government, and modify those communications or prevent them from reaching their destination if it fits into their plan to stop cybersecurity threats.” ..and all these businesses were big supporters of the Obamanation. Are you starting to get the picture?

The Obamanation wants everything to fall under their control. Government control of the economy means control of you, or in a word, TYRANNY.
This is why your participation is SO IMPORTANT. We must get the message to Congress that we will not accept any privacy-killing regulations on the Internet.

If America undergoes a cyberattack, there are measures in place to protect utilities and financial institutions…Reid’s latest push for regulation would include Internet service providers and PRIVATE networks … who exactly that would be remains to be seen. The government will decide, of course.

Who will the Democrats decide to shut down, in the name of “national security?”

Any blog or website you visit is subject to a shutdown by the government IF THEY FEEL LIKE IT, simply because they can claim it’s all in the interests of “national security.”

Remember that communist countries have killed over 100 million OF THEIR OWN PEOPLE! The communists make socialists like Hitler and Mussolini look like amateurs.

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” – George Santayama

Consistently Conservative.

JOIN Conservative Action Alerts in their fight to protect the Internet from government control! Send your Personalized Fax to Congress right now and tell them to protect the Internet from greedy bureaucrats and almost certain taxation and regulation! 

Conservative Action Alerts (CAA): Diener Consultants, Inc., 17388 Nature Walk Trail, Suite No. 301, Parker, CO 80134.

Conservative Action Alerts (CAA) is a media outlet protected by the first amendment and that support for their efforts is not tax-deductible.

Conservative Action Alerts (CAA) is in no way associated with CONSISTENTLY CONSERVATIVE, but this issue is so important that we here at CONSISTENTLY CONSERVATIVE want to help spread their warning, and we urge you to take legal action no matter the form!

Consistently Conservative

Woodrow Wilson was one of America’s biggest Progressive socialist Presidents. His domestic program expanded the role of the federal government by legitimizing government control of the economy and introducing interference into the interests of individual citizens. As the picture would imply, Wilson threw socialism at the American people (while they were not looking).

Wilson fundamentally changed the legal system as he established the Progressive interpretation of the Constitution, a version of philosophy that law schools across this land have been teaching since the beginning of the 20th century. An example of this new way of looking at the Constitution through the prism of socialism is illustrated in his book, “Constitutional Government in the United States (1908).”

Wilson’s  foreign policy established a new vision of America’s role in the world (i.e. interventionism). Wilson attempted to see his vision of world socialism transferred to all the peoples of the world after WW-I buy establishing the League of Nations (the forerunner of the United Nations–how is that working out for you?)

Claude Frédéric Bastiat wrote, “each of us has a natural right, from God, to defend his person, his liberty, and his property”.

Bastiat argued that the proper role for government was  ”substitution of a common force for individual forces” to defend the natural (God-given) rights of the individual. 

Bastiat posited that the law becomes perverted when it punishes an individual by limiting that individual’s right to self-defense in favor of another individual’s acquired right to plunder via guaranteed jobs, relief and welfare schemes, public education, progressive taxation, free credit, public works and the establisment of monopolies. Bastiat wrote, “I do dispute their (the government’s) right to impose these plans upon us by law—by force—and to compel us to pay for them with our taxes”.  Sound familiar?

Bastiat saw, back in 1849, that government can grow endlessly when  the philanthropy (discribed above) becomes its stated function. With this “philanthropic” statism the law is perverted and turned against the life, liberty, and property it is supposed to defend. 

2008 Oct 13

Bailout for more Socialism

The first solution to the current financial problem is to get rid of Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and Chuck Schumer, and all the other Democrats and so called “moderate” Republicans who have pushed banks into providing loans to the “poor and under privileged” who could not afford them. 

Do not get me wrong, I know that many people were pushing loans onto people that they knew could not afford them, but as long as the real state values increased, the deals they made were solvent.  The fallacy is that things never continue to increase in price indefinitely.

The real tragedy is that the very people who created this mess are the same ones in charge of fixing it.  Just today I saw Dodd, Schumer, and Frank parade around like heroes. Heroes? These guys ought to be in prison! 

Since FDR put in the “New Deal” we’ve had more and more and more federal and state socialism, and the solution to any problem is more government!  Why is it that any time there is a financial crisis in this country this country immediately plunges headfirst into even more socialism?   If socialism was so great, then why do we have this problem in the first place?

 Romney refuses to call Obama a socialist? Brilliant, or is he one too?

In his book “No Apology”, Mitt wrote, “The ‘all-Democrat’ stimulus that was passed in early 2009 will accelerate the timing of the start of the recovery, but not as much as it could have had it included genuine tax-and job-generating incentives.”

Was he kidding?

Such a comment about how government spending is going to stimulate the economy suggests that Romney believes in Keynesian economics!

When his father, George, was governor of Michigan, the elder Romney brought the state income tax to Michigan. What a guy!

When good old Mitt was governor (2003 -2007), like a true Romney, he opposed the elimination of the Massachusetts state income tax and championed an auto excise tax on SUVs and a greenfields tax on the development of ocean space.

In 2003, Governor Mitt refused to endorse the Bush tax cuts, earning the praise of Massachusetts liberal (statist) congressman Barney Frank, and was even open to a federal gas tax hike.

Obamney or Neuter? Look at history!

Statement: “I really think Romney can beat Obama. Newt
is smart but he scares me.”

My response: Zero versus 50-50

The Romneys and Electability Deja vu?

In the 1968 Republican nomination contest, George Romney the “Moderate” (Statist) governor of Michigan, ran on an electability platform. Sound familiar? Yes, all the conservatives in the presidential race in 1968 seemed sure losers against a very vulnerable Democratic incumbent, and Romney was a sure thing (or so the inside-the-Beltway establishment RINOs said). However, despite all the electability hype, George Romney (old dad) seemed stuck in the polls between 20%-30%, the internal polling numbers showing seemingly immovable resistance. Déjà vu?  Yes, once again, a Romney is running as Mr. Electable, stuck at 20%-30% in the polls in large measure because he is a proven moderate ( RINO/statist), a deal-breaker for the Tea Partiers like me.

George and his boy Mitt

George and his boy Mitt

Romney and Keynesian Economics

Okay, so the intelligencia/establishment tell us that Mitt is the only candidate that can defeat the Obamanation, but they neglect to tell you the details of  his history. Oh sure, they talk about Romney Care , but  if you look just beyond the surface there lurks  the reason for this furtiveness .  Romney is a statist, and the most detestable part of a Romney as president is his statist economic sophistry.  In his book “No Apology”, Mitt wrote, “The ‘all-Democrat’ stimulus that was passed in early 2009 will accelerate the timing of the start of the recovery, but not as much as it could have had it included genuine tax- and job-generating incentives.” Such a comment suggests that Romney supports discredited Keynesian economics. I cannot gleefully support a candidate with this philosophy.

Do what I say and not as I do?

Say it ain’t so Mitt!

Mitt, you were joking right?

Mitt is for tax overhaul, if by overhaul you mean hauling in more tax money.

Mitt’s intense opposition to the flat tax is most curious and difficult to explain considering Romney started stumping against it before he was a presidential political candidate. Yep, in 1996, he ran a series of newspaper ads in Boston, New Hampshire, and Iowa denouncing the 17% flat tax proposed by then presidential candidate Steve Forbes as a “tax cut for fat cats.” In 2007, Romney continued to oppose the flat tax with harsh language, calling the tax “unfair.” Yes, unfair for crony capitalists like Obamney!

What about the Newt?

The 90′s Newt

 

 The post-Speaker Newt

 Neuters been bad, very bad!

The New Neuter

Free Marketeering vesus Crony Capitalism

   

What most people are not told is how Neuter is much sounder on free-market economic issues than Romney. Gingrich quietly released his tax plan months ago. It calls for slashing the corporate rate, giving individuals big tax breaks, and retaining many major deductions and credits. Mitt Romneys’s reforms would leave us with a corporate-tax rate twice as high as Neuter’s, and, in distiction to the Neuter’s abolition of taxes on capital gains, Romney is proposing to end them only for those making under $200,000 because it would be wrong to “spend our precious tax dollars for a tax cut.” When RINOs like Romney think tax cuts are government “spending,” who needs Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barney Frank?

Bottomline:

Is it folly not to support Obamney? After all, he can win! Not if you know history!

Is it better to support Neuter? Only if you think he will have more days as a conservative than days as a sophist.

 Neuter 50-50, Romney zero

I would say he is 50-50 at best. Now, 50-50 is better than zero, and still not a sure thing, but a vote for Romney is a vote for crony capitalism and zero “change”.

Rick Perry, Conservative?

I have friends that are absolutely behind Rick Perry, and these friends are people whose opinions I respect very much (several in Cali and a muster of Aggies in Texas –see, I am not very discriminating). Being only vaguely familiar with Perry at the time, I started doing a little research on Rick, and I discovered some very troubling things.

Man of Conviction

A good friend of mine knew Perry back in the mid 80′s at A+M University before Perry was very involved in politics, and at that time Perry was, clearly, a Democrat. Because of that experience with Perry early on, my friend has had the opportunity to spend time with Perry in a variety of settings, including at home. Whether, you wish to support him as a candidate or not, let me assure you that he is a man of conviction, NOT just expediencies. My friend, a true Conservative, liked him then, as he does now.

Personally, I think “W” is a good man, but he was not able to withstand the Beltway, and he spent huge amounts of your money, grew the size and scope of government, and set us up (whether he knew it or not) for this current bunch of socialist to run rough-shod over our once capitalistic economy.

I would add that Mao was also a man of conviction, but he didn’t have the convictions we need, and neither does Perry.

Perry, A State-wide Democrat? Yep!

My problem with Perry is the simple fact that he is a Southern Democrat, no matter how good a man he is. In an article sent to me by one of my boyhood friends, Perry is quoted as saying, “I learned in my 20’s traveling the globe as an Air Force pilot that we are the most exceptional nation on the face of the earth.”

In his 20′s? Really? If he was so perceptive,then why was he a socialist Democrat until he was 38 years old? Does anyone really buy that sophistry? When you were 20 were you a socialist? How about at age 35? How about 38 years old?

I, like most of you, am not by any measure perfectly omniscient, and I have modified some of my views over the years, but I knew before I was a in high school that redistribution of wealth is nothing more than stealing from one person and giving to another. There are politicians of all stripes who use the money the government steals (from you, the tax payer) to give to someone else in order to buy their vote (I call them RINOs and Democrats). No matter how you slice it, vote buying is theft, and the Democrats I knew in South Texas were, by definition, thieves. Now, I am not saying this
without experience. When I was in college I got to meet and talk with Senator Lloyd Benson,

and a friend was the grandson of LBJ’s chief-of-staff.

Despite these experiences, my opinion did not change (in fact it was solidified).

Is Perry’s brain slow to develop?

Remember the human brain grows in size (especially the frontal cortex) until a person reaches about 22 years of age.

I don’t know of any documented cases of someone having a cerebral growth spurt at 37. Also, I would posit that there is more than a slight modification in political thought in the transition from a Clintonista to a Reagan-style Republican. So, I cannot believe Perry is a genuine conservative (no matter how vehemently he professes to be one now). Again, unless he has had a brain clot resolve (so he has an improved blood supply to his brain), I cannot see any reason why he suddenly became “reasonable” (other than for political expedience). The fact is Perry was a Democrat well into his adulthood. To be 37 and for Al Gore, let alone be Al’s campaign manager, shows me that this Perry had more than just signs of triviality.

The real question is why was Perry a Democrat and then a Democrat politician, then a state-wide Democrat politician, and then campaign manager for Al Gore (at 37 years old), and then became a Republican at age 38? Do you believe this is reasonable? Have you bumped your head? Sorry, but it seems obvious that he “switched to the Republican side of the isle because the Conservative Texas voter switched (and Perry followed the herd).

Perry’s Dream Act

Okay, so you may think that Perry somehow changed, well then how do you explain that AFTER Perry’s epiphany he
stumped for the Texas Dream Act! I will tell you why! This guy, in order to win Hispanic votes (and retain his power).

Perry in 2001, and Cali’s Governor “moon beam” in 2011, championed the Texas and California Dream ACTS
respectively.  Say it ain’t so!

Sorry! “Perry signed a Texas version of the Dream Act back in 2001, allowing foreign-born children of illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition for college if they have lived in the state for three years prior to graduating high school. Perry explained, “We must say to every Texas child learning in a Texas classroom, ‘We don’t care where you come from, but where you are going, and we are going to do everything we can to help you get there.’… “And that vision must include the children of undocumented workers.” Under the Texas Dream Act, Illegal alien students do not have to actually apply for citizenship — they only have to promise that they will some day! Yes, Perry backs the policy of having all the children of other countries come to Texas for college and let the Texans pay for it (but charge Americans from other states, who want to do the same, extra)!

Not convinced? Texas state legislators have filed at least four bills to repeal the Dream Act, which grants lower, in-state tuition to the children of immigrants who have lived in Texas at least three years, have graduated from a Texas high school and plan to become citizens. Opponents of the Texas Dream Act say it is unfair to give the financial break to illegal immigrants, and then make U.S. citizens who are non-Texas residents pay more to attend college in Texas! Well, not Mr. Perry, Rick said he will oppose efforts to repeal a law, which he signed six years ago, giving tuition breaks to undocumented immigrants attending state universities. Yep, Perry said, “I’m for leaving the law like it is because I think it serves a good purpose,’’ (yes, it delivered him 39% of the Hispanic vote).

Using Perry’s sophistry, support of the Texas Dream Act will ensure that he remains in power and people of the world will love Texas. Hey, sounds a lot like the President already! It is really a swift political move and Governor Jerry “moon beam” Brown signed the same law in Cali! I understand the supporters of Perry in Texas! They want their own version of
“moon-beam!”

Sorry fellows, but it gets worse. Perry wrote a letter to the editor of the Dallas Morning News, “I take strong issue
with a news report in the Dallas Morning News mischaracterizing my position on amnesty for undocumented immigrants from Mexico. The truth is, I am intrigued and open to the Bush administration’s amnesty proposal. Most Texans would agree that it’s better to have legal, taxpaying immigrants from Mexico working in the United States than illegal immigrants living in fear of the law and afraid to access basic services.” When Arizona enacted its controversial statute, he explicitly rejected that approach for Texas: “Recently, there has been much debate over immigration policy in
Washington and what has been implemented in Arizona. I fully recognize and support a state’s right and obligation to protect its citizens, but I have concerns with portions of the law passed in Arizona and believe it would not be
the right direction for Texas.” Seriously, are you kidding me? This is the politician you want to run our country?

I know that Texas is just footsteps from being just like Mexico, and as anyone from South Texas can tell you, that is not a good thing. The difference between US and Mexico is capitalism versus crony capitalism and socialism, and
Mexicans, at a rate of over 85%, believe in socialism. Don’t believe me? Ask the ranchers around Crystal City, Texas!

It is mind-boggling to think about it, but the influx of Mexicans (and other Central and South Americans) really began in the 50′s, and before that there really were very few living in the US. South Texas in 1962, had one of THE best pools of farm labor in the country. Well, what was great in 1962 changed overnight in 1964 under LBJ (a hero to Texas Democrats and Perry). What used to be a community of workers under Eisenhower became a indolent swarm of
government ticks under LBJ and Sam Rayburn, sucking the life-blood out of the community tax payers.

Long story, short I can tell you first hand that it will take at least three (and probably more) generations to get the socialism out of the majority of these dyed-in-the-wool imported socialists. Of course, not all Hispanics are the same, and Cuban immigrants, especially those who remember the difference between pre-Castro Cuba and post-Castro Cuba, are mainly Conservative Rebublicans, and this shows up in the demographics of Florida. However, the vast majority of illegal immigrants from all counties, not just Hispanics, are socialists, and  Perry doesn’t see this, or doesn’t care. Perry,  like Bush, thinks Texans and all Americans should make these trespassers citizens. Does this Dream/Nightmare Act reflect you philosophy too?

The problem I have with Perry is not just the philosophical distinction of statist versus Conservative, because if the socialists are allowed to imports socialist voters, then adios Jesus (Hey-seuss for all you non-Spanish speakers).

 Perry In the Desert of the Beltway

Jesus spent 40 days in the desert being tempted by the devil and came out okay, but a President Perry will be surrounded by demons for 1460 days (4 years), and I can say without doubt Perry is not as sure-footed on water.

Texas Governor maybe, but President?

I understand full well that Perry was probably the best man running for Texas governor, and I would have voted for him too, but he is NOT the best man running for President (at least not right now). If he does win the nomination then he will again be the best man in the race and I will support him; however, he is NOT the best man for our country, and that is what we need.

“Dude”, this guy is just a politician and when he goes to Washington he will become a Belt-way politician.

You can’t tell me that you don’t see though the subterfuge?

Obama and his crony crew are NOT religious, other than to get the dupes who believe he is one of them to support him. You are correct if you believe that a whole bunch of Muslims believe Obama is at least empathetic to the Muslim cause and they all vote for him, but the reason he seems to be one with them is because the Muslims and the statists are working together in “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” sort of way. He is consistent with the Manifesto:

“The worker of the world has nothing to lose, but his chains, workers of the world unite”. Karl Marx

Ironically, all the liberal Jews vote for Obama too. So you have the anti-Jews and Jews voting for the same guy! Brillant!

If you still don’t believe me about statists being atheists, then read Karl Marx. Obama and his Czars quote Karl Marx all the time; so, I will show you what Karl says about religion:

“Religion is the impotence of the human mind to deal with occurrences it cannot understand.” Karl Marx

“The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion.” Karl Marx

With Obamas new policy to support the worlds homosexuals, many uninformed anti-Obama zelots think Islam is pro-homosexual; well, think again. Muslims kill homosexuals:

Allah says: “We also (sent) Lût: he said to his people: “Do ye commit lewdness such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you? For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds” [Sûrah al-A`râf: 80-81]
“Whomever you find doing the act of Lût’s nation, then kill both parties.” (the pitcher and  the catcher).

Photo of Iran’s public hanging of two teens for the crime of homosexuality

Obama and his ilk worship government and central control not God, and they will cobble together any and all means to gain and maintain power regardless of your religious beliefs or sexual orientation. They want your vote now, and they can always come back to subjugate you latter!

Free speech? Only if you are a statist!

On October 13, 2006, members of the Minutemen group, the group that patrols the U.S. border with Mexico and reports illegal crossings, were asked to address a forum on immigration policy at Columbia University in Manhattan. As the founder spoke,  Columbia University students stormed the stage, shouting and knocking over chairs and tables. “Having wreaked havoc,” said the New York Sun, they unfurled a banner in Arabic and English that said, “No one is ever illegal.” The auditorium was cleared, the Minutemen silenced. Afterward a student protester told the Columbia Spectator, “I don’t feel we need to apologize or anything. It was fundamentally a part of free speech. . . . The Minutemen are not a legitimate part of the debate on immigration.”

   “The Minutemen are not a legitimate part of the debate on immigration”?

   Nope, statists are for free speech only if they are the ones speaking!