Monday, February 23, 2009
I haven't been blogging as of late because this tanking economy is really affecting my business, and I've been struggling to keep up with my bills. I've been putting in a lot of overtime and trying to get my financial house in order.
One of the things I was thinking about as I was looking at my mountain of bills was the fact that I'm in debt to credit card companies by the names of JP Morgan, Chase, Citibank...names of the mega-corporation Banker companies that are the primary movers and shakers of the NWO Globalists.
I've been chained into slavery by the NWO through my own ignorance and my own stupidity in my early twenties, when I used my credit cards to fund trips around the world and to live beyond my means.
But now I know the truth of the matter, and I am working towards that day when I can finally tear up those bank statements from the NWO institutions and become a free man again.
People may read my thoughts on the New World Order and the conspiracy for global governance by a power elite and think I'm just another crazy conspiracy theorist.
I refer all skeptics to the last U.S. President who was NOT a Council of Foreign Relations/Tri-Lateral Commission/Bilderberg Group/Rockefeller puppet advancing the NWO agenda...
...the late, great, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, assassinated for taking on the NWO and trying to usurp their power base by issuing executive order 11110.
Think JFK didn't know about the conspiracy of the central bankers to subvert the USA and seize control of the world? That "conspiracies" were all nothing but the ravings of paranoid delusions?
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
I've posted a few times in the past about Phyllis Schalfly who championed the movement to defeat the Equal Rights Amendment that the Femi-Nazi's (with apologies to the National Socialists) of the 60's sexual revolution movement tried to foist on the American people.
Like the mythical, multi-headed hydra, the ERA Fem-tards (with apologies to retards) simply reared their ugly heads in a variety of different fronts to get the same platform of the ERA passed when Schalfly cut off the giant head off their movement back in the hey day.
Family Law Reform Advocate and columnist David Usher examines just how they used incremental gradualism to achieve the initial goals of the ERA over a long period of time, once they failed at getting it all at once...
From REPLACING POST-ERA FEMINIST POLICY WITH "MARRIAGE VALUES"
The final defeat of the ERA June 30,1982 did not mark an end to the pogrom of feminist activism. It just meant feminists had to change their game. Instead of demanding vague equal rights, they began hawking hyper-sexist victim-fear campaigns designed to achieve the same ends targeted in the ERA. The 2008 elections prove this chicanery has been horrendously successful.
Post-ERA Lesbians and gays magically became victims of their genetic proclivities and supposed oppressors. Feminists began to make allegations of sexual improprieties against anyone who disagreed with them -- blackmailing politicians into granting feminists the very economic rights, civil unions, and same-sex marriages that brought the ERA down.
“Trapped” housewives fearfully excommunicated themselves from the safe-haven of marriage, convinced that husbands are unnecessary rapists or abusers. A woman’s right to be supported and cared for by her husband became an ongoing public entitlement burden to be supported by Congress and screaming taxpayers. The mutilated beggar children highlighted in “Slumdog Millionaire” have their American counterparts – leveraged away from one or both parents by feminist policy and then used to beg for more marriage-destructive entitlements.
Post-ERA feminist legal scams such as the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) were marched through Congress by feminist trial lawyers in 1996. The legal trade profits immensely by destroying the marriages and futures of America’s women. VAWA destroys marriage on allegation alone. This is why lawyers in Congress (on both sides of the aisle) automatically pass anything that A.B.A. feminists want.
A very convincing body of evidence proves that the American Bar Association’s approach to domestic violence is founded on feminist agitprop, and directly violates peer-reviewed science. And, an overwhelming body of scientific fact proves that VAWA does not reduce domestic violence.
The official A.B.A. “Standards of Practice For Lawyers Representing Victims of Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault, and Stalking” is a gross violation of ethics and Constitution. It consistently pre-declares the victim as “her.” Imagine, for a moment, what would happen if A.B.A. documents officially named victims “white” and criminals “black”?
$16-billion in TANF seed money is given to states to fertilize illegitimacy and divorce. States are rewarded for seizing it all back by locking up poor or unemployed fathers. Our jails are full of them. The vast majority of America’s 1-million gang members were raised absent marriage.
Why do Conservatives keep losing these battles, many of them fooled into supporting the feminist agenda? It is because post-ERA conservatives forgot how to fight feminism.
I'm reminded of this every time I hear or read a so-called conservative justifying our imperial corporatist wars in the Middle East are justifiable because the Islamic societies don't have 'women's rights.'
Recall that the ERA battle was won against all odds because Phyllis Schlafly constantly talked out how ERA would hurt women, in addition to pointing out the principles. Most women (and politicians who fall over backwards to help women) ended up agreeing with Phyllis. Modern conservatives and libertarians contest the principles only, and never get around to showing everyone how feminist agenda hurts women.
The result of Conservatives' failure to stress the damaging consequences of feminist agenda is a nation of deeply troubled unmarried mothers, fathers, and children, who still think that feminist-liberalism is the answer.
Don't forget, conservatives are too busy worrying about same sex marriage...which is decidedly a policy that directly affects a very, very small percentage of the population. It's akin to arguing that the barn door hinges are broken and how they should be fixed...while the horses are all still in the process of running away. How can you save marriage from the homosexuals when no-fault divorce and the divorce court industry created by the fem-nuts (with apologies to nuts) are absolutely destroying normal, opposite-sex marriage?
Politics have changed in the post-ERA era. To restore America's ethical, economic and social dynamism to a level worthy of world leadership, two things must be done:
First: Feminism has controlled America for over forty years. During this time period, every social indicator measuring the well-being of women and children has declined substantially. Marriage remains the most likely safe haven for living the American dream. We must constantly remind women of this truth.
Second: Conservatives must formulate and aggressively socialize attractive pro-family “Marriage Values” policies, get them passed in the states, and later in Congress.
Can you say 1984? War is Peace! Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Feminism improves the lives of Women and Children!
The National Organization for Women has a freight train of radical legislation set for passage. With über-feminists Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and the National Organization of Women running the White House, Congress fearfully passing anything feminists want, and 2010 another impending Waterloo, the RNC must make "Marriage Values" its top priority yesterday.
If you're counting on the RNC to fix this, don't hold your breath Mr. Usher. They'll be too busy saving marriage from the gays to not even worry about normal marriages utter destruction thanks to the efforts of the divorce courts and the Femi-mafia (with apologies to the mafia).
Thursday, February 5, 2009
And he got up before Congress yesterday and introduced THE ONLY BILL capable of ending our so-called economic crisis:
Before the US House of Representatives, February 4, 2009, introducing
The Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act, H.R. 833.
Madame Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation to restore financial stability to America's economy by abolishing the Federal Reserve. Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people.
From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the current economic crisis caused by the housing bubble, every economic downturn suffered by this country over the past century can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial "boom" followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts.
With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America's exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation.
Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of special interests and their own appetite for big government.
Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy.
In fact, Congress' constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system will enable America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our nation's founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold. Such a monetary system is the basis of a true free-market economy.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand up for working Americans by putting an end to the manipulation of the money supply which erodes Americans' standard of living, enlarges big government, and enriches well-connected elites, by cosponsoring my legislation to abolish the Federal Reserve.
Any guesses on who this might be?
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Seems like that's one of the number one justifications women use to rationalize their behavior.
Check out this article that Field Marshall Watkins posted about on his End of Men blog:
In the article that was the basis for his post, One in Ten Men Could Be Victims of Paternity Fraud, he details the story of a man who is informed by his cheating whore of a wife that the eldest of three girls that he's raised into adulthood is not his. She cuckolded him straight up.
But get her quote from the article...it really takes the cake:
He was the son of a painter and decorator, she the daughter of a tyre fitter and secretary. Lydia was 15 and still at school, Mark two years older and studying to be a baker.
He says: ‘It just worked. She was quite artistic, musically talented – a very good singer. She was basically an innocent girl from a small town who hadn’t really been anywhere, and my history wasn’t so dissimilar.
‘She was my first serious girlfriend. Until then I’d been more interested in cricket than girls.’ They married four years later in 1982.
Lydia has since said that Mark quickly became controlling and manipulative, hitting walls when he was angry and constantly threatening to leave her.
She also claimed that the gradual chipping away of her confidence left her emotionally vulnerable, which is why she was drinking heavily the night Elspeth was conceived.
Lydia, then a secretary with a computing company, was at a conference and ended up in a hotel room with an older colleague, Allen Mottram, known as David.
So let's get this straight: when he got angry, he'd hit the walls (probably because he wanted to hit YOU but he knew that would be wrong).
And he "threatened to leave her."
How is that "controlling?" If he threatened to leave you, tell him "GO THEN."
Instead, you take no personal responsibility, claim you were "emotionally vulnerable" and than cuckold your husband.
Isn't female empowerment in our Brave New World Order wonderful?!?!
Monday, February 2, 2009
Been reading a google-book regarding the way in which tax-exempt foundations and internationalist-minded elite rich like the Rockefellers have funded the social engineering that has shaped our culture and society.
The book is: Mass Control: Engineering Human Consciousness
On page 42, I came across this quotation from Journalist John Swinton, giving a toast to the New York Press Club in 1953. Supposedly, Swinton was one of the most respected journalists of his time, and he was asked to toast the "independent" press of America.
There is no such thing at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press.
You know it and I know it.
There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.
The business of journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. you know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press?
We are the tools of rich men behind the scenes. We are jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men.
We are intellectual prostitutes.
Wonder if his fellow journalists applauded his toast, eh?
This was back in 1953...think anything's changed for the better with regards to our mainstream press?