Quote of the Day 04-08-2009

"The left and right differ only on what part of the federal government gets to decide when we are stripped of our constitutional protections. "

Stewart Rhodes, Government Supremacists, Neocons: The National Security New Dealers

Democratic and Republican Politicians: Whitewashed Tombs

I heard that Missouri's own Senator Kit Bond was hopping mad at the insurance giant, AIG, as well as at the new Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner. Why? Because AIG, right after being handed billions of our grandchildren's money, doled out $1 million bonuses to their executives.

I'm not sure, but it appears that all 100 US Senators are fighting mad at AIG, and all of the Republicans and even some Democrats are calling for the head of the Treasury Secretary. Now, don't get me wrong - I weep not a tear for any AIG executives, and certainly not for our Secretary of the Treasury, but I find the outrage of Senator Bond, and all of the blustering Congressmen and Senators, to be infuriatingly disingenuous and hypocritical.

Most of these Senators, including Senator Bond, voted to fork over our hard-earned money to AIG and many other incompetent but well-connected companies, and went into wordy diatribes defending their odious actions at the time. Now, they pretend to not know that AIG is a corrupt and incompetent institution, and they are now busily working to craft more unconstitutional legislation to make things even worse, economically.

Why did Congress and the new Regime think there was no moral hazard in handing over billions of dollars to a company like AIG? How has this company proven itself deserving of survival? They don't call it an economic correction for nothing, after all.

AIG, who several years ago refused to drop the newly married daughter of a friend of mine from his insurance policy because he "could not prove she was insured elsewhere" had already made contractual agreements with these executives to give them these bonuses. What business does Congress and the new Regime have in deciding how this company (not to mention all the others that will be impacted by their newest hysterical legislation) should spend it's new-found money? Why don't they drop the charade, and just completely take over the businesses of this country? What would these politicians rather AIG had done with the money? These executives were some of the many people to whom the company owed billions of dollars - that's why they were going under in the first place!

I liken our outraged "representatives" toward AIG executives to a bunch of thugs that have invaded our homes, beaten us severely, and taken all of our money, then given it to a hoodlum down the street to whom they owe the money. Then, when the hoodlum spends the money on a luxury car, the thugs howl in outrage and expect us to direct our anger at the hoodlum for how he spent our money, and not on the thugs for violating us. I hope the victims (the American people) will not fall for such outrageous manipulation, and misdirect their anger.

The slouch towards socialism, heartlessness, and cultural decline will only worsen until Americans, one by one, get out of their sports-mentality in politics, stop considering themselves Republicans or Democrats, and reject the socialism, anti-capitalism, and unconstitutionality of both parties. As it is, half the country supports it when Bush does it, then start throwing a fit when Obama does it, while the other half rave and wring their hands at the policies of the Bush Regime, then defend tooth-and-nail the same policies when advocated by Obama. Meanwhile, we all forget what our Senators and Congressmen said yesterday, and don't recognize them for the hypocrites they are today!

We had better wake up - the sooner the better!

Thanks for reading...

Happy Birthday, Abe Lincoln!

This Thursday is the birthday of Abraham Lincoln, probably the most famous President of the United States. It is unlikely that any person has more dramatically impacted the history of our nation. He, above all other American historical figures, served to centralize the state, and destroy, by force of arms, a crucial aspect of the balance of powers worked out by the Founders of the nation, and put us on a seemingly unstoppable path to ever-increasing and ever-strengthening central government.

When I was a boy in school, it seemed in every classroom the portraits of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln sternly looked down upon us children, as if they were gravely critiquing our performance and behavior. I have come to realize that the two men in the two portraits were politically (and in many ways personally) polar opposites. One of the effects of the invariable display in the classrooms of the State's schools of the two men together, was to give the children the impression, year after year, that these men were two players on the same team; that they would have agreed with one another and worked together. In truth, I think George Washington would have been appalled by Abraham Lincoln, as were many of Washington's direct descendants.

I doubt there is another figure in our nation's history, or perhaps the history of the world, which has been more methodically, less accurately, and more thoroughly mythologized. For instance, even many of the most famous quotes attributed to Lincoln, including many that are routinely taught to American schoolchildren, either have no basis in fact, or have been proven to be complete fabrications.

Lincoln is still considered the Great Emancipator, even though a study of the record, the testimony of those who knew him best, and his own words, demonstrate that he did not believe in the equality of white and black people, and he was not really interested in freeing the slaves, except late in the war, as a political maneuver and war strategy, officially emancipating them specifically only in the areas not controlled by the Union army.

Lincoln did not even oppose secession on principle, but only when it did not serve his purposes. This fact is demonstrated by his orchestration of the secession of western Virginia, and setting up of a puppet government there. Even Lincoln's own attorney general believed the act was unconstitutional, since a state can only be created by its people, not by the President or US Congress.

It is also a myth that Lincoln wanted to avert a war, but was forced into one by the hot-headed South. In a letter to U.S. naval commander Gustavus Fox, Lincoln exposes that he had anticipated the results of attempting to provision Ft. Sumter (in other words, that the fort would be fired upon, whipping up the flames of war), and that the "cause of the country (was) advanced" by this goading of the South into firing on the fort.

So, what were Lincoln's motivations? In his own words, his politics were "short and sweet...a national bank...the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff." Another term for "internal improvements" is corporate welfare. In short, Lincoln was a champion of mercantilism, and was the classic modern politician, advancing the agenda of his greedy supporters, even to the point of destroying through force the obstacles in their way (Southern Agrarians and Federalism).

Economist Murray Rothbard defines Mercantilism as "a system of statism which employed economic fallacy to build up a structure of imperial state power, as well as special subsidy and monopolistic privilege to individuals or groups favored by the State."

So, here's to Honest (?) Abe, the triumph of his Mercantilist agenda, the centralization of governmental power, the national bank, the destruction of Federalism, and the seemingly unstoppable path toward total power of the central government on which he so violently put our nation. His ideals are really coming home to roost in 2009.

Thanks for reading...