Then there's the tale of 2 economies ...

Two Economies: Government Workers Optimistic, Private Sector Not

Data from the Rasmussen Consumer Index from the past seven days shows that a plurality of government workers think the economy is getting better while those who work in the private sector tend to have the opposite view. Those in the government sector are also more upbeat about the current state of the economy and their own personal finances.

Today, 46% of government employees say the economy is getting better while just 31% say it’s getting worse. Among those who work in the private sector, the numbers are reversed: 32% say better and 49% worse.

Twenty-four percent (24%) of government employees rate the economy as good or excellent while just nine percent (9%) of those in the private sector are so upbeat.

Fifty-five percent (55%) in the private sector rate the economy as poor, a pessimism shared by 38% of those on the public payroll.

Forty-four percent (44%) of government employees rate their own personal finances as good or excellent while 33% of private sector workers do the same.

Most Americans (51%) believe that government employees are paid too much. Not surprisingly, those who work for the government disagree. Fifty-nine percent (59%) of all Americans say the average government worker earns more annually than the average taxpayer.

Socialism, fascism, communism, call it whatever you want ... The government is taking over and will destroy the economy. It's the tax-eaters vs. the taxpayers. Unfortunately, the tax-eaters are winning.Similar Posts:

• A Michigan Economy for Everyone!
• The Stock Market is Up!
• The Great Washington Power Grab
• Ask What You Can Spend For Your Country
• Today’s Uncertain Economy & Our Roots

If there's one thing that troubles me the most about today's conservative movement, it would be blind-faith in the politicians ability to make decisions as serious as waging war and limiting our freedoms. And I find the mantra that Bush "saved us," as dangerously messianic as today's Obama worship.

Yeah, maybe I'm old school. But as a conservative, I say "let no more be heard of confidence in man."

While many modern writers consider the birth of the conservative movement as taking place in the 1950's, it really stretches back to the early 1900's, when the progressive movement was gaining steam. One of the new progressive-era changes in government was the adoption of Woodrow Wilson's messianic vision of "our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment."

In other words, progressives were the one's who advocated policing the world and nation-building.

Conservatives from the beginning of the century up to Goldwater, championed America First Foreign Policy. Progressives (liberals) on the other hand, wanted to spread democracy across the planet via war and nation-building. Conservatives opposed WWI, WWII, the draft, the UN, you name it ... conservatives didn't want the government getting involved! Anti-war is our conservative heritage.

America First Foreign Policy

America First Foreign Policy begins in the belief that the United States is a civil society that operates under the rule of law, not that of collective determination expressed through government power. In other words, America consists of 300+ million individuals, not one giant hive.

Foremost among the principles that guided Taft’s foreign policy was a strong faith in the exceptionalism of America and its people. Although he was educated at Yale and Harvard, Taft’s belief in basic American values was one that he shared with most Midwesterners of his time, particularly those of his native Cincinnati. Like them, he was convinced that the United States was based on certain noble ideas that placed the nation far above the rest of the world. Of these ideas, individual liberty was for him the most important; indeed, he proclaimed early and often that the "principal purpose of the foreign policy of the United States is to maintain the liberty of our people." He held that there were three fundamental requirements for the maintenance of such liberty-an economic system based on free enterprise, a political system based on democracy, and national independence and sovereignty. All three, he feared, might be destroyed in a war, or even by extensive preparations for war. - Principles Without Program: Senator Robert A. Taft and American Foreign Policy

Under an America First Foreign Policy, we would trade freely with all nations provided the commerce was mutually beneficial, but would not force anything. The government wouldn't protect private interests in foreign lands, nor would it place sanctions on the peoples of another country. Sanctions hurt people, not governments, and free trade has done more to free individuals across the planet than nation-building ever will.

We aren't nosy neighbors. In other words, we avoid entanglements in the political affairs of other countries, as well as their wars with other nations. For example, we would have never built military bases in Saudi Arabia in the first place. Why? Because we don't get into bed with tyranny. We trade, shake hands, and leave.

We would continue to have the most powerful military in the world. While it's true we'd keep our troops out of other nations, we wouldn't hesitate to strike with absolute force if necessary. For example, Rep. Ron Paul (R) advocates an America First Foreign Policy, and he was in favor of our initial invasion of Afghanistan after 9/11.

There would be no United Nations. Instead, nations would agree to specific law which would govern only the relations between themselves. No country would have veto power. All countries would be treated equally. And disputes would be determined by an independent tribunal based solely on law. In other words, the antithesis of the United Nations.

The United States would no longer need to seek the approval of other countries. We could always act in our best interests, and because of increased trade, we'd have a stronger, more prosperous economy. The financial burden "owed" by the American taxpayer to the State would be greatly reduced too, thus improving the economy even more.

Isolationist!

As you can see, America First Foreign Policy hardly "isolates" us from anyone. On the contrary, it increases trade! The label "isolationist" came from FDR and his supporters, not from the realm of reality. Just think about it. Would you consider yourself an isolationist for not telling your neighbor how to raise his kids?

War concentrates power. Always has, always will. Power corrupts. Yes, even in the United States, the government has committed horrible atrocities against our fellow Americans. Famous psychologist Carl Jung calls it the shadow. Everyone and every institution has a dark side, and pretending otherwise doesn't absolve anything.

The true patriot (in my view) is loyal to the American Creed, not any government, including our own!

[W]henever any Form of Government becomes destructive of 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.

There's no loyalty to government. The government is but a golden calf. Who's loyal to a golden calf?

What does war accomplish? WWI and WWII gave birth to all sorts of dictators and tyrants, Viet Nam ended in the slaughter of millions, and the American taxpayer has forked over his earnings to rebuild half the globe! And what do we have to show for it?

A Maoist in the White House, a tyrannical United Nations, and an increasingly fascist (and broke) United States (and broker American taxpayer).

Liberty is the antithesis of force, therefore force cannot produce liberty. Just as the American taxpayer shouldn't be forced to pay for his neighbors medical expenses, he shouldn't be forced to pay for the defense of far-away lands!

I'm sorry, but if European countries don't have the resources to pay for their own national defense, all I can say is they better give capitalism a try. If they don't like freedom, then let them live under a dictator. "Spreading democracy" is a progressive idea. It's not born of liberty. America isn't even a democracy!

Both the war in Iraq and the war Afghanistan are based on this progressive idea to spread democracy. The reality is that it's just another method of transferring wealth to the "less fortunate" countries (which is all of them). European may have so-called "free" health care, but they can't afford to defend themselves. So the American taxpayer gets stuck with the bill, and the American soldier is forced to give them their life.

That's not freedom.

Think about it ... After 8 long years of war and thousands of additional American lives lost, all we have to show for it is 2 al Queda attacks on our home soil within the past month. If you think that's "protecting" America, you're sadly mistaken. Read the American Creed again please, because THAT's America!

Obviously, the PATRIOT Act does nothing to defend America either.

This post just scratches the surface of America First Foreign Policy, but I think it's a good start. We'll get into it deeper as Mike from The Western Experience and I explore both sides of our current foreign policy.Similar Posts:

• Conservative Confession
• Debate: McCain v. Obama Round One
• The Truth about the Mainstream Media

1. Forces you to pay up to 8% of your income for health insurance -- whether you want it or not.

2. Many of the taxes that will pay for the bill will start now, but the benefits won't start until 2014.

3. Grants monopolies to drug companies to prevent generic versions of high tech drugs from coming to market.

4. Under this bill, the cost of medical care will continue to RISE an average of $1,000 a year for a family of four.

5. The minor detail that it's not constitutional!

Get more information at Top 5 Reasons to Kill the Senate Healthcare Bill »»Similar Posts:

• Big Brother and the Indecent Assault of a Child

This week it's Amber Heard, Guns, and Gold ... Hey, what more could you ask for?

“How to Get a Million Hits on Your Blog in Less Than a Year!”

Amber Heard (34-24-34): Amber dropped out of her strict Texan Catholic school at the age of 17, disillusioned with religion after the death of her best friend.

She headed to New York to start a career in modeling, but soon packed her bags and moved to LA to get into acting. TV appearances, including a cameo as a salesgirl in The O.C. reaffirmed that performing – not posing – was where she wanted to be.

• Star of Pineapple Express and slasher flick All the Boys Love Mandy Lane, Amber fell into our dreams and onto the cover of FHM in October 2008.
• A rebellious Catholic schoolgirl, Amber is proficient in American sign language and is a certified lifeguard.
• She tragically lost her best friend in a fatal car crash when she was 16 and now lives by the motto ‘Today is what I have.’

Gillian Anderson   “Rock-a-bye Baby”   Reese Witherspoon

Sophie Howard   STEPHANIE POWERS   MILITARY MOTIVATOR

Gold and Guns

In his extraordinary book Democracy: The God that Failed, Hans Hermann Hoppe points out that the process of civilization is stopped when government continually violates property rights.

The natural process of civilization comes through delaying consumption, saving, and building capital. Undoing it leads to higher societal time preference.

When natural disasters strike or a gunman robs you in an alley, "the effect of these on time preference is temporary and unsystematic," Hoppe explains.

Victims are entitled to defend themselves against the individual aggressor and prepare themselves for the calamities of the occasional act of God. Resources will be reallocated to defend one against potential robbers, and provisions will be made for potential natural disasters.

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup   Jessica Simpson   This is How We Treat Our Friends

However, when government aggresses, it is considered legitimate and "a victim may not legitimately defend himself against such violations." Democracy legitimizes this government aggression because the violence is sanctioned by a majority of voters.

This decivilization process that Hoppe describes continues in fits and starts. The uneducated continue to live in never-never land, believing that each new ruler means change and that their lives and happiness can safely be put in the hands of a kind and caring government. But government's current ham-handedness — with its bailouts, money printing, and rights violations — has alerted more than a few individuals to do what comes naturally: defend themselves and prepare for the worst.

The government's legal-tender money — the dollar — is now under questioning. While the commercial-banking fractional-reserve monetary engine is stalled with loan write-downs and bank failures, the Federal Reserve has expanded its balance sheet like never before. Man of the Year Ben Bernanke is deathly afraid of deflation, and John Maynard Keynes is a hero again. The inflation cake is in the oven, albeit not quite fully baked.

Danica Patrick   Sexy Nerds   Totally Different Panty Bombs

Guns and Gals..........   The Boob Czar   Sexiest Female Musicians

And the current administration does not seem friendly to the property right of allowing us to protect ourselves. The president believes that only law-enforcement officers should have weapons.

Mila Kunis   “Shoot Straight, You Bastards!”   Friday Night Babe

So while high-time-preference folks like Shannan DeCesare shout "Merry Christmas to me" after unloading some gold jewelry for $610 at a gold party, low-time-preference types are lining up in pawnshops and gun shows to buy gold, silver, lead, and guns.

DeCesare attended a gold party that the Wall Street Journal describes as an example of the new Tupperware party. These parties appeal to the cash-for-gold crowd trying to maintain a boom-time lifestyle by unloading their valuables. The cash poor end up taking between 65 and 75 percent of what their gold would be worth to a refiner according to the WSJ.

These parties offer a comfortable atmosphere for selling the yellow metal. "It can be really difficult for a lot of people to walk into a jewelry store or pawnshop holding a little bag of gold," Lisa Rosenthal, owner of Party of Gold, told the WSJ. Ms. Rosenthal's company has specialists working more than 1,000 parties a month. And why would anyone sell their gold for 65 to 75 cents on the dollar? In his book More Than You Know: Finding Financial Wisdom in Unconventional Places, author Michael J. Mauboussin has a chapter titled, "All I Need to Know I Learned at a Tupperware Party." People buy Tupperware because they feel like they must reciprocate the host for hosting the party and providing the free party favors. Plus, as Mauboussin explains, "the single most important fact of the Tupperware formula is the tendency to say yes to people you like."

Audrey Hepburn   Happy New Year!   The Swinging Barmaids

Cache Out   Penélope Cruz   Gillian Anderson

In the case of gold parties, attendees don't want to just show up, drink the wine and eat the appetizers but leave turning their noses up at the low prices offered for their, or their departed mother's, old jewelry, especially when it's their friend down the block hosting the event. They happily trade a metal that has proven to have value for thousands of years for the government's depreciating paper.

A blast from the past   Keeley Hazell
His Fearlessness the Leader of the VRWC of the BLogosphere

But while gold sellers are shy to see the nearby pawn dealer, gold buyers go where they must to see who has inventory for sale. The demand for guns is so good that the gun show in Las Vegas recently charged $14 a head just to walk in and look around — after parking cost of $3. The lot was full and business was brisk.

The demand for space at gun ranges in Salt Lake City was strong enough the day after Christmas that it was a 15- to 20-minute wait to rent an "alley" at the second range we inquired with. The first range contacted was reservation only and completely booked for the day.

Sunday Totty..........   Sarah Chang   Lauren Bacall

Panic buying of ammunition, silver, and gold has created shortages and led to price increases for all three in 2009. "Currently no .380 ammunition — I haven't seen any for about four months… .38 special, it's been at least a couple of months," Denver gun-store manager Richard Taylor told CNN earlier this year. "It's just that there's been a huge demand and it's far outweighed supply right now."

And in November, Bloomberg reported that the US Mint had suspended sales of most American Eagle coins made from precious metals, including gold and silver. With coin sales surging 88 percent in the first 10 months of this year, the mint is out of metal and sales will resume "once sufficient inventories of gold-bullion blanks can be acquired to meet market demand," the mint said in a statement posted on its website.

So, some Americans are unloading their family treasures and cheering for bailouts, money printing, and gun control, while others are stocking up on precious metals, guns, and ammo to protect themselves and their wealth.

Sunday Totty..........   Sarah Chang   The Satisfaction Girls

There is no question which group is the civilized one.

Gold and Guns

Douglas French is president of the Mises Institute and author of Early Speculative Bubbles & Increases in the Money Supply. He received his masters degree in economics from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, under Murray Rothbard with Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe serving on his thesis committee. See his tribute to Murray Rothbard.

Stacy McCain’s Rose Bowl Decadence And Debauchery   Reese Witherspoon
Folks In Uniform Want To Have Fun

It's For Science   Catherine Zeta-Jones   Kate Beckinsale

Demi Moore   Twisted Pervert Stacy McCain   Best Body in Britain

Top Raiderettes   Kim Kardashian   America’s Sexiest Man

It's your birthday, get busy ...   Grade on a Curve   'Broken Embraces'

Juliana Moreira   Happy New Year!
Near Slips & Wardrobe Malfunctions Of 2009 (NSFW PHOTOS)

• Gold and Cadillacs
• Michigan, the Auto Warriors, and Your Gold
• The New Majority’s Fed Failure

A recent episode of this happened on Larry King Live with Rep. Ron Paul and actor Ben Stein. As everyone knows, Ron Paul is against the war and was on Larry King to defend that position. And how did pro-war Ben Stein respond to what Paul had to say?

He called him an anti-Semite.

In other words, Ben Stein had no actual argument in his favor. Click on the post title below to watch the video.

Now let's dig into this a little deeper by picking on my friend Mike at The Western Experience.

Ron Paul, Occupiers, and Rasmussen

Usually I ignore what Congressman Ron Paul has to say on any foreign policy issue. Why? Because, simply put…he is an idiot. Although, he does ask a fascinating question as to why Islamic fundamentalists hate us. His answer is what I have the problem with.

In the video, Ron Paul says "they're terrorists because we're occupiers," to which Mike replied:

Accordingly, it was King Fahd of Saudi Arabia’s co-opting of American forces to protect Saudi oil fields and provide a launching point against Saddam Hussein in the Persian Gulf War which fueled Bin Laden’s already growing hatred towards America and the West.

At this point, I'm not sure what these guys disagree on. Both claim it started with U.S. military bases in the Middle East. So let me ask you this ...

Let's say Swedish forces had been here in Michigan for the last 20 years to "keep the peace." In my eyes (a Michigan resident), I'd consider them occupiers. Wouldn't you?

Let's go further and say the Swedish really were here fighting for freedom, goodness and rainbows, and they're doing a good job defeating the enemy. But sometimes they wipe-out whole neighborhoods of innocent people, or storm through houses uninvited.

How would that make you feel?

Then some articulate speaker comes along, saying the words we want to hear ... "hope," "change," "the oceans will cease to rise" ... He asks us to join him, saying he'll help us if we help him. He "gives" to charities and schools, helps the poor, speaks of social justice and about the empire who is trying to destroy us ...

I think you can see where I'm going with this. Nobody should be surprised that military aggression creates enemies. It should be no surprise either, that they would want to strike back.

AMERICA HATER!

No. Accepting the reality of blow-back hardly makes me anti-American. And a note to Ben Stein, it doesn't make me an anti-Semite either. People who say such things are either intellectually lazy, or don't really have anything to say.

This is a cultural war not a case of freedom fighters attempting to overthrow an imperialistic and tyrannical invader.

I consider it a religious war, but all-in-all the same thing. So if it is a cultural war, then how can a military win it? Nation building?

Fine, but then why not support nation-building at home too? Iraq's "new nation" has socialized health care, so I suppose we should too! Maybe the smart grid is a good idea too, after all, Big Government knows best! In fact, it'd be great to have the military come occupy Detroit, rebuild the city, and install a new regime ...

Radical Islam is winning the war my friends. As Mike says, it's a "cultural war." Looking at our culture, we're in a heap of trouble ...

• California's going under.
• The federal government is trucking towards bankruptcy.
• The Empire State Building was lit green to commemorate the end of Ramadan.
• Sharia law is being taught in Fairfax, Virginia.
• The Legal Advisor to the State Department advocates Sharia being accepted in U.S. courts.
• The Flight 93 Memorial is being built as a mosque.
• Our individual liberties continue to disappear.
• We've been at war for 8 long years and have 2 more terrorist attacks on American soil to show for it!

So if Ron Paul is right in that bin Laden wants to bog us down in the Middle East, bankrupt us, demoralize us, and have us help him recruit for his radical movement, and if Mike's right too, in that it's a cultural war ... I'd have to say we're losing!

I may be against the war, but I'm still against radical Islam. I think radical Islam wants our government to crack down on our freedoms. I think they want the government to act in violent ways overseas. Whether they clamp down on freedoms here at home, or bomb-away abroad ... radical Islam is happy.

I don't want to make them happy.

And please understand the significance of TARP. It was a peek into George W. Bush's soul. It proved there isn't a reason in the world to trust a word the man ever said. Personally, I view TARP (and the subsequent bailouts and stimulus) as nothing short of treason, because George W. Bush sold the American Creed down the river.

I don't trust politicians, and there's no historical reference for me to feel otherwise. And since they screw everything up domestically, why would I trust them to handle things internationally?

P.S. - I emailed Mike and asked him if he'd be interested in a pro-war/anti-war debate discussion, and he replied that he's all for it. This post is a little too all over the map (I think) to start on a proper note, so I'll write something more specific to start tomorrow.

Stay tuned ... this could be fun!Similar Posts:

• Home Run!
• Rep. Michele Bachmann is HOT!
• That Crazy Ron Paul!
• Donkeys and Elephants
• Blogging Politics 4