In the Hour of the Wolf – A Time to Reevaluate

NOTICE: YOU REALLY NEED TO READ ALL THREE PARTS OF SERIES

Many of you know that “The Hour of the Wolf” is when I do my “best” thinking and writing, others will say its when I do my best stinking thinking and writing.

I'll let you be the judge for I am about to unleash the hell that only a pissed off Marine Gunny is capable of when all else fails not only in blog posts but on twitter as well.

BUT, first things first, with this post, I will no longer spend time defining words, idea, etc. within this or any other post. I will establish a separate page that will list terms and words used in my posts with their meanings and source, and YES there will be history and original sources.

Second, I am going to do something that I have never done, I am going to beg you to OPEN your minds, do as I do as a scientist, look at the facts, evaluate and if necessary reevaluate.

FINALLY, I am going to ask that IF you do not agree, which I'll admit a number of people won't, I want you to feel free to comment, but be fore warned; be prepared to defend it with facts and legitimate sources. IF you begin your comment “talking head” said, I will eat your lunch and then I will answer, but I will push you for the original sources. This will apply to all future and past posts.

Now that the housekeeping is out of the way, let's get down and dirty.

“Mediocre minds usually dismiss anything which reaches beyond their own understanding.” ... Francois de La Rochefoucauld

Re-evaluation of current situation

For many years, I have ranted and raved that America has become more and more socialistic. I have quoted and documented the actual words from the Manifesto of the Communist Party (Manifesto), the Platform of the 1908, the Soros run Center for American Progress (CAP) and of course Boo Boo, our current POTUS.

In the process of doing RESEARCH for my various rants and writings I must admit that I have been forced to re-evaluate my conclusions.

America HAS NOT become a socialistic country.

Just as our Founding Fathers used various sources; the Bible, David Hume, John Locke, etc., to establish America; America has “done it its own way”. We went from a group of disorganized colonies under a monarchy to the United States of America united under the unique document called the Constitution.

Americans have always done it our own, quite unique way.

YES, were some mistakes made along the way: but being Americans, we corrected them in most cases without bloodshed. All of which were part of the learning curve.

Unfortunately over the many years, the American people and particularly politicians have forgotten that uniqueness which made America great and began to copy and adapt the movements that began taking place in Europe during the middle 1800's, BUT like everything which made America great, those wishing to bring about this change did it in the unique American way.

They took into consideration that most people would be repulsed by the idea of the use of violence to change the system. After all, the people of America were (are) basically peace loving and would use force only if all else failed, saw the violence in Europe (Revolutions of 1848 and the Commune of 1870) and memories of our own Civil War were still fresh in American's mind.

Even Marx in late 1870, warned the workers of Paris NOT to use violence to overthrow the French capitalistic government and would later say:

“One thing especially was proved by the Commune, viz., that “the working class cannot simply lay hold of the ready-made state machinery, and wield it for its own purposes.”

Eventually those in America, who were seeking power, control, as well as change took heed of these words and turned to using crisis, propaganda and most importantly the ballot to began quietly and slowly using these guises to gain power.

The politicians took office, both locally and nationally, and began to pass laws and even allowed non-elected officials to enact regulations that would end up controlling aspects of American life.

Thus the establishment of what would become more acceptable, at the time, and falsely called “Big Government” but in reality should be called American Communism.

I can hear everybody, screaming now, “We are not communistic. We're a free country under a Constitution. We elect our leaders. We did not have a violent revolution that brought in a dictator, Etc.”

Part of these people's thinking is correct.

Yes, we do elect our our “leaders”.

True, we did not have a violent revolution that brought about a dictatorship. Although, under Boo Boo and the SCOTUS it appears that way.

Instead, Americans grew envious, greedy and sadly lazy and elected those on BOTH sides of the aisle who grew the size of government and made more people dependent on the government. A QUIET REVOLUTION, but a revolution nonetheless.

Does that mean we have not become communistic?

Are the American people really free or are we subject to whims of those in Washington who pass laws, or un-elected officials who issue regulations or the courts who interpret and in some cases misinterpret them. In other words, is Government controlling our lives?

“Si nescis unde venias, nescis quo adeas”

Socialism or Communism

“Yet, when it was written, we could not have called it a socialist (my emphasis) manifesto. By Socialists, in 1847, were understood, on the one hand the adherents of the various Utopian systems:...” (Fredrick Engels in the Preface of 1888 edition of the Manifesto of the Communist Party, which has served as a basis for the “modern” British, American and the late U.S.S.R publications of this infamous plan.)

Now, unless you do what a friend of mine did when we were discussing a mathematical equation and I showed him the equation in a reference book, he threw the book away and said, “it's wrong”; then there is no reason for you to keep reading, your mind is made up and I shouldn't confuse you with facts.

So, for those that are still with me, when I quote Marx or Engels and they say communist or communism I will ask you to remember Engels, preface and call it socialist or socialism.

Not to know what Communism is, is today simply intellectual laziness.

(Paraphrased from Sidney Webb)

Continued in.....In the Hour of the Wolf – A Time to Reevaluate With an Eye on History

In the Hour of the Wolf – A Time to Reevaluate With an Eye on History

“How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!”...Samuel Adams

As I continue my reevaluation of what for years of believing America has edged closer to socialism, let us admit to one important thing; when it comes to socialism and communism, no matter what the various talking heads say, it comes down to a case of some subtle differences in the basic underlying theory between the two and in the long run; it can be a case of semantics and no matter what name you call it, they are both an attack on America and freedom.

Also, lets remember that socialism and communism ARE not about the body politics, they are about economics

Or is it a case of newspeak: where Big Government is not as bad as socialism which is preferable to communism?

Or is it that a Progressive is better then a Liberal which is better then being a Socialist which in turn is far better then being a Communist.

However, as I'm about to show this newspeak has been used and still being used to bury the truth and not scare the citizens of our once great country.

How many hard working, patriotic Americans would be repulsed by candidate on both sides that claims to be communist and wants to put in place various laws, regulations and programs to control what is produced in factories or on the farm? Or, how these products get to the store shelf or eventually to your homes? Or maybe even what you eat or use? Or, that the government will take care of you from the day you're born till the day you die?

Yet, those same Americans will cry, “Where's the federal government?” when __________ (fill in your own outrage). 

Or, will say, “Congress ought to pass a law.” when ____________ (I'm sure everyone can find SOMETHING that they feel there should be a law against).

Historical Look and Meanings

Long before Obama was elected to transform America. 

Long before some people finally woke up and realized that America was being destroyed.

Long before the “talking heads” and uninformed Americans who's idea of communism are a couple of pages in the Manifesto.

Long before those either wish to put their own unique spin on the subject or to show how “smart” they are about socialism and communism; there was a battle going on in America between those who wanted to bring about change in America.

Fredrich Engels, Karl Marx's partner in crime, wrote in 1847 before the publication of the Manifesto, explaining “What is Communism”:

“Communism [Socialism] is the doctrine of the conditions of the liberation of the proletariat.”[1]

American Socialism

Although the idea of Utopian socialism was present in the U.S. even before its founding, it wasn’t until the 1890's when the idea of scientific socialism really began to take hold in America.

The decade of the 1890's was an era of panic and financial depression and just as today, there were those who wanted to change America; those who believed in “not letting a good crisis go to waste”. (Note: And most people thought this idea was an invention of the Obama administration)

It was also during this crisis that American socialists began to prey on people's fear, envy and greed. They used this crisis and began to develop a federation of unions and political organizations. Sadly, for America, these socialists began to lay the foundations for American Communism.

It was also during this period that these foundations were “invading” American colleges, particularly Harvard, where Michael Medved's hero, W. E. B. DuBois and others established the American Fabian Society based on the principles and ideas of the established of the Fabian Society in England.[2]

America was also beginning to outgrow its Nationalism or it might be said, the idea Utopian socialism.

Out of the American socialist movement a number of people came to prominence, very much like Marx and Engels became prominent as leaders of world wide socialist movement.

It is these proud and unabashed socialists and their writings that I will turn to show the differences between socialism and communism and how eventually America put its unique spin on it and as usual did it the American way, thus establishing the wayto American Communism.

One such socialist was W.D.P. Bliss, considered the pioneer historian of the world socialist movement; who wrote A Handbook of Socialism in 1895, that not only summed up what socialism is and what it is not but also showed the division between the three major ideologies of socialism. 

“Socialism is the fixed principle, capable of infinite and changing variety of form, and only gradually to be applied, according to which the community should own the land and capital collectively and operate them co-operativity [sic] for the equitable good of all.”... Bliss

Now for those who want to argue that Bliss is wrong, after all most people's idea of socialism is what they hear on radio or television, let us look at what the Century Dictionary had to say:

“Socialism is any theory or system of social organisation [sic] which would abolish, entirely or in great part the individual effort and competition on which modern society rests, and substitute for it co-operative action; would introduce a more perfect and equal distribution of the products of labour [sic], and would make land and capital, as the instruments and means of production, the joint possession of the members of the community.”

And then there was what Victor L. Berger had to say in his article, American Socialism, published in the July, 9, 1898 edition of Social Democratic Herald:

“The definition of Socialism, as generally accepted now, is “the collective ownership of all the means of production and distribution.” This definition is about the same in all countries.”

Now, let's turn to what Socialism is not and once again I turn to Bliss.

Socialism is not Governmentalism [sic] or Paternalism

IF anyone has REALLY read the Manifesto or closely read the definitions of socialism above, you should notice the absence of one very important word that leads to the misconception of Socialism. NO WHERE does the word government appear.

For many of us, including myself, we were taught to believe that socialism meant a “nanny state”, it is NOT.

Nor is socialism an expansion of State activity.

“The state is not abolished, it dies off. The phrase of the 'socialist state' may thus be judged for its value as a slogan in temporary propaganda of socialism, for its scientific inefficiently.”...Engels

“Socialism is not turning things over to the State, to the municipality, or to government of any kind. By the derivation of the word from the Latin socius, an associate, by its history, by its use by Socialists themselves. Socialism is essentially fraternal, the very opposite of paternalism.”...Bliss

Finally and for better or worst, Fredrich Engels explained it this way:

“The first act in which the State really appears as the representative of society as a whole, namely, the seizure of the means of production in the name of society, is at the same time its last independent act as a State. Interference of the State in social relations gradually becomes superfluous in one department after another, and finally of itself ceases (goes to sleep). The place of government over persons is taken by administration of things and the management of productive processes,...”

Socialism is not the Regimentation of Society

Socialism is not meant to control a person's life, nor does it mean that the State should develop a fixed form of society, as outlined by Plato's oligarchy as defined in his idea of Utopia.

“It seems almost impossible to bring people to understand that the abstract word Socialism denotes, like radicalism, not an elaborate plan of society, but a principle of social action."...Sidney Webb

Webb continue on to point out that Socialism inevitably suffers if identified with any particular scheme, or even with the best vision we can yet form of collectivism itself and tells us:

“People become so much concerned with details, that they miss the principle." They cannot see the forest for the trees." [Editor's note: Is this not the American sheeple today, looking to blame the condition of America today on everyone or everything, yet failing to see the REAL cause. Basically, 'Not seeing the forest for the trees'?] The moment will never come when we can say, "Now Socialism is established," for Socialism is not a status but a life. Society is not to be run into it as a mould [sic]. Socialism is evolutionary, though the evolution may be a gradual and peaceful revolution.”

“True Socialism is as flexible in its system, as it is definite in its aim. Any system that would carry out its principle is Socialistic. This means that in different countries and under different conditions, Socialism would take very various forms.”...Bliss

“Socialism, therefore, cannot be identified with any one form of Socialism.”...Bliss

Socialism is not Co-operation

Socialism is not a workers paradise of co-operation between arbitrary groups of workers that has abolished competition.

In social science co-operation means the union of any group of persons, who agree on equitable principles for the purposes of joint purchase, production, distribution or consumption, based on their mutual benefit. This does not mean using government as a weapon to achieve the goals of joint purchase, production, distribution or here comes the key to the discussion of socialism and communism consumption.

Above all, socialism can be considered a union of the WHOLE of a community or society for the purpose of common ownership and management of land and/or capital.

Or as Hillary Clinton has said:

“We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society.”

Socialism is not Anarchism

Just as there are differences between Republicans and Democrats, there are differences between the two schools of Anarchism.

Those who believed in individual sovereignty (Individual Anarchism) and those who believed that “all things belong to all provided that everyone contribute their fair share of labor...” or Anarchist Communism.

Both “schools” of Anarchism believe in the abolishment of the State.

The Anarchist Communist glorified the use of physical force and emphasized “the propaganda of the deed”, later to be known as the Bolsheviks, while the Individual Anarchist are not afraid to use violence, but they realize that their numbers were too small to successfully use force.

Socialism differed with both of these schools of thought. Socialists not only abhor the use of violence to achieve their goals, but believe in using the State. Socialists realized that “man is born into a society, a fact that man can not escape.” Thus they will use and work within society to gain freedom. (Remember: I am using their thoughts, their words, their philosophy.)

Socialism is not Communism

Many people will argue that difference between Socialism and Communism is a case of semantics, they mean the same and are equally bad. Yes, they are both bad for America.

Some will use the two words interchangeably.

While others will use Socialism instead of Communism in fear of not facing the truth.

Some will lump both words together as Communism or vice versa.

So, let's look at at the difference between the two. Again I will remind you that this is their philosophy and principles back before the newspeak began.

“Socialism puts its emphasis on common production and distribution; Communism on life in common.”...Bliss

Or as Berger would say a few years later in 1898:

“Communism proposes the common ownership of the means of production, or, in some cases, the means of production and consumption. Socialism, on the contrary, asks only for the common ownership of the means of production, as made necessary by the modern development of the tool into the machine. Socialism leaves consumption, i.e., the selection and the enjoyment of the means of life to the free will and the taste of the individuals.”

Communism makes less use of existing government and in most cases overthrows existing governments as evident by attempted overthrow of the French government in 1870 and the Russian revolution of 1917, which I feel marked the beginning of what everyone now recognizes as Communism. The key point is that since 1917, Communism has not only meant violent overthrow of existing governments and morphed into central government control and a dictatorship and the lost of freedom. Again I must remind you, the readers, that Socialism and Communism are ECONOMICAL theories and principles.

Many will say that by the very definitions and philosophies of the writers above, America is more socialist then communist, but remember, America has through the years put its unique spin on these ideas and created American Communism.

“The goal of socialism is communism.”...Vladimir Lenin

Continued in....In the Hour of the Wolf – The Reevaluation - American Communism

Literature Cited and not linked

[1] Engels, Frederick, The Principles of Communism, Selected Works, Vol. 1 pages 81-97,      Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1969.


[2] Dobbs, Zygmund, Keynes at Harvard - Economic Deception as a Political Credo,

     Probe Research, inc; Rev. and enl. ed edition, 1969.

In the Hour of the Wolf – The Reevaluation - American Communism

"How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin."... Ronald Reagan

Unlike many people, when I enter into a project, whether it be scientific or blogging I do so with a fairly open mind. I am human (some wouldn't believe it) after all and as I said in the beginning of this series, I have been forced to reevaluate by ideas on whether American has become a socialist country or have we become more communistic.

The more I researched the history, principles and theories of socialism and communism, I can say that socialism and communism are like beauty, its in the eye of the beholder. Whether you believe that socialism and communism are the same thing or that they are two distinct economical ideas and systems, the one thing every sane, thinking person should realize, NEITHER ONE IS GOOD FOR FREEDOM and NEITHER ONE WORKS.

Realizing this doesn't seem to stop people from seeking power and control from attempting to do it “their way”, trying to prove history and commonsense wrong.

“Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” ...Lord Acton

When Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels published the Manifesto of the Communist Party, they basically forgot or didn't even to take into account one very important factor, human nature.

It is this very human nature, the quest for power that has lead to, what I believe a vast misunderstanding of socialism and communism and in turn has lead to American communism by the use of lies and propaganda to prey on people's basic instincts, envy, greed and laziness.

When a people follow their basic instincts, they fail to see the insidious nature of American communism, the destruction of freedom and putting people into slavery.

As Victor Berger said back in 1898:

“Such “knownothingness” is not surprising, because Socialism has been misrepresented
and maligned by press, pulpit, and politicians so long that even some so-called Socialists who did not study the subject have rather vague and misleading conceptions about it.”

Just as in 1898, the same is true today.

There are many if not all who say socialism consists of central planning by the government that puts into place a number of ideas from either the Manifesto or their own beliefs.

I need to remind people, NO where in the Manifesto is GOVERNMENT mentioned. For those that say, you can't have a society without a government, with human nature that's true.

People need to remember that the root of society and hence socialism is socius which means sharing, joining in, partaking, united, associated, kindred, allied. 

Sadly, there are just as many who believe that without revolution leading to a change in government communism cannot be put in place. Evidently these people haven’t heard of a quiet revolution. This is the same type of quiet revolution that has changed the traditions of America. Today we refer to this type of revolution as a “Velvet Revolution”.

That revolution that has taken place in America over the past hundred plus years and sadly the “knownothings” then and now didn't see it coming or chose to ignore it.

Big Government or American Communism

When you mention Big Government, a majority of people think about the number of departments and people working within the government. Politicians of both stripes campaign on either growing or shrinking the size of government BUT few to none ever mention the scope or reach of government. In others words big government control.

Most of early socialists agreed that Socialism is:

“...the collective ownership of all means of production and distribution”. 

While they also agreed that Communism proposes:

“the common ownership of production or in some cases production and consumption”.

Or as Bliss said,

“Socialism puts its emphasis on production and distribution; Communism on life in common.”

Is this not what has been going on here America? Have our elected officials, whether on local, state or federal level used any “crisis” to gain more power and control by passing laws or regulations that in one way or another controls the various aspects of production and consumption therefore basically controlling American's lives?

“The closest thing to immortality in this life is a government program.”...Ronald Reagan 

Production

When most people hear “common ownership” they think, quite naturally, that everyone possesses the means of production.

Remember to own something also means to have power or mastery over.

Who supposedly owns the government?

For better or worst, the American people do. Therefore, the American people have power or mastery over the means of production. This power is transferred to politicians when the American people elect and reelect them at all levels who use this power to work to institute American communism or in other words, worked to increase their power thus more power to the government.

For those who care to argue, just look back at history, how many times did politicians of all stripes didn't let a “good crisis go to waste” and used their power to enact various government programs that to added more central control of everything from farming to manufacturing.

Does the federal minimum wage law not control production by forcing the means of production to do more with less people and charge more?

Do the various EPA regulations, thus the government, not control means of production of electricity, industry and even farms?

Do government regulations and laws control the means of production of FOOD by paying farmers not to grow or to grow certain crops?

Do government regulations control the means of production of automobiles by imposing mileage and emission requirements on cars and trucks?

Does a 1901 law passed by congress, which allows the president to put PUBLIC land off limits for exploration and drilling for natural gas and oil, not constitute government control the means of production?

Anyone with a brain and an open mind should see that the answer to these questions is a resounding YES. 

Every citizen should ask where in the Constitution are any of these and many other government controls allowed? 

For the lazy, I'll save you the time and effort, ITS NOT! But it is in the 10 planks as outline in the Manifesto and also in the Socialist Party platform of 1908.

Consumption

Some will automatically think that when I say consumption it meaning eating or drinking, but remember consumption also means using something.

Now, take a look at the list above and ask yourself, “Do these government controls on production effect how much I pay for and thus use various products and services?”

Can you buy an incandescent light bulb? NO! Why, because central government says you can't, thus making you use (consume) light bulbs containing a hazardous material or purchasing more expensive light bulbs.

Has gas prices gone up from an average of $1.80 a gallon before the current regime took office to over $2.00 a gallon now?

Can we get petroleum from Canada for consumption in America and if needed for export.

For those who smoke cigarettes, including myself, has the TAXES imposed on a legal product made the price rise, thus the government is controlling our consumption.

Are you going to pay more for electricity because of EPA regulations, thus government control? Is this not government control of consumption of electricity.

Has not Obamacare and Medicaid not effected your consumption of healthcare by raising prices?

American Communism

America has not become communist like the old Soviet Union did under Lenin in 1917, which is what everyone thinks of when the word “communism” is mention.

Nor has America become communistic under a brutal dictator like present day North Korea.

BUT America has become communistic by as Victor Berger said in 1898 when writing about American Socialism:

“To accomplish this we want to make use of our political liberty and take possession of the public powers.”

Is this not exactly what has happened? Haven't people elected and reelected politicians who over the years and allowed corruption and in turn basically destroy the real meaning of the Constitution, particularly the “General welfare clause” using it for everything from helping those less fortunate, to saving the environment and of course the ever popular, “we have do it for the children”.

Whatever catch phrase a politician uses it amounts to one thing. GOVERNMENT CONTROL of your life.

How many times have you heard, “The administration hasn't done anything to help ________(fill in the blank).”

People have forgotten that the federal government was not established to be good or bad.

Our federal government WAS NOT designed to control production or tell the American people what they can or should consume.

BUT AMERICAN COMMUNISM IS!

No Chit Sherlock: Where have YOU Been?

Like most Americans who are fighting for the American way of life when I come on line there is one site that always comes up, the Drudge Report.

While scanning the headlines, I came across a link to a story that made me choke on my coffee.

Unfortunately, I wasn't thinking at the time and didn't copy the headline for farther use, BUT will attempt to paraphrase from memory, “Schlafly: TPP means Congress abdicates authority”. Now, if I didn't get it exactly right, sorry, I'm sure Drudge or someone will correct me.

Now, in all due respect to Ms Schlafly, who from what I have read is a very smart and talented writer, BUT I must ask her, “No chit Sherlock, where have you been?” Congress (as well as the states) has unconstitutionally been abdicating its authority for over a century and NOW people are complaining.

First things first

Let's take a look at the Constitution, you know the document that is suppose to tell the federal government what it CAN do, as opposed to the first ten amendments, The Bill of Rights, which tells the federal government what it can not do.

Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 says:

“...he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices...”

I fully understand that there is no single man elected to the office of president who does not need advice from “experts” in their fields, except maybe Obama, to govern this great country. But does this clause mean that a department within executive branch can control by regulations, NOT laws passed by congress, commerce and just about all aspects of American's freedom and life.

So what did/does congress do instead doing their duty as defined by the Constitution, they unconstitutionally turn their “powers” over to the executive branch by either passing laws or establishing cabinet posts.

Antiquities Act of 1906

This act gave the President of the United States (POTUS) the authority, by presidential proclamation, to restrict the use of public land owned by the federal government.

The key word is owned, did or has the Federal government paid any state or did any state's legislature give its consent for this land to be taken or was it seized on the whim of the President with consent of congress in order to give federal government control over mineral, including oil and gas, exploration and production? As stated in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17.

“...and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;...” (My emphasis)

Or was this an early attempt for the “Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.” (Page 26) or maybe “The extension of the public domain to include mines, quarries, oil wells, forests and water power.” (Page 376).

Federal Communication Commission

Take a look at Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3, which clearly says:

“To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes”

Once again people need to ask, does this clause say that congress can abdicate this power to the executive branch?

As with the Antiquities Act of 1906, congress willfully violated the Constitution to establish the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) in 1934 to take over the duties that were handled by the Interstate Commerce Commission “to regulate interstate communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories” by working towards “six goals in the areas of broadband, competition, the spectrum, the media, public safety and homeland security.”

The key words, in my opinion, is regulate interstate. Is this NOT the responsibility of Congress or is this a subtle way to establish “The collective ownership of railroads, telegraphs, telephones, steamship lines and all other means of social transportation and communication.” (Page 376)

There are some who will say, “This was passed under FDR and was needed because of the 'Depression'.”

Would someone please explain to me how government control of radio, telephone, radio and telegraphs (at that time in history) would help America to recover from the Depression.

Let's fast forward, this same FCC has and is working very hard to seize control of the internet through “Net Neutrality”. Again, where in the Constitution does a department within the executive branch have the right to regulate what a privately owned business can or cannot do?

Where in the Constitution does it give an agency, not even a Cabinet post to regulate international trade and or treaty? Is this not the jobs of the House and Senate?

Take the out of control EPA.

The EPA was established in 1970 to protect human health and the environment by writing and enforcing regulations based on laws passed by Congress.

The Clean Air Act of 1970, was established to protect both public health and public welfare by regulating the emission of air pollutants that could be (my emphasis) hazardous to the health of the Earth. The law set the National Ambient Air Quality Standards in each state and continues to monitor the air quality through these standards.

Now, like all Americans, I know the need for clean air, but by passing this law it, in my opinion, allowed congress and the states to turn over their control of interstate and intrastate commerce to an agency headed by an unelected official, who is not even a cabinet head.

Later in 1972 congress passed the Clean Water Act in order to regulate the water quality standards. This includes navigable waters and any connecting water, including coastal waters, lakes, rivers, streams and wetlands and now mud puddles.

Again, congress and the states unconstitutionally abdicated their right and duties as defined by the Constitution to the executive branch.

These are just a few of instances where Congress and the States have basically violated the Constitution in favor of a centralized government. (SPOILER ALERT! On going in depth project research on this in work for posting later)

So I have to say to Kevin L. Kearns of the U.S. Business and Industry Council and M's Schlafly, who are calling the TPP “another power grab” and pointing out the abdication of congressional powers to the executive branch.....

No Chit Sherlocks: Where have YOU Been? 

Semper Fi!

Further information can be found in:

Undermining the Constitution by Thomas James Norton

The Federalist

Federalist No. 9 - The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard against Domestic Faction and Insurrection, page 38

Federalist No. 47 - The meaning of the maxim, which requires a separation of the departments of power, examined and ascertained, pages 249 – 55

Federalist No. 51 - The same subject continued, with the same view, and concluded, pages 267–72

Federalist No. 66 - A further view of the constitution of the senate, in relation to its capacity, as a court for the trial of impeachments, pages 342– 44 

Federalist No. 71 - Concerning the constitution of the president: a gross attempt to misrepresent this part of the plan detected, page 371

Federalist No. 73 - The same view continued, in relation to the provision concerning support, and the power of the negative, pages 379 – 384

Federalist No. 75 - The same view continued, in relation to the power of making treaties, pages 387–90

Federalist No. 78 - A view of the constitution of the judicial department in relation to the tenure of good behaviour [sic], pages 402–408

Federalist No. 81 - A further view of the judicial department, in relation to the distribution of its authority, pages 418–419

People Trust Their Lying Ears More Their Brain

Pop Quiz: How much spending is actually Constitutional?

On May 8, Neil Cavuto presented a show on Fox Business that IF YOU DON'T GET IT, DEMAND IT, called America's Trust Deficit. As with many shows that Mr. Cavuto presents, it hits the target. Particularly in the first ten minutes which dealt with American's lack of trust in the government. A lack of trust that the government has earned by wasting TRILLIONS of American taxpayer's dollars on various programs which are not truly authorized within the Constitution, but have been passed and signed into law. These laws were never challenged, they were just accepted and now they are out of control and NOW people are concerned.

So, the question arises, is it the government that cannot be trusted or is it the people who believe everything a politician or some “talking head” tells them, not bothering to stop and think, “Is this truly what our founding Fathers intended to be the role of the federal government in its citizen's lives.”

This was evident within the first ten minutes of Neil's show when the discussion began with the government's failures with its various programs and showed that even a well respected “talking head” like Steve Moore, a Heritage Foundation visiting fellow, seems to have a lack of understanding of the Constitution and the role of the federal government.

Mr. Moore began by bringing up how much Washington has change and federal spending increased in the 25 to 30 years he had been in the District of Corruption. According to Mr. Moore, federal spending has increased from about a trillion dollars per year in spending to about four trillion in the coming year. He then continued to discuss spending for schools.

Mr. Moore drew attention to the fact that the per pupil spending when compared with the 1950 and 1960's when schools were considered much better, the cost has increased ca. three times as much as it did then. He failed to mention however, that in the 1950's and 1960's there was very little federal money given to local schools.

What followed was usual discussion and various opinions on federal spending, which in my opinion is the same old B.S.. The same B.S. that many others and I have heard over the years from both sides of the aisle. HOWEVER, no where in the discussion about federal spending did anyone bring up the fact that a lot of this federal spending is no where authorized in the Constitution.

In fact, Mr. Moore said, “...(the) problem is this...that government has gotten away from the core functions of what its suppose to do,...its suppose to educate our kids, its suppose to build good roads and highways, its suppose to defend us...”.

Now, such a well educated man like Mr. Moore should realize that the founding Fathers DID NOT intend for the federal government to use tax money to educate our kids. To build (post) roads, YES (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 7). To provide for the common defense (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1) by raising and supporting an Army and a Navy (Article 1 section 8, Clauses 12 & 13) definitely YES.

No matter how hard I search the Constitution and read the Federalist papers, I can not find anything that says that the federal government should educate our children. In fact, even the Department of Education admits that “The responsibility for K–12 education rests with the states under the Constitution.”

So, where did Mr. Moore come up with the idea that the federal government is suppose to educate our children? Was it from the Manifesto of the Communist Party, “Free education for all children in public schools...” I don't feel so. 

Was it from the Socialist Party Platform of 1908 and bragged about by the Center of American Progress? Again I don't think so.

I feel that Mr. Moore and many Americans have forgotten one very important thing, even though Mr. Moore eluded to it, “schools were considered much better in 1950 and 1960's”.

That important thing is that “the primary source of federal K–12 support began in 1965 with the enactment of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).”

This law, basically took the funding of schools at the local level from the states and allowed for the redistribution of wealth from wealthy states to less wealthy states by the federal government. This redistribution of wealth also gave the federal government the opportunity to gain control of the school systems, can anyone say, “Common Core” or "standard testing" which has lead to corruption among those people trust to educate their children and this is just one case, how many more are out there not discovered.

This redistribution of wealth also lead to the increase in the size of government by the creation of the Department of Education in 1979.

I must ask again, just where is the use of federal taxes “to educate our kids” authorized by the Constitution?

This same question can be asked of Medicaid, the various welfare programs and unemployment compensation.

Just where are any of these programs authorized by the Constitution. Or were these programs put in place over the years as part of an agenda to slowly but surly change America from what the founding Fathers intended?

Over all, I found the show informative, but found that Neil Cavuto and the others did not fully explore the real reason why so many people do not trust the federal government or our elected officials.

The reason; is that to REALLY place the blame of this lost of trust would offend many of his viewers. The true source of this distrust is THE PEOPLE. The very same people who would rather believe the politicians who promise to bring “home the bacon” then stop and think, “Is this what the Constitution authorized the federal government to do?”

You tell me, is our current educational system better NOW or was it better before the federal government got involved? Is America better off now, either financially or spiritually, then before the federal government got involved in things not authorized in the Constitution.

Semper Fi!

In the Hour of the Wolf – And Wondering What the Hell has Happened

After another sleepless night, I stumbled from the bedroom, turned the coffee on to brew and sat down on the sofa. I reached for the remote, turned on the television and as usual for this hour of the morning on FOX, reruns of the various “talking heads”.

As I watched, sipping the first of what will be many cups of coffee, the “talking head” begins with the lead story concerning the police shooting in South Carolina.

Now, I'm a very strong, almost fanatical supporter of law enforcement officers BUT in this case, I have to admit and say the officer was WRONG and the city officials did the right thing. HOWEVER, does this satisfy the “race pimps”, the Al Sharptons, those who, as Greg Gutfeld said, “See everything through the prism of racism”, NO!

“There are lies, damned lies and statistics.”...Mark Twain

Instead of praising the city officials for their quick action, the race baiters cry “racism” by citing statistics saying, that “because the police force is mostly white patrolling a community that has high black population and most of the traffic stops are majority black, the police are racist.” Well, DUH! If you live in a community that has large number of blacks, then a large number of blacks may be stopped for traffic violations. The same would hold true in a largely white neighborhood, the majority of traffic stops will be white. Racism, NO, good policing, YES.

Then the subject of “recruiting” more blacks for the police force comes up.

Just like the military, IF a person is not qualified by education, police record or most importantly has the desire to serve, then what is a police force to do? Lower the standards? Wouldn't that just add to the problem?

As usual, the tax cheat Al Sharpton takes the stage with the usual bullchit about racist police officers, just like he did in the Twana Brawley case, Zimmerman case and of course Ferguson. BUT this time he, along with Mayor De Blasio, really showed their communist colors when he called for “..."there must be a national law on policing"because "it not only protects the citizens, it protects thepolice,” as Mayor De Blasio nodded in agreement.”

No one asks the most important question, just where in the Constitution does it allow the federal government to pass any law concerning a state's policing? Or as in the past, will the states abdicate their rights to the federal government?

What the hell has happened?

Commercial break, another cup of coffee, back in time for the next segment.

The segment begins with a sound bite from one of the conservative candidates for president and just as regular as the sun coming up, the usual “debate” between the “talking head”, a conservative and a socialist democrat takes place with the democrat attempting to talk over the conservative and the “talking head”. Finally, the “talking head” takes charge, spouting the usual and much deserved Obama and democrat bash fest and ends up with the usual Pollyanna outlook for 2016.

What the hell has happened?

Commercial break, another cup of coffee and as a “talking head” drones on, its time to go on line.

After scanning the news, I sign on to twitter.

After posting a “pearl of wisdom”, I turn to acknowledging and saying, “Thank you” to new followers, I look over the past tweets to see what my great followers are talking about.

As I read over the tweets, I read the usual and continuing complaints about the out of control government and the so called "conservative do nothing congress" and just as usual I see the Pollyanna outlook for the 2016 election and the usual division between people on the various candidates and the various “plans” and promises to return America to the principles of our Founding Fathers.

What the hell has happened?

I fully realize that these are just a few examples of me wondering “What the hell has happened”, but I have come to realize, PEOPLE really don't want to know or don't want to believe what the hell has happened.

I'll tell them anyway, COMMUNISM HAS HAPPENED.

America is as close to socialism as Marx outlined in the Manifesto of the Communist Party or the Socialist Party Platform of 1908, that frankly I wonder how much longer it will be before our freedom is completely gone.

“Know thy self, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories.”...Sun Tzu

I am not going to rehash some of the principles of socialism from my earlier posts to show why I feel this way, in the hope that people will learn and realize why America is in the shape we are in today. I will also provide a list of references at the end of this post for those who have an open mind and the desire to learn. For “those who don't have time”, Sorry about that, suffer in ignorance with the rest of the sheeple and continue complaining.

Now, there will be those Pollyannas out there that will tell me I'm wrong.

They will tell me that its not too late. They will strongly tell me, “we can straighten out America's course, bring America back to the ideals of our Founding Fathers.”

Then there will be some who will even say that I'm giving up, that I'm surrendering to the unpleasant fate.

Let's get the accusation of quitting out of the way first.

I AM NOT GIVING UP. I AM NOT SURRENDERING. I LOVE AMERICA AND HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM TOO DAMN LONG TO EVEN THINK ABOUT SURRENDER. HOWEVER, I HAVE TO ADMIT I AM TIRED AND WONDER IF ANYONE IS REALLY LEARNING AND WHY SO MANY PEOPLE DON'T / WILL NOT CALL THE ENEMY BY ITS REAL NAME.

Now to address the Pollyannas.

“Caesar, too, helped the people, but they lost their liberty to him.”

Please explain to me and America how one or two presidential elections or even a conservative take over of both houses of congress will straighten out America?

“I’ll have those niggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years.” —Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One after signing the War on Poverty. [1]

Remember, the President proposes and congress disposes. 

Remember as well, every two years the House is elected and it is the house that “supposedly” controls the purse, so if a conservative House AND the Senate do pass laws that limit spending, particularly on welfare, medicaid, Obamacare or school spending, and the bill is signed into law by the conservative President; How long will it take for the socialists progressives to start claiming that conservatives do not care whether people starve on the streets or die in the gutters? Unfortunately, the generations of greedy lazy American people, who have changed the unconstitutional welfare safety net into a life style will believe them and work hard to vote the conservatives out of office. Just look at history.

"To accomplish this [sic Socialism] we want to make use of our political liberty and take possession of the public powers"....Victor Berger, “American Socialism”, 1898.

How long will it take for conservative state governors or in some cases mayors to be voted out of office if they were to refuse federal money for things like schools, police, fire, medicaid or other unconstitutional use of federal tax dollars?

Is this not very similar to “The government shall also loan money to States and municipalities without interest for the purpose of carrying on public works. It shall contribute to the funds of labor organizations for the purpose of assisting their unemployed members, and shall take such other measures within its power as will lessen the widespread misery of the workers caused by the misrule of the capitalist class.” (Socialist Party Platform of 1908).

I realize that there may be some out there who will say, “Just about everyone pays federal taxes to Washington, why shouldn't those that are “richer” and live in “wealthier” states help pay for schools and other “entitlements” in the less prosperous states.” Isn't this a “redistribution of wealth”? Just asking.

Let's look at federal funding for schools as an example of states abdicating their responsibility and powers to central control by the federal government.

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Tenth Amendment, U.S. Constitution

FIRST and most importantly, there is nothing written in the Constitution that authorizes the federal government to use tax money for local schools or even police, etc. for that matter.

The federal funding for schools became law in 1965 when the The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was passed as part of Johnson's War on Poverty. That “war” has worked out real well, hasn't it? The ESEA ended up being one of the most far-reaching pieces of federal legislation ever to affect education ever passed by Congress. This would eventually lead to the establishment of Department of Education (DoEd) in 1979, thus the take over of what use to be the sole responsibility of the states was completed and the people just slept through it.

Since the DoEd is part of the Executive Branch, the POTUS has tyrannical control of any funding for schools and as we have seen with Boo Boo, if the POTUS wants to abuse his “power”, he will.

The sad part about this takeover is when the states accepted this “free” federal money, the states abdicated their power and the sheeple allowed it by electing ANYONE at the national and local level who promises to give them free stuff, like “free community college”. Isn't this reminiscent of “Free education for all children in public schools...” (Manifesto of the Communist Party and a plank in the Platform of Socialist Party, 1908.)

Since the states abdicated their responsibility for local schools to the federal government, this gave the federal government centralized power to control education. Can you say, “Common Core.”

Can't happen? For those who are old enough to remember:

Using the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, congress passed the National Maximum Speed Law which set the speed to 55 mph on all roads and the states HAD to agree to this if they desired to receive federal funding for highway repair. President Nixon signed The Emergency Highway Energy Conservation Act on January 2, 1974, and it became effective 60 days later.

Now, everyone should agree that when it comes to the FEDERAL road system as stated in the Art. 1, Section 8, Clause 7, the FEDERAL government can refuse funding to states that don't enforce speed limits on federal roads, BUT on state roads? Is this not reminiscent of “collective ownership of railroads, telegraphs, telephones, steamship lines and all other means of social transportation and communication.” (Again the Manifesto of the Communist Party and a plank in the Platform of Socialist Party, 1908.)

Socialism is what the hell has happened.

SECOND, just where in the hell in the Constitution is it written that the FEDERAL government should dictate what wages a PRIVATE company should pay their workers?

THIRD, Where is it written in the Constitution that the POTUS can TAKE a state's land and restrict/prohibit exploration natural resources. Is this not, “Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.” Or is it “The extension of the public domain to include mines, quarries, oil wells, forests and water power” or “The scientific reforestation of timber lands, and the reclamation of swamp lands. The land so reforested or reclaimed to be permanently retained as a part of the public domain.” (Another example from the Manifesto of the Communist Party and a plank in the Platform of Socialist Party, 1908.)

And the REALLY sad part is that the people and states allow it.

SOCIALISM is what the Hell has happened.

FINALLY and definitely not last at the Federal level, again I must ask, just WHERE in the hell is it written in the Constitution that congress, particularly the House, has the authorization to abdicate its duty under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 to the Executive Branch. I could go into any number of cabinet level departments but I would be here for a very long time, instead I will cite just one example for now.

The Federal Communications Commission which was established in 1934 to “to regulate interstate communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories” by working towards “six goals in the areas of broadband, competition, the spectrum, the media, public safety and homeland security.” Again is this not the same as “The collective ownership of railroads, telegraphs, telephones, steamship lines and all other means of social transportation and communication.”

Now, I have shown just some of the socialist's ideas and policies that have been put in place over the past century, although some cabinet positions were established before, but if one notices, some of these early cabinet position seem to have some utopian socialist ideas imbedded when they were proposed.

So, to all of you Pollyannas out there, I will be waiting for answers how do we stop Socialism in one or two elections? BUT before you answer, I have one final question:

Can you purchase an incandescence light bulb?

Semper Fi!

Once again, I must thank my brain trust, Igor & the Riceman

1. Kessler, Ronald, Inside The White House, Blackstone Audiobooks, Inc.; Unabridged edition (April 1, 2008).

Some Past Posts on Socialist Destruction of America

1st Amendment (4 part Series)

2nd Amendment

Federal Takeover of Public Land

General Welfare Clause Abuse (4 part Series)

No Difference Between Socialism and Progressivism

Progressives and Socialism

The Hour of the Wolf – Musings on What is Fair?

As I slowly wake up with my first cup of coffee and cigarette, I turn on the the T.V. and as usual there is a Progressive Socialist complaining that the congress hasn't passed a higher minimum wage. As usual, the Conservative counter point is that the minimum wage should be left to the businesses to determine, something I fully agree with. Then, just as predictable as my second cup of coffee, the Socialist says, “But it’s not FAIR that the owner or CEO of the company makes more then the workers and the government needs to do something about pay inequality.” Isn't the redistribution of wealth one of the main tenets of Socialism?

Later, on a different show, the usual debate on taxes was raging and as regular as clock work, the idea for a FAIR tax was brought up and the usual debate soon followed suit.

I flashed back to something I heard on The Five, when Eric Bolling brought up Obamacare and the Democrat said and I paraphrase, “Its not FAIR that if you don't have insurance and go to the hospital, I have to pay for it.” (ca. 19 March, 2015). Mr. Bolling let a great opportunity pass, all he had to say, "Isn't our tax money paying for Obamacare? Medicaid?What's the difference?"

As I lit my second cigarette and half listened, I started thinking and that's hurts and is rather difficult for me with only two cups under my belt, “WHAT IS FAIR? Who determines JUST what is FAIR?”

Before my rant, let’s take a look at “FAIR”.

I figured it would be easier for readers to check my source if it were online instead of using an old fashion dictionary, so I looked up the meaning of FAIR.

The word FAIR is an interesting word. It can be used as a noun, an adverb, a verb or an adjective.

When it comes to minimum wage, taxes and every other Socialists Democrat talking point, the word FAIR is used as an adjective, so let’s look at those definitions:

1. Agreeing with what is thought to be right or acceptable

2. Treating people in a way that does not favor some over others

3. Not too harsh or critical

After reading and understanding the word FAIR, I turned to the Constitution and what it has to say about FAIR.

For those who haven't taken time or are too lazy to understand it, I'll remind you that the Constitution lays out WHAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN DO, so I'll save you some time, there is only one phrase in the Constitution that may be construed concerning FAIR; Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1:

“...; but all Duties, Imposts (something imposed or levied : tax...) and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States”

There is absolutely nothing concerning FAIR when it comes to a minimum wage, in fact there is nothing about the FEDERAL Government getting involved in what private businesses pay their employees. The same holds true when it comes to health care. Or basically anything else in a citizen's life.

In fact, even the much hated 16th Amendment:

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

Does not say anything about FAIR.

So. according to the Constitution, the Federal government has absolutely no authority in “Agreeing with what is thought to be right or acceptable”. But, the Constitution does authorize the Federal government to “treat people in a way that does not favor some over others” and “not too harsh or critical.” Yet it doesn't.

Yet, a minority of people will get out in the streets, riot and yell,”_______(fill in your own pet peeve) is not FAIR.” Is this minority determining or “agreeing with what is thought to be right or acceptable” for the rest of America.

If that's the case, then I as a minority of one can say, ”Its not FAIR that:

1. That America made a promise to my Brother & Sister Veterans, and BROKE it.

2. Peoples' hard earned money is taxed and used for things not authorized in the Constitution, i.e. welfare, medicaid, Obamacare.

3. Friends of mine, as well as many other Americans, have to work a full time job and then work part time jobs just to make ends meet; yet others, who are fairly capable of working, can sit at home and draw government handouts.

4. That a person is promoted, allowed to commit fraud and given special treatment, because of race or sex.

I could go on, but I fully realize that like beauty, what's FAIR is in the eye of the beholder, so before you yell and cry “That's not fair” ask yourself:

Is it FAIR that a person who HAS worked hard to achieve success, did just about everything that America expected and finally earned the privilege to live and use his hard earned “wealth” anyway that person desires and not be demonized, called names, or be degraded? Isn't this the type of propaganda that Socialists/Communists used and are using to take over a country?

Only in a Socialist country that is on the road to Communism is it FAIR for a small group of people or politicians to determine what a person can do with their own money, what they can say, what they can eat or what they can buy (Some will say that the government doesn't control what you can buy. To them, I say, "Can you buy an incandescent light bulb?)? 

How soon will it be that a small group will determine whether a person should work in an office or on the factory floor, no matter the knowledge or skill, because it is FAIR?

Why should a group of elected politicians who are more concern with their own power than what's right for ALL the people.

"I stand for the square deal. But when I say that I am for the square deal, I mean not merely that I stand for fair play under the present rules of the game, but that I stand for having those rules changed so as to work for a more substantial equality of opportunity and of reward for equally good service."...Theodore Roosevelt (August 31,1910)

What do you think? Let me know.

Thanks to my "Brain Trust", Igor & the Riceman for their assistance.

The Hour of the Wolf - Introduction

Coming soon to A Scream In The Wilderness, will be a “new” and semi regular feature called The Hour of the Wolf. This feature will be a little different from my other posts which usually deals with history or current news commentary. This new column will deal mainly with my personal observations and opinions and will cover a number of topics.

These topics can and will be everything from political to social events (past and present), maybe debunking some conspiracy theories or some things that just interests me. Yes, as in most of my posts there will be some links to references, but most of the time it will be just my musings, things I feel very strongly about and may be use for extended answers/comments from twitter.

As with any “opinion page”, I WANT to hear your thoughts, your opinions and your comments. These can be expressed in the comment section below each post and I will respond to all INTELLIGENT and THOUGHTFUL posts.

Now, to give credit where credit is due.

I chose the title of the section out of respect for J. Michael Straczynski (JMS), the cast and crew of the T.V. series, Babylon 5 because as those who follow me on twitter (@OldMarine1), I am up early and do most of my writing and thinking during what JMS describes as the “hour of the wolf”.

Just what is the “hour of the wolf”?

“The hour of the wolf is that hour around 3 a.m. when you can't sleep because you're worried about one thing or another.”

Or as Susan Ivanova played by Claudia Christian explains in the title episode.

"Have you ever heard of the hour of the wolf? My father told me about it. It's the time between 3:00 and 4:00 in the morning. You can't sleep, and all you can see is the troubles and the problems and the ways that your life should've gone but didn't. All you can hear is the sound of your own heart. I've been living in the hour of the wolf for seven days, Lyta. Seven days. The wolf and I are now on a first-name basis. In times like this, my father used to take one large glass of vodka before bed. To keep the wolf away, he said. And then he would take three very small drinks of vodka, just in case she had cubs while she was waiting outside. It doesn't work."

Since I don't drink, I use that time to write and research in order to keep the wolf of Socialism and her cubs from destroying the FREEDOM and the greatness of America. And like Susan, I sometimes feel it doesn't/isn't working, but I refuse to give up.

I will ask all to check back periodically to see what's new although I will tweet new posts for your consideration, but until then here are a couple of samples.

http://screaminthewilderness.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-hour-of-wolf.html

http://screaminthewilderness.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-hour-of-wolf-america-and-its.html

The Hour of The Wolf - America and its Freedoms Are Being Destroyed

I jerked awake, reached down and grab the pistol I keep beside the bed, slipped on my robe and slowly but quietly walked out of the bedroom. I stopped, looked around and listened. Hearing or seeing no sign movement, I proceeded into the living room again seeing or hearing nothing unusual, I glanced at the clock.

“My God” I thought, “Its almost 3:00 A.M." What I have come to refer to as the hour of the wolf.

I walked into the kitchen, turned the coffee pot on, checked the back door, saw that it was still locked.

I turned back to the coffee pot, saw that it was about a third full, picked it up and poured my first cup of what will be many cups consumed this day.

As I returned to the living room, I stopped short, brought my weapon up and using my free hand aimed it at the figure sitting in the chair.

I soon came to realize that I my eyes and maybe mind were playing tricks on me, lower the weapon and sat down on the sofa.

Just as I sat down and started thinking about the upcoming day, I was startled by the voice from the direction of the chair and once again saw a figure is sitting there.

I reached over for my weapon, when the voice said, “Stand down, you know you don't need that.”

Again I shook my head, rubbed my eyes and looked at the chair again and the figure was still there. Looking more closely, there was something strangely familiar about him.

As I took a sip of coffee and lit a cigarette, the figure began to speak.

“Don't worry about who I am, BUT we do need to talk.”

“About what?” I asked.

“America and its Freedoms are being destroyed.”

I looked at him and quietly said, “What more can I do? I served fourteen years in the Corps. I blog, I speak out on twitter. Frankly, I feel that I am doing everything I can, short of calling for armed insurrection, to wake people up, but I feel that people just aren't listening or even paying attention. Frankly, I'm getting tired or as the 'talking heads' say, 'war weary'. Frankly, I'm getting down right discouraged.”

“DISCOURAGED? TIRED? WAR WEARY? BULLCHIT!”

He lower his voice and continued, “Yes, the people of America have changed. Face it, most have the attention spans of earthworms. BUT, the real problem is that most have developed an its all about 'ME' attitude, how hard I work, how much I should get, what's in it for me.”

I nodded my head, “Yes and I have to admit sometimes I have that attitude.”

“Yes you do,” he said with a stare that sent a chill through me. He continued, “But you DO realize that it isn't about you, its about America. Now, you have to show others that there are more important things then themselves. You have to show them that without God and America's freedom, there IS NO ME. There will be only the 'collective'.”

I glanced down and said, “How do you fight the lack of intellectual curiosity? How do you fight greed and envy? How you fight the media “talking heads” on both sides of this war? How do you fight the "lemmings" who will not accept facts that counter dict their favorite "personality"? How do you get people to stand up for Freedom and not just seek that fifteen minutes of fame”

He looked at me as only another warrior could and said, “You really can't, its up to each and every one to look deep into their hearts and ask, 'Is it better to fight for America and the its freedoms or is it better to look for that fame and fortune that 15 minutes in the spotlight might give?'”

“BUT,” he continued, “You must keep at it, NEVER give up. Continue to show the history. Show the tactics. Continue to point out the hypocrisy on both sides, no matter the insults, the sling and arrows thrown at you." 

"There are a few out there, very few unfortunately, that feel the same as you do, realizing that America is in the swirl of the toilet and fast going down the tubes and don't realize that SOCIALISM IS HERE AND THEY DON'T REALIZE IT." 

"There are some who have quit and taken the easier way of chasing every popular trend just to get numbers for their Twitter account or their blogs." 

"And then there are some who have just given up, being content to just claim how patriotic they are. While others, unfortunately, have just plain given up.”

I stared back at him and replied, “I have tried! I have researched, written and shown that this destruction of America has been on going for over a century, but to no avail. I constantly hear,'its Obama's fault'. I hear, 'that its the government's fault'. I constantly hear, 'Well, Glenn Beck, Hannity, Rush or some other 'talking head' said...' even though HISTORY shows they are wrong. How do you combat that?”

“Again, you may not be able to combat the idol worship, but if you keep pressing the points, REMEMBERING that the future of America depends on people waking up and having the facts. Just think that if you continue to put the information out there and one person reads and tells one or two others and they tell two others, etc."

"Remember an avalanche begins with just one stone rolling down a hill”

I just nodded my head, glancing down a feeling a little ashamed.

He continued, “There are a few others out there that are like you, going about life but, fighting the best way they can. REMEMBER in all wars, the generals or political leaders are always remembered, BUT it is the grunts; those in the trenches, those in the mud, blood and guts, shedding the tears over fallen comrades that are the ones that make it possible for victory and for the leaders to be glorified, to be 'worshiped'. Remember a leader is only as good as those he leads.”

“But,” I began.

“BUT HELL!” he interrupted, “There is no BUT, there is just doing."

"There are people; even some young people, out there who do want to learn. They really thirst for the knowledge that you and others put out there. It may not seem that way, but there you are. Some may use it in their own arguments, some may use it in their writings, but you know that the information is out there.”

He continued, “I know you and others get pi$$ed when your material is stolen by “celebrities” and others. Remember, there are a great number out there that wouldn't know what ethics are, even if it bit them on the @$$. People have become users, they'll use anything or anyone they can to to gain their moments of fame and fortune. All you and others can do is hold true to yourselves, hold true to your beliefs. If it costs you, so be it, at least you know in your heart of hearts that you held faithful to your ethics.”

I looked at him, still wondering who he was and finally asked him, “Just who the hell are you? Why are you lecturing me?”

He looked at me with a smile on his face and said very quietly, “I am the spirit of those who came before you. I'm the spirit of those out there in America who are tired, wondering if anything they do really means anything. I am the spirit that made America great. BUT most importantly, I am you.”

As he disappeared and I glanced at the clock, it was 3:00 A.M. and the coffee pot beeped to let me know it was ready. I poured a cup of coffee and walked into living room sat down, lit a cigarette and turned on the television.

As I took my first sip of coffee, I thought to myself, “Another day in the fight to save America. Is anybody really listening? Oh well, what the hell, let's keep going.”

Let me know what you think, No sign in or joining needed.

Semper Fi!

As usual a special thanks to my friends and colleagues, Igor and the Riceman for their editing and suggestions.

A Page From Obama's Playbook: The BullChit Continues at VA

Everyone should remember the great fanfare when Robert McDonald was approved as Department of Veterans Affairs Secretary. Celebrity spokesman, Montel Williams appeared on "Your World with Neil Cavuto" said and I paraphrase "I'll give him 90 days". 

Its been six months and what has changed? NOT ONE DAMN THING!

Just as in the past, critters in congress and other politicians make promises, have hearings, spend money just to have Obama take it away, and still the same CHIT goes on.

Not only did Robert McDonald insult a decorated Marine and congressman, he has taken a page out of Boo Boo's book, lying on national T.V.

"Documents obtained by the Washington Free Beacon cast doubt on claims made Sunday by the secretary for veterans affairs that 60 people who manipulated wait time data have been fired by the agency over the last half-year.

Department of Veterans Affairs Secretary Robert McDonald said on Sunday that the agency is improving and working toward holding officials accountable, firing 900 employees in the past six months.

“We’re making fundamental changes in the department. In terms of leadership, we’ve held accountable about 900 employees who are no longer with us, that were with us before,” McDonald said on NBC’s Meet the Press.

“900 people have been fired, since I became secretary. We’ve got 60 people that we fired who have manipulated wait times. We’ve got about 100 senior leaders who are under investigation now … so we’re holding people accountable.”

The appearance was McDonald’s first on a Sunday program since taking over the embattled agency in July 2014. McDonald replaced former-Secretary Eric Shinseki, who resigned after it was revealed that 40 veterans died while waiting to receive care at the Phoenix VA facility.

However, new documents obtained and viewed by the Washington Free Beacon raise questions about the information McDonald provided to NBC, specifically the claim that 60 employees were fired because they manipulated wait times.

According to these documents, as of Feb. 5, 2015, only 11 employees tied to wait time manipulations have been fired. (Union intervention?...OM)

The document, which was given to the Free Beacon by a Republican staffer, is sent to both the House and Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs for “official use only,” and “provides the Department’s weekly report on adverse employment actions initiated since June 3, 2014, on any basis related to patient scheduling, record manipulations, appointment delays, and/or patient deaths.”(What about how many Veterans were required to register their firearms?...OM)

The employees in the report are facing “adverse personnel actions,” which are either “proposed” or already “taken.”

The document lists the names of employees facing disciplinary action and their position title. For each employee, the report then notes the proposed disciplinary action, the date it was proposed, the action taken, and the effective date of each action.

Based on this report, from June 3, 2014, to February 5, 2015, the department has proposed a total of 74 personnel actions related to scheduling or record manipulation; five of them were actions against VA executives.

Eleven employees, three of whom held executive positions, are listed as having been removed. (That just 1.2% of the number that McDonald cited, Patriots should ask "what about the other 98.8%? Did they leave because of retirement, new jobs?...OM)

In other cases, employees are listed as resigning, being suspended, “demoted,” “admonished,” or “reprimanded.” In some cases, no disciplinary action was taken.

At least 15 cases are listed as “pending.”

The Department of Veterans Affairs did not respond to several requests for comment at press time.

Now is the time for McDonald to answer. "We (veterans) have served and defended our country. We were given a promise. WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO KEEP THAT PROMISE?"...OM

Source: http://freebeacon.com/issues/documents-cast-doubt-on-claim-that-60-va-employees-have-been-fired-for-manipulating-wait-times/