The Story of the First Thanksgiving 2014


Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.


This is the annual CH 2.0 re-telling of the true story of the first Thanksgiving.

By Matt Ross


I heard  this story years ago, so I thought I’d post it.

The official story has the pilgrims boarding the Mayflower, coming to America and establishing the Plymouth colony in the winter of 1620-21. This first winter is hard, and half the colonists die. But the survivors are hard working and tenacious, and they learn new farming techniques from the Indians. The harvest of 1621 is bountiful. The Pilgrims hold a celebration, and give thanks to God. They are grateful for the wonderful new abundant land He has given them.

The official story then has the Pilgrims living more or less happily ever after, each year repeating the first Thanksgiving. Other early colonies also have hard times at first, but they soon prosper and adopt the annual tradition of giving thanks for this prosperous new land called America.

The problem with this official story is that the harvest of 1621 was not bountiful, nor were the colonists hardworking or tenacious. 1621 was a famine year and many of the colonists were lazy thieves.

In his ‘History of Plymouth Plantation,’ the governor of the colony, William Bradford, reported that the colonists went hungry for years, because they refused to work in the fields. They preferred instead to steal food. He says the colony was riddled with “corruption,” and with “confusion and discontent.” The crops were small because “much was stolen both by night and day, before it became scarce eatable.”

In the harvest feasts of 1621 and 1622, “all had their hungry bellies filled,” but only briefly. The prevailing condition during those years was not the abundance the official story claims, it was famine and death. The first “Thanksgiving” was not so much a celebration as it was the last meal of condemned men.

But in subsequent years something changes. The harvest of 1623 was different. Suddenly, “instead of famine now God gave them plenty,” Bradford wrote, “and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God.” Thereafter, he wrote, “any general want or famine hath not been amongst them since to this day.” In fact, in 1624, so much food was produced that the colonists were able to begin exporting corn

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

What happened?

After the poor harvest of 1622, writes Bradford, “they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop.” They began to question their form of economic organization.

This had required that “all profits & benefits that are got by trade, working, fishing, or any other means” were to be placed in the common stock of the colony, and that, “all such persons as are of this colony, are to have their meat, drink, apparel, and all provisions out of the common stock.” A person was to put into the common stock all he could, and take out only what he needed.

This “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” was an early form of socialism, and it is why the Pilgrims were starving. Bradford writes that “young men that are most able and fit for labor and service” complained about being forced to “spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children.” Also, “the strong, or man of parts, had no more in division of victuals and clothes, than he that was weak.” So the young and strong refused to work and the total amount of food produced was never adequate.

To rectify this situation, in 1623 Bradford abolished socialism. He gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep what they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit. In other words, he replaced socialism with a free market, and that was the end of famines.

Many early groups of colonists set up socialist states, all with the same terrible results. At Jamestown, established in 1607, out of every shipload of settlers that arrived, less than half would survive their first twelve months in America. Most of the work was being done by only one-fifth of the men, the other four-fifths choosing to be parasites. In the winter of 1609-10, called “The Starving Time,” the population fell from five-hundred to sixty.

Then the Jamestown colony was converted to a free market, and the results were every bit as dramatic as those at Plymouth. In 1614, Colony Secretary Ralph Hamor wrote that after the switch there was “plenty of food, which every man by his own industry may easily and doth procure.” He said that when the socialist system had prevailed, “we reaped not so much corn from the labors of thirty men as three men have done for themselves now.”

Happy Thanksgiving all.  Thanks for all of your comments and encouragement.

Source: Mises Institute




A Special Message from the Centers for Disease Control


Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

 centers for disease control logo

With the Ebola outbreak in the news we here at the Worldwide Headquarters of Manhattan Infidel™  are taking a moment out of our busy schedule to give our readers the latest information from the Centers for Disease Control on how to protect yourself.

Q:  What is the Ebola virus?

A:  The Ebola virus (or Ebola Hemorrhagic Fever) is a highly contagious and deadly disease.  There is no known cure.

Q:  Where did the Ebola virus originate?

A:  Some say Africa, though of course that is speculation and racist.

Q:  But weren’t the first recorded cases from sub-Saharan Africa?

A:  We are scientists.  We are not interested in your “facts.”

Q:  What causes Ebola?

A:  Intolerance, racism and capitalism.  Countries with low tax rates usually experience outbreaks.

Q:  What are the symptoms of Ebola?

A: Fatigue, headache, joint paint, vomiting and diarrhea are the first outward signs of infection though the underlying cause is most likely resistance to the Prophet Muhammad.

Q:  I hear there is an outbreak in Africa and an African man flew to Dallas and became sick.  Is this true?

A:  It is irrelevant where the sick person came from.  We at the CDC are not interested in that.

Q:  But if he did come from Africa shouldn’t we, as a precaution, ban flights from countries with known infectious outbreaks?

A:  Your question betrays your underlying racism and makes me sick.  Granted, not “Ebola” sick but sick from moral outrage that in the 21st century we still have to put up with people like you.

Q:  It’s not a racist question.  It’s common sense.  Wouldn’t the best way to prevent an outbreak in the United States be to ban flights from countries known to have outbreaks?  We temporarily banned flights to Israel over the summer because of the war and feared for the safety of Americans.  Isn’t it the same principle?

A:  The two cases could not be more different. Israel is an occupying power and we banned flights hoping to inflict economic damage on them that would bring them to enter negotiations with the Palestinians.  Quite frankly I am surprised by the ignorance of your question and have already alerted the IRS to possible irregularities in your tax returns.

Q:  But I just want to protect America!  I think we should stop flights from infected countries in Africa.

A:  Why do you hate black people?

Q:  I believe I might be infected.  What can I do?

A:  Try vomiting all over your home.  Then go outside and vomit on your front lawn. Make sure that your neighbors see you vomiting so that they will come to your assistance.

Q:  But won’t that infect my neighbors?

A:  Not if they are progressive and favor higher taxes and redistribution of wealth.

Q:  What about washing my hands?

A:  Yeah right.  Since when has washing ones hands ever kept anyone healthy? Besides, washing ones hands is racist.

Q:  I just vomited all over my home and front lawn.  Teams in HazMat suits have ordered me back inside. Shouldn’t I be taken to a hospital?  

A:  What? And infect hospital workers?  No. The safest thing for you to do is to go back inside. If you have any meat in your refrigerator use the meat to clean up the vomit.  This will disinfect your home.  It also means the meat is safe to eat.

Q:  Really?

A:  I think so.  We are kind of new to this whole infectious outbreak thing.  But this advice comes from Jenny McCarthy so we know it’s reliable.

Q:  So I have nothing to fear?  Ebola has no chance of coming to the United States?

A:  None whatsoever.  Unless an infected man flies to this country or crosses our borders.  But what are the chances of that happening?.

Q:  Thank you for your help and information.  I feel better already.

A:  Don’t mention it.  We at the CDC exist to fight the spread of such infectious diseases such as Ebola and we urge all Americans to vote Democrat.  Only through higher taxes can we prevent an outbreak.

Well I for one feel much safer knowing the Government is on the case.


France’s Economy Falters, so it adopts Reaganomics – Again!

François Hollande, President of France – (Socialist Party)

France’s President began his term saying, “We have chased away the clouds, the sky is all ‘rose,’ referring to that favorite color of Communists, red.

At an April 2012 campaign rally after a torrential rainstorm, Francois Hollande, on the eve of being the first Socialist Party member elected President of France in 24 years, boldly proclaimed: “We have chased away the clouds, the sky is all ‘rose.” The crowd roared their approval of Hollande’s imagery communism red triumphing in France.

But as with all socialist policies, when they are tried in the real world, instead of just on paper, the outcome is predictable – they always fail.

On January 14th, 2014 Hollande solemnly acknowledged the failure of his collectivist policies by announcing his administration would cut $40.8 billion of taxes on companies and the self-employed, plus reduce social security charge paid by employers by 5.4%. More shocking to the Left, Hollande said he would pay for his supply-side policies by cutting $86 billion in public spending. Two decades later and again facing a collapsing economy, the Socialist Party of France is being forced to adopt the supply-side economics of President Ronald Reagan.

He promised a lower retirement age, higher wages, and penalizing taxation on the evil rich folks, to the tune of a 75% tax.

Hollande campaigned on an economic manifesto of reducing the retirement age from 62 to 60, a 75% income tax for high earners, constructing 500,000 units of government housing per year and the creation of 60,000 new public teaching jobs.

It’s important to point out that France went down this road in the early ’80s with Mitterand, to terrible results.

His (Hollande’s) policies were a throwback to the 1981 election of the last French Socialist Party President Francois Mitterrand and his Communist Party allies who nationalized 38 banks and 7 key industries, raised minimum wage, cut work-week hours, increased public sector wages, created 250,000 government jobs, increased social welfare payments and radically expanded the nation’s money supply. But as public debt tripled by 1983, the French inflation rate jumped to 14.5% and unemployment rate rose to over 10%.

When it looked darkest for France amid Mitterand’s policies, Reagan’s plans saved the day.

With France about to be kicked out of the European monetary system, the Socialist Party was forced to adopt the supply-side economic policies of cutting taxes and dramatically slashing public spending that President Ronald Reagan was championing in the United States. Two years later, inflation had fallen to 4% and unemployment stopped rising. Although they kept the red rose as its symbol, the Party for twenty years abandoned socialist policies in all but name and adopted free-market liberalism.

So the socialists were beat back – for a while. After the near worldwide economic crises of 2008, the French Socialist Party got it’s sea legs again and started gaining support.

What’s that saying about the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results?

They claimed their manifesto of higher taxes and economic stimulus projects would lead to full employment and eliminate the budget deficit. But the Hollande administration’s deficit spending has driven France into the same crisis as Mitterrand’s government 30 years earlier. The French government now spends 56% of the nation’s GDP, making it one the highest-spending governments in the European Union. Hollande’s vast public sector and punitively high tax rates have driven the rich to take their wealth and leave and for businesses to relocate production off-shore. Franc’s annual deficit has doubled and the nation’s unemployment rate is now at a 15-year high of 11%. Chronic youth unemployment now tops 26% and still rising.

So Hollande did something in France that Obama will never do in America. When he saw his policies weren’t working, he decided to try something different.


Yes, really. Then chaos ensued.

Before his speech, Francois Hollande was already the most unpopular president in French history according to a poll showing that only 26% of the French people have a positive opinion of his leadership. But after his press conference, members of his cabinet had to perform rhetorical acrobatics to deny that the president was adopting conservative policies. Members of former President Nicolas Sarkozy’s conservative “Union for a Popular Movement” were baffled on how to respond after the Hollande essentially co-opted their center-right agenda. It is unclear how the speech will help the Socialist Party, but it did unify the far left, which denounced the president as selling out to pressure from corporations and financial markets. The French business lobby MEDEF praised the announcements, but asked for more details.

Now before we apply sainthood to Hollande for doing the right thing, keep one thing in mind. He evidently is a good student of history because he knows that when Mitterand reversed course, France’s economy made a rebound and Mitterand was re-elected in ’88.

Francois Hollande in his speech sought to show that the Socialist Party, like the party of Francois Mitterrand in the mid-1980s, understands France’s problems and is willing to reverse policies and adopt measures known in France as the “tournant de la rigueur” (austerity turn) to fight inflation and regain competitiveness. Hollande is keenly aware that after the Socialist Party adopted supply-side economics in 1983, the French economy did recover and Mitterrand was re-elected in 1988.

Let’s remember what Ronald Reagan said about how governments view the economy.

DA-SC-90-03096“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: ‘If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.'”

Read the full article at The American Thinker.


What Recovery? Part III: Freedom and Innovation to the Rescue?


In Part I of this “What Recovery?” series, we examined the concept of the velocity of money and how it has been declining for over two decades, which explains why most Americans are not experiencing the economic recovery that technically began in 2009. Then, in Part II, we saw how systemically high unemployment is a factor of US companies having to compete with the lower costs in emerging nations and how our Nanny Government’s fiscal policies make the situation even worse.

Today, we are going to see what well-known libertarian writer, Gary North, thinks. He sees all of what we covered in Parts I and II, yet hee sees a positive future. In fact he does not understand the pessimism of the Americans on the political right.

One of the things which I do not understand is the appalling pessimism within the American Right. I realize that a lot of promoters are cashing in on this pessimism. They get rich by preaching that everything is going to hell in a handbasket. Everything is not going to hell in a handbasket. Communism and Fabian socialism went to hell in a handbasket. Keynesianism is going to hell in a handbasket. Liberty isn’t.

What we are seeing is the greatest triumph of free-market ideas in the history of man. I have lived through it, and I am telling you, we have never seen anything like what we are seeing today. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the reversal of socialist economics in China a decade earlier, we have seen the complete failure of the great alternatives institutionally to the free market economy. The only really systematically communist state left in the world is North Korea, and it is visibly the poorest country in Asia.

Around the world, millions of people are entering free markets. China has made the transition from total Communism to energetic mercantilism. China has entered the Keynesian world order. There is a mixture of mercantilism with Keynesianism in the West, so it is not just a Chinese problem. The state-owned enterprises in China are still a burden on the economy, but step-by-step, they will be abandoned. It is already happening.

India has moved from Fabian socialism to something at least resembling a Western economy. There is no question in my mind that this trend is going to continue. India is going to move out of the intellectual orbit of Oxford and Cambridge of the 1930s. It is clearly experiencing massive economic growth. This is not going to be reversed.


All of the creativity that is found in any nation with ancient traditions, especially geared to mathematics and scholarship, which the elites of both of those societies have possessed for 1,000 years, is going to unleash an enormous number of technological discoveries. There is going to be invention on a massive scale coming out of both of those nations, but my guess is that India will be the major contributor. We can barely imagine the kinds of inventions that will be made available to the world over the next 20 years. When we are talking over the next 50 years, it really is inconceivable.


The United States and Canada will continue to crank out all kinds of inventions. The educational systems in both countries are better than in most other countries, and this is going to improve dramatically over the next half-century because of the rise of online education. There is going to be an exodus from the public schools in both nations, and this is going to dramatically increase both the productivity and the self-discipline in both Canada and the United States. Canada has a lot of self-discipline already. Asians have been pouring into the country for three decades.

Those trapped in public schools will fare poorly. This will not be the middle class. Digital education will overwhelm the bureaucratic educational systems in both nations.

Because the coming innovations will be primarily intellectual and technological, they will be made available to the whole world. This will make for greater competition, and therefore it is going to make for much greater wealth for the common man, all over the world.

Well, I don’t know why Mr. North is so sure that the Fabians Socialists are a thing of the past. They may be losing ground in India, but they are alive and well in the US, most of North and South America, Europe, the UK, and Australia. But, hey! Freedom, Innovation, and Digital Education….I’m all for that.  So, why am I still a pessimist?

Let me try to explain what I think I learned in this investigation.

Summary and Conclusions on “What Recovery?”

It is said that a rising tide lifts all boats. But, when  the tide is rising slowly somewhere, it will be lowering slowly somewhere else.

The economies of developed countries, like the US, have always been impacted to some degree by emerging economies due to their inherently lower costs of production. The United States survived the rise of all the so-called Asian Tigers. As the cost structures of the emerging nations becomes more like that of the US, the playing field levels. With the new emerging nations, China and India, the impact is going to be far greater than any competition America has seen before and it is going to last much longer. When the playing field does level, it could be at a much lower level for the United States. Here are a few reasons for my pessimistic outlook.

  1. While China and India are becoming more capitalistic, the US is becoming more socialistic. No matter which political party is in control, government spending keeps spiraling higher. The US government will continue to misallocate resources and compete against the private sector for those resources. Every year the Federal government will pass more laws and more regulations that raise the cost of production in the US. US companies will, in their own defense, continue to invest in the more friendly business environments of countries like China and India; thus creating more jobs in those countries instead of in the US.
  2. Prior to the information age, countries like the US could protect their technological innovation advantages for years. Today new technology, be it new products or ways to reduce cost, is almost instantly available to emerging countries like China and India.
  3. The early economic tigers from Asia were countries of small population. It didn’t take long before wage increases and regulations to improve the environments and living and working conditions for their citizens eroded their cost advantage over the US. China and India, however, have huge populations. Together they account for about a third of the world’s population. It will take decades before they erode their cost advantage.
  4. So, for decades US companies will see their profit margins squeezed on one side by the lower cost competition from China and India and on the other side by an ever more intrusive government. US companies will continue to invest in places like China and India out of the necessity to survive. This will have an ongoing negative effect on job creation in the US. As the middle class in China and India see their standard of living improving, those in the US will see their standard of living decreasing. When or if the playing field does level, it will be because the US economy has declined toward the rising economies of China and India. The question is: Will China and India continue to become more capitalistic while the US continues to become more socialistic? If that happens, China and India will continue to rise and the US will continue its decline.

Those are the opinions of your humble but pessimistic observer at Asylum Watch. He would be delighted to be convinced by sound arguments that America’s future is not so gloomy.

Well, now you know what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post:  Asylum Watch


Cartoon 60 Years Ahead of Its Time


Make Mine Freedom (1948) is a post WWII cartoon that is alarmingly relevant given the political climate of today. This little gem really sums up the evils of “ism,” a generic term used to represent Communism, Marxism and Progressivism.

Another ironic point in the cartoon is the idea of drinking the KoolAid, because the “ism” in the film is represented by a tonic being peddled by a “Dr. Yoo-Topia.”

Do yourself a favor and take 10 minutes to watch this film. Then forward it to as many people as you can.


Cronyism Is The Antitheses Of Capitalism


Some days I know exactly what I want to write about and then there are days like today when I review sources I have bookmarked, I find it hard to make up my mind. Everything I looked at said this is what you want to write about today, Jim? In the end, I decided to write about one of my pet peeves, cronyism.

These days when we see the word “crony” or “cronyism”, it is almost always used as an adjective to modify the word “capitalist” or “capitalism”. As a free market capitalism purest who became so as a teenager after reading the works of Ayn Rand, I get all bent out of shape every time I see the terms “crony capitalist” or “crony capitalism”. In the early days of this blog, I wrote a couple of posts on this subject and in threads I and a few others tried to come up with a better term to replace “crony Capitalism”. The best we could come up with was “corporatism”. Not very satisfactory and unlikely to catch on in the media. I am convinced that tying cronyism to capitalism is part of a left-wing socialist plot against free market capitalism. They are, after all, the pros at corrupting language. I define cronyism as the act of an entrepeneur or corporate CEO getting into bed with government and using government to create a competetive advantage for their companies over their usually smaller competitors. A true capitalist, on the other hand, knows that it is competition that drives innovation. Be that innovation in achieving a cost advantage or in the design advantages of their products or services. Innovation then leads to bigger market share and greater profits. Cronyism stifles innovation. I see those who practice cronyism as parasites that suck the life blood out of our economy every bit as much as those we complain about on the other end of economic spectrum who abuse our system of social safety nets. Capitalist they are not!

So, because I didn’t like the term “corporatist”, whenever I wanted to mention the theme in future posts I simply used the word “cronyism” alone. However, over time I have come to believe that cronyism should really be used as an adjective to modify the word “fascism”. In my opinion, The Powers That Be (TPTB) who once secretly or not so secretly funded the socialist revolution in Russia a century ago, learned the hard lesson that socialism can not work. I believe TPTB have now latched on to another failed system; that of social fascism. I believe that TPTB see the future as one where powerful centralized governments and a relatively few mega-corporations will rule the world.

By now you may be wondering what provoked this tirade about “cronyism” or “crony fascism”? It was a Human Events article by Steven Greenhut that I saved nearly two weeks ago. Although cronyism is a tool of all statist whether they have a “D” or an “R” after their name, Greenhut points out that the Obama administration and the Democrats have really fallen in love with cronyism. And, he describes how this love affair was on display at the recent Democratic National Convention.

Few political observers were surprised that President Barack Obama sees himself as the second coming of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, as he uttered these words at the Democratic convention Thursday night:

“And the truth is, it will take more than a few years for us to solve challenges that have built up over decades. It will require common effort, shared responsibility, and the kind of bold, persistent experimentation that Franklin Roosevelt pursued during the only crisis worse than this one.”

Greenhut reminds us that Jim Sinegal, the co-founder and former CEO of Costco, spoke at the convention and plugged President Barack Obama’s investment in education and affordable energy, as well as his immigration policies. He then goes on to tell us what kind of “businessman” Mr. Sinegal is.

Despite the apparent disconnect, having Jim Sinegal at the DNC is no more of a surprise than seeing Joe Biden there also. Costco is not an aberration in its support for the Democratic platform. It is, in fact, the embodiment of the kind of pliant, government-subsidized corporation that Democratic leaders prefer these days.

I’ve tussled with Sinegal in the past, back when his company was strong-arming local governments in Southern California into using eminent domain to clear away properties to make it easier for Costco to expand. Costco offers some great merchandise, but its success is built as much on special governmental privilege as it is on hard work and ingenuity. The company takes millions of dollars in subsidies from local governments chasing sales-tax revenue.

I think we can all agree that the bullying and blackmailing behavior of Costco’s Mr. Sinegal is despicable. I hate that people like him can get away with this type of behavior and I hate that politicians give-in to it. The uninformed public hears about these stories and they immediately associate them with big business and with capitalism and it doesn’t help that the media and we conservatives refer to people like Sinegal as “crony capitalist”. The left loves that capitalist receive the blame for this reprehensible behavior. So, I beg my fellow conservative bloggers to refrain from using the term “crony capitalist”. Call it crony socialism or call it crony fascism because that is what it is. Cronyism is the antithesis of capitalism.

Well, now you know what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post:  Conservatives on Fire


Occupy Update: Occupod Bashes Steve Jobs


Occupy is still at it, and the occupod in the video below seems to be ignorant of how Steve Jobs impacted our lives.  Take a look at the video below…

Anyone with a brain will realize the impact that Steve Jobs had an enormous impact on our daily lives.  We use a mouse with computers, we have nice little GUI’s (Graphical User Interface) for our computers.  We used to type computer commands manually, but Jobs made it all “point and click.”  We had cell phones, but Jobs made them better.  In fact, the competition that arose in response to Jobs made all of these things cheaper and better.  To counter, Jobs made his products better, and the process continues to this day.  Without people having ideas, and the freedom to turn those ideas into reality, we wouldn’t have these products…at all…EVER.

This is level of ignorance with which we are dealing folks, and reality has no impact on them whatsoever.

H/T:  All American Blogger


Does the US Hold the Largest Oil Reserves on the Planet?


Quite possibly, if we listen to the following official from the GAO…

So then, if we are floating on oil, and the only barrier to this windfall is government, who is the problem? I think we all know the answer to that.

John Hinderaker, from Powerline, adds some more…

…Green River Formation alone–it is located at the intersection of the states of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, and mostly underlies federal lands–contains as much oil as the entire proven reserves of the rest of the world combined. America is uniquely blessed in its energy resources. Two questions remain: 1) will Obama finally abandon his moronic two percent claim, and 2) will Obama, in a possible second term, block the development of the resources that can assure America’s economic supremacy for generations?

Once again, I think we know the answer to those questions as well.

For those that might be new to this, it has long been our contention that the political left thinks that it is unfair the the US has such a powerful economy.  They also see this as a “zero sum game,” meaning that there is a finite amount of wealth out there, and we have so much because we have somehow stolen it from others.   There is new wealth created every time a product or service of value is invented and offered for sale, but they deny that fact.   They fail to recognize that wealth is expanded, created, and distributed by the market far more efficiently in a capitalist system.  So, in a misguided sense of “fairness,” our leftist friends try to “cut us down to size,” by limiting our ability to develop new energy, create new factories, and the new technology that goes in them.  By limiting the amount of energy sources available to us, they put the brakes on growth, and the creation of wealth.  By doing this, they stifle job creation, as well as revenue to local, state, and federal coffers.    But, in their minds, this is the right thing to do.  Not only is it the wrong thing to do, it is done for all the wrong reasons as well.

Some will discuss the environment, but then again, the environment is the cover that is used to justify the attempt to wreck the engine of the economy.  I would bet a year’s income that if an unlimited and completely clean source of power were created tomorrow, the environmentalists will be rending their garments in grief, as their best chance to kill capitalism just went down the tubes.


Occupod vs. Hannity


If you want some moonbattery on display, take a look at this…

That was simply incredible. Predictable, but incredible. It has all the hallmarks of a Communist regime. For one, when the system fails, it’s always someone else’s fault. Just like when the collective farms in the Soviet Union turned the leading exporter of grain into a a nation in famine. Instead of acknowledging that the system didn’t work, the Soviets blamed others, particularly Americans, and then killed a bunch of innocent citizens for “collaborating” with the non-existent agents of imperialism. Whenever something goes wrong in a Communist state, it is someone else’s fault. The rapists were not occupiers. The vandals are not occupiers. The drug dealers and child molesters are not occupiers. Even though all of those people stayed in the camps, engaged in protests, and sometimes even were in “official” positions within the movement, it was always someone else, like DHS, or the NYPD, or even Breitbart!

We see this too in the Obama administration. Bush is to blame for everything, even for the failure of Obama’s polices.  And, when evidence is cited for the failures, that too, is explained away.

This is the face of Occupy.   This is the person that will take your freedom, and your property.  And, with history as a teacher-they will also kill many people to achieve their totalitarian “paradise.”


Occupods Propose Alternatives to Capitalism: Makes Absolutely no Sense in the Process


We’ve seen all sorts of nonsensical comments from occupods.  Some propose communism while changing the terms. Others openly advocate for the murderous system.  And, still others make no sense whatsoever.  I think the following video exemplifies the third category…

And these people are the future leaders of this country?

I am officially afraid.

Then again, some protesters don’t even know what their signs mean…

Where’s the media on this? Of course, they’re too busy inventing the next Republican war on “X.”


Re-Redefining Conservatism


Remember when Bush came into office with his “compassionate conservative” slogan?  Remember how that translated?  Compassionate conservatism was Bush’s way of saying, “Hey, I’m for capitalism, but only up to a certain point, then I’m for socialism”.  In politics, this is a “playing the whole field” approach.  It appeases moderates who want to hear milquetoast language, liberals who want the social net, and conservatives who aren’t paying attention (hey, conservatism is in the name, it must be good).

Now Romney, who plays center field with the range of Willie Mays, ran into a criticism after he said that he “didn’t care about the poor”. I know, it’s an unfair media-biased statement taken out of context (he also said he didn’t care about the rich, but that’s not reported) but the political reality is that the media has defined this as heartless.  In order to hedge his losses, Romney has turned to Bush’s “Compassionate Conservative” approach with a statement that supports raising minimum wage.

Now supporting a minimum wage increase is stupid.  It doesn’t help the poor; it hurts them. This is why I have a problem with the whole premise of “Compassionate Conservatism”.  Conservatism is the most compassionate form of government ideas we have.  By simply forcing employers to pay a higher wage for their lowest paying jobs many have to either take a loss or hire less.

I’ve been on the losing end of a minimum wage increase.  I worked for a construction company managing their in-house tool rental site for contractors.  There were a lot of minimum wage “hands” that were used by this company for various jobs.  In my area, the minimum wage workers cleaned up used tools, kept the area swept, put away returned tools, scaffolding, and various odds and ends.  When the minimum wage increased a few of these hands were let go and I was forced to do their job on top of my own.  I lost (more work for the same pay), and they lost (no work for no pay).

Conservatism’s compassion comes with the rules of capitalism.  Most workers who make minimum wage are unskilled, young, and just starting to get into the work place.  If you’re unskilled, then you start at minimum wage to learn a skill.  If you work hard then you can convince your employer that it is more cost effective to keep you than it is to retrain someone else.  If that doesn’t get you a wage increase, then you move to a business who wants your skill set or you try learning a more desirable skill set at a starting wage again.  The point is that YOU have more control over your wage.

Liberalism says that government is best equipped to enforce wages.  It doesn’t trust YOU to make the proper decisions or apply the proper work ethic to achieve higher earnings.  Therefore, they have to come in every few years and change the bottom line for employers.  Thing is, when government is constantly telling employers how much they HAVE to pay their lowest wage earners, then the employer is less likely to listen to their workers who ask for increased wages.  Why would you increase the wages if the government is just going to raise it in a year or two anyway?   Negotiation has been done away with along with any effort to self promote.

All of this breeds a community of workers that expect much for little effort. You can find a whole community of them “occupying” various parks and sidewalks in most cities.  A few years ago you could find these same mind-set communities being organized by a man who now lives in a white mansion.  Apparently Mitt heard about that and thought he would try that same approach.  The problem is, the people he’s now pandering to aren’t going to vote for him anyway.  Watching someone sell out is bad enough, but to sell out for free…That’s just not the sign of a good businessman.

We cannot let conservatism be hijacked by these liberals masquerading as true believers.  It is important that we continue to stand up against liberalism, even when it is called conservatism.  Of course, in order to do that, you must be able to tell the two apart.

Original Post: The Sentry Journal


Arizona Withholds Funding From Tuscon Schools Due to Racist Curriculum: Leftists Declare Doing so “Hate:


It always useful to remember that leftists claim that any disagreement with them is hate, even if their are the ones committing the hate.  I know, it doesn’t make sense, but in the topsy-turvy newspeak of the left, it is gospel.  For a current example of that tendency to hate in the name of resisting hate, we have the public schools in Tuscon, Arizona.  If you recall, that district was under fire for having a rather controversial curriculum.  Here is a video…

Here is some more, from Nice Deb…

In October of this year,the “Freedom Socialist Party”  huffed:

Over the summer, the ongoing battle over ethnic studies in Arizona royally exposed the grimy politics and tactics of the right wing.

Arizona HB 2281 became effective Jan. 1, aimed at the popular and successful Mexican American studies program (also known as MAS or La Raza studies) of the Tucson Unified School District (TUSD). The bill outlaws courses that “promote the overthrow” of the government, “promote resentment toward a race or class of people,” are “designed primarily for people of a particular ethnic group, or “advocate ethnic solidarity instead of treatment of pupils as individuals.”

The bill’s author was Tom Horne, who is famously opposed to La Raza education because it is critical of the U.S. government’s relationship with Latin America and treatment of Latinos. As the state superintendent of schools, Horne conveniently was able to find the Tucson ethnic studies program in violation of the new law immediately before leaving that position to become the state’s attorney general.

Last May, a woman had engaged in “grimy politics” by reading  excerpts from a book in the Tucson Ethnic Studies programat a school board meeting. These outrageous and toxic books were teaching kids that the United States is an institutionally racist  system filled with “bloodsucking capitalists” and Anglos who “rape Hispanic culture”.

“Hard drugs and drug culture is an invention of the gringo because he has no culture.”

“We have to destroy capitalism and we have to help 5/6 of the world to destroy capitalism in order to equal all peoples’ lives.

“The Declaration of Independence states that we the people have the right to revolution…the right to overrule the government…”

“Any country based on capitalism is based on greed…”

Of course, hate is not hate when the left is doing the hating.  However, disagreeing with them IS hate, even if the alleged “hate” is in response to their actual hate.  And, as Nice Deb’s excerpt points out, any efforts to point out and expose leftist hate is “hateful” and “grimy politics.”

So, in response to the racial and class warfare (read-HATE) inherent in such programs, Arizona passed a state law banning them.  

Uh-oh!  How are the “progressives” going to use race and class to separate us?  How are the La Raza folks going to indoctrinate more useful idiots to hate the “gringos?”

15-112. Prohibited courses and classes; enforcement






Can you see why the left will have a tantrum about this?  They can’t use race and class to pit people against each other, and promote racial/class collectivism rather than individuality.  They just banned the liberal agenda!

So, by leftist definitions, a law banning hateful curricula is hateful for banning the preferred hate of the left.

Now, the state, and a judge, has agreed that the curriculum is illegal under the statute, and the Tucson Unified School District is going to lose 10% of it’s state funding…

What the leftists will do remains to be seen. However, with history as a guide, we can expect them to enforce “democracy”- by not allowing others to speak, or vote. Because, as we all know, the leftist version of “democracy” means that dissent is banned, and  no votes are to be taken if they might lose. Also, we might see some useful idiots out to support the hate, because, as we all know, resisting hate is hateful, and will not be allowed-because it is hate!


Of the People


Capitalism isn’t simply a philosophy based on the way numbers trend, how to gain leverage, make money, or use debt as a resource.  Much of the philosophy of capitalism is based on the human element.  Without human nature, capitalism holds little water and socialism would do far better.  Within the philosophy is the idea that businesses will put their money wherever they are most apt to grow it.

Last month I wrote a couple of pieces that challenged the mindset of you (and me).  I basically said that our representatives are failures not because the offices are broken, but because the electorate is broken.  They are properly representing their voting base – ignorant and crooked.  If we want to change Washington, we must first change ourselves.  So, let’s pull both of these points together.

Milton Friedman once said, “The way you solve things is by making it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing.” This idea stems from the trust of a conservative/capitalist mind and the knowledge that politicians are trying to, as Milton put it, “buy votes”.  In other words, our political figures are a type of business and as such, they will flux with the most profitable policies.  It is OUR job as the “consumer” to set the market values of those policies.

Mr. Gingrich is a great example of political expediency. He knows what is currently trending up in the political market and throws his political capital into that commodity.  The same is true of the rest of those who run our nation.  Very few in Washington are there because their convictions pressed them to “make a difference”, they are spending millions to win an office for their own benefit.  Congress has become a very cushy place to get a “job”.

Last November we sent a message to many congressional members – their stocks plummeted over night. We will have to do that this next November, and the November after, and the one after, ad infinitum.  It is easy to get frustrated, but it is our JOB to keep them accountable.  If Gingrich gets elected (still holding out for Paul), then it is our job to tell him what is politically lucrative.  If he doesn’t adhere, then we pull our support and put the bum on the curb.

We constantly clamor about the lack of Constitutional knowledge our politicians have or adhere to, but we too often forget that before any article was written to establish a government body, WE THE PEOPLE were given the task of forming a more perfect union, establishing justice, ensuring domestic tranquility, providing welfare, securing our prosperity, and ordaining the Constitution.  We have a responsibility too – and it is time we learned what it is and began doing it.

Original Post:  The Sentry Journal


Fear and Doubt are the Enemies of Success and Advancement: A Defense of Capitalism and Free Markets


A a recent article that Charles Moore wrote, I think he put his finger on exactly what is going on today- the success and advance of the twin threats of fear and doubt. Moore, who is a British journalist and former editor of The Daily Telegraph, in an article about Margaret Thatcher, wrote that after the long boom and success of capitalism and free market economics that “the worm of doubt entered the system”:

You borrowed all the money needed for the price of a house. This made you, in your mind, though not in full fact, an owner. Because the value of the house was rising, it also made you, again in your mind, richer. The bank, which actually owned the house, found clever ways of mixing and selling on the loans it had granted so that it, too, felt richer. Governments, happy at rising revenues, thought it was their business to make sure that when the symptoms of high risk began to present themselves, they were suppressed…. (then) the roof fell in… (and now) when people now hear words like globalization or capitalism… they feel slightly sick.

Free market economics and capitalism did not lead our nation to failure- rather, during its wild success at making millions around the world more prosperous over the past centuries, communism and socialism and fascism latched on to it, sucking from its prosperity to feed its sick aims like parasites, and over time, many smart people began to become confused and unable to see the parasites from the concepts that they latched on.

Where free markets and capitalism created wealth and encouraged personal responsibility, governments and elites put in place rules and regulations which weakened the foundations of the system, subsidized risky behavior such as sub-prime mortgages and leveraging investments, and gave out handouts to favored industries and distorted the market by doing so. When banks, businesses, and corporations operated in a free market of capitalism, they could succeed or fail based on their own efforts and innovation; but in the new markets, which were no longer capitalistic or free, government subsidies and spending and lobbying and regulation and rules determined whether or not a business, corporation, or bank was successful or failed. And although this was no longer capitalism or free markets, but rather markets once free now twisted to the aims of elites and socialists and communists and fascists, many smart people became critical of the markets or capitalism because of the failures of the government bureaucrats who were twisting and corrupting the system.

And then the parasites of leftism began to weaken and kill the free market and capitalism, and the people cried out ‘capitalism and free markets are failing us’- when it wasn’t the free markets and capitalism that failed, but rather the people who failed the system.

They were led to this failure by fear and doubt- they did not believe in the hand of the God and the freedom of individuals and life, liberty, and the protection of private property.

The people (or The People, as leftists call them) feared that although they were becoming prosperous and their lives were rapidly improving, they were somehow falling behind others who were advancing more rapidly. Rather than looking at why they were successful in the free market capitalism- because of their hard work, innovation, and yes, luck- they instead demanded government policies to hold back others and help out themselves, corrupting the very system that had brought them so far. They doubted that if people were free and made free decisions, they would make ‘the right decisions’- that is, the decisions that they would make if they controlled the other people and had power over them (their definition of ‘right decisions’).

Rather than just letting go and trusting that the unseen hand of God, trusting to the thousands and millions of individual decisions, and working to ensure that private property rights are strengthened and respected, they doubted that this giant experiment of capitalism and a free market would work, and feared that they would somehow fall behind others in material wealth if they didn’t vote for and support people who promised to corrupt the system and abuse the system and circumvent the system. Many people trusted and believed in the power of men to control other men and redistribute property to other men, and in so doing rejected free markets and capitalism.

Fear and doubt came to the people’s mind every time there was a recession, or even during periods when great wealth was created but wasn’t immediately distributed evenly. The people reacted to the Great Depression by doubting that the free market would correct (as it had done in the 1920’s and dozens of times before in the 1800’s) and feared that he return to prosperity wouldn’t come fast enough- and so they worked to destroy the system, corrupt the system, and make the market less free- and the results were a slight recession during into a decade long destruction of wealth.

And today, government policies and regulations and taxes and laws which corrupted the free market and corroded private property rights have let the worm of doubt creep once more into the people’s minds, and in their fear that maybe they won’t get to loot the dying Republic of its wealth they vote for Democrats who promise to manage the downfall and distribute the ever-decreasing wealth in the system to their supporters and voters and friends.

To return to success and advance again as a nation in wealth and happiness, we must reject doubt of the free market system and capitalism and trust the people- we need to trust and believe again that the thousands of decisions of free people will create more wealth and make more people happy, and reject those who suggest that having a smaller number of elites make those decisions for us is better. We need to let go of our fear that if we don’t control the market and the system that you’ll lose out, and instead work hard, innovate, save your money, and invest wisely.

UPDATE 12/7/11: President Obama delivered a major speech today on the economy, in which he expressed his doubt that the capitalist system could continue to provide wealth and prosperity for many and work to make society more equal, and from this place of fear he instead wants to trust himself and his fellow men to run a better system that will somehow do a better job of creating wealth and distributing it than having free people make free decisions.

Via memeorandum, in his Remarks by the President on the Economy in Osawatomie, Kansas, we read the following fear and doubt from US President Barack Obama, one-term Democrat. These are selections from the speech- (you can read the whole thing yourself here if you want):

My grandparents served during World War II. He was a soldier in Patton’s Army; she was a worker on a bomber assembly line. And together, they shared the optimism of a nation that triumphed over theGreat Depression and over fascism. They believed in an America where hard work paid off, and responsibility was rewarded, and anyone could make it if they tried — no matter who you were, no matter where you came from, no matter how you started out.

And these values gave rise to the largest middle class and the strongest economy that the world has ever known. It was here in America that the most productive workers, the most innovative companies turned out the best products on Earth. And you know what? Every American shared in that pride and in that success — from those in the executive suites to those in middle management to those on the factory floor.

In this passage, Obama communicates to us that his parents believed in capitalism and free markets and personal responsibility and liberty and protection of property. And furthermore, Obama knows that this system worked. But yet, he has this nagging doubt and fear…

But for most Americans, the basic bargain that made this country great has eroded. Long before the recession hit, hard work stopped paying off for too many people. Fewer and fewer of the folks who contributed to the success of our economy actually benefited from that success. Those at the very top grew wealthier from their incomes and their investments — wealthier than ever before. But everybody else struggled with costs that were growing and paychecks that weren’t — and too many families found themselves racking up more and more debt just to keep up.

He doesn’t BELIEVE in capitalism. He has no faith in people, freedom, liberty, and rights. It’s clear he doesn’t have any hope that people will make the ‘right decisions’ (the decisions he would make) and he wants to therefore control other people. He continues:

But Roosevelt also knew that the free market has never been a free license to take whatever you can from whomever you can. (Applause.) He understood the free market only works when there are rules of the road that ensure competition is fair and open and honest. And so he busted up monopolies, forcing those companies to compete for consumers with better services and better prices. And today, they still must. He fought to make sure businesses couldn’t profit by exploiting children or selling food or medicine that wasn’t safe. And today, they still can’t.

We simply cannot return to this brand of “you’re on your own” economics if we’re serious about rebuilding the middle class in this country.

And it is around here that we get to the heart of the matter- in the last quarter of his speech, after ripping on capitalism and freedom for 3/4’s of the speech, that we finally here what he wants to do…

So what does that mean for restoring middle-class security in today’s economy? Well, it starts by making sure that everyone in America gets a fair shot at success. The truth is we’ll never be able to compete with other countries when it comes to who’s best at letting their businesses pay the lowest wages, who’s best at busting unions, who’s best at letting companies pollute as much as they want.

We need to remember that we can only do that together. It starts by making education a national mission — a national mission. (Applause.) Government and businesses, parents and citizens. We need to remember that we can only do that together. It starts by making education a national mission — a national mission. (Applause.) Government and businesses, parents and citizens. They should be rebuilding our roads and our bridges, laying down faster railroads and broadband, modernizing our schools. Of course, those productive investments cost money. They’re not free. And so we’ve also paid for these investments by asking everybody to do their fair share. And so we have to set priorities. If we want a strong middle class, then our tax code must reflect our values. We have to make choices.

So, in summary, here is Obama’s alternative to free markets and capitalism- give him more power. Give him the power and authority to tell employers what to pay their employees, give him the power and authority to combine big government with big business and big labor (ie, fascism), give him and his cronies the power to give money to favored constituent groups to fund pet projects of vanity (palaces, statues, etc), and the power to demand that all of these decisions are paid for by someone else who does not want to pay for it- to use the power of guns to the head to make people give up cash to Obama and his people to feed their wrong ideas about the power of men to control others for their benefit.

Obama is wrong. He needs to be defeated- not just politically, but his ideas and beliefs need to be rejected by all good people and good citizens and patriots and he and his policies need to be forever rejected in decent society. We must instead look to capitalism and freedom and liberty and property protection to our future, and not look backward to the sort of tyranny that Obama is proposing.

Original Post:  A Conservative Teacher


Black Friday: Why Risk Getting TB or Lice From a Smelly Hippie When You can do all of Your Shopping Here?


Black Friday is coming soon, my friends, and the Occupods have plans to disrupt it…

We at the CH 2.0 recognize the public health risk that the Occupods pose. Their tendency to urinate and defecate in public, the fact that some may be carrying tuberculosis, and that many have been infested with lice and scabies, all pose a public health risks. Additionally, their rampant anti-Semitism, acts of violence and vandalism, or the simple fact that they are smelly hippies may ruin an an otherwise happy shopping experience, have prompted us to action.

Why should you risk an infection disease, or being harassed by an unwashed Communist, when you can do all of your Black Friday shopping here?  Why spend much of the Christmas Season undergoing medical treatment or delousing, when you can shop from the comfort of your own home?  We have the answer here at the CH 2.0.  Take a look at some of our exciting Black Friday Deals below…

You can purchase anything at the CH 2.0 Amazon Store!

Shop Amazon’s Toys – Black Friday and Cyber Monday Deals Week Black Friday Teaser: 32″ LCD HDTV 720p 60HzUnder $300 plus Free Shipping Black Friday Teaser: Cuisinart Appliance Under $50 Black Friday Teaser: Over 50% off select brand name watches 50% Off

Get a Kingston DataTraveler 108 16GB Flash Drive for $14.95 at, a $3.79 Savings! Valid through 11/28-30/2011

Get a Kingston HyperX Blu 4GB 1600MHz DDR3 240-pin Desktop Memory for $14.95 at, an $8.05 Savings! Valid through 11/25-30/2011 Black Friday Teaser: 32″ LCD HDTV 720p 60HzUnder $300 plus Free Shipping

25% off all Panasonic products on Black Friday weekend! 11/25 through 11/28 only.


Panasonic TC-L42D30 42″ screen size class LED HDTV. Was $1,049.95. Now $649.95 with Free Shipping!

Black Friday. $20 OFF $200. APWBLACK.

MR.BEER® Home Brewing Kits. America's #1 Home Brewing System. Makes a great gift!

Sirius XM Radio

BLKCY - Sale

Swiss Army Knives and Watches

American Greetings

336x280 4allmemory
chip_in_hand - upgrade

Panasonic SC-HC05 iPod Docking System with Built-In Bluetooth. Was $179.99. Now $99.99 with Free Shipping!

There will likely be more to come. Check back for more great deals!