Warnings from George Washington


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.

I noticed the other day while scouring liberal web sites that one liberal in typical liberal fashion asked, “What happened to the ‘small arms treaty’ conservatives have been so paranoid about? You know, BIG government wants to take your guns! It appears it’s just like all the other paranoia right-wings are attracted to … nothing to it!” Now, that’s paraphrasing, but here is the actual post:

Via: American Liberal Times

Whatever Happened To The So-Called “U.N. Small Arms Treaty?”

Not so long ago . . . in a land far far away . . . (The land where some “Righties” spend their days in a kind of smug self-satisfied fog of fantasy and delusion) . . . there was a lot of talk about how a proposed United Nations “Small Arms” treaty was going to be used as a mechanism to attack the Second Amendment Rights of American Citizens and which would also lead to confiscation of all privately-owned guns in These United States.
I am still waiting to see any of that paranoia come to pass.  What about you?
Anybody from the “Gubmint” come to collect YOUR guns yet?

To me it’s fascinating the way folks, especially liberals have the propensity to think that because something doesn’t happen right away … it isn’t going to.

In response to the above it appears the Small Arms Treaty is alive and well. I suggest folks read what Mr. John Kerry has been up to. Anyone who believes this guy deserves what they get.


The wonderful thing about America is that our founding fathers made it very difficult for anyone to destroy this nation rapidly. They built checks and balances into the Constitution so that no one person could rule. To take away our Constitutional rights is something that would have to be done incrementally:  Change the attitude of the people. Make them more afraid of “terrorists” than the government. Convince them to give up liberties so the government will make them feel safe. Convince law abiding people to allow the government to monitor their every move under the guise of “national security”.  Allow mass shootings to outrage the public so as to make gun control seem like “common sense”.

Just because something unsavory hasn’t actually happened yet does not mean it isn’t being worked on.



The president is supposed to be a natural born citizen so there would be no possibility of dual affinity. George Washington warned of foreign influence corrupting our republic. In his Farewell Address 1796 he said:

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.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.  (emphasis mine)

Liberalism has been chipping away in contrast to everything that President Washington warned about in his Farewell Address. I read all the time where liberals mock any politician, actually anyone who adheres to their religious beliefs. Especially those of the Christian faith. You know the “holier than thou” kind of mockery if a politician quotes the Bible.  I’ve also read many times where folks mock those who claim that morality is important in the character of one who would be president. Morality in a president has given way to having one who’s considered “cool” because he smoked crack and marijuana.

We’ve been inundated with the “separation of church and state” crap for decades now, until it’s reached the point where a child cannot even pass out candy canes to his school friends without some teacher stopping him, saying “Jesus isn’t allowed in this school!”

This is a small example of the decline in America’s greatness, a greatness that George Washington cautioned could be lost when national morality excludes religious principle.

Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

To those who blindly follow those who speak of patriotism and love for America, but in deed weaken the moral values, economic structure and the might of our military, be not deceived. We were warned, now centuries ago that insidious forces from without and from within will attempt to weaken this nation to the point of surrendering the sovereignty of the United States:

The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed … (emphasis mine)

And finally folks, we see every day the Constitution being ignored and usurped by the president and the members of Congress do nothing. Yea, they are complicit, and many partakers in the destruction of this nation. We citizens have allowed the government far too much power over us. I think Washington informs us who really should be in charge …

The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.

Our established government does not have the power to keep us from establishing another, and we have the right to expel those who violate the Constitution.

Original Post:  Cry and Howl


Warning: ObamaCare Tax Hikes Strike in 2013


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.

My opposition to the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare)  was based on the fact that it used the state to seize property from citizens and use that property to abort babies and encourage old people to die already all while lessening an individuals choices in their own healthcare. Because of its attack on life, liberty, and property rights, I opposed it, in addition to believing that it was unconstitutional and unaffordable. It remains all of these and more, and in addition billions of very real tax hikes hit a range of Americans starting in 2013, which are going to cost my family several thousand dollars.

From Forbes article In 2013, Millions Of Americans Face Obamacare Tax Hikes:

…On January 1, 2013, a 2.3-percent excise tax on the total revenues of medical-device companies — regardless of whether they turn a profit or suffer a loss — will take effect. The tax will hit everything they sell, from x-ray machines and pacemakers to surgical tools and artificial hips. The levy could extract as much as $29 billion over the next 10 years.

That money will have to come from somewhere; device firms won’t simply swallow the tab. So they’ll likely raise prices for patients and slash their workforces. In fact, economists at the Manhattan Institute project that the tax could eliminate as many as 43,000 jobs — and over $3.5 billion in employee compensation….

…Because of the tax, medical-device firms will also have less money to invest in research and development. My colleague Benjamin Zycher estimates that the industry will scale back investment in new products by 10 percent through 2020. That translates to a $2-billion decrease per year…

…Individuals with annual incomes higher than $200,000 and couples who make more than $250,000 a year will face two new taxes — a 0.9-percent increase in the 1.45-percent Medicare levy on earnings above those income thresholds and a new 3.8-percent tax on investment income. Together, these two taxes are expected to raise about $318 billion over the next decade — roughly half of the law’s new tax revenue.

The structure of these taxes penalizes married couples in particular. According to the New York Times, two unmarried singles who made $200,000 each would not owe any additional Medicare tax. But if they were married, they’d owe $1,350.

Meanwhile, the 3.8-percent tax on unearned income, like capital gains, dividends, and interest, will discourage saving and investment

…The law raises the floor for the deduction of medical expenses, from 7.5 percent of income to 10 percent. So only expenses beyond 10 percent of a person’s income will be deductible. This change could add hundreds of dollars to the tax bills of those struggling with major medical bills.

Obamacare also halves the maximum contribution to flexible spending accounts (FSAs), from $5,000 to $2,500. Many consumers use FSAs to cover routine medical expenses, like vision care, orthodontia, and prescription drugs….

…By neutering FSAs, Obamacare deprives patients of control over their own health care — and puts insurers and government in the driver’s seat. Instead of paying for routine care with pre-tax dollars, individuals will have to purchase expensive insurance that covers routine care. In the end, patients may end up paying more

My family uses our FSA to cover costs of sending our children to school so that we can go to work. We won’t have nearly as much money to work with in 2013- personally this will cost my family between $500-$1000 that will be cut from investments or savings for college for our children- thank you Obarfo.

Although it is possible that Obamacare may result in some good for our nation, we know for a fact that it will result in our nation going farther in debt, will result in jobs being lost, will result in less saving and investment, will result in increased fees and taxes on rich and poor alike, and will result in health care being more expensive for everyone in America.

Possibility of small gain for America, certainty of massive losses for America = Obamacare.

Original Post:  A Conservative Teacher


John Adams Predicted the Current Mess


The Founders, like John Adams, not only understood the flaws of prior political systems, but they also were keen observers of human nature.  Bob Belvedere, from TCOTS, found and posted the following quote from John Adams…

I just read the whole section the quote was taken from and have decided to post it here because it not only speaks to the aforementioned Right, but is prophetic in it’s wisdom:

Suppose a nation, rich and poor, high and low, ten millions in number, all assembled together; not more than one or two millions will have lands, houses, or any personal property; if we take into the account the women and children, or even if we leave them out of the question, a great majority of every nation is wholly destitute of property, except a small quantity of clothes, and a few trifles of other movables. Would Mr. Nedham be responsible that, if all were to be decided by a vote of the majority, the eight or nine millions who have no property, would not think of usurping over the rights of the one or two millions who have? Property is surely a right of mankind as really as liberty. Perhaps, at first, prejudice, habit, shame or fear, principle or religion, would restrain the poor from attacking the rich, and the idle from usurping on the industrious; but the time would not be long before courage and enterprise would come, and pretexts be invented by degrees, to countenance the majority in dividing all the property among them, or at least, in sharing it equally with its present possessors. Debts would be abolished first; taxes laid heavy on the rich, and not at all on the others; and at last a downright equal division of every thing be demanded, and voted. What would be the consequence of this? The idle, the vicious, the intemperate, would rush into the utmost extravagance of debauchery, sell and spend all their share, and then demand a new division of those who purchased from them. The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If “Thou shalt not covet,” and “Thou shalt not steal,” were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free.

If this does not describe much of our currently political and cultural rot, I do not know what does.  Those that scoff at the Founders state that they were a product of an agrarian society.  They were, and it frankly doesn’t matter a bit.  You see, our technology may change, our culture may evolve, or de-evolve, as the case may be.  But, people are the constant, and they do not change.  I have always made the point that we could go back in time to a medieval village.  The setting and activities would be drastically different, but the people could be understood.  There would be flirts, thieves, bullies, the bullied, tramps, the pious, the attention seekers, the opportunists, the gossips, and any other label that you could think of.  They wouldn’t have FaceBook, but they’d have the market.  They wouldn’t gather at the water cooler, but at the well. But at any rate, even though the environment would be radically different, the behavior patterns would be the same.  And so as it was then, it is now.  John Adams wasn’t necessarily a visionary, but he did know people, and what he predicted then, is happening now.


Environmentalists See Genghis Khan as Hero Because of the Millions he Killed?


Throughout the history of the world, there have been many religions and movements that have been based around the fact that the world was once perfect before people spoiled it. Followers of these religions believe that mankind is evil and the source of corruption in society, and that society would be better if corrupted man were killed or removed from society. This hatred for people leads these groups and religions to push for policies that limit people and attack what it means to be person

These haters of people attack the right to life by pushing for abortion and a casual relationship with capital punishment, they attack the right to live in freedom by taking choices and decisions away from people and giving this power to the elites who believe that they have removed their own corruption and evilness through various rites or beliefs, and they attempt to destroy the right of people to keep and earn property by taking their wealth from those they view as evil and keeping it for themselves.

This hatred of what it means to be a person- the rights to life, liberty, and private property rights- for many years has been battled by Greek philosophy, Christianity, natural rights theories, and the United States of America. But in recent years, environmentalists discovered a unique way to attack people and push for hatred of of living on others- they will make the very breath of living man evil and preach that the only way cure the perfect world from the evil of man is to stop the production of carbon dioxide.

If the production of carbon dioxide is wrong and evil and hurts the environment, then it should naturally follow that mankind, which breathes out carbon dioxide with every breath, is also wrong and hurting the environment. And therefore to restoreMother Earth to her perfect state before man, these haters of people created models that attempt to show the effect of carbon dioxide on the global atmosphere and through these models push policies that limit people- that push for one-child or no-child policies in developing nations, that limit the production of food and resources so that many starve and die, that limit expansion of industry and energy production so that we all may be poorer, and to attempt to seize property and cause its more inefficient distribution so that life is lessened.

These models are proven wrong over and over, and other processes that better explain the natural functions of the globe are ignored and suppressed, because these people desire in their hearts someone who will kill many millions of people and make the world a better place by doing so. These environmentalists- the real ones who work on the inner circle, not the people who are just innocent pawns in their game- desire someone like Genghis Khan, who is considered by some to be history’s greenest conqueror.

Genghis Khan, you see, did what environmentalists and haters of life want- he killed many people and in doing so reduced global emissions of carbon dioxide and left great areas of land so depopulated that they reverted once again to nature:

Genghis Khan’s Mongol invasion in the 13th and 14th centuries was so vast that it may have been the first instance in history of a single culture causing man-made climate change, according to new research out of theCarnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology, reports Mongabay.com.

Unlike modern day climate change, however, the Mongol invasion cooled the planet, effectively scrubbing around 700 million tons of carbon from the atmosphere.

So how did Genghis Khan, one of history’s cruelest conquerors, earn such a glowing environmental report card? The reality may be a bit difficult for today’s environmentalists to stomach, but Khan did it the same way he built his empire — with a high body count.

Over the course of the century and a half run of the Mongol Empire, about 22 percent of the world’s total land area had been conquered and an estimated 40 million people were slaughtered by the horse-driven, bow-wielding hordes. Depopulation over such a large swathe of land meant that countless numbers of cultivated fields eventually returned to forests.

In other words, one effect of Genghis Khan’s unrelenting invasion was widespread reforestation, and the re-growth of those forests meant that more carbon could be absorbed from the atmosphere.

According to the research, other events that were ‘good for the environment’ and that ‘scrubbed the world’ of the breath of man were “the Black Death in Europe, the fall of China’s Ming Dynasty and the conquest of the Americas.” Environmentalists and those who support their anti-people policies- higher taxes on energy production, restrictive rules on development of land, removing land from development, diverting resources from productive industries into unproductive industries, centralizing power under elites, pushing for less children to be born, causing thousands to starve or die of environmental causes with their war on food production and industry in third world nations, etc- desire these sorts of events and want to cause more of them. It is in the death and destruction of man that they find success for their causes.

Though Genghis Khan’s legacy as one of the world’s cruelest conquerors isn’t likely to change because of the unintended “green” consequences of his invasions, Pongratz hopes that her research can lead to land-use changes that someday might alter how future historians rate our environmental impact.

“Based on the knowledge we have gained from the past, we are now in a position to make land-use decisions that will diminish our impact on climate and the carbon cycle. We cannot ignore the knowledge we have gained,” she said.

We cannot ignore the stated goals of these environmentalists and those who support them like Barack Obama and Al Gore- ‘land-use’ policies that include the death of mankind, except for the elites who have been saved through their enlightenment and the sacrifices they make on the alter of their green god.

Original Post: A Conservative Teacher


A Tale of Two Coverages: Leftist Sites Omit Occupy Oakland Vandalism and Property Destruction UPDATE: More Destruction, and Here There be Trolls


Well, the hard left, in the form of the Occupods, continue to expose themselves.  And, as it unfolds, we see the MSM, as well as the left blogs and sites, continue to cover for them.  A great example is in the coverage of the Occupy Oakland General Strike.  Here is an excerpt from Fire Dog Lake..

UPDATE: Here’s an eyewitness report from the protest, which has morphed into a march up Broadway. They’re chanting “Shout it out, without a doubt, banks took trillions to kick folks out.”

UPDATE II: Mike Konczal has pictures of Men’s Wearhouse and the Grand Lake Theater, both closed today in solidarity with the strike.

UPDATE III: Occupy Oakland claims on Twitter that a wildcat strike has knocked out the Port of Oakland already. Also, they say that 5,000 people are marching in downtown Oakland. Other reports are smaller.

UPDATE IV: Some pics from the morning general assembly and march:

UPDATE V: Some more from today:

• Activists shut down a local Citibank.

• Around 360 teachers didn’t show up for work in Oakland today. That’s about 18% of the total workforce.

• A report from the LA Times.

OK, then, sounds all nice and peaceful, right?

Here is some coverage from The Atlantic

Occupy Oakland has called for a city-wide strike and rally on Wednesday to protest income inequality, and several businesses, including Men’s Wearhouse and the Grand Lake movie theater,have closed their doors in support. Oakland Tribune reporter Matt O’Brien tweeted the above photo of the shuttered men’s clothing store.

The store’s decision will likely meet with approval from the corporate HQ: George Zimmer, founder and chairman of Men’s Wearhouse, has repeatedly donated to Democratic candidates in multiple election cycles, including progressives like 2004 presidential candidate Howard Dean and Rep. Barbara Lee (Calif.).

Note to Self: NEVER spend a dime at the Men’s Wearhouse.

Now, let’s see what really happened, courtesy of Michelle Malkin…

Various sympathizers and observers are tweeting live. Mother Jones reports that the Oakland Whole Foods store — after being falsely accused of threatening to punish workers who walked out on the job today — has been vandalized.

One person on scene writes: “Straight into window breaking and street furniture smashing at whole foods. #generalstrike #occupyoaklandwindow breaking and street furniture smashing at whole foods.”

Whole Foods is defending itself online. To no avail.

A big mob dressed in black is roaming around the streets. They’ve sprayed graffiti on the walls of businesses.

Wells Fargo windows have also been reportedly smashed.

Chase Bank vandalized.

Maybe the city enablers will use federal stimulus money to clean it up.

Overheard on livestream: Occupier sneers: “They can afford new windows.”

It seems that the lefties aren’t telling the whole story.  That’s alright though, we will.

Is it any wonder leftists want to control internet content-in order to make inconvenient truths go away?

And, should these businesses sue the Occupod Organizers for the damage caused?  If there are any legal experts out there, kindly chime in on that one.

UPDATE: We have some troll comments, which I let through, for your amusement.

Also, we have some more pics and footage…

Isn’t that a nice peaceful protest?  Just like the Tea Parties, right?

Here are some pictures…

And your kids are still in public school why?

Well, at least there  aren’t Communists there, right?

I wonder what the trolls have to say about that?

Update H/T: Big Government, and Big Government
Update II: Our Troll is persistent, so why not give him more evidence to deny?


I have more, and more are being released all the time, but trolls are trolls.  As Bezmonev teaches, “access to true information does not matter any more.”  Out troll is proving that to be true.

To show the pattern of vandalism and destruction at leftist protests, here is a video that I did back in 2009…

I can’t see how this is any different.

Image H/T: Michelle Malkin


Obama is Wrong: You Do Have an Inherent Right to Property


In a recent interview with ABC, President Barack Obama was talking about the fee that Bank of America believes is now necessary to charge customers because of recent changes to bank card fees imposed by Democrats in the Dodd-Frank bill’:

“This is exactly why we need this Consumer Finance Protection Bureauthat we set up that is ready to go,” he said. “… (petty government bureaucrats) can stop (the fees being charged by private banks) because if (petty government bureaucrats) say to the banks, ‘You don’t have some inherent right just to – you know, get a certain amount of profit. If your customers – are being mistreated. That you have to treat them fairly and transparently.”

I made some changes- I removed the word ‘you’ that Obama used and replaced it with what I thought he meant, and I removed the word ‘it’ and replaced it with what the ‘it’ was.

As you can see from this statement, the President does not believe that privately owned and operated companies in the United States have an inherent right to create wealth. He believes that wealth did not exist before the government was around and does not exist after government is not around- if Obama and a bunch of hard workers landed on a deserted island that was in a state of nature, he would believe that he would be morally correct to take the fruits of the labor of others since they have no inherent right to what their own labor produces. Obama thinks that government has the right to take from others, whether they created that wealth through their own actions or not, because he thinks that wealth and prosperity is created and sustained by government policies, even though all experience hath shown that this is incorrect.

America was founded on different ideals- our nation was founded on the idea that property existed before the government and will continue to exist after government, and that even in a state of nature with no government, people do have an inherent fundamental natural right to the property that they create through their actions. If a bank charges a fee and gets a profit from this, they have every right to keep that profit, as it is their inherent natural right to create and keep property in our nation, free from government intervention and threats of confiscation. Only in tyrannical governments are the rights of life, liberty, and property not protected, and tyrannical governments then are those which have less happy lives, less free people, and are always considerably poorer in property than those nations which have embraced natural rights philosophy like our founding fathers did.

As we all know, in order to support yourself through reason and stay alive in a society, you must be able to own and use the product of your labor- you must be able to create wealth and keep that wealth in order to live and live free. If the tools of your survival and the products of your hard work are subject to random confiscation by the Obama administration, then your life also becomes subject to possible random destruction- or to put it another way, the tyrannical nature of the Obama administration to target businesses as ‘enemies’ is making our nation more poor and bit by bit making your life more miserable and less rich in goods and happiness and freedom.

Obama is increasingly by his own statements demonstrating his unfitness for the office of President of the United States of America; 2012 can’t come fast enough to get rid of this guy.

Original Post:  A Conservative Teacher