Archive for socialism


Posted in Congress, Current Events, Health Care, Politics, SCOTUS, Tea-Party, The Coming Police State, Unite Against DC with tags , , , , , , , on June 29, 2012 by toptruth

Yesterday the supreme court ruled Obama’s healthcare reform constitutional. I wish I could feign surprise but I knew this would happen. Giving the rubber stamp to the disastrous legislation was a fata complete. The individual mandate is just the beginning of what is wrong with the bill. From taking over a completely unrelated industry so the could hide the real costs to death panels and cutting medicare obamacare is a cruel hoax. This bill is a fascist tax paid to private interests designed to expand government power, limit freedom and implement neo eugenics. Unfortunately most of us fell into the trap and assumed the bill would be socialism. The sad truth is that socialism would be a huge improvement for Obamacare since it’s actually far worse.

Look at all the other federal programs supposedly designed to create a safety net for the poor and elderly. Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security have all been a means by which the federal government has purchased votes and stolen from the people. Mismanaged by design we have become debt slaves and Obamacare will only drag us deeper into a dark abyss    of nanny state control freak hell.

Romney will not save us, republicants will not stop the ship from sinking. We need to implement social programs and legislation from a local level or we will become serfs. The federal government is out of control and must be brought to its knees through a peaceful revolution. This means uniting people around limited government and states rights. We must not let the divide and conquer hypnosis continue.

Dissolve the DHS

Destroy the DEA

Dismantle the DOE

Debunk the IRS

De-bage the ATF

Demand Freedom and Decapitate Tyranny.



More Government Control!? Conspiracy Theory?

Posted in Conspiracy theory?, Economics, End The Fed, Politics, Unite Against DC with tags , , , , , , , , , , on September 11, 2010 by toptruth

I can understand why from a cursory glance some advocate more government control. We see Wall St and global corporations smothering the free market and oppressing the people. The problem is that these interests control the government. We already have an endless panopticon of government controls. The SEC was warned for a decade about Bernie Madoff. The Fed was warned in 99 by a head regulator and personal friend of Hillary Clinton about the derivatives bubble, It was covered up. This is documented in a PBS movie called “warning” which is available for instant watching on Netflix. This is just one reason why even TIME magazine placed Clinton ahead of Bush in blame for the financial collapse.

Dont you see? The monied interests control our government. The US federal government is operating under emergency powers and is essentially in a controlled bankruptcy which is managed by our PRIVATE central bank. This bank is controlled by old world interests revolving around The Rothschild family and British imperialists.

Conspiracy Theory? What about the theory of relativity? Hasnt the establishment always denied untill the bitter end every ground breaking “theory”?   

Please click on the cover art for the Obama Deception and Fall of the Republic to watch these documentaries free on UTube. **located in the second column on the right hand side of my home page**

The New Plan! Americans Unite!

Posted in Congress, Current Events, Economics, Health Care, Tea Party Racism? with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on March 27, 2010 by toptruth

The message has been growing.

There IS consensus in America, We just dont know it yet. WAKE UP! And read this!

Everybody is right and everybody is wrong! Dont you see. I’ve been telling you. Its ALL theatre!

It is time to unite the country around libertarian values. restore the republic. We have the power. At this point everybody agrees that we need states rights. America is beautiful because you can live in California in your twenties, New York in your thirties and North Carolina in your 60’s.

If you dont love that about this country and you crave uniformity and  subjugation, I suggest you move to Cuba.

Imagine if the president worked with the governors to deal with the unique problems of each state?

Imagine if our leaders, instead of confiscating our wealth, made it easier for us to give of it?

Imagine if instead of mixing charity and taxation to the point that you can’t even commit an act of civil disobedience they allowed us to give to charity every week with or instead of withholding pre-tax?

What would happen?! Ask yourself!

What would happen if this country saw REAL hope, REAL change, And Real Charity.

Can you see us uniting? 

I can. It is time, I have been watching. I do not consent to this charade.

In november, we will vote out ever single politician who is non-responsive.

A public servant should actively seek out the opinions of his or her constituents. The personal opinions and ideology held by those public servants should frame only the interactions with constituents.

 On the floor or as a matter of public policy actions should reflect some semblance of moderate representation, wile following the constitution.  This is what our founders meant by the “consent of the governed”.

We will vote republican, for now. After that we should all put everybody’s feet to the fire. That means you get involved. That means that you research ALL view points in a relentless quest to understand and identify every aspect of the political agenda.

I understand you are busy and stressed. The fact is that you are that way because the structure is dissending into chaos. I say that the methods of direct government have been usurped. It’s time to reset the republic.

If the Republicans, Independents and 3rd party candidates we elect in November do not become responsive than we vote for somebody else.

We have been in this paradigm wear by which we elect the lessor of two evils because we are afraid. It is that way because we are alone. Alone in our little bubbles. I have been there. It’s okay. If we unite and connect, we can form a consesus without any particular medium or party affiliations. We will know who our neighbors are going to vote for because we talked to them.

The taboo of discussing politics in public life must be at least temporarily suspended. One thing is absolutely undeniably certain. The decisions we make, as towns, states and a country over the next few years will shape the planet in ways some of us may not yet imagine.

I am begging you to be as informed as possible. Even if you are certain your political counterparts are wrong you MUST actively seek to understand their position. ‘

‘Question with boldness even the very existence of God, for if he be real he must value honest debate over blind faith  ‘ -unknown founder

What IS Obamunism?

Posted in Congress, Current Events, Obama; dictator to be., The Coming Police State with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 25, 2010 by toptruth

Obamunism will be a wonderfull mixture of all these things wrapped in a charming nicotene stained smile.

slav·er·y   /ˈsleɪvəri, ˈsleɪvri/  Show Spelled[sley-vuh-ree, sleyv-ree]  Show IPA
1.the condition of a slave; bondage.
2.the keeping of slaves as a practice or institution.
3.a state of subjection like that of a slave: He was kept in slavery by drugs.
4.severe toil; drudgery.

so·cial·ism   /ˈsoʊʃəˌlɪzəm/  Show Spelled[soh-shuh-liz-uhm]  Show IPA
1.a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2.procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3.(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
Use socialism in a Sentence
co·mu·nism   /ˈkɒmyəˌnɪzəm/  Show Spelled[kom-yuh-niz-uhm]  Show IPA
1.a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
2.(often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
3.(initial capital letter) the principles and practices of the Communist party.

Main Entry: plu·toc·ra·cy
Pronunciation: \plü-ˈtä-krə-sē\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural plu·toc·ra·cies
Etymology: Greek ploutokratia, from ploutos wealth; akin to Greek plein to sail, float — more at flow
Date: 1652
1 : government by the wealthy
2 : a controlling class of the wealthy

— plu·to·crat  \ˈplü-tə-ˌkrat\ noun

— plu·to·crat·ic  \ˌplü-tə-ˈkra-tik\ adjective

— plu·to·crat·i·cal·ly  \-ti-k(ə-)lē\ adverb

Main Entry: cor·po·rat·ism
Pronunciation: \ˈkȯr-p(ə-)rə-ˌti-zəm\
Function: noun
Date: 1890
: the organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction

— cor·po·rat·ist  \-p(ə-)rə-tist\ adjective
Main Entry: tyr·an·ny
Pronunciation: \ˈtir-ə-nē\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural tyr·an·nies
Etymology: Middle English tyrannie, from Middle French, from Medieval Latin tyrannia, from Latin tyrannus tyrant
Date: 14th century
1 : oppressive power <every form of tyranny over the mind of man — Thomas Jefferson>; especially : oppressive power exerted by government <the tyranny of a police state>
2 a : a government in which absolute power is vested in a single ruler; especially : one characteristic of an ancient Greek city-state b : the office, authority, and administration of a tyrant
3 : a rigorous condition imposed by some outside agency or force <living under the tyranny of the clock — Dixon Wecter>
4 : a tyrannical act <workers who had suffered tyrannies>

Main Entry: trea·son
Pronunciation: \ˈtrē-zən\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English tresoun, from Anglo-French traisun, from Latin tradition-, traditio act of handing over, from tradere to hand over, betray — more at traitor
Date: 13th century
1 : the betrayal of a trust : treachery
2 : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign’s family

High Crimes; From Wikipedia
High crimes and misdemeanors is a phrase from Section 4 of Article Two of the United States Constitution: “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

“High” in the legal parlance of the 18th century means “against the State”. A high crime is one which seeks the overthrow of the country, which gives aid or comfort to its enemies, or which injures the country to the profit of an individual or group. In democracies and similar societies it also includes crimes which attempt to alter the outcome of elections.
Main Entry: mis·de·mean·or
Pronunciation: \-di-ˈmē-nər\
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
1 : a crime less serious than a felony
2 : misdeed

Just incase you only believe the mainstream

Posted in Congress, Current Events, Economics, Health Care with tags , , , , , , , , , , on March 24, 2010 by toptruth

 FACT CHECK: Spinning the new health care law

Associated Press Writer
 WASHINGTON (AP) — The tumultuous health care debate that brought you death panels and socialism has spun off a catalog of popular myths that will keep growing as President Barack Obama and all sides battle toward the midterm elections this fall.

At a White House signing ceremony Tuesday, Obama ventured the hope that Americans on all sides will judge the legislation for what it actually says and does. “When I sign this bill,” he declared, “all of the overheated rhetoric over reform will finally confront the reality of reform.”

Wishful thinking, Mr. President.

Facts are stubborn, the saying goes. But myths about the legislation are likely to persist as well. And a lot of people don’t agree on which is which.

“People have taken away from the debate a number of beliefs about the bill that are very difficult to shake based on objective reports,” said Robert Blendon, a Harvard public health professor who follows opinion trends. “There is enough skepticism out there that questions about how it’s going to help the country are likely to continue.”

Here’s a look at some of the myths and realities, from both sides of the issue:

– Obama has put the nation on a slippery slope toward socialism.

Hello? Government’s role in health care has been steadily growing since Medicare and Medicaid were established 45 years ago. Even if Republicans were to take control of Washington and repeal this bill, government would still be on track to pick up more than half the nation’s health care tab by 2012, according to a report last month from Medicare.

“The Republican myth is that the government is for the first time going to take over the health care sector,” said economist Joe Antos of the business-oriented American Enterprise Institute. “The takeover was probably largely accomplished in 1965 with the creation of Medicare and Medicaid. Since the early days, Medicare has called the shots on a lot of policy issues that private insurance fell in line with.”

Still, the new law will undoubtedly expand the government’s influence. Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., warned Tuesday it will lead to the “quasi-nationalization of the health industry.”

Underline “quasi.” Democrats dropped their idea of a government insurance plan to compete with private carriers. So any “socialization” will be channeled through Wellpoint, UnitedHealthcare and other private insurance giants.

– Health care overhaul is going to lower your health insurance premiums.

Obama says that once new competitive insurance markets open for business, in 2014, individuals buying coverage comparable to what they have today will pay 14-20 percent less. Family coverage costs about $13,400 a year, so that could be real money.

But the president’s assurance is based on a selective reading of a Congressional Budget Office report that found most individuals would probably buy better, more expensive coverage than what’s available today.

And Obama skips over an important caveat: The budget office didn’t say premiums would be lower than currently. It said premiums for some people would be lower than they would have been without the bill. Premiums for others would be higher.

With the U.S. population getting older, and medical science pushing the technological envelope, there’s very little reason to think premiums will go down. The best Obama can hope for is to slow the pace of increases.

– You will be forced to pay for other people’s abortions.

Only if you join a health insurance plan that covers abortion. In that case, the costs of paying for abortions would be spread over all the enrollees in the plan – no differently from how other medical procedures are handled, except a policyholder would have to write a separate check for it.

Timothy Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee University, said people who don’t want to pay for abortion could simply pick a plan that doesn’t offer it.

There would definitely be a demand for such plans, and not just from people with moral objections. Single men and older women would have no reason to pay an extra premium for abortion coverage.

– The Democratic bill will lead to government health care rationing.

The legislation sets up a research center to compare the effectiveness of medical treatments, and critics fear that bureaucrats will start issuing justifications for denying patients access to the latest medical technology.

Republicans as well as Democrats had previously called for a major investment in such research to help make sense of which kinds of treatments, medications and technologies are worth the cost.

The legislation specifies that the research findings cannot be used to impose mandates, guidelines or recommendations for payment, coverage, or treatment – or used to deny coverage.

Acceptance of the research is likely to be slow in coming, and the medical community – not government and insurance companies – will probably take the lead in vetting it.

– The American people have already rejected Obamacare.

Although some polls show a majority oppose the bill, most surveys find the public about evenly divided. Blendon, the public opinion expert, believes it’s premature to say that the public has rejected it. Curiously, many individual components – doing away with insurance denials for pre-existing conditions, tax credits to help pay premiums, insurance purchasing pools – are widely popular.

Obama reads those findings to mean that Democrats have a chance to turn around public opinion, and he’s embarking on a campaign to sell the bill.

– The legislation will save Medicare from bankruptcy.

Democrats say the bill – even as it cuts Medicare to pay for expanded coverage for working families – will add at least nine years of solvency to the program’s giant hospital insurance trust fund, now projected to be exhausted in 2017.

Technically that’s true – but only on paper.

Savings from the Medicare cuts will be invested in government IOUs, like any other trust fund surplus. The special Treasury securities count as an asset on Medicare’s books – making the program’s precarious financial situation seem more reassuring. But the government will spend the actual money. And when time comes for Medicare to redeem the IOUs, lawmakers will have to scramble to come up with the cash.

The key point is that the Medicare savings will be received by the government only once, the Congressional Budget Office said, “so they cannot be set aside to pay for future Medicare spending and, at the same time, pay for current spending … on other programs.”

© 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

Click here for copyright permissions!

Copyright 2008 Associated Press

Jonathan Gruber and Health Care tricks Exposed

Posted in Congress, Economics, Health Care with tags , , , , , , on March 19, 2010 by toptruth

Jonathan Gruber  was on c-span gracefully dancing around the truth behind this “health care reform” bill. I would love to take the Pepsi challenge with this guy. Low and behold there was an economist in the room. A young student holding back tears tried to explain to Mr.Gruber that we could not afford this bill.

Gruber responded to questions earlier about costs by saying that costs should be going up. “Why not spend 40% of GDP on health care?”. He said he wanted to quell expectations of cost savings because we should expect them to rise no matter what.

Than after this young man pointed out the fiscal insanity he reverted course and started pushing costs savings again. Saying costs per person would go down. Except he’s including in that the subsidy. Of course the people getting the subsidy are paying less. meanwhile everyone else pays more.

As if that wasnt enough this bill claims to reduce the deficit by taking over the private school loan business. This is so fascistic. All the government controlled corporations have got to go. They put this in there specifically to make the bill look like its spending less. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HEALTHCARE!

AND IT GETS WORSE. Now its come out that all this was planned from the begining. George Soros suprise surprise gave the marching orders on this little trick months ago.

Progressives and democrats love to say that big insurance companies are driving this debate. They couldn’t possibly be more naïve. The insurers got on board right away. They love the idea of the IRS running around demanding people buy more insurance. It is so obvious.

Mostly I want to know I’ll have a bed to die in and enough drugs to make it as painless as possible. I pay my premiums. I paid them even when I was self-employed. I am not however interested in this obsession with health care coverage. The government demanding I have coverage to pay for every conceivable product is tyrannical.  

If I can’t pay that’s life. That’s freedom bro, Love it or Leave it. I don’t want any charity from government for then you are beholden. meanwhile all these charity’s are bankrupting us. And government gets more powerful and the people loaning them money on are behalf (mostly enemy’s) are getting richer.  

Most of the reason healthcare costs are going up is because the federal government keeps cutting reimbursement rates for Medicare and Medicaid payments. This forces doctors to raise rates for everyone else. It is in fact governments role in healthcare that has made costs rise. Why else do you think we pay $50 for an aspirin? because the 10 people before us didnt pay.

This government has said that healthcare by law cannot be denied to people. How can you sell a product that must by law be given away? You cant. This is why the system is collapsing.



Posted in Congress, Current Events, Health Care, Obama; dictator to be., The Coming Police State with tags , , , on March 18, 2010 by toptruth

If I must purchase Health Care to be a citizen in good standing than I am not a free man. Progressives will tell you that morally we must not only buy healthcare for the poor but we  must be compelled to pay for our own if we are not deemed poor enough.

In one piece of legislation they force us to buy a product and at the very same time force us to buy that product for others. It is the very definition of hypocrisy. It is un-american, un-constitutional and absolutely anti-freedom.

If this bill passes there is not a free man in this country and we will officially live under a tyrannical police state.

This is not an exaggeration. Constitutional scholars and federal judges agree.

Your grandparents fled Europe and South America to get away from this kind of Government.

Talk to some Cubans, talk to some recent immigrants from Venezuela.

Barack Obama was raised by radical Marxists, Socialists and Communists. He states in his book that he “sought out the marxist professors”.

What is wrong with us? Do we not understand the diffearence between charity and theft? Charity and Government?

%d bloggers like this: