Change you wanted, Change you have

more about “Change you wanted, Change you have“, posted with vodpod

 

 

Adolf Hitler’s, Obama’s SA members?

At least there is some fifty five million American voters not succumbed to the mindless, irrational euphoria of the misguided followers influenced by propaganda marketing of the word – CHANGE. This election spurs me to recall the ignorant Russian peasants who voted for Vladimir Lenin because of CHANGE. He’s different than the Tsar (George Bush). I dislike the Tsar, therefore I must love Lenin. Ya Lenin’s good! But he’s the leader of the radical Bolsheviks. Yes – but he’s different.

Or the German people crying for change in the Wiemar Republic. Hey, there is a one guy, Adolf Hitler. He hates that Wiemar Republic who’s responsible for the entire Great Depression. Oh what? He’s spewing hatred toward the Jews, democracy, wants to expand German borders into neighboring countries? He’s so – Different!

“George Bush, its your fault” we are experiencing the trough of the business cycle at the present moment. You caused this financial crisis that began twenty years ago because of the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977. As well as increased legislation enforced prior to your presidency that forces loan companies to lend to prospects who cannot possibly repay the insurmountable fund. Also “your responsible” for one Illinois community organizer (BHO) who orchestrated lobbyist to influence loan companies to lend to people unable to pay back the loans. Furthermore, I’m voting for some one different because unemployment reached 6%.

What? Some one is different than George Bush? Who – Barrack who? He supports government intervention similar to France who has 9.1% unemployment and other European countries (Germany) with 10%. Well then he is different . . . I’m voting for CHANGE!!! Bush is sympathetic to capitalism? Therefore I hate capitalism!

I’m not suggesting Obama is equivalent to Hitler or Lenin etc. But I am declaring that we have elected the most radical socialist president since Woodrow Wilson and actually in the history of America, because people – fueled by emotional hatred of the incumbent president and in an act of irrationality voted for man just because he, vowing to redistribute wealth, initiate a government take over of health care, raise the industrial tax, corporate tax, capital-gains tax, windfall tax, tax on the stock market and American’s 401 k-plans (significantly hurting the middle class), and vows to cut military funding by 25%, negotiate with foreign enemy’s without any previous conditions to resolve issues, supports Supreme Court Justices not on a strict constructional basis, but on the notion they would favor a specific class, once voted for the most radical form of gun control in American history, placing restrictions on even single-shot and double-barrel shotguns, voted against a bill preventing abortionist from murdering an already born child clinging to life after a botched abortion, disregards the 1st Amendment with his approval of the Fairness Doctrine, has associations with two terrorists, mentored by a communist poet, closely tied to numerous racists and Marxists, has so many radical friends it would disqualify him to be in the FBI, but oh no . . . not the presidency, claims he will “recreate America” -WHAT, desires to have a “Civilian Corps” of 200,00 men funded equally to the military (Why does this guy want his own personal army?), all because he has induced the majority of people with the flamboyant propaganda of the magical six letter word.

We, who are either genetically  immune to this garbage or just have enough common sense and education about the basics of the economy, must keep a close eye on this guy and the legislation flying off his desk displaying his signature, as well as Harry Reed’s and Nancy Pelosi’s. We must at least attempt to educate the apparently emotionally unhinged and uninformed voters. However, we can rejoice that an African American has became president. Yet we cannot allow the obstruction of our Constitution, the transformation of our economy to even more government controlled socialism.

You say Obama is the answer. What (cause no one knows) is the question. I asked a Barrack supporter why he is voting for him. “He will bring back America,” he stated unspecifically of course. Well I was unaware that America had went anywhere for some one to bring it back. I’ll tell you where it may be heading. America is about to take a vacation to France: Only then maybe, will they say “We want change” and hopefully vote to return to the United States.

Determine how some one votes just by asking them a two part question

How did the stock market crash in 1929 and what would have been the best way to solve the problem?

I find this fascinating, maybe just because I thought of it, but the results seem to be quit accurate.

The market crash came about because of the lack of consumer spending, plain and simple. It produced a bubble in our economy. Now  you may say whatever, it was the time of the roaring twenties. Consumers spent like crazy. But it also was the time of buy now – pay later. a large number of people all buying goods on credit without paying. The businesses producing large amount of goods without being compensated properly. Households did not spend enough on consumer goods and services and businesses did not spend enough investing in new capital.

Now the real kicker that has influenced the way numerous people’s vote is how to fix this problem.

This is such a great question to ask some one because it focuses on the main differences between the platforms of say the Democrat and Republican party. I have said it many times, the strife between these two parties is not a fight between liberal and conservative. Those words practically mean nothing, but could mean everything. It actually is a disagreement between capitalism and socialism. (If you listen to the democrat debates, they want an economy based on government spending while the Republicans primarily focus on an economy based on consumer spending.)

Now Classical economists, such as Adam Smith, David Ricardo, and John Stuart Mill (Three of the first classical economists) would state that the economy always will fix itself. Supply and Demand charts always prove this statement. If the government would  let the economy fluctuate appropriately then it will be able to function smoothly and maintain it’s equilibrium. What many people are not aware of is what really threw our economy in a manic depression with a rate of 25% unemployment was the Smoot – Hawley Tariff act. Economists warned the Democratic congress of the time not to pass an increased tariff, because every time a tariff has been enforced it decreases the gross domestic product (GDP). Never the less it was passed in 1930, and 1931 through 1933 was by far the worse time of the economic depression, thanks to the tariff.

John Maynard Keynes came up with a theory that the market economy could be cured quickly by government intervention. As you should now this was the choice taken by President Roosevelt. He chose to increase taxes on the American people, which in return gave the government the ability to increase government spending in order to lift our economy out of the depression quickly. Now John Keynes predicted that although this action would benefit our economy in the short term it would prompt two long-term problems. One of these is a slow rate of increase in real GDP – a slow pace of improvement in the standard of living. The other long-term problem is persistent inflation – a persistently rising cost of living. Keynes suspected that his cure for depression, increased government spending, might bring both inflation and a lower growth rate of real GDP. With a lower growth rate of real GDP, the pace of job creation would also slow.

Once the late 1960’s and throughout the 1970’s, Keynes’ predictions became reality. Inflation increased during the 1960’s and exploded in the 1970’s. Real GDP growth slowed, and the unemployment rate increased. Keynes is recorded saying “In the long run we’re all dead.” In the 1970’s, Keynes was dead, but others were alive and well but had to suffer the long-term consequences of Keynes’ advice. Our economy continued to suffer until the Reagan tax cuts were initiated, allowing our economy to be based on consumer spending again which lowered unemployment and increased the GDP.

If one answers by saying “it was an unfortunate incident, luckily Roosevelt saved our country, I love tax increases! Then odds are they vote for the guy with a “D” besides their name.

If one answers by saying “the government should have let our capitalist economy function freely, without the government intervention of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff act. Our economy would have corrected itself by establishing it’s equilibrium without the damaging long term effects such as high unemployment in the future.” The probability of them voting Republican is awfully high.

“The more you know – the less likely you will vote for a socialist!”

Democrats who like Ron Paul?

Is there any thing that could be this baffling? Some one explain this to me, why would a Democrat support some one who, besides his stance on the war,  goes against every thing the democratic platform stands for? Now the purpose of this post is not to rant against dems. There are many people who claim to be democrats because they do believe (for some strange reason)  in big government and raising taxes and will oppose any thing opposite to that. Yet there is a significant amount of people who say “I’m a democrat, but I support Ron Paul because even though he is a republican he is as liberal as any one!”

I’m going to step out on a limb her, and say I bet there are democrats who have no idea exactly what they are voting for nor why they call themselves liberals. Could it be that people only say they are liberals just because they heard a joke about Cheney or adore some one from Hollywood? Thats possible, ill tell you how I got there.

Ron Paul wants to bring America back to the principles envisioned by the framers of the U.S. Constitution: limited government, federalism, free trade and commerce. Notice the word “back,” you can’t be more conservative than that. It is not liberal! When they (confused dems) hear Ron Paul say he wants to dismiss the Federal Reserve and the income tax (because it’s unconstitutional) establish a limited government and decrease taxes. They say Yeah he’s cool lets do that. If thats what they want, why would they ever call themselves democrats?!! Your not liberal people, stop claiming to be! Furthermore he is pro-life, he stated he is “unshakable on abortion.” That doesn’t follow the democrat’s pro-choice agenda. He supports the 2nd Amendment, hence the Constitution, that doesn’t follow the democrat’s gun control agenda. He has stated “we must secure our borders now. . No amnesty!” That doesn’t support the democrat’s reform proposals which would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country.

So where am I wrong here? Do some people claim to be liberal, yet at the same time despise increased government intervention, increased taxes and infringements on our constitution? Could our government under go reform if people would stop getting their news on goofy talk shows, or for some – you-tube? Or is it that since he is opposes the war on Iraq people like his view on lower taxes, but if other republican president hopefuls speak of decreasing taxes they are scolded?

President Clinton Last Days in Office

 Want to know what else Clinton did, besides?

This is exacly how he will spend the next 8 years, 4 years, ehh.