Tuesday, April 12, 2011

How To Impress Your Friends & Neighbors

This is not about tips for garnering admiration and respect. The subject is ObamaCare and an historic definition of the word impress. This definition figures prominently in American history: “the act of compelling men into a navy by force and without notice.” The profession involved now is different but the resulting affront to liberty is the same.

Beginning in the mid 1700’s, as the pre-revolutionary colonies became established and thriving, sea trade was big business. Even trade between the colonies was cheaper if done by shipping rather than traveling overland. The number of seamen combined with readily available timber helped make the American colonies a ship-building dynamo. The large number of experienced seamen affected colonial sailors negatively when they became targets of British oppression. According to historian Daniel P. Murphy of Hanover College, due to “the British policy of forcibly impressing sailors into the British navy, American seamen were overwhelmingly Patriot in their sympathies.”

Colonial sailors were being impressed—i.e., forced to serve in the British navy. While these sailors did receive pay, it was not as profitable as working in the lucrative free market shipping trade. The northern colonies, those originally established for religious reasons, were also advocates of free market ideas. These New England sailors, solidly educated in the Bible, bristled at the idea of a man reaping the benefits of the labor of another through slavery. Therefore, in the northern colonies citizens particularly felt the yoke of oppression and tyranny of impression. Needless to say, this practice was seen as arbitrary abuse of power among colonials steeped in John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government (1690):

On Slavery: Sec. 22. THE natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but to have only the law of nature for his rule. The liberty of man, in society, is to be under no other legislative power, but that established, by consent, in the commonwealth; nor under the dominion of any will, or restraint of any law, but what that legislative shall enact, according to the trust put in it. Freedom then is not what Sir Robert Filmer tells us, Observations, A. 55. a liberty for every one to do what he lists, to live as he pleases, and not to be tied by any laws: but freedom of men under government is, to have a standing rule to live by, common to every one of that society, and made by the legislative power erected in it; a liberty to follow my own will in all things, where the rule prescribes not; and not to be subject to the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, arbitrary will of another man: as freedom of nature is, to be under no other restraint but the law of nature. [emphasis added]

The practice of impressing colonial sailors is listed in the abuses section of the Declaration of Independence which was boldly signed by Boston resident John Hancock, a free market shipping entrepreneur:

“He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.”

So devoutly were the religious based northern colonies against slavery that unity of the colonies in their rebellion was under threat, prompting the famous Ben Franklin political cartoon of the divided snake with the caption Join, Or Die. The terms Liberty, Freedom, and Independence as well as natural rights and equality were gifts from God, and God was honored not only for being our Creator, but also because of His Word and His redemptive plan to restore Man into relationship with Himself. Those revolutionary colonials and the citizens of American today share the experience known as the joy of Christian Liberty. These Christians consider slavery anathema, although it is the nature of man to defend the most inhumane practices with out-of-context Scripture.

And so today we have Leftist theologians defending ObamaCare because it is perceived as the duty of government to coerce its citizens to be charitable to one another and then impress citizens in the Health Care Industry to provide that care. That these Leftists are advocating a State Church is undeniable, but their theological defense of ObamaCare is fatally flawed. Their biblical defense reverses the message of the prophets and The Law: God doesn’t want your sacrifice; He wants your hearts to be changed toward worship of Him to one of joy rather than duty. God says it is only through spiritual restoration with Him that we can effect His blessings by doing good for others. In fact, God goes so far as to say that good deeds done for the wrong intentions are not acceptable sacrifices. These leftists/progressives/intellectuals like their Pharisee predecessors would have us believe that acquiescence to coercion can renew Man’s relationship with God. But unless Americans have actually opened those hard books documenting Man’s quest for Freedom and Liberty, or at least as our early colonials certainly could say, read the Bible cover to cover, we only know what the loudest voices tell us. Our national dereliction of study has resulted in creating a citizenship unwittingly standing alongside tyranny because of the banal acceptance of cultural and spiritual nihilism.

It was Christian evangelicals and free market entrepreneurs that established the United States of America. It was Christian evangelicals and free market entrepreneurs that pushed to end slavery in America. It was Christian evangelicals and free market entrepreneurs that joined with Martin Luther King, Jr. to defeat the legal bigotry enforced by Southern Democrats. Christian evangelicals have led the fight to preserve the sanctity of life, which is turning public opinion against the heinous act of abortion. While in Turkey in 2009, President Obama stated that America was not a Christian nation. But it is Gods command in the Bible that we love the Lord Your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength, and all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself.

The evangelical church should do nothing if not denounce ObamaCare and the impress of every health care provider openly and loudly. Your voice is sorely needed in these times that try men’s souls.

Tuesday, April 06, 2010

When Will the Party Bigwigs Learn?

Last October in New York District 23, the Republican Party bigwigs selected Dede Scozzafava as their candidate over conservative Doug Hoffman. While the Tea Party movement supported Hoffman, party leaders such as RNC President Michael Steele and Newt Gingrich rallied behind Scozzafava.

The election ended in a fiasco, with Scozzafava running party-paid ads against the conservative Hoffman, rather than the Democrat Bill Owens. The ire of the people forced a withdrawal of Scozzafava's nomination and Scozzafava went on to endorse the Democrat candidate rather than the conservative Hoffman.

Are we to assume Phil Gramm has personally vetted Bill Flores, candidate in the runoff primary for Republican candidate to represent Texas District 17? Has Phil Gramm sifted through Mr. Flores' business records with the same eye as will the Chet Edwards War Machine?

Phil Gramm is trusting what he is told, rather than actually verifying the qualities he would revere in a candidate himself.

Our press has been woefully inadequate in researching our candidates and we find ourselves voting for someone that we really don't know anything about, other than what he says. As stated before, The Chet Edwards War Machine will leave no stone unturned in their quest to discredit our Republican candidate. The not knowing if there is something under those rocks troubles me.

The jackalope advises her readers to not be fooled by slick ads and vaulted endorsements from people that know nothing.

Saturday, April 03, 2010

Vote for a known commodity

A forwarded message from the Rob Curnock campaign is proof of a huge misgiving I have been pondering in the days before the April 13th runoff election. (The content of the message was from the Lone Star Project, a Washington D.C.-based PAC trying to get Democrats elected in Texas.)

The Chet Edwards campaign has been busy poring over the lives of our two candidates—Rob Curnock and Bill Flores—with an electron microscope. One man has been tested in this situation. The other has not.

The direct lie, and dishonest misrepresentation

In the 2008 election, Chet couldn't find anything of substance on which to attack challenger Rob Curnock. In Chet's ads (complete with Hitchcock-style sinister soundtrack), he had to resort to using only a) the direct lie, and b) dishonest misrepresentation:

a) "Politician Rob Curnock..." DIRECT LIE. Rob has never held political office.

b) "...wants to raise your taxes." DIRECT LIE. Of course, the statement itself is prima facie false. It is also a DISHONEST MISREPRESENTATION in that it misrepresented Rob's consideration of the Fair Tax, and anyone following the facts knew it.

Consider that Edwards ran this on WTAW radio, the local source of The Neal Boortz show, a man who explains and promotes The Fair Tax practically every day. To those of us listening, Chet's ad said loud and clear, "I know I am lying. But you who see it are literally insignificant, because I know that when I lie, enough people will accept it as fact."

Edwards took Rob's greatest strength—being a common man of the people—and turned it into his greatest fault. This is slash and burn dark-art politics straight out of the depths of Saul Alinsky and his book's dedication to Lucifer, brought into the heart of conservative territory. We must be "shrewd as serpents" as we go to the runoff voting booth.

The message referenced earlier is an indicator of what sort of campaign Edwards will wage. Nothing is too low, too negative or too outright absurd, as we saw with him tagging Curnock with the "politician" title. This is why I am supporting Rob Curnock; if that's the best Chet could come up with, then Rob must be a safe, steady, man. Bill Flores is by all accounts a decent man, but he has not been vetted with the Edwards War Machine eye.

Chet thinks Bill Flores will win the runoff

If Mr. Flores is successful in the runoff, we are going to experience the full force of Chet Edwards' War Machine campaign to discredit him. And we may not like what we hear. It will not only be meant to destroy Mr. Flores, but to dishearten and keep us from voting. It will be insidious and ongoing, both calm and vicious. It will build up gradually. Then the most vicious attack will come during the last days of the campaign, intended as a death blow.

The whole time, Edwards will be promising earmarks, delivering earmarks, and promising our veterans a future of patronage rather than freedom. And waving the flag all the while. It will be an extremely hard road to victory, and many could falter in their support, as the darkest secrets will be publicized in the most media-supported fanfare. So, if we do choose the unknown and elect Bill Flores in the runoff there must be no backing down, no faltering, no giving up. The victory must be absolutely clear or the recounting of ballots will destroy us.

For the runoff

We must think strategically; using our vote to not only outmaneuver the Edwards version of political jujitsu (using an opponents strength's against him), but to actually defeat the man and his Machine in November. For Mr. Flores, his greatest asset is his wealth, which will be used against him class-warfare style. His unknowns are his business, his associates, and his past. If he wins the runoff, all of this will be made known. And since Chet will use both the direct lie and dishonest misrepresentation, even things that aren't true will become known. And by many, accepted as fact.

I encourage each of you to consider soberly the choice you are poised to make. On the Lone Star Project site you will see who Edwards and Democrat strategists think we are favoring and a glimpse of what they have planned for destroying that opponent. This is Chicago/George Lackoff/Saul Alinksy politics from the darkest recesses of the heart of man. Anything less than a complete victory in November WILL be challenged in court until the race is stolen. So, if our candidate ends up being Flores, we must stick with him no matter what.

But in this runoff I'm sticking with the known commodity: Rob Curnock. If we choose Rob again it will be our own political jujitsu right back on Chet. And if that happens, this time the David is going to defeat the Goliath.

(Please see the Bryan/College Station Tea Party site as well, where I've been posting for about the last year. Thank you!)

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

A $64,000 Question for Chet Edwards

There is a full Bi-Partisan scandal in Congress that is not getting much attention involving the lobbying firm PMA. According to The Hill - "The firm’s [PMA] founder, Paul Magliocchetti, a former long-time aide on the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee, and others at his firm have been substantial donors to several Democratic lawmakers. For example, PMA employees have given Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) more than $134,000 in contributions, according to the Center for Responsive Politics." The FBI raided the firm's office and seized files in November, 2008.

Chet Edwards (D-TX17) has received almost $64,000 in campaign donations from PMA. This was explained away by Mr. Edwards by his saying a firm in District 17 was represented by PMA. So, now we know how much it costs to buy Chet's vote as chairman of military appropriations.

Paul Magliocchetti donated $1,000 to Chet Edwards in 2008. But other names pop up in connection with donations made to Edwards from employees of PMA as Mr. Magliocchetti used family members, friends, and employees to funnel money to Edwards' campaign coffers.

But, there is even more to the story as a $3,500 campaign contribution from Jon Walker is considered. Again quoting The Hill, "Jon Walker is listed as a partner for EVAS Worldwide, a New Jersey-based aircraft safety company, and gave $19,000 to lawmakers as an EVAS employee, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records. That is more than 40 percent of the political contributions from the company’s employees overall." However, EVAS has never heard of Walker nor do they have any record of him ever being employed by them.

You can see that the list can grow as the search engines work. Pretty soon we are talking about real money here. Only an investigation of PMA's operations will allow the truth to be known.

Jeff Flake (R-AZ) is presenting legislation to investigate PMA and many Democrats have signed on to make that possible.

The $64,000 Question for Chet Edwards is: Will you sign on in suppport of Rep. Flake's legislation to investigate this Bi-Partisan scandal?

If Edwards will not support the investigate our question will be: What do you have to hide, Chet?

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Sinners In The Hands of an Angry President

O sinner! Consider the fearful danger you are in: it is a great furnace of wrath, a wide and bottomless pit, full of the fire of wrath, that you are held over in the hand of that God, whose wrath is provoked and incensed as much against you, as against many of the damned in hell. You hang by a slender thread, with the flames of divine wrath flashing about it, and ready every moment to singe it, and burn it asunder; and you have no interest in any Mediator, and nothing to lay hold of to save yourself, nothing to keep off the flames of wrath, nothing of your own, nothing that you ever have done, nothing that you can do, to induce God to spare you one moment.
- Jonathon Edwards (1703-1758) Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God
What I relate is the history of the next two centuries. I describe what is coming, what can no longer come differently: the advent of nihilism. ... For some time now our whole European culture has been moving as toward a catastrophe, with a tortured tension that is growing from decade to decade: restlessly, violently, headlong, like a river that wants to reach the end…
- Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) Will to Power

To classify Obama in political party terms is to underestimate his hatred of America. Obama is not merely a shrewd political animal. His loathing of capitalism, free market economics, and economic freedom is a spiritual journey because Obama is a nihilist. The Cloward/Piven Strategy, Rules for Radicals, the looting of American wealth and Keynesian Economics are simply the means to an end. The end goal of Obama’s spiritual journey is the complete destruction of the nation as created by the Founders. While the Congress is out to simply amass power for the sake of power, Obama’s quest is an intensely spiritual one. We are coming to the realization that we are a nation of sinners in the hands of an angry god-man President.

Jonathon Edwards concluded his sermon - "Therefore let everyone that is out of Christ, now awake and fly from the wrath to come." Today, our nation is becoming aware that to be “out of Obama” is to experience wrath and destruction. Obama believes in an anti-Constitution, a negative of the ideas of the framers. This negative belief is exhibited in Obama's statement: “But, the [Warren] Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.” It is prudent to realize Obama's understanding of the Constitution is not a simple angel or demon Escher drawing where the mind can view only one interpretation at a time. This is negation of space, where everything that is ‘not’ Constitution replaces what ‘is’ Constitution.

The history of nihilism is both political, and in a thunderingly empty way, deeply spiritual. Russian author Ivan Turgenev’s character Bazarov explains in Fathers and Sons that a “nihilist is a person who does not bow down to any authority and who does not accept any principle on faith" because "conditions in the social organization are so bad as to make destruction desirable for its own sake, independent of any constructive program or possibility."

Real-life nihilist Sergei Nechaev (1847-1882) argued that gross immorality of the European monarchies and Catholic Jesuits meant that any action could be utilized in the sake of the people’s revolution to bring them down. In current times it is easy to understand that “the European monarchies” are now termed: the rich, CEOs, or Wall Street. Free market capitalism is an ethos, a belief system based on fact and an innate, but yet counter-intuitive understanding that skirts the edges of transcendence. How else can one explain the dichotomy such as lowering the price of a product generates more income? In today’s culture, the immorality of Nechaev’s Catholic Jesuits is now the sin of capitalists, free market economics, or conservatives. This is the depth of negated spiritual animosity Obama harbors for the normal American way of life. This president is a democratically elected revolutionist bent on the destruction of the nation he serves.

As Sergei Nechaev and Mikhail Bakunin, wrote in Catechism of a Revolutionist (1869):
He [the Revolutionist] is its [the civilized world] merciless enemy and continues to inhabit it with only one purpose - to destroy it.

The catechism of the church now becomes a catechism for revolutionary means in dialectical materialism’s encroachment into moral themes. The looming tax burden is beginning to cause second thoughts for the future of charitable donations. But fear not because Obama’s massive budget is full of government munificence. The angry god-man President will be the overseer in the State’s provision for the needy. According to the negative Constitution of redistribution, all capitalist sinners will be forcibly brought down to the level of needy. Could this be why Obama doesn’t care about the stock market plunge? If the market represents the wealth of the nation, then ridding us of that burden is a spiritual nihilist’s moral imperative. It should also be noted that a government that owns all debt has enslaved its citizens.

Steeped in the “new time religion” of Liberation Theology, a derivative of Marxist dialectics, Christ’s message of man’s restoration with God is contrived into one of social justice for the poor. Rather than teach the “good news” (gospel) of Christ’s blood atoning for the sins of all who accept it, liberation theology is a “critique of economic structures” with capitalism, not sin, being the source of all that is wrong with the world. Obama’s spiritual purpose is the destruction of the ethos of capitalism.

By deftly redirecting the sin of an individual to an idea, the Marxist dialectic materialist argument swallows Judeo/Christian values whole. The State determines sin, as anything not proscribed by the State. As sinners in the hand of an angry President, taxes are now viewed as atoning contributions for the State’s collection plate. This inevitably means The Rich and Capitalists can only receive atonement through State seizure of all private property. Like Christ’s message to the Rich Young Ruler, Obamessiah’s message for The Rich – a steadily growing group as the necessary credentials are lowered – is give all your riches to the State and follow me. He neglects to add that he is intent upon leading us over the cliff to our total destruction.

There is also another insidious destructive activity that has been building for at least two generations involving the insipid acceptance of meaninglessness. The true danger of nihilism is not the philosophy itself, because even Nietzsche acknowledged that upon the brink of nothingness, man would find the opportunity to search for meaning.
I praise, I do not reproach, [nihilism's] arrival. I believe it is one of the greatest crises, a moment of the deepest self-reflection of humanity. Whether man recovers from it, whether he becomes master of this crisis, is a question of his strength. It is possible… Nietzsche

Nature after all abhors a vacuum and man is a spiritual being. God is certainly able to fill the void.

The cultural danger of nihilism is the trivialization of the idea of nothingness. The Left’s constant chattering has devolved meaning into absurdity. Years of trivializing the important, while heralding the arcane and vacuous has resulted in a generation and a half that blithely believe in nothing. Without so much as reading The Bible, the Declaration of Independence, or The Constitution, these sanguine know-nothings dismiss such writing as mythology, fatally flawed, the ramblings of ancient evil men. Karen Carr, in her book, The Banalization of Nihilism discusses how the glib acceptance of meaninglessness “creates an environment where ideas can be imposed forcibly with little resistance, raw power alone determining intellectual and moral hierarchies.”

To this end Obama speaks dramatic words for the cameras knowing that those watching him are experiencing him emotionally, not rationally. His speeches implant dreamy ideas in viewers incapable of hearing the menace of power behind the dream. We know that Obama does the exact opposite in reality and are angered at his duplicity. We must understand that he is not held accountable by the crowds because reality in their minds is meaningless. They cheer the screen image of Obamessiah, while we, the vanquished sinners devoid of rights, property, and freedom of thought pensively await our visit to Room 101. Nothing is more terrifying than to find yourself in the hands of an angry god-man President.

Monday, January 19, 2009

Defending Conservatives Against Liars - A Lesson From the Wisdom of Job

The recent worldwide news blitz of Rush Limbaugh’s/Magic Negro satire offers an excellent lesson from The Book Job to counter attacks on conservative leaders. William Safire’s book The First Dissident: The Book of Job in Today's Politics describes Job as a political dissident not only for demanding to plead his case before the ultimate authority, but also for his refusal to accept the democratic abuses of his friends. The Joban story applies to today’s conservative leadership that denounces fellow members for minor faults rather than pointing their attention to our political adversaries. The Book of Job offers important insights to avoid this error.

The Joban story revolves around a wager made between Lucifer and God concerning the faith of Job. Lucifer, aka The Accuser, makes the charge Job worships God only because God has favored him. "Allow me to touch all the he has, and he will curse You to Your face", Lucifer accuses. God accepts the challenge. Lucifer is allowed to destroy Job's family and wealth through senseless tragedies. Job's wife finally encourages him to "Curse God and die". When Job’s three friends come to comfort him, they instead begin a series of debates to convince him of an offense to God. Job defends his integrity and finally demands to plead his case before God.

When God appears He overwhelms Job with His power. Job then repents in dust and ashes. Job is now a man forever changed by the presence of God and certain his Redeemer, or Advocate, lives. Lucifer is a cosmic loser, Job's friends get a dressing down from the Almighty for not speaking correctly about Him, and Job is restored twofold in family and wealth. Job's friends are then required to offer a sacrifice, but only the interceding prayer of Job will restore them with God.

The methods of The Accuser are politics erased of character and ethics. It is not without reason Saul Alinsky dedicates Rules for Radicals - "To the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer." Luciferian politics allows the shadiest of characters to freely cast stones at every righteous but flawed man.

The radical left, who hold themselves to no such standards, hold conservatives to a standard of near-perfection. The error of conservative leadership is the same as that of Job’s friends: accepting the premise of the left’s charge and offering self-righteous “help.” The accused is caught in the crossfire. Despite the good intentions of conservative leadership, the effects are the same as if their intentions were bad. Results are every bit as important as intentions and Job’s friends were wrong because Job was innocent.

Consider the Middle Name of Obama Brouhaha:

1) Opportunity - Obama's middle name matches that of brutal Middle Eastern dictator.

2) Method -- Luciferians create logic that use of Obama's middle name equals calling him an Islamic Terrorist.

3) Results -- The media destroys the character of anyone using "Hussein" and useful idiots pile on. The GOP discredits own members.

4) Nihilistic Reality -- Obama declares intent to use full name in swearing in ceremony verifying the false nature of the entire saga.

Rush Limbaugh explains the current Magic Negro episode on his website:
They [MSM] took the occasion of what actually was the inappropriate use of elements of this program, (but that's another story). They took the occasion of somebody running for the RNC chairmanship sending out a CD that had this song on it to revive it anew, and frame it and cast it as they wanted it cast. The last person they wanted commenting on it was me because I'm the one who could have set it straight. Newt Gingrich couldn't set it straight because Newt Gingrich was clueless about what this was all about. Instead, Newt Gingrich sends a note to the Drive-By Media saying, "This is wholly inappropriate. I can't believe it! This is not how we reach out."

The Luciferian pattern of attack:

1) Opportunity -- Although Obama commented on the parody in 2007, the subject is brought up again via GOP chairman candidate Pete Saltsman’s c.d.

2) Method -- The Luciferians use the “Soap Opera Sucker Play” where everyone is consulted except the individual actually involved and ask Newt Gingrich his opinion.

3) Results -- Newt Gingrich blames Rush for the situation. Newt is separated from the conservative fellowship. The GOP is divided on issue.

4) Nihilistic Reality -- another untruth about Rush Limbaugh is established in the minds of the useful idiots. This will be helpful in establishing the need for The Fairness Doctrine.

The Luciferians are more empowered and lie in wait for next opportunity.

We must be astute to the ways of the accuser. Those in positions of power should consider who is making the accusation rather than rushing to give an answer to empower their own self-righteousness. Assuming, as did Job's friends and Newt Gingrich, that the one in the wrong is your dear old friend and ally is the error the Luciferians are lying in wait to record. Ronald Reagan was correct when he said, "Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican." The key word is FELLOW -- equal in values, integrity, and liberty, i.e. a republican.

In practice, this will require shrewdness on the part of conservative leaders; not that this should be news to those up on their scripture memory verses. When the accusing left presents an accusation of a fellow conservative:

1) Allow the targeted person to first set the record straight and make his defense. Then support that defense vigorously or remain quiet in public. Remember, you are not an omnipotent god knowing all the facts.

2) Remember this one undeniable truth: The left, like Lucifer, uses lies carefully -- enough truth to sound plausible but with a slight twist. It is the Luciferian way to trick the ill-informed into making a rash decision that bears a dear cost.

3) Never forget that while the powers of the air may promise a kingdom, power, and glory and may tempt your eyes with what looks good for food or to make one look wise, the result will be separation from the safety of the group. No one can please both the left and the right. Conservatives must remember the safety of both numbers and unity.

4) Always remember that today's left contains the most corrupt political mercenaries in the history of the nation. The perfect retort would be to tell them to clean up their own house and then list a few outrageous acts of corruption to back up your request. (That shouldn't be too hard considering the exponential evidence of political malfeasance.)

The Luciferian attacks on honorable, but flawed men can be overcome by maintaining personal integrity, supporting one another, and most importantly by directing unified ire upon the unrighteous nature of those making accusations. The power of good intentions receiving good results will banish the accuser from the court of public opinion. This is the transcendent nature of the wisdom taught in the Joban story. Conservatives must now use that wisdom through applied knowledge.

Tuesday, December 09, 2008

Chet Edwards Has His Own Radical Ties

In keeping with the huckster phrase "But wait! There's more..." it appears that connections to '60's radicals abound in this current election cycle. Thanks to Kyle-Ann Shiver, American Thinker readers are familiar with Sen. Barak Obama’s links to Saul Alinksy and Bill Ayers. However, for me, in researching Big Labor's campaign donations to my own representative Chet Edwards (D-TX 17), radicals are popping up much closer to home--thanks to the work of 60's radical Wade Rathke.

In researching campaign donations for Chet Edwards, I noticed that for a congressman in a non-union district in the right-to-work State of Texas, Edwards received a huge amount of money from unions. In fact, Edwards is in the top 20 of House members receiving money ($246,100) from labor organizations. But my Democratic Party congressman is not alone. In this 2008 election, Big Labor has funded Democrats with $47,609,244, or 91%, of all their political campaign donations. Although the closest auto manufacturing plant is in San Antonio (a non-union Toyota plant), Edwards has received $8,000 from the United Auto Workers Union. Your first step in determining who is funding your congressman is the Federal Election Commission Campaign Finance Reports and Data page.

However, it was not until I researched a $5000 donation from Service Employees International Union (SEIU) to Edwards that the big picture became abundantly clear: radicals have taken over labor organizations under the organizing direction of Wade Rathke. What makes this fact threatening to American capitalism is the Cloward/Pivens Strategy.

A Brief Introduction to Wade Rathke and the Cloward/Pivens Strategy

Wade Rathke is a former member of 60's radical group Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). SDS, under the organizing leadership of Tom Hayden, perpetrated the Chicago Riots at the 1968 Democratic Party Convention, the Columbia University takeover, and anti-Vietnam War marches in Washington, D.C.. After a national convention of SDS members in Austin, Texas, a new manifesto was written, with contributor Bernadine Dohrn (Bill Ayers' wife). Eventually, SDS evolved (devolved?) into The Weather Underground.

Rathke is the founder of ACORN and the labor group SEIU. Rathke also serves as chairman of the organizing committee for the AFL-CIO, whose president, John Sweeney, was a former president of SEIU. The purpose of these organizations is to put into practice a strategy penned by two Columbia University sociologists, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, who sought to destroy capitalism through managed crisis. According to DiscoverTheNetworks.Org, the Cloward/Piven Strategy "seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse." The method involves using:
"what are commonly called Trojan Horse movements -- mass movements whose outward purpose seems to be providing material help to the downtrodden, but whose real objective is to draft poor people into service as revolutionary foot soldiers; to mobilize poor people en masse to overwhelm government agencies with a flood of demands beyond the capacity of those agencies to meet. The flood of demands was calculated to break the budget, jam the bureaucratic gears into gridlock, and bring the system crashing down. Fear, turmoil, violence and economic collapse would accompany such a breakdown -- providing perfect conditions for fostering radical change."

Wade Rathke writes that he has been "a professional organizer for thirty-five years. (I have) worked for and founded a series of organizations dedicated to winning social justice, workers rights, and a democracy where 'the people shall rule.'" (In other words, according to Rathke, under America's current constitution the people do not rule.) Rathke's beliefs coupled with the amount of money coming from SEIU into Democratic campaign coffers should be startling enough. Is your congressman on this list?

However, Rathke's connection with the extraordinary breadth of the AFL-CIO with its many affiliated labor unions also making donations, makes it easy to see this is a real problem for the future of the nation as we know it today. How many AFL-CIO affiliated labor groups are listed as donors to your congressman at OpenSecrets.Org? Use this widget at Open Secrets to easily see the amount of cash flowing into Democratic Party campaigns and also your district campaigns from these interconnected unions. These are the facts of Rep. Chet Edwards:
  • Misc. Unions (Includes SEIU) - $18,250
  • Public Sector Unions - $47,250
  • Industrial Unions - $48,000
  • Real Estate (Includes Fannie Mae) - $70,000
  • Building Trade Unions - $66,500
  • Transportation Unions - $67,850
  • Civil Servants / Public Officials - $9,500
  • Education - $30,950

According to WSJ: "[SEIU] adopted a new amendment to its constitution at last month's SEIU convention, requiring that every local contribute an amount equal to $6 per member per year to the union's national political action committee. This is in addition to regular union dues. Unions that fail to meet the requirement must contribute an amount in "local union funds" equal to the "deficiency," plus a 50% penalty. According to an SEIU union representative, this has always been policy, but has now simply been formalized." This coercive method of fund raising may be unlawful. According to Dianna Furchtgott-Roth, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute: "Private sector union membership peaked in the 1950s at 36% of the workforce. Now, only 7.5% of private sector workers belong to unions. Yet the DNC will pay homage to the union agenda, including removing the right to a secret ballot for workers voting on whether or not to join unions, higher minimum wages, higher taxes, and extending mandated benefits, such as paid leave, to even the smallest employers."

The issues listed above are the reason why unions are funneling large amounts of cash into Democratic campaigns. SEIU has contributed more that $16,000,000 to Barak Obama. However, as an advocate of the Cloward/Piven Strategy, Rathke's purpose is not to lift up the downtrodden. The strategy is to destroy the capitalist system by pushing the entire workforce into union organizations. Individuals are then under control and are then used to increase demands from employers and government. When the union is unable to meet these demands, such as the current pension fund debacle for auto workers, the debt will be passed off to the American treasury. The long-term strategy is to destroy the American economy.

Radicals have been very busy since exploding onto the scene in the 60's. They have organized, recruited, and are now pouring incredible amounts of money into Democratic Party candidates' coffers. The question we must ask is what do they want in return. These are just a few of the issues of votes and government funding ACORN, SEIU, the AFL-CIO, and others want in return for their donation to my congressman's campaign to continue their war against America.

My representative, Chet Edwards (D-TX 17) has radical connections. The question is, does your representative have these same radical ties?