Commies commies commies... You just gotta hate 'em.

Women and Commies... Best friends since 1848.

The problem is the politicians who ARE communists such as the green party are using the environmental issues in our kids schools.

Our children are being brainwashed.

Someone recently said to me,"Don't get into the circle of it all. Stay on the outside".

That means, "don't get into the operation but stay at the political".

I know that there are many men involved in the MRM who see men as part of the problem to have men's rights. With men now feminised, I do get men asking for groups for support but I know that many are struggling to get the numbers. In father's groups you get men coming in when they need the help and then get out. Not so many stay to help it grow. That would be the same if our group started support groups.

But then at a political level, you have to cut off from the hardships everyday people are going through. But if you do get into caring from the ground, you end up losing the time to fight the political.

I guess that is why the left ideology is not interested in assisting men.

I read in a 1968 women's liberation pamphlet that the women were aware of men being unfree and having hardship but that it was not the position of the WLM to care. They were solely there for the empowerment of women.

No wonder so many people have no interest of getting involved. They are just trying to get through themselves.

But will a MRM equal to WLM encourage communism or is their a good chance this will be balanced to a more humanitarian approach?

Euthanasia is my next topic since that is another part of the left ideology.

After all of its historical embarrassments I don't think we have much to worry about any self-proclaimed Communist movements.

Now the movements that are going down the same path while cleverly evading the label, that's another story.

Quote from Kuuenbu

Now the movements that are going down the same path while cleverly evading the label, that's another story.

The hard sell didn't work, so now they're trying the soft sell :-)

Quote from bola

The hard sell didn't work, so now they're trying the soft sell :-)

They are well financed and run for political office.

Blessings

Bob

You really have to hand it to the Marxists, they have propaganda and rhetoric down to a fine art.

It would seem that the nazis are getting better at the delivery of their recruitment messages as well...

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner, In a constitutional republic the sheep can own a gun.

Democracy is mob rule - in the American declaration of independence there is no mention of democracy at all the forefathers knew that as a system democracy can alienate 49% of the population- its all about the republic that has within it checks and balances to protect or allow the individual to protect themselves

i like the idea of a constitutional republic, I am no expert but in my limited knowledge it seems they the forefathers who wrote the constitution were on to a good thing.

as for capitalism - it can work very fairly for everyone , the issue is however that in USA the power to "make the money" literally print it has been taken out of the hands of the people ( being represented by the elected officials) and put into the hands of the large private banks as such we have the fiat system - why do we need this system. the banks get paid outrageous interest to have a printing press -, income tax was introduced in USA to ensure repayment to the bankers, usury is banned in all religions by the way.

Rotschild said something akin to "let me control the nations money production and I care not who makes its laws" because he knew that in doing so he would become the lawmaker

Thomas Jefferson killed the central banks - he in his tenure got the US debt down to $30,000 dollars or so by revoking the central bank of america charter

An interesting thing to note is that all the US presidents that have been assasinated all had a vendetta against the central banking system

Why? Because they wanted to abolish the privately-owned Federal Reserve Bank. Five US Presidents who sought to abolish the private-owned Federal Reserve Bank were assassinated:

1) Andrew Jackson (Survived); 2) Abraham Lincoln; 3) James Garfield; 4) William McKinley; 5) John Kennedy.

Thomas Jefferson wrote: "The [privately-owned] Central Bank is an institution of the most deadly
hostility existing against the principles and form of our Constitution...
if the American people allow private banks to control the issuance of their
currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations
that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property
until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers
conquered."
Even Abraham Lincoln shared Jefferson's view of the private bankers.
In order to finance the Civil War, he approached the NewYork bankers
to see about getting a loan for the North. The interest rates they proposed
were in the order of 30%. Lincoln's response was akin to; "stuff it."
He then had Congress live up to its Constitutional responsibility for issuing
and valuing currency and issued his famous greenbacks.
Incredibly, like so many of us, even to the heights of power, Lincoln didn't
know at first that he had the OPTION, let alone the probably-intended OBLIGATION
to create money for the nation. With the civil war ending, he had come to the
conclusion that his government issued currency should become the basis of the
re-United States monetary system. Within a matter of weeks he was shot in the
Ford theatre with his monetary system dying with him.
In 1832, President Jackson vetoed the move to renew the charter of the 'Bank of the
United States' (a central bank controlled by the international bankers). In 1836 the
bank went out of business.
The Bank of the United States (1816-36), an early attempt at an American central bank,
was abolished by President Andrew Jackson, who believed that it threatened the nation.
He wrote:
"The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government, the distress it
had wantonly produced...are but premonitions of the fate that awaits the American people
should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of
another like it."
Andrew Jackson had at least two attempts made on his life. So proud and intent on
warning the future generations was he that his tombstone is inscribed with the phrase
"I killed the bank!"
It came back.
The Federal Reserve Act was passed in December 1913; ostensibly to stabilize the economy
and prevent further panics, but as Congressman Charles Lindberg Sr. warned Congress:
"This act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth...the invisible government by
the money power, proven to exist by the Money Trust investigation, will be legalized."
Even as early as 1916 President Woodrow Wilson was saying:
"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation
is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth
of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have
come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated
Governments in the civilized world--no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a
Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion
and duress of a small amount of dominant men."
No more stinging condemnation of a concept can be given than by the man who, convinced
it was for the good, championed it in the first place!

WHO OWNS THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK?

1) Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin; 2) Lazard Brothers Banks of Paris; 3) Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy; 4) Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam; 5) Lehman Brothers of New York; 6) Kuhn, Loeb Bank of New York (Now Shearson American Express);7) Goldman, Sachs of New York.

"1) Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin; 2) Lazard Brothers Banks of Paris; 3) Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy; 4) Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam; 5) Lehman Brothers of New York; 6) Kuhn, Loeb Bank of New York (Now Shearson American Express);7) Goldman, Sachs of New York."

If the above owners of the Federal Reserve Bank are true then the current management of the FRB are just that "Managers" not Uncle Sam or as the feminists would prefer Aunty Samantha

it seems the US is borrowing too much foreign funds not like the pre feminist era where the USA was the creditor and exporter of quality good and capital

Maus, I didn't understand the song well.

Yesterday's hero ... great comment.

Shaazam ... yours too.

Every ties in.

Quote from shaazam

"1) Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin; 2) Lazard Brothers Banks of Paris; 3) Israel Moses Seif Banks of Italy; 4) Warburg Bank of Hamburg and Amsterdam; 5) Lehman Brothers of New York; 6) Kuhn, Loeb Bank of New York (Now Shearson American Express);7) Goldman, Sachs of New York."

If the above owners of the Federal Reserve Bank are true then the current management of the FRB are just that "Managers" not Uncle Sam or as the feminists would prefer Aunty Samantha

it seems the US is borrowing too much foreign funds not like the pre feminist era where the USA was the creditor and exporter of quality good and capital

THE USA does not borrow foreign funds - this is a misconception

it borrows money from the federal reserve bank with a promise to pay with interest

how do they pay to return this money - via taxes on people and corperations

where does the federal reserve get this money - no where - it creates it by the stroke of a pen - or a few binary digits in a electronic ledger sheet

when it actually needs cash via paper moeny it just gets it printed

so there you have it in a nutshell the creation of money is all smoke and mirrors

money is now backed purely by a promise to pay ( debt) this is called the fiat banking system and is slowly turning people into indentured serfs

i recommend you watch "the money masters" on google video for a more in depth explanation than i have given

Quote from yesterday's Hero

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner, In a constitutional republic the sheep can own a gun.

Which is why all governments continually try to take away our arms.

as for capitalism - it can work very fairly for everyone , the issue is however that in USA the power to "make the money" literally print it has been taken out of the hands of the people ( being represented by the elected officials) and put into the hands of the large private banks as such we have the fiat system - why do we need this system. the banks get paid outrageous interest to have a printing press -, income tax was introduced in USA to ensure repayment to the bankers, usury is banned in all religions by the way.

Thomas Jefferson killed the central banks - he in his tenure got the US debt down to $30,000 dollars or so by revoking the central bank of america charter

I see a lot of complaints but I never see any workable proposals for something else.

Before the Federal Reserve Bank and common currency (money) were created, the US had hundreds, or maybe thousands of independent banks printing their own "bank notes" which were in circulation locally. The notes of each bank were generally accepted in the town, city, or neighborhood of the bank, but were less and less acceptable the farther you got from the bank that issued the notes. The economy was in massive confusion and disarray. It worked well enough for local distilleries and farmers, but state wide business was almost impossible and nation wide commerce was exceedingly difficult. About the time that railroads were crossing the nation and needed to sell tickets in Colorado for money that would buy steel in Pennsylvania they realized that 400 different questionable bank notes from 400 independent local banks just wouldn't work.

As for gold and other metals, they aren't very easy to use either. First, there just is not anywhere near enough gold to allow anything close to the amount of commerce that goes on today. Second, carrying around large bars of gold for large purchases is difficult while cutting it up small enough for small purchases doesn't work well either. Third, the value of various metals fluctuates at least as much as the value of bank notes. And finally, transactions on Internet, Visa cards, etc., are dependent on non-metal "money." Most "money" transactions today are processed by computers in credits based on bank notes.

While its easy to whine about the Fed, I haven't seen anything close to alternate proposals that have even a slim chance of producing a workable economy that allows business to function and groceries to be bought.

Instead of the continual rants about you don't like the Federal Reserve Bank and their nationwide notes, please propose something else that would allow me to buy books on line at Amazon, Airline tickets to Paris, or a beer in Texas.


Blessings

Bob

Quote from yesterday's Hero

THE USA does not borrow foreign funds - this is a misconception

it borrows money from the federal reserve bank with a promise to pay with interest

how do they pay to return this money - via taxes on people and corperations

where does the federal reserve get this money - no where - it creates it by the stroke of a pen - or a few binary digits in a electronic ledger sheet

when it actually needs cash via paper moeny it just gets it printed

so there you have it in a nutshell the creation of money is all smoke and mirrors

There is a lot of confusion about what "money" actually is. What we think of as "money" is actually only someone's promise to pay. Pay what? Money. What is money? It's their promise to pay it.

The greenback notes we hand around are simple documents certifying the bank's promise to pay. That's all that bank notes have ever been. Before the Federal Reserve Bank and nationwide "money" each bank printed its own notes and nobody from the next town over knew if they were worth the paper they were printed on. It made for massive confusion trying to do business across a state or nation.

When the government borrows money, they don't actually "print" money. What they actually do is to hole an auction at which they sell "bonds" or "bills" which are their promise to pay the money back. They may sell a $10,000 Treasury Bond for $9,900. The difference is the interest rate to be paid. Of course they sell billions of dollars worth of such bonds and use most of the money to pay off the previous bonds which are coming due. Government Bonds are sold in large financial markets. Anyone with serious cash lying around can buy them. There are agents in every city who can fix you up if you want one.

What they get for their Bond is a stack of "bank notes" which amount to the bank's promise to pay. In recent years it often is done with computerized transactions without using stacks of paper "notes." Of course the bank's promise to pay doesn't amount to anything "real" either. You can say they just "printed" up some money by "magic." That's not too far off. You actually can do it yourself. You can go to a merchant, buy a new car, and pay with a piece of paper that is your promise to pay next month. The piece of paper is your "note." You have just created $10,000 in the same way that the government does. Was your note "real" money? Sure it was. You just bought a car with it. Your note is as "real" as theirs.

The only difference between your "note" and their "note" is that your note is acceptable in your town to your local car dealer, but the guy in Texas (or Paris) might not let you buy beer with it. The government's (Federal Reserve Bank) "note" is known (and therefore accepted) from Maine to California. It's still just a promise to pay, like the note you gave to the car dealer. They print money. You print money. Same thing. But everybody knows them. Nobody knows you.

I hope you enjoyed this little lesson on what "money" actually is.

Blessings

Bob

Quote from julie

Maus, I didn't understand the song well.

Yesterday's hero ... great comment.

Shaazam ... yours too.

Every ties in.

The song is actually a cover version of one composed by this guy...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Stuart_Donaldson