Archive | FREE STATE PATRIOT RSS feed for this section

Iran Accuses U.S. of Lying About New Nuke Agreement

2 Apr

One executive failure after another…

Says White House misleading Congress, American people with fact sheet

Javad Zarif

Javad Zarif / AP

BY:
April 2, 2015 5:40 pm

 LAUSANNE, Switzerland — Just hours after the announcement of what the United States characterized as a historic agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, the country’s leading negotiator lashed out at the Obama administration for lying about the details of a tentative framework.

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif accused the Obama administration of misleading the American people and Congress in a fact sheet it released following the culmination of negotiations with the Islamic Republic.

Zarif bragged in an earlier press conference with reporters that the United States had tentatively agreed to let it continue the enrichment of uranium, the key component in a nuclear bomb, as well as key nuclear research.

Zarif additionally said Iran would have all sanctions lifted once a final deal is signed and that the country would not be forced to shut down any of its currently operating nuclear installations.

Following a subsequent press conference by Secretary of State John Kerry—and release of a administration fact sheet on Iranian concessions—Zarif lashed out on Twitter over what he dubbed lies.

“The solutions are good for all, as they stand,” he tweeted. “There is no need to spin using ‘fact sheets’ so early on.”

Zarif went on to push back against claims by Kerry that the sanctions relief would be implemented in a phased fashion—and only after Iran verifies that it is not conducting any work on the nuclear weapons front.

Zarif, echoing previous comments, said the United States has promised an immediate termination of sanctions.

“Iran/5+1 Statement: ‘US will cease the application of ALL nuclear-related secondary economic and financial sanctions.’ Is this gradual?” he wrote on Twitter.

words 4

He then suggested a correction: “Iran/P5+1 Statement: ‘The EU will TERMINATE the implementation of ALL nuclear-related economic and financial sanctions’. How about this?”

The pushback from Iran’s chief diplomat follows a pattern of similar accusations by senior Iranian political figures after the announcement of previous agreements.

Following the signing of an interim agreement with Iran aimed at scaling back its nuclear work, Iran accused the United States of lying about details of the agreement.

On Thursday evening, Zarif told reporters the latest agreement allows Iran to keep operating its nuclear program.

“None of those measures” that will move to scale back Iran’s program “include closing any of our facilities,” Zarif said. “We will continue enriching; we will continue research and development.”

“Our heavy water reactor will be modernized and we will continue the Fordow facility,” Zarif said. “We will have centrifuges installed in Fordow, but not enriching.”

The move to allow Iran to keep centrifuges at Fordow, a controversial onetime military site, has elicited concern that Tehran could ramp up its nuclear work with ease.

Zarif said that once a final agreement is made, “all U.S. nuclear related secondary sanctions will be terminated,” he said. “This, I think, would be a major step forward.”

Zarif also revealed that Iran will be allowed to sell “enriched uranium” in the international market place and will be “hopefully making some money” from it.

 Iran Says Nuclear Deal Hinges on U.S. Will to Lift Sanctions
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Monday, a deal on Iran’s nuclear program could be concluded this week if the United States and other Western countries have sufficient political will and agree to remove sanctions on Tehran. He said in Geneva, “Our negotiating partners, particularly the Western countries and particularly the United States, must once and for all come to the understanding that sanctions and agreement don’t go together.”
Inform

Mark Caserta: Bergdahl deal was no bargain for US

2 Apr

But a great deal for the Taliban

me

Free State Patriot Editor – Mark Caserta

Apr. 02, 2015 @ 12:01 AM

Desertion on the field of battle has always been considered a loathsome deed. Besides being a blatant act of cowardice, it violates the military oath of enlistment and compromises the safety of others. And as any military person will tell you, a soldier must be able to trust his brother- or sister-in-arms with his or her very life.

Last week, the Army announced that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, a U.S. soldier who slipped away from his Afghanistan patrol base in 2009 and was held in captivity for five years by the Taliban, will now be charged with desertion and misbehavior. If found guilty of endangering the safety of a command, unit or place, Bergdahl faces life imprisonment.

bb 1

I don’t propose to usurp a military court’s decision by prejudging Bergdahl’s guilt or innocence, even though members of his own platoon have stated publicly they fully believe the soldier deserted them.

I do propose to deal with the terms, conditions and consequences of his return.

While it’s just to presume Bergdahl’s innocence until he’s proven guilty, it’s also prudent to be cautious about prematurely including him in the honored list of brave men and women who have proudly demonstrated their loyalty to our country.

Many recall the president’s National Security Advisor Susan Rice going on various Sunday talk shows claiming Bergdahl served his country with “honor and distinction.” And then there was President Obama publicly embracing Bergdahl’s parents in the Rose Garden while allowing Robert Bergdahl to deliver a message to his son, “Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim,” an Arabic phrase considered by some to be a major pillar of Islam. It means, “In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate.”

bb6bb4

But perhaps most disparaging is the insipid way the White House chose to handle Bergdahl’s return.

Bergdahl was a soldier who had reportedly expressed his disillusionment with the Army and his country and acted on it by leaving his post and possibly collaborating with the enemy. Logic would suggest any trade would be a fair and equitable one. But not only did Obama choose to return to the Taliban five of their most senior officers, he broke the law in doing so.

An independent review by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office declared the president indeed broke the law in authorizing the release of five Taliban detainees held by the U.S. in exchange for Bergdahl without giving Congress 30 days’ notice.

bb2 bb3

And now intelligence suggests that three of the five released detainees are attempting to re-engage in militant activities, possibly against the U.S.

It was clear from the outset that any charges against Bergdahl would be extremely embarrassing for the White House given its early stance.

Nevertheless, the rush to honor Bowe Bergdahl’s military service before the facts were known dishonors the service of those who have defended our country with valor. And the inept decision to trade five Taliban leaders for his return has placed our nation at risk.

gitmo 1

Once again, poor judgment and skewed values will place Barack Obama on the wrong side of history – at our nation’s detriment.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

IMPEACH CLINTON…AGAIN?

30 Mar

DOUG SMITH

DOUG SMITH: Author, historian and regular contributor to Free State Patriot.

3/30/15

The most powerful political tool the Congress has to wield against the other branches is impeachment.  The threat of impeachment, whether spoken or implied, acts as a check against the Executive crossing certain lines.

Let us be honest: Congress sucks at it.  They have impeached but not convicted Presidents, and have removed Federal judges. Richard Nixon resigned rather than put the country through the process of impeachment.  It is considered probable, but is by no means certain, that he would have been convicted.

clinton 1

In the case of William Jefferson Clinton, he certainly had a number of potential impeachable offenses against him; perjury, improper monetary dealings, accepting bribes from Chinese Communist Army Officers in the White House, and letting them obtain missile technology, and of course, his out of control sexual escapades, which, to be kind, make Bill Cosby look like Fred Rogers.  He was certainly impeachable, and convictable.

Yet the Congress, knowing his popularity, despite their distaste for him, chose a stupid and spineless approach.  They impeached him in such a way that the defense could be “everyone lies about sex, the GOP is only interested in his sex life”, and in the age of Dr. Phil and Jerry Springer, there was not the will to convict him. Had they portrayed him as a money grubbing, sleazy, unethical politician , shown his pattern of lies, accepting bribes, pushing for bills that weakened the economy, enriching himself while portraying himself as the champion of the little guy, he could have emerged as a man as popular as Bernie Madoff. That President Clinton, it seems probably, but by no means certain, would have been convicted.

clinton 2

Now, Congress once more has a very impeachable President.  The GOP has control of both houses, and without a doubt there are multiple issues, many of them winding through the courts, that constitute the high crimes and misdemeanors required to impeach a President. But, of course, they will never do so. They will never do so because Barack Obama happens to be black. Oh, don’t roll your eyes at me. He makes no bones about it. He wears his blackness like a sword, ready to hack at anyone who criticizes his lies, his incompetence, his lawlessness, or his failure.  If Barack Obama were Jimmy Carter, and the GOP had both houses, he would be gone. But he knows how to play his race, and the GOP lacks the courage to take him on in spite of it for his crimes against the nation.  As long as he does not push to the limits where the people feel compelled to remove him, he can rampage for 2 more years.

However, there is a move the GOP can make to strengthen the Republic, and hold the feet of the Democrats and the Executive to the fire: Impeach Hillary.

clinton 3

That’s right. Impeach Hillary Clinton.  She obstructed justice, she lied to Congress, and she broke the law in a number of ways. She has no record of success to balance against her failings, and despite the sycophants who are so anxious to dance at another Clinton ball, even her own party is starting to see her for what she is.  So, impeach her as Secretary of State. Even the Democrats won’t fight very hard for her, because they are nervous about her in her own right, and very nervous about another candidate who can be linked to Barack Obama.

Impeach her, before her run against the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, armed with the strains of Helen Reddy singing I am Woman, and I married Bill Clinton. Impeach her, convict her, and a few things happen.  She loses her security clearance.  Any files she may have can be subpoenaed. She loses her benefits as an ex Sec State.  And she becomes ineligible to hold ANY federal office, including, that’s right, President of the United States.

clinton 4

The GOP Congress can pull that fang from the snake. And in so doing, remove a threat to the future of the nation, while sending a message to the President, without requiring the courage to directly confront him: You’ve gone far enough. We are not ready to impeach you, yet. But we are warming up to it. And perhaps that will temper his actions till 2016 just a bit. Congress can impeach Hillary.  Congress should impeach Hillary.

Mark Caserta: Obama’s actions expose his convictions

26 Mar

They also expose his priorities.

me

Free State Patriot Editor, Mark Caserta

Mar. 26, 2015 @ 12:01 AM

In their first Oval Office meeting in 2009, President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shook hands and agreed to do everything possible to keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.

Since that time, U.S. relations with our longtime ally in the Middle East have gotten “progressively” worse while the prospects for a nuclear-armed Iran are heightening.

bo bn 1

Rather than choosing to foster our 60-year friendship with the Jewish State and living up to his promise of support, Obama has proceeded to ostracize Israel and barter with her enemies. This dangerous shift of support has emboldened anti-Semitic nations by muddying the political waters where U.S. support of Israel is concerned.

But a recent show of diplomatic ineptness by Obama may have delivered an irreparable blow to relations between Israel and the United States, at least for the duration of his presidency.

And two years is a very long time.

Shortly after Obama delivered his 2015 State of the Union address, House Speaker John Boehner invited Netanyahu to speak to a joint session of Congress. The move was perceived by Democrats as a rebuke to the president’s repeated threat to veto new sanctions against Iran and disrupt negotiations with Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei. But to Republicans, the move was necessary to avoid a very poor deal which would result in a potential nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

bo bn 2

Obama’s decision not to meet with Netanyahu during his visit to the U.S. was met with great disdain and questioned by many on Capitol Hill. But the White House defended the move as standard operating procedure.

“As a matter of long-standing practice and principle, we do not see heads of state or candidates in close proximity to their elections, so as to avoid the appearance of influencing a democratic election in a foreign country,” said National Security Council spokeswoman Bernadette Meehan. “Accordingly, the president will not be meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu because of the proximity to the Israeli election, which is just two weeks after his planned address to the U.S. Congress.”

But many believe that not only did the Obama administration not adhere to principle by avoiding influencing the Israeli election, they may have attempted to manipulate its outcome.

bo bn 3

A bipartisan Senate committee is now investigating the possibility the Obama administration may have aided efforts to defeat Prime Minister Netanyahu in last week’s election. Reportedly, the investigation focuses on State Department grants to a non-profit group that has been leading field organizing efforts openly aimed at replacing Netanyahu’s conservative government with a “center-left” coalition.

Obama’s actions, besides being nave and adolescent, betray his convictions. For what purpose does Obama seek to pave the way for a nuclear-armed Iran? And in what world can Iran be trusted with a nuclear weapon? It would almost certainly result in a third World War!

It’s past time for a bipartisan effort by Congress to rein in this president’s radical agenda.

The world is, indeed, on fire. And Barack Obama is fanning the flames.

bo bn 4

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page

Mark Caserta: Hillary nomination will be troublesome

20 Mar

…If not impossible

me

FSP EDITOR – MARK CASERTA

Mar. 19, 2015 @ 02:01 AM

If Hillary Rodham Clinton is all the Democratic Party has for the 2016 election, liberals must be getting pretty nervous. I don’t know of any other potential candidate, in either party, carrying an equivalent amount of baggage into a presidential bid.

While I’m not a huge fan of Jeb Bush, the thought of “another Bush” in the White House pales in comparison to the thought of another Clinton. Let’s ignore for a moment that Hillary’s accomplishments as four years as Secretary of State were, shall we say, minimal; she and Bill are never very far away from scandal.

In fact, it’s worth a trip down memory lane.

hillary 1

The White House travel controversy, sometimes referred to as “Travelgate,” was the first major ethics controversy of the Clinton administration. It began in May 1993, when seven employees of the White House Travel Office were fired and replaced with associates from Arkansas. The administration stated the firings were done because of financial improprieties, but never produced supporting evidence. Heavy media attention forced the White House to reinstate most of the employees in other jobs and remove the Clinton associates from the travel role.

“Whitewater” was the popular nickname for a series of investigations of Bill and Hillary Clinton that lasted nearly seven years involving a fraudulent land scheme while Hillary was a partner of the Rose Law Firm of Vince Foster and Webster Hubbell. Hubble was later indicted, tried and convicted for tax fraud. Foster, a material witness for then independent counsel Ken Starr’s criminal investigation, mysteriously turned up dead in Fort March Park. His death was ruled a suicide.

hillary 2

Emerging from the same Ken Starr criminal investigation was the infamous Monica Lewinsky scandal, which would cause Bill Clinton to become only the second president in U.S. history to be impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives. Clinton was impeached on two counts: perjury and obstruction of justice.

In 1996, in what was labeled “Chinagate,” the Clinton-Gore campaign allegedly received illegal financial contributions from the Chinese government to help its dwindling poll numbers by siphoning funds into the Democratic National Committee. Investigations revealed the Chinese Embassy in Washington, D.C., was used for coordinating the contributions in violation of the law forbidding non-U.S. citizens or permanent residents from giving monetary donations to politicians and political parties.

And most recently, “Emailgate,” in which Hillary may have violated the Federal Records Act and circumvented the Freedom of Information Act by choosing to delete 30,000 emails from a personal account on a private server.

hillary 3

Why take the time to delete 30,000 emails if she has nothing to hide?

But then, the Clintons are in the business of hiding things, hence the need for a private server.

At this point, I believe it’s very premature for anyone to believe Hillary is a shoo-in for the Democrat nomination.

But if she indeed gets the call from her Democrat peers, given the scandalous “Clintonesque” tradition, even the liberal media may not be able to spin Hillary Clinton into the Oval Office.

hillary 5

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

DOUG SMITH: THE WAR ON LANGUAGE

12 Mar

doug smith

DOUG SMITH: Author, Historian and a regular contributor to FSP

words 1a

Political language — is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. George Orwell, “Politics and the English Language” The oldest political speech I can recall was from Cain: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” Short, but all the elements. The Lie: I have no idea if his body is where I left it when I killed him. The respectability of the murder: I’m not responsible for him. He’s the one who put his head in the way of my fist. Unfortunately, his audience (God) was not easily swayed. But Cain showed the way. Politicians, in particular progressive ones, have been busily perfecting the art the political speech ever since.

words 1words 3

Language is important. That is how we communicate our ideas. If I tell my kid “You cannot have a cookie.”, and he counters with “I didn’t. I only took a baked confection.”, then we have a problem. Words have meaning, and those who twist and shade those meanings are not trying to tell the truth. In the Dark Ages in Britain, from the fall of Rome to the beginnings of the Renaissance, the art of writing was all but lost. Few outside Irish monasteries could either read, or write, and thus, be aware of their history and culture. Communication devolved to the bare minimums needed for survival and civilization to a mean and barbaric existence. (Thank God for the Irish, who preserved the core of written knowledge in monasteries to form the yeast from which the Renaissance rose.) Words have meanings. The written word lets us record those meanings for others besides those sitting near enough to hear us speak. Words, meanings, are the lubricant without which our social interactions cannot rise above barbarism. But, as with Cain, so with many today, there is an assault on language. When words have no meaning, or when they can mean anything, then scoundrels can hide their meanings and intentions from people. Take the word, Democrat, for example. A country that says it is Democratic is meant to be perceived as having a free and benevolent government. However, few people, even those on the progressive left, would describe Die Deutsche Demokratische Republik as anything but oppressive. Fidel Castro was elected over and over by voters with guns to their head, but elected he was. Yet “his” democracy remains one of the most brutal, repressive regimes in the world. He and his cohorts came to power with ruthless murders, and maintained it with a police state, political prisoners, and the theft of wealth of citizens. Just tossing the word democratic at a Gulag does not make it Coney Island.

words 2

But if people can hijack language, destroy meaning, than they can avoid calling evil or stupidity what it is. They can avoid making rational arguments for nonsensical goals. In short, they can be progressives. Hence, an Army deserter is said to have served with honor and distinction. Taxing and spending become investing and paying your fair share. One who is Rich has steady work and a paycheck that can be robbed. Anyone who opposes higher taxes and out of control spending is a right wing extremist. Conversely, Muslim terrorists who murder children with an electric drill are NOT Muslim terrorists, but just extremists. (I guess they REALLY hate taxes.) A backward, corrupt, poor country with tribal warfare and warlords who confiscate any foreign aid becomes a developing country. (One might ask, in fairness, into what they are developing.) A self-serving shakedown artist becomes a civil rights leader. (Again, one might ask, whose rights, other than his own rights to a fat bank account, has Al Sharpton led?) Patriotism becomes a joke, a synonym for a bumpkin, or in the opposite extreme it becomes a blind following of a party or person, rather than a nation. Affordable housing and Affordable Health care provide neither, but put control of both in government hands, where both are ravaged.

words 4

Words become so imprecise that they mean nothing, or everything, or whatever a dishonest speaker or writer wishes them to mean. Thus, they can never be held to account for what they say, or promise, or swear. Reporters cannot even manage to write a simple paragraph or sentence, and readers become accepting of sloppy writing, and reporting, and outright lies. Imprecise and meaningless language makes people vulnerable to nonsense phrases that say nothing but sound good. Hence, “I feel your pain” makes us feel you are one of us. “Hope and Change”, uttered with Greek Columns and fireworks, sounds profound. In reality,both phrases are semantically null: they mean absolutely nothing. So the hearer can project into them whatever he or she wishes to believe, and the slick politician can never be held to account for his promises, because he has promised precisely nothing. But it sounded like something! To quote Orwell again: “the slovenliness of our language makes it easier to have foolish thoughts.” Foolish thoughts lead to foolish actions, foolish decisions, and foolish leaders, leading foolish people off a foolish cliff. We need to take back our language. We can start with simple words. Halt. About face.

Mark Caserta: God’s infallibility cannot be reasoned

12 Mar

Yet, progressive are still trying to convince us that God makes mistakes!

me

FSP EDITOR: MARK CASERTA

Mar. 12, 2015 @ 01:01 AM
cf2

Self-proclaimed theologians have been attempting to prove the fallibility of God since Jesus’ ministry on earth. The Sadducees and Pharisees, two “religious” sects of the time, were constantly trying to entrap Jesus by asking him loaded questions about the scriptures and life in general.

Understand, the progressive mantra is to perpetually propagate the message that having absolute faith in God is not something for the “thinking man.”

But God’s wisdom has always prevailed against those who would challenge His power and authority. And for anyone to espouse an understanding of His Word, and yet, spend more time attempting to prove God’s fallacy than spreading the Gospel, is the epitome of hypocrisy.

It’s my belief that those having a personal relationship with Jesus Christ are empowered with a spirit of discernment that enables them to identify false prophets and steer clear of their promulgation.

But let me be clear. God did not call His people to silence! It’s been the church’s silence that’s allowed the progressive movement to become a formidable faction! So I choose to use my pen and this piece to share what I believe to be the theology of a “true believer.”

Liberals know that to move forward “progressively” they must cause believers to question their faith in God, essentially opening the door to “reason.” But God’s Word isn’t dependent on man’s wisdom, but rather man’s faith.

Faith, as the Bible tells us, is the “substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Depending on the translation, the word “faith” was used nearly 300 times in the Bible and is prerequisite to accepting God as being omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. That is, He is unrestricted, all-seeing and everywhere!

In two of the Gospels, the Pharisees sought to repudiate Jesus’ good works and diminish Him before the people. So they plotted to entangle Him before His followers by asking him a question regarding paying taxes to Rome, a topic sure to create division.

“Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?” they asked. But Jesus “perceived their wickedness,” according to the scriptures, and said, “Why tempt me, ye hypocrites? Show me the tribute money.” After handing Him a penny, he asked them, “Whose is this image and superscription?” They replied, “Caesar’s”. Then, with the wisdom of His Father, Jesus said, “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.”

The Bible says “they marveled, left him and went their way”.

Yet, today, men still seek to diminish God.

I have never seen the face of God, nor have I touched the nail-scarred hands of my savior, Jesus Christ. And I certainly can’t “reason” His grace.

But faith isn’t driven by the ability to reason with one’s mind, but by the ability to believe with one’s heart. And if we are to believe that there is even an “ounce” of fallibility in God’s Word, true faith would be impossible.

So for me and my house, we will continue to serve the Lord, by faith.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.

DOUG SMITH: MAKERS AND MARAUDERS

9 Mar

THE ENEMY FROM WITHIN…

doug smith

FSP regular contributor, author and historian, Doug Smith.

—————————————————————————–

March, 9, 2015

In Barack Obama’s infamous “You didn’t build it” speech, he said that we no longer have to worry about roving bands of marauders.   Webster defines a marauder as one who “roves and wanders in search of plunder”.

We have had marauders throughout much of history. In the dark ages of Europe, ship loads of marauders came southwest from the cold, challenging lands of Scandinavia to go “a Viking” for plunder in Britain and France. It was easier, and more rewarding for them to raid the goods of farmers and fishermen, merchants and tradesmen, and petty lords of England than to do the hard, never ending work of producing their own goods. Just wait for them to build up their goods, raid villages, kill any who resist, and take as much as you can pile into your ships. Then sail back home to wait till time for the next raid.

MARAUDERS 1

Someone in England devised a plan to simply meet the Vikings at the shore, and offer them gold to go away without murdering anybody. This appeasement was known as the Dane geld, or Danish Gold. Unfortunately, what they soon realized was that “Once you pay the Dane geld, you’ll never be rid of the Dane.

Now, one enterprising Viking, William II, also known as the Bastard, and the Conqueror, had a better idea. In 1066, he defeated English forces from his lands in Normandy, and established Norman rule of England. William’s line was notable in history: Henry II and 2 of his sons, Richard the Lionhearted, and after his death the younger brother John, villain of the Robin Hood tales. It was from John the “Nobles” (a group of successful marauders) exacted the Magna Carta. Winston Churchill wrote of John “his vices may have contributed more to civilization than the virtues of his predecessors.” This enterprising band of marauders gave their family a new name, based on a common plant used as a broom, symbolizing how they swept any resistance away before their conquests. The plant was the Genets, or Planta Genets, and the family? The Plantagenet.

MARAUDERS 3

Thus this family, founded by Vikings, notable for producing nothing except the death of their opponents, (at which they were very good: William, Henry, and Richard were all excellent soldiers and generals) became the first royal family of Britain. They amassed wealth in gold and arms, but most particularly, in land. They ate food which they had never grown, but coerced from the peasant class at the point of a sword. The swords of their knights assured that the lions share would go to the king ( note the family coat of arms: 3 Lions) , and a smaller, but significant share would go to the lesser nobility and knights, who were the armed enforcers of the taxes to the king, dukes, earls, barons and knights. They granted, Noblesse Oblige, a meager living to the peasants, who were bound to the land, as long as they worked, produced, and handed over most of what they produced to the tax collectors. Marauding was very good business.

(The current Queen of England is the wealthiest welfare recipient in the world. She has a net worth of 10 Billion, including palaces and stately homes, and still receives an income from the taxpayers of $50 million annually. )

marauders 5

The primary product of the class of nobility (marauders who have granted themselves titles) is government, whose primary function is to extract taxes from the people who actually produce the goods.

Now, an interesting phenomenon occurred around the end of the 19th century. The bulk of the income of the English nobility was derived from the agricultural products of the lands which they owned, but permitted farmers to work. An economic depression caused prices to plummet, and the income for many of the nobles was cut in half. Having little business understanding (they were nobles: they hired managers to deal with the vulgar task of managing their estates) and living with huge staffs in their Stately Old Homes, many aristocrats were suddenly teetering on the verge of bankruptcy. They may have the title of Earl or Marquees, inherited from generations of marauders, but no income, and no standing army to send out to raid France. But there was a source of wealth, impressed with the sound of the British titles of nobility, and quite willing to make a trade. The wealthy daughters of Americans who had become wealthy in the Industrial Revolution, but were cut out of the “ old money society” in America, could marry a poor English lord and become a title Lady overnight, thus solving his insolvency and getting her shot at nobility. So the daughters of successful makers were reluctantly accepted into English society on the basis of their money which propped up many failing estates. Most notable among these was the mother of future PM Winston Churchill. It is estimated that these “Dollar Princesses” brought with them in the first decade of the 20th century, some 1 Billion £.

MARAUDERS 2

So, the descendants of the marauders were, after all, dependent on the descendants of the makers. They must either marry them, or force them to pay with the threat of violence. Since they are not enough to force them alone, they must employ lesser marauders, who will take up arms and enforce the collections for them, in return for their own lesser share of the plunder. Marauders never make things, or grow things, except for laws and rules that make them seem entitled to the produce of someone else’s labor. And, like their Viking ancestors, marauders are very, very good at coercion, force, and justification of taking what they want, simply because they want it.

America is unique in its founding on a premise that the farmer, in his fields, or the worker in his blacksmith shop will be a free and armed citizen, not a helpless, dependent serf. For much of history, the history of the marauder, the serf was strictly forbidden to hold arms, or speak up about how he was ruled. His betters would protect him from other marauders, and rule with wisdom. They would have titles, letters, and degrees to demonstrate how superior they were. Any resistance, whether with arms or with words, was suppressed violently as their Viking ancestors had taught them through the ages.

dems turn 3

In the American experiment, each man could protest, and take up arms and fight, against the lesser marauders of the “Nobility”. That was, and is, new in history, but marauders? They are as old as history itself.

So, Barack Obama was not comforting anyone who is a maker with his assurance that we need not worry about marauders, because whether he realizes it or not, he and his ilk are the marauders.

obama-file-ap-copy_s160x108

Mark Caserta: Congress must unite to protect America

5 Mar

Who will stop Barack Hussein Obama?

me

FSP EDITOR, MARK CASERTA

Mar. 05, 2015 @ 12:01 AM

President Obama made a remarkable statement in his sixth State of the Union address to the nation and a joint session of Congress – one which should have all Americans scratching their heads.

“America, for all that we’ve endured; for all the grit and hard work required to come back; for all the tasks that lie ahead, know this: The shadow of crisis has passed.”

Could Obama really be that out of touch with reality?

dems turn 3

Later in the speech he added, “Fifteen years into this new century, we have picked ourselves up, dusted ourselves off, and begun again the work of remaking America. We have laid a new foundation.”

Our Founding Fathers provided us with an enduring foundation – the U.S Constitution. And brave men and women have given their lives through the years to preserve, protect and uphold this deed to freedom. America does not need to be “remade” by Barack Obama.

Hidden within the president’s own words lies what I believe to be the defining aspiration of Obama’s presidency. Every builder understands before laying a new foundation, the old one must be unearthed and deconstructed. All around us, the foundational principles of the United States of America are being dismantled by this administration’s policies.

immigration 1

An in-depth look at Obama’s life mentors helps explain his apparent ideological distaste for America.

Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s former pastor of 20 years, was someone he equated to an “old uncle.” Known for his proliferation of black liberation theology, Wright encouraged blacks to damn America in God’s name in 2003. Obama entitled one of his books, “The Audacity of Hope” after one of Wright’s sermons.

In Obama’s book, “Dreams From My Father,” he writes about “a poet named Frank” who visited his family in Hawaii, read poetry, and was full of “hard-earned knowledge” and advice. This childhood mentor, mentioned at least 22 times in the book, was a card-carrying member of the Communist Party named Frank Marshall Davis. All references to “Frank” were removed from the audio version years later.

obama muslim 1

And then there’s Obama’s longtime friend, left-wing radical Bill Ayers, who continues to defend the series of anti-Vietnam bombings he carried out as a member of the Weather Underground. A 1995 fundraiser which helped initiate the political career of Barack Obama was reportedly held in Ayer’s living room.

Why revisit history now? America is no longer at a crossroads; we’ve taken a hard left turn toward disaster.

According to several news reports, this administration is offering a pact to Iran which eases restrictions on its nuclear program in several phases over the next decade, paving the way for an Iranian nuclear weapons program. And, once again, Obama intends to bypass Congress in lieu of executive privilege.

israeli flagobama muslim

This president simply lacks the qualifications to single-handedly barter a deal with a rogue nation like Iran, one that threatens to bring about a nuclear arms race in the Middle East while alienating our ally, Israel.

It’s truly time for Democrats and Republicans alike to unite against Barack Obama and thwart his mission to remake America.

Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a

DOUG SMITH: AN EDUCATION PROPOSAL FOR ILLEGALS

2 Mar

There is no free ticket to the American Dream!

doug smith

REGULAR FSP CONTRIBUTOR

AUTHOR AND HISTORIAN, DOUG SMITH

This week, Governor Andrew Cuomo, D NY, threatened to withhold state aid to citizens unless the legislature agrees to state ( Taxpayer) supported aid to undocumented ( “ in the United States illegally”) residents. The progressive Governor purports to offer the American Dream to non-Americans who manage to geographically locate their bodies within Progressive states.

mc 1

If you have had a child go to college, or paid your taxes, or even renewed your driver’s license, you are keenly aware of the great lengths needed to prove that you were who you said you were. Greater lengths, by far, than Brown and Cuomo want children here illegally to endure before getting a free college education.

Now the progressive line on education, and government underwriting of post-secondary education loans has given colleges, (also progressive bastions) to drive their prices up at a rate far outstripping inflation for decades.   Many middle class Americans find themselves increasingly unable to afford the traditional college experience, or afford it only with crippling debt.

mc 4

A bachelor’s degree is no longer the ticket it once was to a higher paying job, or even a job at all. Nearly a quarter million under 30 college grads are working part time, minimum wage jobs as of this writing. Many are still living with their parents approaching their 30s, undermining that other part of the American Dream: home ownership.

So the result of the progressive’s nosey hands ( hmm, is that a mixed metaphor?) in education is that a college costs more and more, delivers less and less, and educates young people to do less that is productive, except vote for Democrats.

At the same time, companies have jobs for skilled trades such as welders and electricians that go languishing for lack of qualified applicants.

mc 3

So, how about if we put your beliefs to the test, progressives? Let the NEA and the Department of Education start colleges in Mexico and Central America. Let s send diversity coordinators, gender studies teachers, and art history professors. Let us spend ( less than what we spend to poorly educate high school students in DC) part of the cost of educating them for free in NY and California, and offer the same art history and archeology courses we offer here. And let us give the education free, just as we would if they were illegally in the US, but in this case we will put the advantage of a progressive education back into the citizens who just want a better life, in Mexico.

After all, if it is good and desirable here, why not in Mexico?

At the same time, let’s gear up to train skilled tradesmen that we need so desperately. And once a student completes education that we offer to become a welder or other tradesmen, in their home country, then let us offer them a fast track work visa to come here and fill those jobs. Of course, Mexico may not want trained welders to go.

mc 5

But instead of drawing people here, and asking taxpayers to pay for them to receive the same failing education here that our own children must, in many cases, endure, let us educate them there, and permit them to come here if, and when, that education makes them a desired commodity. Not that progressive politicians or the NEA (I apologize if any of you had a stroke reading this) would ever permit this to happen. But isn’t the fact that we know they would not even consider it very telling?

While we are about it, let’s also take all public funding away from universities. Today. Let us give it back to taxpayers with children ready to get a post-secondary education. And let them spend that money as they will, instead of incurring huge debts, and let the market dictate who sinks or swims.

Unaccompanied minors ride atop the wagon of a freight train, known as La Bestia (The Beast) in Ixtepec

Perhaps colleges will see the bucks going to welding schools, and rethink the number of administrators and basket weaving professors they are able to pay. Perhaps they will decide college is not a place for them to have permanent employment, and 18 year olds to have fun, but instead a place to prepare 18 year olds to be productive 22 year old citizens. Of the United States. Or even Mexico.