Follow by Email

Monday, November 28, 2011

Are you a Con Man, or one of the conned?



By: Thaddeus S. Kaczor, Jr.


In an article in TIME MAGAZINE, Massimo Calabresi puts forth the proposition that the Federal Reserve 'Saved The World Economy' by bailing out all it's member banks and their affiliates by creating tens of Trillions of dollars, then paying themselves off with it!  Maybe the Fed 'Saved the World' for the Uber-Large International Banking Cartel and those FInancial services companies well-connected to it, , but in doing so it has nearly destroyed the American economy. While you sit in your ivory tower,  Mr. Calabresi, those of us in 'Flyover Land' have had to deal with our savings' and investments' value being wiped out, our home values being decimated, and we are just now beginning to deal with the incipient runaway inflation. No, not the phony 'government statistical' inflation, the REAL WORLD inflation of energy, food, health care and housing that the government 'conveniently' omits from it's fantasyland figures. Likewise, the REAL WORLD unemployment rate remains at over 20%- not the relatively rosy 9% or so that the government concocts by only counting those on the dole, and not those who no longer qualify, or are what is so Orwellian-ly termed 'under-employed'. 

There has been no 'recovery' since 2007- despite the flat-noted trumpeting of such an occurrence being regularly broadcast every quarter since the downturn began. We've been 'right around the corner' so many times that the entire block has been worn smooth, and now most pundits and economists are reduced to running in circles of logic around it when explaining away what is obvious to everybody else. TIME, like the rest of the captured corporate media, is reduced to the role of a cheerleader in a prison camp. Nobody believes what they are pushing, but everybody is either too afraid to speak out, or else stifled from stating what is clearly obvious to everyone: America is Broke; the International Banksters and their revolving-door allies the Government Bureaucrats are looting the economy; and no one in the Media. government or industry (is there a difference anymore?) is willing to level with the American people.

Articles like this one are being taken in three ways by the American Public: They are swallowed whole by the sheeple who are trained to believe whatever anyone 'in authority' tells them; They are believed on faith by those who have been bathed in ignorance for many years by the education system and the government schools; or else they are derided as outrageously bombastic propaganda by those who have enough critical thinking skills to figure out a con job when they see it.

The only question is, Mr. Calabresi: Are you one of the con men, or one of the conned?

Ron Paul's Strength in the 'Youth' Vote... And the Middle-Aged, and the Senior...


By Thaddeus S. Kaczor, Jr.


Sarah Palermo of the scripps-Howard News Service writes in her latest column in The Republic , dismissing the Youthful Enthusiasm of young Ron Paul supporters, that "Young voters tend not to pay very much attention," to politics, until "they get that first steady job, they get married, have kids, have a house."

They ARE paying attention, Mr. Smith. Just like middle-aged and older voters. They can't FIND that 'steady job', or are working at one well below their qualifications. They are worried about getting married- or BEING married- because they don't know if they can raise a family, even on two incomes. They may not be able to afford a house, or might be in danger of LOSING their house (or already lost it) due to the above reasons.

Too many pundits are reading the electorate by the old paradigms- Party Loyalty, affiliation with groups like age, race, ethnicity or income. But the 2010 election was just the beginning of a huge paradigm shift in American politics. Most people are NOT swayed by that 'influential talking head or news network. Most people won't vote for someone merely because of their party (many in fact will vote AGAINST them!). Even the older voter no longer will vote for someone because they 'trust him to protect Social Security'.

There is more information floating around than just the TV News and Newspapers. The electorate is more informed than at any time in our history, and they are downright ANGRY at what they have learned! Pundits and Party Elites are still trying to put voters in their 20th-Century 'boxes' and spoon-feed them the same old horse manure that 'always works'. What they still fail to realize is that, while you may preach to the choir successfully, whole sections of that choir have bolted and are deciding to sing solo. The American electorate is now leaving the old Two-Party (or One-And-One-Half Party) behind. They are coming more and more to realize that while the rhetoric from both wings of the ruling MONEY Party may SOUND different, the end results out of Washington are still the same wasteful, corrupt and managed Big-Government that has driven this country into literal bankruptcy.

Ron Paul is confounding traditional pundits and the party elites by saying what he believes instead of what he THINKS people want to hear. They are realizing he was the only 'voice in the wilderness' who actually warned us of our current catastrophe YEARS ago. They also are waking up to the fact that Ron Paul's most vociferous critics are the same people who called him 'a 'kook',  'fringe' and other demeaning names when he was ACCURATELY predicting the coming American Financial Meltdown.

Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate not afraid to speak unpopular truths- no matter the audience. Perhaps his many years experience as a practicing Physician trained him in telling people the hard truths they needed to hear, and in prescribing the harsh medicine they needed to endure in order to restore their health. Dr. Paul is now writing the prescription to save America from financial, social and societal catastrophe. While many wish to cover their ears and shout 'crazy' while he gives them their needed prescription, more are heeding the call to take the harsh medicine for America that the Good Doctor is prescribing. Many are also waking up to the fact that the alternative economic medicine being prescribed by the Snake-Oil salesman who oppose him is actually just more of the same bad medicine that got us deeper and deeper into the mess we now find ourselves in.

Don't take my word for it- do your own research. Look at ALL the candidates and their proposals. Match them up against their rhetoric and their record. I think you may just end up where I am at- not liking what Dr. Paul is prescribing, but realizing it's for the good of America's very survival.

Listen to the Good Doctor. Ron Paul 2012

Sunday, November 27, 2011

Space Exploration Funding vs. Feeding The World


By Thaddeus S. Kaczor, Jr.
Whenever the topic of space exploration comes up, neo-luddites always seem to rear their rock-swaddled heads and scream 'we could better spend that money HERE on EARTH!'. The Apollo program (by even the most conservative estimates) yielded roughly seven dollars in new technology, processes and other economic benefits for every one dollar spent! Space exploration is probably the most cost-effective expenditure the U.S. Government has ever made. I mean, you wouldn't have as advanced a computer (if one at all!) to post your anti-technology rants on if it weren't for the space program, and nearly every beneficial aspect of our modern society is built on a foundation laid by some aspect of the original space program. SO arguments against the benefits of a robust and vital space exploration program usually are politically-motivated and rarely are based in a factual costs/benefits analysis.

But this bias against the true benefits of scientific exploration is not limited to space. This irrational and emotional failure to actually comprehend what is right in front of us can be extended to criticism of ALL basic scientific research- as money 'wasted' on theoretical physics, biology and other esoteric areas will inevitably yield the next breakthroughs in energy, genetics or food production that will save countless lives, employ millions and increase the standard of living for all humanity.

Still, many cling to the false idea that we must 'choose' between research and 'spending here on Earth'. Let's look at this with a jaundiced eye: We can spend the money instead by propping up third-world dictators with 'humanitarian aid' that is either used as a weapon, or sold to actually BUY weapons. Or we can waste money trying to 'fight global climate change' by funding corrupt grant-chasing scientists and money-grubbing politicians joined at the hip with well-connected 'businessmen' who care not a whit about the environment, but only about increasing their own net worth by gaming a corrupt economic crony capitalist system to their own benefit. Or maybe we can pump more money into the hands of the corrupt international bankster junta so THEY can squeeze third, second and FIRST-world nations and drive all of humanity further into poverty and deeper into their dystopic control regime.

It's your choice. You can gather information and assess it based on the probable positive outcomes, both socially and economically. But please make it an INFORMED one, rather than a knee-jerk reaction based on propaganda and mis-information designed to further someone's ends that probably don't coincide with your own.

Thursday, November 24, 2011

Don't Go Down the Chute at the Charnel House!


By Thaddeus S. Kaczor, Jr.

I post, comment and generally spout off on a LOT of message boards and news sites- from international Media Conglomerates all the way down to the Little Blogs That Could. In my travels around cyberspace, I see a lot of anti-intellectual arguments about Ron Paul, such as "OMG, the Paulites are out tonight", "what a Paultard" and on and on ad-nauseum. Many posters (and even journalists) then proceeded to 'add nothing to the debate' with dismissive (and inaccurate) comments about things like the ridiculously inaccurate "Ron Paul's an isolationist" neo-con talking point, or just plain rude and sophomoric name-calling. This is (unfortunately) typical of much of what Ron Paul and his supporters are up against. Even if you wikipedia the vast difference between 'isolationism' and 'non-interventionism' (apparently many MUST get their info from there!), it's easy to dissemble that argument, and quite frankly, most of the simplistic and fallacious arguments against Dr. Paul.

Meanwhile, Ron Paul's supporters (most of them) soldier on through the ad-hominem attacks, the glittering generalities, the straw man attacks and all the other dishonest propaganda tactics, and continue to ask the hard questions in a reasonable manner. They also persist in deflecting and destroying the jingoistic bumper-sticker neo-con big government talking points thrown at them that are the only intellectual (!) ammunition many opponents seem to have against Dr. Paul.

Denigrating a candidate or his supporters in a simplistic and non-productive way is not 'debate'. It is propaganda. But it IS effective in deflecting the debate away from the issue being argued, and causing the attackee to either defend himself, or go back at the attacker in a similar manner. This is EXACTLY the purpose of such attacks- just ask Saul Alinsky! We, as supporters of Ron Paul and even more importantly, advocates of the principles that he espouses, must resist the temptation to respond in like fashion to the puerile attacks that we continually endure.

Instead, we need to continue the REAL debate and wake people up to how they are being robbed, jobbed and lobbed into the flaming pit of economic serfdom! We need to keep alive debate about the REAL issues facing America; the horrible cost in both lives and economically of the 5 (at least)  wars; the downward spiral that crony capitalism and corruption in D.C. have put this country into both economically and socially; the deleterious effects of the 'War On Terror' and War On Drugs'- whose only REAL effects seem to be the enrichment of those well-connected to the government (crony capitalism) and the massive consolidation of government power at the expense of the wealth, welfare and Civil Liberties of the vast majority of Americans; the phony and destructive 'efforts' of Congress and the President to negotiate a budget (none for three years now!) and the even more ridiculous Kabuki Dance about 'cutting' the budget that doesn't even use real or real-time numbers- let alone accomplish anything within the realm of reality!

Now, they may call us 'Paultard' or say how 'loony' these ideas are.... I welcome such attacks! They only serve to prove the points I have outlined above, and to put lie to the empty arguments being used against the fight for Liberty. When we respond in a rational and calm manner (yet still forceful and determined), we begin to win the argument by staking out the moral and intellectual high ground, and refusing to climb in the quicksand pit of emotional propaganda.

We need to wake up America- or else we will ALL continue to be led like political sheeple down the chute at the Government Charnel House.

Saturday, November 12, 2011

CBS News owes the candidates on it's Debate stage, as well as it's viewing audience an apology.

By Thaddeus S. Kaczor, Jr.

What Follows is the text of my formal complaint to CBS News over the farcical and blatantly biased 'debate' the network hosted on November 12, 2011. I suggest anyone who was as shocked, disappointed and disgusted with the outrageous and shameless promotion of 'certain' candidates, and the obvious exclusion and dismissal of others will follow the link above to register your own complaint.

I am very disappointed with the format and execution of your GOP 'Debate' this evening. The distribution and time given to each candidate was so grossly disproportionate as to go beyond mere bias into the area of 'advocacy journalism'. Edward R. Murrow is spinning in his grave to see such a sham being peddled as a debate! All you have to do is look at the distribution of questions and time allotted to each candidate to see how unfair and ridiculously biased this affair was.


Contrasting this fiasco with the recent CNBC debate on the economy is a study in extremes. CNBC was EXTREMELY fair to each candidate, allowing EACH candidate to respond to EACH topic, and using follow-up questions to elucidate and expand on their answers. By comparison, the debate on CBS obviously and purposefully AVOIDED asking certain candidates ANY questions on MOST topics. Furthermore, follow-up questions were ONLY directed at Romney, Gingrich and (occasionally) Perry and Cain, and most times were mere restatements which allowed the candidates to add nothing to their previous answers.


CBS News owes the candidates on stage who were denied a fair chance to respond to the questions given to the 'chosen few' candidates, as well as it's viewing audience an apology. We were all expecting an actual 'debate', when in reality what was aired was essentially a joint press-conference for Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. If no apology is proffered, or worse, justification for what is essentially an indefensible presentation is instead served, then greater damage to the reputation of the once 'Tiffany Network' and it's tarnished 'Crown Jewel' of a News Department will be done than has already been suffered by the mere presentation of this debacle of a debate.


I sincerely hope that you are able to look beyond the prospects of future political advertising and favors from those candidates who were 'promoted' by CBS through this program, and see the damage CBS has done to the American political system through it's attempt to unduly influence an election by showing blatant bias towards certain candidates, and against others.

Friday, November 11, 2011

Listen to the good Doctor and take your medicine, America.



Listen up, America. I've heard the criticisms of Ron Paul. No, not the irrational name-calling, weird 'conspiracy' and carnival-mirror characterizations of his policies or the Mainstream Media deliberate ignorance. No, I'm talking to the "I like Ron Paul, but..." segment of those with actual critical thinking skills who've actually read his policies, but have doubts based on either the part of his postition they disagree with, or the irrational 'he's unelectable' argument that is the fallback slam of a lazy, bought-and-paid-for corporate media.


You like Ron Paul. You say he is straightforward, intelligent, and understands limited government philosophically and practically better than all his opponents. But you are also saying that in order for Ron Paul to be taken seriously as a Republican, he has to sacrifice his principles, intellectual honesty an credibility on the altar of 'Party Loyalty'?

That's the problem with American Politics in general and Washington D.C. in particular- too many people sacrifice their principles to 'get along' and just 'get something passed'. That's how we end up with abominations like the bloated debt and spending morass we are now in, as well as the total inability of the Federal Government to even function in a realistic and rational manner! Compromise on tactics and implementation is one thing, but compromising basic ideals and principles amounts to a slow (or not so slow) societal suicide.

So many Politicians, pundits and bureaucrats have bargained away their core principles to 'go along and get along' that they can't even comprehend RIGHT and WRONG anymore- economically, socially or morally. When someone like Ron Paul comes along, they are confused because he doesn't fit in any of the standard ethically-challenged boxes that most politicians gladly slide into. Maybe the politicians, pundits and bureaucrats need to wake up, as many of the American people have, to the fact that 'Business as Usual', and the culture of morally relative compromise are not 'ideals' for politicians in D.C. to aspire to, but the CORE PROBLEM that has caused America's major crises in the present day.

Ron Paul isn't afraid to be brutally honest- about America's problems, their root causes, and the painful steps needed to solve them. Too many people seem willing to accept comfortable lies that dig us deeper in the hole, rather than confront the hard truths about our situation. Only Ron Paul has a record of stating honestly (if sometimes un-popularly) what our misguided policies will lead to. Many of those in the GOP who now echo Ron Paul's cautionary explanation of our predicament are the same ones who only a few short years ago either excoriated or laughed at him for stating the very same positions they now purportedly espouse!

The time is getting very late America, and we are now peering over an economic and societal tipping point. Our choice is clear: Do we want to continue the failed policies that have led to our current crisis, hoping for a different result? Or do we need to listen to the man who who has warned over the last 30 years that these policies will lead to the very dire situation that America now finds itself in? You may not like the taste of the Medicine that Dr. Paul is prescribing, but if you are fully informed, you will know that it is necessary. Your choice is do you want to swallow the economic and policy potions of the usual snake-oil salesman, hoping that THIS time the cure will work? Or do you want to listen to REAL Doctor, and take the medicine that will make America Healthy, Sound and whole once again?

Ron Paul 2012.

Listen to the good Doctor and take your medicine, America.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

What Does Herman Cain's Situation REALLY Mean?



By: Thaddeus S. Kaczor, Jr.

Let's look at this whole Herman Cain situation soberly and without the lens of partisanship and campaign spin from ANY side. It's not about race. It's not about 'allegations' (there WAS a settlement after an investigation, after all). When you get right down to it, it's not even about sexual harassment. It's about competence, character and the ability to manage and get through a crisis.

It's about how a candidate handles the pressure of a tough campaign, and all the curveballs thrown at him or her. Disregard the actual substance of the 'allegations', 'charges' or 'findings'- because ultimately, they are merely the template upon which a candidate is tested. This glimpse of how a candidate will perform under pressure is a window into how he or she will perform as President under much more enormous pressure.

If you disregard the Republicans' fundraising hyperbole about 'high-tech lynching' and the hypocritical bluster about 'hypocrisy' from the Democrats, you have to judge Herman Cain's reaction and handling of this crisis in his campaign with a critical and jaundiced eye.

It is obvious he has failed miserably. Walking back statements. Claiming to know nothing about multiple charges of sexual harassment- who could 'forget' being accused about something like this? Especially if they were 'false charges' as Mr. Cain is asserting? Just think in your OWN personal life if you were the target of such allegations- I know I would have such an incident seared into my memory for life!

The only conclusions we can draw are: Mr. Cain deliberately lied and hoped the whole incident would blow over- as if THAT would happen in a hotly contested Presidential Campaign!; That he thought since the records are 'sealed' with a confidentiality agreement that he could say anything to defend himself, and there could be no rebuttal- OOPS! A 'confidentiality' agreement works both ways, and you have to know the press will dig it up anyway.; Lastly, perhaps Mr. Cain actually DOESN'T remember this incident from only 12 years ago. THAT would be the most damning indictment against his ability to lead this country, as 'forgetting about' such an intense episode that occurred only 12 years ago can only indicate that Mr. Cain possesses a severely faulty cognitive reasoning process, that could, in the future, endanger not only his potential Presidency, but the Nation as a whole.

Once you get past the Partisan rhetoric, and even the facts of the cases that were settled by Mr, Cain and the National Restaurant Association, you have to use this incident to judge the character and abilities of one Herman Cain. I, for one find those qualities severely lacking in what I am looking for in a President.