The national Ponzi scheme 66

Here’s a point of view we heartily endorse.

From a column at PajamasMedia by Kyle-Anne Shiver:

According to the commentariat, Governor Rick Perry has stepped into a pile of electoral cow manure. Perry had the unrivaled gall to tell the truth about Social Security — that the program is, by design, a Ponzi scheme.

Personally, I’d like to give Rick Perry a medal for courage and a laurel wreath for leadership. He has signaled his intention to speak truth boldly in terms real people can understand.

Of course, Social Security is essentially a Ponzi scheme, fully dependent upon adequate numbers of new “investors” (workers) to pay off prior “investors” (retirees). But this week, Reason delineated three major Social Security facts that make it far worse than a Ponzi scheme, and audaciously added that Rick Perry was “soft-pedaling” his rhetoric on the subject. From Reason:

One, a Ponzi scheme collects money from new investors and uses it to pay previous investors — minus a fee. But Social Security collects money from new investors, uses some of it to pay previous investors, and spends the surplus on programs for politically favored groups — minus the cost of supporting a massive bureaucracy. Over the years, trillions of dollars have been spent on these groups and bureaucrats.

Two, participation in Ponzi schemes is voluntary. Not so with Social Security. The government automatically withholds payroll taxes and “invests” them for you.

Three: When a Ponzi scheme can’t con new investors in sufficient numbers to pay the previous investors, it collapses. But when Social Security runs low on investors — also called poor working stiffs — it raises taxes.”

When Rick Perry has the gumption to responsibly point this out in public, we ought to be sending the guy thank you notes for clarity and leadership. …

Rick Perry ought to be considered a one-man Reformation truth-squad every time he utters the phrase “Ponzi scheme” to foaming-at-the-mouth liberal pontificators.

Charles Krauthammer is also a Social Security truth-teller. In March, he wrote of Lew’s duplicitous attempt to shore up Obama’s Social Security propaganda, spelling out the Reformation’s argument in demographic enlightenment format:

But demography is destiny. The ratio of workers to retirees is shrinking year by year. Instead of Social Security producing annual surpluses that reduce the federal deficit, it is now producing shortfalls that increase the federal deficit — $37 billion in 2010. It will only get worse as the baby boomers retire.” …

Choices have consequences. And the millions of Americans’ choices not to bear many children, coupled with irresponsible political choices to raid the Social Security trust fund, have rendered “the greatest Ponzi scheme ever devised” just one more bitter fruit in the diminishing Keynesian economist’s orchard.

The fertility-rate in the US is 2.1, the rate necessary for population stability. Demographically, Europe is in a far worse condition. Every European country has a diminishing fertility-rate. And every European country is a welfare state – ie a socialist state. Socialism itself is a Ponzi scheme. It cannot work, it does not work.

Footnote: Of course we deplore Rick Perry’s belief in creationism. But there is no GOP candidate who does not claim to believe in a creator god. Romney and Huntsman are Mormons. Bachmann is a Lutheran. Santorum and Gingrich are Catholics. Paul and Cain are Baptists. It will be a long time yet before the United States has a self-declared atheist president.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
  • George

    Today  September 11, 2001  I was watching television as speeches were given in commemoration to the fallen people on 9/11/2001 .   Prayers were said and quotes from the Bible were made , but it is still oblivious to people that the people perpetrating the attack upon us were Muslim fundamentalists.   The perpetrators carried out their attacks in the name of their RELIGION.  The hijackers weren’t atheists. None of the hijackers were secularists who cut the throats of the flight crew  and shouted out loud —–  ” There is no God ! , There is no God ! “.    Oh no , but these stupid brainwashed people want to embrace the Muslims with no problem but still engage in their anti-secular drivel.  It’s secularphobia ( the fear or hatred of secularists )  that is on the rise. Its athiophobio  ( the fear or hatred of atheists ) that is on the rise.  It’s rationophobio ( the fear or hatred of rationalists ) that is on the rise. 
                          Yesterday I was reading a newspaper article where the liberal woman journalist stated that — ” We need to reach out to our Muslim brothers “.    I believe that was somewhat close to the  title of the article .  In other words, in her mind we need to reach out to the very people or individuals who embrace a belief system that caused this attack in the first freakin’ place.  Duhhhh  !!!!   Am I missing something here ?  
                                  I don’t see this journalist and her ilk encouraging people in America to reach out to secular individuals and try to understand secular freethinkers . I don’t see this journalists and her cohorts trying to encourage Americans to stop their hatred and disdain toward atheists  simply because we don’t embrace a belief in the invisible Sky Daddy.  
                            Furthermore I don’t see this journalist and her colleagues encouraging Americans to open their minds towards people who have beliefs that are logical, rational, analytical , reasonable , common sense and realistic.   Here we have people who want to embrace people who embrace the very belief-system that has waged war with the world .  What have atheists done regarding terrorism, violence, and forceful indoctrination ?    NONE whatsoever !   Is there a piece missing from  this puzzle ? The Muslims attack America  and threaten our very  survival  and we are involved in three wars regarding Muslims and their jihadist crusade  and yet people in America hate atheists .  Huh ?
    Excuse me ?   Say what ?           Hellllloooooo  !!!!!!   What’s wrong with this picture ? Now we have to decide who we are going to vote for as president of the USA — either a Christian born again right wing conservative Bible-thumper who wants to promote a Christain agenda or vote for a neo-marxist socialist who also panders to the most radical of Muslims , tears down our national defense, destroys our economy and tears down our very foundation.  And these are our choices ? 

    • George

      Correction above– I meant to write  [ Today September 11, 2011 ]  

  • Frank

    Perry, Bachmann, and Santorum are all the same; they’re all delusional religious whackos. And that’s why I don’t want any of them close to a nuclear launch button. Here’s a video of Michelle Bachmann from August 5, 2011.

    Michele Bachmann testifies for Jesus Christ

  • Les.w(UK)

    You Americans should make up your mind as to which  is worse – a religious president or a left wing president (or worst of all, one who is left wing and bows down to a muslim dictator…). Given that more than 80% of you believe in mythical beings (not a terribly enlightened lot, are you – present company excepted) there is approximately zero chance of an atheist politician getting anywhere in the US. Here in the more enlightened U.K., we have an openly atheist deputy prime minister. Unfortunately he is also a member of the Lib-Dems, who, being of the left wing persuasion,  are neither liberal, democratic or rational. However, most supporters of the Lib-Dems have now deserted the party, claiming he has betrayed the party’s lefty principles – so perhaps being an atheist has injected a note of rationality into his politics. Unfortunately, some other (non-atheist) members of his party who have forced their way into government, are barking mad lefties – a rather unfortunate quid pro quo.
    re your Ponzi scheme – the US is so deep in debt (and insanely continues to borrow more and more) that you are bankrupt, as are several European countries.  What to do? Personally, I would lock up all current and aspiring politicians and economists, and start again with a less certifiable lot…

    • George

      We already have a left wing liberal president who bows down to a Muslim dictator ( or rather Muslim DICTATORS ) and his name is Obama. Furthermore  Les , would you please  get away from  the  ” You Americans ” stereotyping . Not all Americans think alike and not all Americans are monolithic ( and the same applies  to Europeans ) .  I agree with your overall presentation but please don’t try to “paint” us all or nearly all with the same broad brush. I would rather have a religious president than someone like Obama or a radical left-wing liberal socialist atheist  , that’s for sure. So we are in agreement there , but all of us are NOT in the same boat.

  • Jillian Becker

    Nietrick -

    The lefty Cato Institute and the nutty Ron Paul hurray-chorus? Neither is to be trusted. 

    So Perry was once a Democrat. So was Ronald Reagan. Both saw the light.   

    • lucretius

      Perhaps someone could try to name one country with mostly atheistic population (or even a large proportion of atheists) and a birthrate above replacement level? Are you sure these two phenomena (atheism and low birthrate) are not related? And if they are, are you still looking forward to an atheist USA? 
      A good example to keep in mind is Israel, where the haredim (ulta-orthodox) have an average birthrate of about 10 while the rest of the population (which still includes a lot of religious Jews) has a birthrate of 2.4.

      • George

        I don’t have a certain answer for that question. I’m sure some would say Russia would have a mostly atheistic population but I have read so many conflicting reports that I would have to do more research before I post anything as ceratin.  Even in Russia , the Russian Orthodox Church , and minority religions ( including Islam ) are popular.  I do not know the percentile scale ratio.  Many Muslims are entering other non-Muslim nations and it was reported that they have a birthrate of 5 offspring per family with a higher birthrate than the indigenous people.  I do not have the facts on this as I am merely quoting a non-verifiable source.  Perhaps you may have some confirmed statistics on this issue.

        • lucretius

          Actually Russia is a very unusual case. First, it has a terrible population problem – its population has been actually declining for years (there was a slight improvement recently). Furthermore, this not as much due to low birthrate (though it is low) as to very high early male death rate – primarily due to alcoholism. At least some stereotypes are quite true. 

          But that’s not all. After 70 years of communist anti-religious campaigns and propaganda, a recent poll showed that 80 of Russians describe themselves as religious believers – the highest number in Europe (although few subscribe to organised religions). 

      • George

        I couldn’t post under your last comment because the page wouldn’t allow it so I’m posting here. I actually stated the same thing you last posted to a friend of mine and he didn’t believe it that Russia has become overwhelmingly religious in spite of the anti-religious propaganda of the former USSR.  Not only alcoholism is causing early deaths but there are a number of other contributing factors as well,  such as widespread illness, suicide, stress ( inducing eartly heart attacks ) poor health in general, industrial and farm accidents and a host of others.
                             Even when Americans were saying that the former USSR was such an atheistic nation , it was the Russian Orthodox Church that wielded the true power and control of that communist state. A vast problem with the sub-zero climates have contributed to a problem with farming ( food supply ) not to mention the government control , but so many factors came into play in that nation that affected the longevity of the human life span in general.  As for now , I’m more concerned with the future and present state of America and getting our great country on the right course for survival. I’m learning more and more each day and that is why I stay OPEN for suggestions , comments and different points of view.

      • Jillian

        lucretius - 

        those are interesting points you raise. It may be that atheism and small families are linked. 

        An atheist but smaller nation would be fine as long as it didn’t go in for any welfare nonsense. 

        As far as I know Israel has firmly resisted imposing religious law (except for some stupid concession to the orthodox in the matter of marriage – that it has to be by religious ritual of some, any, sort). Please correct me if I’m wrong. Even with a larger orthodox population (and being born into an orthodox family does not mean a person will remain that way) I think there is no great chance of it becoming a theocracy.  

        • lucretius

          Israel has far more urgent and serious dangers to worry about than becoming  a theocracy. The problems with the ultra-orthodox, who are at this time only about 8% of the Jewish population (but thanks to their explosive birth rate are expected to become 1/3 in less than 15 years time) are of a different kind. First, many of them have a lukewarm attitude to the state of Israel and some refuse to recognise it altogether. Only about 10% serve in the army (the Israeli law permits that). They send their children to their own religious schools, where they study only the Torah (the Jewish Bible) and the Talmud. No mathematics, science, computer science, history – only religion. As a result, only 40% of them are employed and the majority live below the poverty line. 

          The only positive thing about them from Israel’s national interest point of view is their ultra-high birth rate, which is actually much higher than that of the Israel Arabs (whose birth rate is falling).

          The extent of the waste of human resources involved becomes even more apparent if you take into account the fact that the Ashkenazi (Western) Jews have the highest average IQ in the world (about 115). Most of the haredim are Ashkenazi and there must be a large number of kids with Nobel prize level talents, who never get a chance to become anything but rabbis. The irony is that the Jewish rabbis of the Middle Ages knew a great deal more science or mathematics than the contemporary ones do. 

          Israel, of course, has to solve this problem before it destroys its very dynamic, high-tech based economy which at this time is one of the most innovative and dynamic in the world. The problem is that currently 10% of the population reproducing 40% of all the exports. As a result, Israel has a very unequal income distribution, which is one of the causes of the current wave of social protest. If, however, the government yields to the demands of the protesters, it may end up loosing its most elite workers, who can easily find employment almost anywhere in the world. Well, perhaps Israel may actually benefit from the increasing anti-semitism in Western Europe – it makes emigrating their so much less attractive for Israeli Jews. 

    • Keith

      When you are young and think with your heart you are a liberal. As you get older and think with your brain you become a conservative.

      • George

        You’re right about that Keith except that most conservatives in America still can’t think beyond their [GOD] indoctrination which means that they can think politically but are the most unthinking people on earth still embracing religious superstition  [ Christianity ].   So , I guess that makes them half-thinkers . Oh well ! 

    • Anonymous

      I’m sorry the links I provided weren’t up to your standards. I happen to disagree with your assessment of the Cato Institute as lefty. They’ve always seemed very much libertarian to me. The RLC is likewise libertarian, but I won’t quibble about their obvious love for Ron Paul. I was only posting those links because they addressed issues, with sources, that I think are worthy of examination.

      As far as Perry once being Democrat as was Reagan, I’d like to once again point out that Reagan never legislated as one. As one of the new links I’m providing – although at this point I’m sure I’m wasting my time – points out Rick was a conservative Democrat. Fine. He’s fiscally conservative. But he was also willing to tow the party line for his career and when his career path as a Dem was blocked then, and only then, did he switch parties. THIS is my issue with his past.

      Rick Perry is all too willing to throw freedom out the window when freedom gets in the way of what he wants. Gardisil, Eminent Domain, abortion, prayer……I’m sorry. I don’t care how good his fiscal policy is, he has shown time and again that he is an opportunist who will throw the government hammer down to enforce his beliefs. We already have one of those, I’d prefer not to elect another.

      http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/seven-ways-rick-perry-wants-change-constitution-131634517.html

      http://www.texastribune.org/texas-politics/2012-presidential-election/guest-column-perry-as-a-very-conservative-democrat/

      • George

        Hey Nietrick  , the whole mess is enough to drive a person looney. I’ve been taking in the comments  trying to ascertain which is which and we as Americans in this era of time are stuck with a bunch of  corrupt self-centered agenda driven political bureaucrats.   ALL these political  pundits claim to have the answer and ALL of them have their own personal agendas and NONE of them actually care about the people as a whole in it’s entirety. I am not going to say I have come to a conclusion to whom I would prefer because I would be lying and I’m still distrusting on all these individuals so I am going to ponder on the info presented and in time make my decision in all honesty.    

      • Jillian Becker

        Nietrick -
        The Texas Tribune article confirms Perry’s credentials as a conservative – even when he was in the Democratic Party.

        You are right about the Cato Institute. It is libertarian. I made a mistake – confused it with something else.

  • George

    I just posted a comment a few minutes ago to Ralph regarding Social Security.   In regards to the issue of  Wayne Root.    If he is a “born again Christian ” as Jillian pointed out and he  isn’t going to push that in his political agenda as a Christian conservative proselytizer , then so be it.  But how will we know what his intent is ?  Just wondering.  I like Rick Perry in his attitude of supporting America and our capitalistic way of life and culture but I must admit that I do not know where he stands on the matter of secular freethought and his attitude toward us secular freethinkers. As I stated a couple times before , I heard Wayne Root on a conservative radio talk show and didn’t know he was a “born again Christian” as Jillian has pointed out.  Now I’m caught between a rock and a hard place . Nearly all ( if not ALL ) of the conservative right-wing politicians are pro-Christian and promote the Judeo-Christian agenda .    My concern is will the person of my or your choice be one who can separate his religious views from politics. We know how right wing Christian zealots love to mix religion ( read- Christianity ) with politics.  They claim that they want less government involvement in their lives but the can’t seem to get enough of government mixing with religion ( specifically Christianity ). This is my primary concern. Now I find myself in a psychological “tug of war” deciding who is best for America and who will not be anti-secular if he/she gets my vote.  This is my concern  and I must wholeheartedly admit that I DO NOT have an answer ( being totally honest ).  I’m going to monitor the candidates statements and observe more and more where they stand.  I want  to support a candidate who will protect America , help boost the economy and engage in limited government spending , less government intervention of our personal lives , and NOT be  an anti-secular freethought bigot.    This entire scenario can indeed be a puzzling matter to sort this out and once again guys thanks for engaging in mature dialogue on this issue.   You guys are the best————-  George 

    • Keith

      Ideally I would like to support a candidate who thought like me/us but given our current circumstances I will support whoever I think will beat our current “ruler”.  We don’t have the luxury of casting votes to show support for a secular candidate if it means the continued destruction of America.
       

      • George

        I totally agree Keith    !!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Frank

    There are two distinct types of “believers” among the GOP candidates. The first group is what I will call the “bat shit crazy” group. Rick Perry is part of that group along with Bachmann and Santorum. These people want to allow Intelligent Design to be taught in schools as an alternative to Evolution. They want to repeal Roe vs. Wade and make abortion illegal. They want to prevent gay people from having the same civil rights as heterosexuals. They want to, and in Texas they are, rewriting American history text books to say that this country was founded as a Christian nation. In short they want to turn America into a Christian theocracy. I cannot and will not vote for any of them.

              The second group is what I will call the “cultural believers” group. Romney, Huntsman, Gingrich, and Cain belong in this group. (Ron Paul is a group by himself.) These candidates claim religious affiliation because they realize it is necessary in order to be elected. They are not ideologues like those in the other group. They do not have a religious agenda. I can and will vote for any of them. Of course I do have a favorite in this group but any of them would be preferable to someone from the “bat shit crazy” group.

            

    • George

      Many have already re-written history and many are now pushing for  more rewriting .   Their goal is a Christian Theocracy Utopia  .  If some of these candidates had their way , they would change the name of our great country to   — The United States of Christianity  .

    • Anonymous

      You hit the nail on the head, Frank. While I have other issues with the second group that may prevent me from supporting them, there is most certainly a line between them and Team Jesus.

      This is the same reason I’ve stopped listening to Glenn Beck. There’s a certain amount of religion you have to put up with but when you lead with that shit…..sorry. You start trading socialism in the name of government for socialism in the name of God.

      Some days I feel like the last spark of the Enlightenment is sputtering.

      • George

        Thats’s so true Nietrick , and I often find myself cursing  the  conservative radio talk show hosts. While I like their message of small government, low taxes, less wasteful goverment spending , pro-family and pro-military ( national defense ) , etc . messages  , they just can’t seem to be able to shake the GOD  ( read- fundamentalist Christian ) mindset . It is so frustrating.

      • Keith

        Great line there:

        Be it socialism in the name of government or socialism in the name of god it is still socialism.

        • George

          Reminds me of the old saying  [ Six in one hand and a half-dozen in the other  ]. 

        • George

          And both groups Keith are a bunch of wackos !

    • Jillian Becker

      Frank - 
      I can assure you that the US will not become a “theocracy” if Perry becomes president. That will only happen if or when Islam takes over the government.  

      • Frank

        Jillian,I realize America would not become a theocracy overnight. But appointing a bunch of Christers to the federal bench and perhaps a Supreme Court justice appointment or two would certainly tilt the table in that direction. I for one am unwilling to take that chance.

        • George

          The problem I have Frank and I have to be totally honest here is that I truly have not decided who I want to vote for . As it appears  to me we do have to make a choice between the lesser of the evils even if we don’t want to.   Here’s the delema I see Frank. If I vote for a conservative Republican Christian because I’m ticked off about the direction Obama and his cohorts have taken us then I have sort of caved in to the religious right and it gives them a boost for  furthering their agenda.  If I vote for a Libertarian who is also a “born again Christian ”  or liberal leaning person  , I’m still at square one.  I’m certainly not going to vote for a liberal left wing Democrat and end up with Obama II .    I’m not going to pretend that I have the answer because I don’t.  It’s a mind boggling situation but we must indeed sooner or later make a choice. I’m just monitoring the various comments to help me make a more informed decision. So , to be totally honest here Frank  , I still remain undecided and I’m still researching for more info.

        • Frank

          In Reply to George,
          Here is how I will vote. I will vote for any Republican candidate EXCEPT the “bat shit crazy” three: Perry, Bachmann, and Santorum. If any of those three are the Republican nominee I will vote a straight Democratic ticket. Quite frankly (no pun intended) if given a choice between living under socialism or a theocracy I will choose socialism. When things get bad enough economically under socialism then capitalism will re-emerge. But once a theocracy has power it will take many generations to remove it. Quite simply stated it comes down to what all elections come down to – choosing between the lesser of two evils. And for me it’s an easy choice. I’ll take a well meaning socialist over a religious whacko who thinks he is doing god’s work every time.

        • George

          In reply to Frank

                              Well Frank we share the same sentiments on the “between a rock and a hard place position ” ——.   Sometimes I must admit that it drives me nuts trying to decide who is the worst  ( the socialists or the religious fanatic crazies ).  Out of all honesty Frank , I don’t see anyone running who I truly trust .  One nut is pushing socialism and the other nuts pushing Christian theocratic agendas.  I will definately take note on your commentary . What an astonishing position to be in.  Either way we’re screwed ——just one group less than the other.   So we have to make a decision  [ the lesser of the two evils  ].   I will continue to ponder on your presentation.  What a predicament to be in .  I do like your input just the same .  The religious fanatic kooks turn my stomach and if they gain control , we atheists will be their primary targets for sure —and it will be [  OPEN SEASON  ] on secular freethinkers .    Take care Frank . 

      • George

        I agree Jillian  . I do not fear Rick Perry becoming president of the United States but it would horrify  the crap out of me for our great country to fall under sharia law rule and become a Muslim theocracy !     That itself is a NIGHTMARE  thought !

        • Harold

          This scenario is so far from likely that expressinig it smacks of phobia rather than reason.

        • George

          Since I can’t respond to Harold’s post directly . I never said it would happen Harold. Americans are too well armed and too protective of our rights to allow such a takeover by sharia proselytizing.  I said IF that would occur . It will never happen –I’m sure .  That was actually sarcasm ,  but then the expected  response remark by you to my comment smacks of arrogance as expected .  I’m not surprised !

  • Ralph

    I’ve had a fulltime job almost every day of my adult life. My employer and I have paid social security tax for more than 40 years. Now that I’m a week away from being eligible for social security I’ve been labeled a burden on society. I fail to see any logic in this.

    • George

      Actually  Ralph , you earned your Social Security by your tenure investment throughout your career. The people who are a burden are the deadbeats who do nothing but collect welfare ,  attempt to get lifetime unemployment  and Section 8 housing at the government’s expense ( meaning from working taxpayers ).  These types of individuals are nothing but moochers, losers, and parasites upon society. I don’t blame a person who loses his/her job and gets temporary assistance ( and it should be on a incremental payback plan  when re-employed ).  There are so many people in our society that actually believe they are entitled to being taken care of by the government and actually believe the government or society owes them a living while they sit on their butts and collect tax payer subsidizing afforded to them by working people.    There are people who have never worked that are collecting social security which SHOULD be considered illegal and investigated . YOU are in no way a burden in this regard ——-  THEY ARE  !!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Anonymous

      The way the system it set up, in only the most technical of ways, you are a burden. This isn’t to say you haven’t worked hard and paid in your social security taxes, but you paid for your parents, or someone else’s safety net. My generation is paying for you, at an ever increasing percentage per person, as the above points out. We will never see a penny of that money.  I would have far less issue with socical security if the money you worked hard all your life to put into the system was waiting for you to collect it. It’s not.  

      Social programs pit people against each other for their very livelihood in digusting ways. The government becomes insurance adjuster. You work until you can’t to pay for your comrades and when you’re not useful anymore…..well….those death panels are there for a reason.

      You shouldn’t take the raging against the machine personally, Ralph. It’s the government and socialism that people are angry with. I think that point has to be made very clear if we are to avoid the division that is becoming all too common. Hell, if we don’t make clear the line between being angry with socialism and it’s victims/beneficiaries we will end up like Europe.

      • George

        Yep , it is indeed the government and socialism that people are angry with   ( working people that is —who earn their living and aren’t a parasite on others ).    Europe is falling apart  and  Africa has already been destroyed ages ago ( and has never recovered ).  I understand Ralph’s frustration and I also understand your clarification in more broader specifics.    The problem we have and it’s a question that I want to put out there and that is ———- :      How do we get the message to the overwhelming masses of the people ?  I’m open for suggestions .

      • Ralph

        The system is the burden.

  • George

    According to Jillian Becker — Wayne  Root is a born again Christian , so therefore right there  I won’t be in favor of him.  I missed Jillian’s comment post a moment ago.   He appeared that way on the radio show but I wasn’t sure.   There is another libertarian who is on the radio that makes arrogant remarks about atheists and  I’m starting to worry about even the Libertarian Party as well.   I’m going to do more research before I make any definate comments of who I feel is actually best  because each day I’m learning more and more things that I never knew before from different sources.  Wayne Root appeared to be a small government guy on the radio but  I certainly don’t want some religious fanatic in office .  I’m gonna have to take a break and do more research because I need to get more information on this matter—-so  I’ll reserve further comment on the matter so I don’t put my foot in my mouth. I consider myself a conservative libertarian and even I have a few problems ( I admit ) with the Libertarian Party on a couple of issues.
                             To be blunt I don’t like the party system at all ( it’s devisive ) . A person should simply run for public office such as president, governor, mayor , city council person, senator, congressperson, etc. as a citizen representing ALL of the people and not just a particular political group.

  • Jillian

    cheongyei - 

    For your information:  Wayne Root is a “Born Again” Christian. 

    • George

      I’m glad you informed us regarding  Wayne  Root being a ” Born again Christian ” .   When I heard him on a talk radio show he came across as having that appearance in the back of my mind but I wasn’t sure.  I liked what he had to say but I had a ‘subliminal ” suspicion.  Actually I’m distrusting  of all the political parties ( including mine ).   I don’t see America becoming any theocracy because we have such a vast diversity of so many religions and secular groups  within. There would be an all out internal civil conflict if not war and it would be raining chaos. I never want to see that happen and I don’t believe it will.  If Rick Perry wins , I will be cheering  just knowing that the mighty socialist a**hole Obama is out of there.

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul has been telling us this for years, so it is not news.

    Why does the media try to make Perry’s comment look newsorthy now?  If the members of the media had had any balls, they’d have been warning us of this ever since Milton Friedman made it clear two decades ago.

    But the media is bad, so until we tell them to #%*Bleep@&^ off, they will continue the charade of supporting those who hate individual liberty.

    • George

      I definately understand your point cheongyei . That’s exactly what I said previously on this page —-that when you vote for the lesser of the two evils you still get an evil.    Here’s the problem I’ve been faced with and it seems to be a delema of a sort.  If I vote for the lesser of two evils I still get an evil , just not as bad of an evil as the other a**hole evil but an evil just the same.   Then if I vote for a third party candidate who I know doesn’t have a chance of winning , I’m wasting my vote considering the mindset of the  American people who have allowed the two-party system to take over ( Democrats vs Republicans ).  Then if I just say f*** it and don’t vote for anyone at all because I’m pissed off with them all , then I haven’t taken a stand to put one over the other, but then again what if I don’t like any of the candidates that are running ?  Should I vote just for the sake of voting ?  Should I vote for someone I don’t even like or favor just to say I voted  ?  That’s senseless.  Suppose I believe ALL of the candidates are a**holes and I can’t stand either —-am I justified in just sitting out the vote and see what gives ?  Am I un-American for not voting at all because I believe all the candidates selected are jerks and I don’t care for either one ? I must be totally honest here and admit that I don’t have an answer and I find myself puzzled on the issue ( but at least I will admit it and I am seeking  solutions) . 
                             Our society and the world at large is so screwed up with corruption being the order of the day. Politicians are so self-centered and corrupt that they don’t give a rat’s rear end about the people as a whole  but engage in pandering and favortism.I would never enter politics for all the gold in the world. Your point and that of Nietrick are good points and we need to put the puzzle together to save America ( and world society ). As I stated before  —I’m all ears and open for all suggestions because I don’t have the answer but I’m searching.  Thanks for the input——points well taken.

    • George

      Cheongyei , I consider myself a conservative libertarian , but I also know that currently as it now stands a libertarian candidate is NOT going to be of the final selection of Americans. The Democrats and Republicans still have a stranglehold on the electoral process and yes I would love to see a Libertarian (conservative ) in the office but it’s not going to happen and  I’m not going to bury my head in the sand pretending otherwise because of my personal hopes.    You mentioned before about the lesser of two evils and as I stated before I don’t want just ANYBODY in the office of the presidency, but I do know beyond any doubt that any of the conservative candidates running will save America from the damage that Obama has done.  I don’t agree with all their policies  ( especially the religious aspect which is a given ) but we need to turn our country around from  what Obama has done.  The people in the Libertarian party in my opinion are wimps and have not come out fighting strong enough or have voiced their point of views loud enough in the public arena or the mainstream media.   This doesn’t take a gazillion dollars to do. The last thing I want is another Democrat ( especially Obama ) back in the white house.   So I’m going to have to make a decision and I will be voting  Republican for sure  ( it could be Perry ) but I haven’t decided for sure yet . I’m still keeping an open mind and weighing the facts and information to later make an informed choice . Our nation is in peril and another left-wing liberal in office will be a disaster.

    • George

      Cheongyei  , I love Libertarian  Wayne  Root and I heard him on a conservative radio talk show and  I loved what he had to say. I’m a conservative libertarian.  But here’s the problem . Nobody knows who he is on a large scale basis and he isn’t out in the spotlight letting his message be heard on any significant scale to make a hugh difference.  I would love for  Wayne  Root to be president but he needs to step up to the plate because he’s a mystery to most Americans ( and that’s a fact ).
                            When Bob Barr was running , I asked several people about him and they had NO idea who the guy was .  I’m serious.  This is the problem and we can’t ignore this reality.  If Wayne Root threw his hat into the circle and ran for the presidency and came out swinging in the open public like I heard him on the talk radio show it would or just may make a difference .  He’s NOT doing that and it’s disappointing.  Wayne Root has some great ideas but he needs to become more vocal publicly and get his voice out there and IMO he refuses to do so.  The media hasn’t hindered him IMO. If he made enough noise publicly and let more and more people hear his message then it would be a wake up. Look at Obama , he was a nobody that became president  ( of course he had the mainstream media that pushed him into the spotlight, endorsed him and supported him ) but at first he was a nobody.  It is possible for Wayne Root to get a position in the spotlight but NOT the way he’s going about it now—-that’s for sure. 

      • George

        In continuation to my above post.  Now that Jillian has informed us that Wayne Root  is a  “born again Christian”  that soured the deal for me .  I liked his presentation when I heard him on the conservative talk radio show , but I am NOT going to support anyone who is going to promote a “born again” fundamentalist Christian agenda. I have to admit I was totally uninformed of such . It seems as though just when I get to like someone I find out things I never knew before . This is why it is imperative that we get as much info on a candidate as we can to make informed decisions and not come to hasty decisions. I don’t want to make a vote that I will come to regret in shame and disgust.  Keep the info coming guys and hopefully we can come to a good decision of  who is the right one for us conservative secular freethinkers and for  America.  Oh and one more thing guys , thanks for being mature and  intelligent with a sense of tact in the comments.  It makes great dialogue  !  

  • George

    I have said all along that America is not ready for an atheist president.  But then , the more I think about it considering how gullible the American populace really is——just think about it  ”      :     America fervently elected a  bi-racial of unproven birthplace , neo-Marxist ,  anti-American ,  anti-capitalist , anti-military, anti-national security misfit  for the highest office  :  His majesty—OBAMA as our president.       So based upon that alone  , I would say that America would elect   a cyborg for president if he spoke eloquently enough to hoodwink the American people with deceitful charm.
                         A conservative atheist president would certainly put America on the right track for real civility, equality and advancement.  Yep , Rick Perry is telling it like it is regarding social security , but be forwarned , he is NOT  (  in my opinion )  favorable toward secular freethinkers  in any sense.   Once again , we find ourselves caught between a rock and a hard  place  and again we must decide the lesser of the so-called  “evils”.  As for now , he certainly would be a million times better than that anti-American  neo-Marxist OBAMA.

    • George

      Just to clarify myself—my statement has nothing to do with Obama being bi-racial  but the simple fact that he is IMO a con-man and is harmful to America.   Obama has pandered to our enemies and stabbed our allies in the back IMO.      I would vote for Rick Perry if I believed he would turn America around and get  us back on track even if he is a Christian . I would only hope that being a  Christian  , he would be open minded enough to be fair and just with those of beliefs different than his own.   So far , all of the right wing Christians that I have ever met have been so pro-Christian and anti-secular that I tend to be very distrusting in their attitude toward atheists . I also wonder ( and I may be wrong ) if they would end up taking  measures to fight against atheism while pushing a right-wing Christian agenda. The way it looks right now , I would take a hard core  Christian rather than Obama  any day and once again –it’s just my opinion .   I believe that Col. Allen West would be the toughest fighter against radical Islam and Herman Cain would be the best for getting the economy in line. Rick Perry would be the best  OVERALL  in a summary perspective.     Just my personal point of view two cents.

    • Anonymous

      I agree with you about Perry being against free thinkers. IMO, he’s a big government guy and of the deplorably bad GOP pack, he’s near the top for worst in my book. I don’t buy into the idea that anyone would be better than Obama. I think we are in a very precarious situation right now, not totally unlike what’s been happening in the ME in that in your zeal to rid yourself of one tyrant you have to be cautious don’t put another in it’s place.

      I don’t think we are better off putting a big government Republican in, no matter how bad Obama is. The best outcome there is gridlock with lots of spin showing how bad the Republican is which sets up for an even more dangerous liberal to win the next election. The GOP seems to have shirked it’s duty to being the opposition and the upholder of freedom. I will not support a slower suicide.

      • George

        I agree with you Nietrick , and just for the record I DO NOT believe that  ANYBODY  is better than Obama.    Many  of these Republican candidates are RINO  Republicans and many of them associate being a  Republican  or conservative with being a fundamentalist Christian bent on supporting in THEIR minds the idea of saving or preserving a CHRISTIAN NATION  and CHRISTIAN SOCIETY.   I also do not want to support a slower suicide and many voters are sick & tired of voting for the lesser of the two evils because you still get an evil just the same ( pardon the religious term ). One is simply  not as bad as the other but it still doesn’t solve the original problem.  We’re definately on the same team there.  Frankly speaking —I’m open for suggestions.

        • Anonymous

          The lesser of two evils is still evil. 
          That’s why my vote will be cast for principled, rational, liberty-loving individuals only, the type that don’t exist in either major party. 
          Give me a Libertarian any day.

        • Nietrick

          To be honest, I think we’re screwed this time out either way. Ron Paul is the only GOP candidate that seems to give a rat’s ass about liberty at all. However, he’s a loon. Where I part with him is the same place I part with the Libertarian Party, namely, immigration and foreign policy. His (and their) insistance that Islam isn’t a threat is at best willful ignorance. But I digress…..

          The only solution I can see is to keep pounding out the message of liberty and the proper role of government to everyone you meet. I think we’re in the process of realignment in American politics and the future of conservatism is libertarian. I think the popularity of Ron Paul on college campuses now and back in ’08 is helping this realignment. Good little Dems responding to the message of real freedom, and conservatives being able to disconnect conservatism from religiousity.

          But there isn’t a good choice this time out.  The question is, will there be anything to save when the next election comes?

      • George

        Nietrick , Im reading where both you and  Cheongyei stated that Rick  Perry is a big government guy.   Maybe he is or maybe he isn’t —but I must admit that I personally have never heard anything of that sort from him.   Since I must admit I don’t actually know for a fact , could you please enlighten me of what things  Rick  Perry has said or done that is considered to be Big Government.  I truly want to take note of such things. can you list in detail what he has said  ( where and when ) that would be considered Big Government . Can you give me any quotes ( not rumor or heresay ).  I was listening to Wayne  Root on a conservative radio talk show and I certainly like what the guy had to say but nobody on a large scale knows the guy exists .   These guys need to come out from behind the shadows and step up and make some noise and get their message out more broadly. Sure the biased mainstream media is going to support the left-wing liberal candidate ( errrr whats-his-name ). I haven’t been keeping up with a lot regarding  Perry and maybe you can inform me regarding any Big Government position or statements he has made because  I personally haven’t heard any and I won’t say such doesn’t exist but I personally don’t know of any.
                             If  Wayne  Root would get more involved and assertive and make more noise to get the media attention he could really attract a lot of voters who are fed up with both the  Republicans and the  Democrats. 

      • George

        Nietrick , please let me know what you find on your “hunt” regarding sources. I’m truly interested.  Keep us informed —————–    Thanks !

        • Nietrick

          Sourced blog entry from the Cato Institute website. If you throw his name into the site search there are a few other entries as well.
          http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/is-rick-perry-really-for-limited-government/

          This is a letter sent out by the Texas Republican Liberty Caucus. It’s sourced mainly by local Texas papers and such.
          http://www.rlc.org/2011/08/12/texas-rlc-sends-out-warning-on-rick-perry/

          I have to admit that I’m less than great with this links thing. I tend to read things, squeeze out the gist, and remember my opinion of it rather than being able to give a proper bibliography.  I apologize for this, but I hope these two links are enough of a jumping off point. I urge everyone to look into his views on religion, particularly as it relates to government. This is where I think Rick Perry is the most dangerous. I wanted to give one good link on the subject but the vast majority of sites mentioning it are loonie lefty sites.

    • Anonymous

      Perry is a big gooberment / small church proponent.  Anyone who advocates large government programs and bureaucracies and still believes in irrational fairy tales is dangerous as a leader.

      Look at Obyango, his racist christian heritage and big government, socialist Kenyan-Marxist views have been very dangerous to the average Joe.

      • George

        I absolutely agree most certainly. Do you have any suggestions who you would want in the seat of the presidency ?  If so—why ?    Just curious . 

      • Jillian Becker

        I’ve missed something that Perry must have said. Why do you all agree that he likes big government? A quote or link please. 

        • George

          I had the same question Jillian.  I never heard  Perry say such a thing about being big-government .  maybe I missed something. I do not want just ANYBODY for president but I’m sure you will agree Jillian , Perry would be a thousand times better than Obama.     I must have missed him saying something about big government . Maybe I am mistaken but I believe cheongyei may have heard some kind of propaganda about Perry (  I’m not sure but I would like to know when and where he heard Perry state such and the source of the info regarding the assertion ).   All of the right wing candidates are pro-Christian or at least pro-religion but one thing is for sure and that is neither would allow our country to be taken over or allow our nation to be sold out or capitulate to our open enemies.    I don’t have the answer of who is best for the office of the presidency but if I had to choose between Perry and Obama as the two final opposing candidates , that would be a no-brainer , as I would vote for Perry in a heartbeat without hesitation and have no regrets.

        • Nietrick

          I’m going to have to go on the hunt now…LOL. Until I can come back with something concrete, all I can offer is the Gardisil vaccine debacle, the Trans Texas Corridor debacle, and a half remembered something I read recently about 165,000 or so of the jobs he ” created ” in Texas being government jobs.

          I’m also not a fan of someone who spent half of his political career as a Democrat touting himself as a true conservative.  I understand that you grow up and your views can change, but he legislated as a Democrat for many years. That’s one hell of a big change…..or not……

          Now, off to find some credible sources!

        • Ralph

          I missed it also.

  • Anonymous

    Our population is increasing; our population is living longer – yet we still retire at the same age,?

    Every worker is currently supporting 3 baby-boomer retirees.

    As this analysis from the Heritage Foundation proves, Welfare, Social Security and Medicare will consume 100% of federal tax income by 2050, even if every cent of defense spending were re-allocated to these programs: http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/defense-spending-entitlement-spending-problem

    • George

      You’re right tyler520 , and todays politicians are not in office representing the best interests of the American people and American security and progress. They are in power to promote THEIR personal agendas and to support their political party   and special interests.   The politicians need to be reminded that they were elected to represent THE PEOPLE.   The wasteful  government spending, the widespread corruption and societal entitlement mentality  is bankrupting us.   We will end up with a small percentage of the population carrying the weight and burden of the overwhelming vast majority on their shoulders.  We will have a small percentage of the population subsidizing moochers, misfits, lazy people, and entitlement minded bums.
                          The work ethic will be destroyed and our great nation will sink to the level of a FOURTH WORLD NATION  being reduced to poverty status with  chaos galore.