Years ago, I had the opportunity to sit down with a retired gentlemen who had run several successful businesses during his lifetime, in addition to raising a large, happy family. He was a genuinely decent person who made you feel as if he really did care about people. He even volunteered his time to mentor individuals starting small businesses. He was a guy I really respected. Let’s just call him “Bob,” in order to protect the innocent. *snicker*
At the time, I was considering starting a business. I had a rough plan of what I wanted to do. So, as we sat drinking coffee in a local restaurant, I ran my idea by him. Bob asked me a few questions about my plans. He squinted his eyes and pondered it for a bit. He seemed to think my new venture might have “merit.” So then he hit me with the question that I’ve never forgotten: “What’s the worst-case scenario?”
At first, I didn’t really get it. What exactly did he mean by “worst-case scenario?” I asked him. Bob’s response was really a no-brainer when I thought about it. What would I do if something happened like a natural disaster, someone dies, the house burns down, I can’t make payroll for two months, etc.? Of course, it comes down to how deep are my pockets and how much cash flow can I realistically bring in a monthly basis to cover worst-case scenarios.
Bob went on to describe several experiences with small business owners who refused to look at the worst-case scenario and prepare for it, but plunged headlong into their business venture. Typically, it was frivolous spending on things like fancy office spaces or non-business related purchases that would often put the business in the red. And then the worst-case scenario strikes and they are ill-prepared to deal with it. Bob claimed that this was the biggest single factor in why most small businesses fail after the first year or two: they don’t prepare for the worst-case scenario, and the worst-case happens more than one would care to think.
Having studied computer science, Bob’s admonition regarding worst-case scenarios in relation to small business is very similar to algorithm analysis in software engineering. Typically, without getting too technical, a large enterprise-level software application will need to be tested under various conditions. There are certain algorithms in programs that can be considered “volatile.” For example, the algorithm may handle a lot of recursion or sorting of large amounts of data. Mathematics like Big O Notation and the like are used to analyze functions and methods in software (algorithms) under worst-case, normal-case and best-case scenarios. The worst-case, for example, would be at what point does the program or application crash?
Testing for worst-case scenarios in software can be a very time-consuming and complex process, considering the resources available. The math required for analysis is not for the faint of heart. Additionally, mock objects and unit testing may be required to properly analyze and stress test the software application, which all takes time to plan, develop and implement.
The problem is, if you have a complex application, and you spend a lot of time and effort to create it, and don’t thoroughly test and analyze it, you’ll probably go out of business quickly as a software developer. And many do, by not testing for the worst-case scenario in a comprehensive and scientific way that is quantifiable and measurable. Many times the knowledge gained in doing a thorough analysis can have immeasurable benefits.
Which brings us to the thesis of this article: applying the best-case, normal-case and worst-case analysis to the current political situation our nation now finds itself in.
When I was studying journalism as an undergraduate, I listened to a speech by a well-respected author and journalist who addressed the subject of “objective journalism.” He stated that no one can be entirely and perfectly objective; we all look at life through our own set of rose-colored glasses, so to speak. The point is we can strive to be fair in our reporting and writing by presenting both sides of an argument, and not stacking the deck in favor of our own editorial opinion. I’ll do my best to stay true to that principle in this article.
For me, trying to understand what is actually occurring at the federal level of our government, and in the governments of the West in general, is certainly no easy task, considering I am not among the inner-circle of the elites, nor am I privy to any behind-the-scenes knowledge per se. I’m just a so-called citizen journalist witnessing the effects of government on the common man and woman at the street level. And it ain’t pretty! I’m struggling through economic hardship right now myself, like many nowadays, and I’m not seeing it getting any better anytime soon. No, it’s just the opposite; it’s getting worse.
So, with that said, let’s start with the worst-case scenario, since it will be the most difficult to analyze in a truly objective and fair manner. What I’m attempting to do is a present a realistic and sober analysis, not one fraught with unsubstantiated alarmism and outright nuttiness. But we must confront a bit of the alarmism and nuttiness to conduct our analysis of the worst-case scenario. So, let’s just dive right in, shall we?
The Worst-Case Scenario
One of the worst-case scenarios being proposed by some is that the Western World is covertly under the complete and total domination of the globalists (New World Order), and derive their power and immense wealth from secret societies like the Bilderbergers, Council on Foreign Relations, Illuminati, Club of Rome, Skull & Bones, Freemasonry, Rothschilds, and many more. This is what some might call “Alex Jones‘ territory.” The notion that there is a real New World Order that is attempting to take over the world is typically relegated to the wacky, tin-foil hat conspiracy theory bin by most people in our society. But is there any truth to it?
I must admit, in my research on secret societies, and the like, the claims and speculation being peddled is all over the map. For example, some go so far as to promote the theory that these secret societies are ultimately being controlled by aliens who are manipulating our DNA. Others believe it is the Roman Catholic Church and the secret sect of the Jesuits who are the true Anti-Christ on Earth and control all things—pitting West against East purposefully in a diabolical, dialectical strategy of unimaginable, satanic proportions.
Gosh, you know, even if either of the two previously mentioned scenarios were true, I’d be hard-pressed to do anything about it—other than face my ultimate demise with tragic stoicism, praying to the dear Lord the whole time. Honestly, if one is going to make extraordinary claims, then one must provide the extraordinary proof, not the other way around.
Conversely, can I then say that such claims are utterly untrue and have absolutely no validity? No more than I can say that String Theory is settled and conclusive science, considering all current and relevant evidence; it cannot be proven, nor disproved; it still remains in the realm of theory and philosophy.
If such all-encompassing, evil conspiracies are true, like I said, we’re all screwed then. I’m not saying it couldn’t ultimately be true, but I have no real way to verify such claims. Even if I could prove them to be true beyond a shadow of a doubt, I’d probably “disappear” under mysterious circumstances, if you know what I mean.
Now, in all fairness, there is real history behind secret societies like the Illuminati, Freemasonry and the Jesuits, to name a few, for example. But, many times, folks get off in the giggleweeds by riding the slippery slope argument like it was a bobsled in the Winter Olympics when writing about the subject matter. Besides, we are talking about secret societies. So, naturally, it is difficult to determine, if not impossible, without any credible intelligence, just what is actually occurring in the inner-circle of these mysterious organizations. But one would be remiss to discount these secret cabals, with their immense wealth and power, outright.
Where these sorts of conspiracy theories can become downright evil, in my mind, is when lies become mixed with truth, and neither is discernible from the other—which is the quintessential definition of evil, if you ask me.
For example, one insidious and rather prominent conspiracy theory is the Zionist plot, which states that it is really those dirty, greedy Jewish bankers who horde all the world’s wealth, fund all the wars globally, and are the direct cause of of all the world’s problems. Naturally, this is quite popular with white supremacists, radical leftists, and the imams and mullahs of the world who call for the destruction of Israel and the Jews.
Many anti-Semites point to the House of Rothschild as proof of this so-called Zionist conspiracy, since the Rothschild’s family happened to be Jewish. Conversely, if one has reservations about the machinations of the Rothschild’s in the history of central banking in Europe and the United States, then one risks being labeled an anti-Semite.
I have a rather harsh view toward the Rothschild dynasty, and a lot of their rather diabolical and deceptive banking practices, but the fact the Rothschild family happen to be Jewish has absolutely nothing to do with it. I would still have troubling questions regarding the Rothschilds central banking practices whether they were Christians, Buddhists, Muslims, atheists, or whatever, for the matter.
Continuing with the conspiracy theme, the Illuminati is a fascinating subject which allegedly has loose links to the Rothschilds. But, once again, bring the subject up amongst polite company, and you can probably clear the room. There is so much downright nonsense out there regarding the true history of secret sects like the Illuminati that many people think it is all a big joke, and much of it is.
I wrote about some of the history behind the Illumnati sect in a four-part series entitled “Plutocracy of the Damned.” Honestly, I think I probably bit off more than I could chew with the articles, but I did put a fair amount of research into it, and tried to approach the subject with a fair amount of healthy skepticism, considering the large amount of over-the-top, unsubstantiated conspiracy theories that are constantly being proposed nowadays.
But, from some of my research, the secret sect of the Illuminati has been linked by some to the Jocabins, who were instrumental in bringing about the bloodbath that was the French Revolution, and where many of the ideals that define modern-day communism were born. Of course, there are others who flatly refute this historical link. But there are some very interesting similarities between Adam Weishaupt’s Illuminati and the Jacobins. If anything, the worldview of the Illuminati and the Jacobins were eerily similar. I don’t happen to be a big believer in coincidence, so I find this history incredibly fascinating and very mysterious.
One of the more troubling parts of American history, at least to this author, is the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank. There is a lot of mystery surrounding the origins of the Federal Reserve, commonly referred to as The Fed. The first meetings to discuss and plan the formation of the Federal Reserve Bank were conducted under great secrecy on Jekyll Island off the coast of the U.S. State of Georgia in 1917. It was not until after the Federal Reserve had been established as the de facto central bank of the United States did details leak out as to who the major players were behind the scenes. So this could very well fall under the realm of true conspiracy.
The Federal Reserve is a private corporation and is not affiliated per se with the federal government; the “federal” in its name is in name only. It is led by a cartel of bankers who work behind the scenes and are virtually unknown to the general public. What is particularly troubling about the Federal Reserve system is the federal government is literally beholden to the private bank. The fed can turn the money spigots on and off at will, since the issue of currency is not in the hands of the Congress, but a private corporation whose interests may lie far outside the general welfare of the nation.
More troubling is the fact that many of our representatives and senators do not even understand how our monetary system works. I recall listening to an interview where lawmakers stated that Alan Greenspan was fit for the job of fed chief because they couldn’t understand anything he was talking about. Well, to be sure, there are lots of extremely complicated and mind-numbing financial transactions and machinations taking place on top of our monetary system, by the large corporations and big banks that have grown up around it and depend on it, but the system itself does not necessarily require a Ph.D. in Keynesian Economics to understand (click here to learn more).
The cash that may or may not be in your wallet right now is technically referred to as a Federal Reserve Note. Before FDR confiscated all the gold, and allegedly ensconced it all at Fort Knox, U.S. paper currency was redeemable for its worth in gold or silver—meaning: cash had real value. Now, following the dumping of the “gold standard,” a federal reserve note is worth nothing more than the paper it is printed on. It is literally an I.O.U. note, in reality.
Okay, back to the monetary system: for each federal reserve note that the U.S. Treasury purchases from the Federal Reserve Corporation, each note comes with debt pre-attached. This form of phantom currency is created by the rather diabolical and deceptive practice known as fractional reserve banking.
For example, fractional reserve banking allows a bank to only keep 10% of their assets in reserve–a bank customer deposits $100, but the bank can turn around and lend $900 from that $100, since the bank only has to keep 10% of its assets in reserve by law, thereby creating money out of thin air. The bank charges interest on the loan–interest on money that doesn’t technically exist–only on paper. This goes on and on and on.
What this creates is a debt-based economy that is governed by deflationary and inflationary cycles, which leads to recessions, depressions and bubbles, due to the constant conflations and contractions of the money supply. The very bonds that Treasury purchases to back up the currency are themselves I.O.U.’s! The government is literally trying to borrow its way out of debt. And the Treasury Bills (T-Bills) held by China, who are backing up most of our massive federal debt, are surely making Beijing squirm.
Thomas Jefferson clearly rung prophetic when he warned:
“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”
–Thomas Jefferson, Letter to the Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin (1802)
Our current debt-based currency and economy is exactly what Jefferson warned us about, yet we have traveled pell mell the other direction … a direction that will collapse our economy. The house of cards will come crashing down sooner or later, for it is utterly unsustainable. And, more than likely, it will be sooner rather than *later.
Another great concern I have about our monetary system is the fact that a great deal of our nation’s wealth has, for all intents and purposes, been redistributed to the BIS, IMF and World Bank, who hold no allegiance or loyalty to America, by the way. Some even speculate, with some credibility, that most of our nation’s gold is no longer in our possession. If true, it would be the greatest transfer of wealth in human history. And some surmise that this all a plot by the globalist forces of the world to diminish the wealth and power of the United States.
Remember, a conspiracy is simply an agreement between concerned parties to commit an unlawful or illegal act. Conspiracies happen all the time. It is why we have a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), police departments and detectives. The trick is to wade through all the conspiratorial nonsense and get to the real evidence and facts.
So, this brings us to the current day. What is the worst-case scenario when it comes to the Obama Administration and our current Congress, and the special interests they are beholden to? Well, they almost seem too numerous to count. But I will attempt to scratch the surface.
If we’re going to look at worst-case scenarios, when it comes to Barack Obama, we’ll have to look at the whole so-called birther issue. There are prominent figures on both sides of the political spectrum who are of the firm opinion that anyone who even broaches the topic of Obama’s eligibility to be president of the United States is a lunatic akin to a 9/11 truther.
I must admit, I didn’t really “engage the birther narrative” before Obama posted a PDF electronic file of his alleged long-form birth certificate on the White House web site. Not too long before Obama posted his birth certificate, Hawaii’s governor Neil Abercrombie had been quoted as saying he couldn’t find the original Obama birth certificate in the archives, yet the article has been scrubbed from the web. This is where I started to question some things about the whole eligibility issue, particularly considering the fact Barack Obama’s very first Executive Order was strictly for keeping all of his records sealed.
At the time, Donald Trump was putting a lot of pressure on Obama in the media to release his long-form birth certificate, as opposed to the Announcement of Live Birth previously claimed to be Obama’s official birth certificate. What shocked me was Obama did release a file of his alleged long-form birth certificate. What took so long? Why did he not release the long-form version earlier? At around this time, the news broke that Osama bin Laden had been killed in Pakistan and the birth certificate controversy quickly dropped out of the spotlight.
But that didn’t stop Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his lead investigator Mike Zullo from taking a closer look at the whole birther issue. According to Arpaio, his original intent was to clear the president and put the matter to rest once and for all. But, upon further examination of the evidence, which I have also looked into, Arpaio and his Cold Case Posse were convinced that the electronic file posted to the White House web site was indeed fraudulent.
Now, some have dismissed Arpaio as an “idiot.” Others have described Zullo as having some hidden neocon political agenda. These “appraisals” do not offer any insight or rebuttal to the findings of Arpaio’s investigation, quite the contrary; they seem designed to deflect attention away from the findings, not refute them. The mainstream media and those who do not “engage in the birther narrative” have absolutely no rebuttal to the discoveries made during the Cold Case Posse’s investigation into Obama’s long-form birth certificate and selective service registration. Additionally, no suitable explanation has ever been given as to why Barack Hussein Obama is in possession of a Connecticut social security card, since he, nor his father, ever lived there, despite what Bill O’Reilly et al. tries to peddle.
Most disturbing to me, as a result of the investigation by Arpaio into Barack Obama’s eligibility, is the fact that when they went to examine the immigration records in Washington, D.C., they discovered that all the records for the week that Obama was born were missing. Coincidence? Remember, I don’t believe in coincidence. Everything happens for a reason. So what happened to these records? Awfully convenient for them all to just disappear. Maybe Sandy Berger was in charge at the time? Did anybody check his socks? (Yes, that was sarcasm based on reality.)
Now, here’s my question: if all this stuff concerning Arpaio’s investigation is just a bunch of bunk, why hasn’t the mainstream media disproved his findings and shouted it from the rooftops? The whole thing would be over; and Arpaio could be labeled the overzealous “idiot” that some seem to want to label him. (I’m not one of them, by the way.)
But, instead, there is a complete media blackout over the investigation, even on the right-side of the political spectrum. I find this fascinating that so many are absolutely petrified, or unwilling, to even ask questions about this subject matter, which makes me just want to ask more questions. Oh well! Call me a lunatic! *snicker*
The worst-case scenario with Obama and crew would be that he really is a Manchurian president who is employing a Cloward-Piven strategy of overwhelming the bureaucracy with impossible financial demands via entitlement programs like healthcare, welfare, food stamps, unemployment benefits, S.N.A.P., T.A.N.F., etc.—the very welfare programs the left has so staunchly demanded as “rights for the people” over all these years—in order to collapse the free market system (capitalism) and the dollar. This would create pandemonium and human suffering which could create an opportunity to provide the solution to the crisis by claiming the old system failed (U.S. Constitution) and a new one must quickly be established—possibly under a global currency sans the Constitution.
Of course, if this is the real intent of the Obama Administration, and like-minded congressional Democrats, then it is logical to assume a plan for dealing with any counter-revolutionary activity (i.e. internal unrest) would be in place—such as martial law and hauling “Tea Party terrorists” off to FEMA camps under the guise of public safety and “national emergency.” Perhaps, a plan to intentionally create incidents to provoke unrest is in place—providing the excuse to quash any civil disobedience with an iron fist and declare all such individuals “enemies of the state.”
Of course this is all just speculation based on certain writings by radical leftists like Bill Ayers & Van Jones et al. A worst-case scenario of this sort, regarding Barack Hussein Obama and his numerous connections to radical leftists, is summed up in about five minutes in this video (below), and would certainly be a worst-case scenario if true.
The “Normal-Case” Scenario
Dealing with what one might refer to as the “normal-case scenario” may prove to be a bit subjective, since not all will agree with what is meant by “normal.” In this context, I would define normal as “realistic”—meaning: is the worst-case scenario realistic or not? On top of that, I might add that “normal” might imply that our president and the Democrat Party are not intentionally trying to collapse our free market system, like you would expect from an American president, and take their oaths seriously, but are just woefully misguided and ill-informed, despite the fact that they appear to be purposefully running headlong toward financial Armageddon.
Maybe it would behoove us to look at some examples of what Barack Obama has promised, and what it is he has actually done.
President Obama has always promised that his healthcare plan would not affect your current private insurance plan, and that it would not raise the costs or taxes on the middle class. None of this has turned out to be the case. Premiums on some private plans have doubled. And following the fiscal cliff deal, even Americans making under $30,000 per year saw a proportionately bigger hit to their paycheck in taxes than those making $500,000 a year. This was a blatant reversal on all of his campaign promises.
Not only that, young people now entering the workforce are discovering that many employers have cut back their full-time positions to under 30 hours per week due to the devastating costs incurred by Obamacare. This ad from Craigslist vividly expresses one young voter’s dismay over the false promise of “free insurance” and the financial hit it would entail on his bottomline.
Barack Obama also stated on the campaign trail that the high deficit spending during George W. Bush’s time in office was “unpatriotic,” and that if elected he would bring fiscal sanity to Washington by ensuring “everybody pay their fair share.” Taxing the rich would bring all the necessary revenue the federal government would need, according to Barack. Yet, even if the entire incomes of the so-called rich were confiscated at a marginal tax rate of 100%, it would barely put a dent in current deficit spending, let alone the massive national debt.
Well, as it stands now, the president’s proposed budgets have all been rejected outright by the Senate, not one democrat has voted for his budgets; they are not serious budget proposals. As a result, Congress has been running without a budget for the entire time Obama has been in office. And the Congress continues to kick the spending can down the road via continuing resolutions.
Additionally, Barack Obama has spent more money than all presidents combined, over $6 trillion dollars in new federal debt; he is running $1.6 trillion-plus “unpatriotic” deficits; there has been a quadrupling of the money supply via the Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing initiatives as well.
The debt problem is so serious that we could be at a ratio of 200% debt to GDP in just one year’s time, even after the fiscal cliff deal. The credit downgrades also add significantly higher interest payments on the debt, all created by unrestrained discretionary spending. As if that is not enough, Barack Obama has spent more than all previous presidents on a torrent of new regulations pouring forth from Washington, D.C.—choking the lifeblood out of the private sector and the so-called middle class.
Yet Washington, D.C., is awash with billions and billions of dollars of taxpayer money—a veritable boomtown in the middle of economic despair—creating a new aristocracy of crony capitalists that threatens to further undermine the free market and private sector, and, more ominously, our representative form of government. I call it “Moscow on the Potomac.”
Incredibly, the president now claims the federal government does not have a spending problem. Apparently his position on the matter has “evolved” to the point where he now tells us that perpetual spending is really “investing in America’s future,” except when George Bush was doing it. Besides, with Keynesian financial geniuses like Paul Krugman in his corner, we can just keep printing money if we run out, anyway.
Most troubling to me, and more and more Americans that I know on a firsthand basis, is the president’s and the democrat’s all-out assault on the Bill of Rights and the Constitution itself. I wrote more extensively on this in a previous article.
Whether it is undermining the First Amendment by provisions in the healthcare bill that require religious institutions to violate their own faith in order to comply with federal regulations, or the jailing of the producer of the controversial “Innocence of Muslims” film following pressure from the feds, or the demonizing of “liberty lovers” by the DHS and West Point think tanks, or the endless torrent of hate that spews forth from the state-run press against its political rivals, make no mistake about it, it is an undermining of the very thing that many Americans hold most dear—free speech and assembly, and the right to a free press.
By far the most disturbing comments I have heard uttered by Barack Hussein Obama, was his speech he gave at the United Nations shortly following the fiasco that had occurred in Benghazi, Libya, which resulted in the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. The timing of the speech was eery, as was the president declaring:
“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied. Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims, and Shia pilgrims. It is time to heed the words of Gandhi: “Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.” Together, we must work towards a world where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies. That’s the vision we will support.”
What does he mean by “no future”? As in dead? Imprisoned? Exiled? No future? What exactly does he mean by this rather ominous and troubling comment? I’m not the only one who was bothered by these comments. Jim Geraghty at The National Review expressed similar sentiments regarding Obama’s speech before the Unite Nations:
“First, notice the trademark Obama passive voice. What does it mean, ‘the future must not belong to’ a particular group?
Does it mean these people won’t be around in the future?
That in the future, their viewpoint will be marginalized? Out of style? Unpopular? Suppressed? That sometime between now and ‘the future,’ they will have changed their mind? That at some point in the future, no one will feel like slandering the prophet of Islam? Is the First Amendment still in effect in this envisioned future, or has it been rewritten or modified on this topic?”
What the future entails, in the mind of Barack Hussein Obama, is anyone’s guess, since it seems to change on a regular basis, as expediency would dictate—like some sort of living, breathing document. But we do know it involves “fundamental transformation.”
Currently, we are witnessing an all-out assault on the Second Amendment following immediately on the heels of the Sandy Hook massacre. The smoke had barely cleared following the mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, before the White House and its minions began a full-court press on introducing new draconian “gun control” legislation that clearly infringes on the law-abiding citizen’s civil right to own and bear arms.
The Second Amendment is equal with all other rights granted protection under the Bill of Rights. And since the Bill of Rights are the first 10 amendments of the Constitution, and the Constitution is the law of the land, the president and the democrats are violating the sacred oath they swore to defend, protect and preserve the U.S. Constitution.
One of the most egregious constitutional violations of the president and his party, in my opinion, is the brazen and not-so hidden collusion with the mainstream press. The press has become a de facto propaganda arm for the White House and the Democrat Party, and its power is immense. It is one of the biggest reasons I think republicans get hammered so hard in the polls; we have no effective answer to such a powerful media machine.
Although new media and social media are helping to dispel some of the MSM’s blatant progressive myths and memes, it cannot compete, at this time, with the mighty liberal media machine—often referred to as the “democratic machine,” which I always found to be a curious description of a political party. Perhaps it is time for a “republican machine”?
So, in wrapping up the “normal-case” analysis, if it can be called that, it does appear plausible that Barack Hussein Obama and ilk could be purposefully trying to end so-called laissez faire capitalism and free enterprise—the so-called fundamental transformation—as evidenced by their deeds. Whether this is all being done purposefully to provoke conflict, so that the federal government can crack down with an iron fist on the populace at large, remains to be seen.
Some Americans are expressing concern about recent military “drills” that have been occurring nationwide and wonder about their purpose and intent. It could be normal, but people are starting to question what is normal now. Are we being conditioned? Is it just alarmist hypebole? Are we heading toward dark times ahead?
When one tries to determine what is going on in a confused and chaotic situation, it can be useful to just listen to the words being used to describe the situation. More and more we are hearing words like collapse, secession, civil war, etc. We also hear those bantering about the possibility of a third term for Obama.
The fact that such language is being used at all shows that there is a level of fear and powerlessness that is setting in with some as a direct result of governmental policies. I certainly would not advocate for civil war or secession. But I do understand the frustration people feel for the federal government when there is absolutely no transparency or accountability, and may even be actively working against the interests of the American people.
Well, I suppose the best-case scenario is the easiest to wrap-up: if spending and printing money in perpetuity, perpetual class struggle, and an ever-shrinking economy will fundamentally transform our country into some sort of utopian, trans-national, Marxian socialist workers’ paradise, then Obama and his minions are well on their way to make good on their collectivist vision of a national community bound by shared sacrifice and service to an omnipotent and benevolent government—all brought to us by the policies of the Democratic Socialists of America, the Communist Party USA, the labor unions, the state-run press … and, of course, our dear, dear leader.
Besides, even if it all goes wrong for Obama, he can just say, “I didn’t build that!”
It’s all good.
*For more information, I recommend reading G. Edward Griffin’s book The Creature from Jekyll Island for a much more authoritative and comprehensive treatment on the subject of the Federal Reserve. I also recommend William Still’s excellent documentary The Secret of Oz on the history of central banks in the United States and the failures and dangers of debt-based currencies throughout history.