Phil Gramm with John McCain
Watch when the people (Phil Gramm types) who are calling other people whiners start jumping out of windows.
There are a hand full of insiders who are remaining calm, because they set the whole thing up (set up the whole Ponzi scheme, as I've been writing since long before the first blip in the subprime disaster), got out selling short, and will, they think, buy low when they see the bottom. They are ruining other people, rich included. The same thing happened in 1929. There were insiders who knew. They got word. They were warned.
This is the same crowd who put their money in offshore shell corporations so they may avoid paying income taxes. They are being exposed by whistleblowers in the banks and clearinghouses such as in Lichtenstein.
Certain of the super-rich want to cut entitlements and raise taxes on the poor and middle class to bailout speculation on Wall Street, in the banks, at Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, etc. What should the poor and middle class vast majority say? They should say no. If the poor and middle class want to be stupid enough to remain capitalistic, the least they should do is soak the rich. They should roll back all the tax cuts for the wealthy and then some. There should be no special treatment of passive income. They should undo all the free-trade agreements and insist that the nation trade only where labor and environmental and other standards are as high or higher than in the U.S. They can also nationalize the currency (didn't you know the currency is privatized right now) and the central bank.
The Federal Reserve is private. It's secretive as to the banking families that own it lock, stock, and barrel. It's never been audited.
Doing all of that is evil, but it's the lesser of evils. If you're going to vote in the corrupt, unrighteous system, why vote for what is worse for you? Allowing some of the rich to get richer and richer while everyone else finds the going harder and harder isn't better for anyone, not even those who are getting richer and richer.
The poor and middle class can clean house in Washington D.C. and their state houses and county seats and city councils and mayor's offices, etc. Everyone who voted for war, torture, and ripping off the poor can be swept out of office.
Of course, it would be vastly superior for the poor, middle class, and rich to come together to acquire land to grow free food for everyone and to do all the other things Jesus talks about in his Gospel. Give to the Christian Commons Project™ now. There is no better idea anywhere on Earth. Unlike the lesser of evils above, there's no evil in the idea of the Christian Commons Project.
We don't need taxes. We don't need money. We just need love. Love is serving as the least, just as Jesus said. When we all do that, all are served. It's the perfect path. No one has ever come up with anything better. They can't. There isn't anything better.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)