"These measures are not intended to take over the free market but to preserve it," Bush said. What a bunch of double talk that is. Welfare recipients are what then? There are corporate-welfare recipients, and then there are real people.

There is no free market. There is only the top usurers (worldly plutocrats) playing the booms and busts they create.

Smoke and mirrors and voodoo economics are apt expressions here.

What's free about the market? Corporate consolidations are continuing and speeding up. The media giants went from more than 50 when I was a kid to 5 or 6. It's a horizontal and vertical monopoly by virtue of all the interlocking directorates of rabid, unbridled capitalists.

Everything they are doing is being borrowed off future wages of average workers. That's because there are no savings in the U.S., as planned.

Understand that so far, the equity position being offered to the general American population is nonvoting and pays a dividend and not a share of profits. That means that as the average worker slaves away to pay his or her taxes, those taxes go to currently solvent banks so that the banks stock values will go through the roof for current shareholders. Who holds the most shares in the biggest, solvent banks? The richest of the rich of course hold them. Who gets astronomically richer relative to the rest just as you've been told here on this website if you've been a consistent reader?

The superrich will soon be calling for government spending cuts for social services to better reduce the budget deficit. Then they'll ask to raise interest rates to keep unemployment high and to slow inflation. This is serfdom. That's what capitalism is. It's the road to serfdom.

Look, the temporary mundane way out is to dramatically raise taxes on the rich until they maybe have no more than 4 times the average worker, radically cut military spending (close the foreign bases — all of them — and bring home the troops), and hugely increase public works (infrastructure) projects using government paid workers.

Full employment
A guaranteed living wage
Housing projects owned by those living there
Cooperative farms owned by those farming them
Local councils deciding by consensus of all the workers

It's called family and community.

Of course, if you want to start down the road to the permanent solution, there's the Christian Commons Project™.


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)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.