Just a few thoughts tonight, nothing heavy.
A few folks have left comments around that they intend to sign up for every Government handout they can, in an effort to tax the system and help rush the Implosion.
I would ask Patriots to reconsider that course. Do not surrender your deepest principles in such a manner. Do not let fellow Patriots who may one day be sifting through the records of FSA recipients in order to hold trials find your name on the FSA list. You'll have a very hard time explaining it away. Some will have a zero-f'n-tolerance rule, and some will only cut slack to Vets. Taking FSA money is directly stealing from me and everyone else who works - don't be that guy.
And if the goal is to tax the resources of the system, nothing beats a good crime spree. How many bureaucratic man-hours must be spent chasing down the average "Criminal"? From LEO to operators to court clerks to PR spokesmen, to insurance adjusters and claims, et cetera. And the books are filled with "Crimes" that are merely malum prohibitum, with no moral injury done to the "Criminal". Indeed, one could make the argument that a Patriot exercising his personal Liberty in manners that run afoul of "Laws" that offend Natural Law or Rightful Liberty is behaving patriotically.
And the Patriot who uses such endeavors as training exercises, without getting caught, will be ahead of the curve when the pretense of RoL is finally dismissed.
Let's not forget how a properly motivated Patriot could infuse the public's mind with a Robin Hood storyline.
Of course, this is all just a rhetorical exercise. Crime is wrong...or did I just argue that it is not necessarily wrong...
I wonder how expensive all those cameras are...and I'd bet even something as simple as spray painted tags mocking TPTB in prominent places would satisfy several objectives.
A note on the legitimacy of this election: By every modern metric one must conclude that the election was done "properly" and is legitimate.
But as I often ask Patriots to do, I will ask again: Consider the fundamental premise upon which that conclusion is reached.
Is the election legitimate from a Constitutional perspective?
Only if one accepts "General Welfare" and "Interstate Commerce" definitions currently used by the Establishment and the Left.
However, anyone who defines the Constitution through the lens of the Founders Intent must conclude that since so many Articles of the Constitution and BoR Amendments are being violated by those in office, and since any "Law" passed that is in violation of the Constitution has no force and is invalid, then those elected are criminals, behaving treasonously in regards to the Constitution, and therefore taking office and executing their offices criminally.
No Traitor can be said to "legitimately" or "Constitutionally" hold office.
They are usurpers, they are Domestic Enemies.
They are not legitimate holders of Constitutional offices.
Kerodin
III
I would like to point out to all who are considering the suicidally absurd route of "accelerated implosion of the FSB" (Free Sh** Bureaus) that once you are in their system they will OWN you. PLEASE, reconsider, before you do this and give them power to dictate what your medical future will be, what you will be allowed or have forced into your body (on your expense), how your CHILD'S medical future will proceed by the same turn, and where and what they are allowed to learn and be educated with - or if you will even be allowed to keep them in the first place.
ReplyDeleteDON'T allow this, not even for a short while, because pride be d***ed, you won't have to wait for consequence of such action.
You know, I used to think it was always unequivocally wrong to accept any welfare- but discussions with some others have made me question that. The train of thought is here.
ReplyDeleteAnd, why except vets? A check from the government is a check from the government, and at least an idle welfare recipient isn't acting in the interests and following the orders of the corrupt State.
Kent: It is wrong to accept Government welfare, because it is taken by force from one person and given to another. Private welfare is entirely acceptable, because the giver does so willingly.
DeleteAs to Vets: Because the vast majority of veterans are ideologically acting in good faith, for God & Country and all that. Given that bad politicians use them improperly, if a Vet is hurt, I have no problem pitching in (willingly) to help them, as they (in good faith) entered Harm's Way on my behalf.
Yes, I know there are many individual examples of bad faith. I'm talking in general terms.
I have no problem pitching into a collective fund to help such people. Anyone who does object has to fight that on their own, just as I have to fight the theft that is done to me to pay for the lazy FSA waste who is taking for the sake of taking.
K
I had never heard of sauch an idea as getting gov't benifits to 'tax the system'. Absolutely ridiculous and at the same time deplorable.
ReplyDeleteAs Patriots we must resist all efforts of the gov't to enslave us. ALL efforts. This is a moral obligation we have to ourselves. We are honor bound.
And another reason: My grandparents came out to California during the dustbowl and eventually was forced to take gov't aid to survive. We've all read or seen Grapes of Wrath. It took 3 generations to break that chain of dependency even when jobs were finally made available - it was easier to draw that welfare check than it was to work.
It's a bad plan. Please don't lower yourself to this.
Sorry, didn't mean to sound all smart and shit.
gov't aid
DeleteBack then it was "relief"........some to get you by until you got a job, unlike today's lot who stay on welfare generation after generation.
=======
Your piece was right on, Sam and posted.
Nope, my folks stayed on welfare. Later they discovered workman's comp, so they'd find a job just long enough to get hurt, then lay back and collect the checks waiting for the settlement. And my relatives all wonder why I don't want anything to do with them.....
Delete"Please don't lower yourself to this."
DeleteTHAT'S the best reason, because it's all that really matters. Or, it matters more than anything else, including what it does to "the System" and despite how many others are doing it.
We live forever with every action we take. It ain't rocket science. For any particular action, all a person has to consider is, "Do I want to live the rest of my life knowing that I took this action?" Because for EVERY action that ANY person takes, he or she does.
in any fight (and particularly an insurgency), a smart troop will use any and all resources that may be provided to him by his enemy to help him in that fight.
ReplyDeleteThis is no different. Federal cash = more beans, bullets and bad aids
Anon: Sorry, we will have to agree to disagree.
DeleteThere will come a day when FSA records are examined and Patriots hold Court for their crimes - and they will be found guilty of theft, moral depravity, and conspiracy in a system that murders people who refuse to pay "Their fair share".
You see, taking money from FedGov is not a victimless crime. If there is a tax protestor out there who stands on his principles and refuses to surrender his cash to the thugs (think Ann Barnhardt) and they (the Government Agents who have been drafted to enforce the will of you, the thief) imprison her or kill her as a result, you, and every other FSA member, are equally responsible for her death.
And there will be a reckoning.
K
you gonna send 200 million folks to trial? I think not. If I show up on your list and you come for me come heavy.
DeleteAnon: Isn't that *exactly* what is being discussed? Coming heavy for the people who are stealing from us and ruining the republic?
DeleteChoose carefully, and honorably.
This is no game. Thieves have, historically, met bad ends. Don't be a thief.
Don't start none, won't be none.
K
sounds more like a Robespierre like reign of terror to me. He met an unfortunate demise for his zeal
DeleteSorry, Anon. Right and Wrong is pretty darned simple for most people to see, and most people who can see it are getting really fed up tolerating the abuse.
DeletePayback is a bitch. Good people are not starting this fight, but they'll end it or be dead. Life or Not Life - that is all that has ever been on the table, once the abused decide to stop being abused.
These aren't my rules, they are Nature's rules. I simply understand and respect them.
Don't steal from good people, and good people will never have a reason to put you in the ground.
It's pretty simple.
K
simple hey...
Deleteso how about the 12 year old boy with the mental capacity of 2 year old who relies on tax $'s in order to survive. You gonna haul him up in front of your FSA prosecution tribunal? Should we just sit back and let Sam decide who's worthy and who's not?
You are right though,payback is a bitch my friend. You would do well to remember that.
"Sam" isn't deciding anything. Anyone with the slightest historical awareness understands what happens when one group beats another group in a fight - the losing group is eradicated, if the winning group has any sense.
DeleteBut directly to your silly strawman point, show me a single 12 year-old who receives an FSA check. Mommy and/or daddy may, and they may at some point have to answer for it. And their argument will have considerably more merit than anyone claiming to use the system against the system as a tactical weapon.
Your last line is interesting, as you turned this very personal. Have I somehow injured you? I see, you are already on the FSA list, and you justify your theft with the argument that you are helping to implode the system in the name of Patriotism. But your argument fails because you are not stealing from the Government, you are stealing from me and people like me who work for a living.
K
the 12 year old boy is my son, so I know him well. He has done you no harm yet your stance on things might do him much harm. To some extent this is irrelivant because I would not allow this. In terms of what you "know" about me...it's jack squat. So don't suppose you do. Suffice to say I have paid my dues, both financially and in terms of personal service, in full.
DeleteSo, as I pointed out, the check does not come to the child, but to the parent(s) who are failing to support that child on their own, and use the force of Government to steal from me and people like me to pay their bills.
DeleteSorry, you have not, you can not pay sufficient *dues* to become morally entitled to steal from me or anyone else, even to support your child.
Save your excuses and failed reasoning for someone else. No man, woman or child is morally entitled to the dollars in my pocket that I use to feed myself and my family so that their family can eat instead.
K
it's not hard to comprehend. My net receipts in terms of gov tax $'s far and away are much less than my taxes. It's not your money I'm getting back, it's mine. And unless you too are in the top 1% that pays for 40% of the tax burden I suppose it would be you stealing from me, no?
DeleteAnyway, agree to disagree and all that. I have meat loaf to eat. Good luck on your Citadel.
Well, Anon, there is not any conflict, never was, so I'm not sure why you were making a fuss. Obviously if you have put in more than you are taking out, you are not stealing from me or anyone else. That also puts you in a tiny minority.
DeleteMost people take without ever putting in, or take *more than* they put in. By the details you revealed in your last comment, neither you or your child is truly FSA, and if you are ever challenged by a Remnant with an axe to grind, hopefully you'll be able to convince them. But I wouldn't count on it - most such events are essentially lynch mobs and won't bother with details. On the list = guilty.
K
"On the list = guilty."
DeleteYou (almost) make it sound as if you like that, but I know that you don't. I told you quite a while ago that the contradiction that will keep biting you in the ass is that you (sometimes) want Rule-of-Law and not-Rule-of-Law simultaneously.
Happily the resolution to this particular problem, and virtually all the problems like it, is understanding the Fallacy of Tu Quoque. That is, retaliation in like kind is actually wrong and not right. But obviously that'll have to wait till later...much later.
I took that as a warning of what could easily happen rather than what Sam plans to do. The French evolution is a good example of how that type of retaliation can happen and become highly emotional and irrational.
DeleteVJ
@ all,
ReplyDeleteUSMC Vet here. Happy Birthday, Semper Fi.
My son is 100% disabled. Kicked off my private insurance. On Medicaid and Disability. I work a full time career and two part time jobs to make ends meet.
Disability and Medicaid just booted my son because my two part time jobs put my income over the allowable amount... 2k/mo. before taxes/deductions! Try living on that amount with a family of 4.
Private charity my ass. My church I attend and tithe regularly gave is a whopping $300. My son's medical supplies alone runs about $3k/mo.
Semper Fi Lex and Marines. (I'm not a Marine, so not sure if I have just committed an awful faux-pas)
DeleteVets are horribly treated, and the social compact with those who fight on our behalf is ignored by politicians. No vet, in my world, will ever be lumped in with FSA.
This is a topic it would take a week for me to flesh out completely, and it's off-topic for me right now. So I will just leave the summary statement above to stand. No Vet, in my world, will ever be seen as FSA for his/her tour. (One important caveat: Leaving the service and becoming a BoP Guard or ATF Agent adds the vet to the FSA. ;)
K
State funded 'Welfare' is flat out unconstitutional. No ifs, ands or buts about it.
ReplyDeletePeople can justify it all they like. It's always a topic that gets an emotional response from people. (Especially from people on it.)
I was on it myself once upon a time a number of years ago, until I had a total mindset shift in that regard. And these last few years, which have been the hardest in this country that any of us have ever seen financially, I don't take a penny from any .gov or welfare program.
It's not a question of if you have EVER been on it, nor is it even a question of if you are on it now. What it IS a question of, is if you STAY on it. Or worse yet, think that you are somehow going to accelerate the collapse at the cost and sacrifice of your values and morals and become a member of the FSA. You are better than that, fellow Patriot.
And Welfare is not about caring for the elderly or the impoverished or even veterans. (Though the state DOES have a certain obligation to veterans who are injured in the course of duty, but that's something different and is NOT welfare, and shouldn't be confused.)
Personal charity is where this should be handled. Not philanthropy at the point of the gun. If they have to put a gun to my head and tax me or take my property if I don't pay that tax, to pay for YOUR welfare, well then, that's flat out criminal. It's larceny, and a socialistic redistribution of wealth scheme that I cannot abide. Nor should you.
I did several blog posts on this topic a while back on my other blog regarding the Unconstitutionality of Welfare.
If interested read them all from oldest to newest, starting with this one:
http://wildcookery.wordpress.com/2012/10/26/welfare-and-the-victim-mentality-and-how-it-relates-to-foraging/
There are four parts (I – IV) as well as a separate post for comments with some good information in it.
May I kindly suggest ye read them, if ye have not already done so.
They can also read Davy Crockett vs Welfare, which I HIGHLY recommend for anyone who may have questions on the Constitutionality of Welfare.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/ellis1.html
You exempt veterans because 1. You don’t want to make war on the largest capable group that could be supporters of the Patriot Movement (the Progressive Movement is large enough) and 2. Because that was the contract that was offered by the government. Serve 20 years wherever we tell you (normal vet is 10 years away from his family, that is why divorce is nearly guaranteed) and we will allow you to collect 30% (or whatever) of your check for the rest of your life. Don't worry, most vets don't live for more than 10 years after they retire. The life is just that hard. This is the old, did you earn your check from Uncle Sugar or not. Patriots end up on both sides, so I respect that people can disagree with this, but I will not in any way, make Veterans out to be a bad guy.
ReplyDeleteI also have the opportunity to “take advantage” of the system, and you are right, remembering that you are not taking advantage of “a system” but stealing from your fellow men, puts it back into perspective.
And yes, all of these guys running around the blogosphere talking this or that, and none of them, not one is willing to cut down surveillance cameras (and get away with it). The first guy who knocks down a drone will become a national hero. I have a story of a woman rotting in jail right now http://charlescarrollsociety.com/2012/10/15/leah-lynn-plante/ simply because she refused to rat out her friends. She did nothing, but she is unwilling to turn state-witness and they threw here in Jail. Where is the right to _shut the &^%^% up?_ We should be writing this woman in prison, we should be supporting her any way we can. We should start with the small stuff, and always remember when talking to three people you don’t know, one is a federal agent and the other is a paid confidential informant.
The Bard.
Wild Cookery- "(Though the state DOES have a certain obligation to veterans who are injured in the course of duty, but that's something different and is NOT welfare, and shouldn't be confused.)... If they have to put a gun to my head and tax me or take my property if I don't pay that tax, to pay for YOUR welfare, well then, that's flat out criminal. It's larceny, and a socialistic redistribution of wealth scheme that I cannot abide. Nor should you."
ReplyDeleteThose two positions can not be reconciled. It is welfare to pay vets (and current military). If it is wrong to hand out money that is stolen from taxpayers or counterfeited by the Fed, then it doesn't matter who is getting it or why.
"I did several blog posts on this topic a while back on my other blog regarding the Unconstitutionality of Welfare."
And if "constitutionality" is your concern... well, the military is not constitutional (no matter how much you may love it), so where does that leave you?
Yer barkin' up the wrong tree, sir.
DeleteI said, and I quote "Though the state DOES have a certain obligation to veterans who are injured in the course of duty, but that's something different and is NOT welfare, and shouldn't be confused."
There has traditionally been a payment made to soldiers injured in the line of duty, in proportion to their injury. This is a ONE TIME payment, or has been, historically. Not a monthly stipend.
And I'm not the one that dis-included veterans of any kind from welfare. It's still welfare no matter who's getting it.
So, to answer your question, it doesn't leave me anywhere, as I never said ex military should get welfare in the first place.
Our soldier and war wounded should be cared for and honored by private donations through a public company or trust. Such would not be exceptionally difficult to set up if done right.
But we just throw them on the welfare dole with the generational bottom feeders.
We as a people have an obligation to take care of our soldiers and veterans if they are incapable of taking care of themselves. But this should NOT happen through theft of the public treasury through welfare and other forced wealth redistribution schemes.
Maybe ye read something wrong, I don't know. But as I said, ye are barking up the wrong tree. My point was, and stays the same. No WELFARE for ANYONE. It's ALL unconstitutional.
I'm a USAF vet who served 4 years (2 years in SE Asia) during the VietNam war. I worked and paid into the system since I was 16 years old. At the age of 60 I became disabled due to a bout with lung cancer and severe COPD. I am on oxygen 24/7. I find it very difficult to hear that I am getting a check from "an entitlement program".
ReplyDeleteI certainly wish someone would make a distinction between those of us who paid in sweat & blood for our money and those who haven't earned it but collect it anyway.
Al, Thank You for your service.
DeleteThis is how the scum in Washington keep us fighting amongst ourselves, honestly.
There should be a separate (non-governmental, non-welfare, non-treasury) fund that is VOLUNTARILY contributed to by Americans to take care of our veterans and war wounded.
At no point in time should someone who has served their country be ever lumped in with this scum that has been on welfare and the public dole their entire lives, and their whole families know nothing else but generational bread and circuses.
This isn't even a conversation that we should have to be having.
But it is.
Unfortunately, it is what it is, and yes, it's STILL unconstitutional. And yes, it's set up entirely as an entitlement program. One absolutely CANNOT take monies from the public fund to pay for any form of charity, whatsoever. The Founders made this abundantly clear in the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers, and in many different writings from Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton, to name a few.
The bottom line is that it's criminal mismanagement from the top down.
However, the vipers knew exactly what they were doing when they pegged the general welfare (well being) of our veterans pegged to the social welfare (entitlement program) along with the gutter trash.
They knew that even though people would willingly want to get rid of the bread and circuses for those who have contributed nothing, that it would be very difficult for the same public to justify doing so for the veterans as well.
So... that is why it exists as it does.
But to fix it, it all has to die. ALL of it. It's all unconstitutional. Unfortunately that means our honored veterans are the first to suffer.
We need to reclaim our honor and perhaps set up a separate private fund that can be contributed to voluntarily to take care of our veterans, and completely abolish the unconstitutional welfare system in it's entirety.
Felt it important to add that my career is full time paid firefighter so I see firsthand in my work the true leeches that are latched onto the Gov teet.
ReplyDeleteI run calls into ghetto shitholes but they're all on Disability, Medicaid, Medicare, EBT, Section 8, SNAP, TANF, etc and have flatscreen TVs in every room.
The FED-GOV pays these assholes and shits on my son.
I am furious. Count on me and my .308 to even the score when the time comes.
Semper Fi!
Keep up the good work.
See how they did it? Excuse the language, but they fucked with everyone's mind, until nobody knows up from down. So now we have good, honest, hard-working people bickering about who stole or mooched from whom.
ReplyDeleteHere's the answer---IT DOESN'T MATTER. We only live NOW and each person has to decide who he or she wants to be, and then be that way. That's all, and each of us will decide with whom we want to deal, and with whom we don't.
If there's any more to it, then someone please clue me in.
Simple answer. The government stole it. As my old man used to say, if you want to know where the money went, always look to the king.
DeleteWe bicker amongst ourselves for shillings, as they bathe in liquid stolen gold and laugh at us.
I would contend that social security, Medicare, disability, food stamps and all the rest will ultimately kill more Americans than they have ever saved. When the system stops working very few will be prepared because they have become totally reliant on these programs. Where is the morality argument of helping the helpless when that very system ends up killing millions? That's the big flaw in that argument, not taking future consequences into account.
ReplyDeleteUnless you can see into the future and know for certain that a collapse can't happen then what you are saying is that the very real possibility of millions of deaths is an acceptable risk in exchange for your current benefits. Even if the risk is tiny, as long as it isn't zero that is the trade off you are willing to make.
Just one more factor to throw in and stir the pot.
VJ
Hello,
ReplyDeleteJust wanted to thank Kerodin for providing this forum for
us to share our thoughts on this and other topics.
I'm nearly 50, have never been on 'welfare' and have no
desire or wish to be. I'm working full time and only see
a third of my pay (thanks to taking a principled stand
against the IRS 'deatheaters'). My wife does have assistance as she can barely work (in near constant pain from fibromyalgia) but I won't do it..have endured the
pain/inconvienence of twice weekly plasma donations for
over a year now (don't know how much longer my body will
stand for that..not fun in the long run).
That being said, I have absolutely no tolerance or sympathy for those who are definitely generational moochers/parasites and are therefore unashamed about being
in the FSA. I came across this post on Pamela Geller's site (Atlas Shrugs) and it just about made me blow a gasket in double time:
"Hipsters on food stamps" .....Roasted Rabbit With Butter, Tarragon And Sweet Potatoes…
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/11/hipsters-on-food-stamps-roasted-rabbit-with-butter-tarragon-and-sweet-potatoes.html
"They’re young, they’re broke, and they pay for organic salmon with government subsidies. Got a problem with that?
In the John Waters-esque sector of northwest Baltimore — equal parts kitschy, sketchy, artsy and weird — Gerry Mak and Sarah Magida sauntered through a small ethnic market stocked with Japanese eggplant, mint chutney and fresh turmeric. After gathering ingredients for that evening’s dinner, they walked to the cash register and awaited their moments of truth.
“I have $80 bucks left!” Magida said. “I’m so happy!”
“I have $12,” Mak said with a frown.
The two friends weren’t tabulating the cash in their wallets but what remained of the monthly allotment on their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program debit cards, the official new term for what are still known colloquially as food stamps."
These two also remind me of the characters chronicled
in the movie, "RENT". When my wife's son and daughter
showed it to me and I took an instant dislike to it after watching about 30 minutes of it. They (in their mid and
late teens) asked what was wrong, I proceeded to tell them that not one of the characters had a clue about how to live as an independent individual, none of them had the
slightest idea of what useful skills would be and that if
their 'metro beehive' existance was dislocated (ala Katrina) that none of them would make it out alive - worse
they'd probably end up getting other people killed along with them. To make a long story short I told them it'd
be a lot better for them to be independent rather than a 'hiver'.
Btw, imho I think Matt Bracken is definitely spot on about
what could possibly happen when the music is over and the party stops for the generational moochers living in the metros sucking on the EBT/SNAP teat...not going to be pretty, especially given how quickly 'MUY' flash riots can spring up.
Yours In Liberty!
Northgunner III