Authored by William Robert Barber

Government is a tool; a utility composed of Byzantine arrangement wherein the reasoning of objectives and goal meanders between the original intent and the synthesis required for implementation. Forethought is not a legislative requirement of government, nor is prudence, deductive logic, or sensibility. What is compulsory of any government left unfettered is largeness over limited; that its representatives emit the rhetorically melodious explanation versus the plain and specific. And most importantly, by means variable and deliberate remain deceptive to one and all. Because government is captained by humans, it is inherently, by simply operating, resolved to conclude a significant portion of its conveyance of authority in ways and means corruptive. The result of such corruptive behavior, whether delivered within or outside of statutory compliance, breeds ineptness and such will always result, in some measurable way, to some unintentional consequence.

An excellent example of government inherent statutorily compliant corruption is the recent passing of the financial reform bill. Imagine passing ‘new laws’ and allowing Fannie and Freddie to remain intact? These two government sponsored enterprises have liabilities in excess of $5 trillion; they have already cost taxpayers nearly $150 billion, with no end in sight.

Another example is the $6 billion in federal subsidies to the Ethanol industry. According to the Wall Street Journal, it costs taxpayers $1.78 in ethanol incentives to reduce U.S. gasoline consumption by one gallon or nearly two-thirds of the current average retail gas price. This subsidy has been going on over four decades. What private company would continue to fund such a foolish use of cash, time, and resource?

Government is also, demonstrated by its coercive manner, decisively, omnipotent. Its behavior is often duplicitous, contradictory, and in the execution of its responsibilities and obligations costly of time and money. A common characteristic of government is its intrinsically insatiable requirement for more power. There are no exceptions to this definition of government.

Lincoln’s descriptive: “Of the people, by the people, and for the people” is a myth. The constitution is real enough but the interpretation is subject to persons of power. It is not institutions of power because institutions in the finality are managed, influenced, and dominated by persons. The only mitigation to the power of persons is not even the rule of law because that, too is subject to the persons of power. Hence, mitigation of government’s insatiable need for more power can only reside in the super active participation of citizens — and there is no such participation.

There has been no industrialized nation that has not been corrupted from within. Some of the time the corruption is uprooted or abated, sometimes it grows and blossoms under a different title or color; but in the eventual, by means legal or extralegal, the original design, usually in pieces and parts, is forsaken for the promise of better. Surely a rational person would conclude that the promise of better is a consideration of interest; but such a promise must be approached with prudence and certainty, or the penalty may include the everlasting loss of what was once so profoundly exceptional.

There is a moral consequence to government action; if such action is detrimental to the recipient, it matters not at all if the government is a republic or a totalitarian régime. Government has the capacity for moral sinfulness; such sinfulness would include a citizen’s loss of liberty, freedom, and most profoundly the citizen’s impairment of individual choice. All governments, regardless of type, have the innate capacity to deprive citizens of their constitutionally guaranteed rights.

I believe that the Obama government is pushing and pulling us citizens into a socialistic state wherein the law is some liberal progressive’s interpretation of social justice; wherein economic decisions and systems are constituted by some committee’s moral regard, and where the policies of individual liberty and freedom do not trump government incursion and ingress into the providence of societal governess.


Authored by William Robert Barber

Without the votes of three Republicans enjoined with Democrats, a senate filibuster would have blocked the newest of Obama’s remakes of American business; a legislative remake that must be handed off to 10 regulatory agencies with the discretion to write the rules managing the practice of finance. In other words, only in time will the details of the lawful legislation be known. Noticeably, this time line of agency discretion to write the rules will stretch over the next election wherein, if the Republicans are successful in the November election, the sun rises and sets as predicted (“if” has such an unsettling whimsicalness of a meaning) and insanity maybe rejected in favor of sensibility.

The cost and effect of ObamaCare is, day-by-day, stripping off its pretentiousness in favor of its actualities.  Soon the legislation, bare and obvious, will not be able to dance to the whim of Obama rhetoric. The process of implementation will uncover the loosely construed tenants and covenants of this voluminous, ill-defined contextual of a law — a law whose real world ramifications can no longer be disguised or falsities cleverly distorted. ObamaCare was instituted by legislative “hook and crook.” The policy was pushed and pulled but certainly not as a sensible, pragmatic attempt at solving certain health care reforms, but to facilitate the Obama goal of institutionalizing their brand of American Socialism.

The forthcoming election will define the merits and measure of their success. I predict that their heretofore façade of “In the public interest” will be exposed as simply another ideologically founded political maneuver of liberal progressive persuasion.

This country of ours has many very pressing problems, but definitely in competition for the number one spot is our economy. The Federal Reserve, according to those in the know, has been quantitatively managing the money supply while noting the sensitivity of not prompting uncontrollable inflation. As part of its strategy, until just recently, the Feds have been buying assets in the form of mortgage and U.S. government bonds, 1.5 trillion dollars worth. It does look like the economic outlook has deteriorated since the Feds’ last meeting. But in the meantime, the homebuyers tax credit has expired and the Feds, as they predicted months ago, stopped buying up excess mortgages.

The one item of grave concern, an underlying cause and effect of a humdrum economy, is the high unemployment rate. The Democrats can give away money by paying for current consumption in the form of extending unemployment benefits; they can increase government employment, support union agendas… but all they can do in the private sector is create uncertainty and increase taxes.

Mr. Bernanke has sworn that he will not monetize the debt. Hmm… that must mean he does. Monetizing the debt is an action by the Feds to convert debt into available currency. This can be achieved by issuing securities or simply printing money. For years, banana republics have been utilizing this fiscal policy as means by which the reconciliation of debit is satisfied. Since the central bank is not audited, no one really knows the monetary status of this nation — possibly, we have too many bananas in our republic.

All the professional guessers seem to align with their particular socio-political ideology in the first cause; then, in the second, they access and analyse the specifics of the issue. Hiding behind – and often within – their academic accreditations, they shield themselves from the pragmatic and common solutions. This does not protect them from the ‘just as accredited’ and their often unrelentingly mean spirited assaults on the veracity of their person or their merits. But it does lessen the number.

The layperson, lacking the sophistication of the few, the accredited, and the all-knowing… contemplates. The people uninhibited by the effects of Harvard, Princeton, and Yale wonk and therefore the resulting confusion of purposefully misdirected ambiguity, an ambiguity, perpetrated by ‘gnomes of the non sequitur’ posing as professors, is set aside in favor of seeking a practical solution. These taxpayers, these non-accredited laypersons of common education and common means, lacking a doctorate in economics, have written no books nor had their papers published in the haute culture of professional acceptance, are left to the simple measurement of the factual. Unsustainable public debt, current and future, the predictable heavy lifting of Obama healthcare encumbrances, the cost of administrating Obama’s bureaucratically enriched domestic policies, they count the number of unemployed, and they feel the incursion of the central government in the form of legislation, general unfairness, taxes, and fees.

And the Obama Democrats wonder why their hero’s poll numbers are dropping in favor of dissatisfied… well, soon, a little more than 3 months, we will all know the disposition of the electorate.


Authored by William Robert Barber

This government of ours is mimicking the financial-political chaos of ancient Rome. The unrelenting diatribe between those in power and those vying for power, the back and forth of charge and counter charge, coupled with a nuance or two, the at times juvenile explanations are broadcast 24/7. The amount of diverse ubiquitously disseminated information is voluminous as well as inimitable. Quantifying a differing viewpoint is an all consuming endeavor. Everyone has an opinion, none is ignored. Truthfulness is not a requirement of the disseminators. From political pundits, anonymous bloggers, to entertainers, the “free-for-all” of petty, many times truly scurrilous attacks seem comparatively unequal in their venomous intent. But then, if such mongering is not annoying enough, the antitheses, equal in appeal, will try one’s resolve. The ineffective and frankly implausible, often hypocritical, highfalutin bombast fabricated by politicians and their trainers, insincerely delivered with a wide smile solely for political satisfaction, is irritatingly shameful.

How could any of these mimickers of ancient Rome actually believe that the informed citizen (the ones that vote) could actually be influenced by the continuum of contrivance spewing out of the mouths of these politicians? Obviously, enough of the informed believe the politically motivated — otherwise, the tactic would change. I assume the objective is to create enough doubt that the voter will, once in the voting booth, decide to cast either a negative or skip that particular ballot.

Less the advance of technology Caesar would find kinship in the politics of today. As in Caesar’s time, one requires cash, pretty, catchy words and phrases, eager acolytes or at least the pretense of same; certainly, the press must be fastidiously dedicated against one’s opponent, a strong internet marketing presence, and the willingness for unabashed deception. Since Washington’s second term, for the sake of winning, in the name of compromise, the elite of political leadership has, with some worthy exceptions, steadily drifted into the malaise of personal character dilution. The result is less and less inclination for the ideals and virtues of Cincinnatus and more and more for the preference of Sulla. The symbolic Rubicon has been crossed so many times by congress and their brethren of schemers that all pretenses have been set aside until senators finally “pork-barreled” in a four-lane span-bridge.

Congresspersons, not all but many, spend a good deal of their time wings spread, feathers on display, doodle doing legislation, while plotting and planning means to hold their office until they die.

The concept of a “free-press” has been replaced by entertainers with smiles, news that are cut and pasted along the lines of ideological fondness and delivered by genders, in the most part with dashing good looks. These “talking-heads” are keen on hair, teeth, and clothes. All of the dressing for the part is to service viewer ratings; however, if ratings are not up to par, then the value shifts to the practical: All is passable, one can get by as long as they (the actors of the press playing journalist) posses at least the pretense of transcendent regard.

The unions are demanding, like unruly children, that their agenda is enacted and adhered. After all, they shout “we put Obama into power and we (the union) demand our pound of flesh”. For Caesar, the unions would represent paid-for gangs that would march the streets of Rome and beat up the opposition in favor of their candidate. For unions the only factor of consideration is power; the means to achieve that end is simply not relevant. Hmm they sound like some attorneys, crooks, the dastardly, outlaws, and many members of congress.

Truman’s rebuff of MacArthur’s tactical determination secured the future for the dictatorships of China and North Korea. North Korea has been gaining from our weakness since Eisenhower declared (during an election) that he would end the war instead of saying he would deliver victory over an aggressor. JFK did not invade Cuba ninety miles off our coast but initiated a protective umbrella for a corrupt regime, ten thousand miles away. And now Iran has decided that terrorism is a good investment. What is Obama to do?

Since Hadrian built his wall, history has proven over again that power, if not committed, is disabled by its very unwillingness. The President of the United States is stymied by indecision brought to form by conflicting possibilities; his perchance for conceptuality breeds contemplation which leads back to indecision. A leader must distinguish the illusion of dragons from the real. Obama, less his ideological beliefs, is embodied in a maelstrom of self-inflicted contemplation; all he really wants to do is run for office. For this man and his party, governing, as with the seafarer, is the albatross of ominous prospect.

The liberal progressive leadership of Obama’s Democratic Party is lost in the implementation of socialism. They have prioritized social justice as the cause and spreading the wealth as the means. In this particular endeavor Obama has made significant strides…


Authored by William Robert Barber

Since Presidents Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, administration of both political parties have step-by-furtiveness step increased the size, scope, and power of government. Proportionally and in unison with such expansion of federal power there has been an abatement of individual freedom. Furthermore, the country’s fifty states, as an intended consequence of the 16 th amendment and the seemingly ubiquitous application by congress of the “commerce clause”, an enumerated power listed in the constitution in article 1, Section 8, clause 3, are more like fiefdoms with a fealty for pecuniary dependence than sovereign entities. Presently, as an example of the “commerce clause” and its instinctive status of overreach, Obama Care mandates that every individual citizen must buy health insurance.

I suppose it is just a matter of time until congress takes the final step and regulates what and when we eat per meal plan and of course, what we pay for what we eat. Such an overreach will eventually instate mandatory exercise programs detailing time and location, and naturally, what one wears to exercise must be purchased from government licensed union stores.

Is it not so that the spirit and meaningfulness of the whole is nothing less, nor more, than the sum of its pieces and parts? If the spirit of Americanism represents the intangible value and meaningfulness the tangible, isn’t subsequently the measure of the tangible, with all of its meaningfulness, wholly dependent on the veracity of the intangible spirit? Therefore, if the spirit is effected, the long-tail result of such an effect will be that the meaningfulness of the particular tangible will disunite from its original intent, its veracity of purpose will diminish, and the theme of truthfulness distort? Is this not exactly what happened to the application of our nation’s constitution?

I suggest that one’s individual liberty as defined in the meaning of Americanism is the spirit and the definitive of meaningfulness is the constitution. These constitutional rights in the simplicity of the textual are to the common reader unambiguous and pointedly targeted to the political, social, and economic affairs of each and every American. These rights to liberty are, for each and every citizen, innately proprietary.

In symbiosis and lawfully enjoined to individual liberty is the freedom of and for personal sovereignty. Liberty cannot exist without the freedom. The a-priori meaningfulness of personal sovereignty (freedom) is conspicuous within the tangible of laws that restrict the power of government; conversely, where the natural liberty of the individual is limited by government, the impairment of personal sovereignty is imminent. Therefore, the operating objective of legislation, respective of any perception of needs, is to make no law that ingresses upon an individual citizen’s natural liberty and personal freedom.

An indicator of governing ingress on liberty and freedom is the following rule of thumb: The greater the ingress on individuals and businesses, the more porous, ill defined, and ambiguous its tax laws. For instance, if an individual is required to hire a professional in order to, with surety, accurately affirm one’s individual tax return, the governing power is, by matter of practicality, coercive. If one requires an attorney to tell the truth in court, then maybe attorneys should not represent clients in the courtroom. Besides, it is apparent that these representatives of the court in cooperation with judges, have complicated the process of litigating, simply to insure their profitable participation.

When the electorate voted for Obama and his progressive brethren, a new order of an old brand of governing principles was enacted. The populous traded values, from the bucolic American expressiveness emboldened within the existential spirit to the reliance on government programs, committees of experts, a belief that social collectivism is a solution and corporate capitalism is the problem. These resuscitated governing doctrines are an old brand of liberal progressivism, cousins of socialism, communism, and fascism.

Individual liberty and freedom trump any and all government entitlements, promises, or covenants of surety; a citizen, in the interest of being and staying a free person, must not ever trust any government, politician, elected representative, or any of its proclaimed intentions. Vigilance is the necessity as well as the obligation of citizenry.

Do vote conservative!


Authored by William Robert Barber

Respective of my often made assertion that the Obama administration, along with the majority of Democrats in the House and Senate, is an ideologue of liberal progressive doctrine; noting my declarations that Obama is a socialist whose ideal is a plutocratic style to governing. I am still somewhat baffled by the actions and pleadings of his high-ranking supporters.

Do they so misjudge the cultural norms and existential integrity of the American people that they believe they can roughshod downright stupid legislation into law? Do they really believe they can do such things free of resistance? Do they think they can outrun the federal deficit or even the reality of the rising cost of ObamaCare??

The damage to business productivity incorporated within the Dodd-Frank financial fiasco (the title of a WSJ article dating July 1) is self-evident. Could this legislation possibly be enacted? Are we Americans actually going to allow legislation this counter-intuitive to commercial sensibility to become the law of the land? Realizing that the legislation, though written into the form and content of law, is wholly subjective, it purposefully allows the interpretation of the law’s meaningfulness to a committee of unelected regulators. And those are the regulators that will judge the sum of the law’s effect and result. What?! Are we crazy???

The very people that – by their own direct action – helped to bring about the so-called financial crisis are the authors of this new legislation? Who in their right mind would allow these big government advocates-anti-capitalist leftist the authority to write legislation that is so damming to the very business structure of this nation state? Well, I guess we know the answers…

The Obama administration is anti-business and anti-profit; hence they are anti-sensible. Obama declares many untruths at will, embellishing and misdirecting at his on discretion. He denies his own counter-to-economic viability transgressions by simply stating that it could have been worse. He calls out the Republicans as politicians while acting out his leftist political polemics, and at every given opportunity he blames Bush.

This Obama fellow is acting out his role as president but has run out of viable script. His director/writer must be on vacation because he is slipping in the polls. The producer of Obama the President is only interested in the election of 2010 and 12. The Democratic Party is nervous. But Obama, undaunted, seems to believe in his own mythic invulnerability — or he is lost in the wanderlust of his own quest? It might quite possibly be a combination of both….

There are three distinctively factual realities that if voided would impair American sovereignty, hence America’s leadership role. The first is this nation’s requirement to embrace a consistent policy of always maintaining unmatched military superiority. The second is as the largest most dynamic consumer market in the world. Because our nation buys more than any other in the world, we encourage – almost compel – the sellers to American consumers to buy our debt, invest in our infrastructure, purchase our bonds, real estate, and equities. Such international investment strengthens the business scope and veracity of this nation’s economic platform. The third is the fact that this nation is the most innovative, hard-working, and practical in application, direct to purpose and design business network that has ever existed. It is the American concept of implementing business maxims that has built what is known as the “American Dream”. American business is internationally represented by an amalgamation of sophisticated industries, all servicing the buy/sell needs of an ever more demanding world market.

The Obama administration, pushed and pulled by Dodd and Frank, does not enthusiastically encourage such factual realities; indeed, I adamantly believe that the liberal progressives ideologically founded disdain for profit making, as well as the traditional American expressions of liberty and freedom, restrict their mind-set to accept capitalism as the economic system of this country. Obama believes that capitalism confronts and erodes the power of an omnipotent central government and thus endangers the industry of entitlements.

Such conclusions declared above emphasize even more why these persons of leftist, liberal progressive, socialist persuasion must be detached from power…


Authored by William Robert Barber

In the days of old, when wooden ships cleaved the brine and canvas sails captured the wind, a time when warriors, ruled by marital kings, crossed the moat, breached the safety of castle walls and with cold steel in hand challenged the dark unknown, the law rested with the mighty and the lawless were the usurpers. That is until usurpers became the mighty.

The presumption of that age was that the all powerful minority knew better than the common; and besides, most importantly it was understood that the minority would protect the majority against dragons known, unknown, or invented. Though the minority was ignorant, bane, and unintelligent, such assessment mattered little because the majority was even more so. Thus, the little less than totally ignorant ran roughshod over the totally ignorant. The guiding theory was that the majority of the people would submit their being to their corporal lord, their soul to God, and their labor to their betters.

During the Age of Enlightenment, technology stirred alternatives to the heretofore agrarian lifestyle that was solely supported on the rule of serfdom. The long-bow at Agincourt proved the equality of archer to knight; skilled labor built glorious artful edifices and merchants established a lucrative global trade. The real laggards in the abatement of ignorance in favor of intellectual illumination were leaders of kingdoms and the captains of religion.

Their means of suppressing inquisitive intellect was very simple: Script the law of the land and the bible in Latin. Of course these oppressors of reasonableness and sensibility, at the penalty of fire, also forbade the translation of Latin into English.

Today the majority still submits to the minority — but under certain terms and conditions. Instead of the ignorant being lead by the little less than ignorant, we have the common being confronted by the omnipotent intermediary of government. The government of the United States has over the last hundred years blossomed into a Byzantine bureaucracy of departments, agencies, and committees that are entrenched in cities, counties, districts, and state and federal groupings of political authority. This growth of government with all of its ambiguities, complications, and contradictory complexions was not and is not a result of necessity but a premeditated defense by the entrenched forces of this country’s liberal progressive plutocracy. It is these entrenched forces that act against the overtly definitive covenants intrinsic to this nation’s constitution.

These constitutional covenants were and are designed to limit the power of the central government. Such limitation is encapsulated within the citizens’ persistent covet for liberty and freedom.

The powerful no longer insert Latin to restrict interpretive understanding but instead the enigma of legalese; they purposefully elevate the non elected regulators to the status of statutory implementer of lawfulness. They write laws and vote on laws not even read because the purpose of the laws is to suppress liberty and individual freedom, supposedly in favor of the collective interest of the whole. The determination of what is in the interest of the many is proclaimed by a committee of the few.

Obama and his plutocrats must be stopped…