IndyTruth Blog
Obama Deception and Dystopia 
Thursday, May 28, 2009, 11:17 PM - Elections, Foreign Policy, Globalism, Opinion, Policy
Posted by Administrator
Many of the things I have seen from the start of the Obama presidency have seemed ripped right from the pages of my favorite novel, George Orwell's 1984. Propaganda stunts, the permission of torture and extended detention without charges, government control of the economy, and talk of national health care. It is total fascism, and the media and much of the general public are in full support.

Andrew Hughes has written a fantastic description of Obama's performance so far, entitled "America's Nightmare: The Obama Dystopia: Manipulation, propaganda, imagery & PR wizardry." Here is an excerpt:
The President that extended the hand of peace to the Muslim world has murdered hundreds of Pakistani men, women and children. The President who promised accountability in Government has filled his staff with lobbyists, banksters and warmongers. His Attorney General refuses to prosecute some of the worst war crimes committed in modern history and continues to give legal cover to criminals who tortured with impunity.

The country has been further bankrupted by the continuing theft of taxpayer money as the Wall St. campaign donors receive their quid pro quo. Obama has stood by idly as Bernancke states that the private Federal Reserve is not answerable to either Congress of the American public. The U.S. taxpayer is now on the hook for $14.3 Trillion and rising. Foreclosures and unemployment are rising with no meaningful efforts by the administration to alleviate the symptoms, never mind the cause. The new image of America is one of tent cities, lengthening soup kitchen lines, sherrifs evicting countless thousands of young and old from their homes, once prosperous towns descending in to an eerie stillness and an increasingly disillusioned populace.

The "War on terrorism" has mutated in to a control grid for an increasingly aware population. The foundation for this had already been put in place by Bush with the Patriot Act, Patriot Act 2, Military commissions act and numerous executive orders that strangled what was left of Posse Comitatus and the Constitution. (more here)

I have been reporting on the dangerous and unconstitutional policies of Barack Obama since early in his campaign for the Democratic nomination. I was intrigued when I first heard of this legendary young face in the Senate who was supposedly anti-war and pro-civil liberties. When I read his speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in August 2007, I knew exactly where he stood. He promoted American Imperialism and full support of the Israeli government in Middle East policy. He also used rhetoric suggestive of the CFR's documented efforts to build a North American Union, merging the U.S., Mexico, and Canada through a ridiculous infrastructure project and secretive policy-making.

Just after the New Hampshire primary, historian and left-wing political analyst Webster G. Tarpley wrote a piece about elitist puppeteer Zbigniew Brzezinski's influence on Obama and his role in the campaign. He talked about how Brzezinski initiated coups in Eastern European countries with the same campaign strategy he was using to push Obama on the American people. Tarpley saw in Obama's rise the resemblence of a young Mussolini. His concerns appear to have been correct. The propaganda campaign was successful, and since taking office in January, Obama's policies have been purely fascist.

Tarpley is featured in a new documentary, The Obama Deception, which is currently the number one film on the internet. The film covers Obama's connections to elitists who meet in shadowy policy meetings with the worlds top corporate and political leaders, and of course those nasty bankers who have been robbing our country increasingly over the last century. It also discusses Obama's rise to power and what we can expect to see from the first year of his administration. Below you can view the film on Youtube, or I have made a higher quality download available through my site that you can save by clicking here.


5 comments ( 61 views )   |  permalink
Obama breaks election promises on human rights, Rachel Maddow reacts 
Thursday, May 28, 2009, 12:26 PM - Elections, Foreign Policy, Media, News, Opinion, Policy
Posted by Administrator
The liberals are already turning on Obama, even quicker than conservatives turned on Bush. However, they really should have done so before the election–for example, when he voted in July to give telecommunications companies retroactive immunity after they broke the law to help the NSA spy on Americans. It was irresponsible of liberals to forgive Barack Obama before the election for violating our civil liberties. Their party came into power at the expense of our liberty. The least they could have done is voted for a third party progressive. Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader are still socialists, but at least they respect basic human rights and government transparency. Obama speaks like he supports those things, but his actions before and after the election show his dishonesty and complete lack of respect for the American people.

Here is MSNBC liberal commentator Rachel Maddow reporting on Obama's policy on handling detainees:


4 comments ( 30 views )   |  permalink
Now is time to proclaim our 10th Amendment right 
Thursday, February 5, 2009, 11:37 PM - Activism, Opinion, Policy
Posted by Administrator
In reference to federal raids on medical marijuana shops in California, White House spokesman Nick Shapiro said today, "The president believes that federal resources should not be used to circumvent state laws, and as he continues to appoint senior leadership to fill out the ranks of the federal government, he expects them to review their policies with that in mind."

If this truly is the new President's policy, it may be the key for Americans to restore their liberty during the Obama presidency. Our best strategy for restoring liberty may be to start with the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified December 15, 1791 as the finishing touch on the Bill of Rights: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Eight state legislatures are currently considering resolutions which assert a state's authority under the Tenth Amendment to handle issues not delegated to the U.S. government by the Constitution. These are Arizona, Hawaii, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, and Washington. Former gubernatorial candidate Andy Horning has proposed a resolution for Indiana, but it does not yet have a sponsor in the state assembly.

States will most likely have a reason to pass a resolution like this and to challenge the federal government if there is a specific issue it wishes to handle itself. In Oklahoma, the effort is motivated by a desire to pass strict immigration laws. States such as California and Michigan could do it to protect their allowance of medical marijuana.

States will most likely have a reason to pass a resolution like this and to challenge the federal government if there is a specific issue it wishes to handle itself. In Oklahoma, the effort is motivated by a desire to pass strict immigration laws. States such as California and Michigan could do it to protect their medical marijuana laws.

On the issue of marijuana regulation, the Supreme Court ruled in the 2004 case of Gonzales v. Raich that it fit within Congress' role of regulating interstate commerce. The six Justices who voted on the side of the federal government neglected the fact that growing a few plants in your home for personal use doesn't involve any interstate commercial activity.

The Justices who voted against the federal government made some very important statements of dissent.

Justice Clarence Thomas: "Our federalist system, properly understood, allows California and a growing number of other States to decide for themselves how to safeguard the health and welfare of their citizens."

More from Justice Thomas:
If the Federal Government can regulate growing a half-dozen cannabis plants for personal consumption (not because it is interstate commerce, but because it is inextricably bound up with interstate commerce), then Congress' Article I powers -- as expanded by the Necessary and Proper Clause -- have no meaningful limits. Whether Congress aims at the possession of drugs, guns, or any number of other items, it may continue to "appropria[te] state police powers under the guise of regulating commerce...

If the majority is to be taken seriously, the Federal Government may now regulate quilting bees, clothes drives, and potluck suppers throughout the 50 States. This makes a mockery of Madison's assurance to the people of New York that the "powers delegated" to the Federal Government are "few and defined", while those of the States are "numerous and indefinite.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor: "Federalism promotes innovation by allowing for the possibility that "a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country"

There is still a case to be made that the federal government has no business raiding medical marijuana users in states that allow it. And it appears that President Obama wants to respect the states' decision on that issue. There are many other federal regulations against which we could make this same argument, and we should pressure our state governments to exercise their constitutional authority to handle those issues or allow their citizens to handle them independently. If there is ever a time in our lifetimes to proclaim our Tenth Amendment right, that time is now!
add comment ( 25 views )   |  permalink   |  related link
Wasteful pork in the Obama “stimulus” bill 
Wednesday, February 4, 2009, 05:19 PM - Opinion, Policy
Posted by Administrator
The idea of an economic stimulus bill is to improve the state of the economy. One has to wonder what these provisions in Obama’s $900 billion stimulus package would do to help the economy:
  • $2 billion earmark to re-start FutureGen, a near-zero emissions coal power plant in Illinois that the Department of Energy defunded last year because it said the project was inefficient.
  • A $246 million tax break for Hollywood movie producers to buy motion picture film.
  • $650 million for the digital television converter box coupon program.
  • $88 million for the Coast Guard to design a new polar icebreaker (arctic ship).
  • $448 million for constructing the Department of Homeland Security headquarters.
  • $248 million for furniture at the new Homeland Security headquarters
  • $400 million for the Centers for Disease Control to screen and prevent STD's.
  • $1.4 billion for rural waste disposal programs.
  • $125 million for the Washington sewer system.
  • $150 million for Smithsonian museum facilities.
  • $1 billion for the 2010 Census, which has a projected cost overrun of $3 billion.
  • $75 million for "smoking cessation activities."
  • $25 million for tribal alcohol and substance abuse reduction.
  • $10 million to inspect canals in urban areas.
  • $500 million for state and local fire stations.
  • $650 million for wildland fire management on forest service lands.
  • $1.2 billion for "youth activities," including youth summer job programs.
  • $88 million for renovating the headquarters of the Public Health Service.
  • $412 million for CDC buildings and property.
  • $500 million for building and repairing National Institutes of Health facilities in Bethesda, Maryland.
  • $160 million for "paid volunteers" at the Corporation for National and Community Service.
  • $850 million for Amtrak.
  • $100 million for reducing the hazard of lead-based paint.
  • $75 million to construct a "security training" facility for State Department Security officers when they can be trained at existing facilities of other agencies.
  • $110 million to the Farm Service Agency to upgrade computer systems.
In the free market, a company can only spend money on something useful. It is not profitable for a company to waste money on producing a useless product that nobody will use. For the government there is no incentive. It could spend $850 million on trains that nobody rides, and there is no consequence. Since the government cannot create wealth out of thin air, it has to be redirected out of the free market and into the hands of the government through taxes or inflation of the money supply. Government spending draws resources from productive endeavors in the free market to wasteful government projects. This will only further weaken the economy. The key to fixing our economic crisis is to get money out of the wasteful hands of the government and back into the pockets of the American people, where their spending, saving, and investment will use it to stimulate the economy.


3 comments ( 38 views )   |  permalink   |  related link
Should Libertarians Compromise on Property Taxes? 
Wednesday, February 4, 2009, 01:42 AM - Opinion, Policy
Posted by Administrator
A post by Liberty Pile at Bureaucrash posed the question of whether libertarians should make compromises. He starts with a quote from Murray Rothbard, "the day-to-day compromises of supposedly ‘practical’ politics get pulled inexorably in the collectivist direction." The key for us to approach compromise is to not sacrifice any freedom in exchange for another. An action is not compromise if it grants a segment of liberty and does nothing to remove any segment of liberty.

The matter of compromise was a sort of the theme of our last Indianapolis Libertarian Meetup (or maybe it's always the theme for libertarians). We discussed whether libertarians should support Governor Mitch Daniels' property tax caps. Most people seemed to be in agreement that these caps would not guarantee lower taxes in any way, and that reducing spending is the only way to accomplish that. By supporting these caps we would give nothing up in exchange for the caps. However, the caps do not offer any actual tax relief, so we would gain nothing either. Shifting taxes around only sustains the system we are trying to fight. I would interpret this as a compromise because we would reinforce a system of unfair taxation.

An idea we discussed was making property taxes fair and consistent, by setting a permanent assessment at the sale of a property. This would prevent the assessor from coming in and saying that you owe $1,000 more this year (I know people who had this happen last year). It would also let the market determine the value of the property, rather than the assessor's opinion.

Is making property taxes fair and consistent a compromise? If our ultimate desire is to eliminate property taxes, then one could argue that it is. I have heard many anarchist-leaning libertarians argue that authorizing any level of government is a compromise of liberty and permission of enslavement. While I agree with an anarchist society as the ideal, I do not see it as a compromise to move government in the direction of liberty even though it is not the ideal final solution. Assessing property value exclusively at the sale would reduce the government's ability to come and take my property away. While not granting me total rights to the property as I feel is the moral and constitutional solution, this is a restoration of a segment of my property rights. It does nothing to remove any amount of liberty from me. This is not a compromise because I make no new sacrifice, but I do gain something from it.

As long as we are moving in the direction of liberty and reducing the size of government, we are on the right path. As soon as we exchange a piece of liberty for a piece of authority, we are compromising our principles; we are compromising our liberty.
1 comment ( 26 views )   |  permalink   |  related link

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | Next> >>