Category: Culture

Redistribution vs. Wealth Creation

The “Occupy America” groupies seem to believe that there is a set amount of wealth and since that set amount of wealth can neither be increased or decreased it is their conviction that those who are top heavy in this set amount of wealth should be forced, by the god State, to have their wealth redistributed so that those who do not have as much wealth can have more wealth.

Their are several problems with this but let us first note that when the State, as god, controls either directly or indirectly the means of production or the wealth generated by the means of production what one is speaking of also is the god State being given sanction to control the human mind. This is so because the human mind is that which took abstract ideas and translated those ideas into wealth creation. If the created wealth is not to be enjoyed by the mind that created the wealth but instead that wealth is to be seized then what is being advocated for here is not only the control of wealth distribution by the god State but also the control of the human mind that had the capacity to go from idea, to production to wealth.

Secondly, the emphasis on Redistribution over wealth creation destroys a nations citizenry by cutting the nerve that joins labor to prosperity. If, by the god State’s agency, a morality is inculcated into the citizenry which teaches that those who labor and those who do not labor receive the same wealth benefits then what is incentivized is sloth. If the indigent are subsidized by the god State and if the productive are punished by confiscatory taxation then the consequence will be creation of a citizenry that learns the Aesop tale of the Grasshopper and the Ant is a myth. “Occupy America,” is creating a social order where equality of prosperity through redistribution of wealth means the equality of the ghetto.

Again, we would note here that the very thing that “Occupy America” is demanding (redistribution of wealth) is the very thing that will ensure that they remain penniless, miserable, and discontent. Redistribution of wealth always ends up with economic equality, to be sure, but it is the equality of the miserable. Success for “Occupy America” will not be the lifting of the protesters to grand economic heights but will instead mean the descent of the wealth creators to miserable existence of the protesters.

This bring us naturally enough to our next contrast.

Property as Public vs. Property as Private

If the god State is empowered to redistribute wealth the clear implication is that all property is public and no property is private. What “Occupy America” is advocating is the abolition of private property in favor of all property being public. When “Occupy America” demands the government to take private property in order to spread the wealth what they are advocating is the end of private ownership. Thanks to generations of this kind of thing, our once strong private property rights have been abolished through regulatory oppression, bureaucratic tyranny and unbiblical types of taxation and the consequence is the creation of a social order that represents the Hive, the Borg, and the machine, where all exist for the good of the Queen Bee, or for the favor of the those who see themselves as owning the Machinery.

A Liberated America would return to a emphasis on private property and individual achievement. A Liberated America understands that the security that is sought to be guaranteed by making all property public only guarantees both a loss of personal liberty and the personal security that the belief of collective ownership was thought to assure.

Environment as Sin vs. Man as Sinner

“Occupy America” believes that the reason the some people are “have-nots” while other people are “haves” is because of the evil social order environment that locked people in their place. The belief here is that man is impoverished because of the evil cultural institutional environment that has oppressed men. The solution for “Occupy America” is to dismantle the cultural environment and the social order structures that have turned so many people into poor, and oppressed outcasts. For these protesters we find scattered throughout America the evil is located in what they call the Capitalist environment. This can only be fixed by deconstructing what they are calling Capitalism. Only by doing so, can man be free to reach his true potential.

Liberated Americans realize that if the cultural or social order Environment supports sin and reinforces sinful behavior, it is only because it is first the case that men are sinners. Liberated Americans realize that environment does not create sinners so much as it is a reflection of the culture that sinners construct.

The upshot of this is that “Occupied America” types believe that a Utopia can be reached by reconstructing man by reconstructing his sinful environment and so they demand the “New Soviet Man,” or “The New Humanist Man,” through the building of a New World Order that will so adjust future generations that those future generations will be as perfect as the environment that “Occupy America” types intend to build.

Pursuit of Anarchy vs. Pursuit of Liberty

Our last contrast between “Occupied America” and “Liberated America” is the fact that “Occupied America” crowd believes that Liberty will only be assured by anarchy. The irony in this is that if they are successful to this end the result will be Tyranny since a anarchistic social order is not possible and will always eventually result in a strong man to bring order from chaos.

Actually, as much as people hate hearing this, the only possible way to achieve Liberty is to understand that true Liberty has boundaries and constraints. Further, genuine Liberty can only thrive among a people who share a common worldview since without a shared worldview what results is each man doing what is right in their own eyes. This explains why a Libertarian political stance can only work in a social order context where a shared worldview provides the foundation for a Libertarian ethic. Finally, as it is the case that only men freed from their sins by the payment of Jesus Christ for sins on the Cross, therefore only Christians can build cultures that are characterized by Liberty. All cultures that are not Christian are by definition Occupied cultures. Because “Occupy America” descends from a non-Christian world and life view all that will result from any success they have will be only more bondage then we already have.

This final point explain why, ultimately, the problems we have in our political or economic systems will not be resolved through alterations in our social order. Men enslaved to their sins will always build political and economic systems that reflect their bondage to their sin. Liberty, then, will only be procured by men learning that the only way they can be free of their bondage is by learning Christ. Men who have learned Christ will then incarnate that learning into the free social orders that they construct.

I am adamantly opposed to “Occupy America” because I am convinced that if they are successful the consequence will a even deeper bondage then we currently are living with right now. However, for all the opposition and revile that I have for “Occupy America” I realize that the Liberty they desire will not be had through political or economic systems but only through men and women bowing the knee to a non-Marxist Christ.

For several weeks now a astro-turf movement, called “Occupy Wall-Street” has occupied public parks in different cities throughout America (and now the world) and has protested against Corporate greed while appealing to the state to police and regulate greedy corporations. Such an appeal is akin to demanding a ex-lax suppository in order to cure diarrhea.

In this article I want to take just a little space comparing and contrasting the vision of Occupy America vs. the vision of a Liberated America. Remember the assumption behind a Occupational force is that there is a previous evil regime that is being overthrown. If America needs to be “Occupied” one can only wonder what is the evil regime that needs to be overthrown. This brings us to our first contrast.

Capitalism vs. Corporatism

Most of the protesters at these rallies are brain dead in terms of economic theory. A cursory review of the you-tube videos quickly reveals that. However, if there is one utterance that falls across their uneducated lips it is the thought that they are against evil Capitalism and are for sainted Socialism. The Occupiers however don’t realize that the problem that we are having now is not too much Capitalism and too little Socialism but rather that we have too little Capitalism and too much Corporatism (i.e. — Fascism, Socialism, Statism, etc.). The occupiers have rightly seen that there is to much economic disparity in our country but the solution that they are pursuing guarantees that such disparity will be institutionalized as Corporatism gives a system of a thin layer of wealthy elites combined with dense numbers who comprise the oi polloi.

The “Occupy” protesters are too economically illiterate to realize that what they are demanding is a license for those same mega-corporations that they are protesting to continue ignore the market realities that find customers disciplining those corporations by taking their business elsewhere because the mega-corporation did not respond to customer desires and so instead, to avoid bankruptcy they bribed Washington DC to provide the very bailouts about which the protesters are so incensed. The mega-corporations did not minimize their costs, did not make a profit, did not respond to the demands of the market and so in order to stay afloat they turned to their cronies in DC and received bailouts, stimulus, and pork. If instead, the principles of Capitalism had been followed — those very principles that the “Occupy” economic dullards are protesting — those mega-corporations that the protesters insist they hate so much would have been allowed to crumble and fall, thus allowing shrewder Capitalists to purchase the assets of those failed companies and to proceed to provide a better product to the customers. Genuine Capitalism would have let the Big 3 Auto industry fail, they would have let Goldman-Sachs and the New York money interest fail, they would have let the Federal Reserve fail because genuine Capitalism does not believe in private gains and taxpayer losses. If the “Occupy America” crowd had a lick of economic sophistication they would be protesting Fascism, Corporatism, Statism, and they would be doing so both at Wall Street and on Capital Hill in DC. Instead what we get are a bunch of economic heroin addicts who are demanding more heroin in order to cure their heroin addiction.

Rule of Law vs. Rule of Men

Once upon a time there existed a quaint notion that law was objective to all men and that all men, both ruled and ruler, were to be governed by that rule of law. That this was so is seen in the Massachusetts Bill of Rights of 1780 which has as its goal the establishment of a “government of laws and not of men.” Further, the English jurist Sir William Blackstone could write in 1765 that “law is not a transient order from a superior to or concerning a particular person or thing, but something permanent, uniform, and universal.” To the contrary current definitions of law are seen as being merely a social construct. Laws are subjective and their only reality is the reality that force can give to the law as it serves the whim of whoever is controlling the levers of power.

“Occupy America” does not believe in the rule of law unless one believes in their motto that “the voice of the people is the voice of God.” The “Occupy America” has no concept or respect for a transcendent law that speaks of private ownership, they have no concept or respect for a transcendent law that speaks of valid contracts that set fixed limits between what is yours and what is mine, and they have no concept or respect for a transcendent law that establishes connections between labor and success. Instead what they are advocating for is a arbitrariness in the nature of law that allows them the expedience of legally stealing.

Liberated Americans understand that without objective law what eventually descends is Mao’s “power comes from the end of a barrel,” reality. Without the acknowledgment of objective law we return to a world that is red in truth and claw and where the shadows of madame guillotine and Sir Gulag begin to be cast over the landscape. Without a objective law what results is a nation of citizens who are the slaves of the Government since the State is that institution that is control of the capricious and arbitrary law.

This brings us naturally to the next distinction between Liberate America and Occupy America.

Extra-mundane Personal God vs. State as God

Occupy America by insisting on a law that is a social construct by necessity requires someone or something to be the social constructor. If law is not objective and does not descend from a God who rules over men then law must descend from the State as the social constructor. The result is that modern man lives and moves and has his being in the state, or as Mussolini put it, “all within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.”

To see that “Occupy America” views the State as God one only has to understand that it is the State to which they are demanding to arbitrarily recreate the social order that they desire. There is nothing in the appeals of “Occupy America” except the appeal of using the State as a instrument of blunt force to create a more fair world.

“Occupy America,” by locking out the God of the Bible has insured that man will be ruled by the fickle, capricious State god.

Went and listened to a lecture this morning by Scott Lively, author of “Pink Swastika.” I learned,

1.) Homosexual as a word was coined in order to deflect attention from the word of the time that was used, which was sodomite. The word “Homosexual” was latched upon to divert attention away from the dirtiness of the act. Eventually “homosexual” had to give way to “gay” for the same reason that the word “sodomite” gave way to the word “Homosexual.” Now even the word “gay” has become dirty and so other terms are being sought out.

Notice here the language. New worldviews can be spotted by the way the language is changed or manipulated.

2.) Hard core sodomites are themselves turning away from the “genetics” argument as a reason for faggotry. Genetics as a causal argument undermines their recruitment efforts since if faggots and lesbians are born that way then the justification for recruitment has no basis. If someone is born that way then other aren’t born that way and therefore recruitment in the government schools through the curriculum makes no sense.

3.) Lively believes the homosexual ideology / agenda drives feminism. I don’t agree with Lively on this point.

4.) Lively explained that in Nazi Germany there existed a politics of sodomy so that the fags that were persecuted were persecuted by other fags. Lively insisted that it was a case where the hyper “masculine” fags were persecuting the hyper effeminate fags. He also said there was a connection in this business between the Nazi’s who tended to be more of the hyper “Masculine” fags and the communists who were hyper effeminate fags. Lively noted that Hitler was a effeminate fag who over-compensated that tendency by become brutal.

5.) Lively explained that the same kind of odd continuum exists among Lesbians. On one end you will have the Butch Dykes who have forsaken their femininity while on the other end of the spectrum you will have the princess Lesbians.

6.) Lively said the military has had faggotry in this country for years and since it was, until recently, a all male culture the fact that it attracted fags shouldn’t come as a surprise. On this score, also offered a great insight that he believes that the Liberal will not become uber pro-draft since by requiring males to serve in the military that will both increase their numbers and provide opportunity for recruitment.

7.) Noted that there is five stages of the Faggotization of a country.

a.) Tolerance of deviance
b.) Acceptance of deviance
c.) Celebration of deviance
d.) forced embracing of deviance
e.) Punishment for those who oppose deviance.

Lively believes we are at “d” in our country and finds “e” prevalent in Canada.

8.) Noted that the beginning of the Sodomization of our culture began in earnest with Alfred Kinsey who was himself a faggot and, who, through his “surveys” mainlined sexual deviance. Lively also noted that there was a link between Kinsey’s work and the “scientific” surveys on faggotry that has been done in Germany during the Weimar Republic.

9.) Lively made the fascinating observation that the well known photo of Nazi’s burning books was actually a case where the Nazi’s were burning the records that has been kept during the Weimar Republic of an institution that had studied the phenomenon of sodomite behavior. The reason those records were being burned (along with assorted banned books) was that so many of the records from this institute included prominent Nazis.

10.) Lively insisted that the Faggot agenda is a global agenda. He told stories of other countries where he has spoke that is having this agenda jammed down their throat. Lively insisted that the European Union is one such example.

11.) Noted that this catamite agenda destroys nations because it destroys the stability of the family life. He observed that the first step in this agenda was to normalize adultery and out of wedlock heterosexual sex.

12.) Could not vote for Ron Paul because of Paul’s support for Catamites in the military.

13.) Notes that homosexuals are drawn to the Roman Catholic ministry because Catamites like all boys clubs.

14.) Lively does not believe that people are born sodomites, catamites, faggots or lesbians. He insists that any scientific work that supports this is a case where the books have been cooked. Lively insists that the #1 reason for this perversion is sexual molestation when the perverts were children. The other reason is just outright rebellion against authority structures.

15.) Lively rightly noted that God does not make people perverts and then turn around and condemn them for being what He made them to be. To say that God makes people catamites, sodomites, faggots, and Lesbians, and then turns around and condemns them would be like saying that God made people left-handed and then condemns them for being left-handed.

16.) Lively noted that the end goal of this is to make heterosexuality and monogamous marriage the abnormality and to make perversion the norm.

17.) Lively noted the Church’s refusal to lift its voice against this vile behavior. Lively noted that if the Church will not speak against shacking up then it is supporting this agenda because it is all a piece.

18.) Lively noted that the sodomite agenda is now part of the California Government school curriculum. Also noted the advance in faggot and Lesbian couples being able to adopt.

19.) Noted the passport rules in some countries where “Father” and “Mother” have been replaced with “Parent 1” and “Parent 2” are part of the Catamite / Lesbian agenda. Reported that the Catamite agenda has progressed most extensively in Sweden.

20.) Lively believes this nation may already be beyond the point of no return in regard to the sodomite agenda.

‎21.) Taught us that the Pink Triangle had been the symbol of the Catamites / Sodomites / Lesbians until the Pink Triangle was being exposed for what it was and only then did they turn to the “Rainbow” as a symbol.

22.) Taught the best way to make your child faggot / lesbian / catamite/ sodomite is by putting your children in government schools. Noted that already, a child can be punished in a government school for saying “that so gay.”

23.) Lively noted that increasingly their are reports of public school bus trips turning into oral sex rides and that more and more cases are being reported of the vilest STD’s in children arising from this perversion. Also noted that sex acts among children as being seen on the internet.

24.) Lively brought attention to the similarities between the Weimar Republic and the current USSA.

There is a connection in servile cultures between sex without boundaries and the condition of slavery, so much so that one can say that “free love” is the direct enemy of liberty. Unconstrained sexuality is the most obvious of all bribes that serves as an incentive to slavery. Strong and stable families that arise out of the Christian faith serve as a bulwark against the intentions of the State to enslave its people. Break down the family by the offering of sexual dainties, sold as calorie free, and the result will be a turning away from the Liberty created by stable families.

Second the lack of moral discipline that is fostered by sexual laxity translates easily into a lack of discipline characteristic of all slaves. The slave is a slave because he has no discipline. This observation is reinforced when we consider the connection between a lack of moral discipline as exhibited by unconstrained sexuality and the lack of moral discipline as exhibited in piling up economic debt. In both cases the lack of moral discipline encourages enslavement, either to the State or to creditors. The encouraging of sexual laxity, as well as the encouraging of a lack of economic probity ends up being mutually reinforcing with each vacuity creating and supporting the slave mindset.

The present cornucopia of sexual perversions in our culture is a indice that measures how far we have descended into slavery. There was a sound reason for Huxley to create a Brave New World where sexual appetite is encouraged.

Find me unrestrained and unbounded sexuality and I will show you slavery.

Rob Risko attends the church I am privileged to serve as Pastor. Rob is a Major in the Air Force Guard having flown combat sorties in one of the Desert Nouns. Rob realizes the challenges that the current military faces and has expressed his mind on that end more than once. Rob and his wife and family confess Christ and seek to think Christ’s thoughts after Him. He is a friend.

Occupy This, or That!

By Robert Risko · Friday, October 21, 2011

Politicians “test the waters” for democratic acceptance. With calls from North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue to “suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won’t hold it against them, whatever decisions they make” Patriots should recognize the increasingly toxic waters of Socialism staging its treacherous stand against the United States Constitution.

Occupy Wall Street! Occupy Denver! Occupy Los Angeles! Occupy London!

“[A]n armed uprising is inevitable, and…the time for it is fully ripe” might be a familiar phrase to readers. (1) The original statement is not a product of the “Occupiers” but is an official Marxist justification for the Bolshevik Revolution. A careful study of these two revolutionary movements may reveal protections that preserve the United States Constitutional peace. However, many may miss the significance of parallels in history where some real but often imagined conditions of today draw on the same faulty foundations as the Russian Civil War.

We should be vigilant for the next borrowed concept: “We now have the majority behind us.” (1) Already, this reasoning is openly embraced by the “Occupy Wall Street” group: “We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We are using the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to achieve our ends.” (2) Perhaps the only restraint on “Occupy Mobocracy” is that they generally reject the Second Amendment.

Having compared the nature of the United States through history including the Mayflower Compact (3) (the first Colonial Covenant), Declaration of Independence (4), Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union (5) (the first United States Constitution), Federalist (6) and Anti-Federalist Papers (7), United States Constitution of 1789 (8,9,10,11), War Department Training Manual 2000-25 (12), PatriotPost’s Essential Liberty booklet (13), and The Truth Project (14); a comprehensive citizenship lesson on United States Worldview was assembled. (15)

So pervasive is socialist indoctrination in the United States that even our countrymen in the military are fearful of an open discussion of the United States Constitution. Presented with a concise summary of the above reputable sources and designed to effectively educate a critical component of those under solemn oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” (16) military “leaders” dismissed the discussion as “too contentious.” The very individuals with a special requirement to understand and charged to maintain the United States Constitution clearly rejected an opportunity to reintroduce the “1787 Founder” thoughts into modern military discourse.

Where then shall we find bravery and courage for our present challenges? Certainly it should have been from among our “best and brightest” citizens!

Yet the military “leadership” response should not be surprising to the discerning Patriot. Clearly the high calling of military service has been abandoned or surrendered as shown by the truth-twisting of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal and redefining justice and integrity as “consent.” (17)

Further indications mark the decline of Constitution supporters and defenders within the military. Operation ODYSSEY DAWN, which aptly translates to “beginning of a long journey,” was readily prosecuted and heralded by military “leaders” as a success. However, as outlined by Mr. Glenn Greenwald in Congress vs. the President on War Powers, Libya employment was not sanctioned by the Constitutional authority for action against a sovereign nation-state in the form of a declaration of war or Congressional resolution. (8) This inaction of Congress renders the entire operation unconstitutional and thereby a grand failure of constitutional trustees. (18) Those charged with supporting and defending the Constitution should have been the most zealous for Rule of Law in accordance with their Oath of Office by denying the Presidential dictate.

Perhaps the absence of a public school or military education describing the proper responsibilities of citizenship is to blame. Or maybe a more perilous want of integrity has freed personal security to suppress “service before self” is the precipitant to wanton violation of the United States Constitution. Whatever the root cause, nothing could be more apparent than the critical need for personal responsibility rising out of a proper understanding and assent to the Foundation of the United States itself.

Sadly the problems of the United States are a national dilemma that permeates all of American society. They are the products of a larger indoctrination that has prevailed unchecked since the early 1930s and follow earlier constitutional violations of well-intentioned but imperfect men such as Lincoln. (19) The Prussian education system that we “enjoy” produces good employees and soldiers — “good” from the obtuse perspective that wealth can be created without creativity. Any autocrat simply wants obedient masses and will find in the publically-educated United States an abundance of unquestioning servants.

The good news brought about by the PatriotPost and the more recent Tea Party movement is a “questioning spirit” among the once quiet citizenry. It is to be emphasized that this questioning is distinct from anarchy! Upon finding a valid principle, anarchy will attempt to overthrow Civil Liberty so that self-imposed rules are the only remaining determinant of right and wrong (Total Liberty). In contrast, the discerning Patriot-citizen will affirm and defend a tested truth once questioning has found consummation. In these true citizens we find a great hope for this nation! Testing these foundations of our beliefs is crucial to understanding and defending them. Testing these foundations is also crucial to correcting fissures and deterioration that weaken the whole.

As we think on the current perceptions and historic definitions of “Occupy [this or that],” the concerns spelled out by Mr. Alexander in Obama’s Red October Uprising (20) should not be discounted but amplified. Today, concerns mount that the United States military in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya are “occupiers.” Numerous public relations statements are pursued to maintain the understanding that United States presence in foreign nations is at the request of the host government and presence persists only so long as such assistance is required for a stable region.

While the general conclusions made by Mr. Alexander on the dangers of the “Occupy” movement are agreeable, the true nature of the “occupiers” is left undefined. This complete understanding is critical for Patriots as additional affronts to Rule of Law are intensified.

By definition, legal occupiers claim property or ascendancy where no previous claim exists. (21) Where a previous claim is enforceable, occupiers are given another name. The “Occupy” mobocracy claiming legitimacy over a preexisting claim (the U.S. Constitution) is an enemy occupation at best, and blatantly treasonous at worst! This statement is evident, including the International Occupy movements, where the very Constitutions granting rights to assemble and private property ownership are the same Constitutional forms of government and economy that the “Occupy” movement would have overthrown thus canceling constitutional rights themselves even the right to assemble. This is the logic of insanity!

The distorted views taught by public education’s socialist elite have set the stage for an unquestioned claim that these “occupiers” are our countrymen and equal partakers of the privileges of our Constitution. (22) They are not! We might have a responsibility for helping these misguided souls discover reality, but common assent to established Rule of Law and a common mind toward harmonious ideologies mark the true fellow-citizens of a nation, an understanding clearly understood by Senator Joseph McCarthy. (23)

Our countrymen are vigilant adherents to Rule of Law as revealed in our unadulterated national history, honest, discerners of truth by testing, hard-working contributors, personally responsible for their actions and those under their charge, charitable self-sacrificing givers, community-minded servants, and principled decision-makers based on a solid Foundation of the Religion of Jesus Christ as handed down by our Founders; including Christopher Columbus (23) and the Christian Pilgrims of the Mayflower. (3)

We should engage, entreat, and pray that those set against the Truth will yet be won over to it. In the final analysis, our devotion must remain fixed on the Truth and unencumbered by false notions of brotherhood with the insane — even to the peril of our earthly lives.

* * *

1. http://www.marxist.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/oct/10a.htm
2. http://occupywallst.org
3. http://patriotpost.us/document/the-mayflower-compact/
4. http://patriotpost.us/document/the-declaration-of-independence/
5. http://patriotpost.us/document/the-articles-of-confederation/
6. http://patriotpost.us/document/the-federalist-papers/
7. http://www.utulsa.edu/law/classes/rice/constitutional/antifederalist/antifed.htm
8. http://patriotpost.us/document/the-constitution-of-the-united-states-of-america/
9. http://patriotpost.us/document/bill-of-rights-preamble/
10. http://patriotpost.us/document/the-first-ten-amendments-as-ratified/
11. http://patriotpost.us/document/amendments-11-27-to-the-constitution-of-the-united-states/
12. http://www.barefootsworld.net/tm_2000-25.html
13. https://patriotpostshop.com/products/124
14. http://www.thetruthproject.org/
15. https://www.filesanywhere.com/FS/v.aspx?v=8a6d6a8a616676a76e9e
16. http://www.history.army.mil/html/faq/oaths.html
17. http://patriotpost.us/commentary/2011/03/18/a-nation-adrift-economy-and-liberty-and-leftist-incrementalism/
18. http://www.salon.com/2011/06/25/libya_12/
19. http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2009/02/13/lincolns-legacy-at-200/
20. http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2011/10/13/obamas-red-october-uprising/
21. http://www.webster1828.com/
22. http://patriotpost.us/opinion/walter-e-williams/2011/10/19/pitting-us-against-each-other/
23. http://www.senatormccarthy.com/
24. Federer, W. J. (2000). America’s God and Country Encyclopedia of Quotation (pp. 305-306). St. Louis, MO: AMERISEARCH, Inc.