Thursday, November 29, 2007

Define "Matter of National Security"

I think that if you were to ask a presiding politician what an example of a "matter of National security" (MNS) would be, the answer would be something reasonable. However, I bet if you looked at the actions taken or present missions under the heading of being a "matter of National security" you would find most are actually a matter of corporate interests. Not having access to the catalog of these endeavors it is hard to substantiate this claim but consider this:

I would consider a grave MNS as the loss of manufacturing base in this country. Wouldn't you think that having to contract China to build our defense missiles and India to program them would be an MNS tragedy? Yet, that is precisely what we've let happen in effect. And while critics will defend the current state of weapons development as still being home grown, the fact is that we contract with multinational companies to build these devices and those companies have somehow shared certain technologies when necessary even though being forbid to do so. Whether it's missile technologies, super secret quiet submarine propeller designs or satellite technologies, not only has this information gotten to our potential enemies, but they now have the capacity to build it faster and cheaper than we now can, and we helped them do it!

I would also consider a grave MNS as having available and cheap energy. Yet, our MNS focus so far has been on making sure that corporate interests can supply us with that energy. So, all these related MNS missions have truly done is secure corporate interests and income and then GIVEN them the resources they've needed to do it. See

In summary, "matter's of National security" rarely appear to truly be matters which benefit American citizens, save those who are shareholders of the corporate interests those MNS's serve.

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Democrat? Republican? Other?

Trying to chose? It's hard I know. Democrats: No Hope. Republicans: False Hope. Libertarians and others: Nothing but hope. Just like the automobile dilemma, maybe a hybrid is a solution. Yeah, a Libertarian who's a Republican! Turn the false hope into true hope. Ron Paul 2008.

Thursday, November 1, 2007

Who to vote for?

That one's easy. Ron Paul. Try to find anyone with a voting record that proves he is incorruptible - that would be Ron Paul. Anyone, I mean ANYONE who votes to increase the size of government in anyway is not helping anyone anymore. Here's where we went wrong and why.