Saturday, December 31, 2011

Ron Paul, Racism and Conspiracy Theorists

The Ron Paul campaign must really be doing something right. The corporate owned mainstream media is really attacking him with all guns blazing. They dredge up the fear card and accuse him of being a racist. They spin his words and try to frame the argument in a way that, in my opinion, is very dishonest to say the least. Some would call these corporate shills outright liars, but in their minds they're just trying to push the propaganda that will get their guy elected so their corporate masters can maintain their power. The problem for them is that the masses of humanity aren't as dumb as they seem to believe. The people on catching on to their little game. There's a world of difference between the way they treat Ron Paul who WILL follow through on his campaign promises to restore personal freedoms as best he can (judging from his political consistency and voting record), and the way they treated Barrack Obama who made promises that sounded good and somewhat Ron Paulish but were never meant to be kept.

It's alright when your guy goes out there and talks about hope and change and freedom because they know he'll purposely be ineffective when it comes to loosening the grip the establishment holds on power, but when Ron Paul talks about such things they are suddenly scary and bad because he is suggesting real ways to change the establishment and they know he plans on implementing them. Take, for example, this video clip taken from MSNBC Hardball with Chris Matthews. At about the three minute mark, they start talking about the anti Washington, DC sentiment on the street and how Democrats thought Barrack Obama was the answer and are now seeing that in Ron Paul. Chris Matthews asks what is it about, is it that "whole freedom, personal freedom thing?"

Ding, ding, ding. He hit the nail on the head. But he made it sound like freedom is a bad thing. The whole nature of what this nation was supposed to be about is somehow greatly flawed. There's a whole undertow, an ocean of information that he glosses over in a few sentences to try to make Ron Paul and his supporters sound bad. We are all crazy for wanting freedom and for being anti Washington, DC and anti-establishment. What do we want freedom for? Then he turns around and makes freedom something only young people want. When we get older and need health care, around 65 or 70, then suddenly government is pretty healthy. You old people don't want freedom, you want to be told where, what, and how when it comes to health care. Is it any wonder corporate owned mainstream media gets more and more insignificant as time goes on? They make themselves sound foolish without even trying.

So, what does Chris Matthews do next to try to impugn Ron Paul? He turns to another corporate owned media source for back up. A New York Times blogger wrote about Ron Paul's 20 year old newsletter and claims it's impossible to know how Ron Paul feels about blacks or gay people who were "viciously disparaged" in it. I can tell you how he feels about them. It's really not hard and he never had to write about it. He feels they are all individual human beings with unalienable rights that should not be violated by government, and especially not the federal government whose mandate is to protect those very rights they now so often violate. Even if Ron Paul was the most racist individual on earth, which he is not, he supports policies that are definitively non racist. He would not use government to empower racist beliefs. He has proven this time and again by being against some of the most racist policies implemented by the federal government, policies that prey upon the economic underclasses, war in general and the war on drugs in particular.

The wars and occupations we engage in depend upon a volunteer army. Much of that army consists of minorities who volunteer because they don't see better economic opportunities offered in this nation. The war on drugs has jailed a much higher percentage of non violent minorities than white folk. If you don't think these policies are racist in nature, than I think you're looking at them with emotional blinders on. Ron Paul wants to put an end to both these policies. That's about as anti racist as you can get. What difference does it make what he thinks privately, as long as he publicly supports policies that encourage personal freedom for all peoples? Unless, of course, Chris Matthews believes that Ron Paul has supported such policies all these decades just so he could procure the office of President of the United States so he could flip flop as he's never done before and implement a policy of racism unequaled in our times! What a devious plan!

Oh, and that would make Chris Matthews a paranoid conspiracy theorist! That is, of course, unless he believes Ron Paul is a lone wolf who has thought up this plan all by himself and has not told anyone else about it. That doesn't seem very likely. Yet the New York Times piece seamlessly melds the racist accusation into the accusation that Ron Paul is a "paranoid conspiracy theorist." Chris Matthews takes it to the next level by tying it all into the "truther" movement and suggesting that Ron Paul might think that George Bush was pushing some sort of detonator that blew up the world trade center. Talk about trying to dredge up emotional muck to get people to forget about the issues they should be focused upon.

But to address these issues, what is it that Chris Matthews hates about the truth? Why does he try to make the word truther sound so bad? What is wrong with wanting to know the truth? There is so much that went unanswered by the 9/11 commission, what is wrong with wanting another investigation? They just got done explaining how so many people are anti government these days, why should those people accept the conspiracy theories of the government over the conspiracy theories proffered by others who are not involved in government? What is wrong with opening your mind to other possibilities? As for the snide remark about George Bush, I don't think anyone ever accused him of pushing the detonator, but he had to have his buddy Dick Cheney with him when he was questioned about the incident and that little question and answer session took place behind closed doors and was never made public.

So then Chris Matthews takes it another step farther and talks about other conspiracy theories, the most recent being a plot to make it look like the Iranians were planning to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador to get us into another war. Once again, Mr. Matthews makes it seem as if such a plot is impossible and anyone who thinks otherwise is crazy. Has he forgotten about the Gulf of Tonkin? Does he think that everyone involved in the United States federal government is angelic? Does he believe that somehow once you join our government you earn a halo? Maybe he believes that people who seek positions of power in politics couldn't possibly engage in illegal acts in order to maintain their power. Maybe he believes that once you are actually governing people only the best human qualities come out and the worst human qualities are forever squelched in you. That's a pretty Polly Anna thing to believe. I somehow doubt that Mr. Matthews is that naive. More likely he's just doing as he's told by his corporate masters and spreading the scary propaganda to make people afraid of Ron Paul and freedom. Does saying that make me a paranoid conspiracy theorist?

I'd like to see someone play "hardball" with Chris Matthews. On his program he gets to frame the debate and ask the questions in a way that twists peoples' words and make them mean things they weren't meant to mean. It's a game the establishment plays to try to make the way of life they force upon us look good and benevolent while anyone else's philosophies or ideas on how we should live our lives become "crazy" or "stupid" or perhaps even "dangerous." I'm certain there's a clever propagandist out there who could make Chris Matthews' ideas seem just as crazy, stupid or dangerous if given the chance. The problem is, the powers that be won't ever give anyone the chance. I wonder just how he'd do if he was the one being questioned.

The interview finished up on a fine note with the explanation that there's a certain amount of prairie pacifism and war fatigue at work here. Duh. Ten years in Iraq. Eight years in Afghanistan. They're still trying to make us believe that the war in Iraq is over when it's not. They over look Libya. Yeah, people want to get out. No more war. No more devious intelligence gathering that puts our reputation at risk. Peace is not a bad thing, nor is it dangerous. No matter how the corporate owned media spins them, freedom and peace are ideals we should strive for. People are tired of the lies and corruption that leads to war that profits the elite few who have grabbed control of our system of government.

Ron Paul is leading because his ideas make sense. He is different from the established candidates. He has opened people's minds. As people's minds open they become more willing to take a look at alternative views of history. Perhaps this will cause a certain amount of them to realize just how badly they've been manipulated throughout their lives. Perhaps that's why these propagandists seen on the establishment corporate mainstream media are losing audience share and becoming less significant all the time. Most people will sooner or later be able to recognize truth when they see it. As has been said, the truth will set you free, and Ron Paul certainly seems more truthful and honest than any other politician at the federal level.

If you like my writings, I am asking for your help. Please visit my website to see my archived articles and help support me by making a donation. I am also pleased to announce the release of the latest book by Matthew Wayne entitled "The Edge of Sanity" at If you do not wish to make a donation this is a product you can purchase. The download for this book is only $2.99, but interested readers can receive an additional 25% off by entering the coupon code CX99R until Jan. 29th, 2012. Even if you simply take a moment of your time to download the 20% of the book offered for free that will be of tremendous help to me in gaining exposure for my work which will help create sales.

Friday, December 30, 2011

Evolution and Food, a Different Point of View

I read a paper once on a native American tribe from the southwest. They had a larger than normal occurrence of diabetes. To put it in a nutshell, in trying to determine the cause of this the study found that the loss of a melon that had been natural to their diet contributed greatly to the rise in diabetes cases within the tribe. When the melon was reintroduced into their diet the occurrence of diabetes fell dramatically. It turns out that after ten thousand years of depending on this fruit for a major part of their diet their digestive systems had adapted to the point where taking the food source away caused it damage.

Unfortunately, I can't remember the source for this. It was read long ago when I was in college for some science class I was taking or some such thing. It stuck with me because I remember thinking how this demonstrated the nature of evolution. Evolution isn't something that happens suddenly and, poof, you have a new species. It's not even something you can necessarily see. It's something that happens over a long period of time, thousands and even millions of years, and something that one might not even be able to detect outwardly or by the remains we find. In short, evolution is the adaptation an organism undergoes to keep up with its changing environment. How well an organism can adapt will determine whether it survives and what it will evolve into.

In the case above the native Americans evolved into organisms that needed something in the melon to help them break down sugars in their diet. This wasn't discovered until the food source was removed and the abnormally high occurrence of diabetes was investigated. It makes sense to me that the digestive track and its processes would be some of the first and easiest things to evolve with a changing environment as opposed to something like height, or limbs, or other outward structures. This is because not only are these changes taking place at the molecular and cellular levels, but the body will be changing slowly as the food sources change. Given enough time, the organism may become dependent on certain food sources to remain healthy in ways we might not even think of.

All this gives me pause to think, what happens if our modern day food sources are suddenly changed? How would that affect our bodies that have adapted to certain qualities in certain food sources over the millennia? Will our bodies even be able to absorb the necessary nutrition from such food sources? Will they develop diseases such as diabetes and cancer? Such questions are already being answered, and you're doing the answering. Certain companies have decided it's alright to make such genetic changes in our food supply and not even tell us about them. Our federal government and their establishment corporate sponsors have teamed up and decided that there is no problem with turning the citizenry of this nation into guinea pigs. They refuse to even label genetically modified foods at the store and let you make the decision whether you wish to purchase and eat them or not.

It's bad enough that we eat so much prepared food. It's bad enough that we eat so many preservatives and manmade additives and ingredients in our modern diets. It wouldn't surprise me to find that these things have quite a bit to do with the increased cases of cancers, diabetes, heart disease and other maladies prevalent in modern society. But at least we more or less choose to consume such foods. At least most of us realize the risks and choose convenience and affordability over quality. Many people aren't even aware they're consuming genetically modified food, let alone informed on the risks.

We have been eating many foods for thousands of years. Our bodies expect certain elements and qualities in our meats, grains, fruits and vegetables. Our bodies have evolved over these thousands of years along with the food our diets consist of. My generation is possibly better able to handle the processing our food undergoes than even my father's generation, but that is not certain. When a different element is introduced into our food, our bodies have to figure out how to deal with it. Our bodies have to evolve. That takes time. Our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren will likely have a better chance of their bodies adapting to absorb the necessary nutrition from these genetically modified foods than you or I do, but there are no guarantees. For all we know, modifying such foods could backfire and cause a catastrophe. And what will be available for most of us to eat is now being decided by a few faceless bureaucrats and elite corporatists who will never be held accountable for any possible disaster.

At the very least, food that is genetically modified should be labeled so. At the very least, those who grow natural crops should be reimbursed when their crops are destroyed by wind borne cross pollination with genetically modified crops. Instead the powers that be fight to prevent genetically modified foods from being labeled. Instead the courts are finding in favor of corporate farms and forcing small family farms out of business when cross pollination occurs by claiming the small farmers have violated the corporations' patents on such foods. Everything is backward. The powers that be want to keep us in the dark. The powers that be seem to want to force natural foods out of the market. Is it any wonder that so many see a conspiracy when it comes to food manipulation?

This is just another example of the total failure of the federal government to protect individuals or even to simply be reasonable and fair. In study after study it is shown that natural foods are better for the body. In study after study it is shown that natural foods provide the body with the nutrition necessary to grow stronger, to stay younger longer, to fight off diseases better, yet the corporate farms that have taken control of so much of our farmland insist on feeding us foods that are less and less natural and therefore less nutritious and less beneficial to the body. At the very least each individual should be able to decide what food they want to eat and feed their families. In our modern world, even the very least is denied us due to misinformation, government incompetence and even deliberately hidden information. It seems to me that if the powers that be appointed to such tasks can't protect the integrity of our food they should be held accountable when that integrity breaks down.

If you like my writings, please visit my website to see my archived articles and help support me by making a donation. I am also pleased to announce the release of the latest book by Matthew Wayne entitled "The Edge of Sanity" at The download for this book is only $2.99, but interested readers can receive an additional 25% off by entering the coupon code CX99R until Jan. 29th, 2012.

Thursday, December 29, 2011

All Roads Lead to Ron Paul

Ron Paul is finally getting the attention he has deserved for so long. The mainstream corporate media is finally relenting, although grudgingly, to the pressure applied by virtue of Dr. Paul's rising popularity and his unwavering principles. His message of liberty is finally beginning to sink into the minds of the sheeple. It has taken a long time because our society has grown up around sound bites of a few seconds or less. It becomes difficult to explain complicated solutions in less than a minute, let alone only a few seconds. It is also easier for those who edit sound bites to make bad ideas sound better, or more compassionate, or more moral, etc. The manipulations have recently become so obvious, however, that even the most sheepish of those who follow the herd have begun to notice.

Sound bites don't depend on deep thought and moral, philosophical reasoning. Sound bites depend more on emotion. The emotion usually preyed upon is fear. It usually takes the form of "if not this than that" or "if not this than how?" Examples are, "If not the Republican candidate than (gasp) the Democrat candidate." "If we don't fight them over there, than we'll have to fight them over here!" "If we don't protect democracy, than we'll all be living under sharia law!" etc. Similarly, I've heard or read things like "If not for government, how would there be roads?" or "If not for the Department of Education, how would our children be educated?" or "If not for the Department of Housing how could poor people afford housing?" These types of tactics to control thought processes serve only to restrict the imagination and maintain the status quo.

But maintaining the status quo is taking us down a road to a very dark place. Even the most oblivious mind is beginning to recognize this. It's really not difficult to see the dark clouds and the storms gathering if we stay on the road we're on, yet the only solutions offered by the powers that be are more of the same. More taxes. More spending. More borrowing. More restrictions. More lies. More corruption. When someone in the back of the bus starts to speak up and say "Hey, maybe we should turn around and find our way back to a better road," it's getting easier to listen.

There was a time in this nation when we were on a better road. There was a time when we prospered so well that we out prospered the rest of the world and built a nation with a lifestyle nearly all the other nations were envious of. There was a time when our ancestors enjoyed more personal liberties than the vast majority of other people throughout the world and used those liberties to build better lives for themselves and their families. There was a time when a great many people knew what it meant to be free and struggled to find their way to the shores of the United States of America so that they could get away from intrusive governments and the overbearing restrictions these governments impose on their citizens. We took a wrong turn off that road long ago.

More and more people are starting to realize this, and are voicing their concerns in various ways. Whether these people participate in the Tea Party or the Occupy Wall Street protests, they are all after the same thing, though they may not know it yet. If you want the illegal wars and occupations of foreign lands to end, you want freedom. If you want taxation to cease, you want freedom. If you want the Fed audited and held accountable for their corruption, you want freedom. If you want the Constitution of the United States of America to once again be honored by government representatives rather than scorned by them, you want freedom. If you want less government, you want more freedom. If you want transparent, accountable government, you want freedom. If you want affordable schools, or affordable healthcare, you want freedom. If you want to straighten out the economy, you want freedom.

Lots of people want freedom and they don't even know it. Many people will pick a pet issue and concentrate on that. They look to government to solve the problem for them by voting for this candidate or that candidate from this party or that party. They take this tact over and over again and no problem is solved. They vote for Democrats, there is still war. They vote for Republicans, taxes are still too high. They vote for Democrats, costs for education, healthcare and other socialized programs continue to soar. They vote for Republicans and the federal government continues to grow. No matter who's in power, our freedoms are continuously violated, the police state intrudes more into our personal lives, government gets more and we receive less. Government has failed. We were all better off with more freedom and less government than we have been since the federal government has become such a leviathan.

No matter what you want, no matter what issue you're concerned with, getting Ron Paul from the back seat into the driver's seat will get you on the road to where you want to go. He has always stood for the principles of individual liberty and has consistently voted in support of those principles. No other candidate currently running for president has such a record. In fact, those other politicians and establishment cronies who have been in power for so long have made certain that the established powers that be have maintained their power. They are in control of the bus and they refuse to give up their power and turn it around no matter the consequences. They seem to think that even if the bus goes over a cliff they will be able to jump out at the last minute or somehow survive the crash.

With Ron Paul driving, however, all others riding along will be able to determine for themselves when they want to get off the bus. They will be able to determine for themselves what roads they want to go down. This has been the dream of mankind since time immemorial, to be able to take responsibility for one's own destiny rather than being tied into the fate of a multitude. That is the essence of the principles of liberty. We each determine for ourselves what avenues we wish to explore and where we wish to invest the money we earn. We each get to own a little corner of the world and do as we please with it. Some will succeed and flourish and others will fail. It will be up to individuals whether those that fail should be helped or not. No one will be forced to invest in principles, practices or policies they do not believe in. That is the nature of the world as it should be. That is what humanity should strive for.

This seems to be what the established powers are afraid of. They don't seem to want humanity to reach its full potential. They want to maintain their fear based control of humanity. They seem afraid that if they lose control that their way of life will disappear. They certainly don't seem to want to give anyone a chance to compete with them and show that we can innovate and develop better ways if given a chance. This is why they use their controlled media to attack Ron Paul. This is why they dredge up twenty year old controversies that were explained long ago. This is why they're panicking as their failure is exposed. People are beginning to check their emotions and think about things just a little bit more. They are beginning to understand that these little feel good sound bites that have steered us down a collectivist path have failed to bring us the promised results.

Almost everyone understands that we have been lied to. Almost everyone understands that the establishment politicians have utterly failed. Almost everyone is at least beginning to realize that our representatives are not our representatives, but are the representatives of a small group that has been in charge for a very long time now. No matter your party, no matter your issue, it is time to choose an alternative to the same old, same old. Ron Paul is the best alternative we have. He stands at the crossroads between the corrupt and growing status quo and the honest, open and accountable government almost all of us wish to see.

If you like my writings, please visit my website to see my archived articles and help support me by making a donation. I am also pleased to announce the release of the latest book by Matthew Wayne entitled "The Edge of Sanity" at The download for this book is only $2.99, but interested readers can receive an additional 25% off by entering the coupon code CX99R until Jan. 29th, 2012.

Saturday, December 3, 2011

Government Thugs, Terrorists and 93 Treasonous Senators

There is just too much going on to remain still now, isn't there? Things are getting way too interesting to ignore. I have a little time on the weekends so I thought I'd take the time to write a short commentary on a couple of recent developments. I don't need to tell you that something is wrong, we all know something is very wrong. The system has failed us. The problem is, those in charge of the system refuse to change the system. They keep failing. They have no new or effective ideas. They also refuse to listen to the grievances of the many. They refuse to be accountable.

It seems that once again the government is showing its true colors. They have but one trick up their sleeve, only one thing they do real well, and it's not roads. The government is force. It is violence. Government as an organization cannot handle anything without violence or the threat of violence. They are the mob. They are the definition of immorality. It should not be surprising when they become violent. Indeed, it is often surprising when they remain peaceful.

It should be no surprise to anyone that many of the Occupy (fill in the blank) movements have been broken up in a violent fashion by the police. Many of them were likely chomping at the bit to get in there and "knock some heads together." They've been wanting to get in there and show these peaceful protestors what for. This goes to show that it is not the common folk that need to be feared. They are not engaging in mob violence. It is the government agents that use violence, and indeed it is shown time and again that they are usually the ones that initiate the violence.

I really don't know for sure why this is. It is my conjecture that this is because violent type people are attracted to jobs that will give them free reign to express that violence. They are not going to think about whether what they're doing is right or wrong. They're not going to be thinking about the oath they may have taken to the Constitution. They are simply going to obey orders without question. In fact, I believe that those in charge of these organizations purposely recruit people with personality types that are easy to mold into obedient robotic types who don't mind just following orders.

The police should be protecting the people of the United States, not the politicians. It is at least partially because they have this enforcement arm that the politicians are able to avoid accountability for the mistakes they make. For the most part the politicians control the police and have great influence in terms of the judicial system. It would be a wonderful thing to start seeing the police refuse in mass to carry out orders from their superiors that instruct them to carry out violence against common folk merely trying to voice their legitimate grievances and have them legitimately addressed.

This nation is supposedly engaged in a war on terror. I'm afraid the people of this nation are losing badly. It seems to me that the terrorists have taken over government agencies. I am personally far more terrified of what the government has done and continues to do to destroy our way of life than anything any extremist criminal can do. I know there are many others who share this point of view with me. Government agencies are engaging in violence, not ordinary people. Government agencies use coercion and threats in their interactions with others, not ordinary people on the streets or ordinary businesses on Main Street. The federal government, on the other hand, seems to be winning the war as those in power gather more power to themselves at the cost of individual freedom. It seems to me that anyone who questions the federal government and demands accountability, particularly in a peaceful manner, terrify government officials and can therefore be considered terrorists by said officials.

With the police and the justice system behind them, the senators in Washington, DC have decided they can once again circumvent the US Constitution by passing yet another bill that violates individual rights spelled out in the first ten amendments. Whether or not this bill will become a law is yet to be seen, but judging by the 93 to 7 vote for the bill it would be surprising if the house votes against it. When a bill is passed with such overwhelming numbers one can be fairly certain that there is tremendous pressure being applied by the powers that be who control our congress. This certainly isn't because of political pressure from the people, many of whom have voiced their concern against this bill. I am talking about S 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act.

This bill authorizes the entire United States of America to be defined as a war zone due to the war on terror and allows for the indefinite jailing of United States citizens without trial or due process of law. Senators will, of course, argue this point, but as usual the language used in the bill is so ambiguous that it will allow for many different interpretations. It is also understood by many, especially those of us who have had to deal with the justice system in some way or another, that laws are often enforced due to the letter of the law, not the spirit of it. The very fact that there could have been any kind of controversy should invalidate that law and cause it to be rewritten in a more straight forward manner.

In my opinion, this Constitution of this nation was set up to limit the scope of government and should be the supreme law of the land. People who question the authority of government should not be considered terrorists, they should be considered concerned individuals trying to hold elected officials accountable to following the law. It was thrown out long ago. It was well hidden from the public long ago, but it is becoming harder and harder for even the most zealous government worshipper to deny. The limited republic set up by our founding fathers after having fought so hard against a powerful, tyrannical, empirical monarchy has been lost. It is now a fascist, corporate controlled oligarchy because the people have no power to enforce the Constitution.

I don't believe that speaking out against government or its policies is treason. I don't believe that pointing out its mistakes and ineptitude is treason. I believe that acting against the best interests of the people of a nation that you are supposed to represent is tantamount to treason. I believe that passing laws that usurp power and suppress the supreme law of the land is treasonous. I believe that a senator should be smart enough to know when a bill is unconstitutional. If we had an enforcement arm that could make sure the supreme law of the land is never violated than the 93 senators who voted for S 1867 could be arrested and put on trial for treason. If we had that kind of power, in my humble opinion, several unconstitutional laws passed in the past decade or so would never have even been introduced, we would still enjoy our individual freedoms, and we would enjoy a much greater sense of security in this nation.

I believe there will be difficult times ahead, but I have confidence we will overcome these hardships and come out better on the other side. The important thing is to remain peaceful, as difficult as that might seem. The important thing is to take care of each other because, god knows, the government is not going to take care of us. Sometimes it seems to me that the government wants to eliminate us. Mankind is striving to improve itself and will not be denied. Keep envisioning peaceful change. Keep refusing to engage in violent behavior. The ordinary people hold the moral high ground. The promise of freedom that this nation was built upon has yet to be fully realized. I'd like to think that it is our destiny to achieve a society that provides the liberty we deserve and our forefathers fought to obtain.

My archived articles are available at Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Viewing the Santa Claus Mentality

It's been several weeks since I've last posted an opinion article. Please forgive me, but I've been very busy lately. I've actually found some work that pays me and I've been taking care of that rather than writing which hasn't been paying the rent for me. I do enjoy eating. One of my jobs is being a guinea pig in a research study. The other day, while waiting for them to poke, prod or stick me, I was watching daytime TV, something I hardly ever do. I was watching a show called "The View" which involves several famous lady television personalities discussing "issues" of the day. They started talking about Barack Obama's accomplishments and said some things that really struck me as not very well thought out, to put it politely. The more I listened, the more I felt as if my intelligence had been greatly insulted. I'd like to opine about just a few of them.

Let me preface this by stating that I think words are very important. I think that we oft times misuse and abuse words. Words are especially important in the media and with media personalities who many people look up to. Sometimes words are not to be taken literally, but they are by some people. Subconsciously people may take words to heart and believe them as literal without really thinking about it. In this way, public opinion can be manipulated. I am also guilty of doing this, though I do try to be specific with my writings.

One statement made by at least one of the ladies on "The View" was that Barack Obama "saved" GM. Barack Obama has never "saved" anyone or anything as far as I know. What Barack Obama may have done is support legislation that forced American taxpayers to pay for the operations of General Motors and other American automobile manufacturers. In other words, he supported a bailout to a very wealthy corporation that has mismanaged its business. Barack Obama is not some superman that can fly in on his own and "save" a multi-billion dollar international corporation, he needs help from other politicians and bureaucrats willing to spend other people's money. Media personalities should stop implying one man has such power.

To speak to the issue, however, perhaps this legislation did save GM, that is what is seen. What is not seen are the companies that would have been created had GM gone out of business. What is not seen is the millions of jobs that may have been created as GM's assets were bought up by smaller, more agile, more viable auto companies and put to better use. What is not seen are the more innovative products that may have been created had free markets been allowed to operate as they are supposed to. What is not seen are the dreams and ambitions that have been squashed not because GM went out of business, but because they stayed in business. You might say that this is speculation, and you'd be correct, but keep in mind that small businesses employ more people than big businesses (who seem to continuously try to cut costs by cutting labor expenses) and historically when nations are prospering they are implementing free market principles and when they are failing they are nationalizing companies and implementing collectivist principles.

Another claim made on "The View" was that Barack Obama "gave" us healthcare. Barack Obama has given no one healthcare, with the exception of his kids or family maybe, who he might have administered some aspirin or applied a bandage to. If I'm wrong and he has given someone healthcare, he may have committed the crime of practicing medicine without a license. For the most part, only doctors are allowed to provide healthcare in this nation. Doctors are supposedly some of the most intelligent, best educated people in our nation, but when they are forced to give service to people for free then they are suffering a subtle form of slavery.

What Barack Obama did do was support legislation that requires every individual in this nation to purchase a product known as healthcare insurance or face fines and penalties to be paid to the federal government. He supported legislation which removes choice. He supported a bill so huge and convoluted it may take decades before its ramifications are truly known. He, and those who helped him, forced through legislation using coercive or at least ethically questionable methods. He used his bully pulpit as the newly elected head administrator to help pass legislation as if it was a mandate from the voters though it had not been one of the major issues during the campaign. To make the statement that he "gave" us healthcare is extremely misleading.

One of the ladies made the statement that now people with pre-existing conditions have to be covered. This might be true. This has been a contention in this nation. I agree that the costs of healthcare has gone way up and that people with pre-existing conditions should be taken care of, but I believe there are better, more efficient ways to do this than through federal mandate. At the very least, the government could have written a short, to the point law to take care of this problem. Here's an example, "Insurance coverage will not be denied to those with pre-existing conditions by any company who wishes to provide healthcare insurance to people residing within the United States of America." They needn't write a thousand pages of law to accomplish that.

At one point, one of the women asked if I (as one of many viewers of "The View" on that particular day) thought that these things would have been accomplished if John McCain had been elected to the head administrative position in these United States of America. To be honest, I think that John McCain and Barack Obama answer to the same powers that be. But that really doesn't matter. The implication is that there are only two parties, Democrat and Republican, and only two platforms, and only two choices in this nation which are basically the same coin with two sides. We don't select the candidates, they are selected for us to make sure we have no real choice. I haven't voted for a Republican or Democrat as head administrator to this nation for decades, with the exception of Ron Paul. I think that they are all as a rule corrupt liars, with Ron Paul the exception.

But the above issues are not really what this article is meant to be about. The point I want to make is the presentation of what I would refer to as the Santa Claus mentality. These women are supposed to be some of the most intelligent, most respected women in our nation, yet look how they framed their praise of Barack Obama. He "saved" something for us. He "gave" us something. They imply that he is some sort of super hero, some sort of Santa Claus. Unfortunately, it is likely that many people just accept these notions and will parrot these opinions without further thought.

There are a number of conclusions I can draw from watching this show. These women may actually believe what they say about Mr. Obama. Perhaps they need some form of hero to cling to. Perhaps they long for a Santa Claus to take care of some need they have within them that hasn't been met in the real world. Perhaps they feel the need to have someone take care of them from cradle to grave rather than taking personal responsibility for their own lives. There are many people in the world that seem to engage in this kind of wishful thinking. There are many who seem to have this psychological makeup. Somehow, I doubt this is true of most successful people, and the women on "The View" are certainly successful.

These women may simply be repeating certain things they are told to repeat. They may have to express certain points of view or the powers that be that own the network they work at will fire them. Certainly there is evidence of this when we consider that Rosie O'Donnell once co-hosted that show until she took a controversial position on the 9/11 attacks and she was fired and effectively shut up. Hmm, that could make some people wonder. Still, judging from the sincerity with which these women present their opinions, this doesn't seem very likely to me.

What I feel is the most likely explanation for what I heard is that these women are in denial. They are subconsciously blocking out ideas and opinions that cross over their comfort zones. They have trouble when thinking outside the box. They continue to draw upon their indoctrination and refuse to see the corruption and the unfairness inherent in the system that has treated them so well. They are now looking down from their personal ivory towers and really don't wish to recognize that these towers are built upon faulty foundations. Personally, I think that every time they are offered a choice they take the blue pill instead of the red one. Fortunately, I believe that more and more people are taking the red pill and seeing through the illusions that have been built up around us and sold to us as reality.

It is time to reframe the debate. It is time to start using the language as it should be used rather than to create impressions of reality that simply don't hold up to scrutiny. It is time to be rid of the Santa Claus mentality. There is no Superman. There is no Santa Claus. Each one of us should be making our own decisions that we feel are best for our own lives. We should stop expecting any one man, or the government as a whole, to save us as a collective. We should stop expecting any one man, or the government as a whole, to give us stuff as if every day was Christmas. What the federal government was supposed to be set up for was to protect our individual rights against state governments that might try to abuse them. What it was supposed to do was protect opportunity so that every person in this nation could gain wealth and affluence through hard work and effort. It failed to adhere to its original mandates. I think that at the core, both the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street were about re-establishing the liberty principles this nation was created upon. I hope that those individuals involved with either one of these organizations will keep them alive and help them grow in that direction.

My archived articles are available at Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.

Sunday, November 6, 2011

Ron Paul, the Honest Government I Deserve

I have heard that you get the government you deserve. This might be true for you, but I can tell you I've never gotten the government I deserve. I've never voted for a corrupted, corporate establishment owned, globalist, big government Democrat. I've never voted for a corrupted, corporate establishment owned, globalist, big government Republican. I've always voted for candidates who espoused smaller, more transparent government. I've always voted for candidates who espoused peace and non aggression in foreign policy. I've always vote for principle, never either of two evils whether one is lesser or not. It wasn't enough that someone just paid lip service to principle, they had to exhibit a public record supporting their position.

I have voted for honest government. Establishment politicians lie. They appeal to the perceived desires they see in the voters whose ballots they want to capture, but they don't even plan on honoring their words. To say they are deceitful is more than an understatement. I don't deserve deceitful government. I don't deserve secret government. I don't deserve a government who looks down upon me and treats me like a stupid herd animal they can fool, manipulate and control. Maybe you do, and maybe that's why you keep voting for establishment candidates, but I do not.

I have voted for government with integrity. Establishment politicians are corrupt. They take money from lobbyists. They are funded by international corporate interests. They belong to secretive non governmental organizations that seem able to exercise selfish power over the policies implemented by government. They care not for common folk or their travails, they care only for their own and the benefit of their benefactors. Perhaps that is the government you deserve, but I deserve the integrity I asked for.

I have voted for the American libertarian principles of freedom and liberty despite what the corporate political establishment has offered up as representing America and what it stands for. I have voted for small, constitutional government. Establishment politicians want to control your life from birth to death. They want you enslaved. They do so through big government. They do so by creating government monopolies to severely limit your choices. They do so by limiting your purchasing choices and empowering their choices through regulation and the taxation of income. Perhaps you don't want to make financial decisions for yourself. Perhaps you want to be taken care of from cradle to grave. You have gotten the government you deserve. I wish to make my own decisions and to take care of myself. Where is the government I deserve?

I have voted for peace. I do not wish to see my children marched off to war for the sake of international corporations and their profits. I do not wish to see or hear about innocent bodies strewn in the streets due to the actions of my fellow countrymen. I certainly don't want to be forced to pay for such actions. Establishment politicians seem to be war mongers, even those who present themselves as peace candidates. I would as soon simply trade with other cultures rather than bomb them. I would as soon feel secure because we are well liked in the world and get along with others rather than because we are scanned and/or felt up at airports, train stations, bus stations and soon at random on the roadways and in the malls by TSA agents on power trips. Perhaps you have voted for war. Perhaps you believe that's the way to greater security. Perhaps you have desired and voted for the police state. You have gotten the government you deserve. The problem is those of us who believe in freedom not only for ourselves, but for others, do not get the government we deserve.

In 2008 I did not vote for hope, I voted for real solutions that have worked in the past and should work into the future. I did not vote for change, I voted for transformation to a better way, a step toward a better world. I did not fall for the sirens' song of establishment politicians, I looked for a genuine voice who proved with his actions and public record what he espoused with his words. I voted for Ron Paul, even though I had to write his name on the ballot. I refused to vote for any candidate backed by the corporate establishment.

I'm really not sure who deserves the kind of tyrannical and freedom crushing government we are evolving in this nation. Perhaps it's those in the inaccurate, so called mainstream media who refuse to acknowledge Ron Paul's growing popularity. Perhaps those talking heads and political pundits deserve to be patted down and groped by TSA agents. Perhaps they deserve to be pulled over and interrogated at roadside checkpoints. Perhaps they deserve to have their homes and personal belongings searched without warrant. Perhaps they deserve to be over scrutinized and over taxed by government agencies. Perhaps they deserve to have all their individual rights violated by government, but I do not. And I don't believe many others do either. I don't believe very many people voted for this kind of government intrusion at all, no matter who they may have voted for in the past.

The best government is the government you don't have to think about. The best government is the government that can be trusted to do the right thing. People are thinking about the government too often these days, and the thoughts aren't usually pleasant ones. Hardly anyone trusts the government. Many are of the opinion the government continuously does what's wrong. The masses are grumbling and almost no one is sitting up and saying we have the best government ever, and anyone who does is quickly shouted down and relegated to irrelevancy.

We have a chance in 2012 to truly voice to the powers that be the kind of government we think we deserve. We can tell them we wish for smaller, more responsible government, or we can tell them we want bigger, unaccountable government. We can tell them we want honest government, or we can let them keep getting away with the corruption they engage in. We can tell them we want transparent government, or we can tell them we don't mind their secrecy. We can tell them we want peace, or we can let them continue to throw away lives and treasure with their occupations and wars of aggression. We can tell them we want honest money and a stable economy, or we can let them continue to keep us indebted to a private central banking cartel with a monopoly on the currency supply. We can vote for Ron Paul, or we can vote for one of the establishment, corporate owned candidates. First he must win the Republican nomination, so we have to support him in such numbers and shout so loud that the powers that be can no longer ignore him. Time is growing short. You can strive to get the kind of government you deserve, or you can accept the government someone else deserves.

My archived articles are available at Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Silver and Sunshine, the Great Vampire Killers

If you were a parasite with intelligence, how would you design yourself to survive? Well, if it was me, I'd try to convince my victims that I was a necessary part of their lives. Of course to do that, I'd have to be very charming. I'd have to be able to capture their minds, so to speak, to put them in a trance and to make them believe that what I was doing was good for them. At that point, I'd be able to feed off of them as much as I wanted, so long as I kept them alive. I mean, if I killed one I could always find another one I could attach myself to, but if I killed too many and especially if there were others of my kind hanging around, I could be in trouble if the supply of victims ran low. This is a problem that vampires might run into if their supply of human beings runs low.

Of course, none of us like to be fed upon. We slap mosquitoes. We burn off leeches. We inspect ourselves for ticks if we've been in the woods and pull them out if they've attached themselves. We take medications to get rid of internal worms. Most of us are disgusted by such creatures. Yet if the same behavior is exhibited by humans, especially good looking humans who are sexually stimulating, many will accept it as a matter of course and even romanticize it.

Those who are aware of the evil nature of such parasitical creatures, however, keep their eyes out for the hidden vampire and seek to destroy it before it can harm another. It is much harder for them to fall for the vampire's charms. It is much harder to brainwash them into thinking the vampire is necessary. Vampire hunters will try to warn others of the true nature of the vampire living amongst them, but their warnings will oft times go unheeded. The vampires are experts at enslaving human minds and creating willing servants who will guard the vampire's secrets and try to thwart the vampire hunters. No one wants to admit to the reality of vampires and would sooner go along with their lives completely oblivious to the danger they are in, some even defending the vampires for fear of upsetting the status quo.

Vampires like to consider themselves superior to humans. They exist in their undead form for longer than humans live on average. They think themselves physically stronger. They think themselves more intelligent. They have powers ordinary humans only dream of. They get off on observing the hapless humans they feed upon and perhaps every once in awhile toying with them like a cat toys with a mouse. They think they can get away with whatever they please and no one can stop them. But they do have their weaknesses. There are a few things that can be done to destroy them and their evil plans.

It is interesting to note a couple of things that have been known to destroy certain vampires in the past. The two I wish to talk about are silver and sunshine. Silver is a well known anti bacterial agent. It will also kill several forms of parasites. Perhaps it is no surprise that it kills vampires (and werewolves) as it seems to be a cleansing agent.

Sunshine is also known to kill vampires. It is also known to help battle bacteria and parasites in the human body. It provides the body with vitamin D which is a necessary nutritional component that boosts the human immune system. Again, we see a real life cleansing agent prevalent in the lore for killing an evil that has inflicted mankind. Is this just a coincidence, or are there real life examples of vampires feeding on humankind throughout history?

Well, I don't know about individual vampires, but I do recognize societal vampires. These are the parasites that feed off the productivity of humanity as a whole. They suck the lifeblood of our economic systems and bring sickness, destruction and even death to the societies they infect. Most people walk about in a daze, either super exuberant or in a state of financial shock, not knowing that these vampires are the true cause of the boom and bust cycles their economies go through. I am talking, of course, about the Federal Reserve system in the United States of America and central banking in the Western world in general. The same remedies used to destroy vampires of lore can be used to bring about the end to these economic vampires, or at least to hold them more accountable.

Silver is just one precious metal that can be used to destroy the monster that is the Federal Reserve. The paper money put out by that institution is created from nothing and only good as long as people will accept it in payment for goods and services. The vampiric Federal Reserve has managed to ruin the value of its currency, the Federal Reserve Note (FRN), by flooding the market with its product. This has happened because of the simple law of supply and demand. The supply has been inflated, so those selling products and services are demanding more of it. Silver, however, as with any precious metal, cannot be printed on demand and it is therefore harder to inflate the supply. Its value will go up as the supply dwindles. Producers will ask for less of it as they compete with others supplying similar products and services in the marketplace. If the marketplace begins to demand silver (and other precious metals) instead of paper for their goods and services, FRNs will be forced out of the marketplace and the parasitical Federal Reserve system will be destroyed.

The other well known cure for vampires, sunlight, is equally lethal to the Federal Reserve system. For decades, the vast majority didn't realize that there was a vampire in their midst. People looked at the Federal Reserve system and thought is was a government institution set there to see to the needs of the populace rather than a quasi private, quasi public entity that could siphon its profits to the coffers of a wealthy elite while ensuring that any loses would be paid for by the American taxpayer. It's good work if you can get it. Of course this would only work so long as enough people remained ignorant of the true nature of this institution. By shining the light on the Federal Reserve, so to speak, the people become enraged and policy can be changed to hold the Fed accountable. While this appears to be happening, it is important to make sure the Fed remains exposed until the full light of day shines upon it so it cannot duck back into the shadows and hide behind the backs of its servant politicians who defend its policies.

These are, of course, only two of the remedies that can be applied to rid our society of the most dangerous vampire we have ever known. I'm sure there are more. The most important thing is to make sure enough people realize the true nature of the Federal Reserve. Once that is accomplished and enough people have become aware, those who run the Federal Reserve will hopefully become less arrogant and more willing to work to benefit the masses. They don't want to be held accountable by the entire world for causing the total destruction of the world's economy. They don't want their crimes to be well known, and so perhaps the heat will be enough for them to put an end to their criminal enterprises. After all, I don't think they want to be burned, and I doubt very much they want to be begging for mercy from the masses of humanity. They would very much like to stay on top, even if it means some of their most cherished plans against humanity have to be postponed. While I am all for killing the vampire, I also understand that many of its victims have fallen in love with it and its removal must be done carefully so that the victims do not suffer its fate and can recover.

My archived articles are available at Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.

Monday, October 31, 2011

Imagination and the Battle Against Globalism and the New World Order

It should be no secret by now that a cadre of central banksters, politicians and extremely wealthy corporatists have been working to implement a global order which would benefit their interests. The mere knowledge of this causes different reactions in different people. Some will enter a state of denial and claim no such things exist. Others may admit to the existence of such conspiracies, but would claim there was nothing that can be done to stop them. Still others would not only admit to the conspiratorial nature of those at the top, they would explore methods to thwart such plans and prevent humankind from re-entering a feudal serf system. They would try to convince the deniers to join them in their efforts. To these people I say use the gift of imagination that nature has given to the human race.

Those who would conspire to deny humans their basic rights and to life, liberty and property do so in the most devious ways. I have heard it said that the most hopelessly enslaved are those who believe they are free. This is what has happened to humanity in the Western world. Those at the top pulling the strings, the ruling elite as I call them, have created power structures in such a way as to give people the illusion of freedom and self determination while in reality they are a serf class completely dependent on the establishment systems that are in place. They did such a good job that they may well have trapped themselves in their delusional snare.

The world around us has existed for all our lives. We have seen changes, but they have been more or less subtle. Most of the important structures and institutions we have grown accustomed to have been around since before we were born, depending, of course, on your age. We can't imagine life without them. This is, perhaps, at least partially by design. There is much that remains hidden to most behind the hustle and bustle of everyday life. There is much that goes unreported behind the glitz and dazzle of the modern day establishment news media. There is much that remains unknown to the public at large inside the academic industrial complex. In short, there is much that has been kept from the general public so that the current power elite could remain in power, so that the establishment could remain the establishment now and into the future.

Yet power seems to be slipping through the fingers of the establishment. Try as they might to remain a hidden hand, more and more people are looking to where the light is shining and are identifying the culprits that have brought tyranny upon us. It is becoming obvious that those who have failed us, those who are responsible for the current economic debacle and the impending catastrophe, those who are behind the wars and the violence in the world, are the same ones who are pulling the strings of governance. These are the people who have used their vast wealth to corrupt the politicians for their own benefit. These are the people who are trying to consolidate even more power and form a tyrannical centralized world government that they can control.

The illusions are slipping away, reality is coming into focus and the people are moving to reassert their power and demand accountability. The establishment is shaking. It is quite likely they are frightened of the people gaining knowledge. They don't like being exposed. They may be getting ready to panic. Once panicked they are more likely to make mistakes. They will get desperate. Desperation could lead to violence. It is at this point, when they try to force their will upon the masses through violence, that the common folk must measure their reaction and use their imagination to counter such measures, for reacting with violence could well be the biggest mistake possible.

The powers that be have two main weapons, fear and force. Fear prevents people from taking action. It makes them hesitate. They are afraid of the violence that can be brought down upon them. They are afraid of the pain and the damage such violence could cause. They are afraid of the changes that could come to the world they know. Most of all, they are afraid of the unknown. These are fears that need to be overcome if the common folk are to reclaim the power they deserve and their rightful inheritance of liberty. They must speak up against the practices of the power elite and know that their policies are immoral and the principles of freedom are the very essence of morality.

In our efforts to prevent the ruling elite from completing their globalist agenda we have discovered many things that haven't worked. We have seen that voting doesn't work. Too many sheeple don't seem to realize that the two party system is just one party with two faces working for the elite. They don't seem able to comprehend that power corrupts. And when a candidate appears on the scene that is actually honest and not working for the corporate establishment interests, the machinery is put in place to marginalize and discredit him, or the dubious voting machines are put to work to steal the election.

We have seen that the justice system doesn't work. Time and again we have seen the courts make bad rulings and uphold unconstitutional laws. Time and again they have allowed government to trample on individual rights. They have shown that they are not an organization interested in truth and justice so much as an organization devoted to revenue collection and the growth and profit of its own branch of government. The justice system, while it will bring individuals who have harmed others to justice and rule in favor of individual rights every so often for public relation purposes, is more than willing to throw people who have harmed no one into a cold cell simply for dissenting, believing they own their own bodies, or objecting to the opinions and policies of those in power. Once again we see a system where people go along to get along due to fear of imprisonment and the power the system has over them.

We have seen that protests have mixed results. While they might get a "win" for some minor issue or another every once in awhile, the major issues remain unassailable and the globalists move forward with their centralization agenda. We have seen movements co-opted by powerful groups with political agendas of their own. We have seen that politicians don't really listen to or honor the message of the protests. They hear it, and then they pay it lip service, but they do nothing substantial about it if that message contradicts the wishes of the establishment ruling elite. They spin the message until its original meaning is twisted and lost in obfuscation. Lately they have even blatantly lied, making promises to adhere to a message or principle and then doing exactly the opposite of what they promised. They care not for democracy or the opinions of a vocal group, they care only for the wishes of those with the money, those with the real power.

We have seen that violence doesn't work. Violence is their strong suit, not ours. If there's one thing that governments do really well, it's violence. They have spent their fortunes figuring out bigger and better ways to kill and destroy. We think of weapons, for the most part, in terms of self defense. Violence will just beget more violence. In a violent political struggle, the winner is just the more powerful of two violent gangs. The common folk are going to be ruled over by one violent gang or another.

It may seem like the ruling elite hold all the cards, but they have no imagination. They simply keep repeating their old tricks, as they have for ages, hoping we won't learn, hoping we're too distracted to notice. This is why we need to use our imaginations. We need to innovate to figure out peaceable ways to reassert our power and hold them accountable. A couple of things we do have, we have the ability to say no. We have love, empathy and the ability to help each other. We can say "no" to their dictates and refuse to follow their orders. We can tell them we've had enough of their tyranny and refuse to harm our fellow humans as they attempt to divide and conquer. We can help those who actively dissent and help to set up organizations that will provide needed services when the establishment organizations can no longer function.

We can continue to expose them for the criminals they are. The corporate globalist elite and those who support them understand that what they are doing is wrong. Continue rolling the video during any encounter you might have with those who claim any kind of "authority" over you. Video any public encounter you may have with any sort of public figure associated with the corporate establishment. Watch them scurry as the light is shone upon them. Very few people like bullies. Almost nobody appreciates being coerced into paying for services they don't want to use, or for very poor customer service. Shaming those who engage in such activity is quite important. I think exposure is one of the things the globalists fear most.

I'm sure there are far more innovative ways of being civilly disobedient and asserting your freedom and independence. It is up to you to find and apply such methods. We are all moving into the future and that future does include global economics and commerce, the question is who will control it? Will we all be able to interact on a voluntary level, or will we be forced to do business through a few elite controlling monopolistic power structures? Will we be able to make our own decisions as to what we consume, or will we have to ask permission from a few control freaks at the top as to what we can and cannot purchase? Will we be able to freely associate with whoever we want, or will we be forced to interface with some unfeeling bureaucracy in some unknown place? The answer lies in you and how you choose to live your life, for that is where you exercise the most control.

My archived articles are available at Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.

Sunday, October 23, 2011

Co-opting the Populist Majorities

I have stated before that I am happy to see the "Occupy Wall Street" movement moving forward and turning into something bigger. I am happy to see it gain momentum and migrate to other areas. The American people, like people all over the world, are angry with the ruling classes and are voicing their discontent. Whether the oligarchs have planned and/or financed the populist movements that have popped up lately I don't know, but it seems to me that it would be prudent for them to try to infiltrate such movements and obtain leadership positions so that they can steer them in directions they want them to go.

As with the tea party movement that was co-opted by the right, or the Republicans, so the left, or the Democrats, is co-opting the Occupy Wall Street movement, or at least trying to. Like the Tea Party movement, the Occupy Wall Street movement seems to be a decentralized grass roots effort without leadership or direction, just a protest meant to show the establishment the anger felt by the common folk. The people have shown that they know the system is broken and they want it fixed, but there are many divergent views as to exactly what about the system is broken and how to fix it. As often happens, there are many who attempt to take leadership upon themselves and instill their own vision of what should be and how to achieve that vision into the movement.

It seems to me that people have a tendency to do as little work as possible. Unfortunately, this also appears to be true when it comes to thinking. There are, however, those who are willing to do the thinking for everyone so long as they believe they'll gain something from it. I believe it is therefore important to expose as many people who are taking part in these protests to as many perspectives and ideas as possible. I believe it is important for all individuals to think for themselves and internalize as much information as possible to form their opinions.

It seems to me that many people taking part in these movements self identify with certain groups that may have gripes with other groups. This makes it easier for the establishment to use the strategy of divide and conquer to destabilize popular movements. A good example of this is business owners versus employees. Just because one owns a business doesn't make one rich or successful. Even those who are well off, very successful and look extremely wealthy, whether incorporated or not, can't really be compared to the huge, international corporations that have formed the backbone of the establishment. Yet there are those who would believe such successful businessmen are part of the elite ruling class. It seems to me that the differences and lack of understanding between these two groups can make it difficult for one to empathize with the other.

The problems that have become prevalent in this nation today aren't about left or right, Democrat or Republican, or conservative or liberal. The differences in these philosophies are miniscule for the most part. The problems are about liberty or tyranny. When government harasses, intimidates and jails the populace, that is tyranny. When people are able to peacefully go about their lives and their business without fear of official government intrusion and retribution, that is liberty. I believe that most people, despite what they might say about wanting freebees, simply wish to be left alone and would be happy to live in an economic environment that provided opportunity. I believe that most people, though they may not know it, would be pleased with free market solutions that would hold businesses accountable for their mistakes and create a competitive environment that rewarded and invited hard work and innovation.

This is not what we have in our nation today. What we have in a way is unique, and yet it has been tried in various iterations throughout history. It is the unholy marriage of big government, the huge established international corporations, and the central banking cartel pulling the strings. It can be called fascism, corporatism, an oligarchy, a plutocracy, etc., but there hasn't been a free market in this nation for a long, long time, if indeed there ever was a true free market. It is, in my humble opinion, the insistence on looking to the federal government to help regulate the marketplace that has enabled it to become the leviathan it is today and given it its ability to create market monopolies that could not otherwise exist.

I have found that there are a number of things that point to evidence that a given person or organization is trying to co-opt a movement and implant an agenda into it, especially if they are claiming a leadership or financial role to officially represent the diversified people involved in the movement. The first is a claim that more taxes are necessary. More taxes amount to more government. It is tantamount to asking the already over bloated federal government to grow even larger. Higher taxes on the rich is just a wealth redistribution scheme and could even send them fleeing from the country, taking jobs with them. Less spending is what is needed. Stopping hostilities in occupied nations and bringing troops home would be a good start and would save trillions. Whatever happened to the anti war movement anyway and why isn't it being cranked back up at these new Occupy Wall Street protests? I thought the left was supposed to despise war.

Another thing I'm leery of are efforts to insist on intervention and oversight from world organizations. America can take care of itself and its own problems. We do not need oversight from world organizations. We do not need a one world government. One world government would not be a touchy, feely, loving thing. It would involve more centralization, grander corruption and more money wasted on unnecessary bureaucracies that chew up and spit out little guys while letting the huge corporate interests get away with murder. It would mean more wealth, privilege, autonomy and immunity for the already super wealthy elite and more unjust restriction for the common folk while their rights are disrespected and eroded away. What is really needed is decentralization and more emphasis on local structures where problems are better understood, they can better be held accountable and individual rights are more likely to be taken into account.

Another thing to watch out for are people agitating for violence. I am quite happy to see Occupy Wall Street remaining a peaceful vigil as that movement had the capacity to blow up early on. People need to be aware of agent provocateurs in their midst. I understand that it is easy to get frustrated at the seeming lack of progress when it comes to changing the economic conditions. No one in power seems to be listening to the common folk, but they have been hearing the clamor coming from the street recently. Remember this, it is not the politicians that are changing things, it is the protesting and the threat of civil disobedience that is having the greatest effect. Violence never solved anything.

The other thing that bothers me is the entitlement mentality. I cringe when I hear someone asking to be given something for nothing. It seems that too many don't realize that in order to get something from the government, it had to be taken from someone else by force of taxation. Taxation is neither voluntary nor free from coercion as the powers that be would have you believe. People don't seem to realize that in order to get some form of service for free the people who provide that service have to become slavish. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Someone paid for it. In the current system we have, in order to benefit some, economic harm has to be done to others.

I understand that billions were given to the elite uber rich in the form of bailouts, and I understand the "I want mine" attitude, but two wrongs don't make a right. Personally, I think we'd have been better off if the lower classes had been bailed out rather than the elite banking cartel. This action has helped the super rich in a couple of ways. It has given them the liquidity they needed to cover up their criminal dealings while providing them with a way to pit the upper middle class taxpayers against the poor welfare class. The problem the ruling class might be having now is that I believe a lot more people have figured this out than they might have counted on.

Finally, I'd be wary of Republican and Democrat politicians jumping in front of the parade and wanting to pass new laws. With a few exceptions, politicians are mostly part of the problem and I don't believe they're going to be part of the answer, certainly not the batch of establishment globalist cronies we have in there now. We need laws repealed, not further restrictions imposed, in order to give entrepreneurs freer reign and grease the gears of economic growth. Perhaps if during the next couple of election cycles we can replace the current incumbents with more liberty oriented, smaller government folks things will be different. Until such a time, I think it is safe to assume that most politicians jumping on the bandwagon to make grand speeches to these movements are doing so for their own benefit, to get elected and to promote their corporate big government agendas.

If there's one thing the ruling class can't have, it's successful populist movements. They will try their best to co-opt such movements and make them irrelevant. It is therefore helpful to identify issues agreed upon by different movements and join together where possible. One such issue is the Federal Reserve. Both the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street crowds have identified this monolithic organization as a main source of our current economic troubles. Auditing, investigating, changing and even eliminating this failed institution should continue to be a mantra coming from all sides. Those who have participated in or enabled fraudulent and unethical behavior in the banking industry should be held accountable for their criminal activities and should be forced to make things right even if they have to lose their own massive fortunes doing so.

The other thing I believe most people would agree with is that business and personal relationships should be voluntary in nature. We need to recognize that government as it is run today is far from voluntary. It has been said many times that government is a monopoly on the use of force. Even Barrack Obama has said so. This force either prevents people from engaging in activities they want to engage in or makes them engage in behavior they don't want to engage in. The problem is that thousands, perhaps millions, of laws have been written that prevent people from engaging in behaviors that may be beneficial to them or that force them to engage in behaviors that may be harmful to them. In short, governments in general and the federal government in particular have overstepped their bounds far too often and the common folk are finally showing their displeasure.

It is my hope that populist movements don't succumb to establishment co-opting. I think it is important to keep putting out the message of freedom into these movements. I hope that more people are coming to understand this message and how important it is to become the free society that was the dream of some of the founders of this nation. Should the principles of freedom and liberty once again take hold in this nation and come to flourish and bloom, I think we will see such prosperity as is difficult to imagine.

My archived articles are available at Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

999 is 666 Upside Down and Backward

"Let me tell you how it will be,
There's one for you, nineteen for me...
...Don't ask me what I want it for,
If you don't want to pay some more
Cause I'm the taxman,
Yeah, I'm the taxman."
From Taxman by The Beatles

No, I'm not claiming that Herman Cain is the Antichrist, though I'm sure that there are many others who will. I will say, however, that I'm scratching my head wondering how he got so popular promoting such a lame tax scheme. Are there really that many people who will fall for such a propagandistic gimmick? Are there really that many people who don't know how taxes work? Are there really that many people that don't understand that this is a tax increase for everyone? My guess is that the media is exaggerating Mr. Cain's popularity just as they are understating Dr. Paul's. I think the establishment is running scared at Ron Paul's popularity and so they commanded their corporate media lackeys to promote this guy as the next great messiah or some such thing.

If you haven't figured it out by now, the establishment wants to keep someone it can control in the White House, but it doesn't want you to think the president is controlled. They know that Ron Paul is too principled and wants to use the Constitution as a legal tool to force establishment entities to relinquish some of their power. His record shows he can't be bought off and he will likely deliver true change at least when it comes to how the executive branch of the government is run. With Ron Paul's surge in popularity and the ideas of freedom beginning to catch on, the establishment needs someone they can present to the Republican base as someone in tune with Republican concerns. It seems they've already given up on Mitt Romney with his Romneycare so similar to Obamacare and Rick Perry with his mandated vaccines and obvious globalist connections.

Looking at Herman Cain's past, it isn't hard to figure out who he really represents. From 1989 to 1996 he worked on the Omaha Branch Board, as a Deputy Chairman and as a Chairman respectively for the Kansas City branch of the Federal Reserve. Need I say more? This man reeks of establishment. He says the right things to appeal to the conservative base, but has no voting record to help determine whether he will stand by his views or if he's just paying lip service to conservative values. In this respect, he is a nebulous political figure much like Barrack Obama was in 2008. If nothing else, he certainly has shown that he loves taxes and that intimates to me that he'd as soon raise your taxes rather than cut spending.

What's more concerning to me than the more obtuse issue of where Mr. Cain's money comes from and who he represents is his insistence that more taxation is a viable solution for problems created by government excess and greed. While it is true that I am notorious for being anti income tax and believing the only fair tax is no tax, I wouldn't be so quick to speak out against a plan that actually reduced the tax burden of the common folk. Mr. Cain's 999 tax plan is not a tax break for anyone, and it is most definitely an increase for the poorest Americans. Right on it's surface it ensures that close to 27% of everyone's income will go to the federal government. That's in addition to property, state and local taxes that everyone pays. Too many people can't afford such an increase.

For those that might be unfamiliar with Mr. Cain's plan, he wishes to implement a 9% corporate tax rate, a 9% flat income tax rate, and a 9% national sales tax. Some of you might be thinking that Mr. Cain's plan only ensures that one would pay nine percent of his income to the federal government based on the nine percent income tax portion of his plan. Well, consider this, do you think that corporations are going to just accept a 9% hit to their bottom line and not do anything about it? I very much doubt that. I would venture to guess that such an increase in their costs would be passed onto you. It might not happen right away, but eventually the consumer will pay for the tax increase through higher prices. While one could make the legitimate claim that one can avoid this tax by not doing business with corporations, the reality is that corporations are so pervasive in this country that only a miniscule number of people would actually be able to accomplish such a feat.

As for income tax rates, according to the Tax Foundation the median percentage of income tax paid for the lowest half of earners in 2008 was 2.59%. There's no doubt here that these people would suffer a significant tax increase on this alone should Mr. Cain's plan be implemented. The top 50% paid a median income tax of 13.65%. A couple of things to keep in mind. The figures above are for adjusted gross income. Mr. Cain's plan, as far as I can tell, would be based simply upon gross income, so depending upon the numbers one paying 13.65% tax on adjusted gross might be paying less than 9% gross. Another consideration is that the top 50% median is greatly pulled up by the top 10% or so who pay much higher income tax rates then most of us. This tax plan would be a tax cut for those people. Once again we see a tax cut for the very rich who can most afford it and a tax increase for the poor. Kind of makes one wonder why anyone who isn't worth millions or tens of millions would support such a plan.

Lastly let's look at the 9% sales tax. Honestly, can you afford to pay 9% more for everything you purchase? This makes one wonder if Herman Cain has gone to the grocery store recently, or ever. Of course, a similar argument could be made here as above that one could avoid this tax by not doing business, but how many of us have the means and the ability to produce food, shelter, clothes and the essentials for life? That's not including all the nice modern conveniences that make life so much easier and enjoyable. With lower income people everywhere already having to make tough choices between things like medicine or food, heat or rent, etc., why would anyone think it would be a good idea to take another 9% of their income to give to the federal government and make it that much tougher for the already dispossessed to survive?

I've said it more than once and I'll say it again, to me taxes are theft. They are a form of extortion. One could say they are legalized, legitimized theft to help pay for socialized services provided by a monopolistic organization called the federal government. I say theft is theft no matter the excuses, no matter how covert. They more or less turn the populace into a quivering slavish mass of humanity too fearful to withhold their funds from the behemoth that has become the federal government no matter how much they disagree with the policies practiced by that organization.

There are those who would claim that we all need to "pay our fair share" for government services we all benefit from, and personally I wouldn't mind doing so if I felt I was getting fair value for the money I spend and if I didn't feel threatened and coerced to do so. If their services are so great than why can't they collect money on a voluntary basis like the rest of us? The problem is that I feel, as do many others, that many of the services provided by the federal government are not valuable, yet if I don't pay for them through my income taxes I will be audited and threatened with fees, fines, jail or worse. I've seen in my lifetime a lot of people whose lives have been ruined by the IRS, and the IRS never have to answer for their crimes.

A program like 999 is 666 upside down and backward. The fact that so many are touting this as a viable solution to our economic problems shows how misleading a successful marketing campaign can be. The little 999 mantra reminds me a little of the "hope" and "change" mantra I heard during the 2008 presidential campaign. It is not the mark of the beast which you will need before you can buy or sell anything, but it could become the law of the land that you will have to pay for to feed the beast known as the federal government. It doesn't mean that Mr. Herman Cain is the antichrist, but it does show how centralized government has become more anti Christ like. They don't care if they mark you or not, as long as they get their money. They don't care if you protest or not, as long as you continue to pay their taxes. They don't even care who you vote for, as long as they continue to pull the strings.

Herman Cain might understand that what is needed is less spending and a smaller federal government, but he is not the one who will manifest such changes. He wants to keep the status quo. He wants to keep growing the centralized federal government, to keep empowering Washington, DC, and to keep the populace obedient. He is just another control freak, big government politician that will say and do anything to get elected. Ron Paul is still the best candidate for instilling worthwhile change in government policies. He understands that the federal government is already too big. He understands that the federal reserve needs to be audited and that the income tax and the IRS need to be eliminated. Vote against the backward and upside down 666. End the fed. End the wars. End the income tax. Vote for Ron Paul.

My archived articles are available at Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

The Fed, Economic Growth and Economic Stability

With all that's going on in the world today I thought it might be interesting to take a step back and consider the question "How did we get here?" I know that at times it might seem like I harp on the subject, but I believe it is an important one. Sometimes, we don't know how far back into antiquity some ideas go. Often times I am surprised when I find out just how long ago certain knowledge was gained. It seems to me that there is not only truth to the saying that he who doesn't know history is doomed to repeat it, but I think that perhaps those who know history can manipulate those who don't and profit from their knowledge coupled with others' ignorance.

History, to me, is more than just names and dates and a series of events that happened on a timeline. It is more than just a linear progression. It is not two dimensional to be looked at simply in terms of cause and effect. It is like a diamond, like a clear multi-faceted crystal that can be examined in a multitude of ways from nearly infinite perspectives. To get a more accurate view of history it is important to examine as many of these perspectives and facets as possible. By doing so we can gain insight into the inner workings of mankind's psychology, particularly at the different class levels as they existed then and as they exist now. It is also important to examine the things that didn't happen, the would've beens and could've beens that never were. In this way we exercise our imaginations to help us evaluate present and future decisions for our personal lives going forward.

For the purpose of brevity, I don't want to go too far back into the past. I would like to mention a couple of points, however. The first is that money has been around for a very, very long time. It originated out of a need to represent the labor needed to produce certain products for trade for a more efficient barter system. The second is that the manipulation of money has been around for nearly as long as money has. Since money was usually coined from precious metals, it wasn't long before people figured out how to shave coins and debase the metals for their own profit while making the money worth less for the common folk. Such practices were quickly recognized as fraudulent, a form of stealing, and laws were enacted to attempt to prevent people from engaging in such practices.

The third point I'd like to mention is that paper money originated long ago in the form of receipts for gold deposited in the safes of local goldsmiths. In this way, the goldsmiths soon became the world's first bankers of sorts. Some of them soon discovered that the receipts they gave out were, in fact, as good as gold. They noticed that only a certain percentage of their costumers at any one time would come back soon and claim their gold, so they began to give out a certain percentage more receipts than they had gold, a practice very much like what is known today as fractional reserve. This made them very wealthy. It didn't take long, however, for the people to recognize the fraudulent nature of this practice and demand an end to it. Theft is theft whether done through covert or overt means.

This brings us to fiat money. It seems that with wealth comes power and influence. At some point, the wealthy bankers were able to convince the royalty of Europe to team up with them, so to speak. It wasn't hard to see the advantage this would have for both those classes of society as they could siphon off the wealth of the working, productive class and move it to the parasitic ruling class without direct taxation which most people oppose. Many people believe that fiat money is synonymous with paper money, but this is not so. Fiat money merely means money by decree, or money that law says must be accepted as a token of exchange when conducting trade. If a government passed a law requiring maple leaves to be used as tokens of exchange when conducting trade, then maple leaves would become legal tender and one could gather up maple leaves as one sees fit and use them at local merchants to purchase goods and services. If a merchant refused to take the maple leaves, the consumer could report that merchant to the local authorities and the merchant could be arrested and thrown in jail. This would remain so as long as the populace believed their government to be legitimate.

Fast forward to 1913. It was near the end of this year, actually closer to 1914, that the Federal Reserve act was passed. It is interesting to note that this act was not passed until after the 16th amendment to the Constitution was ratified, which happened earlier in Feb. 1913. This was, in my opinion, the most significant event of the 20th century. It was the creation of a semi-private, quasi-governmental central bank in the United States of America. It came about despite the dismantling of central banks in this nation twice in its young history. It came about despite the debates that had been going on since the inception of the nation. It came about despite the pragmatic arguments against letting such an institution take hold in our nation. It came about despite Constitutional law that forbade such an enterprise. It came about and legalized practices that had already been recognized as fraudulent centuries before.

There also was much secrecy surrounding the creation of the Federal Reserve. It seems to me that the population at the time was much more aware of the dangers of central banking than it is today. In order to gain the public trust those who would most benefit from such a system, the same oligarchic families that are involved in it today, had to resort to a great deal of deception and unethical means. These men knew what they were doing and they knew it was unsavory, that's why they wanted to remain hidden and they wanted the public misinformed. They knew their eventual goal would be to create a fiat paper currency that would slowly but surely steal the purchasing power of the common folk. In the meantime, as their system moved the economy toward inevitable collapse, they and their descendents would acquire an incredible amount of the real wealth in the world.

My favorite illustration of how this works follows. Let's say you had a rich great grandfather who had an extra two hundred thousand dollars he didn't know what to do with back in 1914. This was a very hefty sum back then, and he figured it was much more than was necessary to keep a family going for many generations. At the outbreak of WWI, (which coincidentally started not long after the passing of the Federal Reserve Act) he becomes uncertain as to the fate of mankind and so he decides to bury it in the backyard. He divides the money in half and puts a hundred thousand in cash in one box and buys a hundred thousand in physical gold bullion which he buries in another box. Not long after he dies and the two boxes are forgotten as he takes their hiding place to the grave, not that it matters as his estate is quite large even without it.

Now, let's say that you inherit his estate. You spot a place that looks like it might make a good rose garden and lo and behold you dig up the two boxes as you get to work. The cash, taken at face value, has lost an extreme amount of buying power. Consider that one could buy a loaf of bread for a nickel or less in 1914, a Ford Model T would cost one $99 dollars and a very nice house would cost one three thousand dollars or less. I'm not sure but I would guess that mansions would run from ten to thirty thousand. Although a hundred grand is still a good chunk of money today, it would only make a very nice down payment on most homes and you'd still have to take out a mortgage. You certainly couldn't easily buy twenty or more rental properties with it like you could back then.

Ah, but you also got the box of gold. While that gold had the exact same purchasing power in 1914 as the face value of the cash, it's purchasing power today is much more than a hundred grand. Let's do some quick math. The average cost of an ounce of gold in 1914, according to this chart by the National Mining Association, was $18.99. A hundred thousand dollars would have bought $100,000÷$18.99 per ounce, or 5265.92 ounces of gold. Today's gold price, as I write this, is $1664.28 per ounce. The gold has the purchasing power of $1664.28 per ounce multiplied by 5265.92 ounces, or $8,763,981.04 in today's dollars. Do you see where that purchasing power has been stolen? That's $8,663,981 in purchasing power that's been lost. That means that a hundred dollars used to have the purchasing power of approximately $8,764. Ten dollars back then was like approximately $870 today.

Looking again at the National Mining Association chart mentioned above, one quickly notices how long gold held its value at around twenty dollars per ounce. The chart only goes back to 1833, but the gold constant goes back much further, at least to the 1400s, according to this source. During all these years, there was no central bank in the United States of America, but the state banks more or less competed against each other using the Constitutionally approved coining standards for precious metals. That's economic stability. While there were economically troubled times, those times were short lived as the freer markets established in this nation quickly adjusted to market fluctuations and the market manipulations of the European central banks.

One notices how the cost of gold shoots up in the early thirties and then once again in the early seventies. Those were very economically troubled times and personally I'd like to know how much gold was owned and bought by central banks and the families that own them at the time. It's getting very scary now how quickly the price of not only gold, but of all precious metals, has shot up. That is an indication of how many dollars are out there floating around. While the economy might be growing in terms of dollars, economic activity has certainly slowed. I've heard that some indicators are pointing toward recovery, and I certainly hope they're correct, but in my personal life I see no indication that the economy is going to get better any time soon.

So we find ourselves in the present circumstances. With all the protests going on, with all the "occupation" movements taking place, it is apparent that the common folk have come to realize that something is very wrong. Very few people, however, seem to understand the history of how we came to this point in time. They blame this politician or that politician, this political party or that political party, this policy or that policy, this philosophy or that philosophy. They don't seem to understand that, while all these things may have contributed to the problems in one way or another, all these things have been manipulated across time to benefit the moneyed elite. If one thing has remained nearly constant over the past hundred years, it's that the old money has stayed with the same shadowy group of families controlling the world's central banking cartel. One thing is certain, since the Fed's birth in 1913 the economy has grown, but it has been quite unstable with huge mood swings. All the economic growth seems to have gone into their coffers. They have had a government sponsored and endorsed monopoly on the creation of our currency for nearly a hundred years and they have managed to utterly fail on maintaining the stability in the markets and a high employment rate as they promised they would.

What Americans had before the creation of the Fed was ownership. What they had was pride that they had earned their belongings, self reliance as they made their way through life, and respect for others' private property. What they had was freedom and independence. That has been taken away from us. Such principles have been slowly eroded over the decades. Hard work, ingenuity and independence have been replaced by sloth and dependence on the system. The vast majority of us own nothing. We are too far in debt. Too many of us are one step away from losing everything. We no longer do for ourselves and our families anymore. We no longer take the risks and reap the rewards. We stifle ourselves from fear of breaking one of the millions of laws on the books. We beg permission from government agencies to allow us to start our own businesses, to do what we do best. We demand that things be given to us for nothing and have become dependent on the system to take care of us. That is what happens when a monetary system based on something of value is allowed to be shifted into a fiat, paper currency system based on credit.

Yes, there are viable solutions out there that can be used to turn this economic situation around. Yes, I even think that some solutions based on government force of law and regulation can be applied to help the situation. But I don't think this will help if we lose focus on the main causes of the problem. I don't think government solutions will work so long as the Federal Reserve and their corporate cronies have so much power within the federal government. If we allow for competition in the market place, if we stop allowing government to protect and bailout corporations and the international banking systems, we can start empowering the individual.

People have a tendency to protect their selves, their families and their friends. They have a tendency to hang onto power tenaciously once they achieve it. They have a tendency to reward their friends and punish their enemies if given a chance. They have a tendency to become corrupted by the power. As long as government decides who is too big to fail and who is not, the wealthiest of the moneyed elite will be able to pay to play and to bankrupt those who they don't want to play with. As long as a government sanctioned monopoly on currency exists, it will be the moneyed elite and their political cronies who will call the shots. The ultimate answer has nothing to do with increasing taxes or imposing more regulations, the ultimate answer is to empower individuals and let them decide who thrives and who fails in an open, transparent marketplace by voting with their dollars. When the common folk once again throw off the chains of socialist government, demand respect for their natural rights, and are able to keep all the money they earn and possess property without fear of government sanctioned confiscation, then they shall be truly free and we will once again prosper. Then we will know economic stability whether we have economic growth or not.

My archived articles are available at Please visit there and make a donation to help support me and my efforts. I also have an ebook available entitled "The Ouijiers" by Matthew Wayne.