Suicide Deaths of US Military, Every 80 Minutes A Vet Takes His/Her Life

The only Veteran in the Race, the the only non-CFR man addressing a topic that Robomney will never touch, is guess who? Ron Paul, of course!

These stellar weekly commentaries by a statesman have been enjoyed for decades by liberty lovers who have been aware of this gem of sanity in the US Congress, the near lone citizen patriot and statesman in the US Congress, who took his oath of office seriously, which meant he wouldn’t wheel and deal to “get things done” and he would oftime stand alone; had little clout within the corrupt system; zero lobbyist money; and relegated as a non-player in the game of the ever continued expansion of government that continues no matter which party is in power.

When will you hear the non-choice and non-change candidates, Robomney—CFR Team A vs CFR Team B—speak to any of this suicide?  You wont.  Nor will you hear the ever feigning phonies, shills, and liars for the Moneychangers, be they Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, Levin, or the rest address this lamentable and sorrowful “darker side” of American empire, the destruction of the military men and woman who now take their own lives at the rate of one ever 80 minutes.

Robamney, and the extreme ignorant and un-principled who uphold such, seem to lust for more blood and the “darker side” of empire, with its “grim and tragic overlay of brutal conquest, of subjugation, of repression, and an astronomical cost in life and treasure.” (Gordon B. Hinckley, “War and Peace,” Ensign, May 2003, 78)

Every 80 minutes another US Veteran takes his/her own life and the “Freedom Fries” and “Freedom Toast” shills for the Military-Industrial Complex will not say a word of it, be they Hannity, Limbaugh, Beck, O’Reilly, or even some a bit closer to home, surely no popular statist loving talk show hosts on KSL radio (in Salt Lake City, where duped masses who should know better, uphold Romney’s vicious foreign policy that has been denounced again and again by statements of LDS Church leaders through the years,) will grieve the loss of these veterans nor a curtailment of the policy that leaves “terrible wounds of war” with “bodies maimed and minds destroyed.”

Richard Draper says Babylon, the Great Whore, has as her doctrine: “Blood = Gain,” a description for American Empire and the Military-Industrial complex.

The LDS warmonger types turn deaf, dumb, and blind to principle when “ambitious and scheming leaders” bamboozle them with war propaganda—ever another foreign boogeyman to bomb and subjugate and obliterate for the agenda of the Moneychangers and the Great Whore Babylon whose doctrine, as BYU Ancient Scripture professor, Richard Draper, says is: “Blood = Gain.”

LDS folks would do well to remember this too from Gordon B. Hinckley, delivered 31 years to the month of another of his predecessors in that office who likewise was “mentally stone[d]” by the “warlike” people who give lip service to believing in living prophets:

No one can ever estimate the terrible suffering incident to these wars across the globe. Lives numbered in the millions have been lost. The terrible wounds of war have left bodies maimed and minds destroyed. Families have been left without fathers and mothers. Young people who have been recruited to fight have, in many instances, died while those yet alive have had woven into the very fabric of their natures elements of hatred which will never leave them. The treasure of nations has been wasted and will never be recovered.

The devastation of war seems so unnecessary and such a terrible waste of human life and national resources.” (Gordon B. Hinckley, “An Unending Conflict, a Victory Assured,” Ensign, Jun 2007, 4–9)

Shame on American’s for spitting in the face of noble statesman of the past, for despising and heaping ridicule upon the Foreign Policy, not only of US Founders, but of the Lord himself—and this we would refer to as the Monroe Doctrine which was the “inspiration of the Almighty,” said Joseph Fielding Smith, and that quote will follow.

Ezra Taft Benson articulated the foreign policy that we see LDS people in droves treating with great disdain as they worship the Warfare/Welfare statism that robs their children of a future, binding them down with intense debts for empire:

There is one and only one legitimate goal of United States foreign policy. It is a narrow goal, a nationalistic goal: the preservation of our national independence. Nothing in the Constitution grants that the president shall have the privilege of offering himself as a world leader. He is our executive; he is on our payroll; he is supposed to put our best interests in front of those of other nations. Nothing in the Constitution nor in logic grants to the president of the United States or to Congress the power to influence the political life of other countries, to ‘uplift’ their cultures, to bolster their economies, to feed their people, or even to defend them against their enemies.” (The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p. 614; see also pp. 682 & 704.)

Now, what of the Monroe Doctrine? Certainly the Doctrine was totally abandoned when entering WWI, to say nothing of WWII which the LDS Church First Presidency opposed, including its predicted outcome that would (did) enrich the Moneychangers, just as J. Reuben Clark prophesied would be the case. Is the Monroe Doctrine worth anything in a day when “ambitious and scheming leaders” have bamboozled the “more part of the righteous” to come down to believe in their works and partake of their spoils? Yes! LDS Apostle, Joseph Fielding Smith said the Monroe Doctrine—which Ron Paul is in alignment with and for which LDS neocons demean him—was “the inspiration of the Almighty” and the “greatest and most powerful fortification in America.” Pres. Benson quotes him in the following:

In the decade prior to the restoration of the gospel, many countries of South America fought wars of independence to free themselves from European rule. Russia, Austria, and Prussia, however, urged France to aid Spain and Portugal to restore their monarchies in South America. This effort was repulsed by a proclamation from the United States government known as the Monroe Doctrine. The heart of the Monroe Doctrine consists of these words: “The American continents … are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.”

The Lord had promised, “I will fortify this land against all other nations” (2 Ne. 10:12). President Joseph Fielding Smith said that “the greatest and most powerful fortification in America is the ‘Monroe Doctrine.’ … It was the inspiration of the Almighty which rested upon John Quincy Adams, Thomas Jefferson and other statesmen, and which finally found authoritative expression in the message of James Monroe to Congress in the year 1823” (The Progress Of Man, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., pp. 466–67). (Ezra Taft Benson, “A Witness and a Warning,” Ensign, Nov. 1979, 31)

Quoting directly from the Monroe Doctrine—which is the “inspiration of the Almighty,” we read that we (USA) will not interfere in the internal concerns of other nations:

Our policy, in regard to Europe, which was adopted at an early stage of the wars which have so long agitated that quarter of the globe, nevertheless remains the same, which is, not to interfere in the internal concerns of any of its powers; to consider the government de facto as the legitimate government for us; to cultivate friendly relations with it, and to preserve those relations by a frank, firm, and manly policy; meeting, in all instances, the just claims of every power; submitting to injuries from none. (from President James Monroe’s seventh annual message to Congress, December 2, 1823)

Ron Paul wants a strong national defense at home, not empire abroad, and the US Troops have given more to his campaign than all other candidates combined, both CFR Team A Republicans and CFR Team B Democrats. (But the saps who take FOX or CNN for their news source, or Glenn Beck for that matter, would have you believe Ron Paul wants Iran to nuke us all; send your kid to a brothel to explore the world of prostitution and smoke doobies.)

George Washington’s Farewell Address in 1796:

I shall ask your indulgence while I express with more lively sensibility, the following most ardent wishes of my heart….

That we may avoid connecting ourselves with the Politics of any Nation, farther than shall be found necessary to regulate our own trade…. In a word, nothing is more certain than that, if we receive favors, we must grant favors; and it is not easy to decide beforehand under such circumstances as we are, on which side the balance will ultimately terminate; but easy indeed is it to foresee that it may involve us in disputes and finally in War, to fulfil political alliances. Whereas, if there be no engagements on our part, we shall be unembarrassed, and at liberty at all times, to act from circumstances, and the dictates of Justice, sound policy, and our essential Interests.

That we may be always prepared for War, but never unsheath the sword except in self defence so long as Justice and our essential rights, and national respectability can be preserved without it;”

Echoing Washington, John Quincy Adams said in his address of July 4, 1821: “America goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.”

How unfortunate it is, that such a vast majority of the people, especially the LDS people, are, as Hugh Nibley (also a US Veteran) points out, more prone than any for a “military solution.” This mindset was condemned by Spencer W. Kimball in his appraisal of the LDS people and the nation as a whole on it’s 200th Anniversary of Independence, the June 1976 First Presidency message, which Nibley points out, was “given the instant deep freeze.”

Spencer W. Kimball:

Spencer W. Kimball’s appraisal of the National bloodlust and LDS people on the nations Bicentennial was “given the instant deep freeze.”

When I review the performance of this people…. I am appalled and frightened…. We are a warlike people, easily distracted from our assignment of preparing for the coming of the Lord. When enemies rise up, we commit vast resources to the fabrication of gods of stone and steel – ships, planes, missiles, fortifications – and depend on them for protection and deliverance. When threatened, we become anti-enemy instead of pro-Kingdom of God; we train man in the art of war and call him a patriot, thus, in the manner of Satan’s counterfeit of true patriotism, perverting the Savior’s teaching: ‘Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven.’ ” (Spencer W. Kimball, “The False Gods We Worship,” Ensign, June 1976, 3)

More from Gordon B. Hinckley lamenting the darker side of empire, and certainly a US Veteran every 80 minutes taking his/her life is dark:

I have walked with reverence through the British cemetery on the outskirts of Rangoon, Burma (now known as Myanmar), and noted the names of hundreds and thousands of young men who came from the villages, towns, and great cities of the British Isles and who gave their lives in hot and distant places…

All who have lived upon the earth before us are now gone. They have left all behind as they have stepped over the threshold of silent death. As I have visited these various cemeteries I have reflected, first, on the terrible cost of war. What a fruitless thing it so often is, and what a terrible price it exacts.” (BYU devotional, Oct. 31, 2006)


Robamney: CFR Team A vs CFR Team B—Both are CFR

The Establishment Con Game Goes on and on, Election cycle after election cycle, where the candidates put before the people are essentially one in the same, be they CFR Team A or CFR Team B. It’s all a big show and theater for public consumption. Some are waking to the fool exercise and refuse to be conned further by choosing the “establishment” candidates.

In the 1960’s, Bill Clinton’s mentor, Carroll Quigley, professor of History at Georgetown, authored a book entitled “Tragedy and Hope.” He had been given the private documents and writings of the power elite and commissioned to write a book for them, which was not intended for public consumption, as it revealed their plans that the populace at large should not be awakened to. The elite can’t afford the sheeple to become the “informed citizenry” that Thomas Jefferson said was essential to maintaining a free society.

The Elite care not what “candidate” is selected and put in office when that candidate is under their control, be they Democrat or Republican, it makes little difference.  The astute observer of politics over time begins to recognize that there may be a few slight trimmings for show in change, nothing of any major effect is ever changed despite the election of the other party into office.  When we have the establishment put forth candidates backed by their nefarious Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) it matters not to them who it is that is their spokesperson, puppet, and stooge in the White House, be they CFR Team A or  CFR Team B, as columnist Gary North puts it.

Author G. Edward Griffin refers to the con game played out as the “Quigley Formula” described here:

The National parties and their presidential candidates, with the Eastern Establishment assiduously fostering the process behind the scenes, moved closer together and nearly met in the center with almost identical candidates and platforms, although the process was concealed as much as possible, by the revival of obsolescent or meaningless war cries and slogans (often going back to the Civil War). … The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy. … Either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies.” [Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (New York: Macmillan, 1966), pp. 1247–1248.]


It is increasingly clear that, in the twentieth century, the expert will replace … the democratic voter in control of the political system. Hopefully, the elements of choice and freedom may survive for the ordinary individual in that he may be free to make a choice between two opposing political groups (even if these groups have little policy choice within the parameters of policy established by the experts) and he may have the choice to switch his economic support from one large unit to another. But, in general, his freedom and choice will be controlled within very narrow alternatives by the fact that he will be numbered from birth and followed, as a number, through his educational training, his required military or other public service, his tax contributions, his health and medical requirements, and his final retirement and death benefits.” (Tragedy and Hope: pp 866).

As one contemplates the reality of really “no choice,” given in election cycles, one begins to understand more fully and comprehend the warning by the Book of Mormon prophet Moroni when he puts forth the Command of God to us in our day that we must “awake to a sense of your awful situation” for our having tolerated and permitted this vast secret combination to be built up above us which seeks to “overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries” which of course is the CFR agenda.

As it is very obvious to the honest and astude observer, Romney is hardly different than Obama, and this is by design. The “Quigley Formula” con game is played out by the elite on a majority of the citizenry who manifest ignorance, despite their flag waving patriotism. They are effective dupes who haven’t quite figure out what LDS Church President Gordon B. Hinckley saw clearly, as quoted from his little book, “Standing for Something” (with foreword by CBS Newsman, Mike Wallace):

Gordon B. Hinckley

I have lived long enough now to know that many political campaigns, for example, are the same. I have heard again and again the sweet talk that leads to victory but never seems to be realized thereafter. We need moral men and women, people who stand on principle, to be involved in the political process. Otherwise, we abdicate power to those whose designs are almost entirely selfish.”  ~ Gordon B. Hinckley (Standing for Something, pp. 170–171.)(emphasis added.)

Gordon B. Hinckley had been counselor to LDS Church President, Ezra Taft Benson, who likewise lamented the blindness of well meaning people, seemingly unable to recognize the pattern.  These people, despite being well meaning, are ineffective and worthless in the protection of their liberties and the maintenance of the Republic:

If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers — normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free — Americans who have been lulled away into a false security.” (April 1968, General Conference Report)

Is Mitt Romney a good man?  Probably he is in the general sense.  Surely he is not an evil man. We can commend him for being a good husband and father, and surely many other things.  We who support Ron Paul don’t attack Mitt Romney, nor Obama for that matter, personally.  But the ideas these men put forth—the un-American destructive policies that further put the strings of tyranny upon the people of this nation—we will decry.  These would be, naming just a few, the vast militarism (not defense) manifest in the “darker side” of empire abroad, condemned and warned of by the US Founders, Statesemen (including the LDS Church’s First Presidency durring the time of WWII,) and patriots.  We decry the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and this horrendous power to “assassinate” “on the presidents say so alone” US citizens merely suspected as terrorists, having had not due process convicting them of so being by a jury of their peers.

We too decry Romneycare/Obamacare, which are vicious and evil, un-American, and are so far outside The Proper Role of Government as to make one shake their head in disbelief at the far flung and far afield point we’ve reached in apostatizing from the US Constitution and the writings and principles espoused by the Founders.

We commend the counsel of Joseph Smith to throw our votes away upon worthiness, and not the “lesser of two evils” nonsense CFR game played upon the people constantly.  Said Joseph before his martyrdom:

Joseph Smith

…we shall have the satisfaction of knowing that we have acted conscientiously, and have used our best judgment. And if we have to throw away our votes, we had better do so upon a worthy rather than an unworthy individual who might make use of the weapon we put in his hand to destroy us.” (Times and Seasons, Nauvoo, IV, 441. Cited also in Roberts, Comprehensive History, II, 208–209.)

May Ron Paul, the only non-CFR man with as great of a grass roots following as has been had in decades, have some divine miracles performed for the cause that he represents.  The GOP may combine, the media may spin, columny may defame, but the message of liberty will never be crushed, for God is a lover and promoter of human liberty and freedom, and ultimately, his purposes will override that of the CFR agenda of Lucifarian control and elimination of choice (even in terms of elections between CFR Team A or B).  Freedom is God’s fight, as Ezra Taft Benson stated, and if one stands for freedom, even if they stand alone, they will still stand with God.


Ron Paul Aligns with Thomas S. Monson on Health Care

In dire days of Government run amuck with Romneycare and Obamacare, Ron Paul is found, once again, in magnificent alignment on critical issues with LDS Church presidents in upholding correct and constitutionally sound principles.  American’s fooled into any degree of government involvement in healthcare are a huge problem in our nation today.  In Parallelling our day to that related in the Book of Mormon just barely preceeding vast destructions and wrath by the God of Nature, Ezra Taft Benson told us that the “more part of the righteous” had been “seduced” to come down to believe in the works and partake of the spoils of the Gadianton robbers, allowing secret combinations to flourish. 1

Thomas S. Monson has voiced the alternative to ObamaCare with all its evils and frauds, empty promises, power and control:

LDS Church President Thomas S. Monson

I am grateful for the privilege to stand before you, and I pray that I might effectively communicate to you that which I have felt prompted to say.

A few years ago I read an article written by Jack McConnell, MD. He grew up in the hills of southwest Virginia in the United States as one of seven children of a Methodist minister and a stay-at-home mother. Their circumstances were very humble. He recounted that during his childhood, every day as the family sat around the dinner table, his father would ask each one in turn, “And what did you do for someone today?”1 The children were determined to do a good turn every day so they could report to their father that they had helped someone. Dr. McConnell calls this exercise his father’s most valuable legacy, for that expectation and those words inspired him and his siblings to help others throughout their lives. As they grew and matured, their motivation for providing service changed to an inner desire to help others.

Besides Dr. McConnell’s distinguished medical career—where he directed the development of the tuberculosis tine test, participated in the early development of the polio vaccine, supervised the development of Tylenol, and was instrumental in developing the magnetic resonance imaging procedure, or MRI—he created an organization he calls Volunteers in Medicine, which gives retired medical personnel a chance to volunteer at free clinics serving the working uninsured. Dr. McConnell said his leisure time since he retired has “evaporated into 60-hour weeks of unpaid work, but [his] energy level has increased and there is a satisfaction in [his] life that wasn’t there before.” He made this statement: “In one of those paradoxes of life, I have benefited more from Volunteers in Medicine than my patients have.”2 There are now over 70 such clinics across the United States.

Of course, we can’t all be Dr. McConnell’s, establishing medical clinics to help the poor; however, the needs of others are ever present, and each of us can do something to help someone.”  (Thomas S. Monson, “What Have I Done for Someone Today?,” Ensign, Nov 2009, 84–87)

As this vile “ObamaCare” is foisted on us, 16,500 new IRS agents now being hired to prey upon and extort insurance premiums from us, it will go down in the record, that God’s prophet, successor to others who have been repeatedly mentally stoned, did give a bit of enlightenment on how things might be done differently.  It was not a mistake that he quoted  and highlighted the work of Dr. McConnell, even his non-government “Volunteers for Medicine.”  Ron Paul—a medical doctor—too, speaks of church hospitals that used to be found doing all over the nation, and none were turned away.  Government was not involved.  Yes, God’s prophet will go down in the record as highlighting a real solution and example of a solution that is traditional Americanism, Christian in nature, a model of solutions to be made in terms of solutions for the poor and needy, rather than the Babylon substitute of worshiping the state as a false god and provider of “services” which Barry Sotoro (a.k.a. Obama) signed into law.  It is admitted by Democrats,  Romneycare was a blueprint for Obamacare.

  1. “Secret  combinations flourished  because, as Helaman tells us, the Gadianton robbers ‘had seduced the more part of the righteous until they had come down to believe in their works and partake of their spoils’ (Helaman 6:38). …even as today.”  (Ezra Taft Benson  “The Savior’s Visit to America”  May Ensign 1987.  p. 4.)

Why We Go To War

A man feeling inspiration created this video, which brings one to nearly weep at the peril of our foolish nation whose citizenry have succumbed to “ambitious and scheming leaders” who bring them into costly wars and are now about to enter into warfare that will ultimately bring a “full end to all nations” as “war without mixture is poured out upon the nations of the gentiles”—nations who uphold the Great Whore Babylon whose doctrine is: “Blood = Gain,” as Professor of Ancient Scripture and author Richard Draper puts it.

Rigged and Fixed Elections in America, Our Last Thread by Which the US Constitution Hangs

Americans are foolish to let voting be conducted as it is.  Said Dwight Eisenhower’s Secretary of Agriculture, the great Freedom Lover, Ezra Taft Benson:

Ezra Taft Benson would say the thread has been severed?

Our great Constitution has been beaten and torn until now it hangs by a single thread, and that thread is our franchise to vote.”(Ezra Taft Benson, 1976, Freeman Institute, Provo, Utah)

The “We Are a Warlike People” Billboard

A new website up,, and soon to be billboard as well.

LDS Scholar, Hugh Nibley, a WWII Veteran himself, said President Kimball’s June 1976 message was “given the instant deep freeze”

LDS Church President, Spencer W. Kimball, in his address to and appraisal of the LDS people and the nation as a whole, on the bicentennial celebration of the Declaration of Independence said he was “appalled and frightened.” He condemned the “repugnant” stance of the people, for, he said, we are a “warlike people” and then went on to describe our worshipping of false gods of militarism.  He exposed our propensity to uphold Lucifer’s counterfiets to true patriotism to one that delights in war, murder, and bloodshed.  He sobered us to realize we indeed do not adhere to the doctrines of the Prince of Peace.

President Kimball reminds us, we need not fear enemies abroad, for we can rely on the Lord for his promised protection, if we will cease the evils we espouse—and few things are more repugnant surely than the wicked and evil preemptive war doctrine condemned in the Book of Mormon among many places scripturally.  The bombing and murder of hundreds of thousands of innocents in Iraq, for example, is the kind of wickedness and evil policy that has the God of Heaven withdraw his aid and support, his defense of the United States and allows secret combinations to flourish, which brought forth the attack of 9/11 by a “vicious, oath bound, and secret organization bent on evil and destruction” whose object is to “bring down the church” as they “woo the people with sophistry and take control of the society.”

Those sifting through this site will find some of that doctrine condemning our evil policies spelled out in clear terms.  Most Latter-day saints will find much of that content as a shock, proving their ignorance and failure thus far in their lives to “search the prophets diligently.”

LDS Church President Gordon B. Hinckley quotes scripture saying “we are to renounce war and proclaim peace” but then said, “but there is another overriding responsibility” that we must be mindful of.  He then went on to explain that we are truly justified to defend ourselves against tyranny and oppression, being “motivated by a better cause” than that espoused by ambitious and scheming leaders and their military-industrial complex agenda for empire, with its “darker side” with its “grim and tragic overlay of brutal conquest, of subjugation, of repression, and an astronomical cost in life and treasure.”  Preemptive war does not register into the equation of justification for “defense” as any student and prayerful lover of the Book of Mormon knows.

There is one certain legitimate reason and justification for war, and it lines up with the Declaration of Independence, which righteously speaks of not only our right, but it is “our duty” to throw off tyrannical and wicked government that does not stay within the confines of Divine law.  The preemptive wars, the torture, secret CIA prisons, the “legalization” of assassination of American Citizens by the President and more to be named are all great evils and wickedness that the Declaration of Independence states it is our duty to throw off.  We who stand with Ron Paul back the re-enthroning principles of the US Constitution and its restraints and chains to be put upon every officer of government once again, and cease the wicked empire with all of its “darker side.”


Romney Dangerous, Spits Upon the US Constitution and Rule of Law

Stunning to see that immediate and emphatic “absolutely” out of Romney. He is so far off on this issue that it truly boggles the mind.

American’s who vote for such Stalinistic positions as this may just in time get their reward, as they come into the cross hairs of the vicious police state themselves, which will seek their blood:

Moroni described how the secret combination would take over a country and then fight the work of God, persecute the righteous, and murder those who resisted. Moroni therefore proceeded to describe the workings of the ancient secret combinations so that modern man could recognize this great political conspiracy in the last days. (See Ether 8:23–25.) (Ezra Taft Benson, Conference Report, Oct.. 1961, Improvement Era, Dec. 1961, p. 954; as quoted in God, Family, Country, p. 349.)

Many have been “seduced” to uphold secret combinations, and with Romney Here, it is beyond sobering how he doesn’t even feign pretense for western tradition stemming from Magna Carta down through our time as relating to Habeus Corpus.

These evil and un-constitutional powers, you Mormon’s, will be turned on you, and your blood will be hunted.

Ezra Taft Benson speaks of this deception and the sleeping Elders of Israel—especially any who would vote for Romney:

It is the devil’s desire that the Lord’s priesthood stay asleep while the strings of tyranny gradually and quietly entangle us until, like Gulliver, we awake too late and find that while we could have broken each string separately as it was put upon us, our sleepiness permitted enough strings to bind us to make a rope that enslaves us.

For years we have heard of the role the elders could play in saving the Constitution from total destruction. But how can the elders be expected to save it if they have not studied it and are not sure if it is being destroyed or what is destroying it?” (Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson p. 619–620. also (An Enemy Hath Done This, p. 313.)

Additionally he stated:

The devil knows that if the elders of Israel should ever wake up, they could step forth and help preserve freedom and extend the gospel. Therefore the devil has concentrated, and to a large extent successfully, in neutralizing much of the priesthood. He has reduced them to sleeping giants. (An Enemy Hath Done This, p. 275., also Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson p. 619.)

J. Reuben Clark:

God provided that in this land of liberty, our political allegiance shall run not to individuals, that is, to government officials, no matter how great or how small they may be. Under His plan our allegiance and the only allegiance we owe as citizens or denizens of the United States, runs to our inspired Constitution which God Himself set up. So runs the oath of office of those who participate in government. A certain loyalty we do owe to the office which a man holds, but even here we owe, just by reason of our citizenship, no loyalty to the man himself. In other countries it is to the individual that allegiance runs. This principle of allegiance to the Constitution is basic to our freedom. It is one of the great principles that distinguishes this “land of liberty” from other countries.

Thus God added to His priceless blessings to us.

Then continuing, President Clark’s stunning conclusion and warning which now sets before us as living witnesses to these prophetic words:

I wish to say with all the earnestness I possess that when you youth and maidens see any curtailment of these liberties I have named, when you see government invading any of these realms of freedom which we have under our Constitution, you will know that they are putting shackles on your liberty, and that tyranny is creeping upon you, no matter who curtails these liberties or who invades these realms, and no matter what the reason and excuse therefore may be.” (J. Reuben Clark, Jr., The Improvement Era, vol. 43, no. 7 (July 1940), p. 444)(Emphasis Added.)

An Open Letter to Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck

photo credit: Gage Skidmore

By Connor Boyack


You are a complicated man, you know that?

I know many people who think you are the embodiment of deception, seeking to lead an otherwise truth-seeking people off a cliff. To such people, I often stand up for you, noting that you do say some great things from time to time, and have, for example, referred many people to read good books by men far smarter than you or I. You’re not all bad, I say, though emphatically emphasizing that I disagree with you on many things.

Many things.

I try and give you the benefit of the doubt. As you often say, you’re learning as you go along, and progressing towards a libertarian viewpoint. Just the other day, as you have in the past, you told one of your guests that you consider yourself libertarian. So I think to myself: “okay, he’s slowly waking up, maybe he’ll continue to improve over time.”

But good heavens, Glenn. You’re so inconsistent! For example, you’ve recognized that Ron Paul is the closest thing we’ve got to the founding fathers, and then youencourage people not to support him. Then you about-face and suggest he’s what we need, only to then attack him a few days later.

Flip-flopping Mitt Romney? He’s got nothing on you.

But hey, I get that you have a hard time with consistently applying a principle. Many people do. No sweat. All is forgiven. I don’t listen to you, and I encourage others to steer clear, but you’re welcome to continue your self-contradicting tirades all you like, so long as you have the breath to do so. I prefer to keep my distance from you, as I don’t consider you a reliable source of analysis and truth. In short, I ignore you.

This morning, however, you said something that cannot stand without a rebuttal. You attacked Ron Paul, which isn’t a surprise, but you brought our mutual religion (yours and mine, not mine and Dr. Paul’s) into the picture.

Here’s the four minute audio clip:

Continue Reading on

RomneyCare, ObamaCare Decried by Ezra Taft Benson

We cannot have incrementalism and expect anything but tragedy.  Obamacare, Romneycare, or Republicancare (medicaid part D) are disastrous and should be decried by all the citizenry who must demand their repeal. Let’s recall this precious information from Ezra Taft Benson.

Why does our sys­tem pro­duce more bread, man­u­fac­ture more shoes, and assem­ble more TV sets than does Russ­ian social­ism? It does so pre­cisely because our gov­ern­ment does not guar­an­tee these things. If it did, there would be so many accom­pa­ny­ing taxes, con­trols, reg­u­la­tions, and polit­i­cal manip­u­la­tions that the pro­duc­tive genius that is America’s, based on free­dom of choice, would soon be reduced to the floun­der­ing level of waste and inef­fi­ciency now found behind the Iron Curtain.

When gov­ern­ment pre­sumes to demand more and more of the fruits of man’s labors through tax­a­tion and reduces more and more his actual income by print­ing money and fur­ther­ing debt, the wage earner is left with less and less with which to buy food and to pro­vide hous­ing, med­ical care, edu­ca­tion, and pri­vate wel­fare. Indi­vid­u­als are then left with­out a choice and must look to the state as the benev­o­lent sup­porter of these ser­vices. When that hap­pens, lib­erty is gone.

…Exam­ples abound in the world of the fail­ure of alter­na­tive sys­tems to the free mar­ket. What amazes me is that we can­not see from their exam­ple the obvi­ous fail­ure of social­ism, what is does to a nations econ­omy, and how it morally debil­i­tates a people.

Great Britain is a tragic exam­ple of this. Here is a nation that has pro­vided the free world with a tra­di­tion of free­dom and demo­c­ra­tic rights, stem­ming from the Magna Carta and com­ing down through other impor­tant his­tor­i­cal doc­u­ments and state­ments by famous Eng­lish­men. Yet Eng­land today is los­ing her free­dom. She has become a giant wel­fare state. Today gov­ern­ment spend­ing in Great Britain amounts to 60 per­cent of her national income.

This is social­ism. Med­ical doc­tors under social­ized med­i­cine are leav­ing Great Britain in record num­bers, as are thou­sands of others.

British Prime Min­is­ter James Calaghan said, ‘We used to think that you could just spend your way our of a reces­sion and increase employ­ment by cut­ting taxes and boost­ing gov­ern­ment spend­ing. I tell you , in all can­dor, that that option no longer exists, and that inso­far as it ever did exist it only worked by inject­ing big­ger doses of infla­tion into the econ­omy, fol­lowed by higher lev­els of unem­ploy­ment as the next step.’ (Lon­don Times, Sep­tem­ber 29, 1976, from Labor Party Con­fer­ence at Black­pool, Eng­land, p.4.)

Such a con­fes­sion led the renowned econ­o­mist, the Nobel Lau­re­ate, Dr. Mil­ton Frei­d­man , to com­ment, ‘That must surely rank as one of the most remark­able and coura­geous state­ments ever made by a leader of a demo­c­ra­tic gov­ern­ment. Read it again. Savor it. It is a con­fes­sion of the intel­lec­tual bank­ruptcy of the pol­icy that has guided every British Gov­ern­ment in the post­war period—not only labor gov­ern­ments but also Tory gov­ern­ments; of the pol­icy that has guided almost every other West­ern government—including the U.S. under both Repub­li­can and Demo­c­ra­tic admin­is­tra­tions; of the pol­icy that is now being rec­om­mended to Mr. Carter by his advis­ers.’ (Newsweek, Decem­ber 6, 1976, p. 87.)

Con­sider another exam­ple: our neigh­bor to the north, Canada. For twenty years (1944–1964), the province of Saskatchewan lived under a social­ist gov­ern­ment. Her is what the pre­mier, the Hon­or­able W. Ross Thatcher, said about this experience:

In 1944, the Social­ists said they would solve the unem­ploy­ment prob­lems by build­ing gov­ern­ment fac­to­ries. They promised to use the prof­its to build high­ways, schools, hos­pi­tals, and to finance bet­ter social wel­fare mea­sures gen­er­ally. Over the years they set up 22 so-called crown cor­po­ra­tions… By the time we had taken over the gov­ern­ment, …12 of the crown cor­po­ra­tions had gone bank­rupt or been dis­posed of. Oth­ers were kept oper­at­ing by repeated and sub­stan­tial gov­ern­ment grants.

Dur­ing the whole period the Social­ists waged war against pri­vate busi­ness. The mak­ing of prof­its was con­demned as an unfor­giv­able sin. What was the result? Investors sim­ply turned their backs on the Social­ists. Dozens of oil com­pa­nies pulled up stakes and moved out. Gas explo­ration ground to a com­plete halt. Prospect­ing in our vast north became almost non-existent.

Dur­ing the period Canada was expe­ri­enc­ing the great­est eco­nomic boom in her his­tory, Saskatchewan received only a hand­ful of new fac­to­ries. After 18 years of Social­ism, there were fewer jobs in man­u­fac­tur­ing that existed in 1945—this despite the invest­ment of $500 mil­lion in crown corporations.…

Dur­ing the period more than 600 com­pletely new taxes were intro­duced; 650 other taxes were increased. Per capita taxes in Saskatchewan were soon sub­stan­tially out of line with our sis­ter provinces—one more rea­son why indus­try located elsewhere.

…the Social­ists promised to make Saskatchewan a Mecca for the work­ing man. Instead, we saw the great­est mass exo­dus of peo­ple out of an area since Moses lead the Jews out of Egypt. Since the war, 270,000 of our cit­i­zens left Saskatchewan to find employ­ment elsewhere.

If there are any Amer­i­cans who think that Social­ism is the answer, I wish they would come to Saskatchewan to study what has hap­pened to our province.’ (Quoted in Cory­don, Indi­ana, Republican.)

We say, “It can’t hap­pen here.” The les­son of New York City should tell us that this same thing is hap­pen­ing here–to us—now! As Dr. Frei­d­man has pointed out, New York City is no longer gov­erned by its elected offi­cials. It is gov­erned by a com­mit­tee of over­seers appointed by the State of New York. New York City has par­tially lost its free­dom. When will we learn the les­son that fis­cal irre­spon­si­bil­ity leads to a loss of self-government? When will we learn that when you lose eco­nomic inde­pen­dence, you lose polit­i­cal freedom?

We have accepted a fright­en­ing degree of social­ism in our coun­try. The ques­tion is, how much? The amount of free­dom depends upon the amount of fed­eral con­trol and spend­ing. A good mea­sure­ment is to deter­mine the amount, or per­cent­age, of income of the peo­ple that is taken over and spent by the state. In Rus­sia, the indi­vid­ual works almost wholly for the state, leav­ing lit­tle for his own wel­fare. Scan­di­navia takes about 65 to 70 per­cent of the income of the peo­ple, Eng­land some 60 per­cent. The United States is now approx­i­mately 44 percent.”

There are indi­ca­tions that Amer­ica is mov­ing away from the phi­los­o­phy that made her the most pros­per­ous nation in the world. In effect, we are mov­ing toward the phil­an­thropic phi­los­o­phy of Mr. B and aban­don­ing the work incen­tive phi­los­o­phy of Mr. A. [Mr. A. and B. relate to a para­ble related ear­lier in the book, Mr. A rep­re­sent­ing the US Founders bib­li­cal phi­los­o­phy, Mr. B rep­re­sent­ing a well mean­ing but destruc­tive phi­los­o­phy of social­ism, the ‘nanny state.’] Mr. B’s phi­los­o­phy has crept in unawares under the guise of a new name—egalitarianism. It is, of course, the social­ist doc­trine of equal­ity. It strikes a sym­pa­thetic chord with many Amer­i­cans because its ini­tial goal is equal­ity of rights. Today, how­ever, the goal for the pro­po­nents of equal­ity is to restruc­ture our entire eco­nomic sys­tem using the power of the fed­eral gov­ern­ment to enforce their grand design. They now advo­cate through­out our econ­omy that we ‘redis­trib­ute wealth and income,’ a good def­i­n­i­tion for social­ism. Our present mid­dle –of-the-road pol­icy is as Von Mises sug­gested, social­ism by the install­ment plan.

Amer­i­cans have always been com­mit­ted to tak­ing care of the poor, aged, and unem­ployed. We’ve done this on the basis of Judeo-Christian beliefs and human­i­tar­ian prin­ci­ples. It has been fun­da­men­tal to our way of life that char­ity must be vol­un­tary if it is to be char­ity. Com­pul­sory benev­o­lence is not char­ity. Today’s egal­i­tar­i­ans are using the fed­eral gov­ern­ment to redis­trib­ute wealth in our soci­ety, not as a mat­ter of vol­un­tary char­ity, but as a mat­ter of right.

The chief weapon used by the fed­eral gov­ern­ment to achieve this equal­ity is through so-called trans­fer pay­ments. This is a term that sim­ply means that the fed­eral gov­ern­ment col­lects from one income group and trans­fers pay­ments to another by the tax sys­tem. These pay­ments are made in the form of Social Secu­rity ben­e­fits, hous­ing sub­si­dies, Med­ic­aid, food stamps, to name a few.

Today, total cost of such pro­grams exceeds $150 bil­lion dol­lars. That rep­re­sents about 42 per­cent of the total of all gov­ern­ment fed­eral spend­ing, or about one dol­lar out of every 7 dol­lars of per­sonal income. (See U.S. News and World Report, August 4, 1975, pp. 32–33.) When will we resolve as Amer­i­cans that a dol­lar can­not make the trip to Wash­ing­ton, D.C., and back with­out a bureau­cratic bite being take out of it?

Med­ic­aid, the government’s reg­u­lar health pro­gram for the poor, cost tax­pay­ers $13 bil­lion in 1975. Medicare, the pro­gram for the dis­abled and elderly, cost $15 bil­lion. Aid to fam­i­lies with depen­dent chil­dren cost over $5 bil­lion, and about $3 bil­lion was spent on food stamps. This is to name only a few of the so-called ben­e­fits paid out.

Our present Social Secu­rity pro­gram has been going in the hole at the rate of $12 bil­lion a year, and yet the party now in power wants to increase the ben­e­fits to include a com­pre­hen­sive national health insur­ance pro­gram. Rec­og­niz­ing that the present pro­gram will be insol­vent by 1985, Pres­i­dent Carter has now rec­om­mended that Social Secu­rity be funded out of the gen­eral tax funds. Charges were made in the last elec­tion cam­paign that the Social Secu­rity pro­gram was going bank­rupt. These charges were denied. Now the truth is out. The President’s rec­om­men­da­tion must be regarded as an admis­sion of the fail­ure of the present sys­tem and as a cal­cu­lated pol­icy to take this coun­try into full-scale socialism.

Our major dan­ger is that we are currently—and have been for forty years—transferring respon­si­bil­ity from the indi­vid­ual, local, and state gov­ern­ments to the fed­eral gov­ern­ment, pre­cisely the same course that lead to the eco­nomic col­lapse in Great Britain and New York. We can­not long pur­sue this present trend with­out its bring­ing us to national insolvency.

Edmund Burke, the great British polit­i­cal philoso­pher, warned of the threat of egal­i­tar­i­an­ism: ‘A per­fect equal­ity will indeed be produced—that is to say, equal wretched­ness, equal beg­gary, and, on the part of the prac­ti­tion­ers, a woe­ful, help­less, and des­per­ate dis­ap­point­ment. Such is the event of all com­pul­sory equal­iza­tions. They pull down what is above; they never raise what is below; and they depress high and low together beneath the level of what was orig­i­nally the lowest.’

All would like to equal­ize with those who are bet­ter off than they them­selves. They fail to real­ize that incomes dif­fer, and will always dif­fer, because peo­ple dif­fer in their eco­nomic drive and abil­ity. His­tory indi­cates that gov­ern­ments have been unable to pre­vent inequal­ity of incomes. Fur­ther, equal­iza­tion efforts sti­fle ini­tia­tive and retard progress to the extend that the real incomes of all are lowered.

We must remem­ber that gov­ern­ment assis­tance and con­trol are essen­tially polit­i­cal pro­vi­sions, and that expe­ri­ence has demon­strated that, for this rea­son, they are not suf­fi­ciently sta­ble to war­rant their uti­liza­tion as a foun­da­tion for sound eco­nomic growth under a free enter­prise sys­tem. The best way—the Amer­i­can way—is still max­i­mum free­dom for the indi­vid­ual guar­an­teed by a wise gov­ern­ment that pro­vides for police pro­tec­tion and national defense.

His­tory records that even­tu­ally peo­ple get the form of gov­ern­ment they deserve. Good gov­ern­ment, which guar­an­tees the max­i­mum of free­dom, lib­erty, and devel­op­ment to the indi­vid­ual, must be based upon sound prin­ci­ples. We must ever remem­ber that ideas and prin­ci­ples are either sound or unsound in spite of those who hold them. Free­dom of achieve­ment has pro­duced and will con­tinue to pro­duce the max­i­mum of ben­e­fits in terms of human welfare.

Free­dom is an eter­nal prin­ci­ple. Heaven dis­ap­proves of force, coer­cion, and intim­i­da­tion. Only a free peo­ple can be truly a happy peo­ple. Of all sad things in the world, the sad­dest is to see a peo­ple who have once known lib­erty and free­dom and then lost it.

We are a pros­per­ous peo­ple today because of a political-economic sys­tem founded on spir­i­tual val­ues, not mate­r­ial val­ues alone. It is founded on free­dom of choice—free agency—an eter­nal, God-given prin­ci­ple, and per­sonal virtue.

The Found­ing Fathers, inspired though they were, did not invent the price­less bless­ing of indi­vid­ual free­dom and respect for the dig­nity of man. No, that price­less gift to mankind sprang from the God of heaven and not from gov­ern­ment. Rec­og­niz­ing this truth, they forged safe­guards that would bind men’s lust for power to the Con­sti­tu­tion. Each new gen­er­a­tion must learn that truth anew.

Yes, America’s foun­da­tion is spir­i­tual. With­out the moral base to our sys­tem, we are no bet­ter off than other nations that are now sunk into obliv­ion. If we are to remain under heaven’s benign pro­tec­tion and care, we must return to those prin­ci­ples which have brought us our peace, lib­erty, and pros­per­ity. Our prob­lems today are essen­tially prob­lems of the spirit.

We here in Amer­ica, as Theodore Roo­sevelt said over a half cen­tury ago, ‘hold in our hands the hope of the world, the fate of the com­ing years, and shame and dis­grace will be ours if in our eyes the light of high resolve is dimmed, if we trail in the dust the golden hoped of man.’

With God’s help and inspi­ra­tion, per­haps we may rekin­dle a flame of lib­erty that will last as long as time endures.” (Ezra Taft Ben­son, This Nation Shall Endure, pp. 108, 112–117.)

Down­load the talk “Free­dom and Free Enter­prise” at this URL:

[Please note the prin­ci­ples expressed in this audio and tran­script. Mitt Romney’s social­ized health­care scheme now imple­mented Mass­a­chu­setts is cut asun­der by this talk.]