Oct 6, 2012

We Have Moved!

I am pleased to announce that we have upgraded and moved The Subsidiarity Times to a new hosting service. Please go to this link to continue a great reading experience from the Professor!

© 2012 The Subsidiarity Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written or re-distributed without written permission from blog author.

Sep 10, 2012

2012 Nursery Rhyme: Flop Goes Obama!

The Professor was working today with the tune of "Pop Goes the Weasel" running through his mind (He will not disclose how it got there; long story) and suddenly came up with new lyrics to the familiar tune which is now shared for you all to enjoy.

Flop Goes Obama!

The nation is in serious debt,
It is financial trauma,
We need someone to clean up this mess,
"Gladly!" says Obama,

But he just adds on more debt,
And thinks he's our papa,
When reality sets in,
Flop goes Obama!

© 2012 The Subsidiarity Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written or re-distributed without written permission from blog author.

Aug 31, 2012

2012 Minnesota Vikings Final Roster Predictions

The Minnesota Vikings finished the pre-season 1-3 and so a bit disappointed, but Coach Leslie Frazier and GM Rick Spielman feel the team is headed in the right direction and with good reason. As roster cuts loom, here, based on analysis of the three games, is a prediction list of who will make it and who will not.


In: Christian Ponder; Joe Webb; Sage Rosenfels;

PS(Practice Squad): McLeod Bethel-Thompson;

Out: None

Analysis: Ponder, barring a catastrophic break-down, was always going to be the guy. Webb may still be learning as a passer, but his supreme talent and slow but steady improvement guaranteed him the backup spot. Rosenfels is needed as a veteran mentor to both and his salary made cutting him an unattractive option. Bethel-Thompson, however, was impressive and, provided he clears waivers, is clearly destined for the practice squad. How could he not? He seems destined to eventually earn a spot as the No. 3 on the Vikings squad in the very near-future.


In: Adrian Peterson; Toby Gerhart; Jordan Todman;

PS: None

Out: Lex Hilliard;

Analysis: Peterson is the face of the team and Gerhart has proven his value and will likely open as the starter until Peterson is fully back up to speed. Todman thinks he may not have done enough, but in fact he just may have. His 76 yard TD run against Houston may have landed him a spot. Hilliard, to be blunt, was awful all pre-season and is clearly on his way out.


In: Jerome Felton; Matt Asiata;

PS: Ryan D’Imperio;

Out: None

Analysis: Felton was very unspectacular all pre-season and has had run-ins with the law, but considering the Vikings have bent over backwards the last one to two years trying to acquire him, he probably will remain until he becomes a liability. Asiata was impressive all pre-season and is virtually guaranteed a spot. D’Imperio is such a solid special teams player and is showing flashes as a developing fullback so the team, if they waive him, will probably bring him back to the practice squad as the backup plan for promotion when Felton gets let go.


In: Percy Harvin; Jerome Simpson; Michael Jenkins; Jarius Wright; Stephen Burton; Devin Aromashodu;

PS: Emmaneuel Arceneaux;

Out: None

Analysis: Harvin is the star of the receiving corps and fans will get real excited when Simpson takes the field in Week Four. Jenkins, by taking a pay cut and showing just enough veteran savvy, may have earned himself one more season on the squad. Wright finally broke out big time in the Houston game and the Vikings have to feel good about him serving as Harvin’s backup and substitute. Burton was a bit inconsistent but he is a solid player and may have landed himself a role as a future No. 3 possession receiver. Aromashodu finally showed up against Houston and may have landed himself a spot as Simpson’s replacement, but he will be let go once Simpson comes back. Arceneaux was not given much in the way of opportunity with the first string so he probably gets another practice squad stint with a promotion coming if anyone in the receiving corps gets hurt.


In: Kyle Rudolph; John Carlson; Rhett Ellison; Allen Reisner; Mickey Shuler Jr.;

PS: None

Out: None

Analysis: Far-fetched? Not as much as you think. Rudolph and Carlson have injury histories and Ellison had an injury scare during the pre-season. Reisner and Shuler have really flashed and the guess here is that the Vikings will not risk losing either of them. It will be a bit of a strain on the roster, but considering how important the tight end is in Bill Musgrave’s offense, this seems to be the safest route for the Vikings to go, and all five guys are young.


In: Matt Kalil; Charlie Johnson; John Sullivan; Brandon Fusco; Phil Loadholt; DeMarcus Love; Joe Berger; Geoff Schwartz;

PS: Quentin Saulsberry;

Out: Patrick Brown; Chris DeGeare; Tyler Holmes; Kevin Murphy; Austin Pasztor;

Analysis: The starting five seems set. Love is a solid backup tackle but needs to get over his injury issues. It looked like Love might be relegated to injured reserve with Patrick Brown filling in for him, but Brown was hideous against Houston and may have cost himself a potential spot. Berger and Schwartz are good because of their versatility in filling in all along the line. Saulsberry was a pleasant surprise in camp and may have earned himself a practice squad spot with his hard work and talent.


In: Jared Allen; Kevin Williams; Brian Robison; Letroy Guion; Everson Griffen; Christian Ballard; D’Aundre Reed; Fred Evans; Trevor Guyton;

PS: Nick Reed;

Out: Chase Baker; Jeff Charleston;

Analysis: Tough to part with anyone here. The Vikings have one of the best eyes in the league for defensive line talent. Allen and Williams are All-Pros, Robison, Griffen, Ballard and D’Aundre Reed have Pro-Bowl and All-Pro written into their future, Guion looks like he might indeed be the answer at nose tackle and Evans and Guyton provide depth. Nick Reed is a definite candidate for the practice squad. Charleston played well, but was simply stuck behind a bunch of very good defensive linemen and is too old for the practice squad.


In: Chad Greenway; Erin Henderson; Jasper Brinkley; Audie Cole; Marvin Mitchell;

PS: Larry Dean

Out: Tyrone McKenzie; Corey Paredes;

Analysis: Starting spots seem set with Greenway, Henderson and Brinkley, but if Cole plays like he did in the pre-season and Brinkley struggles, do not be surprised to see the rookie thrown into the mix. Mitchell has proven to be a solid pickup and provided he stays healthy could challenge for playing time. Dean, a great special teamer, is a candidate for the practice squad only because the Vikings have more pressing needs at the moment. McKenzie played well, but the numbers just do not seem to be working out in his favor.


In: Antoine Winfield; Chris Cook; Chris Carr; Josh Robinson; Zackary Bowman; Marcus Sherels;

PS: Brandon Burton;

Out: Bobby Felder; Reggie Jones;

Analysis: Winfield and Cook are the starters though Robinson could challenge for Winfield’s spot if he can stay healthy. Carr and Bowman did not look spectacular in the pre-season, but they provide a veteran presence in the secondary which is something the Vikings did not have last season. Sherels is only good in the slot, but his return abilities are what help him stick around. Burton goes to the practice squad because he is a large corner with developmental skills and with Winfield’s injury history, may be looking at a promotion sometime during the season. Jones ruined his chances of sticking with a costly fumble on a punt and Felder simply did not show enough to stick around this year though he may get invited back to training camp next year.


In: Harrison Smith; Mistral Raymond; Jamarca Sanford; Robert Blanton;

PS: Andrew Sendejo;

Out: Eric Frampton;

Analysis: Smith has begun showing John Lynch-type abilities which should excite Vikings fans. Raymond has worked his way to success all his life so why doubt his ability at free safety now? Sanford is mainly a special teamer but he does have starting experience and a knack for recovering fumbles and recording interceptions. Blanton suffered setbacks with his injuries during the pre-season but he has better abilities then all the other safeties besides Smith and Raymond. Sendejo was a surprise with his trong play and may have earned a practice squad spot and a potential promotion if anybody in the top four gets hurt. Frampton was good with special teams, but getting burned on a deep pass against Buffalo was a killer blow to his roster hopes.


In: Cullen Loeffler; Chris Kluwe; Blair Walsh;

PS: None

Out: Ryan Longwell;

Analysis: Yes Longwell is not and was never on the roster during the pre-season, but his ghost always stalked the special teams talk. He remained on the free agent market always as a looming spectrum watching to see if Blair Walsh would produce or not. Walsh was spectacular on kickoffs, pretty solid on field goals and perfect on extra points. He gets the nod going into the season but he has to do what Doug Brien and Aaron Elling never did for the Vikings of the last decade and actually make it all the way through the season without struggling spectacularly and then being replaced. Kluwe is still good as punter but needs to improve his holds on field goals and extra points for the rookie Walsh. By the same token, Loeffler needs to shake off the rust coming from finishing last year on injured reserve and improve his snaps so he does not shake Walsh’s confidence either. If they can all do well then the Vikings special teams group will no longer be just solid, but also young and so destined to remain around for a while.


What can we take out of the 2012 pre-season? Hard to say; The first team looked like it was finally coming around but depth still seems like an issue in some spots. The Vikings will probably use this year to get the young players experience while looking forward to next year and another potentially good draft class to help turn this team around more quickly and so help the Detroit Lions displace the Chicago Bears and Green Bay Packers as the class of the NFC North division in the very near-future.

© 2012 The Subsidiarity Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written or re-distributed without written permission from blog author.

Aug 21, 2012

The Professor's New Vlog Section: The Rural Doctrine

Professor Wall has published his first vlog. In the inaugural August 21, 2012 episode, he addresses Congressman Paul Ryan's selection as Mitt Romney's running mate for vice-president of the United States, what Senator Rand Paul really said when speaking about the selection of Ryan, the rumors surrounding a possible removal of Vice-President Joe Biden from the Democratic national ticket and what all of this means for the upcoming general election.

To view, go here

© 2012 The Subsidiarity Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written or re-distributed without written permission from blog author.

Aug 2, 2012

2012 Candidate Profiles: David Gerson of Minnesota Congressional District Two

Professor Wall interviews congressional candidate David Gerson (R-MN)

Incumbent Republican U.S. representative John Kline (R-MN) has been looked upon as a hero in the Minnesota GOP for his stunning upset of popular Democratic congressman Bill Luther (DFL-MN) in 2002, but times have dramatically changed since then. Ten years after his historic victory, Kline has a number of constituents unhappy with him and as a result he is now facing his first severe election test since 2002. This time, however, the challenge is within his own party; coming from engineer and economic author David Gerson (R-MN) of Eagan, Minnesota.

“I was asked to come down to CD2 and run in the primary against John Kline and the issue is that his constituents felt that he was not representing their interests and that his voting over the last ten years has not equaled or been in line with the Republican platform” said Gerson in an interview with New Agora. He also added: “The reason why I am taking on the incumbent Republican versus running against a Democrat is because I believe that both parties’ leaders have failed us, including the Republican Party. We are looking to reform the Republican Party to ensure that when we send people to Washington D.C. that they uphold our values and our ideals and we feel there is a need to hold our current leadership responsible for their transgressions in not doing so.”

Gerson, born in Boston and raised in both Boston and North Carolina, received bachelors and masters degrees in the engineering field from North Carolina State University and is currently an executive at a global engineering company where he is responsible for executive engineering transformation.

He also has begun dabbling in writing books on economics and recently just published his first book on economics labeled ‘How Crony Capitalism Crushed the Middle Class and Killed the Economy: Revealing the Economics of Legal Plunder’. When asked how he was inspired to write the book, Gerson said:

“I’ve been always a little bit interested in Macroeconomics and since the financial crisis I have had a much deeper concern like most Americans and I’m a pretty analytical guy so I dive into things pretty deeply.” Gerson then related how, having never taken a college-level economics course, he was forced to do much of his own research, but looked upon that as an advantage as he entered his study of economics with an open mind. He then directed his studies to every part that he did not know so that he would have more fully rounded knowledge. As he studied, he began to have some ideas that were different from what was being presented and started to put those ideas into a book which forced him to do a lot of research to validate his points. It helped to shape some of the thoughts that he had and to confirm a lot of the thoughts that he had and he attempted to bring across the economic message in a way which would be digestible in the book, though he admitted that the book is ‘slightly wonkish’. He also stated that he hoped more people would build on his work and that the ideas he had put forward in it would influence him in his congressional votes on economic policy if he were to be elected to Congress.

Gerson, who references and criticizes the Federal Reserve in his book, states that he supports Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed bill and the drive to end the Federal Reserve, while also emphasizing that it will not be a simple task and there will have to be a long transition period and transition plan put in place where the setting of interest rates and other such things are systematically removed from bureaucratic control and given back to the free market before the end of the Federal Reserve can finally come about.

“The number one thing is transparency. People need to see transparency and that will obviously affect the behaviors of the people that operate inside the Fed” Gerson added, referring to the Audit the Fed bill.

In reference to Ron and Rand Paul’s new crusade for internet freedom, Gerson emphasized that he supports the crusade as a fight for freedom of speech.

“I don’t want to see government controls over the internet. We have a right to free speech and I don’t want to give control to some bureaucrat that is going to determine what is proper and what isn’t” said Gerson.

When asked about the ‘indefinite detention of Americans’ clause in the NDAA law, Gerson stated that he was surprised more Americans were not outraged at the loss of their right to due process of the law. He then reiterated a pledge to work with congressmen such as Justin Amash and Rand Paul to repeal laws such as the NDAA indefinite detention clause, H.R. 347 (which limits the rights to free speech in and around federal buildings and grounds) and the PATRIOT Act (which allows government to access individuals’ private records along with other invasive capabilities). He also stated that he supported efforts to eliminate the use of drones on American soil.

“I hate to oversimplify it, but we cannot sacrifice our rights in the name of safety period” stressed Gerson.

With regards to issues such as abortion and marriage, Gerson stated that he is pro-life and supports pro-life causes but that he would rather see the pro-life issue resolved at the state level first. He added that he would support pro-life legislation such as Ron Paul’s Sanctity of Life Act which would overturn the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision by removing the issue from federal jurisdiction and returning it to the states where most criminal law is already handled. He also supports efforts to defund Planned Parenthood. Concerning marriage, Gerson stated that he believes marriage is not a federal issue.

Gerson also pledged that he would work to repeal the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

“I would work to repeal (Obamacare). It is that simple. I don’t think it’s the right thing for America. It makes bigger government, bigger government controls; with bigger government comes inefficiencies and market distortions which is unhealthy for America.”

With his positions on the issues laid out, Gerson was asked about his campaign to unseat John Kline as the Republican nominee for Congress in Minnesota’s Second Congressional District, with the first reference being to what he feels needs to happen in order for him to successfully defeat Kline in the primary.

“I think it is this simple. People need to know John Kline’s voting record” said Gerson “John Kline does a great job messaging against the Democrats, but he has been part of the Republican leadership and part of leadership period on both sides of the (aisle) that has failed us over the last ten years. He has voted in line with (Speaker of the House) John Boehner on every major issue. No one votes with John Boehner more than John Kline. If you are happy with the leadership in Congress, and we know that nobody is, they have the lowest approval rating in history, you will love John Kline. We need to expose his record, which is un-defendable.”

Put simply, Gerson believes that if people are awakened to who Kline really is, then that will be all he needs to win the primary.

“(Kline) has not been representing his constituents” continued Gerson “He has been representing special interests in Washington D.C. He says he is for lower taxes, but he continues to vote for big government programs, bigger government, bigger budgets, bigger federal deficits that increase our taxes. He has voted to take away our civil rights; he has voted for the NDAA; he voted for the PATRIOT Act and its extensions every time; he voted for H.R. 347. So he has taken away our civil rights and he has voted for bigger government; he has voted for a 2.4. trillion dollar increase in the debt ceiling; he provided the deciding vote on Medicare Part D, the largest social welfare initiative since (President Lyndon) Johnson’s Great Society programs. He overrode President (George W.) Bush’s veto which effectively repealed the Freedom to Farm Act which even President Bush labeled as lacking fiscal discipline and he liked Cash for Clunkers so much that he voted for it twice.”

When asked, in contrast to Kline’s record, why voters should pick him over Kline, Gerson issued a straight forward answer.

“Well I’m not a career politician. I’m successful in the private sector so if I get voted out of Congress I can go back to the private sector and maintain my standard of living, actually I would increase it by going back to the private sector. So I will not be swayed by the Establishment from my own agenda (into) supporting the special interest groups and playing the Washington games; so I am a private sector guy, I am not a career politician. I will represent my constituents. I am a true conservative and I will uphold the Republican platform. The problem has been that we have been electing people that have come to campaign and say that they believe in the Republican platform but then go to Washington D.C. and transgress completely away from what our ideals and our true conservative values are.”

In a follow-up question, Gerson was asked to comment on Kline’s statement in an email to potential supporters in the 2nd Congressional District where he appeared to label Gerson as an outsider from Minneapolis and the Fifth Congressional District and why he felt Kline was resorting to this tactic to disqualify Gerson in the minds of voters instead of debating the issues.

“I would love for him to meet up and debate me on the issues” said Gerson with a touch of enthusiasm, “because I would love to call him on his voting record which is just un-defendable. I have no idea why he made that statement, your characterization might be as right as any.” Gerson then explained that, while it was true that he had originally been living in Minneapolis, he was moving to the 2nd Congressional District and has been active in the Minnesota Republican Party. He also re-emphasized that he was recruited through certain networks to come down and challenge Kline.

“(I) was recruited to come down here and try to send this message, not just to John Kline, but to all incumbents and to the Republican Party that we need some catharsis, we need to be honest with who we are and we need to deal with the last elephant in the room that our leadership has been failing us and we cannot blindly vote for people because they are incumbents” said Gerson.

Gerson was also asked, if he were to become the nominee, if he would be able to change his strategy from contrasting records to educating the populace about why his stances are more correct then what Democratic nominee Mike Obermueller will be standing for.

“It is a two-fold thing, not only do they have to understand who John Kline is and what he has really voted for and the fact that he is not representing who he is and his voting record is one of the worst in Washington D.C. and we have to start holding our incumbent leaders responsible for their transgressions. They also have to know who I am and my background.” Gerson then stressed that people could learn a lot about his views through his book and through his website where he lays forth overviews to why he is running, what his beliefs are and what he is doing to get people to believe again in the system so that they can take back their government and so help re-energize the Republican Party base with candidates who are private sector-oriented and not career politicians.

When asked about his political future and whether he would consider running for either a state office or for the Republican nomination to challenge Senator Al Franken or Governor Mark Dayton in 2014, Gerson emphasized that he currently was completely focused on the task at hand, namely defeating John Kline in the Minnesota GOP primary.

“I currently have no aspirations to do anything except win on August 14th” said Gerson, then adding: “I fully expect that we will actually be in a race for the general election, come August 15th. I am not thinking beyond August 14th today, we are a machine, we are focused on winning on August 14th in this primary.”

Finally, Gerson was asked if his campaign had a campaign song to which Gerson replied that they did not but that they would love suggestions and he encouraged constituents to call in with recommendations.

Congressman Kline should be worried about this challenge. Considering Minnesota gave its nod for the Republican presidential nomination to Congressman Ron Paul and the Republican U.S. Senate endorsement to state representative Kurt Bills and that David Gerson is clearly in the same mold as those gentlemen, it is obvious that this is a serious challenge. If the trend which has been taking place in the Minnesota GOP continues, then Kline could very well find himself watching Gerson and Obermueller battle for his seat in the general election while he prepares for retirement as another victim of the Tea Party and Liberty Movement’s takeover of American and Minnesota politics.

© 2012 New Agora and The Subsidiarity Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written, re-transcribed or re-distributed without written permission from blog author.

Jul 31, 2012

Jason Lewis: America’s Founding Fathers adopted the Principle of Subsidiarity

(The Subsidiarity Times) Last month, talk show host Jason Lewis gave a very interesting perspective on America’s structure of government during his radio show when he revealed to his listeners that the Founding Fathers of the United States adopted the Principle of Subsidiarity in founding this nation.

“What the framers saw was the idea of being governed by a far-away monarchy as untenable. They did not like being told what to do especially by one family, one person, one throne; but not only that because it was across the pond (Atlantic Ocean). ‘What are they telling us?’ So they adopted the Principles of Subsidiarity that said: ‘Look, local government is best’. And (also) as Madison said and Hamilton as well, the best way to govern a country this large, America was going to be a larger proposition then Great Britain, would be the principles of republicanism, where you divide the majority into a bunch of different jurisdictions and then you let those local jurisdictions decide. Rather then have the national government decide for all of the jurisdictions.”

Mr. Lewis is correct in his analysis. The Founding Fathers believed that they should govern themselves in their own jurisdictions. That was the primary reason they opposed the Stamp Act and the other taxes and regulations that Great Britain attempted to impose on the American colonies in the years leading up to the American Revolution. Plus, building off that experience of a national government trying to dictate their laws, taxes and regulations, it was one of the primary reasons that the Framers clearly stated in the United States Constitution that all powers not clearly granted to the Federal Government in the Constitution were to be reserved expressly for the states.

© 2012 The Subsidiarity Times. Audio courtesy of The Jason Lewis Show; re-published with permission. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written, re-transcribed or re-distributed without written permission from author.

Jul 19, 2012

Former Governor Ventura: Take Party names off the election ballots so voters will really have to find out what the candidates stand for.

(The Subsidiarity Times) In a radio interview with talk show host Brian Wilson of Brian Wilson and the Afternoon Drive, former Governor Jesse Ventura (Reform/Independence-MN), promoting his new book “DemoCRIPS and ReBLOODlicans: No More Gangs in Government”, put forward a very interesting proposition on how to get voters back to voting for individual candidates and what they stand for rather then just a political party, as well as revealing some little-known facts about his own term as governor in Minnesota.

“This could start at the local level. Why do we allow party or gang symbols and names on an election ballot? Turn them into Political Action Committees, the same ways that teachers union, the firemen, whatever, they could still endorse; but they do that by design. By putting the name Republican or Democrat next to the candidate, you don’t even have to know who the candidate is; if you are conservative you go in and look for Republican, if you are liberal, you go in and look for Democrat. If they remove all that, well then it is imperative to the voter then: ‘What does John Smith stand for?’”

This proposition followed a joke that Ventura shared with Wilson where he proposed that a law be made whereby every political candidate would be required to wear a NASCAR racing suit adorned with the names/symbols of all of his sponsors so the voters could then become informed voters and so know who “owns’ each particular candidate.

Further on in the interview, Ventura revealed some rather interesting facts about his own campaign for governor and his term as governor in Minnesota. He first revealed that he pulled off the impossible by getting Republicans and Democrats to unite together to oppose him during his last year as governor.

“Who else in the country can accomplish that today? Nobody” said Ventura, referencing the gridlock currently going on in Washington D.C.

Ventura then added a couple more fascinating facts “Let me go back to my campaign for a minute. I never took over fifty or a hundred dollars. I didn’t take any PAC money from any special interest group; and get this, here is what the media doesn’t want the public to know about my campaign in Minnesota: I only raised three hundred thousand dollars to become governor. So I bet I am the only elected official in fifty years in a major election, Governor, Congress, anything like that, who actually made more money doing the job then what I spent to get it…and because I didn’t take special interest (money), I am also the only governor or whatever in my four years, I never met with a lobbyist once.”

© 2012 The Subsidiarity Times. Audio courtesy of Brian Wilson and the Afternoon Drive Show; re-published with permission. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written, re-transcribed or re-distributed without written permission from author.

2012 Candidate Profiles: Chris Fields of Minnesota Congressional District Five

He is running in a district where Republicans have not won since 1960, but that does not deter former Marine Chris Fields (R-MN) from believing he can replace incumbent Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN) in Minnesota’s Fifth Congressional District and so join the other 434 U.S. representatives on Capitol Hill in January 2013.

“(The) campaign is going good, we have a lot of support” said Fields in an interview with New Agora journalist Professor Wall, “the interesting part of the people that support Chris Fields is this: they’ve ranged from all spectrums of the political world. We have Democrats, hardened Democrats, because frankly they are not very satisfied with Keith Ellison and the things that he has been doing, the grandstanding in Congress, his lack of legislative achievements and so they are in our camp; and then we have social conservatives that are in our camp because I am a strong pro-life candidate and we also have Ron Paul supporters and I’m a liberty loving guy like all of those guys and so our support is very deep and very wide. In fact, last month alone we raised thirty thousand dollars which is a big deal for a congressional campaign of this size in the toughest district for Republicans to win in.”

Fields said his motivation to run was twofold. Part of his motivation came from his experience growing up as the impoverished child of a very young mother (she had three children before she was twenty) which left an imprint on him and has helped him understand the struggles of so many of today’s Americans. The other part came from his twenty-one years of service in government as a United States Marine. Those experiences, said Fields, evoked a very strong sense in him of what he could do to turn things around.

In current events, when asked for his opinion on Ron Paul’s “Audit the Fed” bill currently going through Congress, Fields emphasized that it would not be a quick process to bring the end of the Federal Reserve about, but that he supports ‘the thrust of (Ron Paul’s) argument which is: “we need accountability.”’

“I think that’s where his bill is aimed: at getting more accountability with our economic policy and I would be a huge supporter of that alone” said Fields.

Concerning Ron and Rand Paul’s new crusade for internet freedom, Fields supports efforts to keep the internet open and free.

“We would have to take a look at the legislation (in favor of internet freedom), but I did not support SOPA” said Fields

“What I am concerned about with internet freedom” he continued, “is that it has to remain open, it has to remain accessible to everyone, to bloggers and to the wide range of Americans who want to be able to express themselves. What is truly concerning to me is when you have, whether it is the recording industry or some of the other industries that are lined up against (internet freedom) and they want to control the voice, they want to own the internet so to speak. That really doesn’t sit well with me and it shouldn’t sit well with a lot of Americans.”

Chris Fields converses with potential supporters
Chris Fields converses with potential supporters as part of his bid to win the congressional seat in Minnesota's 5th House District

In regards to the prospective indefinite detention of Americans thanks to certain clauses in the NDAA law, Fields stated that, while the clause was, in a sense, ambiguous and many had tried to reassure Americans that the law would not be used or construed that way, he still could not have supported it.

“With the NDAA, no I could not have voted for that, with that statement in there. There was one statement that could be construed as ‘Americans could be held, detained’; President Obama had a signing statement saying ‘Hey, this in fact not what we are going to do’, this is not a road his administration was going to go down, but the fact that its in there just leads me to believe that some clever lawyer somewhere could potentially use that and that is enough for me not to support that bill. I don’t want to give those folks the ammunition to restrict American liberties and our due process because that is what this goes to: our due process.”

Fields expressed even stronger concerns about the use of drones on American soil. “I’m particularly concerned about drones and here is why:” said Fields “A couple of weeks ago a drone just crashed in Maryland and Maryland is a pretty big state, but my experience in the military is that we usually test out equipment out there on the West Coast in Nevada in the big desert, so that wouldn’t have raised my eyebrow; but the fact that it crashed in Maryland, like what sort of testing were they doing out there? What was this drone’s mission in particular? Was he going around picking up signals from everyday Americans? We need to know more about that and the fact that this administration has used drones so extensively in the War on Terror, it is a system that can be ripe for abuse.”

Following up his opinions on these issues, Fields emphasized that, unlike Ellison who seems to choose his battles based on the administration in power, he would rather vote for what was right than follow the party line.

“I’m not interested in the Left or the Right so to speak, its about what is right for me and what I see (as the difference between) myself and Keith (Ellison) is ‘Hey, I want to be someone that focuses on what is right and I don’t care who the administration is’; if its President Romney, no, I get to oppose his use or abuse of drones; or you know, this NDAA, I don’t care who put that bill forward, you know, you have to have some sort of integrity and that’s what our political system is missing right now.”

Upon being asked for his stances on some of the main social conservative issues as well as Obamacare, Fields re-emphasized his pro-life roots, especially being born to a fifteen year old mother, and added “I am Pro-Life from cradle to grave with no exceptions and you know what, I am pretty unapologetic about that.” He did go on to add however that he was not a single-issue candidate and that he felt that the country has more pressing concerns which must be solved before a constitutional amendment banning abortion could be constructively addressed and have any hope of becoming law. Speaking on Obamacare, Fields expressed grave concerns about the Federal Government intervening in healthcare and said he would prefer state and local authorities taking control of their own situation in regards to addressing any healthcare problems. Fields also added that he felt the marriage issue would be best settled by the people at the state level in the referendums currently being voted on rather then judges.

With two candidates vying for the Democratic congressional nomination in Congressman Ellison and activist Gary Bosiclair, (an ally of Democratic presidential candidate Randall Terry), Fields is ready to lay out why voters should pick him over either of those candidates in November.

“With Keith, you know what you’re going to get” Fields said of Ellison, “Keith has been in office since 2006 and not much has gotten better in the lives of many of the people in the district. Minneapolis is home to the largest achievement gap in education between black and white students and with regard to unemployment we still have the largest unemployment gap between blacks and whites in the entire country. That is an embarrassment and I would say this: In the age of Obama and with a representative like Ellison, that should not be the case. Minneapolis and the fifth congressional district have not gotten the focused attention they need. Keith is out talking about a lot of national issues, you name it, everything from Syria to Palestine to Citizens United, this guy is all over the map and what we don’t have here is focused attention; and what we aim to do is provide focused attention, not focusing on the issues that are friendly to Left or issues that are friendly to the Right, but focusing on what is right and what is right for the fifth congressional district. We need to get private enterprise in here and we need to start making investments, not just government investments, which is exclusively what Keith talks about almost, but we need to get private dollars, we need to make ourselves more attractive economically so that we can get new Fortune 500 (companies) to grow. We have a lot of Fortune 500 companies, but we don’t have a lot moving here and that’s what we need to begin to do.”

With Boisclair, Fields commented that: “(I) read some of his stuff, I understand he is pretty strong on the (Pro-)Life issue and I applaud him for that but beyond that we have not seen a whole lot of information with regard to where he stands. If you are going to be strong on the (Pro-)Life issue but then continue to support some of the other drastic environmental pieces of legislation that the Democratic Party has put out, like being opposed to the Keystone Pipeline and things of that nature, well then you have the difference there. So you have to backup what you’re talking about with a strong agenda that gets people back to work and in particular addresses the achievement gap in education as well as the unemployment gap.”

Concerning his political future, Fields was asked if he would consider running for the Republican nomination to challenge Senator Al Franken or Governor Mark Dayton in 2014.

“Well right now we have to focus on what is on our plate and so me pontificating on what I am going to do the day after the election is probably not where my focus needs to be. And one of the things that voters are going to understand about me is that I am incredibly focused and incredibly disciplined. And that is probably a product from me being in the Marines but probably not insofar as, coming from the South Bronx in New York City, there is a whole lot of ways to get yourself distracted and turned around and so that you go all off of course in terms of making yourself successful in life. (I) been able to avoid those distractions and so I think in the political sense here I can avoid the distraction of thinking about tomorrow and focus in on what is important for today.”

© 2012 New Agora and The Subsidiarity Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written, re-transcribed or re-distributed without written permission from blog author.

Jul 4, 2012

The Stamp and Declaratory Acts of our Era: Obamacare and the Supreme Court Decision

The Supreme Court’s appalling 5-4 ruling upholding the poorly named Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) has thrown down the challenge to the American people. The people of America proclaimed the motto of the Gadsden Flag “Don’t Tread on Me” through the Tea Party for the last five years and the Federal Government, speaking through the majority opinion in the Supreme Court’s decision, has responded accordingly: “Oh yeah? Stop us then.” With that answer from the Federal Government, the second coming of the American Revolution has come closer to reality.

If one thinks back to the original American Revolution, that movement also started over two vastly unpopular laws. First, there was the Stamp Act of 1765. That law required every individual to pay for a government stamp on almost everything, from legal documents put together by lawyers to playing cards and dice used by sailors. It would be followed in 1766 by the Declaratory Act which decreed that Parliament had the “full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies and people of America in all cases whatsoever.” These acts were the closest thing to taxing and regulating behavior the modern world would see from a government until the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The acts ignited a firestorm of protests from the colonists. They were outraged at the prospect of being taxed and over-regulated by a government a long way away which knew very little about the colonies and refused to see the misery that their taxes and regulations would inflict upon them.

Today in America we are seeing a similar wave of anger against the act which has come to be known as Obamacare. In this act, which became law on March 23, 2010, all American citizens are required to either purchase health insurance or be taxed. To uphold the law under the Constitution in the June 28, 2012 Supreme Court decision on the law, Chief Justice John Roberts argued that the federal government has the right to tax American citizens for any reason whatsoever. In making this decision, Roberts and the liberal justices on the Supreme Court have opened a Pandora’s Box. This law is going to hit every citizen of America and everyone is either going to have to pay more money for a limited-choice, government-sanctioned healthcare plan or see their taxes skyrocket higher every April. The Supreme Court Decision, by decreeing that the federal government can tax Americans for anything at all, has, like the Declaratory Act, given the federal government the power to regulate human behavior at any level and they do it by taxing you, just like the Stamp Act.

The gauntlet has been laid down ladies and gentlemen. Furthermore, the states are responding. Since the indefinite detention of American citizens without trial was made legal in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, several states have responded by introducing bills to nullify the NDAA, which means that that federal law will not be effective inside that state’s borders. Now, it has been proposed to nullify Obamacare at the state level and already several states have introduced legislation to do just that. This action is very similar to how the colonies responded to the Stamp and Declaratory Acts. They refused to pay the taxes and to effectively implement this refusal, they enacted a nation-wide boycott of British goods in order to avoid paying the taxes. It was, effectively, nullification of British laws by the American colonies.

So how is this leading to a second American Revolution? Just watch and wait. Once the states’ nullification measures begin to take effect and Obamacare and any other laws which are nullified prove to be unenforceable, the federal government will be forced to either let the states get away with those measures or they will have to move troops in to force the state governments to obey federal laws. If they choose the latter option (which seems likely), then expect the situation to really get out of control. The federal government already seems to be preparing for this in having the military drill inside American cities. If they implement military takeovers of the states and their local governments, one might expect history to repeat itself and events which took place in a British-occupied Boston and in the small towns of Lexington and Concord in 1775 will repeat themselves in one or more of America’s fifty states which will lead to the states rising against the federal government in a Second American Revolution to re-enforce the principles of the Founding Fathers. Only this time, the cry of warning from those seeking freedom will not be “The British are Coming!” but: “The Feds are Coming!”

© 2012 The Subsidiarity Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written or re-distributed without written permission from blog author.

Jun 28, 2012

Guest Op-ed: How Will the Catholic Church Respond to the Contraception Mandate?

Today, June 28, 2012, a great tragedy befell America in the ruling by the United States Supreme Court upholding the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). This ruling will fall particularly hard on religions who have been targeted by the HHS mandate requiring religious employers to provide coverage for contraceptives even if it goes against their religion. In response to this abominable attack upon religious freedom in America, my colleague from New Agora, the incorrigible papist Chris Scribner, has written an excellent op-ed article detailing what the Catholic Church's response to the Supreme Court's ruling and the HHS mandate should be and it is re-posted here as a guest posting on The Subsidiarity Times.

How Will the Catholic Church Respond to the Contraception Mandate?

The June 28, 2012 Supreme Court decision to uphold the Affordable Care Act (commonly termed Obamacare) quashed the hopes of conservative Catholics that a decision by the Obama administration to require religious employers to provide contraception might be repealed in the immediate future. In short, the mother of all clashes is brewing between the Catholic Church and the Obama administration.

On August 1, 2012, health plans for most organizations will be required to cover contraception, “emergency contraceptives,” and sterilization procedures. The mandate will be extended to non-profit religious employers on August 1, 2013. Narrow religious exemptionshave been granted, but as Cardinal Wuerl has pointed out, not even Mother Teresa would qualify for these exemptions.

In other words, the Obama administration is forcing institutions affiliated with the Catholic Church to pay for coverage of contraceptives, “emergency contraception,” and sterilization. After being pressured by religious groups, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) tweaked the mandate so that insurance companies would be forced to provide contraception instead of Catholic institutions themselves. But Catholic institutions would be paying insurance companies to provide birth control to employees, so the religious objections of Catholics have not been resolved. (Besides, since many Catholic companies and diocesesself-insure, the major sticking point remains for Catholics in a host of cases.)

If the Church did comply and provided contraception coverage to its employees, it would signify that the Church’s moral teaching on contraception could be changed. And the Church would instantly lose all credibility if She reversed herself on contraception or any of Her other moral teachings; if She could reverse Herself on one critical teaching at the whim of the state, any of Her teachings would be mutable.

Accordingly, the Catholic Church is treating the HHS mandate as a serious blow to religious freedom. Every single one of the Catholic bishops in America has sworn that the Church will not and cannot comply with the Obama administration’s mandate. President Obama refuses to budge on the matter. The Catholic Church is now celebrating a “Fortnight for Freedom” – two weeks of prayer and penance as part of a “great hymn of prayer for our country” – in response to the HHS mandate.

The Catholic Church can choose to respond to the HHS mandate in several different ways. Here is a brief overview of the ways the Church can choose to respond to it. This list will also examine historical precedents for these choices.

© 2012 Gray Matters and The Subsidiarity Times. Re-printed with the permission of article author and Gray Matters. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written or re-distributed without written permission from the author of this article.

Jun 27, 2012

The Ideological Idols

When People think they possess the secret
of a perfect social organization which makes evil
impossible, they also think that they can use any
means, including violence and deceit, in order to
bring that organization into being. Politics then
becomes a “secular religion” which operates under
the illusion of creating paradise in this world.
– Pope John Paul II

Ideologies are a natural result of a democratic-republican form of government. People all have opinions on how problems should be handled at the level of government and in a free democratic-republican system, they are allowed to voice these opinions in debates, elections, and the public square (i.e. talk radio, television and the workplace). Unfortunately, many people believe in their ideologies to an extreme and so come to think their ideology is the be-all and end-all of their world. They worship what the ideology presents to them as the ultimate goal of those following that ideology. It is a sad reality.

Totalitarianism: The idol of those who follow the Totalitarian ideologies (Socialism; Communism; Nazism; Fascism) is Government; All-Powerful, Big Brother Government. They believe that government is the magic elixir which can solve all social, political and financial problems at every level and push for government to be given as much power as the world can give so they can solve these problems and thus produce Utopia. This “heaven on earth” cannot exist in this world because man is not perfect. Mistakes and abuses will be made and in a totalitarian system, wrongdoing and mistakes can be legalized or covered up because it is sanctioned by government which leads to greater harm for the people. {The failure and fall of the Soviet Union is a prime example of this}.

Liberalism: Power is the shrine at which liberals adore. They are similar to Totalitarians in that they believe government should be the vehicle to affect change that is needed, but they want the power for themselves and their friends because they believe they can solve everything that is wrong in the world if they are only given the power. What they fail to realize is that with power comes tremendous temptation and that temptation can corrupt anyone and so lead to the abuse of a system. {Good examples of this are scandal-ridden American presidencies such as those of Ulysses S. Grant and Warren G. Harding}.

Moderatism: Moderates glorify public opinion as their deity. Moderates believe that if the people want something then it should be given to them. They believe this will result in true peace and, by default, utopia. If the majority of the people want it, then it must be good for them and so bring about good results for them. The problem here is that deception is possible at any level and when the general public is deceived about certain ideas or facts, then caving in to public opinion can lead to disastrous results. {The French Revolution is a great example of this}.

Conservatism: Money is the bottom line for conservatives. The commonly accepted priority of most conservatives is fiscal responsibility, but this degenerates into simple money hunger. Money is what they are most interested in because to them it is what buys happiness and ensures that they have the ability to keep that happiness. They acknowledge that utopia cannot be accomplished on this earth but that does not bother them as much so long as they have the money to solve their own ills. They only wish to limit government when it hampers their ability to make money. This attitude is wrong, however, because it has been proved time and again that money cannot buy happiness or solve every ill. Some issues can only be solved by things that money cannot buy, such as love and truth. {Charles Dickens eloquently proves this in his classic story A Christmas Carol}.

Libertarianism: Libertarians worship personal freedom. A large number of libertarians believe that, as long as they do not infringe on someone else’s personal freedom, they should be free to do whatever they wish to themselves and that no form of authority has a right to say otherwise. They think that if everyone is left to rise or fall based on their own virtues or vices regarding their personal habits, then a more complete and happy society can be achieved. This view is dangerous in the sense that it does not acknowledge the legitimate place of authority on many levels, sometimes not even at the family or community level. This mindset tends to absolve people from the obligation to “Love Thy Neighbor” whereby one person can help another avoid inflicting great harm to himself/herself. While libertarians are correct in feeling that certain levels of government should not dictate personal habits because government is force, they are incorrect in feeling that the decisions that an individual makes regarding their own personal habits or livelihood should be left unaddressed by anyone at all. The family has the authority to talk to a person about their personal habits and way of living and in some cases this responsibility extends to members of the community such as the individual’s neighbors and co-workers. {Tragic deaths from bad personal habits such as drug abuse and irresponsible driving often stem from the same mindset as that which would fuel a libertarian society}.

Subsidiarism: Subsidiarism believes in problems being resolved at the most local level possible. People following this ideology wish to govern themselves by setting forth most of their own laws that they wish to follow in their own communities rather than always looking to the provincial or national government to run their lives and set their laws. Subsidiarists hold that the Creator is the one who is to be worshipped and respected because human beings receive their dignity from the Creator, Who made them as individuals and gave them their rights. They acknowledge that, as human beings, they are not perfect and cannot achieve total perfection, but that the faults that individual human beings show, (whether its in dealing with their fellow human beings, or in their own personal habits), can be best handled and settled at the appropriate level, whether it be the family level, the community level, the provincial level (for serious faults such as murder), or the national level (for grave crimes, such as treason). This will not bring about utopia, but it can isolate the instances of abuse and poor management of problems which arise and so keep the harm that comes as a result restricted to the lowest number of people possible. {The argument could be made that the early United States is the closest historical example of this kind of society}.

© 2012 New Agora and The Subsidiarity Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written or re-distributed without written permission from blog author.

Jun 26, 2012

Dan Liljenquist’s Senate run in Utah exposes the neo-conservative infiltration of the Tea Party

June 26th, 2012, the voters of Utah will vote for candidates to be the standard-bearers for their respective parties in the run for many federal and state offices which will take place this November. The most contested of all of these primary races will apparently be the primary race for the Republican nomination for United States Senate in which Senator Orrin G. Hatch, who has held the seat since 1977, is being challenged by Tea Party-backed state legislator Dan Liljenquist. While certain polls predict that Hatch might succeed in holding off Liljenquist and so avoid the fate which befell his former (or soon-to-be former) Senate companions Bob Bennett and Richard Lugar, Liljenquist will still be able to claim a moral victory in the primary, even if it does not include winning the Utah GOP’s nomination for United States Senate.

Liljenquist will win a moral victory in his challenge against Hatch by the fact that his candidacy has exposed the extent to which big-government neo-conservatives have sought, and in many cases succeeded, to infiltrate and claim leadership positions in the small-government-demanding Tea Party movement. Hatch has backed many laws unpopular with the Tea Party movement during his time in the Senate, among them the TARP bailout, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (which he co-sponsored with the late Senator Edward Kennedy), the No Child Left Behind Act, the Bridge to Nowhere, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailouts, Medicare expansion, raising the debt limit and many other laws of that nature. Yet, despite all of Hatch’s support in favor of these things which the Tea Party despises, there is a very large lineup of so-called “Tea Party leaders” who have backed Hatch’s re-election bid and that should be disturbing to the grassroots Tea Party organizers. The list of these supposed “Tea Party leaders” includes names such as Tea Party Express co-leader Sal Russo, two members of the neo-conservative “talk radio mafia”: Mark Levin and Sean Hannity, and, most disturbingly of all, former Alaska Governor and 2008 GOP Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. With such Tea Party-oriented names as these lining up against Liljenquist, is it any wonder he is trailing in the polls to Hatch?

Win or lose, however, what Liljenquist has done by challenging Hatch in the primary and so forcing these so-called “Tea Party leaders” to choose sides in the primary battle between himself and Hatch, is expose the neo-conservative infiltration of the so-called “Tea Party leadership positions” for all to see. This fact had originally begun to show during Congressman Ron Paul’s 2012 candidacy for President, but many tried to dismiss it as evidence of the Tea Party being infiltrated by the neo-conservatives by following Rush Limbaugh’s lead when he proclaimed “Ron Paul is NOT the Tea Party and he is not the founder of the Tea Party”. Limbaugh is wrong of course as evidenced by the fact that the Tea Party movement arose “from the ashes of Paul’s 2008 Presidential Campaign” to quote one political commentator and the evidence to support this lies in the fact that Ron Paul organized the fantastically successful “Tea Party Moneybomb” on the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party in 2007 which is the first recorded Tea Party protest. All that aside, however, no one can dispute Liljenquist’s Tea Party credentials as opposed to where Hatch has stood over the past several years and so in a primary such as this, the true Tea Party supporters would be and should be endorsing, supporting and voting for Liljenquist. As people such as Levin, Hannity, Russo and Palin have failed to support Liljenquist, this shows them for what they truly are: neo-conservative infiltrators of the Tea Party movement.

Liljenquist’s moral victory in exposing these infiltrators for the rest of the nation to see makes a victory by Hatch in the primary a pyrrhic victory for the neo-conservatives in their attempt to infiltrate the Tea Party. Their opposition to Liljenquist has shown them for who they truly are and the news should be shouted from the rooftops to the many Tea Parties across America that the Tea Party members must no longer look to these neo-conservative infiltrators for leadership, but to the people who actually stand for the true principles of the Tea Party and will back those candidates who are going to stand by those principles of limited government both at home and abroad.

© 2012 The Subsidiarity Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written or re-distributed without written permission from blog author.

Jun 16, 2012

Senator Ron Johnson: “Ron Paul has done a real service to this nation”

(The Subsidiarity Times) In an interview with talk show host Jason Lewis, United States Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin expressed high praise for Ron Paul and the work that Paul has carried out in his two presidential campaigns.

“Ron Paul, I think, has done a real service to this nation, the way he talks about liberty, the way he has energized our young people. You know, I kind of count on the youth’s natural propensity to rebel, to start rebelling about their university professors, you know, start reclaiming their freedom, it is their future that is being immorally mortgaged here” said Senator Johnson.

Jason Lewis followed the Senator’s comments with an observation about how the youth of the late 1960s and early 1970s were all about free speech and rebelling against authority in their youthful days and now that they are older and in positions of power, they are demanding total compliance of the youth of today’s world.

“The good news is,” replied Senator Johnson “and that is the example of Ron Paul, the youth is starting to get it. They will value their liberty when they are taught that it is their right, not government’s right, it is their right and they will defend it and I find that when I talk to people on the universities, Ron Paul certainly tapped into that, the Republican Party and Conservatives need to tap into the energy of the youth.”

Very telling observation from Senator Johnson, who, unlike the mainstream media, has actually noticed the thousands upon thousands of young people who greeted and cheered for Ron Paul at every speech he gave during his campaigns.

© 2012 The Subsidiarity Times. Audio courtesy of The Jason Lewis Show; re-published with permission. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written, re-transcribed or re-distributed without written permission from author.

Jun 2, 2012

Judge Napolitano: If drones had existed in 1776, Jefferson would have had any sent to spy on him by George III shot down.

(The Subsidiarity Times) In a radio interview with radio talk show host Brian Wilson of “Brian Wilson and the Afternoon Drive” on the afternoon of May 30, 2012, Judge Andrew Napolitano, speaking on the controversy surrounding the President’s assumed authority to use drones to spy on and kill people, made the comment that if drones had existed in 1776, he felt that Jefferson would have had any drones sent to spy on him shot down.

“Can you imagine if drones existed in 1776 and George III had sent one to hover around the bedroom of Monticello? Everybody that worked for Jefferson would have had muskets in their hands to shoot it down! And they would have been heroes for having done so!” said Napolitano

Wilson and Napolitano were discussing a recent New York Times article detailing some very disturbing aspects of Obama’s undeclared wars along with a piece recently written by Napolitano himself containing some very strong criticisms of Obama’s law-usurping actions in pursuing these undeclared wars. They also discussed Napolitano’s statement in his article that “Obama has a morbid fascination with his plastic killing machines” (a reference to the drones) and what the impact of drones employed domestically would have on the American populace.

“There are three hundred fifteen, three hundred sixteen local and state police departments that already have drones but they don’t have the permission from the Federal Government to fly them. So the question is, what will they do with them? I mean, will they have them hover outside people’s bedrooms? Will they hover over people’s backyards? Or will they use them to kill people?” asked Napolitano.

He then added that “I caused quite a stir when I said on Special Report with my colleague Bret Baier that, in my view, the government would have a difficult time finding a jury to convict someone who shot down a drone that hovered over his family and children in his backyard; in fact such a person might very well be viewed by the jury as a hero. I’m not suggesting this should be done and I’m certainly not advocating violence, but I am suggesting that this use of drones would really turn the Constitution on its head”.

© 2012 The Subsidiarity Times. Audio courtesy of Brian Wilson and the Afternoon Drive Show; re-published with permission. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written, re-transcribed or re-distributed without written permission from author.

Jun 1, 2012

Schiff: The real financial crash hasn’t happened yet and I think its coming soon

(New Agora & The Subsidiarity Times) In a radio interview promoting his new book The Real Crash: How to Save Yourself and Your Country, financial analyst and former candidate for the United States Senate, Peter Schiff, warned Americans that the real crash he has been warning about has not happened yet and will likely happen soon.

“I described what was going to happen to the U.S. economy when the housing bubble burst, but that was not the crash I was trying to get people to guard against; it was going to be the next wave that was going to come, that was going to follow the government’s response to the smaller crash that happened first. So I just reiterated that in this book that the actual crash, the one I have been forecasting all along, hasn’t happened yet and I think its coming soon” said Schiff to radio talk show host Brian Wilson in the May 30th, 2012 interview.

Following up Schiff’s point, Wilson then asked him “You point out in the book, you give the history of how we got here, you point out how if we continue doing what we’re doing: we’re broke, we’re in debt up to our kazonkas, we’re in hoc to China and all the rest of that, we’re printing fiat money, and all the rest of that, and we’ve talked about that a lot here on this station, including our conversation with you and if we continue doing this, we’re going to have this currency/sovereign debt crisis thats going to just blow up and rain all over the place, its going to be very bad. There is another road to take in this fork in the road and as you point out in the book, that one has got a much happier ending, its a little rocky at the beginning, but its a much happier ending, but, and here is the conundrum as I see it, the dichotomy, is that road, while it has a happier ending, has to go through hell involving politicians making decisions and doing things that they absolutely have never done in the past and, quite frankly I don’t think have any intention, of doing in the future as long as there is a can to kick down the road. So where does that leave us?”

Schiff responded with a tough, but honest assessment of the situation: “(It leaves us) between a rock and a hard place. Its not going to be easy. I mean, doing the right thing never is easy, look if it was easy, Europe would have done it. But its not easy and we have to understand that. But the alternative is actually worse, I mean yes, if we opt for the easy road we postpone the pain, but we ultimately are going to feel it and its going to be worse. Now for the politicians, they would rather have the pain tomorrow then today because tomorrow is after the election and today is before it. But for Americans who care about their country and who care about their children and their grandchildren, you know, lets get it over with! Lets do the right thing now! Lets stop making these mistakes so we can start fixing the mistakes and preparing the country for a future prosperity instead of continuing to dig ourselves into a deeper hole that is so much more difficult to get out of!”

© 2012 New Agora and The Subsidiarity Times. Audio courtesy of Brian Wilson and the Afternoon Drive Show; re-published with permission. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written, re-transcribed or re-distributed without written permission from author.

May 25, 2012

Minnesota Vikings Position by Position Analysis 2012

The Minnesota Vikings will have a very different team in 2012 from the one they had in 2011. This analysis shall break down each position for the Vikings as they go through their minicamps and head towards training camp 2012.

Locks: Christian Ponder; Joe Webb;
On The Bubble: Sage Rosenfels; McLeod Bethel-Thompson;
Analysis: Ponder and Webb showed a lot of potential last season. They each guided the team to one win each and showed flashes of brilliance while they were at it. Seeing as Ponder is the higher draft pick and slightly more polished, he will begin the season as the starter with Webb backing him up. If he falters however, look for Webb to try and take advantage of the opportunity to prove he can lead. The real battle at the quarterback position, however, will be for the No. 3 spot. Sage Rosenfels has the edge due to his experience as a veteran, but McLeod Bethel-Thompson has a strong arm and if he flashes enough, he could end up sticking around.

Locks: Adrian Peterson; Toby Gerhart;
Likely Safe: Jordan Todman;
Long Shot: Derrick Coleman;
Out: Caleb King;
Analysis: Peterson wants to come back as soon as he can, but he should take a lesson from Vikings draft choice Greg Childs about trying to come back from an injury too quickly. Peterson should definitely sit out the pre-season and since the first two games are against Indianapolis and Jacksonville, he would probably be better off just sitting those two out and making sure he is okay when Minnesota faces Super Bowl contender San Francisco. Gerhart flashed a lot last season so he should do well filling in for AP and Jordan Todman has been impressing the Vikings staff with his abilities so he will provide depth behind Gerhart and later Peterson. Caleb King’s situation which necessitated his release was sad because he flashed a lot for the Vikings in pre-season last year and could have provided more valuable depth.

On The Bubble: Ryan D’Imperio; Matt Asiata; Jerome Felton; Lex Hilliard;
Analysis: D’Imperio wasn’t flashy but showed a lot of potential last season and Asiata reportedly impressed the coaches in pre-season before getting hurt. Felton had been on the Vikings radar last season, but they were unable to bring him in until now. Lex Hilliard can play both fullback and halfback, but he never flashed much while in Miami. With a draft choice being spent on H-back Rhett Ellison, chances are the Vikings are no longer alarmed about Jim Kleinsasser’s retirement and will just see if anybody stands out. With this in mind, the guess is that Felton and Hilliard will probably not be impressive enough for the Vikings to abandon their youth movement, and so it will come down to Asiata and D’Imperio. If Asiata stays healthy, he probably gets his turn at fullback on the regular roster while D’Imperio spends the 2012 season on the practice squad refining his game.

Wide Receiver
Lock: Percy Harvin;
Likely Safe: Michael Jenkins; Jerome Simpson; Greg Childs; Jarius Wright;
On The Bubble: Devin Aromashodu; Emmanuel Arceneaux; Stephen Burton; Bryan Walters;
Long Shots: Kerry Taylor; Kamar Jorden;
Out: Kris Adams;
Analysis: Harvin carried the Vikings passing game last year almost single-handedly. He is better in the slot position though. Jenkins gets another year due to his experience and so helps stabilize the receiving corps. Simpson has wowed Christian Ponder with his abilities, so once his three game suspension is over he will probably become Ponder and Webb’s deep threat. Childs was one of the best receivers in the nation before getting hurt and if he is truly healthy again and back to form, he could surprise a lot of people. Wright provides depth behind Harvin and could develop into the same kind of weapon that Harvin is. The battle will be for the No. 6 receiver spot. Aromashodu has speed, but did not show very much consistency last season. Arceneaux was a star in the CFL, but his opportunities were limited last season. Burton is a former draft pick with good body control, but still needs some work. Walters was a pickup from the Chargers and has showed some abilities, but needs to show more in order to make his way on to the roster. The guess here is that Harvin, Jenkins, Simpson, Childs and Wright will lock up the first five spots while Arceneaux gets the No. 6 spot until Simpson comes back from suspension and then Arceneaux joins Burton on the practice squad for 2012.

Tight End
Locks: Kyle Rudolph; John Carlson;
Likely Safe: Rhett Ellison; Allen Reisner; Mickey Shuler Jr.;
Analysis: Offensive coordinator Bill Musgrave is running a tight end-heavy offense, so do not be surprised if the Vikings keep five tight ends on their active roster. Yes, you read right: FIVE. Rudolph and Carlson are tall athletic pass-catchers who will probably be Ponder and Webb’s main receiving targets in the offense next season. Ellison was drafted to fill the H-back role vacated by the retiring Jim Kleinsasser, so barring a complete breakdown in camp, Ellison will get a spot. Reisner and Shuler are both players that the Vikings staff have been very high on and with injuries always a real possibility, the team probably will want to hang on to them too just to make sure they have a deep corps of tight ends available just in case injuries strike.

Offensive Tackle
Locks: Matt Kalil;
Likely Safe: DeMarcus Love;
On The Bubble: Phil Loadholt;
Long Shots: Patrick Brown; Darrion Weems; Tyler Holmes; Levi Horn;
Out: Jose Valdez; Kevin Murphy;
Analysis: Kalil filled a huge need at left tackle, but the question now is on the right side. Loadholt struggled mightily last season and the reason he is most likely on the bubble is because many have been referring to Loadholt in a very similar fashion to the way they referred to Bryant McKinnie before his release last season. The pressure will especially be on Loadholt if DeMarcus Love continues to progress as he did last season. Overall, do not be surprised if Love beats out Loadholt for the right tackle spot if Loadholt continues to struggle. It probably will not happen, just do not be surprised if it does.

Likely Safe: Charlie Johnson; Geoff Schwartz; Joe Berger;
On The Bubble: Chris DeGeare;
Long Shot: Austin Pasztor;
Analysis: Johnson was over-matched at left tackle last year and now faces another daunting task, namely replacing All-Pro Steve Hutchinson at left guard. He is better suited for guard, but replacing an All-Pro could be the trick that dooms his Vikings tenure if he does not perform it to coaches and fans satisfaction. Berger played very well for spot duty last season, but needs to continue to play at that high level if he wants to get the right guard job. Schwartz was a smart free agent signing and a versatile player who, if he does not win a starting job, will probably stick around because he can provide depth at guard and tackle. DeGeare is the wildcard. He started at times his rookie year, but was overweight last season and so spent that year on the practice squad. If he whips himself back into shape and shows consistency, he could make a run for the right guard spot or push Johnson on the left.

Lock: John Sullivan;
Likely Safe: Brandon Fusco;
Long Shot: Quentin Saulsberry;
Analysis: Sullivan has adequately replaced the departed Matt Birk and will remain a starter, but he could be staring at his eventual replacement in the tough-nosed Fusco who showed a lot of potential in spot duty last season.

Defensive End
Locks: Jared Allen; Brian Robison; Everson Griffen;
Likely Safe: D’Aundre Reed;
On The Bubble: Anthony Jacobs; Nick Reed;
Long Shots: Eric Latimore; Ernest Owusu;
Out: Kevin Cyrille;
Analysis: Allen is coming off a year to remember career-wise and Robison proved to be an excellent replacement for the departed Ray Edwards. Griffen is one of the most athletically talented players in the league and the team has to find ways to get him on the field when their defense is playing, whether it is at defensive end or linebacker. D’Aundre Reed flashed a lot last pre-season and so has the inside job to be Allen’s main backup if he continues to play as well as he did. Jacobs and Nick Reed are intriguing prospects, but will probably end up on the practice squad due to the team’s depth on the defensive line.

Defensive Tackle
Locks: Kevin Williams; Christian Ballard;
Likely Safe: Letroy Guion; Trevor Guyton;
On The Bubble: Fred Evans;
Long Shots: Chase Baker; Tydreke Powell; Terrell Resonno;
Analysis: Despite his age, Williams is still a star for the Vikings defense and should be given the dignity John Randle never was, namely that of retiring as a Viking. Ballard flashed a lot last season and will probably be the heir when Williams calls it a career. Guion at nose tackle is an intriguing experiment, but Guyton might actually end up being the starter there because of his strength and disruptiveness. Evans has had a lot of chances to prove himself and this could be his last shot. One undrafted guy to watch is Powell because he is an actual nose tackle.

Outside Linebacker
Locks: Chad Greenway; Erin Henderson;
On The Bubble: Solomon Elimimian;
Long Shot: Tyler Nielsen
Analysis: Greenway is the star of the linebacker corps and rightly so. He can blitz, intercept passes and play well in space. If he can stay healthy, he could be staring at more Pro Bowl appearances down the road. Erin Henderson had a good year last season in his first opportunity as a starter but it remains to be seen if that was because of his improved abilities or because of former coordinator Fred Pagac’s style of defense. Solomon Elimimian was a hard hitter in the CFL, but can he translate that to the NFL? If he does, he could push Henderson for playing time. Nielsen was an undrafted free agent but has reportedly impressed the coaching staff and may get an opportunity to stick around.

Middle Linebacker
Likely Safe: Jasper Brinkley;
On The Bubble: Audie Cole; Larry Dean; Tyrone McKenzie; Marvin Mitchell;
Long Shot: Corey Paredes;
Might Be Back: E.J. Henderson
Analysis: Brinkley has played well in the middle when given the opportunity back in 2009 and 2010, but he missed all of last year with an injury and may need some time to get back into the flow of the game. That being said, he may not be ready to take over the starting job this season. Cole was a nice draft pick, but needs time to get acclimated to the pros and definitely should not be starting if the team can help it. Dean showed Jesse Tuggle-like skills last season as an undrafted free agent, but needs to prove to the team he is more then just a special teams player. McKenzie had a promising career ahead of him before suffering a bad injury. Now he has to prove he has fully recovered and can be the player he once showed flashes of being. Mitchell was a solid backup in New Orleans, but has never shown the ability to be anything but a backup. If the Vikings are worried about the position heading into training camp, do not be surprised if E.J. Henderson gets brought back on a one year deal until the Vikings can draft a replacement next season.

Locks: Antoine Winfield; Chris Cook;
Likely Safe: Josh Robinson;
On The Bubble: Chris Carr; Zackary Bowman; Asher Allen; Brandon Burton; Marcus Sherels; Nicholas Taylor;
Long Shots: Reggie Jones; Bobby Felder;
Out: C.C. Whitlock;
Analysis: This was the Vikings weakest spot last year and no wonder. The hope is that this season, by returning to the Tampa-2 scheme under new defensive coordinator Alan Williams, the team can play to the strengths of their players in the secondary. Winfield’s career is winding down and he has announced that he will retire when his contract expires, so to keep him in the best position to make a difference, the Vikings probably want to see him playing the slot mainly. Cook has to prove himself again, but he was showing flashes of being a shutdown corner before his legal troubles derailed him. Robinson was the fastest player at the NFL scouting combine and if he can turn that speed into an asset at the corner position, then he could prove to be a nice complement to Cook. Depth spots will be the name of the battle in pre-season. Carr played well as a nickel and dime back with the Ravens, but needs to prove he can still do so here. Bowman looked to have a promising career with the Bears before imploding. To stick here he must re-discover the form that made him a starter on the Bears defense. Allen has had plenty of opportunities to prove himself and has not done so adequately enough. This could be his last shot. Burton is a tall corner with upside who got playing time in a very unfavorable situation last year. He has a longer leash then some of the others here, but still needs to improve his game. Sherels was a pre-season star last year and contributed some big plays on special teams during the regular season, but due to the newcomers and the fact that Sherels needs some more time to refine his defensive playing skills, he may end up on the practice squad until Winfield retires. Taylor is an intriguing prospect as a former basketball star, but he may be too raw to contribute right away. He probably joins Sherels on the practice squad and gets another year under his belt before seriously challenging for a role on the regular defense.

Lock: Harrison Smith
Likely Safe: Mistral Raymond; Robert Blanton; Jamarca Sanford;
On The Bubble: Eric Frampton;
Long Shot: Andrew Sendejo;
Analysis: Smith fills a gaping hole in the secondary that has not been adequately filled since Darren Sharper’s departure. He can play either the strong or free safety positions and probably will find out which position he will play at based on who wins the job to start alongside him. Raymond is probably the frontrunner to start alongside Smith because of his athletic abilities. He played well at free safety last season and seemed to have a knack for finding the ball in turnover situations. Blanton is a converted corner who played with Smith in college and has impressed the coaching staff with his abilities, but he may be a bit too raw to start at this point. Sanford is the de facto starter alongside Smith heading into training camp and he will get a chance. While he wasn’t overly impressive in a starting role last season, Sanford did show a knack for coming up with turnovers and if he continues that trend he could win the spot just by that uncanny ability. Frampton will probably stick around because he is such a solid special teams player.

Special Teams
Locks: Chris Kluwe; Cullen Loeffler;
On The Bubble: Blair Walsh;
Out: Ryan Longwell;
Analysis: This has been the team’s true strength the last few seasons, but it probably will be tested this year. Loeffler is a welcome sight back from his injury because his replacement last season, Matt Katula, was awful. Kluwe, the Twitter warrior, is as solid as they get at punter (and, by the way, has every right to voice his opinions under the United States Constitution’s First Amendment). The question will be at kicker. The Vikings are to be commended for having Ryan Longwell’s best interests at heart in their decision to release him long enough ahead of training camp for him to find a new team, but is rookie Blair Walsh ready? That is a question that must be haunting the Vikings. If Walsh falters and Longwell is still on the free agent market, do not be surprised if the Vikings do what they did for so many years with Gary Anderson and invite Longwell back one year at a time until they find a long-term replacement.

Final Analysis
Head Coach Leslie Frazier and new General Manager Rick Spielman wanted a younger team and they have got one. How fast will this team jell? Only time will tell. It was probably wise for the team to do a longer training camp because of all the new players on the roster, but it remains to be seen if it will be enough to get them to seven or eight wins in the regular season. Do not expect playoffs this year, but the team will probably show flashes of greater things to come.

Week 1 Starter Predictions
Quarterback: Christian Ponder
Runningback: Toby Gerhart (Adrian Peterson upon return from injury)
Fullback: Matt Asiata
Deep Threat Receiver: Greg Childs (Jerome Simpson upon return from suspension)
Possession Receiver: Michael Jenkins
Slot Receiver: Percy Harvin
Left Tackle: Matt Kalil
Left Guard: Charlie Johnson
Center: John Sullivan
Right Guard: Geoff Schwartz
Right Tackle: Phil Loadholt
H-back: Rhett Ellison
No.1 Tight End: Kyle Rudolph
No. 2 Tight End: John Carlson

Right Defensive End: Jared Allen
Under Tackle: Kevin Williams
Nose Tackle: Trevor Guyton
Left Defensive End: Brian Robison
Weakside Linebacker: Erin Henderson
Middle Linebacker: Jasper Brinkley (E.J. Henderson if he is re-signed)
Strongside Linebacker: Chad Greenway
Pass Rushing Linebacker: Everson Griffen
No. 1 Cornerback: Chris Cook
No.2 Cornerback: Josh Robinson
Nickel Cornerback: Antoine Winfield
Dime Cornerback: Chris Carr
Strong Safety: Harrison Smith
Free Safety: Mistral Raymond

Placekicker: Blair Walsh
Punter: Chris Kluwe
Long Snapper: Cullen Loeffler

© 2012 The Subsidiarity Times. All rights reserved. This material may not be re-published, re-broadcast, re-written or re-distributed without written permission from blog author.