Saturday, October 12, 2013

US Government Default on Debt: What It Means To American Economy

What does a government shutdown mean to YOU - PERSONALLY? 

WASHINGTON — A prolonged government shutdown — followed by a potential default on the federal debt — and the consequences of which would be dire (to say the least). Here is just a sampling of what can and may happen on an economic scale:

(1) Financial markets would start to decline in value as many companies and individual bondholders have holdings within the United States Government.

(2) As stocks and mutual funds lose financial value, investors begin to stop investing. The longer the upheaval lasts in financial markets, the more investors begin to “sell off” securities in an effort to avoid even greater losses. As investor apprehension and the mass exodus grows away from financial markets, the closer a complete collapse of the financial system.

(3) The lower stock prices will also send the rapid devaluation of company-held stock into a free fall motion. As investors and company owners stop investing, employment will also grind to a halt and – quite possibly - send the unemployment rate higher only to further slow already sluggish, tepid economic growth.

(4) While a shutdown of a few days might do little damage, a longer standoff would suck money out of the economy and spread anxiety among consumers and businesses in a way that is likely to hold back economic activity.

(5) A default on the federal debt, which may occur within 30 days without congressional action, would be much worse. Failing to raise the debt ceiling would require the government, a major driver of growth, to cut spending by about a third, potentially forcing delays in Social Security checks, military pay and payments to doctors.

(6) There are other risks, too. On Oct. 17, the Treasury is to ask investors for $120 billion in loans. But if investors grow nervous about whether the United States will be able to pay them back, they are likely to demand higher interest rates, which would cause rates to spike throughout the financial system, leading to more expensive mortgages, auto loans and credit-card bills. As these interest rates begin to climb, spending will decrease as more expensive money costs will deter more people from parting with more of their money supply.

(7) U.S. bonds have long been a key pin of the global financial system. Failure of the government to pay on those debts would greatly damage U.S. credibility nationally and abroad.

(8) As spending slows, recession will loom more likely.

(9) American Businesses, who have cash reserves, will become less inclined to invest and hire.

(10) As financial uncertainty mounts, this emotional response will add to the economic uncertainty and will become a vicious, unrelenting feeling which may add to even more instability to the economy and destabilize economic growth. Positive emotion has long been a key driver of the American Economy and is gauged by the Consumer Price Index.

(11) The stock market, as measured by the Standard & Poor’s 500 index, was down four of five days last week, and the U.S. dollar also fell. More relevant, the cost of a type of insurance that investors use to protect themselves against default in U.S. government bonds has rocketed in recent days, suggesting the chances of default are increasing.

(12) Additionally, if the American Government faces to pay its obligations, contractors and builders will lose confidence in their government to be paid their amounts due. As this continues, more government jobs will become less desirable and could – theoretically – induce its own problems who would risk nonpayment for materials and labor invested in roads, bridges, buildings, etc.

(13) For example, the closure of national parks and museums may hurt hotels, restaurants and the people who work for them. The process of getting approval for a home loan could take much more time, slowing a housing recovery that is one of the few bright spots in the economy.

(14) A prolonged shutdown could trim economic growth in the final three months of the year by up to 1.4 percentage points. Under that scenario, the economy would hardly expand at all — at a time that is usually one of the most important economic periods of the year. Employment and income, overall for all citizens would be negatively affected.

(15) The Treasury has warned that it will have only about $30 billion in cash on hand by the middle of next month, and estimates are it will run out of money by the end of the month. If it is low on cash, the government is likely to hold back on payments until enough money comes in by way of tax revenue, according to a Treasury Department inspector general report. Social Security checks, veterans’ benefits and active-duty military pay could be delayed two weeks, according to estimates. Such delays would not only disrupt lives but also cause an economic contraction because that money often flows directly into the economy through grocery shopping, car sales and staple purchases.

(16) As a worldwide consequence, the United States currency could be devalued so much that other countries could refuse to accept the currency as payment. If this were to happen, (the loss of the United States currency as the World’s Reserve Currency) worldwide exports from the United States would be slashed significantly and could altogether nearly stop. If this were to happen, the United States would be vastly negatively affected by orders of scope and magnitude and theoretically could cause a worldwide Second Great Depression. If an economic depression were to happen, it would be nearly impossible from which to recover.

(17) There is simply not enough gold and silver to sustain the world’s economy. Even if investors were to invest in this as an “exchangeable currency” it may be priced so high that for the average United States citizen (or world citizen) that these precious metals could lose total value as there would be too little supply to satisfy demand.

(18) Since the United States dollar is the cornerstone of worldwide economic stability, losing complete value as a facilitator of trade, would send the entire worldwide economy into a possible economic “perfect storm” whereby the purchasing power of consumers – the world over – would lose the ability to trade freely and prosper.

(19) In conclusion, this whole economic system is based on 2 major things: First, credibility of the currency. Second, high consumer and investor confidence. Once these two issues are undermined across the nation and the world, it is almost impossible to retract and the consequences of which would be immeasurably dire.  Finally, an economic collapse would be 5 - 6x greater than the Economic Crash of 2007-08.

Reporting for the News,

Michael Hathman

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Vice President Dick Cheney, the Iraq War & the Military Industrial Complex

President Dwight Eisenhower warned Americans about the "Military Industrial Complex" in his farewell speech leaving as President of the United States in 1961.  Apparently, President Eisenhower had perfect vision looking back to World War II and presiding over the Cold War. This is not at all surprising in the least as the old aphorism goes: "Hindsight is always 20/20 vision."  What does that mean?  Well, we should learn from our past.  In fact, it is our past that directs the very decisions we make about our future.  When we don't learn from our past, we infer another old adage that states, "History is bound to repeat itself."

Let me explain...
Just prior to World War II, British Prime Minister Chamberlain exclaimed, "Peace in our time!" thinking he was averting a Second World War with Germany when Hitler started "annexing" parts of Europe. Appeasement was the policy of the day.  Thinking that would be the end of the aggression, the Western powers fooled themselves into a false sense of security thinking that peace would finally win over war.

Meanwhile, in direct contravention of International Law and the Versailles Peace Treaty, Germany started rearming and restarting a vast military industrial complex by contracting with multiple factories to make various armaments, artillery, tanks, planes and guns for the upcoming war.  Hitler and the industrial military complex (which was still in power after Germany's defeat in World War I) now had the chance to become rich providing massive military capability - made with the latest and best technology of the day.  And, as further assurance the military complex would have security knowing that the Nazi War Machine would provide an excellent profitability for an indefinite time period - by engaging in massive warfare and with an eye towards military conquest.

Eisenhower plainly saw this "alliance" between the Nazis and the powerful owners of manufacturing.  This alliance was still very much in place after World War 1 and had not been dismantled.  In fact, WWI did not see the dismantling of this power bloc until the Nuremberg Trials after World War II.  This power alliance posed the greatest single threat to threat to political stability and democracy in Germany.  The money, power and warfare makes for incredible wealth for a nation.  And, the power players who manufacture the weapons of war will constantly use their massive wealth and political power to put pressure on politicians to make and manufacture those weapons and to step up that production in war time.

This massively influential institution is required to be fully armed and functional and must be available upon a moment's notice.  But, there has never been a time in all of human history has any nation been known to dump so many resources into military matters as the United States of America.

Eisenhower saw plainly the effects that such a massive industrial military complex would have on the nation and the world.  He saw that this complex should be maintained and used more as a peace keeping format than one of aggression as implemented by the Nazi Empire.  This political, wealthy and powerful complex would have significant influence in American politics and the governing of our nation.  Eisenhower was right to be worried about this connection as it could lead the Republic towards acts of aggression and away from more peaceful missions of diplomacy.

Thus, under the rule of Nazism, the idea of the "industrial military complex" was born.  Interestingly enough, two books were written on the matter - before and during World War II: Fascism and Big Business by Daniel Guerin and Behemoth: The Structure and Practice of National Socialism by Franz Leopold Neumann.  (See: Wikipedia)

Fast forward to President Dwight Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the public.  This historic speech alludes to some of the matters that President Eisenhower was witness to during his tenure as Supreme Leader of the Allied Forces and as President of the United States ("POTUS").

Fast forward to September 11, 2001 - Terrorists murder millions in the WTC incidents on President Bush's watch.

Approximately a month later, Bush and Cheney invade Afghanistan to wipe out Al qaeda.

I am certain that Cheney told Bush that it would be in the best interest of the Bush Legacy to attack Iraq, depose of Saddam as President of Iraq and link the government of Iraq to weapons of mass destruction and Al qaeda.  Indeed, the Bush Administration went along with the plan and years later the public finds out that Iraq never had any such weapons and that there was no connection found between Hussein and the terrorists.

Halliburton (A Dick Cheney Company) would be one of the contractors given approximately $138 billion dollars in contracts to do work in Iraq.  Cheney's wealth skyrocketed as a result.

Conclusion: If war is so profitable, it will be nearly impossible to keep the peace.  You can most certainly bet that the industrial military complex will be lobbying for war as those contracts are worth TENS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS.  The American people have a responsibility to separate the politicians from making certain decisions wherein there is a conflict of interest.  Regardless of their position in government, our republic must do everything possible to steer clear of decisions that are of monetary benefit to those politicians who make decisions in areas of government that can and will benefit them monetarily.  Failure to do so can only lead to mass corruption and could possibly even threaten the very well being of the Republic.


Michael Hathman

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Is Racism In the Republican Party Out of Control?

Is racism still well and alive?  As Sarah Palin might remark in the positive, "You betcha!"

You would think in 2013 that racism would have died a terrible death years ago.  We even have a President of the United States of America who is a member of the minority (soon to be the majority) of people of color.  And, a more intelligent and sophisticated person would care less about the race of the President.  But, this apparently is not the case.  It seems we have seen some of the most racist, outrageous and unbecoming conduct of Americans I have ever witnessed in recent American history.

It is as if America has slipped back, in large part, to the 1960's with regard to some racist, hate mongering ever seen.  And the placards seem to support the very same racist placards seen held by opponents of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's.  Take a look:

These are some of the most unfortunate and tragic photos of our time in recent political history.  And, many of these racists are of the extreme and fanatical Republican right.  Indeed, the Republican philosophy has always touted the following:

- The "Political Party of Christians"

- The Party of "Family Values"

- The Party of the Pro-Life Movement

Well, here's the problem:  

- REAL Christians don't champion racism because it is an Antichrist belief and most certainly in diametric opposition to "Love thy Neighbor".

- Family Values includes respect for others - their rights and their well being.  Racism does not support any worthwhile values at all.

- Racism is not consistent with any "Pro-Life Movement" philosophy.

I know that many Republicans are not racists.  But, there are Republicans who are good and decent people and they need to stand up to those racists in their own party and completely repudiate - if necessary even greatly embarrass - these racist individuals.  The aforementioned signs only serve to completely destroy the Republican Party and their chances of winning elections.

While this author subscribes and supports many of conservative values, I cannot, do not and will never support any political party that supports or condones racist behavior or the distribution of any type of racist media or placards displayed at rallies and Republican events.

It is my greatest hope that ALL AMERICANS will take a stand and strongly condemn racism in every form and fashion.

Reporting for Politico Now,
Michael Hathman

Congress Earns FFF Rating - Republicans Bear Brunt of Grade

Congress has earned a "FFF" Rating from a concerned citizen.

As America's least popular organization, the "approval rating" is reaching a point at being nearly non-existent.  Furthermore, the political infighting has reached a level of ridiculousness never seen before in all of American history and the nonsense that continues to go on is blatantly wrong and appalling at best.  At worst, Congress has been able to accomplish little-to-nothing other than cause mass chaos and political jackassery!

Based on a "PASS" and "FAIL" basis, here is how Congress rates on the following issues:

1.  Starting with the most basic premise of all: Congress was elected to do ONE thing: Move the United States of America in a progressive and meaningful manner towards prosperity.  In its primary mission, Congress has egregiously earned the following grade: FAIL.

2.  On the issue of Benghazi, the real fault lies with the terrorists who assailed and murdered Americans at the complex.  Republican leaders have blamed the Obama Administration with the responsibility and have completely ignored the fact that the murderers were actually the ones responsible and have had "hearings" on the matter which have accomplished nothing and have not done anything to bring these criminals to justice.  Missing the whole point, Congressional Republicans earn a grade of FAIL.

3.  On the IRS matter of "targeting" conservative groups for "political standing" it was the IRS' fault with regard to their own operations.  Apparently the law clearly indicates that groups are to receive special status ONLY IF they EXCLUSIVELY promote the social good.  The IRS acted outside the law and decided to interpret the word, "EXCLUSIVELY" to mean "PRIMARILY" in the context of the law.  Congressional Republicans have completely missed the point of this interpretation of the law.  As Lawrence O'Donnell of MSNBC stated, the two words have completely different meanings and therein lies the matter.  On this point, Congressional Republicans earn a grade of FAIL.

4.  On the issue of Obamacare (which is now the law of the land) have completely wasted precious Congressional time to repeal this law over 30(+) times to date.  Instead of trying to take steps to "improve the law" as it stands, Republicans have decided repeal is a better alternative to the Republican healthcare plan (which does not exist).  Congress has a duty to support any program which supports and sustains the health of all Americans.  Additionally, Congressional Republicans would rather shut down the government to the detriment of all Americans rather than compromise to take steps to promote American prosperity.  On this point, Congressional Republicans earn a grade of FAIL.

5.  On the issue of the Sequester, which is the Republican plan for austerity measures is completely and totally contrary to their mission to help progress America towards complete and total prosperity.  The austerity measures put in place by the European Parliament has failed miserably.  The sequester has done nothing to promote prosperity in America and does everything to further damage the income of all Americans across the board.  As a matter of fact, the sequester actually makes cuts to important programs such as Head Start, school lunches and a variety of research and development programs that sustains America's world lead with regard to technological improvement, innovation and medical advancement.  Also, the sequester does nothing to further advance the modernization of aging American infrastructure.  Economics have proven - time-and-time-again - that prosperity raises tax revenues, reduces deficit spending and improves the quality of life for the United States as a whole.  On this matter, Congressional Republicans earn a grade of FAIL.

6.  On the issue of political obstructionism - which again is completely in opposition to the mission of Congress - to promote and improve American prosperity, Congressional Republicans earn a grade of FAIL.

7.  On the voter suppression by passing draconian even more restrictive voting laws: Congressional Republicans are disfranchising the voting rights of minorities, the youth, the middle and lower classes as well as less fortunate Americans.  The opportunity to vote and to do so more often is an American right regardless of race or the likelihood that a voter will vote for a certain party.  By limiting (and cutting off) the voices of "undesirable" American voters, Republicans can better assure their chances of winning more elections.  These criminal and draconian voting suppression laws are simply meant to oppose the very spirit of liberty our Founding Fathers supported at their own mortal risk (and died supporting) and such laws undermine the Republic.  On this matter, Republicans massively FAIL.

8.  On the matter of racism spouted by RACIST BIGOTRY  Republicans have failed to address at rallies and protests and political gatherings extraordinarily egregious speech and posters calling the president and his supporters names and using pictorials to exhibit this outrageous and very, very stupid behavior.  Republicans FAIL

In order to illustrate this point, I have included these extraordinarily offensive images to hopefully incite some sort of response from readers:

 Oh, ya - all these signs: FAIL, FAIL, FAIL!

Reporting for Politico Now
Michael Hathman

Friday, March 8, 2013

Michael Hathman Explains Political Jokes Are Still Popular

Political jokes are always fun to tell.  Whether it be a political party, a politician, idea, platform or whatever related to anything and everything political, the joke probably exists.

I have added a few of my own:

Joke #1:  How many Republicans does it take to change out a public street light?  None.  They would refuse to change the light bulb on the grounds that the treasury can't afford the labor to change the light bulb or run the electricity.

Joke #2: How many Republicans are in charge of the Republican Party?  Good question.  The most obvious answer is that all of them in charge - of their own agenda.

Joke #3: The descriptions of government using the example of a cow.
Capitalism: The owner uses the cow and sells the milk for a profit.
Fascism: The fascists shoot the owner and steals the cow and sells the milk.
Communism: The communists shoot the owner, take the cow and distributes the milk using a bureaucracy.
Socialism: The socialists take the cow from the owner and sells the milk to the public.

Joke #4: Politics and Newspapers Explained...

1. The Wall Street Journal is read by the people who run the country.

2. The New York Times is read by people who think they run the country.
3. The Washington Post is read by people who think they should run the country.
4. USA Today is read by people who think they ought to run the country but don't really understand the Washington Post. They do, however like the smog statistics shown in pie charts.
5. The Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind running the country, if they could spare the time, and if they didn't have to leave L.A. to do it.
6. The Boston Globe is read by people whose parents used to run the country.
7. The New York Daily News is read by people who aren't too sure who's running the country, and don't really care as long as they can get a seat on the train.
8. The New York Post is read by people who don't care who's running the country either, as long as they do something really scandalous, preferably while intoxicated.
9. The San Francisco Chronicle is read by people who aren't sure there is a country, or that anyone is running it; but whoever it is, they oppose all that they stand for. There are occasional exceptions if the leaders are handicapped minority, feministic atheist dwarfs, who also happen to be illegal aliens from ANY country or galaxy as long as they are democrats.
10. The Miami Herald is read by people who are running another country, but need the baseball scores.
Joke #5: Difference Between Republicans and Democrats
A Republican and a Democrat were walking down the street when they came to a homeless person. The Republican gave the homeless person his business card and told him to come to his business for a job. He then took twenty dollars out of his pocket and gave it to the homeless person.
The Democrat was very impressed, and when they came to another homeless person, he decided to help. He walked over to the homeless person and gave him directions to the welfare office. He then reached into the Republican's pocket and gave the homeless person fifty dollars.

Now you understand the difference between Republicans and Democrats.
More Jokes Coming Forthwith
Michael Hathman

Sunday, February 24, 2013

Michael Hathman Explains How RFID Could Ultimately Limit All Types of Freedoms

RFID technology has offered many different benefits to our world such as tracking, information management and even the ability to transact business without a credit card or money.  RFID implants almost "wipe out" the need to carry a wallet or a purse for monetary purposes.

But can RFID technology actually pose a threat to the liberties of the people - especially within the framework of a working republic if such a technology were to become widely accepted or mandated by government - especially if the RFID chip were used as the "primary tool" for financial transactions?

I believe that the answer to this question is a resounding "yes" especially for those people who believe in the right to free speech, assembly and the freedom to practice religion as they see so see fit.  RFID could ultimately be made to become an "enemy tool" to the freedoms of persons who believe in a free society where free speech is meant to protected, where politics can be freely discussed, and where a person can freely choose to exercise his preferred brand of religion.

Interesting to note, currently all hard money in circulation is approximately 3.0% of all money currently in circulation.  If the RFID chip is to be the standard tool for all financial transactions - this would put the liberties of the people at extraordinary risk.  Chances are, the bankers would be in control monetarily.  If the bankers don't like any particular person carrying a chip, they could, theoretically, the bankers could simply "deactivate" the chip.

Indeed, any person who would be implanted with a chip would be at the mercy of the super elite.  Any person who challenges the power of the elite could quickly find themselves in economic dire straights with a deactivated chip.  Indeed, any person who challenges the policy holders could find themselves without any meaningful power to challenge this type of establishment or political establishment.

It is my opinion that if such a chip were ultimately widely used and an end was put to the use of hard money cash, the RFID chip would present the greatest single threat to the liberties of the free world.

Reporting for Political News,
Michael Hathman

Friday, February 22, 2013

Michael Hathman Explains the Sequester: Truth, Lies & Reality

The Sequester is another move by the Republican Party to gain political points and to try to outdo President Obama on the budget talks.

Over a trillion dollars have already been cut from the budget but the Republicans simply don't seem to be satisfied that it is ever enough.

While "Smaller Government & More Freedom" is a mainstay Republican concept, so is the idea of more "austerity planning" which threatens to weaken an already fragile American Economy and undo the growth made since the Crash of 2007.  But Republicans don't seem to be all that concerned.

No doubt that there is a real need to balance the budget and most American citizens would most certainly agree with this sort of planning.  There is no doubt that when dealing with budgeting human lives will tend to be impacted and it is usually the liberal political spectrum that is concerned with limiting the damage as much as possible when it comes to responsible fiscal management.

The United States Congress will need to find a balance between good fiscal management and also limiting the negative human impact as much as possible.  Republicans seem not to be concerned at all with human suffering but more so with the bottom line and monetary management solely and this reflects in the general attitudinal disposition of both Republican politicians and those who tend to vote Republican most of the time.

Indeed, many Independent voters feel that there must be a balance which must be struck between human suffering and proper fiscal management.

Friday, January 4, 2013

Michael Hathman: Gun Control & Freedom

The Second Amendment was included in the United States Constitution by our Founding Fathers.  This inclusion was one of the greatest and most important considering the historical facts of the time.

The Revolutionary War was caused due to British oppression of its British citizenry who resided in the Thirteen Colonies of North America.  The power-hungry British government imposed unfair taxes and treatment of its citizens.  Yes, even in a parliamentarian government tyranny can arise.  And, due to the British government's insistence that Colonialists pay these taxes (while having no representation in the British Parliament) American Colonialists became resentful of the unfair treatment and tyranny imposed on them by their own government which was meant to serve their interests.

Soon, the British passed several oppressive laws, decrees, demands and declarations forbidding certain actions in which the American Colonialists may engage including British gun control laws.

Infuriated with the provisions and demands the British government were making against the Colonies, many of the citizens became infuriated to the point of taking up arms should the British Government make any move to send British troops to enforce their will against the citizenry (which did happen).

At the time, the population of the American Colonies was merely 2,500,000 combined.  Soon, the conflict came to a head in the American Revolution wherein 50,000 Patriots lost their lives for the establishment of what would become the United States of America.

The Founding Fathers gambled and risked everything - including their own property and lives on the American Revolution.  They knew that if they lost, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin - just to name a few - would be hanged for treason against the Crown.

With the aid of the French, America won her right to independence.  Upon reflection of all that had happened, the Framers of the Constitution felt that in light of the recent British oppression, oppressive gun control laws, occupation and war, citizens MUST have a right to bear arms especially in the event their government became tyrannical and abusive to its citizens in the future.  So, the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution was included in the Bill of Rights (the first 10 Amendments of the Constitution).

So far, during the 200 years of America's existence, the government has not become so corrupt, abusive and tyrannical as had been experienced under British dominance.  Although, there have been some issues that have been hotly debated as of late, the American People must have a say as to how their government behaves and acts towards its own populace.  Abraham Lincoln once mentioned, "Government of the People, by the People, for the People."  Indeed, much like the Founding Fathers, Abraham Lincoln knew that government had a role to serve the people.  He also knew the Biblical principle that, "A house divided against itself cannot stand."  (Matt 12:25)

Interesting to note, Abraham Lincoln did not oppose the the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution.  In fact, after the Civil War, nothing was mentioned about gun control.  It is supposed, looking back to what a government can do by force of arms, Lincoln knew the people had a right to self-defense in every capacity wherein tyranny may be a problem.  Indeed, the Civil War was not about slavery per se but about States Rights versus Federal Rights and the issue as to whether any State of the Union had a "right" to secede from the Union.  The Civil War settled that question.

Now, America has seen gun control enacted in other nation states where dictators of the worst kind seized control.  See gun control video on USSR.  See gun control video on Nazi Germany.

The Founding Fathers had this to say with regard to guns:

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself.  They are the American People's liberty teeth and keystone under independence...  From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that insure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable... the very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference -- they deserve a place of honor with all that is good." - George Washington

"On every question of the construction of the Constitution, let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." He further states, "Let no free man ever be debarred the use of arms."  - Thomas Jefferson

"The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."  Declaring further, "The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.  A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."  - James Madison

"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradatino that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense?  Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress?  If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"  Further stating, "We should not forget the spark that ignited the American Revolution was caused by the British attempt to confiscate firearms of the colonists." - Patrick Henry

Wherein, we must ask ourselves as a free society, does it profit the American People to disarm themselves.  It is by being armed that the government is kept in clear check in its power by an armed people who are dedicated to the principles and ideals of freedom and independence from tyranny of every kind.  When the people disarm, they do so at their own risk and to their own foolish choices.  Indeed, a people who cares not to defend their freedom, even with firearms, do not deserve to be a "free people" deserving of any rights under any construct whatsoever.

We are now considering banning firearms with certain dispensing capabilities and rounds - these would be considered "fighting weapons" or "weapons of war".  Indeed, how would an American armed with only pistols fare against a military as equipped as the United States military which answers - not to the American People - but to the GOVERNMENT of the American People.  Here is what our "free" society is up against:


370,000 Air Force Personnel
1, 366, 000 Armed Forces
$5,000,000,000,000 of imported arms
380,000 Navy Personnel
1,500,000 Other Personnel
16,000 Tanks

We have not even considered: the vast number of guns and ammunition, warships, carriers, airplanes, drones, missles, hand grenades, special warfare devices, etc.

This is a great military power against which the American People have very little protection - even with the best, most advanced fighting guns available on the consumer market today.  And, even though the military is only considered, this also does not include any armaments that policing agencies throughout our nation also have nor the advanced weaponry well-funded criminal organizations also have at their disposal.  While I personally believe that there is not currently a "great" threat to the well being of the American People, there is always the potential for abuse, tyranny and, yes, even terror (especially by criminals or religious radicals).  The American People must be ready to meet any challenge posed by any person, groups of persons (including government) when - and if necessary - by force of arms.

Support the Second Amendment.  Your freedom may depend upon it.

Reporting for the News,
Michael Hathman