Lehigh Valley Conservative

The political apologetics of today fails to address the complete scope of the argument, and when addressing a particular issue, they will not defend the source of, nor the why of, the discussion, consequently the position taken will be weak.  Epistemological issues show’s that rival theories rest not on an intellectual demand but on emotive, volitional, or speculative considerations. 

The piece meal approach misses the connection of theology and God’s law to the issue itself, often-creating contradictions within the argument.  There is no systematic development of an issue when arguing a conservative position.  The single issue will be viewed as the item to be argued rather then a piece of information that fits within a social make-up that defends a social order. 

Disjointed positions and arguments seem to be more prevalent today only because of the seriousness of the problems and ignorance of the people at this moment in history.  But never the less we must view these problems and single issues with the development of a systematic unity when addressing the problem and/or issue.

Here is a politician’s view of one critical issue where he is ready to give way to something that is not in the interest of the citizen and has not been since its inception.  Rather then view the solution within the system of “Biblical Law and Constitutionality” he chooses to make his decision based on one item —-Congress would be far worse in running the Federal Reserve and we would not stand a chance against Congress to stop inflation.  As if, we (the citizen) stood a chance to do something and/or change anything the FED did, a private banking enterprise run by private bankers.

On page 22 of Patrick Toomey’s book “The Road to Prosperity” we have this:

 “Since the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 all power to control the supply of money in America has rested with the Federal Reserve Bank (the FED).  Placing so much power in the hands of un-elected, and essentially unaccountable, officials would normally give great offense to my generally democratic instincts.  But I have served in Congress and I am convinced that we would be far worse shape if we let those folks run the money machines.  It is hard enough to keep the FED from inflating; we wouldn’t stand a chance against Congress.” 
   
Regardless of any of his other positions, this position alone will and is sinking the ship of state and his position should have been one of eliminating the FED and correcting Congressional faults.  Because if the moneychangers want a one-world money system we will have one and the USA will become part of a one-world government and you can kiss liberty and freedom good-by.  The Federal Reserve System is as evil as our President’s system he is trying to put in place. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/currency/6152204/UN-wants-new-global-currency-to-replace-dollar.html

Comment from above article/link:

 ”I’ve been talking about this and things like it for years. If you aren’t aware of internationalist creeping, then you have your head in the sand. And that’s the nice way of saying it.
This isn’t news, its an announcement of intent and world government will be more corrupt than the Chinese government.”

And if you can’t see that—–WE SHALL SEE shortly, maybe before November 2010 elections.