Even before the June primary election, it was obvious a Terry Branstad/Chet Culver contest would mainly consist of sarcastic, distorted, personal, accurate, and not-so-accurate attacks.

Despite serving five terms as governor combined and a term as lieutenant governor and two terms as secretary of state respectively, neither 2010 candidate has published detailed plans on how he would lead the efforts to fix the problems that plague Iowa: spending, taxation, education, and governance.

So it is no surprise the two took their "fried eggs" and "cooked books" televised warfare live to the stage of the Orpheum Theatre in Sioux City on Tuesday, September 14.

It has been discovered by real-estate professionals at Think Big Work Small Daily (ThinkBigWorkSmall.com) that banks are refusing to modify mortgage loans because it is far more profitable to let mortgages default so that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), using taxpayer money, can reimburse the banks and financial institutions for their losses under special agreements struck during the "financial crisis."

A recent analysis of IndyMac's new owner, One West Bank, exposed the financial benefit to One West in letting mortgages go all the way to foreclosure rather than modifying the loans or allowing short sales of the properties -- selling the property for less than the amount owed on the loan.

If you still believe that the current 111th Congress is representative of the American people, then you exist in stubborn denial, likely as a victim of the most deliberately dumbed-down mainstream media in U.S. history. But you skate on that excuse only so far. After a while, when every instinct in your civic being tells you something is dreadfully wrong with what is passing for news each day -- makes no difference whether via the networks (ABC, NBC, or CBS) or cable news (CNN, MSNBC, or Fox) -- it's time to trust yourself and seek alternative news sources. All mainstream news is designed to keep you blaming the "other party," living in fear, and taking no personal responsibility.

If you are gullible enough to believe the yellow journalism that passes for news anymore, then you really have no one to blame but yourself, especially for ignoring what your instincts are correctly trying to tell you -- that the mainstream media is basically the public-relations agency for the govcorp (the unholy alliance of international mega-corporations composed of energy, food, finance, communications, insurance, and pharmaceuticals; elected officials; banksters; government bureaucrats; union bosses; large not-for-profit foundations; Democratic/Republican party leadership; and the cabal of lawyers loyal to the bar before the U.S. Constitution) that is seizing America's resources, and with it, our liberty.

Anyone with a a hint of common sense knows you can't spend (borrow and consume) your way out of debt into financial recovery, let alone prosperity. Secondly, the most recent jobs report indicated that of the 431,000 new jobs created via the stimulus bailout, 390,000 were government jobs, mostly for the Census Bureau, leaving a paltry 41,000 new jobs created in the private sector, which is the only sector that pays its own way. Furthermore, most of the 390,000 employed in the Census Bureau will be laid off this summer, because those jobs are coming to an end. This is hardly recovery.

Sooner rather than later, each of us will have make a decision about his/her national identity as an American. The question will be whether, as an American sovereign, you are willing to relinquish your status in favor of a merging with other sovereign nations, beginning with Mexico and Canada most likely, to form an entirely new form of international/global governance; hence the term "new world order."

This choice of national identity is no longer science fiction. The media has finally brought this grave issue into mainstream focus, and the evidence points conclusively to just such an eventuality. Every day, America is drawn further into the global financial meltdown through Washington's policies of intervention, financial aid, and our own out-of-control borrowing that forces taxpayers' participation on whatever level our international creditors dictate.

The decade-long travesty of justice that assailed local dentist Dr. David Botsko because of an out-of-control Davenport Civil Rights Commission (DCRC) is finally over thanks to a ruling by the Iowa Civil Rights Commission on Friday, May 7, dismissing all charges against him. Iowans can be reassured that when due process is actually followed, testimonies actually read, and evidence actually considered and weighed against the rule of law, justice does prevail, at least when the Iowa Civil Rights Commission is adjudicating. Davenport residents, however, have no such assurances where the DCRC is concerned.

The biggest thing individuals can do is decide which type of governance you support. And I don't mean which political party you advocate. Either you believe in a large, centralized entity that controls top-down, with unlimited powers, or you believe in a small, decentralized entity that controls from the bottom up, with limited jurisdiction. This decision is the only one that really matters regarding America's future. One thing is certain: Both Republicans and Democrats are on the side of top-down unlimited powers and jurisdiction.

The U.S. Bill of Rights emphasizes the latter, with the first 10 amendments clearly indicating what the government is limited to, not what it has the authority to bestow. In other words, the first 10 amendments state "shall nots" in enumerating the tasks of government. Its purpose is a singular mandate to protect the "unalienable rights of each individual," rights that already existed before the creation of a government to protect them.

(Editor's note: This package also includes the sidebars "The More You Make, The More They Take" and "The 'Contract' and 'Article 8 of the Articles of Freedom the Works of Continental Congress 2009' on the Income Tax.")

Your  Servant GovernmentWere our federal and state constitutions written to limit and control the actions of the people or limit and control the actions of the government? The Iowa Constitution reads: "All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the people, and they have the right, at all times, to alter or reform the same, whenever the public good may require it."

What denotes "public good" is no doubt the seed of discord between those who would see government take or borrow resources to provide for those that cannot provide for themselves and those who would see government ensure the protection of personal property so the people may provide for themselves and each other.

I remember watching The Matrix for the first time and feeling horrified at the prospect of waking up to find myself in an alternate reality that I had no notion existed until that moment. More importantly, the new reality was the reality, reducing my previous so-called life to one long dream invented by others for purposes I could not fathom.

After 9/11, many Americans have been slowly waking up to extremely harsh realities that none of us could have conceived of a decade before. Many voters had an inkling that politicians lied, and most knew that special interests were at the head of the line for funding. But few could imagine that legislators would deliberately undermine the sovereign status of individual Americans with an unprecedented expansion of government, the exponential growth of the national debt, and ever-increasing taxation without representation - all for the purpose of eventually merging American production with that of foreign nations to create a single centralized economy. It is the stuff of movies ... and nightmares.

It is time for Americans to understand a key political distinction between "progressives" as they relate to both Democrats and Republicans. Progressives are individuals from both parties who commonly believe in social improvement through government action. Traditionally, progressives are thought to be liberal or Democrat in nature. This is not accurate. The first progressives were actually a splinter group from the Republican Party in 1912. Today, it can be argued that most of our legislators are progressive Democrats and progressive Republicans, evidenced by the exhaustive amount of legislation from both sides of the aisle that perpetuates government's ever-growing involvement in American lives.

The notion that a progressive agenda is strictly that of liberals, Democrats, or socialists is a misconception in desperate need of correction. The past century has shown us that any salient differences between the two parties have only narrowed with each new administration and/or legislature.

Pages