Washington & Lincolns Thanksgiving Day Proclamations
By the PRESIDENT of the United States Of America
WHEREAS it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favour; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me “to recommend to the people of the United States a DAY OF PUBLICK THANKSGIVING and PRAYER, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:”
NOW THEREFORE, I do recommend and assign THURSDAY, the TWENTY-SIXTH DAY of NOVEMBER next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed;– for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish Constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted;– for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge;– and, in general, for all the great and various favours which He has been pleased to confer upon us.
And also, that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions;– to enable us all, whether in publick or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shewn kindness unto us); and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.
GIVEN under my hand, at the city of New-York, the third day of October, in the year of our Lord, one thousand seven hundred and eighty-nine.
(signed) G. Washington
Lincolns Thanksgiving Day Proclamation
The year that is drawing toward its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften the heart which is habitually insensible to the everwatchful providence of almighty God.
In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign states to invite and provoke their aggressions, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere, except in the theater of military conflict; while that theater has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union.
Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defense have not arrested the plow, the shuttle, or the ship; the ax has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well of iron and coal as of the precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased, notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege, and the battlefield, and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom.
No human counsel hath devised, nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the most high God, who while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy.
It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently, and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American people. I do, therefore, invite my fellow-citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next as a day of thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens. And I recommend to them that, while offering up the ascriptions justly due to him for such singular deliverances and blessings, they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to his tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners, or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the interposition of the almighty hand to heal the wounds of the nation, and to restore it, as soon as may be consistent with the Divine purposes, to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquillity, and union.
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United Stated States to be affixed.
PRESIDENT LINCOLN’S THANKSGIVING DAY PROCLAMATION, OCTOBER 3, 1863.
The Real Story of Thanksgiving
RUSH: Now, the real story of Thanksgiving: “On August 1, 1620, the Mayflower set sail. It carried a total of 102 passengers, including forty Pilgrims led by William Bradford. On the journey, Bradford set up an agreement, a contract, that established just and equal laws for all members of the new community, irrespective of their religious beliefs. Where did the revolutionary ideas expressed in the Mayflower Compact come from? From the Bible,” and this is what’s not taught. This is what’s left out. “The Pilgrims were a people completely steeped in the lessons of the Old and New Testaments. They looked to the ancient Israelites for their example. And, because of the biblical precedents set forth in Scripture, they never doubted that their experiment would work. But this was no pleasure cruise, friends. The journey to the New World was a long and arduous one. And when the Pilgrims landed in New England in November, they found, according to Bradford’s detailed journal, a cold, barren, desolate wilderness. There were no friends to greet them, he wrote. There were no houses to shelter them. There were no inns where they could refresh themselves. And the sacrifice they had made for freedom was just beginning. During the first winter, half the Pilgrims — including Bradford’s own wife — died of either starvation, sickness, or exposure.
“When spring finally came, Indians taught the settlers how to plant corn, fish for cod and skin beavers for coats. Life improved for the Pilgrims, but they did not yet prosper! This is important to understand because this is where modern American history lessons often end. Thanksgiving is actually explained in some textbooks as a holiday for which the Pilgrims gave thanks to the Indians for saving their lives, rather than as a devout expression of gratitude grounded in the tradition of both the Old and New Testaments. Here is the part that has been omitted: The original contract the Pilgrims had entered into with their merchant-sponsors in London called for everything they produced to go into a common store, and each member of the community was entitled to one common share. All of the land they cleared and the houses they built belong to the community as well.” They were collectivists! Now, “Bradford, who had become the new governor of the colony, recognized that this form of collectivism was as costly and destructive to the Pilgrims as that first harsh winter, which had taken so many lives.
“He decided to take bold action. Bradford assigned a plot of land to each family to work and manage, thus turning loose the power of the marketplace. … Long before Karl Marx was even born, the Pilgrims had discovered and experimented with what could only be described as socialism. And what happened? It didn’t work! Surprise, surprise, huh? What Bradford and his community found was that the most creative and industrious people had no incentive to work any harder than anyone else, unless they could utilize the power of personal motivation! But while most of the rest of the world has been experimenting with socialism for well over a hundred years — trying to refine it, perfect it, and re-invent it — the Pilgrims decided early on to scrap it permanently. What Bradford wrote about this social experiment should be in every schoolchild’s history lesson,” every kid gets. “If it were, we might prevent much needless suffering in the future.” Here’s what he wrote: “‘The experience that we had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years…that by taking away property, and bringing community into a common wealth, would make them happy and flourishing — as if they were wiser than God,’ Bradford wrote.
“‘For this community [so far as it was] was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For young men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without any recompense…that was thought injustice.'” That was thought injustice. “Do you hear what he was saying, ladies and gentlemen? The Pilgrims found that people could not be expected to do their best work without incentive. So what did Bradford’s community try next? They unharnessed the power of good old free enterprise by invoking the undergirding capitalistic principle of private property. Every family was assigned its own plot of land to work and permitted to market its own crops and products. And what was the result?” ‘This had very good success,’ wrote Bradford, “for it made all hands industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.” Bradford doesn’t sound like much of a Clintonite, does he? Is it possible that supply-side economics could have existed before the 1980s? … In no time, the Pilgrims found they had more food than they could eat themselves. … So they set up trading posts and exchanged goods with the Indians.
“The profits allowed them to pay off their debts to the merchants in London. And the success and prosperity of the Plymouth settlement attracted more Europeans and began what came to be known as the ‘Great Puritan Migration.'” Now, aside from this program, have you heard this before? Is this “being taught to children — and if not, why not? I mean, is there a more important lesson one could derive from the Pilgrim experience than this?” What if Bill and Hillary Clinton had been exposed to these lessons in school? Do you realize what we face in next year’s election is the equivalent of people who want to set up these original collectivists communes that didn’t work, with nobody having incentive to do anything except get on the government dole somehow because the people running the government want that kind of power. So the Pilgrims decided to thank God for all of their good fortune. And that’s Thanksgiving. And read George Washington’s first Thanksgiving address and count the number of times God is mentioned and how many times he’s thanked. None of this is taught today. It should be. Have a happy Thanksgiving, folks. You deserve it. Do what you can to be happy, and especially do what you can to be thankful, because in this country you have more reasons than you’ve ever stopped to consider.
President-elect Barack Obama’s Raw Deal of investment–read more government spending, more deficits and more taxes– will result in a recession lasting upwards of 24 to 30 months.
Obama’s answer to every problem is a new or bigger government program and more and more bailouts.
Government spending takes time to implement– a year or more before it has any significant impact on the economy.
After two years of recession and higher unemployment rates the economy will be heading into a hyperinflation as a direct result of bailouts creating money or credit in unprecedented amounts–too many dollars chasing too few goods and services.
When this happens the Federal Reserve will slam on the brakes and institute a contractionary monetary policy with higher and higher interest rates.
In summary Obama Raw Deal consists of stomping on the gas pedal of government spending and leaving it there for two years followed by two years of slamming on the brakes by raising taxes.
The Federal Reserve will accommodate the Raw Deal approach until inflation rears its ugly head.
Then the Federal Reserve will also slam on the brakes and raise interest rates.
The election of 2012 will result in some real and needed change and a conservative/libertarian Presidential candidate to stop BO’s Raw Deal–the audacity of socialism–a wrecked economy!
The message will be restoring the American Dream with:
A FairTax or flat income tax
Lower capital gains taxes if there is flat income tax.
Lower business income taxes if there is flat income tax.
Repeal of higher gasoline taxes and repeal of any cap & trade laws
Cutting government spending
Eliminating many Federal Government Departments
Securing the borders and stopping all illegal immigration and the criminal aliens removal(CAR) and deportation to country of origin.
Stiff fines and imprisonment for any business or union that employs criminal aliens or has members that are criminal aliens
Background Articles and Videos
Jolting’ the Economy
By Thomas Sowell
“…The Great Depression of the 1930s was in fact the longest-lasting of all our depressions.
Government policy in the 1930s was another bipartisan disaster. Despite a myth that Herbert Hoover was a “do nothing” president, he was the first President of the United States to step in to try to put the economy back on track.
With the passing years, it has increasingly been recognized that what FDR did was largely a further extension of what Hoover had done. Where Hoover made things worse, FDR made them much worse.
Herbert Hoover did what Barack Obama is proposing to do. Hoover raised taxes on high-income people and put restrictions on international trade, in order to try to save American jobs. It didn’t work then and it is not likely to work now.
Perhaps the most disastrous of all the counterproductive policies of the federal government was the National Industrial Recovery Act under FDR, which set out to do exactly what the politicians today want to do — micro-manage businesses.
Fortunately, the Supreme Court declared that Act unconstitutional, sparing the country an even bigger disaster. …”
Obama’s Pro-Growth Economic Team? A liberal-conservative consensus?
By Larry Kudlow
“…Here’s my thought on his team. Summers, Geithner, and Romer will all recommend no tax hikes in a recession. Maybe for Keynesian reasons; maybe a nod to supply-siders. Obama talked about a liberal-conservative consensus. But what’s especially encouraging is the appointment of Ms. Romer, who easily could serve as CEA head in a Republican administration (just like Geithner could have been McCain’s Treasury man).
About a year and half ago economist Don Luskin sent me a long article about taxes by Christine and her husband David Romer, who were writing for the National Bureau of Economic Research. From the introduction: “The resulting estimates indicate that tax increases are highly contractionary. . . . The large effect stems in considerable part form a powerful negative effect of tax increases on investment.”
Later in the article, the Romers write: “In short, tax increases appear to have a very large, sustained, and highly significant negative impact on output.”
That’s what makes the Romer appointment so interesting. In fact, there is no question that Obama’s economic team is right of center. All three are market-oriented. They’re also pro-free-trade. Hopefully Summers and Geithner maintain the Robert Rubin King Dollar policy of the Clinton years. And if Ms. Romer can stop tax hikes, that will help the greenback even more.
At a minimum, both Romer and Geithner could have served under Gerald Ford or George H. W. Bush. But they may be more pro-growth than that. Romer’s study of the damage of tax hikes on the economy and her emphasis on investment are right on target. In a New York Times story, a former Treasury colleague of Geithner’s says, “he’s no liberal.”As for Summers, while he has been mau-maued by Democratic feminists and some of the unions, he is a tough, clear-headed thinker who has for years tried to merge Keynesian and supply-side policies. No mean feat.
Now here’s the rub: all this talk about a $700 billion stimulus package. I hate to be the one to pull the plug, but government cannot spend our way into prosperity. The wish list of Democratic spending initiatives includes short-term tax rebates, massive new transportation bills, even more education money, exotic green-technology spending, a big-government embrace of health care, and heaps of cash for UAW-Detroit carmakers. None of that will stimulate economic growth. …”
OBAMA’s TAX PLAN – Penn & Teller and gang return to comment on Barack Obama’s socialist plans to turn the United States into a Marxist wasteland! ** FEATURING Plumber, Joe Wurzelbacher. *** Vett Barack Obama, NOT Joe the Plumber! ***
Gerald Celente on Fox Business predicting revolution, riots and civil unrest in America
Five most laughable words Obama has spoken as president-elect
By Michelle Malkin
There’s a lot to choose from, I know. But these five snort-worthy — no, gag-worthy — words from Barack Obama’s radio address over the weekend will be hard to beat:
Live on YouTube–It is Saturday Night Live–From The Bankrupt Congress.
New game in town–Bailout or Bankruptcy!
To play the game you must Take a hike–walk to Washington D.C.–and walk home if you lose!
How much your company or union contributes to the political campaign of the Democratic Party determines the outcome–bailout or bankruptcy.
Congressional payolla on parade.
Congress raises taxes on successful businesses and subsidizes or bailouts failing businesses–Obamanomics.
A hell of a way to run an economy.
Since the American people pay for the bailout in higher taxes and inflation– they want no more bailouts– the United States is broke.
The American elites just ignore the American people and propose the Raw Deal–recession followed by hyperinflation and call it progressive, I call it socialism.
Background Articles and Videos
On the Skids: Are U.S. Automakers Running Out of Time?
Lawrence G. Hrebiniak: The Mismanagement of America, Inc.
Auto industry planning car pool to Washington
After being skewered by Congress and lampooned on NBC’s “Saturday Night Live,” the CEOs of Detroit’s three automakers may end up making their return trip to Washington by car as they seek a federal bailout.
Correspondence with a Presumed Proponent of Auto Bailouts
Posted by Daniel Ikenson
“…I am opposed to interventions of any kind. The Wall Street bailout and the subsequent partial nationalization of what were private U.S. financial institutions is in essence a penalty on prudent behavior and a subsidy for risk taking. It is patently unfair and grievously unwise to use taxpayer dollars to insulate people or institutions from the consequences of their actions, as it is unfair and unwise to deprive risk takers of the full fruits of their efforts.
The story is no different in the auto industry. Yes, the industry employs thousands of workers and there are many jobs in related industries that depend on a healthy (or at least functioning) auto industry. I am sympathetic to your suggestion that auto’s woes are at least in some part attributable to the credit freeze, which is a response to, among other things, circumstances beyond its control. But there’s much more to the picture than the one you seem to want to paint of the auto industry as an innocent victim.
The fact is that much of the Big Three’s problem is self-made. The credit crunch and the contraction of demand is just the latest dark cloud, and a problem that affects all industries, not just autos. Thus, if there is a bailout for Detroit, where, how, and why do we draw the line to exclude other manufacturers, home builders, coal miners, and masseuses, who are all suffering from the same contraction in demand caused in part by the credit crunch? Don’t tell me we should bail everyone out. For starters, we can’t afford that.
Detroit’s problems predate the financial meltdown. Management and labor, together, consigned the Big Three to a future of troubles when ridiculously liberal work rules that flew in the face of basic economics were agreed upon, requiring management to pay workers at 90% of their salaries when they were laid off. The “Cadillac Platter” of health and retirement benefits granted to the UAW also dramatically raised the cost of producing vehicles at unionized auto plants in the United States. And let’s not forget about the far-in-excess-of-average manufacturing wages that auto workers “won” through concessions by management over the years. Management agreed to all of these conditions — and labor pushed them — because both sides assumed that the U.S. governent would come to the rescue (that the industry was too big to fail) when the chickens came home to roost over this inefficient, uncompetitive cost structure. That, to my mind, reflects labor’s and management’s greed. …”
Citibail: Another in an endless series of doomed, late-night bailouts; 1 am Eastern update: Citicorp to receive $306 billion fed backing + $20 billion more from Crap Sandwich
By Michelle Malkin • November 23, 2008 10:45 PM
“…Crap Sandwich 2.0 is morphing again.
We’ve gone from the toxic assets purchase plan to the capital injection plan to the throw-it-all-against-the-wall-and-whatever-the-hell-sticks-sticks non-plan plan. In the latest late-night bailout plot — you smelled it coming, didn’t you — the feds are colluding with Citigroup to engineer another “rescue” that will not work.
Let’s repeat that not-so-bold prediction: It ain’t gonna work.
Unless by “work” you mean opening the floodgates to more and more and more bailouts of businesses that deserve to fail.
Mamas & The Papas-My heart stood still / Glad to be unhappy
Background Articles and Videos
California Dreamin': Songs of The Mamas and Papas
California Dreamin Video Story
The Mamas & the Papas
The Mamas & the Papas (credited as The Mama’s and the Papa’s on the debut album cover) were a vocal group of the 1960s. The group recorded and performed from 1965 to 1968 with a short reunion in 1971, releasing five albums and ten hit singles.
Judy Collins & Joan Baez – Oh Had I A Golden Thread
Oh, Had I a Golden Thread – Pete Seeger / Judy Collins
JUDY COLLINS – In My Life (1966)
Judy Collins – In My Life
JUDY COLLINS – “Someday Soon” HD 1969
Judy Collins – Chelsea Morning
Judy Collins – Since You’ve Asked
Judy Collins – John Riley
Kisses Sweeter Than Wine – Theodore Bikel, J
Judy Collins- Mr. Tambourine Man
Judy Collins sings Bob Dylan – Like a Rolling Stone
Judy Collins sings Bob Dylan – Gotta Serve Somebody
Judy Collins – Daddy You’ve Been On My Mind
Judy Collins – Anathea – Newport Folk Festival
JUDY COLLINS – “Golden Apples Of The Sun” 1976 HD
Judy Collins & Leonard Cohen – Suzanne
Judy Collins & Leonard Cohen – That’s No Way to Say Goodbye
Judy Collins & Joan Baez – Oh Had I A Golden Thread
JUDY COLLINS ~ Mr Tamborine Man
JUDY COLLINS ~ Pack Up Your Sorrows
Judy Collins – Pass It On
Judy Collins – Someday Soon 1969
Judy Collins – Turn Turn Turn
Judy Collins – From A Distance
Amazing Grace (without choir) by Judy Collins
JUDY COLLINS – “Amazing Grace” 1976
Judy Collins – a cappella – With God on Our Side – by Dylan
Judy Collins – Bird On A Wire
Judy Collins – Song for Bernadette
Judy Collins Kris Kristofferson – “Me and Bobby McGee”
Judy Collins – The Blizzard 1991 (Colorado Song)
Judy Collins- Who Knows Where the Time Goes?
Judy Collins – My Father
Judy Collins – Gaelic Lullaby
Judy Collins – “Sailor’s Life”
Judy Collins – Memory (Musical Cats) 1982
JUDY COLLINS – “Someday Soon” Sing-along 1988
Judy Collins – Both Sides Now
Judy Collins – Send In The Clowns
JUDY COLLINS – “Fortune Of Soldiers” 1988
JUDY COLLINS – “Dreaming” 1988
Judy Collins – “The Blizzard” 1989
Judy Collins – Over the Rainbow
Judy Collins – Fires of Eden
JUDY COLLINS – “Wings Of Angels” 2002
JUDY COLLINS – “Someday Soon” 1996
JUDY COLLINS – “Cherry Tree Carol” 1996
JUDY COLLINS – “Silver Bells” Christmas Carol 1996
JUDY COLLINS – “The First Noel” 1996
JUDY COLLINS – “Silent Night” 1996
JUDY COLLINS – “John Denver Medley” 2005 Take Me Home, Country Roads
Judy Collins – Kingdom Come (Tribute to 9/11 Firemen)
Judy Collins – Born to the Breed
Judy Collins – “Farewell to Tarwathie”
Diamonds and Rust Judy and Joan at Newport Folk Festival 2009
Judy Collins – Test of Time
Judy Collins – Cherry Tree
Judy Collins – Let It Be
Amazing Grace – Judy Collins
Background Articles and Videos
“…Judith Marjorie Collins (born May 1, 1939 in Seattle, Washington) is an American folk and standards singer and songwriter, known for the stunning purity of her soprano; for her eclectic tastes in the material she records (which has included folk, showtunes, pop, and rock and roll); and for her social activism.
I.O.U.S.A. Bonus Reel: A $53 Trillion Federal Financial Hole
Our Country is Broke – How You Can Fix It
I.O.U.S.A.: Byte-Sized – The 30 Minute Version
David Walker: Nobody is going to Bailout America
Why Wont The Bail Out Work? MUST SEE!
Neal Boortz Explain the FAIRTAX
CNN Glen Beck -Dirty Secrets and Real Truth about US Debt & Economy
Congress should forget about bailing out any business including the auto companies.
Congress should also forget about any new spending programs.
The United States is broke!
Both political parties are not leveling with the American people and are in deep denial about the nature and magnitude of the problem–the Federal government is in a financial hole–it is broke.
The Federal Government has been spending beyond the means of the American people to pay!
Time for a tax revolt and the implementation of The FairTax!
The FairTax addresses all our economic problems from the foundation up.
Save The Economy Now: The FairTax
Rescue the homeowner and you rescue the economy When the federal government ends the destructive practice of withholding taxes from paychecks millions of Americans will see a huge boost in their take home pay–enough to save their homes and pay mortgage bills.
A $10 trillion dollar stimulus program funded with private investments
Economists say the FairTax will attract literally trillions of dollars into our economy from offshore. That means new jobs right here in America, higher wages and a stock market that goes up instead of down.
Bring Back the “Made in America” Label
The FairTax ends the retail price disadvantage American producers suffer under the income tax system. The income tax system adds up to 20% to the price of American products and that chases our manufacturing and service industries offshore. The FairTax gives American companies–and jobs–a fair chance.
Our economy works when wage earners prosper
The FairTax makes our economy works again and restores consumer confidence by putting more money in wage earners’ pockets. It attacks the problem at the base of the pyramid where average people live–not at the pinnacle. It ends the tax disincentives to upward mobility, savings, investment and capital formation.
Bankruptcy Questions : What Is Chapter 11 Bankruptcy?
Background Articles and Videos
US Government Immorality Will Lead to Bankruptcy
IOUSA * IOUSA Movie * IOUSA Movie Trailer * Patrick Creadon
(1 of 7) David M. Walker speaks to NACo conference attendees
(2 of 7) David M. Walker speaks to NACo conference attendees
(3 of 7) David M. Walker speaks to NACo conference attendees
(4 of 7) David M. Walker speaks to NACo conference attendees
(5 of 7) David M. Walker speaks to NACo conference attendees
(6 of 7) David M. Walker speaks to NACo conference attendees
(7 of 7) David M. Walker speaks to NACo conference attendees
America’s Financial Future (Part 1)
America’s Financial Future (Part 2)
/20/08 Lou Dobbs & David Walker on the Economy
First, Why We Need a Fair Tax
Second, Fair Tax Questions and Advantages
“The FairTax is a proposed change to the federal tax laws of the United States that would replace all federal income taxes with a single national retail sales tax. The plan has been introduced into the United States Congress as the Fair Tax Act (H.R. 25/S. 1025). The tax would be levied once at the point of purchase on all new goods and services for personal consumption. The proposal also calls for a monthly payment to all family households of lawful U.S. residents as an advance rebate, or ‘prebate’, of tax on purchases up to the poverty level. The sales tax rate, as defined in the legislation, is 23 percent of the total payment including the tax ($23 of every $100 spent in total—calculated similar to income taxes). This would be equivalent to a 30 percent traditional U.S. sales tax ($23 on top of every $77 spent before taxes).
With the rebate taken into consideration, the FairTax would be progressive on consumption, but would also be regressive on income at higher income levels (as consumption falls as a percentage of income). Opponents argue this would accordingly decrease the tax burden on high income earners and increase it on the middle class. Supporters contend that the plan would decrease tax burdens by broadening the tax base, effectively taxing wealth, and increasing purchasing power. The plan’s supporters also argue that a consumption tax would have a positive effect on savings and investment, that it would ease tax compliance, and that the tax would result in increased economic growth, incentives for international business to locate in the U.S., and increased U.S. competitiveness in international trade. Opponents contend that a consumption tax of this size would be extremely difficult to collect, and would lead to pervasive tax evasion. They also argue that the proposed sales tax rate would raise less revenue than the current tax system, leading to an increased budget deficit.
In recent years, a tax reform movement has formed behind the FairTax proposal. Increased support was created after talk radio personality Neal Boortz and Georgia Congressman John Linder published The FairTax Book in 2005 and additional visibility was gained in the 2008 presidential campaign. A number of congressional committees have heard testimony on the bill; however, it has not moved from committee since its introduction in 1999 and has yet to have any effect on the tax system. The plan is expected to increase cost transparency for funding the federal government, and supporters believe it would have positive effects on civil liberties, the environment, and advantages with taxing illegal activity and illegal immigrants. There are concerns regarding the proposed repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment, removal of tax deduction incentives, transition effects on after-tax savings, effect to the income tax industry, incentives on credit use, and the loss of tax advantages to state and local bonds. …”
“The United States total public debt, commonly called the national debt, or U.S. government debt, is the amount of money owed by the United States federal government to holders of U.S. debt instruments. Debt held by the public is all federal debt held by states, corporations, individuals, and foreign governments, but does not include intragovernmental debt obligations or debt held in the Social Security Trust Fund. Types of securities held by the public include, but are not limited to, Treasury Bills, Notes, Bonds, TIPS, United States Savings Bonds, and State and Local Government Series securities.
As of November 19, 2008, the total U.S. federal debt was $10.6 trillion., with about $37,316 per capita (that is, per U.S. resident). Of this amount, debt held by the public was roughly $6.3 trillion. Adding unfunded Medicaid, Social Security, Medicare, veterans’ pensions, and similar obligations, this figure rises to a total of $59.1 trillion, or $516,348 per household. In 2007, the public debt was 36.9 percent of GDP , with a total debt of 65.5 percent of GDP. The CIA ranked the total percentage as 27th in the world.
Public debt is the amount owed by the government to its creditors, whether they are nationals or foreigners. External debt is the debt of all sectors of the economy (public and private), owed to foreigners. In the U.S., foreign ownership of the public debt is a significant part of the nation’s external debt. The Bureau of the Public Debt, a division of the United States Department of the Treasury, calculates the amount of money owed by the national government on a daily basis.
The total debt has increased over $500 billion each year since FY 2003, considering both budgeted and non-budgeted spending. The annual US budget deficit declined from $318 billion in 2005 to $162 billion in 2007, but increased to $455 billion in 2008.Since FY 2002, the deficit reported by the media has been significantly less than the annual change in the debt, which surpassed $1 trillion for the first time in FY 2008.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO), Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the U.S. Treasury Department have warned that debt levels will increase dramatically relative to historical levels, due primarily to mandatory expenditures for programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and interest. Mandatory expenditures are projected to exceed federal tax revenues sometime between 2030 and 2040 if reforms are not undertaken. Further, benefits under entitlement programs will exceed government income by over $40 trillion over the next 75 years. The severity of the measures necessary to address this challenge increases the longer such changes are delayed. These organizations have stated that the government’s current fiscal path is “unsustainable.”
GOP bailout stooge to Cavuto: “It’s not your money”
By Michelle Malkin
“…Behold the hubris of an entrenched Republican congressman shilling for the auto bailout. His name is Rep. Joe Knollenberg (R-Michigan) and you’ll be happy to know that he lost his re-election bid.
Attention, Republicans obsessed with “re-branding” the party and crafting appealing messages to win back voters. Here’s your textbook example of how not to act and what not to say if you want to restore credibility to conservatism: …”
President Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address was delivered November 19, 1863 on the battlefield near Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
President Lincoln Gettysburg Address
Lincoln At Gettysburg
Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address
Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address – by Ken Burns
Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead who struggled here have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
“…The Battle of Gettysburg (July 1–3, 1863), fought in and around the town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, as part of the Gettysburg Campaign, was the battle with the largest number of casualties in the American Civil War and is frequently cited as the war’s turning point. Union Maj. Gen. George Gordon Meade’s Army of the Potomac defeated attacks by Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia, ending Lee’s invasion of the North.
Following his success at Chancellorsville in May 1863, Lee led his army through the Shenandoah Valley for his second invasion of the North, hoping to reach as far as Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, or even Philadelphia, and to influence Northern politicians to give up their prosecution of the war. Prodded by President Abraham Lincoln, Maj. Gen. Joseph Hooker moved his army in pursuit, but was relieved just three days before the battle and replaced by Meade.
The two armies began to collide at Gettysburg on July 1, 1863, as Lee urgently concentrated his forces there. Low ridges to the northwest of town were defended initially by a Union cavalry division, which was soon reinforced with two corps of Union infantry. However, two large Confederate corps assaulted them from the northwest and north, collapsing the hastily developed Union lines, sending the defenders retreating through the streets of town to the hills just to the south.
On the second day of battle, most of both armies had assembled. The Union line was laid out in a defensive formation resembling a fishhook. Lee launched a heavy assault on the Union left flank, and fierce fighting raged at Little Round Top, the Wheatfield, Devil’s Den, and the Peach Orchard. On the Union right, demonstrations escalated into full-scale assaults on Culp’s Hill and Cemetery Hill. Across the battlefield, despite significant losses, the Union defenders held their lines.
On the third day of battle, July 3, fighting resumed on Culp’s Hill, and cavalry battles raged to the east and south, but the main event was a dramatic infantry assault by 12,500 Confederates against the center of the Union line on Cemetery Ridge. Pickett’s Charge was repulsed by Union rifle and artillery fire at great losses to the Confederate army. Lee led his army on a torturous retreat back to Virginia. Between 46,000 and 51,000 Americans were casualties in the three-day battle. That November, President Lincoln used the dedication ceremony for the Gettysburg National Cemetery to honor the fallen and redefine the purpose of the war in his historic Gettysburg Address.
“…The cemetery was dedicated on November 19, 1863. The main speaker at the ceremony was Edward Everett, but it was here that Abraham Lincoln delivered his most famous speech, the Gettysburg Address. The night before, Lincoln slept in Wills’s house on the main square in Gettysburg, which is now a landmark administered by the National Park Service. The cemetery was completed in March 1864 with the last of 3,512 Union dead were reburied. It became a National Cemetery on May 1, 1872, when control was transferred to the War Department. It is currently administered by the National Park Service as part of Gettysburg National Military Park and contains the remains of over 6,000 individuals who served in a number of American wars, from the Mexican-American War to the present day.
3,512 Union soldiers were buried in the cemetery; of these, 979 are unknown. …”
“The Gettysburg Address is a speech by U.S. President Abraham Lincoln and one of the most quoted speeches in United States history. It was delivered at the dedication of the Soldiers’ National Cemetery in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, on the afternoon of Thursday, November 19, 1863, during the American Civil War, four and a half months after the Union armies defeated those of the Confederacy at the decisive Battle of Gettysburg.
Abraham Lincoln’s carefully crafted address, secondary to other presentations that day, came to be regarded as one of the greatest speeches in American history. In just over two minutes, Lincoln invoked the principles of human equality espoused by the Declaration of Independence and redefined the Civil War as a struggle not merely for the Union, but as “a new birth of freedom” that would bring true equality to all of its citizens, and that would also create a unified nation in which states’ rights were no longer dominant.
Beginning with the now-iconic phrase “Four score and seven years ago…”, Lincoln referred to the events of the Civil War and described the ceremony at Gettysburg as an opportunity not only to consecrate the grounds of a cemetery, but also to dedicate the living to the struggle to ensure that “government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth”.
Despite the speech’s prominent place in the history and popular culture of the United States, the exact wording of the speech is disputed. The five known manuscripts of the Gettysburg Address differ in a number of details and also differ from contemporary newspaper reprints of the speech. …”
“Bruce Frederick Joseph Springsteen (born September 23, 1949), also known for his famous nickname The Boss, is an American songwriter, singer and guitarist. He has recorded and toured with the E Street Band. Springsteen is widely known for his brand of heartland rock infused with pop hooks, poetic lyrics, and Americana sentiments centered around his native New Jersey.
Springsteen’s recordings have tended to alternate between commercially accessible rock albums and somber folk-oriented works. Much of his status stems from the concerts and marathon shows in which he and the E Street Band present intense ballads, rousing anthems, and party rock and roll songs, amongst which he intersperses long, whimsical or deeply emotional stories.
His most famous albums, Born to Run and Born in the U.S.A., epitomize his penchant for finding grandeur in the struggles of daily life. He has gradually become identified with progressive politics. He is also noted for his support of various relief and rebuilding efforts in New Jersey and elsewhere, and for his response to the September 11, 2001, attacks, on which his album The Rising reflects.
He has earned numerous awards for his work, including eighteen Grammy Awards and an Academy Award, and continues to have a strong global fan base. He has sold over 65 million albums in the U.S, and 120 million worldwide. …”
Peter Schiff – No More Bailouts – Let The American Auto Makers Fail – Failed Management
Jim Rogers: Inflation down the road
No More Bailouts!!!
The Democratic Party and Barack Obama received sigificant campaign contributions from the UAW, both money and time from the UAW memership.
Union members were encouraged to vote for Barack Obama and Democratic Party members running for office.
The union does not want to force the auto companies into bankruptcy that would result in the cancellation of the labor contracts and a new contract with lower wage levels and benefits.
The UAW is now pressing the Democratic Party and President-Elect Obama for a bailout of the big US auto companies.
I am against any and all subsidies and bailouts.
The Federal government should not favor either winners or losers by intervening in the market place.
Any politician of either party that votes for bailouts will not be getting my vote in the future.
Any company that obtains a bailout no matter what form it takes will not be getting my business.
More and more bailouts will result in inflation which is a tax increase on all the income and wealth of the American people.
No more taxes!
No more bailouts!
Let markets work and businesses fail and succeed–the American Way!
Listen to the American people–no more bailouts!
You’re Going To Destroy A Worldwide Economy! Ron Paul
Andy Rooney on Prices
Brother, Can You Spare A Dime?
Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?” lyrics by Yip Harburg, music by Jay Gorney (1931)
They used to tell me I was building a dream, and so I followed the mob,
When there was earth to plow, or guns to bear, I was always there right on the job.
They used to tell me I was building a dream, with peace and glory ahead,
Why should I be standing in line, just waiting for bread?
Once I built a railroad, I made it run, made it race against time.
Once I built a railroad; now it’s done. Brother, can you spare a dime?
Once I built a tower, up to the sun, brick, and rivet, and lime;
Once I built a tower, now it’s done. Brother, can you spare a dime?
Once in khaki suits, gee we looked swell,
Full of that Yankee Doodly Dum,
Half a million boots went slogging through Hell,
And I was the kid with the drum!
Say, don’t you remember, they called me Al; it was Al all the time.
Why don’t you remember, I’m your pal? Buddy, can you spare a dime?
Once in khaki suits, gee we looked swell,
Full of that Yankee Doodly Dum,
Half a million boots went slogging through Hell,
And I was the kid with the drum!
Say, don’t you remember, they called me Al; it was Al all the time.
Say, don’t you remember, I’m your pal? Buddy, can you spare a dime?
“Annie” (1982) – Tomorrow
Background Articles and Videos
Annie (1982) – You’re Never Fully Dressed Without A Smile
Jackie Mason ’08 Vlog 59 Bailing Out General Motors
Schwarzenegger and Kyl on Auto Bailout: Blame the Unions
Peter Schiff – Obamanomics Will Accelerate An American Economic Collapse Into A Great Depression
Democrats working on bailout plan that includes ownership stake in Detroit automakers
by Ken Thomas | The Associated Press
“…Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., are developing legislation that would let the auto industry tap into the $700 billion Wall Street rescue money, approved by Congress last month, to fund their business operations.
General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC are lobbying Congress to approve the aid, citing an economic downturn that has choked off auto sales, frozen credit and made them vulnerable. GM, the nation’s largest automaker, posted a $2.5 billion quarterly loss Friday and has predicted it could run out of cash by the end of the year without government help.
“The reason why the autos are in this challenge is because of the meltdown in the financial market,” said Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm. “They were on a restructuring path — yes, they were challenged — but this has utterly kicked them in the gut and is strangling them because they can’t borrow money.”
The legislation could set up a congressional showdown with the White House during President George W. Bush’s final days in office. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., are hoping for quick passage of the auto bailout during a postelection session that begins Monday.
Bush is open to helping the industry, the White House says, but the administration has expressed reservations about using the bailout money beyond the financial sector. …”
“…In 1960, the Big 3 sold about 90% of all cars purchased in the U.S; today they sell about 47%.That is, most cars bought by Americans this year were not made by the Big 3. And this share loss has accelerated over the past decade.(Also note that Michigan has already lost more than half of its auto manufacturing jobs in the last ten years, so lots of current Big 3 jobs will likely be “lost” even if they continue to operate outside Chapter 11.)
A dollar invested in GM shares twenty years ago would today have a face value of about 7 cents.There is no five year period that I could find in the last thirty years for which GM’s stock price outperformed the S&P 500.The market capitalization of GM is now under $2 billion, which is substantially less than that of such icons of our economy as Cognizant Technology Solutions, DaVita, Inc., Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold, and the Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan.GM is in danger of becoming a small-cap.Investors apparently don’t buy (literally) Cohn’s thesis. …”
“…Now with the three major U.S. car companies warning they could face a collapse before year’s end without new government help, Democratic congressional leaders are pushing to carve out a portion of the financial rescue money for them.
It’s far from certain the package will become law _ or even see an up-or-down vote. Republicans and President George W. Bush are reluctant to send new money to the carmakers, saying they should instead speed distribution of a $25 billion loan package Congress approved in September to help automakers develop fuel-efficient vehicles. …”
UAW leader says blame economy for Detroit 3 woes Saturday November 15, 4:45 pm ET By Mark Williams, AP Business Writer
UAW president says economy to blame for automakers problems, not workers
“…General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC are seeking $25 billion from the government to get them through the economic crisis and the worst sales slump in more than 25 years. GM appears to be in the worst shape, warning that it can’t borrow from normal sources.
The nation’s largest automaker said it had $16.2 billion in cash at the end of September, raising the possibility that GM will fall below the minimum of $11 billion to $14 billion needed for day-to-day operations by the end of the year.
Democrats in the lame-duck Congress are pressing for a bailout of Detroit’s Big Three with money from the $700 billion Wall Street rescue package. But President George W. Bush and many Republicans have come out against the idea, arguing that the financial rescue package was not intended for such uses, and that a bailout would reward poor management and lead other industries to demand government handouts.
In a statement Saturday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the Democratic proposal gives automakers time to develop plans to assure their long-term viability, including meeting new fuel-efficiency standards and developing new technology.
“A restructured, competitive American automobile industry will continue to play a crucial role in our national economy and in the global marketplace,” she said.
“…The United Auto Workers, seeking to hold on to lucrative health benefits and job protections, has gone on strike against General Motors for the first time since 1970.
The length of the walkout may hinge on the answers to two crucial questions: How long can the U.A.W. afford to stay out? And how long can G.M. endure a strike? While an indefinite strike would pose risk to both sides, each has made a calculated decision that it has more to gain by standing tough. G.M. is better positioned to handle a strike now than in earlier contract talks, though not for reasons that have to do with strength. With its operations shrinking in the United States, the majority of its sales and profits are now coming from abroad.
GM is seeking to move to a lower cost structure and more flexible work force to better compete against Japanese automakers. The danger, as in every auto strike, is that the network of suppliers and manufactures that feed the GM assembly lines will also be hit thus causing a ripple effect through the economy: …”
“…The issue is whether the federal government should bail out, with a capital injection the size of what would have been unthinkable four months ago, General Motors and perhaps the other two U.S.-based auto manufacturers, Ford and Chrysler.
As one born and raised in Detroit and its suburbs, who once lived next door to Big Three factory workers and later went to school with the children of Big Three executives, I have mixed feelings about this proposal. My native Michigan is ailing, with the highest unemployment in the nation, plummeting housing values and cascading foreclosures. Its economy, despite the efforts of two previous governors — Democrat Jim Blanchard and Republican John Engler — is dangerously dependent on what used to be called the Big Three and are now called the Detroit Three.
The bankruptcy of one or more of them would deeply impact the personal lives and dash the seemingly reasonable expectations of those who, directly or indirectly, have depended on them. I can’t help but think of these people when the issue is raised.
And yet the implications of a bailout are frightening. The Detroit Three were unprofitable well before the current financial crisis hit, and GM is reportedly hemorrhaging $1 billion a month. The huge cost of lavish employee and retiree health care benefits, negotiated with the United Auto Workers (UAW), makes it impossible for the companies to sell for a profit anything but the big cars and SUVs that, after gas prices hit $4 a gallon last spring, almost no one wants to buy.
No one in the private sector is willing to pony up a dime for this business plan. GM stock is below its 1946 price, and one investment house has priced it at zero. …”
Don’t use temporary economic woes to remake U.S. institutions
By Thomas Sowell
“… is not just a question of being able to put scare headlines on newspapers or alarmist rhetoric on television. Such things are just the prelude to massive political “change” in fundamentally sound institutions that have for more than two centuries made the American economy the envy of most of the world.
If the left succeeds, it will be like amputating your arm because of a stomach ache.
To add to the painful irony, many of those who are most eager to have a massive government intrusion into the market are among those whose previous intrusions into the market are largely responsible for the current financial crisis.
It was the left– the “liberals” or “progressives”– who led the charge to force lending institutions to lend to people whose credit history made them eligible only for “subprime” loans that were risky for both borrowers and lenders.
It started way back in the Carter administration, with the Community Reinvestment Act, and gained momentum over the years with legal threats from Attorney General Janet Reno and thuggery from ACORN, all to force lenders to lend where third parties wanted them to lend. Now we have a bad stomach ache– and now the left wants to start amputating the market.
“…The International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, better known as the United Auto Workers (UAW), is a labor union which represents workers in the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico. Founded in order to represent workers in the automobile manufacturing industry, UAW members in the 21st century work in industries as diverse as health care, casino gaming and higher education. …”
Ex-KGB Uri Bezmenov On Ideological Indoctrination – Part 1
Yuri Bezmenov Explains Soviet Strategy for Subversion 1 of 9
Yuri Bezmenov Explains Soviet Strategy for Subversion 2 of 9
Yuri Bezmenov Explains Soviet Strategy for Subversion 3 of 9
Yuri Bezmenov Explains Soviet Strategy for Subversion 4 of 9
Yuri Bezmenov Explains Soviet Strategy for Subversion 5 of 9
Yuri Bezmenov Explains Soviet Strategy for Subversion 6 of 9
Yuri Bezmenov Explains Soviet Strategy for Subversion 7 of 9
Yuri Bezmenov Explains Soviet Strategy for Subversion 8 of 9
Yuri Bezmenov Explains Soviet Strategy for Subversion 9 of 9
Background Articles and Videos
“…Brainwashing (also known as thought reform or as re-education) consists of any effort aimed at instilling certain attitudes and beliefs in a person — beliefs sometimes unwelcome or in conflict with the person’s prior beliefs and knowledge, in order to affect that individual’s value system and subsequent thought-patterns and behaviors.
In 1987 the American Psychological Association (APA) Board of Social and Ethical Responsibility for Psychology (BSERP) provisionally declined to endorse one particular approach to brainwashing as “lack[ing] the scientific rigor and evenhanded critical approach necessary for APA imprimatur”. The debate amongst APA members on this subject continues.
The English words “re-educate” and “re-education”, which the Oxford English Dictionary attests in general senses from 1808, began in the 1940s to express specifically political connotations. George Orwell mentioned in Animal Farm (1945) “the Wild Comrades’ Re-education Committee (the object of this was to tame the rats and rabbits)”; and Arthur Koestler in The Age of Longing (1951) wrote of “revolutionary vigilance,.. and discipline, and re-education camps”.
The term “brainwashing” first came into use in the English language in the 1950s. Author John Marks writes that a journalist later revealed to have worked undercover for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) first coined the term in 1950. The OED records its earliest known English-language usage of “brain-washing” by E. Hunter in New Leader on 7 October 1950.
Earlier forms of coercive persuasion occurred for example during the Inquisition and in the course of show trials against “enemies of the state” in the Soviet Union; but no specific term emerged until the methodologies of these earlier movements became systematized during the early decades of the People’s Republic of China for use in struggles against internal class enemies and foreign invaders. Until that time, presentations of the phenomenon described only concrete specific techniques. …”
Looks like the black helicopters will be landing any minute.
Time to find a cave and stay there.
Santa Claus is coming to town!
Bruce Springsteen – Santa Claus Is Comin’ To Town
You better watch out
You better not cry
Better not pout
I’m telling you why
Santa Claus is coming to town
He’s making a list
And checking it twice;
Gonna find out Who’s naughty and nice
Santa Claus is coming to town
He sees you when you’re sleeping
He knows when you’re awake
He knows if you’ve been bad or good
So be good for goodness sake!
O! You better watch out!
You better not cry
Better not pout
I’m telling you why
Santa Claus is coming to town
Santa Claus is coming to town
New World Order
The New World Order is Here!
CNN/DOBBS: W FULFILLS HIS DAD’S DREAM OFA NEW WORLD ORDER
New World Order – Time to blow the cover
NORTH AMERICAN UNION
North American Union Discussed on FOX
Defamation And The Takeover Of America
Background Articles and Videos
New World Order
“…New World Order refers to a supposed conspiracy in which a powerful and secretive group is plotting to eventually rule the world via an autonomous world government, which would replace sovereign states and other checks and balances in world power struggles. In this theory, many significant occurrences are said to be caused by a powerful secret group or groups. Historical and current events are seen as steps in an on-going plot to rule the world primarily through a combination of political finance, social engineering, mind control, and fear-based propaganda.
The modern use of the phrase New World Order originated in the early 20th century with Cecil Rhodes, who advocated that the British Empire and the United States of America should jointly impose a Federal World Government (with English as the official language) to bring about lasting world “peace”. A sinister motive is seen in the fact that Rhodes founded the Rhodes Scholarship as a global brotherhood of future leaders. Lionel Curtis, who also believed in this idea, founded the Round Table movement in 1909, which led to the establishment of the British-based Royal Institute for International Affairs in 1919 and the U.S.-based Council on Foreign Relations in 1921. The concept was further developed by Edward M. House, a close advisor to Woodrow Wilson during the negotiations to set up the League of Nations (it is unclear whether it was House or Wilson who invented the actual phrase). Another important influence was the author H.G. Wells, a vigorous advocate for world government.
One official mention which has garnered attention was in Gerald Ford’s “Declaration of Interdependence” on October 24, 1975; according to the ex-general counsel of the Export-Import Bank of the United States, Peter Beter, the Declaration of Interdependence states that:
We must join with others to bring forth a new world order… Narrow notions of national sovereignty must not be permitted to curtail that obligation.
Elements are present in the populism of the nineteenth century. In present form, this can be traced to the collapse of the Soviet Union and President George H. W. Bush’s new world order speech of September 11, 1990. In it, he described the United States’ objectives for post-cold-war cooperation with the former Soviet Union, using the phrase new world order.
Alternative terms for the New World Order are used by theorists: Cryptocracy, Fourth Reich, High Cabal, Illuminati Bankers, Power Elite, Powers That Be, and Synarchist International. …”
Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America
Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America
“…The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) was launched in March of 2005 as a trilateral effort to increase security and enhance prosperity among the United States, Canada and Mexico through greater cooperation and information sharing.
This trilateral initiative is premised on our security and our economic prosperity being mutually reinforcing. The SPP recognizes that our three great nations are bound by a shared belief in freedom, economic opportunity, and strong democratic institutions.
The SPP provides the framework to ensure that North America is the safest and best place to live and do business. It includes ambitious security and prosperity programs to keep our borders closed to terrorism yet open to trade.
The SPP builds upon, but is separate from, our long-standing trade and economic relationships. It energizes other aspects of our cooperative relations, such as the protection of our environment, our food supply, and our public health. …”
Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America
“The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America is a region-level dialogue with the stated purpose of providing greater cooperation on security and economic issues. The Partnership was founded in Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005 by Paul Martin, Prime Minister of Canada, Vicente Fox, President of Mexico, and George W. Bush, President of the United States.…”
“…The stated goals of the SPP are cooperation and information sharing, improving productivity, reducing the costs of trade, enhancing the joint stewardship of the environment, facilitating agricultural trade while creating a safer and more reliable food supply, and protecting people from disease.
The SPP is based on the belief that prosperity is dependent on security, and claims that the three nations are bound by a shared belief in freedom, economic opportunity, and strong democratic institutions. It is intended to assist, rather than replace, existing bilateral and trilateral institutions like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and claims to work towards the three North American countries working cooperatively in the face of common risks and economic competition from low cost comulti-modal transportation system along the International Mid-Continent Trade and Transportation Corridor to improve both the trade competitiveness and quality of life in North America.
North American Facilitation of Transportation, Trade, Reduced Congestion & Security (NAFTRACS) is a three phase pilot project designed to focus on business processes and information as freight is transported from buyers to sellers. The project is intended to create a partnership between businesses and local, state, and federal governments, while claiming to foster cooperation among the same entities. …”
The most important political development of the second millennium was the firm establishment, first in one or two countries, then in many, of the rule of law. Its acceptance and enforcement in any society is far more vital to the happiness of the majority than is even democracy itself. For democracy, without the rule of law to uphold the wishes of the electorate, is worthless, as the history of the past half-century has shown again and again in Africa, Latin America and Asia. The Soviet Union had, in theory, a wonderfully democratic constitution, But it lacked the rule of law entirely, and as a result Stalin was able to murder 30 million of its citizens and die safely in his bed, unarraigned and unpunished.
“What do we mean by the rule of law? We mean a judicial regime in which everyone is equal before the law, and everyone–and every institution–is subject to it.”
~Paul Johnson, Laying Down the Law, The Wall St. Journal, March 10, 1999,
What the American people want to know Senator Obama is why you will not produce in court a certified copy of your birth certificate to prove to the American people that you are in fact a natural-born citizen of the United States as required by Article Two, Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States of America?
Article Two of the United States Constitution
Clause 5: Qualifications for office
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
Columbo – No More Questions
columbo – “i really love my work, sir”
Birth Certificate Lawsuit – Obama can’t be President?
U. S. SUPREME COURT AWAITS RESPONSE TO
BERG’S WRIT OF CERTIORARI
FROM OBAMA, DNC and Co-DEFENDANTS
(Contact information and PDF at end)
(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 11/07/08) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States filed a Writ of Certiorari in the United States Supreme Court on October 30, 2008, requesting review of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Judge Surrick’s Dismissal of Philip J. Berg’s lawsuit against Barack H. Obama, Jr., the DNC and the other co-Defendants. Accordingly, the U. S. Supreme Court has set dates in which Barack Obama, the DNC and all co-Defendants are to respond to the Writ, which is on or before December 1, 2008.
Mr. Berg remarked today, “I look forward to receiving Defendant Obama’s response to the Writ and am hopeful the U. S. Supreme Court will review Berg v. Obama. I believe Mr. Obama is not a constitutionally-qualified natural-born citizen and is ineligible to assume the office of President of the United States.”
Mr. Berg’s case, Berg vs. Obamawas dismissed from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Docket # 08-cv-4083 for lack of standing. Mr. Berg filed a Writ of Certiorari for review of the case and an injunction to stay the election pending review. Justice Souter denied the injunction. It is expected that the Court will decide whether or not to review Berg v. Obama after the Defendants file their response, and Mr. Berg has replied to the Defendant’s response.
The Defendants’ response is due by December 1st and Mr. Berg’s reply will be submitted thereafter.
1/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
2/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
3/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
4/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
5/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
6/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
7/7 – Philip Berg News Conference at US Supreme Court – 10/30/08
Background Articles and Videos
The Supreme Court and Obama’s Birth Certificate
“…At this point, Supreme Court Justice David Souter’s Clerk informed Philip J. Berg, the lawyer who brought the case against Obama, that his petition for an injunction to stay the November 4th election was denied, but the Clerk also required the defendants to respond to the Writ of Certiorari (which requires the concurrence of four Justices) by December 1. At that time, Mr. Obama must present to the Court an authentic birth certificate, after which Mr. Berg will respond.
If Obama fails to do that, it is sure to inspire the skepticism of the Justices, who are unaccustomed to being defied. They will have to decide what to do about a president-elect who refuses to prove his natural-born citizenship.
“I can see a unanimous Court (en banc) decertifying the election if Obama refuses to produce his birth certificate,” says Raymond S. Kraft, an attorney and writer. “They cannot do otherwise without abandoning all credibility as guardians of the Constitution. Even the most liberal justices, however loathe they may to do this, still consider themselves guardians of the Constitution. The Court is very jealous of its power – even over presidents, even over presidents-elect.” …”
Obama’s birth certificate sealed by Hawaii governor
Says Democratic senator must make request to obtain original document
By Jerome R. Corsi
“…Although the legitimacy of Sen. Barack Obama’s birth certificate has become a focus of intense speculation – and even several lawsuits – WND has learned that Hawaii’s Gov. Linda Lingle has placed the candidate’s birth certificate under seal and instructed the state’s Department of Health to make sure no one in the press obtains access to the original document under any circumstances.
The governor’s office officially declined a request made in writing by WND in Hawaii to obtain a copy of the hospital-generated original birth certificate of Barack Obama.
“It does not appear that Dr. Corsi is within any of these categories of persons with a direct and tangible interest in the birth certificate he seeks,” wrote Roz Makuala, manager of constituent services in the governor’s office, in an e-mailed response to a WND request seeking the information.
Those listed as entitled to obtain a copy of an original birth certificate include the person born, or “registrant” according to the legal description from the governor’s office, the spouse or parent of the registrant, a descendant of the registrant, a person having a common ancestor with the registrant, a legal guardian of the registrant, or a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant. …”
“…In a startling development, Obama’s Kenyan grandmother has reportedly alleged she witnessed Obama’s birth at the Coast Provincial Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.
Friday, U.S. Federal judge Richard Barclay Surrick, a Clinton appointee, dismissed a lawsuit brought by Pennsylvania attorney Phillip J. Berg who alleged Obama was not a U.S. “natural born” citizen and therefore ineligible for the presidency under the specifications of the U.S. Constitution, under Article II, Section 1.
Berg told WND last week he does not have a copy of a Kenyan birth certificate for Obama that he alleges exists.
In Kenya, WND was told by government authorities that all documents concerning Obama were under seal until after the U.S. presidential election on November 4.
“Fight the Smears” declares, “The truth is, Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America.”
Although the Obama campaign could immediately put an end to all the challenges by simply producing the candidate’s original birth certificate, it has not done so. And the “Fight the Smears” website offers no explanation as to why Obama has refused to request, and make public, an original hospital-generated birth certificate which the Hawaii Department of Health may possess. …” http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=79174
“US constitutional definition
The special term “Natural-Born Citizen” is used in particular as a requirement for eligibility to serve as President or Vice President of the United States. Section 1 of Article II of the Constitution contains the clause:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
Additionally, the 12th Amendment to the Constitution states that: “[N]o person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides an additional source of constitutional doctrine stating that birth “in the United States” and subjection to U.S. jurisdiction at the time of birth, entitles one to citizenship:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the Jurisdiction thereof, are Citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. . .
However, the full text of the fourteenth amendment does not mention the phrase “natural-born citizen,” nor does it address Presidential qualifications. The phrase “natural born Citizen” is not defined anywhere in the Constitution.
Section 8 of Article I confers on Congress the power “to establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization…” This power has been construed to include defining the characteristics of a “natural born citizen”, as well as the conditions of “naturalization”.
The 1790 Congress, many of whose members had been members of the Constitutional Convention, provided in the Naturalization Act of 1790 that “And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens.” In addition George Washington was president of the Constitutional Convention and President of the United States when this bill became law. If Washington disagreed with this definition, he could have vetoed this bill. …”
“…These things seem to either be locked up or not available. They should be available as part of the public record given the high office you are seeking to win, Sir. I’ m sure it’s just some oversight or glitch or something, so if you could you tell me where these things are..
Could you help me please find these things, sir?
Let’s see here….Ah, Yes, Sir It’s just a short list….Shouldn’t take too long if we could just get together, Sir……AllI need is :
Your Occidental College records
Your Columbia College records
Your Columbia Thesis paper
Your Harvard College records
Your Selective Service Registration
Your medical records
Your Illinois State Senate records
Your Illinois State Senate schedule
Your Law practice client list
A Certified Copy of your original Birth certificate
Your embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth
Your Harvard Law Review articles that were published
Your University of Chicago scholarly articles
Your Record of baptism
Oh hey… listen, Sir ! I know you are VERY busy! Is this too much for you now? I mean,…I tell you what. I will come back tomorrow. Give you some time to get these things together, you know? I mean, I know you are busy, so I will just let myself out……But I will be back tomorrow. And the day after………..
Who wants to know these things ask Senator Obama? Columbo answered:
Update: Thanks to an email from John S. – a patron of climateaudit.org – we have learned that the Russian data in NOAA’s GHCN v2.mean dataset is corrupted. For most (if not all) stations in Russia, the September data has been replicated as October data, artificially raising the October temperature many degrees. The data from NOAA is used by GISS to calculate the global temperature. Thus the record-setting anomaly for October 2008 is invalid and we await the highly-publicised corrections from NOAA and GISS.
Update 2: The faulty results have been (mostly) backed out of the GISS website. The rest should be done following the federal holiday. GISS says they will update the analysis once they confirm with NOAA that the software problems have been corrected. I also removed the subtitles since the GISS data no longer reflects October as being the warmest ever.
Those proposing a cap and trade tax or carbon tax need the government funded junk science of climate computer models to justify their claim that man is the cause of global warming.
Don’t Panic – Flaws In Catastrophic Global Warming Forecasts
The Man-made Global Warming Hoax (Part 6)
One big problem–global temperatures have been cooling for eight years.
Well what do the numbers show?
Climate Change – Bob Carters 5 Tests of CO2 part 1
Climate Change – Bob Carters 5 Tests of CO2 part 2
Global Warming – what do the numbers show.
Global Warming, humans, Carbon Dioxide
Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?
By Timothy Ball
“…Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification. For example, Environment Canada brags about spending $3.7 billion in the last five years dealing with climate change almost all on propaganda trying to defend an indefensible scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations and failing to meet legislated pollution targets.
No sensible person seeks conflict, especially with governments, but if we don’t pursue the truth, we are lost as individuals and as a society. That is why I insist on saying that there is no evidence that we are, or could ever cause global climate change. And, recently, Yuri A. Izrael, Vice President of the United Nations sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirmed this statement. So how has the world come to believe that something is wrong?
Maybe for the same reason we believed, 30 years ago, that global cooling was the biggest threat: a matter of faith. “It is a cold fact: the Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years. Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species,” wrote Lowell Ponte in 1976.
I was as opposed to the threats of impending doom global cooling engendered as I am to the threats made about Global Warming. Let me stress I am not denying the phenomenon has occurred. The world has warmed since 1680, the nadir of a cool period called the Little Ice Age (LIA) that has generally continued to the present. These climate changes are well within natural variability and explained quite easily by changes in the sun. But there is nothing unusual going on. …”
James Hansen advocating a green redistribution of wealth scheme
Did Napoleon Use Hansen’s Temperature Data?
by Steve McIntyre
“…It’s colder in Russia in October than in September, as Napoleon found out to his cost in 1812.
Sitting in the ashes of a ruined city without having received the Russian capitulation, and facing a Russian maneuver forcing him out of Moscow, Napoleon started his long retreat by the middle of October.
Flash forward almost 200 years later. NASA has just reported record warmth in October throughout Russia, with many sites experiencing similar temperatures in October as in September – perhaps the sort of situation that Napoleon had hoped for (not similar as anomalies, but similar in actual temperatures in deg C.) …”
“…Actually, many stations didn’t just experience similar absolute monthly temperatures. Many stations had exactly the same monthly temperatures in October as in September. Here are the last three years for the Russian station, Olenek, showing NASA GISS monthly temperatures (in deg C) bolding Sept and Oct 2008. October 2007 had an average temperature of -9 deg C, as compared to 3.1 deg C in Sept 2007. October 2008 had the identical temperature as September 2008.
YEAR JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
2006 -34.0 -29.9 -23.5 -18.1 1.6 10.6 16.9 11.5 4.4 -14.6 -27.7 -29.1
2007 -27.9 -41.5 -21.6 -4.0 0.1 12.4 13.5 11.3 3.1 -9.0 -24.8 999.9
2008 -30.0 -29.4 -19.6 -13.4 1.3 12.0 13.1 12.1 3.1 3.1 999.9 999.9
This exact match of October 2008 to September 2008 was repeated at many other Russian stations. A CA reader notified me of this phenomenon earlier today and I’ve confirmed for myself that the information is accurate. Based on what he described as a “Cursory” look, he sent me the following list currently “updated” stations that exactly replicate the Sept data: Almaty, Omsk, Salehard, Semipalatinsk, Turuhansk, Tobol’sk, Verhojansk, Viljujsk, Vilnius, Vologda. I can add Hatanga, Suntora, GMO ImEKF. Not all stations were affected – Dzerszan, Ostrov Kotal, Jakutsk, Cokurdah appear to have correct results. …”
The world has never seen such freezing heat By Christopher Booker
“…A surreal scientific blunder last week raised a huge question mark about the temperature records that underpin the worldwide alarm over global warming. On Monday, Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), which is run by Al Gore’s chief scientific ally, Dr James Hansen, and is one of four bodies responsible for monitoring global temperatures, announced that last month was the hottest October on record.
This was startling. Across the world there were reports of unseasonal snow and plummeting temperatures last month, from the American Great Plains to China, and from the Alps to New Zealand. China’s official news agency reported that Tibet had suffered its “worst snowstorm ever”. In the US, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the month, and ranked it as only the 70th-warmest October in 114 years.
So what explained the anomaly? GISS’s computerised temperature maps seemed to show readings across a large part of Russia had been up to 10 degrees higher than normal. But when expert readers of the two leading warming-sceptic blogs, Watts Up With That and Climate Audit, began detailed analysis of the GISS data they made an astonishing discovery. The reason for the freak figures was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on October readings at all. Figures from the previous month had simply been carried over and repeated two months running. …”
“…A GISS spokesman lamely explained that the reason for the error in the Russian figures was that they were obtained from another body, and that GISS did not have resources to exercise proper quality control over the data it was supplied with. This is an astonishing admission: the figures published by Dr Hansen’s institute are not only one of the four data sets that the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) relies on to promote its case for global warming, but they are the most widely quoted, since they consistently show higher temperatures than the others.
If there is one scientist more responsible than any other for the alarm over global warming it is Dr Hansen, who set the whole scare in train back in 1988 with his testimony to a US Senate committee chaired by Al Gore. Again and again, Dr Hansen has been to the fore in making extreme claims over the dangers of climate change. (He was recently in the news here for supporting the Greenpeace activists acquitted of criminally damaging a coal-fired power station in Kent, on the grounds that the harm done to the planet by a new power station would far outweigh any damage they had done themselves.) …”
It seems that Wall Street genius and multi-millionaire, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, is admitting that the US Treasury will be following my and other people’s advice and not buying “troubled assets” and instead will be making loans to banks that need a temporary infusion of capital.
I believe the American people have been mislead, lied to and not told the real reason behind the urgency of getting the bailout bill pass last month. The game plan all along was to be able to buy back the “troubled assets” held by foreign governments that are also major holders of US government securitites. The original plan did not make sense to hundreds of economists and financial advisors including me.
Nations, most likely China among serveral others told the US government to either make them whole or they would stop buying and holding US Treasury bills and notes.
The Federal government should not be bailing out any business or government entities such as states or cities and never foreign nations and their financial institutions.
In doing so they taking money from other people and businesses that earn income and create wealth and giving it to businesses and government entities that have mismanaged their affairs and are losing money and destroying wealth.
This can occur directly by taxes on businesses or individuals or indirectly by printing money or issueing government debt to finance the bailout.
The latter eventually results in inflation or a general rise in prices.
This depreciates the value of money.
If any auto company is in financial trouble and cannot raise any additional equity capital or loans from banks, it should either seek a buyer for some or all of its assets or file for bankruptcy.
If union members in the auto industry want their jobs they should agree to drastic cuts in both wages, benefits and retirement and pension plans.
Sooner or latter, General Motors, Chrysler, and may be even Ford, will have no alternative but to go into bankruptcy.
One of the first things that will have to happen is the companies will seek to void all union labor contracts and retirees will lose most if not all of their pensions. The price of mismanagement and greed by executives and the leaders of the UAW will finally be paid. The day of reckoning is fast approaching.
Do not expect any sympathy from the American people:
“…Sizable pluralities of Americans are opposed to taxpayer-backed bailouts of the Big Three automakers, with 73% now worried the U.S. government will run out of money with all the demands being made on the federal treasury in the current economic crisis.
Forty-one percent (41%) of adult Americans are Very worried the government will run out of money, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Only six percent (6%) are not worried at all.
Women are slightly more worried than men, Republicans more than Democrats, whites more than blacks, and younger Americans more than older ones. …”
The executives and union leaders would ran the auto industry only brought it upon themselves.
The federal government should never bailout any business no matter how big.
Businesses are free to succeed or fail.
Once the government starts bailing out businesses then other businesses in financial trouble just line up and ask for a bailout.
Government intervention in the economy with bailouts to those “too big to fail”, results in a misallocation of scarce resources including capital and labor to business that have mismanaged their business and away from companies that have been successful in creating wealth and jobs.
Those companies that are too big is the problem and bailouts are not the solution.
Troubled companies should try to downsize or fail.
Bailouts are using the law to plunder the American people’s assets.
I call it a stickup and stealing no matter how slick it is done.
Remember it was government intervention in the real estate mortage markets that is the root cause of the problem that resulted in the real estate bubble and current financial crisis.
More government intervention in the economy is only making the problem worse.
Government intervention in banning oil and gas exploration off the US coasts and ANWR impacted the supply of oil and eventually the price of gasoline went up.
The Federal government should stop trying to regulate the supply and demand of energy and deciding what type of vehicles the consumer should purchase.
The consumer should be sovereign as to the goods and services it wants to purchase.
Neither Congress nor the President should interfer with the American’s people freedom of choice.
Every time the federal government intervenes in the economy the result is government failure resulting in economic recession if not depression.
Government intervention leads to more and more government intervention.
When will American elites learn that socialism is a failure and leads to more and more government coercion?
Just leave us alone and mind your own business.
Ban Bailouts and Stop Inflation Now!
Fox: Shep Smith on auto bailout: It’s not capitalism.
11-10-08 Ron Paul on Fox Business with Neil Cavuto discussing bailout
KILLBILL – TARP Same bailout plan with lipstick on it – Defazio
Newt with Greta on fixing the economy without a bailout
Lou Dobbs – Henry Paulson All Talk No Action!
The Bailout is for China?!?!
Let Economy fail…
Let Wall Street Burn…
CRISIS SUBPIME-THE LAST LAUGH- John Bird and John Fortune
Background Artilcles and Videos
Banks HOARDING TAXPAYER’s $$ NOT HELP HOMEOWNERS! Kashkari
First Look: Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)
Kudlow – TARP
“We’re Bailing Foreign Banks, Too, With Your $700 Billion”
“We’re Bailing Foreign Banks, Too, With Your $700 Billion”
Silly Money: Where did all the money go? (1 of 5)
Silly Money: Where did all the money go? (2 of 5)
Silly Money: Where did all the money go? (3 of 5)
Silly Money: Where did all the money go? (4 of 5)
Silly Money: Where did all the money go? (5 of 5)
Obama asks Bush to bail out Detroit now
Rick Moran “…In their meeting yesterday, Barack Obama asked President Bush to allow the auto industry to tap into the $700 billion kitty passed by Congress to bail out the financial industry.
“…Obama will base his support for the bail out on the contingency that the auto-industry “go green” and make “cleaner, more energy efficient” vehicles.
That’s fine and dandy but that kind of recapitalization needs an awful lot of bread – a heck of a lot more than any numbers being thrown around so far ($50 billion is the most I’ve seen). You not only have the immediate crisis to deal with but then, on top of that, Obama wants Detroit to completely alter the way they do business.
You are talking about a massive investment in product redesign and retooling auto plants. If the financing were to be in the form of guaranteed loans, we should definitely balk at that kind of short sighted policy. The chances of one or more of the Big Three going under are pretty darn good at this point and if that were to happen, the taxpayer would be stuck holding the bag.
The cascade effect from the financial meltdown is now in full flow and its got to be stopped somewhere before the government gets their grubby paws on most major industries. The auto industry is a good place to start raising holy hell in opposition to a bail out. When an industry makes products that Americans don’t want whose fault is that? I would say everyone from the CEO down the to the workers on the line are to blame and throwing money at these incompetents is the worst thing we can do. …” http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/11/obama_asks_bush_to_bail_out_de.html
Hank Paulson Naked Emperor
By Michelle Malkin
“….Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson finally confirmed what lonely bailout opponents tried to tell the American public all along: The man doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing.
Paulson held a bazooka to taxpayers’ heads. He groveled on his knees in front of Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. He lured leaders from both political parties into linking arms in a panicked Chicken Little line dance for the beleaguered mortgage industry. Paulson demanded an unprecedented $700 billion troubled assets relief program for the good of the country. For the health of the housing market. For the survival of the economy. No time for deliberation. No time to review the failures of such interventionist approaches around the world. Now, now, now!
And now? The pulled-out-of-the-posterior “$700 billion” price tag has ballooned into the trillions. The “mortgage industry rescue” has expanded to banks, insurance companies, automakers, credit card companies, and possibly the entire national volume of consumer lending. Oh, and that vaunted “TARP” component, Paulson admitted this week, is nothing but a four-letter-word that rhymes with TRAP.
In September, Paulson offered his lofty pledge: “The ultimate taxpayer protection will be the stability this troubled asset relief program provides to our financial system, even as it will involve a significant investment of taxpayer dollars. I am convinced that this bold approach will cost American families far less than the alternative – a continuing series of financial institution failures and frozen credit markets unable to fund economic expansion.” Two months later, Paulson’s conviction melted faster than microwaved butter. “Our assessment at this time is that this is not the most effective way to use TARP funds,” he sheepishly told the nation Wednesday.
Hey, who died and put Emily “Never mind” Litella in charge of the economy? …”
“…Three GOP Senators have sent Treasury Secretary Hank “Never mind” Paulson a “joint letter of concern.” I’ll have more on this abominable subject in my syndicated column tomorrow.
Joint Letter of Concern to Secretary Paulson After His Announcement to the Change Intent of the Troubled Asset Relief Program
November 13, 2008
Dear Secretary Paulson:
We are writing to express our deep concern over your announcement this morning that the Department of the Treasury will halt all plans to purchase trouble mortgage assets through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). We are concerned that the program has been fundamentally changed from its original intent and worry that continued changes may erode the structures of accountability put in to protect taxpayers.
When legislation authorizing the TARP was first proposed to members of Congress in mid-September, its primary component was a program to allow the Secretary of the Treasury to purchase “toxic” mortgage assets from financial institutions. The primary reason for this course of action, we were told, was to assist the market in discovering the price of these assets and to return liquidity to the financial markets.
At a hearing of the Senate Banking Committee on September 23, 2008, you made the following comments on the urgent necessity of a troubled asset purchase program:
We have proposed a program to remove troubled assets from the system. This troubled asset relief program has to be properly designed for immediate implementation and be sufficiently large to have maximum impact and restore market confidence. It must also protect the taxpayer to the maximum extent possible, and include provisions that ensure transparency and oversight while also ensuring the program can be implemented quickly and run effectively.
This troubled asset purchase program on its own is the single most effective thing we can do to help homeowners, the American people and stimulate our economy.
Although the legislation was passed on October 3, the program was never implemented and now has been officially abandoned in favor of alternative plans after little more than a month. Such a rapid reversal raises questions about the TARP’s original design as well as the propriety of future plans.
Congress never intended for the TARP to be a blank check that could be spent with unlimited discretion. To ensure proper boundaries are in place to protect the taxpayer, we hope and expect that congressional approval will be sought by the administration before further changes are made.
U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D., U.S. Senator Richard Burr, U.S. Senator David Vitter
“The Bolsheviks, originally alsoBolshevists (Russian: Большевик, Большевист (singular) Russian pronunciation:[bəlʲʂɨˈvʲik], derived from bolshe, “more”) were a faction of the Marxist Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP) which split apart from the Menshevik faction at the Second Party Congress in 1903 and ultimately became the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The Bolsheviks seized power in Russia during the October Revolution phase of the Russian Revolution of 1917, and founded the Soviet Union.
Bolsheviks (or “the Majority”) were an organization of professional revolutionaries under a strict internal hierarchy governed by the principle of democratic centralism and quasi-military discipline, who considered themselves as a vanguard of the revolutionary proletariat. Their beliefs and practices were often referred to as Bolshevism. The party was founded by Vladimir Lenin, who also led it in the October Revolution. …”
“…The United States Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4) authorizes Congress to enact “uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States.” Congress has exercised this authority several times since 1801, most recently by adopting the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, codified in Title 11 of the United States Code, commonly referred to as the Bankruptcy Code. The Bankruptcy Code has been amended several times since 1978, most recently in 2005 through the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 or BAPCPA. Some law relevant to bankruptcy is found in other parts of the United States Code. For example, bankruptcy crimes are found in Title 18 of the United States Code (Crimes), tax implications of bankruptcy are found in Title 26 of the United States Code (Internal Revenue Code), and the creation and jurisdiction of bankruptcy courts are found in Title 28 of the United States Code (Judiciary and Judicial procedure).
While bankruptcy cases are always filed in United States Bankruptcy Court (units of the United States District Courts) and federal law governs procedure in bankruptcy cases, state laws are often applied when determining property rights. For example, law governing the validity of liens or rules protecting certain property from creditors (known as exemptions), derive from state law. State law therefore plays a major role in many bankruptcy cases and it is often unwise to generalize some bankruptcy issues across state lines. …”
The largest bankruptcy in U.S. history occurred on September 15, 2008, when Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. filed for Chapter 11 protection with more than $639,000,000,000 in assets, greater the next 15 largest bankruptcies put together.
The next 15 largest corporate bankruptcies are as follows:
“This article is about the Treasury fund. For the legislative bill and subsequent law, see Public Law 110-343. For the legislative history and the events leading to the law, see Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.
The authority of the United States Department of the Treasury to establish and manage a Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) managed by a newly created Office of Financial Stability became law October 3, 2008, the result of an initial proposal that ultimately was passed by Congress as H.R. 1424, enacting the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 and several other acts. The law which created the fund authorized the Treasury to draw up to $250 billion for immediate use, then requires the President to certify that an additional $100 billion in funds are needed; a final $350 billion are subject to Congressional approval. As of November 12, 2008, $290 billion of the first $350 billion allotment funding TARP has been allocated: $250 billion for bank equity infusions, and $40 billion for an equity infusion into insurer American International Group. …”
Consumer sovereignty is a term which is used in economics to refer to the rule or sovereignty of purchasers in markets as to production of goods. The term can be used as either a norm (as to what consumers should be permitted) or a description (as to what consumers are permitted).
In unrestricted markets, those with income or wealth are able to use their purchasing power to motivate producers as what to produce (and how much). Customers do not necessarily have to buy and, if dissatisfied, can take their business elsewhere, while the profit-seeking sellers find that they can make the greatest profit by trying to provide the best possible products for the price (or the lowest possible price for a given product). In the language of cliché, “he who pays the piper calls the tune.”
To most neoclassical economists, complete consumer sovereignty is an ideal rather than a reality because of the existence — or even the ubiquity — of market failure. Some economists of the Chicago school and the Austrian school see consumer sovereignty as a reality in a free market economy without interference from government or other non-market institutions, or anti-market institutions such as monopolies or cartels. That is, alleged market failures are seen as being a result of non-market forces.
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 1 (part 1/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 1 (part 2/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 1 (part 3/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 1 (part 4/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 1 (part 5/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 2 (part 1/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 2 (part 2/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 2 (part 3/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 2 (part 4/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 2 (part 5/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 3 (part 1/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 3 (part 2/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 3 (part 3/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 3 (part 4/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 3 (part 5/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 4 (part 1/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 4 (part 2/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 4 (part 3/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 4 (part 4/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 4 (part5/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 5 (part 1/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 5 (part 2/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 5 (part 3/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 5 (part 4/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 5 (part 5/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 6 (part 1/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 6 (part 2/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 6 (part 3/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 6 (part 4/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 6 (part 5/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 7 (part 1/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 7 (part 2/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 7 (part 3/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 7 (part 4/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – Episode 7 (part 5/5)
Robert Hughes – American Visions – 8th episode, part 1 of 5
Robert Hughes – American Visions – 8th episode, part 2 of 5
Robert Hughes – American Visions – 8th episode, part 3 of 5
Robert Hughes – American Visions – 8th episode, part 4 of 5
Robert Hughes – American Visions – 8th episode, part 5 of 5
Background Articles and Videos
Playlist: Robert Hughes – American Visions (1997 TV series)
Charlie Rose: May 22, 1997
– An hour with Robert Hughes about American Visions
A conversation with art critic Robert Hughes about his eight-part PBS series and accompanying 600-page book, “The Epic History of Art in America”, which profiles Georgia O’Keefe, Andy Warhol, Edward Hopper, and Frank Lloyd Wright.
Charlie Rose – An hour with Robert Hughes
Charlie Rose: June 8, 1995
First, former Secretary of Education William Bennett and art critic Robert Hughes of “Time” magazine discuss the influence popular entertainment has on American culture and behavior, and whether the demand for products should outweigh potential consequences.
Charlie Rose – FUERTH / R. HUGHES
GUESTS/AFFILIATIONS: Leon Fuerth, National Security Advisor to Vice President Gore /// Robert Hughes, Art Critic, Time Magazine / Author; 3 clips from “Australia: Beyond the Fatal Shore” [Thirteen/WNET New York]
“Robert Studley Forrest Hughes AO (born 28 July 1938) is an Australian-born art critic, writer and television documentary maker who has resided in New York since 1970.
“…His 1997 television series American Visions reviewed the history of American art since the Revolution. He was again dismissive of recent art; this time, sculptor Jeff Koons was subjected to scathing criticism. …”
“But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.”
~ Frederic Bastiat, The Law
The first book you should read in economics is The Law by Frederic Bastiat.
“Claude Frédéric Bastiat (June 30, 1801 – December 24, 1850) was a French classical liberal theorist, political economist, and member of the French assembly. He is buried at San Luigi dei Francesi in Rome.
The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.
~Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
“…The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies–civilians and military–is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, “and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,” and “fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God.” …”
~Osama Bin Laden Jihad
Shariah Financing-Wall Street-selling our souls for $$$
Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld Explains Sharia Banking (Arutz 7 Video)
Frank Gaffney, Coalition to Stop Shariah
Wafa Sultan on Sharia
I was listening to a local talk radio show when I heard Joy Brighton explaining Shariah Islamic banking and its connection to jihad terrorism to the show’s host.
At first I thought this was a joke as did the talk show host.
I could not believe what I was hearing.
Watch and listen to the above videos.
As far as I am concerned any US financial institution that is being bailed out by the Federal government should be banned from offering Shariah Islamic banking and finance products and services.
In my opionion no US financial institution operating either in the US or abroad should be permitted to offer these products and services as well.
The products and services are financing jihid terrorism against US citizens.
Obsession – Islamic Jihad coming to America
Just say no to Shariah Islamic Banking coming to America in a neighborhood near you.
Call your own financial institution and bank and ask if they offer Shariah products and services.
Then decide where you are going to keep your money and investments.
“…The Treasury Department has announced it will teach “Islamic finance” to U.S. banking regulatory agencies, Congress and other parts of the executive branch today in Washington, D.C. – but critics say it is opening a door to American funding of Islamic extremism.
‘Islamic Finance 101′
According to its announcement, the “Islamic Finance 101″ forum is “designed to help inform the policy community about Islamic financial services, which are an increasingly important part of the global financial industry.”
The Treasury Department has collaborated with Harvard University’s Islamic Finance Project to coordinate the event. The department says it expects about 100 people will attend the seminar. …”
“…Tenets of Shariah
In his essay, “Islamic Finance or Financing Islamism,” Alex Alexiev outlined the following tenets of Shariah taken from “The Reliance of the Traveler: The Classic Manual of Sacred Law”:
A woman is eligible for only half of the inheritance of a man
A virgin may be married against her will by her father or grandfather
A woman may not leave the house without her husband’s permission
A Muslim man may marry four women, including Christians and Jews; a Muslim woman can only marry a Muslim
Beating an insubordinate wife is permissible
Female sexual mutilation is obligatory
Adultery [or the perception of adultery] is punished by death by stoning
Offensive, military jihad against non-Muslims is a religious obligation
Apostasy from Islam is punishable by death without trial
Lying to infidels in time of jihad is permissible …”
“Islamic banking refers to a system of banking or banking activity that is consistent with the principles of Islamic law (Sharia) and its practical application through the development of Islamic economics. Sharia prohibits the payment of fees for the renting of money (Interest|Usury|Riba) for specific terms, as well as investing in businesses that provide goods or services considered contrary to its principles (Haraam). While these principles were used as the basis for a flourishing economy in earlier times, it is only in the late 20th century that a number of Islamic banks were formed to apply these principles to private or semi-private commercial institutions within the Muslim community. …”
“…Shari’a finance is a new weapon in the arsenal of what might be termed fifth-generation warfare (5GW).2 The perpetrators include both states and organizations, advancing a global totalitarian ideology disguised as a religion. The end goal is to impose that ideology worldwide, making the Islamic “nation,” or ummah, supreme.3
Shari’a is the crucial source and ultimate authority dictating the actions of practicing individuals and radical Muslim states and movements alike. Failing to understand the political use of shari’a hampers the U.S.ability to mount effective policies, plans, and strategies to successfully counter this fast-growing totalitarian threat. …”
“…Shari’a is the set of Islamic laws established by Muslim jurists, based on the Qur’an and deeds of the prophet Muhammad, as recorded beginning more than 1,200 years ago. Its end goal, for all time, is establishing a world ruled entirely by Islam and the harsh shari’a laws. These laws govern every aspect of daily life and prohibit individual, political, and religious freedoms.
“…Osama bin Laden wrote what is referred to as a fatwa in August 1996, and was one of several signatories of another and shorter fatwa in February 1998. Both documents appeared initially in the Arabic-language London newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi. At the time, bin Laden was not a wanted man in any country except his native Saudi Arabia, and was not yet known as the leader of the international terrorist organisation al-Qaeda. Therefore these fatwas, or fatawa, received relatively little attention until after the August 1998 United States embassy bombings, for which bin Laden is indicted. The indictment mentions the first fatwa, and claims that Khalid al-Fawwaz, of bin Laden’s Advice and Reformation Committee in London, participated in its communication to the press.
Bin Laden’s 1996 fatwa is entitled “Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places”. This document is sometimes called the Ladenese epistle, a term derived from bin Laden’s surname. It is a long piece, and complains of American activities in numerous countries. …”
“…On that basis, and in compliance with God’s order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims
The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies–civilians and military–is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, “and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,” and “fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God.” …”
YOUR GOVERNMENT AT WORK U.S. Treasury teaches ‘Islamic Finance 101′ Advisers, scholars to promote controversial Shariah funding
Jihad Comes to Wall Street “Sharia finance” does exactly what it promises, financing the spread of sharia — and terror.
By Alex Alexiev
“…The legitimization of sharia in the West and its gradual imposition in Muslim communities and beyond is a key objective of sharia finance, and there is no doubt it has already made huge strides. Indeed, the precedent of legal sharia-finance transactions was used by the hapless archbishop of Canterbury to buttress his argument that introducing sharia in the United Kingdom was unavoidable.
Given the reality of malignant Islamism now spreading into our own capital markets to the loud cheers of the same Wall Street masters of the universe who gave us sub-prime mortgage securitization, Americans have a right to ask: Where are the U.S. Treasury Department and the SEC, whose job it is to protect our markets? Given the outright fraudulent misrepresentation of the potential liabilities of sharia-finance funds under existing regulations, they should get involved soon.”
Rising oil prices and the West’s dependency on Middle Eastoil, combined with willful blindness and political correctness, provide a surge of petrodollars, making financial and economic jihad so much easier to carry out. Moreover, according to shari’a, Muslims hold all property in trust for Allah.4 Therefore, under the shari’a, all current and historic Muslim acquisitions everywhere, including the United States
, belong to the ummah, in trust for Allah.
Funding the jihad, i.e., financial jihad, or Al Jihad bi-al-Mal, is mandated by many verses in the Qur’an, such as chapter 61, verses 10.11: “you . . . should strive for the cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives,” and chapter 49, verse 15: “The [true] believers are only those who . . . strive with their wealth and their lives for the cause of Allah.” This has been reiterated throughout Islamic history and in recent times. “Financial Jihad [is] . . . more important . . . than self-sacrificing,” according to Saudi and Muslim Brotherhood (MB) spiritual leader Hamud bin Uqla al-Shuaibi.6
Qatar-based Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of the most prominent Sunni scholars in the world today, reiterated the legal justification for “financial jihad [Al-Jihad bi-al-Mal]” in a lecture he gave on 4 May 2002 in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). According to him, “collecting money for the mujahideen (jihad fighters . . . ) was not a donation or a gift but a duty necessitated by the sacrifices they made for the Muslim nation.” 7 …”
WHAT AMERICANS NEED TO KNOW
By Christopher Holton
Center for Security Policy
“….Fighting Back Against Shariah
“…The Center for Security Policy is taking the national lead in exposing the risks of
Shariah-Compliant Finance, with briefings to agency officials at Treasury, SEC,
Congress, Dept. of Homeland Security and various state District Attorney offices.
The Center has also built a national coalition of groups to begin educating the average
investor about the risks to their investments from financial jihad.
These efforts include an authoritative legal memorandum written on the subject by legal
scholar and experienced litigator David Yerushalmi, who is also leading an intelligence
investigation into the promotion of Shariah in U.S. mosques in his “Mapping Shariah”
The Center has established a web site devoted to stopping Shariah at
But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.”
~ Frederic Bastiat, The Law
President-Elect of United States of America Obama
Power of the Market – How to Cure Inflation 1
Power of the Market – How to Cure Inflation 2
Power of the Market – How to Cure Inflation 3
Inflation is the one form of taxation that can be imposed without legislation.
No more bailouts.
Ban them all.
Enough is enough.
In a free enterprise economic system businesses go out of business every day.
New businesses are also started everday.
The management of the auto companies gave into union demands for higher wages, pensions and health care over many years resulting in cars that are no longer price competitive with auto companies that do not have unions.
On the Skids: Are U.S. Automakers Running Out of Time?
If the auto industry accepts a government bailout, I will never buy another American car again.
Either compete in the marketplace or go out of business–no bailouts.
Only if you are huge can you go to the Federal government hat in hand and ask for billions of dollars.
Your company may or may not get any money.
If you are a small to even large business, you will not get a dime and you will be lucky to even get a hearing.
Those companies that contribute to political campaigns whether Republican or Democrat due receive special consideration but no guaranntee of a bailout.
Now you know why Obama was getting all those bundled campaign contributions from Wall Street and the auto industry.
If you have a workforce with large unions, you will also get special consideration from the Democratic Party.
Looks like the economy is going into a period of stagflation or a repeat of the Carter years.
No more bailout government intervention in the economy.
Hyperinflation is the final result of bailout after bailout.
A printing press inflation a la the German Weimar Republic inflation in 1922-1923 is now in the making.
When President Barack Obama calls for wage and price controls like Nixion and Carter you will know for sure that inflation has arrived and they are in panic mode.
The fact that wage and price controls always lead to higher inflation will not matter.
First, they institute the “Fairness Doctrine” to stop free speech on talk radio–to shut you up.
Second, they take your guns–to disarm you.
Third, they take your property–to make you poor and dependent on government.
Fourth, they call out their new national civilian police force if you protest or resist.
Fifth, they will force you to “serve” in one of their corps:
“When you choose to serve — whether it’s your nation, your community or simply your neighborhood — you are connected to that fundamental American ideal that we want life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness not just for ourselves, but for all Americans. That’s why it’s called the American dream.”
The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by setting a goal that all middle school and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year and by developing a plan so that all college students who conduct 100 hours of community service receive a universal and fully refundable tax credit ensuring that the first $4,000 of their college education is completely free. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.
Seems like the revivial of the Hitler Youth corps in America together with the Sturmabteilung (the SA) or “brownshirts” as a new National Civilian Police force.
The similiarities are “creepy” as in the “creepy cult of personality.”
Obama’s Cult of Personality
This is the road to socialism and serfdom.
Sounds like Nazis Germany in 1933.
This was one of the results of the fall of the Weimar Republic.
Chancellor Hitler was also an excellent speaker and very popular with the German people from 1933 to 1942.
Start connecting the dots people.
Obama is a radical socialist and is modeling his socialist movement and related organizations after Hitler’s National Socialism.
He is using the financial crisis as a cover for instituting radical change in America’s institutions.
The American elites are betraying the American people and believe they can control Obama.
Do not bet your life on it.
Many in Germany did and lost their lives.
Where is the adult supervision?
The inmates in Congress, the Whitehouse, and in the courts are running the asylum.
Lawrence G. Hrebiniak: The Mismanagement of America, Inc.
Inflation is another tax on the American people’s savings and investments.
All the Federal government needs to do is keep bailing out their political allies and have the Federal Reserve follow a low interest expansionary monetary policy.
Sooner rather latter inflation results.
The Rise of National Socialism in the United States of America?
Time for more SIN buttons–Stop Inflation Now.
‘Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it.’
Martial Law & Economic Disorder with Glenn Beck
Obama’s Homeland Security Police State
Obama’s Homeland Security Police State
Auto Industry Won’t Go Down
Wall Street “Socialism”, the new moral hazard
Ron Paul to Bernanke – Moral hazard of currency devaluation
THE NEWSHOUR WITH JIM LEHRER | Paul Solman’s Moral Hazard Pt. 1 | PBS
THE NEWSHOUR WITH JIM LEHRER | Paul Solman’s Moral Hazard Pt. 2 | PBS
Bird and Fortune – Financial Adviser
No More Bailouts!!!
“…A bailout might avoid any near-term bankruptcy filing, but it won’t address Detroit’s fundamental problems of making cars that Americans won’t buy and labor contracts that are too rich and inflexible to make them competitive. As Paul Ingrassia notes nearby, Detroit’s costs are far too high for their market share. While GM has spent billions of dollars on labor buyouts in recent years, they are still forced by federal mileage standards to churn out small cars that make little or no profit at plants organized by the United Auto Workers.
Rest assured that the politicians don’t want to do a thing about those labor contracts or mileage standards. In their letter, Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Reid recommend such “taxpayer protections” as “limits on executive compensation and equity stakes” that would dilute shareholders. But they never mention the UAW contracts that have done so much to put Detroit on the road to ruin. In fact, the main point of any taxpayer rescue seems to be to postpone a day of reckoning on those contracts. That includes even the notorious UAW Jobs Bank that continues to pay workers not to work.
A Detroit bailout would also be unfair to other companies that make cars in the U.S. Yes, those are “foreign” companies in the narrow sense that they are headquartered overseas. But then so was Chrysler before Daimler sold most of the car maker to Cerberus, the private equity fund. Honda, Toyota and the rest employ about 113,000 American auto workers who make nearly four million cars a year in states like Alabama and Tennessee. Unlike Michigan, these states didn’t vote for Mr. Obama.
But the very success of this U.S. auto industry indicates that highly skilled American workers can profitably churn out cars without being organized by the UAW. A bailout for Chrysler would in essence be assisting rich Cerberus investors at the expense of middle-class nonunion auto workers. Is this the new “progressive” era we keep reading so much about?
The car makers say that bankruptcy is unthinkable and “not an option.” And bankruptcy would certainly be expensive, not least for Washington itself, which could be responsible for 600,000 or so retiree pensions through the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. In that sense, the bailout is intended to rescue the politicians from having to honor that earlier irresponsible guarantee. But at least that guarantee would be finite. If Uncle Sam buys into Detroit, $50 billion would only be the start of the outlays as taxpayers were obliged to protect their earlier investment in uncompetitive companies. …”
“…Capitalism is a system of profit and loss. It works because each person and each company, in seeking its own interest, is led “as if by an invisible hand” to supply goods and services that others want. Companies that satisfy consumers prosper. Companies that can’t produce goods that consumers want–like Chrysler, repeatedly–suffer and sometimes go out of business. The failures are often painful. But as Dwight Lee and Richard McKenzie wrote in their book Failure and Progress (or at least in this column based on the book), “Economic failure is to the economy what physical pain is to the body. No one enjoys pain, but without it the body would lack the information needed to maintain its health.” Government subsidies to prevent business failure simply keep pouring money into businesses that are relatively unsuccessful at satisfying consumer desires. They are, among other things, censorship of vitally needed information. Employees, entrepreneurs, and investors need to know where their money and talent are most valuable. Profits and losses are key indicators of that.
When businesses make bad decisions, they should suffer economic losses. That’s how we keep the system honest and productive. Caroline Baum of Bloomberg points out that the bailout for subprime borrowers involved helping people to stay in homes that they couldn’t afford, in many cases because they misled lenders or connived with lenders who knew they could package and resell bad mortgages. When governments make bad decisions, they should not pour good money after bad. Instead, they should try to repeal burdensome regulations, privatize functions that ought to be private, and be willing to sell purchases they shouldn’t have made, even at a loss.
Plenty of people had warned about the problems of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. As Arnold Kling notes in a new Cato Briefing Paper, the current crisis ” may have been the most avoidable financial crisis in history.” Treasury Secretary Larry Summers was one of those Cassandras back in 1999. So was Lawrence J. White in a 2004 Cato Policy Analysis calling for privatization, or failing that, a clear removal of the federal guarantee for the two companies. Instead, Congress and successive administrations continued to push Fannie and Freddie to get bigger and to buy mortgages that were in clear jeopardy of default. And now, having created this crisis, the federal government proposes not to wind down the overextended companies but to take them over so they can get all the benefits of crack federal financial management. Kling proposes a better exit strategy. …”
“Moral hazard is the prospect that a party insulated from risk may behave differently from the way it would behave if it were fully exposed to the risk. Moral hazard arises because an individual or institution does not bear the full consequences of its actions, and therefore has a tendency to act less carefully than it otherwise would, leaving another party to bear some responsibility for the consequences of those actions. For example, an individual with insurance against automobile theft may be less vigilant about locking his or her car, because the negative consequences of automobile theft are (partially) borne by the insurance company.
Moral hazard is related to information asymmetry, a situation in which one party in a transaction has more information than another. The party that is insulated from risk generally has more information about its actions and intentions than the party paying for the negative consequences of the risk. More broadly, moral hazard occurs when the party with more information about its actions or intentions has a tendency or incentive to behave inappropriately from the perspective of the party with less information.
A special case of moral hazard is called a principal-agent problem, where one party, called an agent, acts on behalf of another party, called the principal. The agent usually has more information about his or her actions or intentions than the principal does, because the principal usually cannot perfectly monitor the agent. The agent may have an incentive to act inappropriately (from the viewpoint of the principal) if the interests of the agent and the principal are not aligned.
“In economics, hyperinflation is inflation that is “out of control”, a condition in which prices increase rapidly as a currency loses its value. Formal definitions vary from a cumulative inflation rate over three years approaching 100% to “inflation exceeding 50% a month.” In informal usage the term is often applied to much lower rates. As a rule of thumb, normal inflation is reported per year, but hyperinflation is often reported for much shorter intervals, often per month.
The definition used by most economists is “an inflationary cycle without any tendency toward equilibrium.” A vicious circle is created in which more and more inflation is created with each iteration of the cycle. Although there is a great deal of debate about the root causes of hyperinflation, it becomes visible when there is an unchecked increase in the money supply or drastic debasement of coinage, and is often associated with wars (or their aftermath), economic depressions, and political or social upheavals. …”
“…Although the inflation decreased with the introduction of the Rentenmark and the Weimar Republic continued for a decade afterwards, hyperinflation is widely believed to have contributed to the Nazi takeover of Germany. Adolf Hitler himself in his book, Mein Kampf, makes many references to the German debt and the negative consequences that brought about the “necessity” of National Socialism. The inflation also raised doubts about the competence of liberal institutions, especially amongst a middle class who had held cash savings and bonds. It also produced resentment of Germany’s bankers and speculators, many of them Jewish, whom the government and press blamed for the inflation. …”
“…The German inflation of 1914–1923 had an inconspicuous beginning, a creeping rate of one to two percent. On the first day of the war, the German Reichsbank, like the other central banks of the belligerent powers, suspended redeemability of its notes in order to prevent a run on its gold reserves.
Like all the other banks, it offered assistance to the central government in financing the war effort. Since taxes are always unpopular, the German government preferred to borrow the needed amounts of money rather than raise its taxes substantially. To this end it was readily assisted by the Reichsbank, which discounted most treasury obligations.
A growing percentage of government debt thus found its way into the vaults of the central bank and an equivalent amount of printing press money into people’s cash holdings. In short, the central bank was monetizing the growing government debt.
By the end of the war the amount of money in circulation had risen fourfold and prices some 140 percent. Yet the German mark had suffered no more than the British pound, was somewhat weaker than the American dollar but stronger than the French franc. Five years later, in December 1923, the Reichsbank had issued 496.5 quintillion marks, each of which had fallen to one-trillionth of its 1914 gold value. …”
“Adolf Hitler (20 April 1889 – 30 April 1945) was an Austrian-born politician who was elected to lead the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei NSDAP), the Nazi Party. He was Chancellor of Germany (1933–1945) and Führer und Reichskanzler of Germany (1934–1945).
Hitler was a decorated veteran of World War I who led the Nazi Party in Weimar Germany. Following his imprisonment after a 1923 failed coup, he gained support by promoting nationalism, antisemitism and anti-communism with charismatic oratory and propaganda. The Nazis executed or assassinated many of their opponents, restructured the state economy, rearmed the armed forces and established a totalitarian and fascist dictatorship. Hitler pursued a foreign policy with the declared goal of seizing Lebensraum (“living space”). The German invasion of Poland in 1939 caused the British and French Empires to declare war on Germany, leading to the outbreak of World War II in Europe.
The Axis powers occupied most of continental Europe and parts of Asia and Africa until defeated by the Allies. By 1945, Germany was in ruins. Hitler’s bid for territorial conquest and racial subjugation caused the deaths of 43 million people, including the systematic genocide of an estimated six million Jews as well as various additional “undesirable” populations in what is known as the Holocaust.
During the final days of the war in 1945, as Berlin was being invaded by the Red Army, Hitler married Eva Braun. Less than 24 hours later, the two committed suicide in the Führerbunker. …”
With this combination of legislative and executive power, Hitler’s government further suppressed the remaining political opposition. The Communist Party of Germany and the Social Democratic Party (SPD) were banned, while all other political parties were forced to dissolve themselves. Finally, on 14 July, the Nazi Party was declared the only legal party in Germany. Labour unions were merged with employers’ federations into an organisation under Nazi control, and the traditional autonomy of German state governments was abolished.
Hitler also used the SA paramilitary to push Hugenberg into resigning, and proceeded to politically isolate Vice-Chancellor Papen. Because the SA’s demands for political and military power caused much anxiety among military leaders, Hitler used allegations of a plot by the SA leader Ernst Röhm to purge the SA’s leadership during the Night of the Long Knives. Opponents unconnected with the SA were also murdered, notably Gregor Strasser and former Chancellor Kurt von Schleicher.
President Paul von Hindenburg died on 2 August 1934. Rather than holding new presidential elections, Hitler’s cabinet passed a law proclaiming the presidency dormant and transferred the role and powers of the head of state to Hitler as Führer und Reichskanzler (leader and chancellor). Thereby Hitler also became supreme commander of the military, whose officers then swore an oath not to the state or the constitution but to Hitler personally. In a mid-August plebiscite, these acts found the approval of 84.6% of the electorate. This action technically violated both the constitution and the Enabling Act. The constitution had been amended in 1932 to make the president of the High Court of Justice, not the chancellor, acting president until new elections could be held. The Enabling Act specifically barred Hitler from taking any action that tampered with the presidency. However, no one dared object. With this action, Hitler effectively removed the last remedy by which he could be dismissed from office—and with it, all checks and balances on his power.
In 1938, Hitler forced the resignation of his War Minister (formerly Defense Minister), Werner von Blomberg, after evidence surfaced that Blomberg’s new wife had a criminal past. Hitler replaced the Ministry of War with the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (High Command of the Armed Forces, or OKW), headed by General Wilhelm Keitel. More importantly, Hitler announced he was assuming personal command of the armed forces. He took over Blomberg’s other old post, that of Commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces, for himself. He was already Supreme Commander by virtue of holding the powers of the president. The next day, the newspapers announced, “Strongest concentration of powers in Führer’s hands!” Many experts believe that it was at this point that Hitler became absolute dictator of Germany. It can, however, be argued that he became absolute dictator four years earlier with his assumption of the president’s powers. …”
“…The Hitler Youth (German: Hitler-Jugend(help·info) , abbreviated HJ) was a paramilitary organization of the Nazi Party. It existed from 1922 to 1945. The HJ was the second oldest paramilitary Nazi group, founded one year after its adult counterpart, the Sturmabteilung (the SA). …”
“…The HJ was organized into corps under adult leaders, and the general membership comprised boys aged fourteen to eighteen. From 1936, membership of the HJ was compulsory for all young German men. The HJ was also seen as an important stepping stone to future membership of the elite Schutzstaffel (the SS). Members of the HJ were particularly proud to be bestowed with the single Sig Rune (victory symbol) by the SS. The SS utilized two Sig Runes as their mark, and this gesture served to symbolically link the two groups.
The HJ was organized into local cells on a community level. Such cells had weekly meetings at which various Nazi doctrines were taught by adult HJ leaders. Regional leaders typically organized rallies and field exercises in which several dozen Hitler Youth cells would participate. The largest HJ gathering usually took place annually, at Nuremberg, where members from all over Germany would converge for the annual Nazi Party rally.
The HJ maintained training academies comparable to preparatory schools. They were designed to nurture future Nazi Party leaders, and only the most radical and devoted HJ members could expect to attend.
The HJ also maintained several corps designed to develop future officers for the Wehrmacht. The corps offered specialist pre-training for each of the specific arms for which the HJ member was ultimately destined. The Marine Hitler Youth, for example, was the largest such corps and served as a water rescue auxiliary to the Kriegsmarine[citations needed].
Another branch of the HJ was the Deutsche Arbeiter Jugend – HJ (German Worker Youth – HY). This organization within the Hitler Youth was a training ground for future labor leaders and technicians. Its symbol was a rising sun with a swastika.
The Hitler Youth regularly issued the Wille und Macht (Will and Power) monthly magazine. This publication was also its official organ and its editor was Baldur von Schirach. Other publications included Die Kameradshaft (Comradeship), which had a girl’s version for the BDM called Mädelschaft, and a yearbook called Jungen eure Welt (Youth your World). …”
CHANGING OF THE GUARD
Web faux pas: Plan leaked for ‘civilian security force’?
Before blogs caught it, Obama site told of requiring students to serve
“…The official website of President-Elect Barack Obama, Change.gov, originally announced that Obama would “require” all middle school through college students to participate in community service programs; but after a flurry of blogs protested children being drafted into Obama’s proposed youth corps, the website’s wording was softened.
Originally, under the tab “America Serves” Change.gov read, “President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in under served schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps.
“Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year,” the site announced.
AIG uses my money to tell me how taking more of my money is good for me
By Michelle Malkin
“…In the dark of night last night, the Bush administration and AIG hammered out a plan to confiscate more of my money and yours For The Good Of The Economy. The first $85 billion didn’t work. The next $38 billion work. So let’s throw more bad money after bad! Who needs Obama? Like I’ve said repeatedly over the last year, statism and socialism are here and now. Via WSJ:
Bailout Politics The Congressional Dems who enabled this crisis are now being trusted to fix it?By Thomas Sowell
“…Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac do not deserve to be bailed out, but neither do workers, families and businesses deserve to be put through the economic wringer by a collapse of credit markets, such as occurred during the Great Depression of the 1930s.
Neither do the voters deserve to be deceived on the eve of an election by the notion that this is a failure of free markets that should be replaced by political micro-managing.
If Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were free market institutions they could not have gotten away with their risky financial practices because no one would have bought their securities without the implicit assumption that the politicians would bail them out.
It would be better if no such government-supported enterprises had been created in the first place and mortgages were in fact left to the free market. This bailout creates the expectation of future bailouts.
Phasing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would make much more sense than letting politicians play politics with them again, with the risk and expense being again loaded onto the taxpayers. …”
Did the Obama Campaign Promise Media Companies Bailout Money For Positive Press?
“…The NYT’s debt has been downgraded to junk bond status.The Tribune Company has debt financing troubles. If banks,insurance companies,and car companies can loot the taxpayers because they’d paid off the right politicians: why shouldn’t we expect the media companies to do the same? The overt bias of the media,this campaign cycle,seems much more than liberal reporters air brushing Obama’s past.Has the Obama campaign promised the media companies taxpayer dollars for good coverage? Just in case you think what I written here is crackpot musings,GE the parent company of NBC,MSNBC,and CNBC is getting bailout money.A free press is only possible with the free market in goods and services which implies a healthy respect for property rights.Companies that take bailout money aren’t concerned with free speech or property rights.Something to think about as freedom gets extinguished.Just how independent can a news organization be when they are on the pad of the federal government? …”
“…When President Ford began sporting his lapel button proclaiming WIN (for Whip Inflation Now), a Miami entrepreneur named Marvin D. Baida was quick to see the possibilities. But when he tried to peddle WIN pins for a quarter each, there were few takers. Then Baida had an inspiration: he started selling a 25¢ button that declared SIN (for Stop Inflation Now). The public took to SIN instantly: 60,000 pins have been ordered, and Baida has branched out into T shirts and bumper stickers (HONK IF YOU WANT TO SIN). …”
“…The Federal Reserve describes itself as a system that is “independent within the government.” This means it must work within the overall objectives established by Congress, but its decisions do not have to be ratified by the president or anyone else in the executive branch. This level of independence is justified as both a check on executive power and as a way to manage the risk that decisions directly affecting the operation of the marketplace might become dangerously politicized. The case for a similar approach to homeland security is compelling. In both instances, the goal is to better align commercial interests with public interests.
The overall thrust of this proposed FSRS is to create a participatory system that does not unrealistically rely on the activities of federal agencies. By using the Federal Reserve as a template for enlisting expertise beyond Washington, the United States can achieve a middle ground between placing the fate of critical networks entirely in the hands of overworked federal authorities and relying on a laissez-faire approach that provides no protection.
This, admittedly, is an ambitious proposal. But now is not a time for timidity. Nor is it a time for persisting with an outmoded national security framework, designed for a different enemy in a century gone by. Americans must demand that their government put in place the kind of structure that widens the breadth and quality of civic participation in making the United States safe. And the entire nation, not just the national security establishment, must be organized for the long, deadly struggle against terrorism.”
Flynn is a retired U.S. Coast Guard commander and foremost expert on homeland security and border control, director of the Council’s Hart-Rudman Task Force on Homeland Security. Flynn’s expertise is in homeland security, transportation security, border control; international crime and the drug trade.
FOX: Scott Johnson (Obama Campaign Breaks Campaign Finance Laws in Collecting Funds)
Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions
Obama: How Much Foreign Money?
Secrets: Palin ‘One Step’ From Stealing — video.newsweek.com
Sarah Palin spent $ 150,000 in one month for clothes – The devil wears Prada!
Sarah Palin Defends $150,000 Shopping Spree 10-26-2008
I for one am getting very tired of the sexist comments of the pump and dumb drive-by media or big media and their pals on the the radical socialist left about Governor Sarah Palin.
The election is over and they are still harping about money spent on some clothes for campaign events.
A little perspective is in order.
Assume for a minute that the amount spent is $150,000 for some clothes.
What is really disturbing and should get far more attention is the millions of dollars being sent from abroad to Senator Barack Obama’s Presidential campaign by foreigners.
This is illegal no matter what the amount.
Looks like organized money laundering to me with the real source of the money unknown.
Ruehsen on Money Laundering & Terrorism Financing
Expect more huge bailouts for both domestic and foreign corporations as well as large and continuing subsidies to these same companies.
Will Obama stay bought?
Of course he will.
He will want to run again in 2012 and will need even more money.
Those individuals that contributed millions to Obama campaign are of very special interest to Obama.
Why do you think Obama was very friendly with now convicted felon Tony Rezko.
In Chicago politics a corrupt politician that is bought and paid for is called hope and change.
Change with an Asterisk
Obama LIED About Taking Money From Oil Companies
Barack Obama & Tony Rezko Connection
Barack Obama Mafia Cronyism?
Barack Obama – The Cult Continues – Tony Rezko
Rezko Guilty of 16 Counts in Corruption Case
Obama tied to Chicago corruption
The real reason big media is attacking Governor Palin is fear she will run in 2012 and win.
Big Media and the radical socialist left is doing all they can to destroy her now or at least make her “damaged” goods.
Suggest they look to the President-elect who is already damaged goods.
Big Media knows they cannot keep the lid on Obama for four years, no matter how much they hide his highly questionable past associations and alliances.
Someone always talks when faced with a long prison sentence.
69% of GOP Voters Say Palin Helped McCain
“…Ninety-one percent (91%) of Republicans have a favorable view of Palin, including 65% who say their view is Very Favorable. Only eight percent (8%) have an unfavorable view of her, including three percent (3%) Very Unfavorable.
When asked to choose among some of the GOP’s top names for their choice for the party’s 2012 presidential nominee, 64% say Palin. The next closest contenders are two former governors and unsuccessful challengers for the presidential nomination this year — Mike Huckabee of Arkansas with 12% support and Mitt Romney of Massachusetts with 11%.
Three other sitting governors – Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Charlie Crist of Florida and Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota – all pull low single-digit support.
Former California Politician Attacks VP Palin Critics
Women Against Gov Palin
the Mainstream media thinks you’re Stupid…
McCain, Palin and the Media…
Sarah Palin is change…
Background Articles and Videos
Ex-CIA Expert: Obama Took Millions in Illegal Foreign Donations
By: Kenneth R. Timmerman
“…A Newsmax investigation of Obama/Biden campaign contributors, undertaken in conjunction with a private investigative firm headed by a former CIA operations officer, has identified 118 donors who appear to lack U.S. citizenship.
Some of these “red flag” donors work for foreign governments; others have made public statements declaring that they are citizens of Cameroun, Nigeria, Pakistan, Canada, and other countries.
A Newsmax sampling of about 3,400 donors also found hundreds more who showed “yellow flags” such as not having used a Social Security number or a known U.S. address. Most U.S.-born citizens are issued Social Security numbers at birth or by the time they enter kindergarten.
Under federal law, only U.S. citizens or permanent residents may donate to federal political campaigns. It is illegal for the campaigns to accept money knowingly from foreign donors.
The McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill of 2002 placed new restrictions on political fundraising after the scandals of 1996, when the Clinton-Gore re-election campaign was exposed for having taken millions of dollars of unregulated soft money from donors with ties to Chinese military intelligence.
But even with the new laws, it remains very difficult to identify with any precision foreign money if a campaign itself does not cooperate with the Federal Election Commission and perform its own due diligence.
Until very recently, the Obama campaign had no safeguards in its online fundraising Web site designed to weed out foreign donors. Instead, its operations appeared to be designed specifically to enhance the flow of illegal money.
Obama’s Foreign Donors: The media averts its eyes
By Pamela Geller
“…I have been researching, documenting and studying thousands upon thousands of Obama’s campaign
donations for the past month. Egregious abuse was immediately evident and I published the results of my ongoing investigation. Each subsequent post built a more damning case against Obama’s illegal contribution activity.
The media took little notice of what I was substantiating. I went so far as to upload the documents so that anyone could do their own research. I asked readers to download the documents and a number of folks pitched in.
Despite dropping the groundbreaking bombshell story of “Palestinian” brothers from the Rafah refugee camp in Gaza who donated $33,000 to Obama’s campaign, no big media picked up the story. Jihadis donating to Obama from Gaza? Could there be a bigger story? Foreign donations are illegal, but this story was all that and so much more. The “Palestinian” brothers were proud and vocal of their “love” for Obama. Their vocal support on behalf of “Palestinians” spoke volumes to Obama’s campaign.
Why Is Chicago So Corrupt?And how do you measure corruption, anyway?
By Daniel Engber
“…In Chicago, corruption persisted, to some degree because the city never had the benefit of a reformist mayor like New York City’s Fiorello LaGuardia, who had political ties to FDR. Instead, Chicago moved towards a one-party system that made it even more vulnerable to corruption: The city’s last Republican mayor left office in 1931. Today, not even the Democratic primaries are competitive—for the most part, once you’re in office, you stay there. The weak campaign finance laws in Illinois probably helped to stave off competition in recent years.
The star power of Chicago politicians may also contribute to the city’s continuing problems with corruption. Incumbents tend to be big personalities who get celebrity coverage in the local papers—which sometimes translates into ethical leeway from voters. (In cities like Los Angeles and New York, local politicians take a back seat to the media celebs.)
Bonus Explainer: How do we know that Chicago’s so corrupt? The most straightforward way to measure corruption is to check the number of convicted local officials. Between 1995 and 2004, 469 politicians from the federal district of Northern Illinois were found guilty of corruption. The only districts with higher tallies were central California (which includes L.A.), and southern Florida (which includes Miami). Eastern Louisiana (and New Orleans) rank somewhat further down the list. …”
“…Thirteen years later, the now out-of-business slum lord, Tony Rezko, is a convicted felon and on his way to federal prison, while his political protégé is trying to become the head of the federal government. Do you suppose foreign-born Tony understands irony? Do you think he’s scrambling to find Eric Holder’s phone number? Although, considering Obama’s demonstrated willingness to abandon anyone who comes between him and the White House, Ol’ Tony probably shouldn’t hold his breath waiting for a return call. After all, the tens of thousands he has given Obama in the past are now chump change for a candidate who can forego public campaign funding without a backward glance at either his promises or his former mentors.
The true irony in all this is not that this champion of change is tainted; it’s by what he’s tainted. You’d at least think if this Pied Piper of America’s youth is going to be just another corrupt politician that it would be something hip like being in the pocket of some billionaire software developer or hip-hop promoter.
But slum lords? The Messiah of Change?
So what at first seemed nothing more than tainted whiffs of unwise political and religious associations by Obama are growing into a stench of ordinary political corruption that may very well be more than many moderate voters, even Democrats, can stomach. For sure there are increasing numbers of blowflies buzzing in and about the diminishing glow of that once-bright halo. Of course, for the Kool Aid drinkers, it will simply morph into a crown of thorns.
“…Government domain names (”.gov”) for websites are supposed to be restricted to eligible government organizations and programs.
Does Barack Obama’s transition website, www.change.gov — which is basically a souped-up version of his campaign site — qualify? As Ed Morrissey pointed out yesterday, “The incoming administration technically has no status as a government organization or program until January 20, 2009. The “Office of the President-Elect” doesn’t exist within the government.”
The primary goal of the transition site seems to be to collect e-mail addresses and personal information — for future fund-raising and political organizing projects. More on that in a moment.
Did the GSA, which administers the rules governing .gov websites, vet this site? One industry exec doesn’t think so, and has sent a complaint:
To whom it may concern,
Recently a new .gov domain name was registered. The name of this domain was http://www.change.gov. This appears to be a violation of the Domain Naming Conventions Summary located at https://www.dotgov.gov/dnc.aspx. The domain does not appear to meet the criteria outlined on that page. It is my belief that the name was granted without the proper review, due to the current political climate and may in fact have been a political favor which is a clear violation of federal law.
What is the process to file a complaint regarding improper use of the .gov TLD?
Thank you for your time and cooperation.
Chief Technology Officer
Known Element Enterprises – Corporate …”
FEC Rules Leave Loopholes For Online Donation Data
Reports Of Irregularities In Donations Under $200 Raise Questions Of Who Bears The Burden Of Filtering Out Improper Money
by Neil Munro
“The increasing use of online financial tools, debit cards and prepaid credit cards to make political contributions has created technological loopholes in federal and public oversight of campaign donations.
The result has been a recent spate of news stories raising questions about apparently implausible or suspicious donations to the presidential campaigns. Right-of-center activists also claim that Barack Obama‘s campaign has collected tens of millions of dollars from suspect overseas donors. Their complaints spurred the Republican National Committee on Oct. 6 to ask the Federal Election Commission for an investigation of the Obama donations.
To test the campaigns’ practices, this author bought two pre-paid American Express gift cards worth $25 each to donate to the Obama and McCain campaigns online. As required by law, the campaigns’ Web sites asked for, and National Journal provided, the donor’s correct name, location and employment. The cards were purchased with cash at a Washington, D.C., drugstore, and the campaigns’ Web sites were accessed through a public computer at a library in Fairfax County, Virginia.
The Obama campaign’s Web site accepted the $25 donation, but the McCain campaign’s Web site rejected it. …”
“Money laundering is the practice of engaging in financial transactions in order to conceal the identity, source, and/or destination of money, and is a main operation of the underground economy.
In the past, the term “money laundering” was applied only to financial transactions related to organized crime. Today its definition is often expanded by government regulators (such as the United States Office of the Comptroller of the Currency) to encompass any financial transaction which generates an asset or a value as the result of an illegal act, which may involve actions such as tax evasion or false accounting. As a result, the illegal activity of money laundering is now recognized as potentially practiced by individuals, small and large businesses, corrupt officials, members of organized crime (such as drug dealers or the Mafia), and even corrupt states, through a complex network of shell companies and trusts based in offshore tax havens. A few examples of money laundering are smurfing or kiting.
The increasing complexity of financial crime, the increasing recognized value of so-called “financial intelligence” (FININT) in combating transnational crime and terrorism, and the speculated impact of capital extracted from the legitimate economy has led to an increased prominence of money laundering in political, economic, and legal debate. …”
“…Money Laundering Basics
Money laundering, at its simplest, is the act of making money that comes from Source A look like it comes from Source B. In practice, criminals are trying to disguise the origins of money obtained through illegal activities so it looks like it was obtained from legal sources. Otherwise, they can’t use the money because it would connect them to the criminal activity, and law-enforcement officials would seize it.
The most common types of criminals who need to launder money are drug traffickers, embezzlers, corrupt politicians and public officials, mobsters, terrorists and con artists. Drug traffickers are in serious need of good laundering systems because they deal almost exclusively in cash, which causes all sorts of logistics problems. Not only does cash draw the attention of law-enforcement officials, but it’s also really heavy. Cocaine that’s worth $1 million on the street weighs about 44 pounds (20 kg), while a stash of U.S. dollars worth $1 million weighs about 256 pounds (116 kg). …”
“…Even in the freest society power is charged with the impulse to turn men into precise, predictable automata. When watching men of power in action it must be always kept in mind that, whether they know it or not, their main purpose is the elimination or neutralization of the independent individual – the independent voter, consumer, worker, owner, thinker – and that every device they employ aims at turning man into a manipulatable ‘animated instrument,’ which is Aristotle’s definition of a slave.
On the other hand, every device employed to bolster individual freedom must have as its chief purpose the impairment of the absoluteness of power. The indications are that such an impairment is brought about not by strengthening the individual and pitting him against the possessors of power, but by distributing and diversifying power and pitting one category or unit of power against the other. Where power is one, the defeated individual, however strong and resourceful, can have no refuge and no recourse. …”
~Eric Hoffer, The Ordeal of Change, 1976
YOU wanted “change”…
The pump and dumb drive-by mainstream media or big media for short have already started to cover their asses (CYA) about not reporting about Barack Obama–the “creepy cult of personality” that we do not know.
Brokaw and Rose Admit They Don’t Know Much About Obama.
Who Is Barack Obama? Who doesn’t Know?
Big media is slowly going into dump mode.
They are running scared.
Serves them right.
A narcissistic radical socialist diletante appears to be a fairly accurate description of President-elect Obama but rather long.
The first thing a man will do for his ideals is lie.
~Joseph A. Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis , page 43.
Jackie Mason ’08 Vlog 24 Obama’s Fraud
The Great Pretender
Background Articles and Videos
Obama – Building a Religion
The cult of Obama and the Obama youth. remember history.
The Obama Youth
Return of the Creepy Obama Kids
Obama Youth – Junior Fraternity Regiment
Creepy Obama Music – From Acceptance Speech
MIND CONTROL MADE EASY! Become a Cult Leader Today!
Undercover Marketing – The new Invasion of Body Snatchers
The Secret Side of David Axelrod
The Obama campaign’s chief strategist is a master of “Astroturfing” and has a second firm that shapes public opinion for corporations
“…From the same address in Chicago’s River North neighborhood, Axelrod operates a second business, ASK Public Strategies, that discreetly plots strategy and advertising campaigns for corporate clients to tilt public opinion their way. He and his partners consider virtually everything about ASK to be top secret, from its client roster and revenue to even the number of its employees. But customers and public records confirm that it has quarterbacked campaigns for the Chicago Children’s Museum, ComEd, Cablevision, and AT&T.
ASK’s predilection for operating in the shadows shows up in its work. On behalf of ComEd and Comcast, the firm helped set up front organizations that were listed as sponsors of public-issue ads. Industry insiders call such practices “Astroturfing,” a reference to manufacturing grassroots support. Alderman Brendan Reilly of the 42nd Ward, who has been battling the Children’s Museum’s relocation plans, describes ASK as “the gold standard in Astroturf organizing. This is an emerging industry, and ASK has made a name for itself in shaping public opinion and manufacturing public support.” …”
‘The Top Ten Things that Creep Me Out About Obama’
For your reading pleasure this morning, I thought I would include something of my own creation. A “Top Ten” of things that really creep me out about Obama.One must be careful when criticizing the messiah, for obvious reasons:
I know it is not politically correct to say that Obama “creeps me out.” That’s because immediately after uttering such blasphemy, our friends on the left would put me on the couch and matter of factly inform me that I am suffering from “The White American Disease” and recommend a torturous rehabilitation that would include watching 6 hours a day of “Blaxploitation” films and continuous viewings of Roots in order to inculcate the proper amount of white guilt and outrage directed against white males into my racist psyche.
But really, some of the stuff this guy pulls is really too much. Here’s just a sample:
9. It creeps me out that there are about twice as many women at Obama rallies as there are men. Now I am not of the Melvin Udall School of anti-feminist thought (when asked how he writes women so well, Udall responds “I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability”). But what is one to think when watching the reaction of females as Obama is speaking? I’m sorry, but it is hard to imagine a man covering their mouth, chest heaving, barely able to contain himself and then ooooohing and aaaaaahhing when the messiah says something particularly vapid and innocuous.Elvis, I can understand. But a politician?It’s as if “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” has come to life and the pods have been placed in every newsroom in America. It isn’t just Crissy Mathews and MSNBC. It’s news anchors at CNN, reporters for Time and Newsweek, editorial writers at WaPo and the New York Times. Big media is in the tank for this guy in a big way. They have thrown off all semblance of fairness (never mind objectivity) and just don’t care that people know they are in Obama’s corner. They can’t be shamed into changing. They evidently won’t be deflected from doing their best to elect Obama.
This kind of thing causes the hairs on the back of my neck to prick up – like walking through a graveyard at midnight. It is just plain creepy – no other word for it.
8. It creeps me out that the press seems hypnotized by this guy. Grown men and women blubbering like babes when talking about how exciting he is, how mesmerizing he is when he peaks. …”
Barack Obama seduced whites with a vision of their racial innocence precisely to coerce them into acting out of a racial motivation.
“…Obama’s special charisma — since his famous 2004 convention speech — always came much more from the racial idealism he embodied than from his political ideas. In fact, this was his only true political originality. On the level of public policy, he was quite unremarkable. His economics were the redistributive axioms of old-fashioned Keynesianism; his social thought was recycled Great Society. But all this policy boilerplate was freshened up — given an air of “change” — by the dreamy post-racial and post-ideological kitsch he dressed it in.
This worked politically for Obama because it tapped into a deep longing in American life — the longing on the part of whites to escape the stigma of racism. In running for the presidency — and presenting himself to a majority white nation — Obama knew intuitively that he was dealing with a stigmatized people. He knew whites were stigmatized as being prejudiced, and that they hated this situation and literally longed for ways to disprove the stigma.
Obama is what I have called a “bargainer” — a black who says to whites, “I will never presume that you are racist if you will not hold my race against me.” Whites become enthralled with bargainers out of gratitude for the presumption of innocence they offer. Bargainers relieve their anxiety about being white and, for this gift of trust, bargainers are often rewarded with a kind of halo. …”
“…The kind of self-righteous self-confidence that has become Obama’s trademark is usually found in sophomores in Ivy League colleges– very bright and articulate students, utterly untempered by experience in real world.
The signs of Barack Obama’s self-centered immaturity are painfully obvious, though ignored by true believers who have poured their hopes into him, and by the media who just want the symbolism and the ideology that Obama represents. …”
“…For someone who has actually accomplished nothing to blithely talk about taking away what has been earned by those who have accomplished something, and give it to whomever he chooses in the name of “spreading the wealth,” is the kind of casual arrogance that has led to many economic catastrophes in many countries.
The equally casual ease with which Barack Obama has talked about appointing judges on the basis of their empathies with various segments of the population makes a mockery of the very concept of law.
After this man has wrecked the economy and destroyed constitutional law with his judicial appointments, what can he do for an encore? He can cripple the military and gamble America’s future on his ability to sit down with enemy nations and talk them out of causing trouble. …”
“…Despite his words today about “change” and “cleaning up the mess in Washington,” Obama was not on the side of reformers who were trying to change the status quo of corrupt, machine politics in Chicago and clean up the mess there. Obama came out in favor of the Daley machine and against reform candidates.
Senator Obama is running on an image that is directly the opposite of what he has been doing for two decades. His escapes from his past have been as remarkable as the great escapes of Houdini.
Why much of the public and the media have been so mesmerized by the words and the image of Obama, and so little interested in learning about the factual reality, was perhaps best explained by an official of the Democratic Party: “People don’t come to Obama for what he’s done, they come because of what they hope he can be.”
David Freddoso’s book should be read by those people who want to know what the facts are. But neither this book nor anything else is likely to change the minds of Obama’s true believers, who have made up their minds and don’t want to be confused by the facts. …”
“…Sex education for kindergartners is just one of many issues on which Barack Obama has lined up consistently on the side of arrogant elitists of the far left. Senator Obama’s words often sound very reasonable and moderate, as well as lofty and inspiring. But everything that he has actually done over the years places him unmistakably with the extreme left elitists.
Sadly, many of those who are enchanted by his rhetoric are unlikely to check out the facts. But nothing is a more real or more important issue than whether what a candidate says is the direct opposite of what he has actually been doing for years.
The old phrase, “a man of high ideals but no principles,” is one that applies all too painfully to Barack Obama today. His words expressing lofty ideals may appeal to the gullible but his long history of having no principles makes him a danger of the first magnitude in the White House. …”
“…In his book “Dreams from My Father,” Obama said candidly that black teachers and administrators “defend the status quo with the same skill and vigor as their white counterparts of two decades before.”
It is not a question of Obama’s not knowing. He has demonstrated conclusively that he knows what is going on.
But, for all his eloquent words, he has voted consistently for the teachers’ unions and the status quo.
“I owe those unions,” he has said frankly. “When their leaders call, I do my best to call them back right away. I don’t consider this corrupting in any way.”
Only other politicians’ special interests are called “special interests” by Barack Obama, whose world-class ability to rationalize is his most frightening skill. …”
“…In the world of rhetoric– the world in which Obama is supreme– he is a moderate, reasonable man, reaching out to unite people and parties, dedicated to reform, opposed to special interests and a healer of the racial divide.
It is only in the real world of action that Barack Obama is the direct opposite. He has pushed for federal subsidies for ethanol, for example, as other Midwestern Senators have, since a lot of corn is grown in the Midwest to be turned into ethanol.
He is 100 percent behind the teachers’ unions in their fight to preserve their grip on the public schools and exempt their members from being judged by performance instead of seniority– which is to say, he is throwing the students, and especially minority students– to the wolves.
Senator Obama would never call voting for ethanol subsidies a vote for “special interests,” any more than he called his total support of the teachers unions a matter of special interests, even though teachers unions are the biggest obstacle to changing the status quo in public schools that have failed American children in general and minority children in particular.
Barack Obama’s track record on so-called “real issues” is no better than his track record on issues of character and judgment. The media’s track record of conveying the facts to the public is a travesty of their claims about “the public’s right to know.” …”
“Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) is a personality disorder defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the diagnostic classification system used in the United States, as “a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and a lack of empathy.” 
The narcissist is described as turning inward for gratification rather than depending on others and as being excessively preoccupied with issues of personal adequacy, power and prestige. Narcissistic personality disorder is closely linked to self-centeredness. …”
Barack Obama: The Radical New Party Socialist, With Evidence (Updated)
“…Some interesting information has surfaced today which cements what many of us already suspected about Barack Obama. For starters, Obama hasn’t always been a loyal member of the Democratic Party, and new information out now shows quite the contrary.
In 1996, during his Illinois state senate run, Barack Obama was a member of a radical socialist organization called the Chicago New Party, a group of hardcore left-wing socialists bent on infiltrating the Democratic Party with their ultra-socialist candidates.
One of their newest, most promising candidates in 1996 was none other than the now well-known Barack Obama, currently running for President of the United States of America.
These claims aren’t baseless or even a stretch, rather there are many direct links between Obama and these radical factions which I will explore below. First though, a little background on the Chicago New Party and the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America. …”
Life has no meaning unless one lives it with a will, at least to the limit of one’s will. Virtue, good, evil are nothing but words, unless one takes them apart in order to build something with them; they do not win their true meaning until one knows how to apply them.
La Belle Angele, 1889
I shut my eyes in order to see.
I have posted three videos on the art works of Paul Gauguin with YouTube on the Channel: A PRONK STUDIO VIDEO:
As Election Nears, a Black Voice Enters Comedy Fray
By FELICIA R. LEE
“…Chocolate News” borrows the fake-news template from two of Comedy Central’s most successful programs, “The Daily Show With Jon Stewart” and “The Colbert Report,” but uses the conceit to fill a void of politically charged black-oriented comedy. The first season of this show, also created by Mr. Grier, a comedian and actor, is an equal-opportunity offender, skewering rappers, Maya Angelou, gangbangers and election fraud.
“This is the perfect chance,” Mr. Grier said during an interview on Monday at the Bowery Hotel on the Lower East Side. “I wanted something where I could have the clearest and most unfiltered artistic and creative voice. I had done the sitcom thing to lesser and lesser degrees of success.”
The timing could not be better for the 52-year-old Mr. Grier, most famous for such characters as Antoine, a gay film critic, and Loomis Simmons, a crooked infomercial host, on “In Living Color,” the sketch-comedy program on Fox from 1990 to 1994 that made stars out of Keenen Ivory Wayans and his brothers Shawn, Damon and Marlon Wayans, as well as Jamie Foxx and Jim Carrey. High ratings this season for shows like “Saturday Night Live” demonstrate that this historic presidential election has whetted a public appetite for political comedy and topical satire. And since Dave Chappelle abruptly and noisily left the popular “Chappelle’s Show” in 2005, Comedy Central has not had a black host of an original sketch-comedy series at a time when race and racial politics are front and center. …”
A preview of Maya Angelou’s inaugural poem for Obama
By Michelle Malkin
“…Poet Maya Angelou’s hyper-stylized prose and diction are almost beyond parody. But the brilliant comedian David Alan Grier pulls it off. This skit of Grier-as-Angelou rehearsing her draft Obama inauguration poem will bring tears to your eyes — and you may even need a change of clothes (language warning at the end). Click to play the video: …”
Either a change for the worse or a change of party affiliation–the choice is yours.
Frankly, I have given up on the Republican Party.
I consider myself a movement conservative or more precisely a classical liberal or libertarian or “economic conservative”.
While I voted for McCain/Palin, this is the last time the Republican Party will get my vote.
I will now be listed as independent and will work for the formation of a new third party.
Remember, Abe Lincoln won only 39.9% of the vote in 1860 as the Whigs moved to the Republican Party.
Time for Republican and Democrats tired of being sold down the river by their party elites to move on.
Time to start a third party that attacts four groups of people
Fiscally responsible or balanced budget business conservatives.
Libertarians that want smaller Federal government by eliminating Departments and cutting Federal spending.
Social or religious conservatives that are pro-life and family.
No more compassionate conservative or neoconservatives that want to expand the Federal government and build democratic nations abroad.
If you are for growing the Federal government and increasing the tax burden, join the Democratic or Republican Parties.
Close and secure the border from the southern invasion.
Had McCain made illegal immigration and the fair tax the two issues of the campaign, he would have won.
No more global warming or climate change fanatics with their cap and trade tax bullshit.
I urge all movement conservatives and libertarians to find a new home and run candidates that both talk the talk and walk the walk.
It might take ten to twenty years.
Just remember Goldwater tried in 1964 and Reagan finally succeeded in 1980.
Bush-Reagan Debate 1980 on Taxes
Reagan did it by grassroot efforts.
It can be done.
Here is a reality check:
The take-away or message from these two charts is Federal government spending needs to be cut drastically by eliminating whole Federal Departments and absolutely no new Federal entitlement programs.
No more of bigger and growing budget deficits:
Why did Republican Party lose? Big Spending!
This table lists the gross federal debt as a percent of GDP by Presidential term since World War II. It is currently the highest since 1955. For net jobs changes, see Jobs created during U.S. presidential terms. The elected representatives of the United States share responsibility for making the decisions which bring about changes in the national debt. All spending bills start in the House of Representatives. It should be noted that oftentimes, the sitting President faces an opposition Congress. 
Further increases with Obama already in the works.
The new Democratic and Republican Party theme song from the gals on K-street:
K Street Washington D.C.
Time to put ACAP on big government and big spending.
Let the American people keep their hard earned money and invest or spend their money themselves!
Background Articles and Videos
What if Economic Conservatives Stay Home on Election Day?
by Michael D. Tanner
“… Yet it was the Republicans’ big-spending, big-government ways that helped ensure their defeat in the 2006 midterm elections. It wasn’t evangelical Christians or so-called “values voters” who deserted Republicans. Roughly 70 percent of white evangelicals and born-again Christians voted Republican in 2006, just a fraction less than in 2004.
It was suburbanites, independents, and others who were fed up not just with the war and corruption, but also with the Republican drift toward big-government who stayed home, or even voted Democratic, on election day 2006. That night, more than 65 percent of voters told a pollster they believed that “The Republicans used to be the party of economic growth, fiscal discipline, and limited government, but in recent years, too many Republicans in Washington have become just like the big spenders they used to oppose.”
So far, the Republican presidential candidates have offered little to … small-government conservatives.
So far, the Republican presidential candidates have offered little to these small-government conservatives. Fred Thompson gives an occasional nod to entitlement reform. John McCain has been critical of pork barrel spending. Ron Paul opposes pretty much all government programs. But by and large, the candidates have not offered a platform for curtailing the size, cost, and power of government.
Can anyone think of a single major government program that any of them, with the exception of Rep. Paul, have called for significantly cutting or eliminating? …”
“…So here we are, on the verge of the greatest accomplishment by the American Left since…Well, maybe ever. To them, the Clintons represented the Menshevik phase, while Obama represents the seizure of power by the Bolsheviks. So, to quote the original Bolshevik himself, what is to be done?
First, the Republican Party needs to relentlessly reform its state electoral rules to ensure that those voters choosing the Republican candidate are genuine Republicans who have the best interests of the Republican Party at heart. This self-evident corrective of course should have been completed by early 2001. It wasn’t, so here we are, with a self-admittedly weak-on-economics candidate trying to talk his way through a financial meltdown. It has been pathetic.
Second, we as voters and activists need to re-examine the emphasis we place — or don’t place — on communication skills. Conservatives need to rediscover the importance of communication and argument in our representatives. It is important to note that the only Republican in recent history who received any compliment from the media hive was Ronald Reagan, who they labeled “The Great Communicator.” This was of course an apparent put-down, since they were writing off Reagan’s successes as the result only of his hypnotic, inscrutable speeches. But that non-compliment-compliment was the hive’s acknowledgment that Reagan had been effective against them.
Going back to Bush 41 in 1988, the Republican’s have nominated a string of candidates who have been at best “poor” in communications. As the 1960’s Left demographic takes its seats in the highest offices of the media, academia, entertainment, arts, “public policy” think tanks, polling organizations, even business and finance, we have to assume that every one of our initiatives will be maligned, marginalized and targeted for oblivion, while the most crackpot schemes of the Left will be given respectful and favorable commentary. In this environment, we simply cannot afford any more tongue-tied leaders who are unable to argue their way out of a paper bag. …”
Just heard on the internet that the writer Michael Crichton died.
Always enjoyed his books and movies and his intellectual honesty and courage.
He will be missed by millions of his readers.
Michael Crichton, 1942-2008
‘Jurassic Park’ Author Michael Crichton Dies
Best-Selling Author Michael Crichton Dies
“CBS) Best-selling author and filmaker Michael Crichton died unexpectedly in Los Angeles Tuesday, after a courageous and private battle against cancer, according to a statement released by his family. He was 66.
Crichton is best known as the author of “Jurassic Park” and the creator of “ER.” His most recent novel, “Next,” about genetics and law, was published in December 2006.
“While the world knew him as a great story teller that challenged our preconceived notions about the world around us — and entertained us all while doing so — his wife Sherri, daughter Taylor, family and friends knew Michael Crichton as a devoted husband, loving father and generous friend who inspired each of us to strive to see the wonders of our world through new eyes,” the statement said. “He did this with a wry sense of humor that those who were privileged to know him personally will never forget.”
Through his books, Crichton served as an inspiration to students of all ages, challenged scientists in many fields, and illuminated the mysteries of the world in a way all could understand.
“He will be profoundly missed by those whose lives he touched, but he leaves behind the greatest gifts of a thirst for knowledge, the desire to understand, and the wisdom to use our minds to better our world,” the statement added. …”
‘Jurassic Park’ author, ‘ER’ creator Crichton dies
“…He published “The Andromeda Strain” while he was still a medical student at Harvard Medical School. He wrote a story about a 19th-century train robbery, called “The Great Train Robbery,” and then directed the 1979 film version.
He also directed several other films, including “Westworld” (1973), “Coma” (1978), “Looker” (1981) and “Runaway” (1984).
In 1993, while working on the film version of “Jurassic Park” with Steven Spielberg, he teamed with the director to create “ER.” The NBC series set in a Chicago emergency room debuted in 1994 and became a huge hit, making a star of George Clooney. Crichton originally wrote the script for the pilot in 1974.
“Michael’s talent out-scaled even his own dinosaurs of ‘Jurassic Park,’ ” said Spielberg, a friend of Crichton’s for 40 years, according to The Associated Press. “He was the greatest at blending science with big theatrical concepts, which is what gave credibility to dinosaurs again walking the Earth. … Michael was a gentle soul who reserved his flamboyant side for his novels. There is no one in the wings that will ever take his place.”
Crichton was “an extraordinary man. Brilliant, funny, erudite, gracious, exceptionally inquisitive and always thoughtful,” “ER” executive producer John Wells told the AP. “No lunch with Michael lasted less than three hours and no subject was too prosaic or obscure to attract his interest. Sexual politics, medical and scientific ethics, anthropology, archaeology, economics, astronomy, astrology, quantum physics, and molecular biology were all regular topics of conversation.” …”
“John Michael Crichton, M.D. pronounced /ˈkraɪtən/, (October 23, 1942 – November 4, 2008) was an American author, film producer, film director, medical doctor, and television producer best known for his science fiction and techno-thriller novels, films, and television programs. His books have sold over 150 million copies worldwide. His works were usually based on the action genre and heavily feature technology.
Many of his future history novels have medical or scientific underpinnings, reflecting his medical training and science background. He was the author of The Andromeda Strain, Congo, Disclosure, Timeline, State of Fear, Prey, and Next. He was also the creator of ER, but most famous for being the author of Jurassic Park, and its sequel The Lost World, both adapted into high grossing films and leading to the very successful franchise. …”
Apart from fiction, Crichton has written several other books based on scientific themes, amongst which is Travels, which also contains autobiographical episodes.
As a personal friend to the artist Jasper Johns, Crichton compiled many of his works in a coffee table book also named Jasper Johns. That book has been updated once.
Crichton is also the author of Electronic Life, a book that introduces BASIC programming to its readers. In his words, being able to program a computer is liberation:
In my experience, you assert control over a computer—show it who’s the boss—by making it do something unique. That means programming it….[I]f you devote a couple of hours to programming a new machine, you’ll feel better about it ever afterward.
To prove his point, Crichton included many self-written demonstrative Applesoft (for Apple II) and BASICA (for IBM PC compatibles) programs in that book. Crichton once considered updating it, but the project seems to be canceled.
Michael Crichton on People Who Don’t Mind Their Own Business
Michael Crichton on Environmentalism as a Religion
States of Fear: Science or Politics? with Michael Crichton
Michael Crichton Speech #2
Michael Crichton Speech #3
Michael Crichton Speech #4
Michael Crichton Speech #6
The Andromeda Strain (1971) TRAILER
The Andromeda Strain (1971) Part 1
Michael Crichton Movies
Charlie Rose – An hour with Michael Crichton
Michael Crichton on Global Warming, Part 1 of 3
Michael Crichton on Global Warming, Part 2 of 3
Michael Crichton on Global Warming, Part 3 of 3
Charlie Rose – CRICHTON (FROM 11/26/02) / RIPERT
Charlie Rose: November 16, 1999
First, a dialogue with best-selling author Michael Crichton about his love of storytelling, huge success with the “Jurassic Park” series, and work on the television show “E.R.” He also introduces his book “Timeline”, in which characters employ quantum teleportation to journey to the time of the Hundred Years’ War.
Charlie Rose: December 26, 1996
An interview with author and screenwriter Michael Crichton about his book about an airline accident, “Airframe”. He also talks about the role of the media during wartime and during accidents such as the one portrayed in his book.
Charlie Rose: January 14, 1994
Interview with Michael Crichton