Archive for May, 2009

Calling and Raising The Stakes for Race Card Players–Obama and Sotomayor

Posted on May 30, 2009. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Cult, Culture, Economics, Education, Employment, Immigration, Links, People, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Talk Radio, Video | Tags: Cost of Illegal Immigration, illegal immigration, La Raza, Law Enforcement, M.E.Ch.A., NCLA, Obama, President Obama, Racism, Sonia Sotomajor, Supreme Court |

lady_jsutice

sotomajor

“…I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life. …”

~Sonia Sotomayor

“When a nominee for the Supreme Court, one of only nine lifetime appointments, makes an overtly brazen racist comment about tens of millions of American citizens, we don’t need lectures. What we need to do is to confront her with what she said and what it says about her.”

~ Rush Limbaugh

Rush Limbaugh May 29 2009 Morning Update

~ Rush Limbaugh

Racism on the Supreme Court…

Tom Tancredo Still Thinks La Raza Is “Latino KKK” & Limbaugh: ‘Obama Hates White People’

Obama appoints a racists to the supreme court

Fox Anchor Wonders If GOP Can “Shut Down” Sotomayor Nomination

Fox News Digs Dirt On Sonia Sotomayor

Sonia Sotomayor

2001 speech at the University of California’s Berkeley School of Law.

“…Thus, feminist theories of judging are in the midst of creation and are not and perhaps will never aspire to be as solidified as the established legal doctrines of judging can sometimes appear to be.

That same point can be made with respect to people of color. No one person, judge or nominee will speak in a female or people of color voice. I need not remind you that Justice Clarence Thomas represents a part but not the whole of African-American thought on many subjects. Yet, because I accept the proposition that, as Judge Resnik describes it, “to judge is an exercise of power” and because as, another former law school classmate, Professor Martha Minnow of Harvard Law School, states “there is no objective stance but only a series of perspectives – no neutrality, no escape from choice in judging,” I further accept that our experiences as women and people of color affect our decisions. The aspiration to impartiality is just that–it’s an aspiration because it denies the fact that we are by our experiences making different choices than others. Not all women or people of color, in all or some circumstances or indeed in any particular case or circumstance but enough people of color in enough cases, will make a difference in the process of judging. …”

“…Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice O’Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am not so sure Justice O’Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life. …”

http://www.law.berkeley.edu/4982.htm

The lecture was published the following year in the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal.

Sonia Sotomayor: Courts make policy full clip

Coulter On Sotomayor: Clarence Thomas & Miguel Estrada’s Backgrounds Didn’t Impress Democrats

Media Matters’ Boehlert goes head-to-head with Tancredo over Sotomayor on CNN

Tom DeLay Attacks Sonia Sotomayor & La Raza On CNN

The racist comments of Sonia Sotomajor at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law should have eliminated her from serious consideration as a nominee for justice of the Supreme Court.

The fact that President Obama still went forward confirms his own views about race learned in the pews every Sunday morning over a twenty year period listening to his Reverand Wright:

Part 1: Rev. Jeremiah Wright In His Own Words

Part 2: Rev. Jeremiah Wright In His Own Words

Part 3: Rev. Jeremiah Wright In His Own Words

Since Sonia Sotomajor is also a member of the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), a group that favors amnesty or a pathway to citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants, this too should also have eliminated her from consideration.

Illegal immigrants are breaking immigration laws and should be tried and deported from the United States for entering and working in the United States illegally.

NCLR also favors driver licenses for illegal immigrants and prohibiting local and state police from the enforcement of immigration laws.

President Obama was also a big supportor of the National Council of La Raza (NCLR):

Barack Obama at Annual NCLR Conference

Judges should not in any way give the impression they are in any way supporting criminal aliens entering and working in the US.

The tactics of National Council of La Raza and the radical socialist Democratic Party is to attempt to shutup their critics by labelling their exercise of free speech as hate speech and to attempt to get them fired or thrown off the air.

Press Conference -Janet Murguía, National Council of La Raza

This exchange between Lou Dobbs and the President of La Raza is an excellent example of how they try to go about shutting people up that disagree with their radical socialist views:

Lou Dobbs slams Janet Murguia of La Raza 1 of 3

Lou Dobbs slams Janet Murguia of La Raza 2 of 3

Lou Dobbs slams Janet Murguia of La Raza 3 of 3

La Raza supports driver licenses and amnesty for illegal immigrants and calls it by the code word of a pathway to citizenship.

Judges should be for law enforcement and not supporting any organization that promotes the selective enforcement of our nation’s laws and amnesty for criminal aliens.

The American people want the immigration laws enforced.

The American people want illegal immigration to be stopped and all the illegal immigrants to either return home on their own or face criminal alien removal and deportation to their country of origin.

There are currently over twenty five million American citizens searching for a full time job while between ten and twenty million illegal immigrants are currently working in the United States.

These were jobs in the past done by American citizens, but are now done by illegal aliens who are paid less than what an American citizen would have to be paid and are compliant workers.

Every day Americans are seeing in their own communities jobs being done by illegal aliens while American citizens are unemployed.

American taxpayers are paying for the education, medical care, welfare services, jails, and prisons for illegal aliens.

No wonder the states that have encouraged illegal immigration are now facing billions in deficits!

The American people are telling both political parties to enforce immigration laws or face their wrath.

The political elites of both parties have repeatedly ignored the American people on the issue of illegal immigration.

President Obama and the radical socialist Democratic Party by refusing to enforce immigration laws is following the Cloward-Piven strategy of creating a crisis by flooding local, state, and the Federal governments with millions of illegal immigrants demanding services as well as jobs.

Cost of Illegal Immigration

CNN’s Lou Dobbs – “Hate Crimes Going Down, Not Up”

Lou Dobbs Tonight – 03.28.07 – Lou Takes on Leftist SPLC

Aztlan Rising

What the Local News Doesn’t Show You

Illegal immigrant supporters harass American citizens

Time to call the race card players bluff and raise the stakes by joining the Second American Revolution.

You are invited to attend a Tea Party on July 4, 2009, Indepedence Day!

Join the Second American Revolution

The Meaning of Independence Day

Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

Second American Revolution–Tea Party Celebrations–Washington Fair–July 4, 2009–An Open Invitation To The American People

American People’s Plan = 6 Month Tax Holiday + FairTax = Real Hope + Real Change!–Millions To March On Washington D.C. Saturday, July 4, 2009!

Millions of Rightwing Extremists To March On Washington D.C. Fair–Celebrating Independence Day Tea Parties and Chanting “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!”

Please Spread The Message of Liberty

“Proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.”

Let Freedom Ring

Thomas Paine on to Washington

switchfoot-dare you to move(live)

Background Articles and Videos

Sonia Sotomayor ‘La Raza member’
American Bar Association lists Obama choice as part of group

By Joe Kovacs

“…As President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee comes under heavy fire for allegedly being a “racist,” Judge Sonia Sotomayor is listed as a member of the National Council of La Raza, a group that’s promoted driver’s licenses for illegal aliens, amnesty programs, and no immigration law enforcement by local and state police.

According the American Bar Association, Sotomayor is a member of the NCLR, which bills itself as the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S. …”

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=99420

National Council of La Raza

“…The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) – the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States – works to improve opportunities for Hispanic Americans. Through its network of nearly 300 affiliated community-based organizations (CBOs), NCLR reaches millions of Hispanics each year in 41 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. To achieve its mission, NCLR conducts applied research, policy analysis, and advocacy, providing a Latino perspective in five key areas – assets/investments, civil rights/immigration, education, employment and economic status, and health. In addition, it provides capacity-building assistance to its Affiliates who work at the state and local level to advance opportunities for individuals and families.

Founded in 1968, NCLR is a private, nonprofit, nonpartisan, tax-exempt organization headquartered in Washington, DC. NCLR serves all Hispanic subgroups in all regions of the country and has operations in Atlanta, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Phoenix, Sacramento, San Antonio, and San Juan, Puerto Rico. …”

http://www.nclr.org/section/about/

National Council of La Raza

“The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) is a non-profit and non-partisan advocacy group in the United States. It is not to be confused with La Raza Unida. Its stated focus is on reducing poverty and discrimination, and improving opportunities for Hispanics. According to the organization’s website, it is “the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States”^{[citation needed]} and “serves all Hispanic subgroups in all regions of the country”.^{[citation needed]} NCLR receives funding from philanthropic organizations, such as the Ford Foundation, and corporations such as Citigroup and Wal-Mart. NCLR serves its constituency by means of its Affiliates, nearly 300 community-based organizations. The NCLR is headquartered in Washington, D.C. and maintains eight regional offices in Atlanta, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Phoenix, Sacramento, San Antonio, and San Juan, Puerto Rico. The current president is Janet Murguía.^[1]

^…”

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Council_of_La_Raza}

NCLR LAUDS HISTORIC APPOINTMENT OF SOTOMAYOR TO NATION’S HIGHEST COURT

Judge Sonia Sotomayor Would Be the First Hispanic on the Supreme Court if Confirmed

“…Washington, DC—NCLR (National Council of La Raza), the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States, applauds President Obama’s nomination for Supreme Court Justice, Judge Sonia Sotomayor, to replace retiring Justice David Souter.

“Today is a monumental day for Latinos. Finally, we see ourselves represented on the highest court in the land,” said Janet Murguía, NCLR President and CEO. “Judge Sotomayor’s story personifies the American Dream for so many Latinos in this country.”

“By nominating someone with the experience, background, and superb legal credentials of Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama has made an excellent choice for the entire country,” added Murguía. “The President wanted a justice who not only is a respected jurist, but also understands how the law affects the lives of everyday people. Judge Sotomayor embodies those qualities.” …”

http://www.nclr.org/content/news/detail/57500/

M.E.Ch.A.

“…M.E.Ch.A. (Spanish: Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán, “Chicano Student Movement of Aztlán“) is a student organization that seeks to promote Chicano unity and empowerment through education and political action. The acronym of the organization’s name is the Spanish word mecha, which means “fuse”. The motto of MEChA is La Unión Hace La Fuerza (“Unity Creates Strength”), according to the MEChA National Constitution.^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4]…”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEChA

M.E.Ch.A.

http://www.nationalmecha.org/philosophy.html#philosophy

NCLR AND DEMOCRACIA U.S.A. LAUNCH A NEW PARTNERSHIP TO INCREASE LATINO VOTER PARTICIPATION

“…Washington, DC– The National Council of La Raza (NCLR), the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S., and Democracia U.S.A., one of the country’s leading Latino-focused voter registration and civic engagements efforts, today announced an historic partnership designed to maximize Hispanic participation in the democratic process.

“The importance of the Latino vote in shaping our country’s future has never been greater. This is the ‘perfect moment in time’ to combine Democracia U.S.A.’s proven expertise and NCLR’s broad reach to promote increased Latino civic engagement in the 2008 elections and beyond,” said Janet Murguía, NCLR President and CEO.

“Democracia U.S.A. brings substantial expertise and a strong track record of successfully registering and turning out new Latino voters. NCLR is a leading and highly respected voice for Latinos in America. By joining forces, Latinos will be engaged in the political process like never before,” stated Jorge Mursuli, President of Democracia U.S.A. …”

http://www.nclr.org/content/news/detail/50909/

Janet Murguia, President and CEO NCLR

It’s not just ACORN: La Raza partner caught red-handed

By Michelle Malkin

“…ACORN isn’t the only one cornering the voter fraud market.

Democracia USA is a partner of open-borders La Raza (The Race) in an aggressive, nationwide Hispanic voter registration drive.

George Moneo at Babalu Blog reports that canvassers for Democracia USA have been caught on tape sabotaging electoral integrity. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/09/its-not-just-acorn-la-raza-partner-caught-red-handed/

LOL

Obama’s Supreme Court Pick: Racist?

Background Articles and Videos

Independents outnumber Democrats, Republicans

by Liz Sidoti/ Associated Press

“…Barack Obama’s presidency has ushered in an era of centrism, with the country experiencing such a boost in independent voters that they now make up the largest proportion of the electorate in 70 years.

This fickle group doesn’t have uniform opinions, so its dominance carries potential risks for emboldened Democrats and opportunities for out-of-power Republicans. …”

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2009/05/independents_outnumber_democra.html

Background Articles and Videos

Switchfoot

“Switchfoot is an American alternative rock band from San Diego, California. The band’s members are Jon Foreman (vocals, guitar), Tim Foreman (bass guitar, backing vocals), Chad Butler (drums, percussion), Jerome Fontamillas (guitar, keyboards, backing vocals), and Drew Shirley (guitar).

Known for their energetic live shows ^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4], the three guitarists in the line-up often operate simultaneously, building on the pop sensibilities of Foreman’s songwriting, and, rounded out by Fontamillas’s work on the synthesizer, bringing his industrial roots to the sound, the band works up “the Switchfoot sound”^[5] – a melodic crunch of densely layered sound featuring some electronic experimentation, and often driven by hard-charging guitar riffs, while throwing in a few softer, spacey ballads as well.

Switchfoot first gained mainstream recognition after the inclusion of four of their songs in the 2002 movie A Walk to Remember. This recognition led to their major label debut, The Beautiful Letdown, which was released in 2003. It went on to sell over 2.6 million copies and produced the band’s best-known singles, “Meant to Live” and “Dare You to Move”.

According to Jon Foreman, the name “Switchfoot” is a surfing term. “We all love to surf and have been surfing all our lives so to us, the name made sense. To switch your feet means to take a new stance facing the opposite direction. It’s about change and movement, a different way of approaching life and music”.^[6]

^…”

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switchfoot}

Switchfoot Official Site

^{http://www.switchfoot.com/}

Switchfoot Unplugged 2008

Switchfoot Interview (March 2009)

Background Articles and Videos

Barack Hussein Obama Denied National Security Clearance

“…Barack Obama cannot be Trusted with Classified Information

How can the President of the United States be denied a basic security clearance? How can the Commander and Chief of the most powerful military be denied access to classified information? Barack Obama would be denied the necessary security clearance for President if he was held to the same standard as everyone else. If you can’t pass a Secret level background investigation, which is required for many soldiers, you should not be eligible for the Presidency.

What is a Security Clearance?

Having served in the U.S. military, law enforcement, and as a civilian government contractor, I’ve had my fair share of background investigations. The United States government employs a multitier security clearance paradigm.

Confidential – Unauthorized disclosure could cause “damage to national security.”
Secret – Unauthorized disclosure could cause “serious damage to national security.”
Top Secret – Unauthorized disclosure could cause “exceptionally grave damage to national security.”

Each level of access requires a progressively more in-depth background investigation before the clearance is obtained. The President of the United States should be able to flawlessly pass the most extensive investigation and a polygraph test. Both are required for workers in some Special Access Programs classified Top Secret.

The purpose of the clearance is to determine an individual’s honesty, trustworthiness, reliability, financial responsibility, criminal activity, emotional stability, foreign influences, family associations, drug use, mental health, judicial proceedings, employment history, traits of character, and loyalty to the United States. This collective data is used to evaluate your ability and willingness to safeguard national secrets. Based on the facts about Barack Obama, he fails to satisfy the minimum requirements for even a basic secret clearance. His background investigation would have “Red Flags” shooting up in so many places; the issuing panel would deny him a clearance outright. …”

http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/profiles/blogs/barack-hussein-obama-denied

Eligibility attorney plans return to Supreme Court

Says, ‘I will be filing until I get an answer’

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

“…California attorney Orly Taitz, who has taken cases challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president to a number of courts across the nation including the U.S. Supreme Court, says she’ll be returning to the high court, this time seeking a petition for the extraordinary writ of mandamus.

“As Attorney General Eric Holder and U.S. Attorney Jeffery Taylor did not institute Quo Warranto and did not respond, I will go back to SCOTUS,” Taitz announced today on her website. …”

“…Taitz was the lead attorney earlier representing military officers from the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines when they cited Quo Warranto, a legal right established in British common law nearly 800 years ago and recognized by the U.S. Founding Fathers, to demand documentation that may prove – or disprove – Obama’s eligibility.

The legal phrase essentially means an explanation is being demanded for what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto “affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents.”

Originally requesting the action were Maj. Gen. Carroll Childers; Lt. Col. Dr. David Earl-Graef; police officer and Selected Reservist Navy Commander Clinton Grimes; Lt. Scott Easterling, now serving on active duty in Iraq; New Hampshire state Rep. Timothy Comerford; Tennessee state Rep. Frank Nicely and others.

“As president-elect, Respondent Obama failed to submit prima facie evidence of his qualifications before January 20, 2009. Election officers failed to challenge, validate or evaluate his qualifications. Relators submit that as president elect, Respondent Obama failed [to] qualify per U.S. CONST. Amend. XX [paragraph] 3,” the document said.

John Eidsmoe, an expert on the U.S. Constitution now working with the Foundation on Moral Law, has told WND the demand is a legitimate course of action. …”

http://usjf.net/archives/1211#more-1211

Barack Obama ‘receives preferential treatment on Wikipedia’, report claims

President Barack Obama was at the centre of an ethics debate last night after it was claimed he has received favourable treatment from the website Wikipedia.

“…An in-depth report by the online publication WorldNetDaily.com alleged that any negativity surrounding Mr Obama has been deliberately deleted by the online encyclopedia.

Topics routinely “scrubbed”, it was claimed, include Mr Obama’s alleged ties with such controversial figures as the so-called Weatherman terrorist, Bill Ayers, as well as the religious leader, Rev Jeremiah Wright, even though users had complied with Wikipedia rules requiring them to link additions to credible reports from news outlets. …”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/wikipedia/4965132/Barack-Obama-receives-preferential-treatment-on-Wikipedia-report-claims.html

Alias-bloopers 50th-Columbo visit CIA

Background Articles and Videos

SCOTUS pick: Sonia Sotomayor

By Michelle Malkin

“…So, it’s Sonia Sotomayor. Identity politics triumphs. Here’s the bio/record info I shared at the beginning of the month:

sotomayor

“Judge Sotomayor’s nomination to the Supreme Court would be very concerning given her hard-left record on the Court of Appeals, where she is recognized by practitioners as one of the more liberal judges.

-Judge Sotomayor’s personal views may cloud her jurisprudence. As Judge Sotomayor explained in a 2002 speech at Berkeley, she believes it is appropriate for a judge to consider their “experiences as women and people of color” in their decisionmaking, which she believes should “affect our decisions.”

-Only just recently, in Ricci v. DeStefano, Judge Sotomayor was chastised by fellow Clinton-appointee Jose Cabranes for going to extraordinary lengths to dispense with claims of unfair treatment raised by firefighters. Judge Sotomayor’s panel heard a case raising important questions under Title VII and equal protection law, but attempted to dispose of the firefighter’s arguments in a summary order, until called out by Judge Cabranes. The Supreme Court has agreed to review the case.

-Substantial questions also persist regarding Judge Sotomayor’s temperament and disposition to be a Supreme Court justice. Lawyers who have appeared before her have described her as a “bully” who “does not have a very good temperament,” and who “abuses lawyers” with “inappropriate outbursts.”

And here’s the rundown on Obama’s SCOTUS choice from Wendy Long at the Judicial Confirmation Network: …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/26/scotus-pick-sonia-sotomayor/

Sonia Sotomayor

Sonio_Sotomayor

“… Sonia Sotomayor is a federal appeals judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit based in New York City. She was nominated to this position by Bill Clinton on June 25, 1997 and received her commission on October 7, 1998. ^[1]

On Tuesday, May 26, 2009, the Associated Press reported that Barack Obama will announce during the day that he has chosen Sotomayor for the seat on the Supreme Court of the United States that is becoming vacant because of David Souter‘s announced retirement.^[2],^[3],^[4],^[5] ^[6],^[7],^[8].

As of 9:30 AM-EDT on May 26, 2009 FOX News^[9] and CNN^[10] have confirmed AP reports that Sotomayor has been nominated. A 10:15 AM EDT press conference has been scheduled at the White House.

For a link to the press conference of the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor CLICK HERE

Sotomayor, who grew up in a public housing project in the Bronx, is of Puerto Rican descent. Her father was a manual laborer who did not attend high school and who died when Sotomayor was nine years old, a year after she was diagnosed with juvenile diabetes. Her mother, a nurse, supported Sotomayor’s educational goals. Sotomayor, who is divorced, has no children.^[11]

If Sotomayor is appointed to the court, she will be the third woman ever to serve on the Supreme Court (after O’Connor and Ginsburg) as well as the court’s first justice of Hispanic descent.^[12]

There is general agreement that Sotomayor would be a “reliably liberal” vote on the nation’s high court, if she is appointed. At the same time, she is not considered to be a “favorite of the left”.^[13] Sotomayor has been described as both outspoken and “quite brash” on the bench–characteristics that could help her carve out a place in the high octane environment of the nation’s highest court.^[12]

http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Sonia_Sotomayor

Oliver Wendell Holmes

“…Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. (March 8, 1841 – March 6, 1935) was an American jurist who served on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1902 to 1932. Noted for his long service, his concise and pithy opinions, and his deference to the decisions of elected legislatures, he is one of the most widely cited United States Supreme Court justices in history, particularly for his “clear and present danger” majority opinion in the 1919 case of Schenck v. United States, and is one of the most influential American common-law judges. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Wendell_Holmes,_Jr.

Friedrich von Hayek

Friedrich August von Hayek CH (8 May 1899 – 23 March 1992) was an Austrian (and, after 1938, British) economist, philosopher and intellectual known throughout the world for his arguments about the ability of prices to aggregate knowledge, promoting classical liberalism and free-market capitalism against socialist and collectivist thought. He is considered to be one of the most important economists and political philosophers of the twentieth century,^[1] One of the most influential members of the Austrian School of economics and mainstream economics,^[2] he also made significant contributions in the fields of jurisprudence and cognitive science.

He shared the 1974 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics with Gunnar Myrdal “for their pioneering work in the theory of money and economic fluctuations and for their penetrating analysis of the interdependence of economic, social and institutional phenomena.”^[3] He also received the U.S. Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1991.^[4]

Hayek lived in Austria, Great Britain, the United States and Germany, and became a British subject in 1938. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Hayek

Advice on Consent
By the Editors

“…Judge Sonia Sotomayor is female, Hispanic, liberal, and mediocre. Conservatives should draw attention to the third adjective while understanding that the first two are likely to be politically decisive during her confirmation hearings.

Sotomayor’s liberalism would not constitute a reason for denying her a seat on the Supreme Court if it merely consisted of a set of policy positions identical to those of the Senate’s 15 most liberal members. Unfortunately, liberalism has for some time now incorporated a tacit judicial philosophy in which the goal is to impose policies as left-wing as a judge can get away with. Sotomayor seems to march to that beat. More to the point, perhaps, she has shown no signs of marching to any other one.

Judges who decide cases in this manner abuse their office and undermine the rule of law. They also generate policies that are harmful to our economy, dangerous to our national security, and destructive to our social fabric. Liberal activism on the bench has these effects even when the offending judges are geniuses. The nominee’s approach to judging is more important than her IQ, and it is on that subject that senators ought to be trying to shed light. And they should take their time doing it. Thanks to years of activism, Supreme Court justices have more power than most senators. We should spend at least as much time learning how they would exercise it as we do for Senate candidates. …”

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZmJiNzBjYzdhODE4M2ZmNmZiZWNhYzA3Yzc5NDFlOTE=

Will GOP Senators stand up against Obama SCOTUS pick?

Rick Moran

“…We are probably just hours away from an announcement of a Supreme Court nominee by Obama and it’s not clear at this point just how vigorously the GOP will oppose the almost certain liberal pick by the president.

This Politico piece by Andy Coller and Daniel Libit points out the differing philosophies of the Republicans and Democrats when it comes to SCOTUS nominations:

Conservatives remember Sen. Ted Kennedy’s ferocious attack on “Robert Bork’s America,” the pubic-hair-on-the-Coke-can humiliations visited upon Clarence Thomas and the way that Samuel Alito’s wife cried after Sen. Lindsey Graham recounted the Democrats’ charges against her husband.

Echoing a widely held conservative belief, the Heritage Foundation’s Michael Franc says the two sides just do things differently. “Liberal senators come to a battle over judicial nominations armed with submachine guns,” he said, “and conservatives come with pen knives.” …”

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/05/will_gop_senators_stand_up_aga.html

Conservatives itching for SCOTUS fight

By DANIEL LIBIT & ANDIE COLLER

“…While conservatives know that they can’t defeat Obama’s nominee without massive Democratic defections, they nevertheless want to see their senators come out with their guns blazing.

“Republicans in the House have gone a long way [toward satisfying conservatives] with votes on the stimulus,” says Gary Bauer, president of the anti-abortion, anti-gay-marriage group American Values. “But when it comes to the Senate, there are still a lot of people not convinced that … what people expect is for them to carry the banner of our philosophy as boldly and with as much confidence as the other side does.”

“The other side does not agonize about whether they are going to give a Republican Supreme Court nominee a difficult time, they just do it.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22914.html

F.A. Hayek Volume 1

Friedrich A. Hayek’s libertarian treatise
Law, Legislation and Liberty:

“…Volume 1 deals with the relationship between law and liberty in a free society. The three main tenets of Hayek’s discussion are: there are differences between the spontaneous order that exists within society as opposed to the “made” order of organizations; the laws and rules imposed by organizations limit the freedom of individuals when juxtaposed to the natural laws that exist within a larger society; and autocracy develops when organizations attempt to impose “made” order into society. In short, Hayek asserts, “freedom can be preserved only by following principles and is destroyed by following expediency.” …”

http://unix.dfn.org/af_FAHayek_vol1.shtml

The Supreme Court high hurdles contest

By Michelle Malkin • May 27, 2009 09:33 AM

hurdle

Able to leap tall life obstacles in a single bound!

Not all “compelling personal stories” are equal
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2009

“…Clever. Challenging Sotomayor’s credentials and extreme views on race and the law is not merely anti-Hispanic. It’s anti-American!

More significantly, Sen. McCaskill waved the high-hurdle card after being asked to defend Sotomayor’s infamous statement at a 2001 University of California at Berkeley speech asserting brown-skin moral authority: “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” McCaskill actually denied that Sotomayor had make the remarks, then argued the words were taken out of context.

You want context? It’s even worse than that soundbite. As National Journal legal analyst Stuart Taylor reported, “Sotomayor also referred to the cardinal duty of judges to be impartial as a mere ‘aspiration because it denies the fact that we are by our experiences making different choices than others.’ And she suggested that ‘inherent physiological or cultural differences’ may help explain why ‘our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging.’” The full speech was reprinted in something called the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal. “La Raza” is Spanish for “The Race.” Imagine if a white male Republican court nominee had published in a law review called “The Race.”

The selective elevation of hardship-as-primary qualification demeans the entire judiciary. If personal turmoil makes one “incredibly qualified to pass judgment on some of the most important cases in our country,” let’s put reality-show couple Jon and Kate Gosselin on the bench. Millions of viewers tune in to watch their “compelling personal story” of life with eight children on television. It’s a “richly, uniquely American experience” of facing obstacles and overcoming the odds. Get them robes and gavels, stat. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/27/the-supreme-court-high-hurdles-contest/

The Case Against Sotomayor by Jeffrey Rosen
Indictments of Obama’s front-runner to replace Souter.
Post Date Monday, May 04, 2009

“…But despite the praise from some of her former clerks, and warm words from some of her Second Circuit colleagues, there are also many reservations about Sotomayor. Over the past few weeks, I’ve been talking to a range of people who have worked with her, nearly all of them former law clerks for other judges on the Second Circuit or former federal prosecutors in New York. Most are Democrats and all of them want President Obama to appoint a judicial star of the highest intellectual caliber who has the potential to change the direction of the court. Nearly all of them acknowledged that Sotomayor is a presumptive front-runner, but nearly none of them raved about her. They expressed questions about her temperament, her judicial craftsmanship, and most of all, her ability to provide an intellectual counterweight to the conservative justices, as well as a clear liberal alternative.

The most consistent concern was that Sotomayor, although an able lawyer, was “not that smart and kind of a bully on the bench,” as one former Second Circuit clerk for another judge put it. “She has an inflated opinion of herself, and is domineering during oral arguments, but her questions aren’t penetrating and don’t get to the heart of the issue.” (During one argument, an elderly judicial colleague is said to have leaned over and said, “Will you please stop talking and let them talk?”) Second Circuit judge Jose Cabranes, who would later become her colleague, put this point more charitably in a 1995 interview with The New York Times: “She is not intimidated or overwhelmed by the eminence or power or prestige of any party, or indeed of the media.” …”

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=45d56e6f-f497-4b19-9c63-04e10199a085

Sotomayor: “Empathy” in Action

by Thomas Sowell

“…The Supreme Court of the United States is in effect operating on the heart of our nation– the Constitution and the statutes and government policies that all of us must live under.

Barack Obama’s repeated claim that a Supreme Court justice should have “empathy” with various groups has raised red flags that we ignore at our peril– and at the peril of our children and grandchildren.

“Empathy” for particular groups can be reconciled with “equal justice under law”– the motto over the entrance to the Supreme Court– only with smooth words. But not in reality. President Obama used those smooth words in introducing Judge Sotomayor but words do not change realities. …”

http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/05/27/sotomayor__empathy_in_action

Obamas Fascists America

Levin on Obama and Supreme Court Justices 1

Levin on Obama and Supreme Court Justices 2

Levin on Obama and Supreme Court Justices 3

Levin on Obama and Supreme Court Justices 4

Levin on Obama and Supreme Court Justices 5

Barack Obama: The US Constitution Is “Imperfect”

BARACK OBAMA IS ” ANTI ” CONSTITUTION (OF THE UNITED STATES)…..RUSH LIMBAUGH / PART 1

BARACK OBAMA IS ” ANTI ” CONSTITUTION (OF THE UNITED STATES)…..RUSH LIMBAUGH / PART 2

Supreme Court Nominee Sonia Sotomayor’s Statement

BARACK OBAMA Pastor ANTI-AMERICAN Rev Jeremiah Wright Racism

Part 1: Rev. Jeremiah Wright In His Own Words

Part 2: Rev. Jeremiah Wright In His Own Words

Part 3: Rev. Jeremiah Wright In His Own Words

Charles Krauthammer on Jeremiah Wright

Background Articles and Videos

The Fountainhead

“…The Fountainhead is a 1943 novel by Ayn Rand. It was Rand’s first major literary success and its royalties and movie rights brought her fame and financial security. The book’s title is a reference to Rand’s statement that “man’s ego is the fountainhead of human progress”.

The Fountainhead’s protagonist, Howard Roark, is an idealistic young architect who chooses to struggle in obscurity rather than compromise his artistic and personal vision. The book follows his battle to practice modern architecture, which he believes to be superior, despite an establishment centered on tradition-worship. How others in the novel relate to Roark demonstrate Rand’s various archetypes of human character, all of which are variants between Roark, her ideal man of independent-mindedness and integrity, and what she described as the “second-handers.” The complex relationships between Roark and the various kinds of individuals who assist or hinder his progress, or both, allows the novel to be at once a romantic drama and a philosophical work.

The manuscript was rejected by twelve publishers before a young editor, Archibald Ogden, at the Bobbs-Merrill Company publishing house wired to the head office, “If this is not the book for you, then I am not the editor for you.” Despite generally negative early reviews from the contemporary media, the book gained a following by word of mouth and sold hundreds of thousands of copies. The Fountainhead was made into a Hollywood film in 1949, with Gary Cooper in the lead role of Howard Roark, and with a screenplay by Ayn Rand herself. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fountainhead

The Relevance of Atlas Shrugged in Today’s World – Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

The Moral Defense of Freedom

Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, Ed Snider Speech

Ayn Rand Interview with Tom Snyder, (1 of 3)

Ayn Rand Interview with Tom Snyder, (2 of 3)

Ayn Rand Interview with Tom Snyder, (3 of 3)

The Meaning of Independence Day – Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

Background Articles and Videos

Mary Cassatt

Mary Stevenson Cassatt (May 22, 1844 – June 14, 1926) (pronounced [kəˈsæt]) was an American painter and printmaker. She lived much of her adult life in France, where she first befriended Edgar Degas and later exhibited among the Impressionists.

Cassatt often created images of the social and private lives of women, with particular emphasis on the intimate bonds between mothers and children.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Cassatt

Mary Cassatt

http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/cassatt/

Background Articles and Videos

Rush Limbaugh — “Obama is Ruining the Economy”

By Rush Limbaugh

“…”Obama and Pelosi and Dingy Harry and Barney Frank and Chris Dodd said that we had all the answers, that we can borrow and spend our way out of this. In fact, that’s the only thing that we could do! The only solution we had was to borrow and spend our way out of it. So they spent all the money and then some, and things are getting worse and they’re forecast get worse? Okay, so let’s add it up. This crowd was wrong about Iraq. They’re wrong about Guantanamo Bay. They were wrong about General Petraeus. They were wrong that Americans want bigger government and higher taxes. The odds are that this bunch is wrong about the economy, too.” …

http://www.opposingviews.com/articles/opinion-rush-limbaugh-obama-is-ruining-the-economy-r-1242945224

Rush Limbaugh on Hannity: Does Rush Want Obama to Succeed?

Background Articles and Videos

Dueling banjos in Washington; Updated

By Michelle Malkin

“… It’s the Obama-Cheney showdown this morning. I, for one, am gratified to see this White House forced to put national security on the front burner. If not for the forceful public defenses by Vice President Cheney of the aggressive, proactive measures the last administration took to keep us safe, the current commander-in-chief would be happily gabbling about solar panels and weatherization subsidies or somesuch.

National security is and always will be the Democrats’ soft spot. And they know it.

Which is why Team Obama scrambled to preempt Cheney’s AEI speech.

Which is why the same Senate Democrats who cheered so lustily when Obama declared his Gitmo closure date turned around and denied him the funds to implement it.

Which is why Obama is embracing the very same principles of preventive detention that the Left went bananas over for the past eight years.

And which is why you woke up this morning to news of one of countless terror busts whose results were, ahem, inherited by the Obama administration.

The men and women who worked tirelessly the past eight years to prevent and disrupt jihadist plots at home and abroad aren’t the ones who’ve “lost their way.” …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/21/dueling-banjos-in-washington/

Cheney Outshines Obama… Dear Leader Forgets Defense Chief’s Name During Security Speech

“…To Obama, surrendering Iraq to Al-Qaeda and the Iranians was a better security stance than building a democracy in the former Baathist regime. Obama denies the success of enhanced interrogation techniques despite the fact that the CIA confirmed that waterboarding of 9/11 mastermind Led to Info that aborted 9/11-style attack on Los Angeles. Obama says Gitmo makes us unsafe but would release Uighur terrorists inside the US tomorrow if he could.
If it wasn’t clear before that Dear Leader is a committed moonbat, it should be after today’s speech.
Here’s Obama accusing the Bush Adminstration of being dishonest:

Unfortunately, faced with an uncertain threat, our government made a series of hasty decisions. And I believe that those decisions were motivated by a sincere desire to protect the American people. But I also believe that – too often – our government made decisions based upon fear rather than foresight, and all too often trimmed facts and evidence to fit ideological predispositions. Instead of strategically applying our power and our principles, we too often set those principles aside as luxuries that we could no longer afford. And in this season of fear, too many of us – Democrats and Republicans; politicians, journalists and citizens – fell silent.

It would be nice if he for once could back up his attacks with specific instances where the Bush Administration “trimmed facts and evidence.”
It would be nice if he could back up his Far Left talking points before he accused the previous administration of lying.
How disgusting! …”

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/05/cheney-outshines-obama-dear-leader.html

Obama’s Blueprint and America’s Enemies

Despite the Talk, Adopting the Bush Approach

Andrew McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor and author of “Willful Blindness: Memoir of the Jihad,” is legal affairs editor at National Review.

“…It is also not true, no matter how many times Mr. Obama and his supporters repeat it, that Guantanamo Bay and enhanced interrogation (or “torture” as they call it) are primary drivers of terrorist recruitment. The principal exacerbating factor in recruitment is successful terrorist attacks. That is what convinces the undecided to join jihadist movements, and that is what the Bush administration’s approach prevented. And if the president truly insists on “transparency,” he should stop suppressing memoranda that detail the effectiveness of the C.I.A. interrogation program. Given his decision to reveal C.I.A. tactics, is it too much to ask that the American people be informed about what intelligence the program yielded? …”

http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/obamas-blueprint-and-americas-enemies/#mccarthy

High Noon

“High Noon is an American 1952 western film directed by Fred Zinnemann and starring Gary Cooper and Grace Kelly. The film tells the story of a town marshal who is forced to face a gang of killers by himself. The screenplay was written by Carl Foreman, based on John W. Cunningham’s pulp short story, “The Tin Star”.

In 1989, High Noon was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant”, entering the registry during the latter’s first year of existence. The film is #27 on the American Film Institute’s 2007 list of great films. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Noon

Dick Cheney Redux: Liz Cheney Gives Us Round Two of Fear Mongering in MSNBC

Lawrence O’Donnell Goes Nuts Over Cheney’s Speech

Background Articles and Videos

The CIA’s Fight With Obama

By David-Crockett

“…The novelist Charles McCarry was a deep cover CIA operative for ten years. “I never met a stupid person in the agency,” he said in a 2004 interview. “Or an assassin. Or a Republican.”

The CIA’s war against President Bush was motivated by ass covering, or by political partisanship. But with President Obama, it’s personal.

Many are furious about his disclosure of explicit details of the interrogation methods used on some al Qaida bigwigs, and his waffling on whether or not those who employed them will be subject to prosecution.

Others are incensed by his decision to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay, and to let some of those incarcerated there (17 Chinese Uighurs) loose in the United States.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held two hush hush meetings with CIA Director Leon Panetta and Democratic members of the Intelligence Committee last week.

“Her fear and frustration have apparently given way to panic after word reached her of the CIA’s reaction to the damage she, President Obama and other Democrats have done to the spy agency in the last three months, wrote Jed Babbin, a former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, in Human Events May 1. “Pelosi learned that her actions and those of President Obama have so damaged CIA morale that the agency’s ability to function could be in danger.” …”

http://www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/?p=1640

The Obama Time Line

“…The following timeline presents the important aspects of Barack Obama’s life, from birth to the present. Every attempt has been made to present accurate information, names, and dates. If errors or significant omissions are noted, please feel free to contact the author at colony14@gmail.com. Although the timeline’s content will frequently change as events occur, the author will gladly send you a .pdf version if you would find that useful.

NOTE: Considerable time and effort has gone into the research and creation of this timeline. This work is the intellectual property of the author and is fully protected by copyright law ©. Any non-profit re-posting or re-printing of this timeline without crediting the author (Don Fredrick at www.colony14.net) and without the consent of the author is prohibited. Any for-profit re-posting or re-printing of this timeline is prohibited.

There are tentative plans for the publication of “The Obama Timeline” in book form in the summer of 2009. The book will cover the period of 1961 through Obama’s first 100 days in office. Watch www.colony14.net for news of publication and availability. …”

http://colony14.net/id41.html

Security Clearance

“…A security clearance is a status granted to individuals allowing them access to classified information, i.e., state secrets. The term “security clearance” is also sometimes used in private organizations that have a formal process to vet employees for access to sensitive information. A clearance by itself is normally not sufficient to gain access; the organization must determine that the cleared individual needs to know the information. No one is supposed to be granted access to classified information solely because of rank, position, or a security clearance. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_clearanceBackground

Check or Background Investigation

A background check or background investigation is the process of looking up and compiling criminal records, commercial records and financial records (in certain instances such as employment screening) of an individual.

Background checks are often requested by employers on job candidates, especially on candidates seeking a position that requires high security or a position of trust, such as in a school, hospital, financial institution, airport, and government (including law enforcement and military). These checks are traditionally administered by a government agency for a nominal fee, but can also be administered by private companies. Results of a background check typically include past employment verification, credit score, and criminal history.

These checks are often used by employers as a means of objectively evaluating a job candidate’s qualifications and to identify potential hiring risks. However, these checks may sometimes be used for illegal purposes, such as unlawful discrimination (or employment discrimination), identity theft, and violation of privacy. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_check

Could Barack Obama Pass a Security Background Check?

“…Given all the shady characters (Bill Ayers, Rashid Khalidi, Ali Abunimah, et al) that Barack Obama has been associated with, the question has come up–understandably–of whether Obama could pass a security clearance background check like average Americans have to go through when working around sensitive national security information. …”

http://www.dakotavoice.com/2008/10/could-barack-obama-pass-security.html

U.S. bonkers for Obama birth certificate billboard

By David-Crockett

“…“As Obama transforms this country from self-governing constitutional republic to one governed by a central ruling elite, the simple fact remains that no controlling legal authority has established that he is indeed a ‘natural born citizen’ as the Constitution requires,” Farah said. “Obama’s promises of transparency have become a bad joke as he continues to hide simple, innocuous documents like his birth certificate and his student records.”

The idea behind the billboard campaign is to make sure Obama cannot avoid this question any longer. He must be asked to produce it at every turn, Farah says. Billboard space is currently being negotiated in Los Angeles, Houston, Dallas, San Antonio, Sacramento, San Francisco, New York-New Jersey, Des Moines, Seattle and other metro areas. …”

http://www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/?p=1825

Obama Couldn’t Be Cleared

By George H. Wittman

“…The lowest-ranking enlisted persons in the Armed Forces of the United States who are expected to handle sensitive matters in the scores of jobs involving classified equipment or written material must be investigated before obtaining their security clearance. Could Barack Obama gain such a clearance? To begin, the clearance applicant would have to complete a detailed personal history form that includes, if necessary, government access to all health and education files. This is the starting point of all security investigations. Top Secret clearance involves a field investigation rather than the Secret version that is usually limited to a “name check” that is a basic police and public information file review. For the TS clearance an investigator will visit the home neighborhoods and work place sites of the applicant in search of supportive and/or derogatory references. If the clearance is extended further into the handling of information of such importance that it requires a compartmented distribution, the field and document investigation is pursued with considerable vigor over a lengthy period of time. Nuclear and other sensitive technical or political matters fall into this category. In all cases, whether on the lower level or up to the most sensitive intelligence, the background of the applicant’s personal and business involvement forms the nucleus of the initial phase of the investigation. The people with whom the applicant associates lead the investigator to personal connections and matters relative to the individual’s character, beliefs and past acts appropriate to matters of security. Eligibility for clearance at all levels is directly influenced by the people with whom one associates. Yes, who your friends are and have been does count — a great deal. This is true, of course, in many types of police investigations where suspicion is adequate reason for further inquiry. In matters of security clearance, past associations often can mean the end of the process rather than just the beginning. …”

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-129216

Soviet spies in America (1921-1948)

From Conservapedia

“…Chronology and structure of Comintern, Communist Party USA, and Soviet espionage networks in the United States. The CPUSA’s secret apparatus operated a very large and successful organization in the United States from about 1921 to about 1948. …”

http://www.conservapedia.com/Soviet_spies_in_America_(1921-1948)

Top secret NSA – by Discovery Channel – 1/5

Top secret NSA – by Discovery Channel – 2/5

Top secret NSA – by Discovery Channel – 3/5

Top secret NSA – by Discovery Channel – 4/5

Top secret NSA – by Discovery Channel – 5/5

Cold War: Spies – part 1

Cold War: Spies – part 2

Cold War: Spies – part 3

Cold War: Spies – part 4

Cold War: Spies – part 5

1 of 4: Victor Davis Hanson: “Political Challenges Facing the Obama Administration”

2 of 4: Victor Davis Hanson: “Political Challenges Facing the Obama Administration”

3 of 4: Victor Davis Hanson: “Political Challenges Facing the Obama Administration”

4 of 4: Victor Davis Hanson: “Political Challenges Facing the Obama Administration”

1 of 2: Victor Davis Hanson – Question & Answer Session

Background Articles and Videos

Gross Domestic Product

The gross domestic product (GDP) or gross domestic income (GDI), a basic measure of an economy’s economic performance, is the market value of all final goods and services produced within the borders of a nation in a year. ^[1] GDP can be defined in three ways, all of which are conceptually identical. First, it is equal to the total expenditures for all final goods and services produced within the country in a stipulated period of time (usually a 365-day year). Second, it is equal to the sum of the value added at every stage of production (the intermediate stages) by all the industries within a country, plus taxes less subsidies on products, in the period. Third, it is equal to the sum of the income generated by production in the country in the period—that is, compensation of employees, taxes on production and imports less subsidies, and gross operating surplus (or profits).^[2] ^[3]

The most common approach to measuring and quantifying GDP is the expenditure method:

GDP = consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports), or,
GDP = C + I + G + (X − M).

“Gross” means that depreciation of capital stock is not subtracted out of GDP. If net investment (which is gross investment minus depreciation) is substituted for gross investment in the equation above, then the formula for net domestic product is obtained. Consumption and investment in this equation are expenditure on final goods and services. The exports-minus-imports part of the equation (often called net exports) adjusts this by subtracting the part of this expenditure not produced domestically (the imports), and adding back in domestic area (the exports).

Economists (since Keynes) have preferred to split the general consumption term into two parts; private consumption, and public sector (or government) spending. Two advantages of dividing total consumption this way in theoretical macroeconomics are:

Private consumption is a central concern of welfare economics. The private investment and trade portions of the economy are ultimately directed (in mainstream economic models) to increases in long-term private consumption.
If separated from endogenous private consumption, government consumption can be treated as exogenous,^{[citation needed]} so that different government spending levels can be considered within a meaningful macroeconomic framework.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product

Consumer sovereignty

“…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. It is the power of consumers to decide what gets produced. People use the this term to describe the consumer as the “king,” or ruler, of the market, the one who determines what products will be produced. ^[1] Also, this term denotes the way in which a consumer ideologically choices to buy a good or service. Furthermore,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, “The one with the gold makes the rules.”

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. However, it has also been argued (e.g., by Goutam U. Jois) that even a “pure” market system violates the consumer sovereignty norm. …”

Greenhouse gas

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Greenhouse_gas

The Global Warming Report

Global Warming: How Hot Air and Bad Science Will Give You Staggeringly Higher Taxes and Prices.

Roy Spencer at the climate change contrarian conference

Dr Roy Spencer on Global Warming Part 1 of 6

Dr Roy Spencer on Global Warming Part 2 of 6

Dr Roy Spencer on Global Warming Part 3 of 6

Dr Roy Spencer on Global Warming Part 4 of 6

Dr Roy Spencer on Global Warming Part 5 of 6

Dr Roy Spencer on Global Warming Part 6 of 6

Recent Evidence for Reduced Climate Sensitivity

Obama’s $1,300 car tax

By Michelle Malkin

“…Nobody in the White House is going to call the president’s “mileage and pollution” plan what it is.

It’s a $1,300 car tax. On the working class. On the middle class. On everyone who has responded to the government’s consumption-mania incentives — loosened credit, tax deductions — and bought/planned to buy a new car without taking into account these unanticipated costs:

President Barack Obama wants drivers to go farther on a gallon of gas and cause less damage to the environment — and be willing to pick up the tab.

Obama on Tuesday planned to announce the first-ever national emissions limits for cars and trucks, as well as require a 35.5 miles per gallon standard. Consumers should expect to pay an extra $1,300 per vehicle by the time the plan is complete in 2016, officials said…

…Administration officials said consumers were going to pay an extra $700 for mileage standards that had already been approved. The comprehensive Obama plan would add another $600 to the price of a vehicle, a senior administration official said.

The extra miles would come at roughly a 5 percent increase each year. By the time the plan takes full effect, at the end of 2016, new vehicles would cost an extra $1,300.

That official said the cost would be recovered through savings at the pump for consumers who choose a standard 60-month car loan and if gas prices follow government projections.

Let’s all deliver a collective snort in response to yet another self-delusional bureaucrat’s promise that yet another massive government intervention will produce cost savings:

CAFE Standards Kill: Congress’ Regulatory Solution to Foreign Oil Dependence Comes at a Steep Price

by Ryan Balis

“…On the heels of the Arab oil embargo, in 1975 Congress enacted Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards as a regulatory solution to reduce the United States’ dependence on foreign oil and gasoline consumption.1 CAFE standards mandate that vehicles sold in the U.S. meet fuel efficiency – or “fuel economy” – standards. Current standards require an average of 27.2 miles per gallon (mpg) for cars and 21.6 mpg for light trucks.2

Beginning in 2008, “one-size-fits-all” CAFE standards for light trucks will be phased out. New regulations will divide light trucks into six categories based on vehicle size – each category having its own mpg target.3 However, the fuel economy for these vehicles will be raised from the current 22.2 mpg to 24.0 mpg in model year 2011.4

According to a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimate, implementing this change will cost American consumers over $6.71 billion in added vehicle expenses from 2007-2011.5 Yet Marlo Lewis, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, calculates that the fuel savings will be a mere 0.44 billion gallons of gasoline annually.6 On average, U.S. cars and light trucks consume some 11 billion gallons of gasoline each month.7 …”

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA546CAFEStandards.html

In-Depth Look – White House Reacts On GDP Report – Bloomberg

In-Depth Look – First Read Of 1Q GDP – Bloomberg

Background Articles and Videos

United States Declaration of Independence

“…The United States Declaration of Independence is a statement adopted by the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776, which announced that the thirteen American colonies then at war with Great Britain were now independent states, and thus no longer a part of the British Empire. Written primarily by Thomas Jefferson, the Declaration is a formal explanation of why Congress had voted on July 2 to declare independence from Great Britain, more than a year after the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War. The birthday of the United States of America—Independence Day—is celebrated on July 4, the day the wording of the Declaration was approved by Congress.

After finalizing the text on July 4, Congress issued the Declaration of Independence in several forms. It was initially published as a printed broadside that was widely distributed and read to the public. The most famous version of the Declaration, a signed copy that is usually regarded as the Declaration of Independence, is on display at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. According to most historians, Congress signed this document on August 2, 1776, and not on July 4, as is often believed.

The sources and interpretation of the Declaration have been the subject of much scholarly inquiry. The Declaration justified the independence of the United States by listing colonial grievances against King George III, and by asserting certain natural rights, including a right of revolution. Having served its original purpose in announcing independence, the text of the Declaration was initially ignored after the American Revolution. Its stature grew over the years, particularly the second sentence, a sweeping statement of human rights:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

This sentence has been called “one of the best-known sentences in the English language”^[2] and “the most potent and consequential words in American history”.^[3] The passage has often been used to promote the rights of marginalized groups, and came to represent for many people a moral standard for which the United States should strive. This view was greatly influenced by Abraham Lincoln, who considered the Declaration to be the foundation of his political philosophy,^[4] and promoted the idea that the Declaration is a statement of principles through which the United States Constitution should be interpreted. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independence

The Declaration of Independence – July 4, 1776

Part 1/5) The Constitution of The United States

Part 2/5) The Constitution of The United States

Part 3/5) The Constitution of The United States

Part 4/5) The Constitution of The United States

Part 1/5) The Constitution of The United States

U.S. Constitution – Part 1

U.S. Constitution – Part 2

Happy_July_4

Background Articles and Videos

Obama calls for ‘fair-minded words’

By Carol E. Lee Carol E. Lee

“I do not suggest that the debate surrounding abortion can or should go away,” Obama said in a commencement address he delivered at the Catholic university, after receiving an honorary degree. “Because no matter how much we may want to fudge it — indeed, while we know that the views of most Americans on the subject are complex and even contradictory — the fact is that at some level, the views of the two camps are irreconcilable.”

“Each side will continue to make its case to the public with passion and conviction,” Obama added. “But surely we can do so without reducing those with differing views to caricature.”

Obama called for a new, more respectful tone on the issue, marked by “open hearts, open minds, fair-minded words.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090517/pl_politico/22611

64% Say 17-Year-Olds Need to Talk to Parents Before Taking ‘Morning-After’ Pill

“…Fifty-eight percent (58%) of Americans say abortion is morally wrong most of the time. Twenty-five percent (25%) disagree.

Sixty-four percent (64%) of women believe most abortions are morally wrong, a view shared by just 51% of men. Eighty-eight percent (88%) of pro-lifers agree, as do 29% of those who are pro-choice.

Most Americans (52%) now think it is too easy to get an abortion in America. That’s up slightly from two years ago when 45% thought it was too easy. Earlier this year, the number who thought it was too easy had declined.

Just 13% now say it’s too hard to get an abortion, while 21% believe the current availability is about right.

Most Republicans (68%) and adults not affiliated with either major party (52%) say abortion is too easy in this country. Among Democrats, 37% say it’s too easy, 17% too hard and 27% about right.

Eighty-four percent (84%) of pro-life Americans think it’s too easy to get an abortion here, and 20% of pro-choice adults agree. A plurality of those who are pro-choice (41%) say the level of difficulty involved is about right.

While abortion is an issue that many voters are passionate about, it ranks low on the list of issues that voters consider Very Important. …”

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/may_2009/64_say_17_year_olds_need_to_talk_to_parents_before_taking_morning_after_pill

Abortion statistics and other data

by Wm. Robert Johnstonlast updated 18 November 2008″…Comments on abortion statistics

Abortion statistics and other data is intended to improve the accessibility of abortion statistics. It is under continuing development. The reader should be aware that abortion statistics are often hard to obtain, and those statistics that are available are frequently inaccurate.Official abortion statistics are often low due to incomplete reporting. In the United States, for example, not all states mandate such reporting. Even in those states that require or encourage reporting of abortion statistics, this reporting is incomplete (as demonstrated by higher numbers reported to abortion advocacy organizations). From 1988 to 1997, the total number of U.S. abortions reported to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control was 11.3% lower than the total number reported to the Alan Guttmacher Institute (the research branch of Planned Parenthood). In 1998 four states discontinued state-level gathering of abortion statistics, contributing to the 25.4% drop in CDC figures from 1997 to 1998.In contrast, other organizations that provide estimates of abortion statistics may be motivated to inflate the numbers. Currently, the Alan Guttmacher Institute is an important source for estimates of both legal and illegal abortions worldwide. AGI is an extension of an organization engaged in intense political lobbying for the completely unrestrained practice of abortion. High abortion rates are in their political (and financial) interests for a number of reasons. For example, high numbers of illegal abortions are an element of their rationalization for legalized abortion.

Thus, when AGI estimates high rates of illegal abortions in the developing world these estimates bear scrutiny. Many such estimates are based on limited surveys. Some such surveys are limited to urban areas, which are not representative of rural areas. Other studies use compound assumptions to develop a figure for illegal abortions from data on hospitalizations for miscarriages. …”

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/index.html

Losing our legacy

Abortion in Black America

“…Today, Planned Parenthood openly rejects any adherence to the eugenic philosophies and racist views of Margaret Sanger. In fact, Planned Parenthood’s website devotes an extensive discussion about Margaret Sanger trying to explain away what is characterized as these anti-choice myths and distortions.

But the legacy of Margaret Sanger lives on. The plain and tragic fact is that Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry are effectively carrying out the eugenic policies that Margaret Sanger initiated with the Negro Project nearly 65 years ago.

Consider these alarming facts:

94% of all abortion clinics in this country are located in metropolitan areas;
Although Black America accounts for only 13% of our current population, nearly 36% of all abortions are performed on African Americans;
Each day in America, over 1200 African American preborn babies are lost to abortion;
In numerous cities across America, there are a greater number of abortions than live births among African American women;
Abortion is the number one cause of death among African Americans surpassing all other causes combined. …”

http://www.abortioninblackamerica.com/genocide.html

Pithiest summation of Obama’s abortion remarks at Notre Dame

By Michelle Malkin

“He might have called for toning down the rhetoric but his abortion policies are tuned up on steroids.”

– Greg Mueller.

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/17/pithiest-summation-of-obamas-abortion-remarks-at-notre-dame/

Showdown at Notre Dame

By Michelle Malkin

An estimated 20,000 protesters are expected this weekend to oppose Catholic Notre Dame’s embrace of abortion militant Barack Obama.

Eighteen were arrested today at the gates of the university.

More than 360,000 have signed a protest petition.

The White House is pooh-poohing the controversy:

The White House has responded to opposition to President Obama’s appearance at the University of Notre Dame, claiming that only “one group” is organizing a boycott and pointing to other groups who support the president’s commencement speech and reception of an honorary degree.

“I think there’s one group organizing a boycott and, as best I can understand it, there are 23 groups that have formed in support of the president’s invitation,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs.

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/15/showdown-at-notre-dame/

The Negro Project

Slide and Lecture Presentation

An Overview of Abortion in the United States

http://www.guttmacher.org/presentations/ab_slides.html

http://www.guttmacher.org/sections/abortion.php?scope=U.S.%20specific

Bush Memos Suggest Abuse Isn’t Torture If a Doctor Is There

by Sheri Fink,

“…According to the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel, which wrote the memos, legal approval to use waterboarding, sleep deprivation and other abusive techniques pivoted on the existence of a “system of medical and psychological monitoring” of interrogations. Doctors, psychologists and other medical personnel were assigned to monitor interrogations and intervene to ensure that interrogators didn’t cause “serious or permanent harm” and thus violate the U.S. federal statute against torture [3].

The reasoning sounds almost circular. As one memo [4], from May 2005, put it: “The close monitoring of each detainee for any signs that he is at risk of experiencing severe physical pain reinforces the conclusion that the combined use of interrogation techniques is not intended to inflict such pain.”

In other words, as long as medically trained personnel were present and approved of the techniques being used, it was not torture.

The memos provide official confirmation of both much-reported [5] and previously unknown roles of doctors, psychologists, physician assistants and others in the CIA’s Office of Medical Services (OMS). The government’s lawyers characterized these medical roles as “safeguards” for detainees.

Medical oversight was present from the beginning of the special interrogation program following the 9/11 attacks and appears to have grown more formalized over the program’s existence. The earliest of the four memos [6], from August 2002, states that a medical expert with experience in the military’s Survival Evasion Resistance, Escape [7] training would be present during waterboarding of detainee Abu Zubaydah and would put a stop to procedures “if deemed medically necessary to prevent severe medical or physical harm to Zubaydah.” (All interrogation techniques, the memos said, were “imported” from the military training.) …”

http://www.propublica.org/article/memos-suggest-abuse-isnt-torture-if-a-doctor-is-there-417

Liz Cheney: Waterboarding isn’t torture because of SERE training

SERE Survival Evasion Resistance Escape USAF Air Force

Waterboarding Saves Lives…

Background Articles and Videos

Cloward-Piven Strategy

“…

Strategy for forcing political change through orchestrated crisis

First proposed in 1966 and named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, the “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Inspired by the August 1965 riots in the black district of Watts in Los Angeles (which erupted after police had used batons to subdue a black man suspected of drunk driving), Cloward and Piven published an article titled “The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty” in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation. Following its publication, The Nation sold an unprecedented 30,000 reprints. Activists were abuzz over the so-called “crisis strategy” or “Cloward-Piven Strategy,” as it came to be called. Many were eager to put it into effect.

In their 1966 article, Cloward and Piven charged that the ruling classes used welfare to weaken the poor; that by providing a social safety net, the rich doused the fires of rebellion. Poor people can advance only when “the rest of society is afraid of them,” Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970. Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system; the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation; poor people would rise in revolt; only then would “the rest of society” accept their demands.

The key to sparking this rebellion would be to expose the inadequacy of the welfare state. Cloward-Piven’s early promoters cited radical organizer Saul Alinsky as their inspiration. “Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1972 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judaeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one. …”

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6967

Cloward-Piven Strategy To Destroy America

“…In the summer of 1965, the Watts section of Los Angeles erupted in six days of violent riots after a State Highway Patrol Officer pulled over and arrested a man for driving under the influence of alcohol. When it was all said and done, 34 people had been killed, 1,032 injured, and 3,952 arrested.

In typical liberal fashion, Democrats used the event to sponsor new government programs, to expand the welfare rolls. The radical left of the time viewed the riots as a prime opportunity for socialist revolution.

Shortly after the riots, Richard A. Cloward a Columbia University sociologist and fellow sociologist, wife and collaborator Francis Fox Piven exploited the riots to further their views of social equality and had begun circulating copies of an article they had written called “Mobilizing the Poor: How it could be done.” The article, slightly edited and re-titled appeared the following spring in the Nation. They believed that destruction could be used as an effective means of bringing about “change.” …”

http://rightwingrebel.com/2009/03/12/obama-and-the-cloward-piven-strategy-to-destroy-america/

Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis

By James Simpson

“….The Strategy was first elucidated in the May 2, 1966 issue of The Nation magazine by a pair of radical socialist Columbia University professors, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. David Horowitz summarizes it as:

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

Cloward and Piven were inspired by radical organizer [and Hillary Clinton mentor] Saul Alinsky:

“Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one. (Courtesy Discover the Networks.org) …”

“… Cloward and Piven looked at this strategy as a gold mine of opportunity. Within the newly organized groups, each offensive would find an ample pool of foot soldier recruits willing to advance its radical agenda at little or no pay, and expand its base of reliable voters, legal or otherwise. The radicals’ threatening tactics also would accrue an intimidating reputation, providing a wealth of opportunities for extorting monetary and other concessions from the target organizations. In the meantime, successful offensives would create an ever increasing drag on society. As they gleefully observed:

Moreover, this kind of mass influence is cumulative because benefits are continuous. Once eligibility for basic food and rent grants is established, the drain on local resources persists indefinitely.

Cloward-Piven Strategy

“…The Cloward-Piven strategy refers to a political strategy outlined by Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, then both sociologists and political activists at the Columbia University School of Social Work, in a 1966 article in The Nation. The two argued that many Americans who were eligible for welfare were not receiving benefits, and that a welfare enrollment drive would create a political crisis that would force U.S. politicians, particularly the Democratic Party, to enact legislation “establishing a guaranteed national income.”^[1]

The Strategy

Cloward and Piven’s article is focused on forcing the Democratic party, which in 1966 controlled the presidency and both houses of Congress, to take federal action to help the poor. They argued that full enrollment of those eligible for wellfare “would produce bureaucratic disruption in welfare agencies and fiscal disruption in local and state governments” that would “deepen existing divisions among elements in the big-city Democratic coalition: the remaining white middle class, the white working-class ethnic groups and the growing minority poor. To avoid a further weakening of that historic coalition, a national Democratic administration would be constrained to advance a federal solution to poverty that would override local welfare failures, local class and racial conflicts and local revenue dilemmas.”^[2] They wrote “the ultimate objective of this strategy (is) to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income… (via)the outright redistribution of income.”

Focus on Democrats

The authors pinned their hopes on creating disruption within the Democratic Party. “Conservative Republicans are always ready to declaim the evils of public welfare, and they would probably be the first to raise a hue and cry. But deeper and politically more telling conflicts would take place within the Democratic coalition,” they wrote. “Whites – both working class ethnic groups and many in the middle class – would be aroused against the ghetto poor, while liberal groups, which until recently have been comforted by the notion that the poor are few… would probably support the movement. Group conflict, spelling political crisis for the local party apparatus, would thus become acute as welfare rolls mounted and the strains on local budgets became more severe.”^[3]

Michael Reisch and Janice Andrews wrote that Cloward and Piven “proposed to create a crisis in the current welfare system — by exploiting the gap between welfare law and practice — that would ultimately bring about its collapse and replace it with a system of guaranteed annual income. They hoped to accomplish this end by informing the poor of their rights to welfare assistance, encouraging them to apply for benefits and, in effect, overloading an already overburdened bureaucracy.”^[4]

Reception

Historian Robert E. Weir argues that the original goal of the strategy was to bring about a crisis in the welfare system that would require radical reforms.^[5] A major article in the New York Times in 1970 investigated the welfare system and discussed the impact of the Cloward-Piven strategy.^[6] Howard Phillips, chairman of the Conservative Caucus, was quoted in 1982 as saying that the strategy could be effective because “Great Society programs ‘had created a vast army of full-time liberal activists whose salaries are paid from the taxes of conservative working people.”.^[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward-Piven_Strategy

Truth & Consequences – There is no Right and Left, only Right and Wrong

Links to All Manufactured Crisis Articles in the Series

“…

The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part I: Manufactured Crisis

The Cloward-Piven Strategy Part, II: Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis.

The Cloward-Piven Strategy, Part III: Conspiracy of the Lemmings.

Link to printable documents on the American Daughter website.

The Cloward Piven Strategy, Part IV: Manufactured Healthcare Crisis

The Cloward Piven Strategy, Part V: ACORN on the Ropes

Listen to the Brannon Howse interviews on the Cloward-Piven Strategy: here and here.

…”

http://truthandcons.blogspot.com/2009/03/links-to-all-three-manufactured-crisis.html#

Conspiracy of the Lemmings: Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis; Part II

“…Cloward and Piven focused on welfare, voting, housing and immigration “rights.” But leftist positions on any issue, whether championing equal “rights,” abortion “rights,” education “rights,” rights to health care, housing, legal protections of antisocial or even criminal behavior, to the point of absurdity, are intentionally divisive. They add new fiscal and regulatory burdens on government, and set new precedents that undermine the limited government concepts embedded in our Constitution, while conferring discriminatory special benefits on legally defined groups the rest of us are forced to pay for. They deliberately put our society at war with itself. And as Cloward and Piven made clear, the true purpose is not even to help those groups, but rather to duplicitously enlist them as part of an offensive to collapse our society from within!

Democrats embrace the rhetoric of “compassion,” but look past the rhetoric to the results. This country is polarized as never before because of their relentless agitation for extremist positions on every issue, and the outrageous tactics they use to promote them. But while Radical Saul Alinsky’s tactics guide today’s Democrat electoral game plan, the Cloward-Piven Strategy describes the overarching goal of almost every leftwing organization/movement/ideal today. …”

http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2008/10/31/conspiracy-of-the-lemmings-barack-obama-and-the-strategy-of-manufactured-crisis-part-ii/

New Party

“…

Marxist political coalition
Was active from 1992-1998
Endorsed Barack Obama for Illinois state senate seat in 1996

Co-founded in 1992 by Daniel Cantor (a former staffer for Jesse Jackson‘s 1988 presidential campaign) and Joel Rogers (a sociology and law professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison), the New Party was a Marxist political coalition whose objective was to endorse and elect leftist public officials – most often Democrats. The New Party’s short-term objective was to move the Democratic Party leftward, thereby setting the stage for the eventual rise of new Marxist third party.

Most New Party members hailed from the Democratic Socialists of America and the militant organization ACORN. The party’s Chicago chapter also included a large contingent from the Committees of Correspondence, a Marxist coalition of former Maoists, Trotskyists, and Communist Party USA members. …”

“…Though Illinois was not one of the states that permitted electoral fusion, in 1995 Barack Obama nonetheless sought the New Party’s endorsement for his 1996 state senate run. He was successful in obtaining that endorsement, and he used a number of New Party volunteers as campaign workers. By 1996, Obama had become a member of the New Party.

In 1996, three of the four candidates endorsed by the New Party won their electoral primaries. The three victors included Barack Obama (in the 13th State Senate District), Danny Davis (in the 7th Congressional District), and Patricia Martin, who won the race for Judge in the 7th Subcircuit Court. All four candidates attended an April 11, 1996 New Party membership meeting to express their gratitude for the party’s support.

The New Party’s various chapters similarly helped to elect dozens of other political candidates in a host of American cities.

One of the more notable New Party members was Carl Davidson, a Chicago-based Marxist who became a political supporter of Barack Obama in the mid-1990s. …”

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7434

Carl Davidson

“…By 2007, Davidson had become somewhat disillusioned by what he perceived as a diminution in Barack Obama’s anti-war fervor. Early that year, for example, Davidson wrote the following:

“I’m from Chicago … and [I've] known Obama from the time he came to the New Party to get our endorsement for his first race ever…. He said all the right things to the ACORN and New Party folks, and we endorsed him [in 1996], but I noticed too, that he seemed to measure every answer to questions put to him several times before coming out with it….…”

“After he visited Iraq when the war was on, he turned. Now we had to set aside whether it was right or wrong to invade, now we had to find the ‘smart’ path to victory, not Bush’s ‘dumb’ path. Also, in dealing with Iran, we had to leave on the table bombing their nuclear sites. For this, a lot of the local antiwar activists started calling him ‘Barack ‘Obomb ‘em’…. Our peace groups here are sending a bunch of us to visit him soon, and get on his case. Perhaps he’s still a work in progress, as Jesse Jackson says, but he still has a way to go to get back in my good graces …”

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2322

The Obama Deception The Mask Comes Off Part 1

The Obama Deception The Mask Comes Off Part 2

The Obama Deception The Mask Comes Off Part 3

The Obama Deception The Mask Comes Off Part 4

The Obama Deception The Mask Comes Off Part 5

The Obama Deception The Mask Comes Off Part 6

The Obama Deception The Mask Comes Off Part 7

The Obama Deception The Mask Comes Off Part 8

The Obama Deception The Mask Comes Off Part 9

The Obama Deception The Mask Comes Off Part 10

The Obama Deception The Mask Comes Off Part 11

The Obama Deception The Mask Comes Off Part 12

Background Articles and Videos

Nancy’s Versions
By the Editors

“…S peaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is almost certainly not telling the truth about her foreknowledge of EITs — what the CIA calls “enhanced interrogation techniques” and critics call “torture.” To answer the inevitable question, we turn to recently released CIA records. What Pelosi knew: “Briefing on EITs, including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of particular EITs that had been employed.” When she knew it: September 2002. Pelosi raised no objection at that time; but now that the Left is demanding an inquisition to study Bush-era interrogation programs, Madame Speaker pleads ignorance.

Fortunately for those with an interest in establishing the facts, Pelosi did not attend that briefing solo. Also in attendance was Porter Goss, at that time a member of Congress, who went on to become director of the CIA. He pronounces himself “slack-jawed” with disbelief that Pelosi today claims not to have known what interrogation techniques were being used. “We understood what the CIA was doing,” he wrote in the Washington Post. “We gave the CIA our bipartisan support. We gave the CIA funding to carry out its activities. . . . I do not recall a single objection from my colleagues.” Note that the memo says Pelosi was given a “description of particular EITs that had been employed” on Abu Zubaydah, a lieutenant to Osama bin Laden. He had been waterboarded repeatedly by that point. If that did not make the list of “particular EITs,” then what did? Perhaps Pelosi would enlighten us? …”

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NjU1ZGI3ZGM0Zjc1ZDg1MzQyMmQ3NDQyMGIzNWM3ODA=

Pelosi proved a liar on torture – again

“…Allahpundit at Hot Air has lost count but he believes there are now three different sources that have contradicted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s contention that she didn’t know what the CIA was doing as far as enhanced interrogation techniques:

Remember, Madam Speaker’s official story is that she was briefed merely on the White House’s belief that waterboarding was legal, not that they ever planned to actually, you know, use it. I’m starting to lose count of how much evidence there is to the contrary at this point: First was this 2007 WaPo report on Pelosi being given a virtual tour of a CIA “black site” at which waterboarding would be used, then came Porter Goss’s op-ed last week reminding her that he got the same briefings she got and he knew exactly what was going on,…

And now, a memo has surfaced from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the CIA that shows “Truth Commission” Pelosi to be a towering hypocrite and a liar.

Paul Kane of the Washington Post has the details:

In a 10-page memo outlining an almost seven-year history of classified briefings, intelligence officials said that Pelosi and then-Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) were the first two members of Congress briefed on the tactics. Then the ranking member and chairman of the House intelligence committee, respectively, Pelosi and Goss were briefed Sept. 4, 2002, one week before the anniversary of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The memo, issued to Capitol Hill by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Central Intelligence Agency, notes that the Pelosi-Goss briefing covered “EITs including the use of EITs” on Abu Zubaida. EIT is an acronym for enhanced interrogation technique, and Abu Zubaida, whose real name is Zayn al-Abidin Muhammed Hussein, was one of the earliest valuable al-Qaeda members captured. He also was the first to have the controversial tactic of simulated drowning, or waterboarding, used against him.

The issue of what Pelosi knew and when she knew it has become a tussle on Capitol Hill. Republicans have accused her of knowing for years about the interrogation techniques CIA agents were using and of objecting only when the tactics became public and antiwar activists protested. …”

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/05/pelosi_proved_a_liar_on_tortur.html

Pelosi, the CIA, and the Dems’ dangerous blame game

By Michelle Malkin

Photoshop credit: David Johnson

“…We had dueling press conferences this morning with Nancy Pelosi accusing the Bush CIA of lying to her about waterboarding and House GOP leader John Boehner defending the integrity of the briefers.

Pelosi had a particularly frozen look on her face throughout her presser as she repeated the “Bush lied about Iraq” mantra to justify her own inaction:

“They mislead us all the time,” she said. And when a reporter asked whether the agency lied, she did not disagree.

She also suggested that the current Republican criticism marked an attempt to divert attention from the Bush administration’s actions.

“They misrepresented every step of the way, and they don’t want that focus on them, so they try to turn the focus on us,” she said.

Projection: It’s what’s for breakfast.

If Pelosi were so incensed about how the CIA misled her, why wasn’t this her response to news of the 2002 briefing a week ago?

Blink, blink.

Pelosi issued a renewed call for a “truth commission.” …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/14/pelosi-the-cia-and-the-dems-dangerous-blame-game/

What Nan knew

By Michelle Malkin

“…House Speaker Nancy Pelosi knew from September 2, 2002 that enhanced interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, were being used on jihadi detainees.

She knew. From Day One.

That’s what the CIA memo, published at Human Events, shows.

ABC News follows. Pelosi’s spokesperson says his boss has a “recollection” that is “different.” …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/07/what-nan-knew/

M3 is back

“We did some sleuthing and data extraction and put M3 back together from various weekly Federal Reserve reports that are still available.

The formula we’re using has five 9s correlation to the original data back to 1980. …”

“…Finally and to put M3 into proper perspective with inflation (as measured by CPI without lies), the M3 and M2 strong inflation link is virtually unquestionable. The longer term inflation picture is clear, although M2 shows a pause and likely temporary disinflation as of 2008. Certain bloggers are incorrect and have continually avoided these facts and the linked chart. …”

http://www.nowandfutures.com/key_stats.html

Wage-Price freeze as the world ends

USA 53 Trillion In Debt

Federal Reserve Buys $1 Trillion Dollars of U.S. Bonds

Federal Reserve Monetizes U.S. Debt

Ron Paul Vs Ben Bernanke May 5th

Federal Government Deficits In Billions

federal_spending

05-11-09 Ron Paul On Fox Business “…runaway Inflation is hurrendous”

Stop Spending Our Future – The Crisis

What does one TRILLION dollars look like?

pallet_x_10000

Freedom Watch 5/13/09 Part VI

Both the Federal Reserve and the Federal Goverment are engaged in an unprecedented massive increase in both the money supply and goverment spending.

Economists are watching and wondering are Bernanke and Obama crazy?

No, just trying to wreck the US economy and destroy wealth and jobs with their reckless combination of monetary and fiscal policy.

Both are playing a very dangerous game where the economic consequences could be very high unemployment and inflation rates.–an inflationary depression.

If the Federal Reserve is slow in reducing the money supply and credit in 2010 to stop increasing rates of inflation, then expect President Obama to institute wage and price controls to try to stop inflation becoming hyperinflation and ruining his chances of becoming a two term President.

Wage and price controls are a bad idea that never works and defeats the whole purpose of market prices providing valuable information for decisions by both consumers and producers.

Both Presidents Nixon and Carter tried it and it did not work.

President Obama is already trying to limit the pay of executive of company that accept government bailouts.

This results in talented individuals leaving the company for better and higher paying jobs elsewhere.

When President Obama institutes wage and price controls, the abject failure of his economic policies will be manifest.

Marc Faber Forecast On Howestreet.com Part 1

Glenn Beck: May 13, 2009 part 4 of 7

Obama and Geithner Speak on TARP and Executive Pay – Bloomberg

http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html

Yaron Brook on Capitalism, Question 1 – Ayn Rand Institute

Deep Impact

The reckless monetary and fiscal policies of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and President Barack Obama are a threat to your liberty, property and happiness.

You are invited to attend a Tea Party on July 4, 2009, Indepedence Day!

Join the Second American Revolution

we_the_people

The Meaning of Independence Day

Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

Second American Revolution–Tea Party Celebrations–Washington Fair–July 4, 2009–An Open Invitation To The American People

American People’s Plan = 6 Month Tax Holiday + FairTax = Real Hope + Real Change!–Millions To March On Washington D.C. Saturday, July 4, 2009!

Millions of Rightwing Extremists To March On Washington D.C. Fair–Celebrating Independence Day Tea Parties and Chanting “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!”

Please Spread The Message of Liberty

liberty_bell1

“Proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.”

Let Freedom Ring

Background Articles and Videos

Money Supply

“…In economics, money supply, or money stock, is the total amount of money available in an economy at a particular point in time.^[1] There are several ways to define “money”, but standard measures usually include currency in circulation and demand deposits.^[2]^[3]

Money supply data are recorded and published, usually by the government or the central bank of the country. Public- and private-sector analysts have long monitored changes in money supply because of its possible effects on the price level, inflation and the business cycle.^[4]

That relation between money and prices is historically associated with the quantity theory of money. There is strong empirical evidence of a direct empirical relation between long-term price inflation and money-supply growth. These underlie the current reliance on monetary policy as a means of controlling inflation.^[5]^[6] This causal chain is however contentious, with heterodox economists arguing that the money supply is endogenous and that the sources of inflation must be found in the distributional structure of the economy. (see Lance Taylor’s 2004 Reconstructing Macroeconomics) …”

“…Money is used in final settlement of a debt and as a ready store of value. Its different functions are associated with different empirical measures of the money supply. Since most modern economic systems are regulated by governments through monetary policy, the supply of money is broken down into types of money based on how much of an effect monetary policy can have on each. Narrow measures include those more directly affected by monetary policy, whereas broader measures are less closely related to monetary-policy actions.^[6] Each measure can be classified by placing it along a spectrum between narrow and broad monetary aggregates. The different types of money are typically classified as Ms. The number of Ms usually range from M0 (narrowest) to M3 (broadest) but which Ms are actually used depends on the system. The typical layout for each of the Ms is as follows:

M0: currency (notes and coins) in circulation and in bank vaults, plus reserves which commercial banks hold in their accounts with the central bank (minimum reserves and excess reserves). M0 is usually called the monetary base – the base from which other forms of money (like checking deposits, listed below) are created – and is traditionally the most liquid measure of the money supply.^[7]
M1: currency in circulation + checkable deposits (checking deposits, officially called demand deposits, and other deposits that work like checking deposits) + traveler’s checks. M1 represents the assets that strictly conform to the definition of money: assets that can be used to pay for a good or service or to repay debt. Although checks linked to checking deposits are gradually becoming less popular, debit cards linked to these deposits are becoming more popular. Like checks, debit cards, as a means to complete a transaction through their links to checkable deposits, can also be considered as a form of money.^[8]
M2: M1 + savings deposits, time deposits less than $100,000 and money market deposit accounts for individuals. M2 represents money and “close substitutes” for money.^[9] M2 is a broader classification of money than M1. Economists use M2 when looking to quantify the amount of money in circulation and trying to explain different economic monetary conditions. M2 is a key economic indicator used to forecast inflation.^[10]
M3: M2 + large time deposits, institutional money-market funds, short-term repurchase agreements, along with other larger liquid assets.^[11] M3 is no longer published or revealed to the public by the US central bank.^[12]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_supply

Money Stock Measures
Release Date: May 7, 2009

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h6/Current/

Annual U.S. Money Supply Growth – M3 Estimates by ShadowStats

“…M3 refers to the total supply of US dollars in existence (virtual and physical) around the world. Back in 2006, the US Fed decided it was time to keep quiet on how much they were increasing M3. You can see where the red line turns blue. That’s because the blue data can’t be verified, but only estimated now, by indirect means. You can ask Peter Schiff about this too, he wrote all about it in his latest book.

ShadowStats US Money Supply

Socialism and Fascism

[

Carter Wage-Price Guidelines

Nixon imposes wage-price freeze

FREE TO CHOOSE 1990 VOL. 3: ” THE FAILURE OF SOCIALISM ” (BARACK OBAMA & LEFT WING) / PART 1 of 5

FREE TO CHOOSE 1990 VOL. 3: ” THE FAILURE OF SOCIALISM ” (BARACK OBAMA & LEFT WING) / PART 2 of 5

FREE TO CHOOSE 1990 VOL. 3: ” THE FAILURE OF SOCIALISM ” (BARACK OBAMA & LEFT WING) / PART 3 of 5

FREE TO CHOOSE 1990 VOL. 3: ” THE FAILURE OF SOCIALISM ” (BARACK OBAMA & LEFT WING) / PART 4 of 5

FREE TO CHOOSE 1990 VOL. 3: ” THE FAILURE OF SOCIALISM ” (BARACK OBAMA & LEFT WING) / PART 5of 5

Yaron Brook on Capitalism, Question 3 – Ayn Rand Institute

Yaron Brook on Capitalism, Question 4 – Ayn Rand Institute

Yaron Brook on Capitalism, Question 5 – Ayn Rand Institute

James Turk of goldmoney.com is interviewed by Mike Maloney – part 1/3

James Turk of goldmoney.com is interviewed by Mike Maloney – part 2/3

James Turk of goldmoney.com is interviewed by Mike Maloney – part 3/3

GoldMoney

“…GoldMoney is a digital gold currency founded in 2001 by James Turk. The main office and servers are located in Jersey, one of the Channel Islands of the British Isles. It allows the instant transfer of gold, silver and platinum between user holdings.

As of 30 June 2006, over US$135.0 million of value with 176,600 troy ounces (5,490 kg) of gold in storage, which was worth $108.0 million; and 2,666,445 troy ounces (82,935.7 kg) of silver, worth $28.5 million at the time.^[1]

By 31 December 2008, over US$476.0 million of value with 357,900 troy ounces (11,130 kg) of gold in storage, which was worth $309.6 million; and 13,223,311 troy ounces (411,290.9 kg) of silver, worth $142.7 million.^[2]

^…”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GoldMoney

The Police – Every Breath You Take: Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=doFKkuzoawM

Background Articles and Videos

UNION MEMBERS IN 2008

In 2008, union members accounted for 12.4 percent of employed wage
and salary workers, up from 12.1 percent a year earlier, the U.S.
Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The
number of workers belonging to a union rose by 428,000 to 16.1 million.
In 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available,
the union membership rate was 20.1 percent, and there were 17.7 million
union workers.

The data on union membership were collected as part of the Current
Population Survey (CPS). The CPS is a monthly survey of about 60,000
households that obtains information on employment and unemployment
among the nation’s civilian noninstitutional population age 16 and
over.

Some highlights from the 2008 data are:

   –Government workers were nearly five times more likely to belong
     to a union than were private sector employees.

   –Workers in education, training, and library occupations had the
     highest unionization rate at 38.7 percent.

   –Black workers were more likely to be union members than were
     white, Asian, or Hispanic workers.

   –Among states, New York had the highest union membership rate
     (24.9 percent) and North Carolina had the lowest rate (3.5 percent).

Membership by Industry and Occupation

The union membership rate for public sector workers (36.8 percent)
was substantially higher than the rate for private industry workers
(7.6 percent). Within the public sector, local government workers had
the highest union membership rate, 42.2 percent. This group includes
many workers in several heavily unionized occupations, such as teachers,
police officers, and fire fighters. Private sector industries with
high unionization rates include transportation and utilities (22.2 per-
cent), telecommunications (19.3 percent), and construction (15.6 per-
cent). In 2008, unionization rates were relatively low in financial
activities (1.8 percent) and professional and business services (2.1
percent). (See table 3.)

Among occupational groups, education, training, and library occupa-
tions (38.7 percent) and protective service occupations (35.4 percent)
had the highest unionization rates in 2008. Sales and related occu-
pations (3.3 percent) and farming, fishing, and forestry occupations
(4.3 percent) had the lowest unionization rates. (See table 3.)

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

Union paid millions to companies with family ties

An SEIU spokeswoman says there’s nothing improper about the payments.

By Paul Pringle

“…The Service Employees International Union’s headquarters has paid millions of dollars to consulting firms, political nonprofits and individuals with family ties and other personal connections to some of the labor organization’s top officers, records show. …”

“…The nation’s fastest-growing union, the SEIU bills itself a standard-setter in the drive to reform and modernize the labor movement. It has adopted a code of ethics that bars officers from directing business to their relatives, although a spokeswoman said no competitive bidding process is required when such contracts are awarded.

Labor Department https://cslxwep1.dol-esa.gov/Disclosure/OnlineSR30.jsp?ReportId=LM30 from 2003 through last year show that: …”

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/26/local/me-union26

Big Labor’s investment in Obama pays off

By Michelle Malkin

seiu

“…We spent a fortune to elect Barack Obama — $60.7 million to be exact — and we’re proud of it,” boasted Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, to the Las Vegas Sun this week. The behemoth labor organization’s leadership is getting its money’s worth. Whether rank-and-file workers and ordinary taxpayers are profiting from this ultimate campaign pay-for-play scheme is another matter entirely. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/13/big-labors-investment-in-obama-pays-off/

Specter, card check, and the final betrayal

By Michelle Malkin • May 14, 2009 04:03 PM

“…Back on March 24, Arlen Specter announced his opposition to Big Labor’s card-check legislation, the “Employee Free Choice Act.” Some conservatives cheered. But as I noted at the time, Specter left the door wide open in his Senate floor statement: “I would be willing to reconsider Employees’ Free Choice legislation when the economy returns to normalcy.”

On April 28, Benedict Arlen made his party switch official. He said he would not change his opposition to card-check, to which I replied: “Snort.”

On May 5, Specter met with the corruptocrats at the SEIU and another union has launched ads pressuring the chameleon to change his colors again.

Presto, change-o, here comes the “compromise” (that’s Specter-ese for sellout): …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/14/specter-card-check-and-the-final-betrayal/

Controversial ‘card check’ bill back for fourth time

The business community says the bill, which makes it easier for workers to unionize, would be a job killer.

“…Not only does it set terms of employment, work rules, and wages, but an employer is bound by it for two years,” he adds.
A similar bill passed the House on March 1, 2007, by a vote of 241 to 185. On June 26, 2007, it fell nine votes short of the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster in the Senate.

In both houses, some lawmakers who have sponsored the bill in years past are holding off on their endorsements. Critics say that’s because with enhanced Democratic majorities on Capitol Hill, the bill has a real chance of passing this year – and sponsors will take heat for its consequences.

“I’m just waiting for it to unfold in committee and see what it looks like when it hits the floor,” says Sen. Mark Pryor (D) of Arkansas, who backed the bill in the last Congress.

“When business groups contact me in Arkansas, I listen to them just as I do to unions. My sense is we can find common ground on this, but we’re not just there yet,” he adds.

Sen. Susan Collins (R) of Maine, a GOP moderate who has helped broker many of the bipartisan deals in the Senate, says that she is opposing this bill because it does not guarantee a secret ballot to ensure that workers will be protected from intimidation – and because it gives government too heavy a hand in contract negotiations. The binding arbitration provisions in the bill “would be the most significant change in labor law in decades, and I think it’s ill advised,” she says. …”

http://www.nrtw.org/en/blog/quick-hits-98212008

Forced-Unionism Abuses Exposed

The facts Big Labor bosses would rather you didn’t hear about

“…The best-known provision in the “Employee Free Choice Act” would rewrite federal labor

law so that union officials could, without the employer’s acquiescence, secure monopolybargaining

power over all the front-line employees at a business solely through the acquisition of

signed “union authorization cards.”

Over the years, labor-law scholars, federal courts, and even union organizing manuals have

all recognized the fact that many employees who sign such cards do not actually want a union as

their monopoly-bargaining agent. They sign for a host of other reasons: to get union organizers

off their backs, to expedite an election so the union organizing campaign will end soon, or even

because they have been threatened.

That’s why union officials like Mr. Stern are so eager to mandate “card checks”: so that

workers who oppose unionization, but sign “authorization cards” for one reason or another,

never get a chance to vote “No” in a secret-ballot election.

http://www.nrtwc.org/exposed/exposed200902.pdf

Crossing The Line

Fred Ross Jr.

“…For the past ten years I have worked for SEIU, most recently leading a campaign to organize 9,000 healthcare workers at St. Joseph Health System (SJHS) hospitals across California. I was drawn to SEIU because of its commitment to social justice, including its inspiring Justice for Janitors campaign, its successful work on behalf of homecare workers, its leadership on immigrant rights, and its innovative strategies to hold corporations accountable. I have been an organizer since 1970, when I first started organizing with Cesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers (UFW). I know a little bit about struggle and the terrible cost of internal union conflicts. I’ve been shot at by a supermarket security guard, knocked unconscious by a Coachella Valley grape grower, and survived a heated confrontation with the Salvadoran military.

This is why SEIU’s recent attacks on UNITE HERE have come as such a shock. I am deeply disappointed that SEIU president Andy Stern is financing and helping staff a disruptive attack on the leaders and members at UNITE HERE around the country — the worst instance of a union undermining another union since the Teamsters sought to undermine Cesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers in the late 1960s and 1970s. Last month I decided to leave SEIU, in part because of these attacks.

Over the past six weeks, a number of longtime friends and allies from the UNITE HERE leadership have asked me to join them in their current struggle. Let me tell you why I am proud to support the courageous members and leaders of UNITE HERE. …”

http://talkingunion.wordpress.com/2009/05/09/crossing-the-line/

Glenn Beck – ACORN & SEIU using Thug Tactics?

Union Intimidation Meets Identity Theft

The union non-union gap

Chris Edwards on pay gap between federal & private workers on CNN

Background Articles and Videos

White House memo challenges EPA finding on warming

“…An Environmental Protection Agency proposal that could lead to regulating the gases blamed for global warming will prove costly for factories, small businesses and other institutions, according to a White House document.

The nine-page memo is a compilation of opinions made by a dozen federal agencies and departments during an internal review before the EPA issued a finding in April that greenhouse gases pose dangers to public health and welfare.

That finding could set in motion for the first time the regulation of six heat-trapping gases from cars and trucks, factories and other sources under the Clean Air Act.

The document, labeled “Deliberative-Attorney Client Privilege,” says that if the EPA proceeds with the regulation of heat-trapping gases, including carbon dioxide, factories, small businesses and institutions would be subject to costly regulation. …”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090512/ap_on_go_ot/us_epa_climate

Clearing the Air

Peter R. Orszag, Director

“…Media reports today are suggesting that OMB has found fault with EPA’s proposed finding that emissions of greenhouse gases from motor vehicles contribute to air pollution that endangers public health and welfare. Any reports suggesting that OMB was opposed to the finding are unfounded.

The quotations circulating in the press are from a document in which OMB simply collated and collected disparate comments from various agencies during the inter-agency review process of the proposed finding. These collected comments were not necessarily internally consistent, since they came from multiple sources, and they do not necessarily represent the views of either OMB or the Administration. In other words, we simply receive comments from various agencies and pass them along to EPA for consideration, regardless of the substantive merit of those comments. In general, passing along these types of comments to an agency proposing a finding often helps to improve the quality of the notice.

Perhaps more importantly, OMB concluded review of the preliminary finding several weeks ago, which then allowed EPA to move forward with the proposed finding. …”

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/05/12/ClearingtheAir/

Greenhouse Gases

“…Greenhouse gases are gases in an atmosphere that absorb and emit radiation within the thermal infrared range. This process is the fundamental cause of the greenhouse effect.^[1] Common greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere include water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, and chlorofluorocarbons.In our solar system, the atmospheres of Venus, Mars and Titan also contain gases that cause greenhouse effects.

Greenhouse gases, mainly water vapor, are essential to helping determine the temperature of the Earth; without them this planet would likely be so cold as to be uninhabitable. Although many factors such as the sun and the water cycle are responsible for the Earth’s weather and energy balance, if all else was held equal and stable, the planet’s average temperature should be considerably lower without greenhouse gases.^[2]^[3]^[4]

Human activities have an impact upon the levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, which has other effects upon the system, with their own possible repercussions. The 2007 assessment report compiled by the IPCC observed that “changes in atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases and aerosols, land cover and solar radiation alter the energy balance of the climate system”, and concluded that “increases in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations is very likely to have caused most of the increases in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century”.^[5]

^…”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gases

Supreme Court says carbon emissions count

Heritage In Focus: Supreme Court’s EPA Ruling

Professor Jon Cannon on Massachusetts v. EPA

Chris Horner Debates Massachusetts v. EPA (4/3/07)

Background Articles and VideosLeading

Archbishop: Notre Dame’s Plans to Honor Obama a ‘Scandal’

By Katherine T. Phan

Christian Post Reporter

“…Archbishop Raymond Burke, the first American to lead the Vatican supreme court, told attendants at the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast that Catholics should not honor those who have publicly violated “moral law.”

“The proposed granting of an honorary doctorate at Notre Dame University to a president who so aggressively advocates an anti-life and anti-family agenda is rightly the source of the greatest scandal,” Burke told the crowd at the Washington D.C. event.

The comments by Burke, who formerly led the Archdiocese of St. Louis, add to the intensifying protest by Catholics and pro-life advocates over Notre Dame’s decision to allow Obama to deliver the commencement speech and receive an honorary doctor of laws degree at the May 17 event.

Over the past two months, at least 60 Catholic bishops have made public statements denouncing the invite. Some 354,000 people have also signed petitions against the president’s appearance and honor at notredamescandal.com. …”

http://www.christianpost.com/Education/Higher_edu/2009/05/leading-archbishop-notre-dame-s-plans-to-honor-obama-a-scandal-09/index.html

Archbishop Raymond Burke, Prefect of the Vatican’s highest court, the Apostolic Signatura, called on Catholics to “give an uncompromising witness” to the dignity of life and sharply criticized the University of Notre Dame for its planned honor for pro-abortion President Barack Obama during an address on May 7 to the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast.

“…Archbishop Raymond Burke, Prefect of the Vatican’s highest court, the Apostolic Signatura, called on Catholics to “give an uncompromising witness” to the dignity of life and sharply criticized the University of Notre Dame for its planned honor for pro-abortion President Barack Obama during an address on May 7 to the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast. …”

Full Text of Archbishop Raymond Burke’s Speech

Introduction
1. I am deeply honored to give the Keynote Address at this annual gathering of Catholics to pray for our nation. I express my heartfelt esteem and gratitude to those who, each year, organize and support the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast.

2. The theme of this year’s Breakfast is most fitting to the difficult time through which our nation is now passing. Before the fundamental and great challenges which we as a nation are facing, how better to express our patriotism than by celebrating the teachings of our Catholic faith. The most treasured gift which we as citizens of the United States of America can offer to our country is a faithful Catholic life. It is the gift which, even though it has often been misunderstood, has brought great strength to our nation, from the time of its founding. Today more than ever, our nation is in need of Catholics who know their faith deeply and express their faith, with integrity, by their daily living.

3. Although I no longer have my residence in our beloved nation, I am no less bound to practice the virtue of patriotism, taught and exemplified by Our Lord during His public ministry. It is Our Lord Who gives us, in the Church, the grace to practice patriotism as a fundamental expression of the bond of charity which we have, in Him, with our fellow citizens. From my earliest formation in the life of the faith, received at home from my parents and in the Catholic schools, it was clear to me that duty to one’s nation, to one’s fellow citizens, is integral to our life in Christ in the Church. In the Baltimore Catechism, the virtue of patriotism is joined with filial piety. These essentially connected virtues, in the words of the Catechism, dispose us to honor, love and respect our parents and our country (Revised Baltimore Catechism and Mass, No. 3, New York: Benziger Brothers, Inc., 1949, 1952, no. 135). Surely, the most fundamental expression of patriotism is daily prayer for our homeland, the United States of America, her citizens and her leaders. Our participation in the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast is, I trust, an extraordinary expression of the daily prayer which we all offer for our country, as good Catholics and, therefore, good citizens.

4. It pleases me that today’s celebration included a presentation by Mother Shaun Vergauwen, Superior General of the Franciscan Sisters of the Eucharist. I have known Mother Shaun’s religious congregation for all the years of my priestly life. The consecrated life of the Franciscan Sisters of the Eucharist is an inspired witness to the truths of our Catholic faith, especially what pertains to the Gospel of Life, and, therefore, also makes a strong contribution to the good of all citizens in our nation.

Growing Crisis in Our Nation
5. I come to you, this morning, with the deepest concern for our nation. I come to you, not as someone who stands outside of our nation but as a citizen who, with you as fellow citizens, takes responsibility for the state of our nation and, therefore, cannot remain indifferent and inactive about what most concerns the good of us all, especially those among us who are small, weak and defenseless.

6. Over the past several months, our nation has chosen a path which more completely denies any legal guarantee of the most fundamental human right, the right to life, to the innocent and defenseless unborn. Our nation, which had its beginning in the commitment to safeguard and promote the inalienable right to “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” for all, without boundary, is more and more setting arbitrary limits to her commitment (cf. The Declaration of Independence: Action of Second Continental Congress, 4 July 1776, in The Constitution of the United States with the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation, New York: Barnes and Noble Books, 2002, p. 81). Those in power now determine who will or will not be accorded the legal protection of the most fundamental right to life. First the legal protection of the right to life is denied to the unborn and, then, to those whose lives have become burdened by advanced years, special needs or serious illness, or whose lives are somehow judged to be unprofitable or unworthy.

7. What is more, those in power propose to force physicians and other healthcare professionals, in other words, those with a particular responsibility to protect and foster human life, to participate, contrary to what their conscience requires, in the destruction of unborn human lives, from the first or embryonic stage of development to the moment of birth. Our laws may soon force those who have dedicated themselves to the care of the sick and the promotion of good health to give up their noble life work, in order to be true to the most sacred dictate of their consciences. What is more, if our nation continues down the path it has taken, healthcare institutions operating in accord with the natural moral law, which teaches us that innocent human life is to be protected and fostered at all times and that it is always and everywhere evil to destroy an innocent human life, will be forced to close their doors.

8. At the same time, the fundamental society, that is, the family, upon which the life of our nation is founded and depends, is under attack by legislation which redefines marriage to include a relationship between two persons of the same sex and permits them to adopt children. In the same line, it is proposed to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. At the root of the confusion and error about marriage is the contraceptive mentality – which would have us believe that the inherently procreative nature of the conjugal union can, in practice, be mechanically or chemically eliminated, while the marital act remains unitive. It cannot be so. With unparalleled arrogance, our nation is choosing to renounce its foundation upon the faithful, indissoluble, and inherently procreative love of a man and a woman in marriage, and, in violation of what nature itself teaches us, to replace it with a so-called marital relationship, according to the definition of those who exercise the greatest power in our society.

9. The path of violation of the most fundamental human rights and of the integrity of marriage and the family, which our nation is traveling, is not accidental. It is part of the program set forth by those whom we have freely chosen to lead our nation. The part of the program in question was not unknown to us; it was announced to us beforehand and a majority of our fellow citizens, including a majority of our fellow Catholics, chose the leadership which is now implementing it with determination. For example, I refer to our President’s declared support of the Freedom of Choice Act, which would make illegal any legislation restricting procured abortion; his repeal of the Mexico City Policy, permitting U.S. funding of procured abortion in other nations, together with the grant of fifty million dollars to the United Nations Fund for Population Activities which, for example, supported the Republic of China’s policy of one child per family by means of government-dictated sterilization and abortion; his proposal to rescind the regulations appended to the federal Conscience Clause, which assure that, not only physicians, but also all health-care workers may refuse to provide services, information or counsel to patients regarding medications and procedures which are contrary to their conscience; his removal of limitations on federal funding of embryonic-stem-cell research, involving the wholesale destruction of human life at the embryonic stage of development; and his choice of the members of his administration, who are remarkable for the number of major officials, including several Catholics, who favor the denial of the right to life to the unborn and the violation of the integrity of marriage and the family. These are only some examples of a consistent pattern of decisions by the leadership of our nation which is taking our nation down a path which denies the fundamental right to life to the innocent and defenseless unborn and violates the fundamental integrity of the marital union and the family.

10. As Catholics, we cannot fail to note, with the greatest sadness, the number of our fellow Catholics, elected or appointed by our President to public office, who cooperate fully in the advancement of a national agenda was is anti-life and anti-family. Most recently, the appointment of a Catholic as Secretary of Health and Human Services, who has openly and persistently cooperated with the industry of procured abortion in our nation, is necessarily a source of the deepest embarrassment to Catholics and a painful reminder of the most serious responsibility of Catholics to uphold the natural moral law, which is the irreplaceable foundation of just relationships among the citizens of our nation. It grieves me to say that the support of anti-life legislation by Catholics in public office is so common that those who are not Catholic have justifiably questioned whether the Church’s teaching regarding the inviolable dignity of innocent human life is firm and unchanging. It gives the impression that the Church herself can change the law which God has written on every human heart from the beginning of time and has declared in the Fifth Commandment of the Decalogue: Thou shalt not kill.

11. As is clear, the anti-life and anti-family path down which our nation is being led has repercussions for many other peoples who rely upon the United States for aid or who are influenced by the international policies upon which our nation insists. The interest of so many nations in our recent presidential election is a clear sign of the world leadership which our national leadership exercises. What those who were so enthused about the strong message of change and hope in the United States, delivered during the last election campaign, are now discovering is a consistent implementation of policies and programs which confirm and advance the culture of death, which can only finally leave our world without the great hope, described by our Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI in these words:

Let us say once again: we need the greater and lesser hopes that keep us going day by day. But these are not enough without the great hope, which must surpass everything else. This great hope can only be God, who encompasses the whole of reality and who can bestow upon us what we, by ourselves, cannot attain. The fact that it comes to us as a gift is actually part of hope. God is the foundation of hope: not any god, but the God who has a human face and who has loved us to the end, each one of us and humanity in its entirety. His Kingdom is not an imaginary hereafter, situated in a future that will never arrive; his Kingdom is present wherever he is loved and wherever his love reaches us.
His love alone gives us the possibility of soberly persevering day by day, without ceasing to be spurred on by hope, in a world which by its very nature is imperfect. His love is at the same time our guarantee of the existence of what we only vaguely sense and which nevertheless, in our deepest self, we await: a life that is truly life (Pope Benedict XVI, Encyclical Letter Spe salvi, On Christian Hope, 30 November 2007, Acta Apostolicae Sedis no. 31).
The change which brings hope can only be the renewal of our nation in the divine love which respects the inviolable dignity of every human life, from the moment of its inception to the moment of natural death, and which creates and gives growth to new human life through the love of man and woman in marriage. Any hope which is incoherent with the great hope is truly illusory and can never bring forth justice and its fruit, peace, for our nation and world.
Addressing the Crisis
12. How can we as Catholics address effectively the critical situation of our nation in what pertains to the fundamental right to life and the integrity of the family? What does the virtue of patriotism, together with all of the virtues inspired by the Holy Spirit dwelling within us, require of us for the common good, for the good of the whole nation? First and foremost, it demands what we are doing this morning, that is, prayer, and the serious reflection which arises from our communion with God in prayer.

13. When Our Lord descended from the Mount of the Transfiguration, he found that his disciples had tried, without success, to help a boy afflicted by an unclean spirit. Our Lord then cast out the unclean spirit, prompting his disciples, when they were alone with Him, to ask why they had been unable to free the boy from his affliction. Our Lord responded with these words: This kind cannot be driven out by anything but prayer and fasting (Mk 9:29). Our Lord reminded them that the good which they wished to accomplish in the face of great evil could only be attained through prayer and fasting. In other words, evil cannot be overcome by our own forces alone, but by the grace of God which inspires and strengthens our thoughts and actions. It is Christ alone who has accomplished the victory over sin and its most evil fruit, eternal death, and it is Christ alone, in the Church, who continues to bring forth the fruits of His victory in our lives and in our world.

14. In the battle for the protection of the right to life and for the safeguarding of the integrity of marriage and the family in our nation, we are easily tempted to give way to discouragement. And it would be right to do so, if the outcome of the battle depended upon us alone. But it does not. Christ is with us always in the Church and, in a particular way, in the struggle to restore the respect for the right to life of all of our brothers and sisters, especially those who are helpless and who have the first title to our care, and to safeguard the integrity of marriage and the family. Christ Who is the Gospel of Life, encountered in prayer and through the Sacraments, will give us the strength to announce His word of life and to act upon His word of life, on behalf of all in our nation, especially those who depend upon us to care for them and protect their God-given rights.

15. If we are serious about our patriotic duty, then we must pray everyday for our leaders, especially our President, and our nation. We should also practice more fervently our fasting and abstinence for the conversion of our lives and the transformation of our society. If we want to act for the common good, the good of all, in our nation, then we will seek to convert our lives each day to Christ, especially through the Sacraments of Penance and the Holy Eucharist. Christ desires to announce the Gospel of Life and bring about its saving effects in our nation by the complete conversion of our lives to Him for the sake of all our brothers and sisters, without boundary, and for the sake of the preservation of the sanctuary of human life, marriage and the family.

16. At various times of great crisis in our nation and in the world, the Holy Father and our Bishops have called upon all Catholics to offer special prayers for the nation and for the world. I recall so well, from my youth, the Leonine Prayers offered at the conclusion of every Mass to address the growing threat of atheistic materialism in our world. Remember, too, how Pope Saint Pius V, in 1571, called upon the whole Church to pray, especially through the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, when the Christian world was under attack by the Turks. After the victory of the Battle of Lepanto, on October 7, 1571, he established October 7th as an annual feast in honor of Our Lady of the Rosary and introduced the title of Mary Help of Christians into the Litany of Loreto. In the present crisis, praying daily the Rosary for our nation and invoking daily the intercession of Mary Help of Christians will be powerful forces for the victory of life and love.

17. At every Mass, we should offer special prayers for our nation and her leaders, in order that the culture of death may be overcome and a civilization of love may be steadfastly advanced. All Catholics throughout the nation should take part in Eucharistic adoration and in the praying of the Rosary for the restoration of the respect for human life and for the safeguarding of the integrity of the family. In our prayers, we should seek, above all, the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, under her title of the Immaculate Conception. Mary Immaculate is the patroness of our nation. In a most wonderful way, she appeared, on our continent, in what is present-day Mexico City, in 1531, as the Immaculate Mother of God, in order to manifest the all-merciful love of God toward His children of America. Through her example and intercession, the Native Americans and Europeans, who were on the brink of a most deadly conflict, were brought together to form one people under her maternal care, and the widespread practice of human sacrifice among the native people was brought to an end. In our time, in many parishes and dioceses there are campaigns of prayer for our nation and her leaders. May these powerful spiritual works continue and prosper, so that, through prayer and fasting, the grave evils of contraception, procured abortion, euthanasia, the experimentation on embryonic human life, and so-called same-sex marriage may be overcome in our nation.

18. Connected with our prayer must be the thoughtful and faithful reflection upon the Church’s teaching on the respect for all human life and the integrity of the family. In our homes, in our Catholic schools and universities, in parish study groups, and in everyday conversations and discussions with our neighbors, we are called to give an uncompromising witness to the Gospel of Life. Parents, parish priests and institutions of Catholic education must be aware of the constant anti-life and anti-family messages which constantly bombard us and our young people. One has only to think, for example, of the corruption of the goodness of our youth by the multi-million dollar industry of pornography, especially on the Internet. Our reflection as individuals and groups must open our eyes to the gravity of the situation in our nation, lest we fail to take responsibility for the widespread attacks on human life and the family. Our reflection must help us all and, in a particular way, our young people to see the godless secularism and relativism which underly and justify our nation’s anti-life and anti-family programs, policies and laws.

19. Our encounter with the world must be clear and uncompromising. Parents must reflect in their daily living the lifelong and rich fruit of the Gospel of Life, which they are called to teach to their children. Catholic educational institutions must devote themselves ever more strenuously to the study of the truths of the faith, addressing them to the moral challenges of our time. In a culture marked by widespread and grave confusion and error about the most fundamental teachings of the moral law, our Catholic schools and universities must be beacons of truth and right conduct. Clearly, the same is true of our Catholic charitable, missionary and healthcare institutions. There can be no place in them for teaching or activities which offend the moral law. Dialogue and respect for differences are not promoted by the compromise and even violation of the natural moral law. The profound granting of an honorary doctorate at Notre Dame University to our President who is as aggressively advancing an anti-life and anti-family agenda is a source of the gravest scandal. Catholic institutions cannot offer any platform to, let alone honor, those who teach and act publicly against the moral law. In a culture which embraces an agenda of death, Catholics and Catholic institutions are necessarily counter-cultural. If we as individuals or our Catholic institutions are not willing to accept the burdens and the suffering necessarily involved in calling our culture to reform, then we are not worthy of the name Catholic.

Catholics and Public Life
20. Our prayer and conversion of life, and the serious reflection upon and study of the truths of the moral life, both as individuals and in our Catholic institutions, require that we accept our responsibility as citizens to work tirelessly to change unjust programs, policies and laws. In a nation set so firmly on a path of violation of the most fundamental moral norms, Catholics and others who adhere to the natural moral law are pressured to think that their religious commitment to the moral law as the way of seeking the good of all is a merely confessional matter which cannot have any application in public life. Apparently, a number of Catholics in public life have been so convinced. How often do we hear Catholic legislators who vote in favor of anti-life and anti-family legislation claim that they are personally opposed to what the legislation protects and fosters, but that they as public officials may not allow religious beliefs to affect their support of such legislation? How often do we hear fellow Catholics supporting candidates for office, who are anti-life and anti-family, because of political-party loyalties or for reasons of other policies and programs supported by the candidate, which they deem to be good? How often is such thinking justified by the claim that religious faith is a purely private matter and has no place in the public forum? On the contrary, the common good depends upon the active engagement of religious faith in the public forum.

21. Addressing the role of the Church in the political order, Pope Benedict XVI reminds us:

•It must not be forgotten that, when Churches or ecclesial communities intervene in public debate, expressing reservations or recalling various principles, this does not constitute a form of intolerance or interference, since such interventions are aimed solely at enlightening consciences, enabling them to act freely and responsibly, according to the true demands of justice, even when this should conflict with situations of power and personal interest (Pope Benedict XVI, Ad Congressum a Populari Europae Faction provectum, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 98 [2006], 344).”
•In his Encyclical Letter Deus caritas est, our Holy Father reminded us of the great gift of our faith which enables reason to do its work more effectively and to see its proper object more clearly (Pope Benedict XVI, Encylical Letter Deus caritas est , On Christian Love, 25 December 2005, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 98 [2006], 239, no. 28). When the Church addresses her social teaching to issues of the common good, she has no intention of giving the Church power over the State or to impose on those who do not share the faith ways of thinking and modes of conduct proper to faith (Deus caritas est, no. 28). Her aim, which is our aim as patriotic Catholics, is simply to help purify reason and to contribute, here and now, to the acknowledgment and attainment of what is just (Deus caritas est, no. 28). In addressing the critical issues of our nation, the Church and we, as her faithful sons and daughters, intervene on the basis of reason and natural law, namely, on the basis of what is in accord with the nature of every human being (Deus caritas est, no. 28).

22. Our uncompromising commitment to protect the inviolable dignity of innocent human life and to safeguard the integrity of marriage and the family are not based on peculiar confessional beliefs or practices but on the natural moral law, written on every heart and, therefore, a fundamental part of the Church’s moral teaching. At the same time, what is always and everywhere evil cannot be called good for the sake of accomplishing some other good end. All of us must be concerned about a wide range of goods which are important to the life of our nation, but the concern for those goods can never justify the betrayal of the fundamental goods of life itself and the family. We must take care to uproot from our moral thinking any form of relativism, consequentialism and proportionalism, which would lead us into the error of thinking that it is sometimes right to do what is always and everywhere evil.

23. An important part of our moral reflection must include a clear understanding of the principles regarding cooperation in evil, especially by the act of voting. Too often, in our time, our inability to accomplish all that we should for the sake of the defense of the right to life and of the protection of the integrity of the family is used to justify the direct choice of a political leader who espouses a position or positions in violation of the natural moral law. The Servant of God Pope John Paul II, in his Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, addresses at length the question of cooperation in evil which violates the dignity of innocent human life. He offers as an example the case of a legislator who has the possibility of voting for a law which would restrict the evil of procured abortion, even though it would not eradicate it completely. He concludes that the legislator could vote for the legislation, while his own opposition to procured abortion remains clear, for his vote does not in fact represent an illicit cooperation with an unjust law, but rather a legitimate and proper attempt to limit its evil aspects (Pope John Paul II, Encylical Letter Evangelium vitae , On the Good and Inviolability of Human Life, 25 March 1995, Acta Apostolicae Sedis 87 [1995], 487, no. 73). In an analogous manner, as voters, we are often faced with a choice among candidates who do not fully oppose unjust laws. In such a case, we must choose the candidate who will most limit the evil effects of unjust laws. But, there is no element of the common good, no morally good practice, which a candidate may promote and to which a voter may be dedicated, which could justify voting for a candidate who also endorses and supports the deliberate killing of the unborn, euthanasia or the recognition of a same-sex relationship as a legal marriage. The respect for the inviolable dignity of innocent human life and for the integrity of marriage and the family are so fundamental to the common good that they cannot be subordinated to any other cause, no matter how good it may be.

24. In the present situation of our nation, a serious question has arisen about the moral obligation of Catholics to work for the overturning of the Supreme Court decisions in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. There are those who would tell us that such work is futile and, therefore, is to be abandoned, so that we can devote ourselves to help prevent individuals from choosing abortion. As Catholics, we can never cease to work for the correction of gravely unjust laws. Law is a fundamental expression of our culture and implicitly teaches citizens what is morally acceptable. Our efforts to assist those who are tempted to do what is always and everywhere wrong or are suffering from the effects of having committed a gravely immoral act, which are essential expressions of the charity which unites us as citizens of the nation, ultimately make little sense, if we remain idle regarding unjust laws and decisions of the courts regarding the same intrinsic evils. We are never justified in abandoning the work of changing legislation and of reversing decisions of the courts which are anti-life and anti-family.

Conclusion
25. As we gather this morning to pray for our nation, let us draw courage and strength from the glorious pierced Heart of Our Lord Jesus. Let us not give way to discouragement in our exercise of patriotism but rather be confident of the essential contribution which our Catholic faith makes to the life of our nation.

26. May the courage and strength which comes to us from the Sacred Heart of Jesus enlighten our minds to see more clearly the gravity of the situation of our nation and inflame our hearts to do our part to transform the life of our nation, in accord with the natural moral law, that is, with what is just and serves the good of all. Let us draw courage and strength from the Sacred Heart of Jesus through prayer and the Sacraments, especially the Sacraments of Penance and the Holy Eucharist. May the courage and strength of Christ guide our reflection on the state of our nation and lead us to that just action, taught to us by our faith, which serves the good of all.

27. Invoking the intercession of Mary Immaculate, Our Lady of Guadalupe, Mother of America, let us pray today and everyday that we as Catholics, true to our faith and, therefore, patriotically devoted to our nation, may promote respect for all human life, safeguard the sanctity of marriage and the family, and, thereby, foster the good of all in the nation and in the world.

Thank you. God bless you.

(Most Rev.) Raymond L. Burke
Archbishop Emeritus of Saint Louis
Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura

http://www.speroforum.com/a/19229/Vatican-official-says-Obama-honor-is-scandal

Notre Dame Pays for Picking Obama

Larrey Anderson

The idea of choosing Barack Obama for graduation speaker, and for giving Obama an honorary degree, may cost the University more than just prestige. The decision may cost Notre Dame millions of dollars in contributions from alumni.

As I have reported here in American Thinker, Ambassador Mary Ann Glendon has already refused to share the stand with Obama. She turned down Notre Dame’s highest honor, the Laetare Medal, in protest of the honorary doctorate to be bestowed upon President Obama.

AT has also reported serious reservations by the vast majority of alumni about Notre Dame’s decision to honor Obama. We have published the fact that some prominent Catholic clergy will not attend the event.

Now an alumni website is reporting that Notre Dame may have lost nearly $10 million dollars in one week from alumni who object to the University inviting Obama to speak and in granting him an honorary degree. An email from the organization Catholic Vote verified the figure. …” http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/05/notre_dame_pays_for_picking_ob.html

“We prayerfully implore you to halt this travesty immediately.”

By Michelle Malkin

“…More than 80,000 have signed the petition protesting President Barack Obama’s invitation to speak at Notre Dame.

Read here. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/03/24/we-prayerfully-implore-you-to-halt-this-travesty-immediately/

Obama’s Notre Dame commencement robe: Will there be another ‘cover-up’ at the highest level?

By Doug Powers

“…Ever since the announcement that President Obama would deliver the commencement address at Notre Dame, and the subsequent “Georgetown/Jesus cover-up,” people have been been asking, “Will he, or won’t he?”

As of today, he will:

President Barack Obama is expected to wear the traditional doctoral robe featuring the cross and prayer of the Virgin Mary when he speaks at the University of Notre Dame next month, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs told CNSNews.com on Monday.

I have no doubt Obama will wear the robe. What he’ll have on over it is anybody’s guess. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/04/28/obamas-notre-dame-commencement-robe/

Local Catholic Bishop Will Boycott Obama’s Appearance at Notre Dame’s Graduation

By Edwin Mora

“…The Rt. Rev. John D’Arcy, bishop of Ft Wayne-Soth Bend, Ind. (AP photo)

(CNSNews.com) — Bishop John M. D’Arcy, who presides over the Roman Catholic Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend that includes the University of Notre Dame, says he will not attend the university’s May 17 graduation because the commencement speaker will be President Obama whom the university intends to award an honorary doctorate in law.

“This will be the 25th Notre Dame graduation during my time as bishop,” D’Arcy announced Tuesday afternoon. “After much prayer, I have decided not to attend the graduation.”

“I wish no disrespect to our president, I pray for him and wish him well,” said D’Arcy. ”I have always revered the Office of the Presidency. But a bishop must teach the Catholic faith ‘in season and out of season,’ and he teaches not only by his words–but by his actions.”

The bishop pointed out that his decision to skip the commencement is “not an attack on anyone, but is in defense of the truth about human life.” …”

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=45563

Top 10 Catholic states’

States with highest percentage of Catholics voted overwhelmingly for Obama, including California

“…Three days before the Nov. 4 General Election, at the request of the news media, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statistical table showing the number of Catholics in each of the 50 states as a percentage of each state’s population. Using that data, California Catholic Daily took a look at how the nation’s ‘most Catholic states’ voted in the presidential race. Of the 10 states with the largest percentage of Catholics in the general population, all voted for Sen. Barack Obama — and most by overwhelming margins. …”

http://www.calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=372be62d-9823-46cf-8d63-259cd7b650e9

Obama + Catholic Notre Dame = What the?…..

Shame, Shame on YOU, Notre Dame!

Pope Talks to Pelosi on Abortion

Pope Stands up to Pelosi on Abortion

Laura Ingraham Discusses Pelosi and the Pope’s Abortion Ruling

Background Articles and Videos

World’s Smallest Political Quiz

http://www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html

GOP recasts brand, sans wedge issues

By Ben Smith

“…Top Republican leaders Thursday offered a first look at plans to remake their party with a renewed focus on the bread-and-butter issues of domestic policy.

The National Council for a New America launched with an open letter that’s notable for what it leaves out: The issues that a large segment of the party’s base are most passionate about. The letter, signed by 14 congressional Republican leaders, makes no mention of same-sex marriage, immigration — legal or otherwise — or abortion.

The letter outlines five policy areas, four of them domestic, and promises a search for solutions on the economy and on “high quality, affordable [health] care for all Americans.”
What George Will missed: The decrepit state of the California GOP …”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0409/21957.html

PEGGY NOONANAmerica may be ready for a new political party.

Third Time

“…Right now the Republicans and Democrats in Washington seem, from the outside, to be an elite colluding against the voter. They’re in agreement: immigration should not be controlled but increased, spending will increase, etc.

Are there some dramatic differences? Yes. But both parties act as if they see them not as important questions (gay marriage, for instance) but as wedge issues. Which is, actually, abusive of people on both sides of the question. If it’s a serious issue, face it. Don’t play with it.

I don’t see any potential party, or potential candidate, on the scene right now who can harness the disaffection of growing portions of the electorate. But a new group or entity that could define the problem correctly–that sees the big divide not as something between the parties but between America’s ruling elite and its people–would be making long strides in putting third party ideas in play in America again. …”

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/pnoonan/?id=110008453

Party Hacks: Rebooting the GOP

“…It’s worth noting, though, that the Democrats were never able to replicate the gop‘s mastery of talk radio—and not for lack of trying. And Republicans are trying to upgrade their outreach while saddled with a much bigger challenge: determining what the party stands for. That’s not something that can be solved with technology. Stepping up to the mic at the rnc‘s Tech Summit, Sean Doughtie, who runs a Florida-based new-media firm, summed up the problem: “We can blog about blogging. We can twitter about Twitter. But what we’re experiencing as a party is a failure of our brand.”

It didn’t bode well for a party in flux when the rnc‘s Web guru, Cyrus Krohn, abruptly resigned in March. His farewell blog post was titled “rnc-YA.”

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2009/05/party-hacks-rebooting-gop

What George Will missed: The decrepit state of the California GOP

By Michelle Malkin

“…George Will’s latest column on the sagging economy of California and the upcoming slate of massive tax-hike initiatives on the ballot only scratches the surface of what’s rotten in the formerly Golden State.

The state GOP is a basket case. The party establishment epitomizes everything that is wrong with the Republican Party nationally: Cronyism, arrogance, waste, and leadership out of touch with its base.

I reportedon how grass-roots conservatives greeted California GOP chairman Ron Nehring with boos and heckles of “Go Home!” and “Throw Them Out!” at the Sacramento Tea Party on April 15. Tea Party organizer Mark Meckler publicly called out Nehring for the party’s waffling on the tax propositions. Nehring attempted to coopt the Tea Party movement for the GOP’s purposes. The tax revolters were having none of it. Here’s the vid: …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/04/what-george-will-missed-the-decrepit-state-of-the-california-gop/

Hero worship

By Michelle Malkin

“…I’ve been seeing a lemming-like increase in hand-wringing articles about the need for a GOP “hero.”

The latest comes from McCain/Bush flack Nicolle Wallace in “The Daily Beast” — Tina Brown’s liberal salon sprinkled with acceptable, non-conservative Beltway Republicans who swallow false premises whole.

Wallace parrots the line that the Republican Party needs an “effective communicator” who can match Obama’s “eloquence.”

Her genius, never-before-thought-of proposal: Get an actor!

Wallace floats Gary Sinise as the next “hero.” …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/12/hero-worship/

California Sagging

By George Will

“…But what actually ails California is centrist evasions. The state’s crisis has been causedby “moderation,” understood as splitting the difference between extreme liberalism and hyperliberalism, a “reasonableness” that merely moderates the speed at which the ever-expanding public sector suffocates the private sector.

California has become liberalism’s laboratory, in which the case for fiscal conservatism is being confirmed. The state is a slow learner and hence will remain a drag on the nation’s economy. But it will be a net benefit to the nation if the federal government and other state governments profit from California’s negative example, which Californians can make more vividly instructive by voting down the propositions on May 19.

Remember the story of the mule that paid attention only after being walloped by a two-by-four? The Democratic-controlled state Legislature is like that. Fortunately, it has handed voters some two-by-fours — the initiatives. Resounding rejections of them should get Sacramento’s attention. …”

http://townhall.com/columnists/GeorgeWill/2009/05/03/california_sagging?page=full&comments=true

Milton Freidman – Socialism vs. Capitalism

Ronald Reagan on Capitalism and Socialism

The Morality of Capitalism 1 – Ayn Rand Institute

The Morality of Capitalism 2 – Ayn Rand Institute

The Morality of Capitalism 3 – Ayn Rand Institute

Contemporary American Conservatism

http://fora.tv/2008/09/01/Contemporary_American_Conservatism

Background Articles and Videos

5 Things You Need to Know About Barack Obama’s New Chief of Staff

“…With Rahm Emanuel accepting the offer of Chief of Staff within the Obama White House, it’s time to learn more about the brash but brilliant representative from Illinois and former Clinton White House staffer. With a reputation for being a hard-charging guy who also gets things done, he’ll help set the tone for the next administration. He’s sometimes known as the Democrat’s Mafia enforcer, due to the time he mailed rotting fish to a pollster who’d crossed himHere’s what you need to know about Rahm Emanuel:

1. He’s Got Sharp Elbows

After getting his feet wet serving as Clinton‘s Director of Finance during the successful 1992 presidential bid, he’s known for not suffering fools, glady or otherwise.

With the nickname of “Rahmbo,” saying he’s not afraid of hurting feelings is an understatement. Clintonista Paul Begala, speaking to Rolling Stone, said “He’s got this big old pair of brass balls, and you can just hear ‘em clanking when he walks down the halls of Congress.” He’s sometimes known as the Democrat’s Mafia enforcer, due to the time he mailed rotting fish to a pollster who’d crossed him.

On the night of Clinton’s victory in 1992, Emanuel reportedly stood up at the celebratory dinner, read off a list of Cliniton’s enemies, and stabbed a steak knife into a table while screaming “Dead! Dead! Dead!” So yeah, he’s intense. …”

http://www.zimbio.com/Rahm+Emanuel/articles/12/5+Things+Need+Know+Barack+Obama+New+Chief

Rahm Emanuel

Rahm Israel Emanuel[1] (born November 29, 1959) is an American politician currently serving as White House Chief of Staff to President Barack Obama. He served previously as Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives, representing Illinois’s 5th congressional district from 2003 until his resignation in 2009 to take up his current position in the Obama Administration.

Emanuel was chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee during the 2006 mid-term elections and remained a top strategist for House Democrats during the 2008 cycle. After Democrats regained control of the House in 2006, Emanuel was elected chairman of the Democratic Caucus. This made him the fourth-ranking House Democrat, behind Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn.[2] Two days after Obama’s election victory, he was announced as Barack Obama’s designate for White House Chief of Staff.[3] Emanuel resigned from the House on January 2, 2009[4] and began his current job on January 20, 2009, the day of Obama’s inauguration.[3]

Emanuel is an influential member of the New Democrat Coalition. He is noted for his combative style and his political fundraising abilities.[5]

http://redistributingknowledge.blogspot.com/2009/03/rahm-emanuel-equates-nra-members-to.html

Rahm’s ill-gotten gains

By Michelle Malkin

“…So, when’s the ACORN/MSM-chartered bus to Rahm’s (illegal) apartment departing to protest his ill-gotten gains?

Hmmmm?

Before its portfolio of bad loans helped trigger the current housing crisis, mortgage giant Freddie Mac was the focus of a major accounting scandal that led to a management shake-up, huge fines and scalding condemnation of passive directors by a top federal regulator.

One of those allegedly asleep-at-the-switch board members was Chicago’s Rahm Emanuel—now chief of staff to President Barack Obama—who made at least $320,000 for a 14-month stint at Freddie Mac that required little effort.

As gatekeeper to Obama, Emanuel now plays a critical role in addressing the nation’s mortgage woes and fulfilling the administration’s pledge to impose responsibility on the financial world.

Emanuel’s Freddie Mac involvement has been a prominent point on his political résumé, and his healthy payday from the firm has been no secret either. What is less known, however, is how little he apparently did for his money and how he benefited from the kind of cozy ties between Washington and Wall Street that have fueled the nation’s current economic mess.

Though just 49, Emanuel is a veteran Democratic strategist and fundraiser who served three terms in the U.S. House after helping elect Mayor Richard Daley and former President Bill Clinton. The Freddie Mac money was a small piece of the $16 million he made in a three-year interlude as an investment banker a decade ago… …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/03/26/rahms-ill-gotten-gains/Rahm

Emanuel Equates NRA Members to Terrorists

”…Isn’t it funny that the guys who actually fly planes into buildings, kidnap innocent people and chop off their heads, and openly call for the destruction of our nation cannot be called terrorists, but we, the lawful citizens of the United States who are members of the NRA, are considered terrorists? Rahm “Scar” Emanuel is like a nightmare version of Jeff Foxworthy. Instead of making innocent correlations about rednecks, Emanuel makes correlations like this: if you’re a member of the NRA, then you might be a terrorist.

This is even more disturbing in light of the story coming out of Missouri about the attempts to tie Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, constitutionalists, etc. to militias and terrorism. My guess is Rahm’s idea is that if you decree that suspected terrorists cannot have guns, and then you label supporters of the 2nd Amendment as terrorists, you then can revoke the gun rights belonging to that suspected group. …”

http://redistributingknowledge.blogspot.com/2009/03/rahm-emanuel-equates-nra-members-to.html Rahm Emanuel Equates NRA Members to Terrorists

More Gun Control Introduced in Congress

Gregory Young

“…The liberals are at it again. In a new bill introduced the first day of present session of Congress, and with zero coverage from the MSM, H.R. 45 (Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009) targets all gun owners in the U.S.A.

This nefarious bill seeks to strip us all of our Constitutional Rights to possess and bear firearms of any distinction. It requires, within the first two years, that all new guns be registered. The bill goes retroactive after two years. Meaning that two years after the passage of the bill, ALL FIREARMS in a citizen’s possession must be registered, not just those purchased after the bill passes, and this apparently applies to antique firearms as well.

Every five years the firearm owner must go through a complete renewal process for each weapon owned. Failure to comply carries stiff penalties including confiscation of the firearms and jail time (penalties as high as ten years imprisonment in some cases). The bill also authorizes government searches without warrant, the creation of a federal bureaucracy to monitor firearm possession, etc.

The following is a summary of the bill as provided by the Congressional Research Service. If you read the whole bill, you’ll find it will effectively preclude the ownership of any firearms by law-abiding people unless directly licensed by the Attorney General : …”

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/02/more_gun_control_introduced_in.html

Defining domestic extremism

By Michelle Malkin

“…If you oppose drivers’ licenses for illegal aliens, you may be a “domestic extremist.”

Seriously. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/01/defining-domestic-extremism/

Debunking the “90 percent of guns used in Mexican crimes are American” lie

By Michelle Malkin

“…Excellent myth-buster piece from William La Jeunesse and Maxim Lott at Fox News on an anti-gun rights lie. Countering the double-barreled propaganda from both the gun controllers and the open-borders lobby is a job most of the MSM refuses to do:

You’ve heard this shocking “fact” before — on TV and radio, in newspapers, on the Internet and from the highest politicians in the land: 90 percent of the weapons used to commit crimes in Mexico come from the United States.

– Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said it to reporters on a flight to Mexico City.

– CBS newsman Bob Schieffer referred to it while interviewing President Obama.

– California Sen. Dianne Feinstein said at a Senate hearing: “It is unacceptable to have 90 percent of the guns that are picked up in Mexico and used to shoot judges, police officers and mayors … come from the United States.” …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/04/02/debunking-the-90-percent-of-guns-used-in-mexican-crimes-are-american-lie/

Background Articles and Videos

“ACORN is a criminal enterprise”

By Michelle Malkin

“… “ACORN is a criminal enterprise.”

These are the five simple words that every conservative candidate officeholder should be repeating often and loudly.

It’s about the fraud. It’s about the coordinated corruption. It’s about the effect on housing, the economy, and the entire electoral landscape.

Does the GOP get it yet? At least one Republican candidate does.

Kris Kobach, the former Bush administration national security/immigration enforcement official and constitutional lawyer, announced that he will run for Kansas Secretary of State last week. His prime motivation: stopping the ACORN racket:

Kris Kobach’s desire to be Kansas Secretary of State can be summed up in one word:

“ACORN,” he told a modest audience that gathered Thursday for lunch at Salina’s Western Sizzlin restaurant.

Salina is one of eight cities Kobach, who until recently was chairman of the Kansas Republican Party, is visiting to announce his desire to be secretary of state.

ACORN — the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now — is an aggressive get-out-the-vote organization that represents low- and moderate-income people nationally. “Since 1970, ACORN has been building community organizations that are committed to social and economic justice,” its Web site says.

Kobach describes it differently.

“ACORN is a criminal enterprise,” he said Thursday. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/01/acorn-is-a-criminal-enterprise/

Counterprotesting Obamacare and the ACORN/SEIU mob

By Michelle Malkin

“…I wrote earlier this month about the need for the Right to counter the huge Obamacare push by the big government alliance. Resistance has to happen on the ground, on the airwaves, and in the halls of Congress. ACORN, the SEIU, and the rest of the liberal grass-roots network are organized and committed to helping the White House. They’re pulling out all the stops:

Activists delivered a stack of dirty laundry to U.S. Rep. John Boehner’s West Chester Twp. office Wednesday, May 27, to protest his stance on health care reform.

The 14 T-shirts had messages written on them, many from a nearby low-income neighborhood.

“I have breast cancer — a pre-existing condition. I can’t get health coverage. Please Mr. Boehner, support health care for Americans now,” read one T-shirt signed by “Cassandra.”

“I lost my insurance because I couldn’t get enough hours at work,” another read.

The demonstration was part of a nationwide effort organized by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now and Health Care for America Now. They targeted Boehner, U.S. House Republican leader, because of his record of opposing expansion of publicly funded healthcare.

“These health insurance companies have a lot of dirty laundry to air,” said Ohio ACORN Director Amy Teitelman. “We want Rep. Boehner to be on the side of the people who made these T-shirts, not on the side of health insurance companies.”

“(Boehner) has voted consistently against expanding healthcare, and we’re trying to get him to see it’s hurting his constituency,” said ACORN organizer Debra Hentnik.

Health Care for America Now is funded by the radical left Tides Foundation, founded by Drummond Pike — the ACORN sugar daddy who bailed out the rotten Rathke family after ACORN founder Wade Rathke’s brother, Dale, was exposed as the thief who embezzled nearly $1 million from the organization.

The Right needs to expose these corruptocrats; show Americans that the do-gooder poseurs want more power and control, not real “health care reform;” and match them foot soldier for foot soldier in the streets. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/31/couterprotesting-obamacare-and-the-acornseiu-mob/

Document drop: The truth about ObamACORN

By Michelle Malkin

“…They thought it would go away. They were wrong. Obama and the Left thought ACORN’s scandalous racket was a dead issue. But whistleblowers, investigative bloggers, and talk radio continue to press for transparency and taxpayer accountability. Iowa GOP Rep. Steve King has renewed efforts for congressional hearings into the financial structure of the massive, publicly subsidized activist group and its non-profit affiliates. Judicial Watch sheds light on ACORN’s partnership with the Census. Keep an eye on ACORN’s propaganda role in the Obama push for a government health care takeover. And Glenn Beck spotlights the left-wing strategy session to rescue ACORN.

My column today returns to one of the Obama campaign’s big lies — that Barack Obama “never organized with ACORN” and that ACORN had nothing to do with Project Vote. They were joined at the hip back then and they remain joined at the hip today.

Here’s the text of e-mails from ACORN and affiliate staffers patting themselves on the back for their role in Obama’s voter registration drive (click here for the original). Note the addressees, including Frances Piven. Yes, that Frances Piven: …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/29/document-drop-the-truth-about-obamacorn/

Conyers chickens out of ACORN probe

By Michelle Malkin

“…Democrat Rep. John Conyers backs down from his pledge to investigate ACORN fraud: Bok, bok, bok.

Matthew Vadum zeroes in on the right question: What happened in a mere two weeks to change Conyers’ mind? Did he get a call from friends of ACORN in high places? Did he get something else? Why drop the call for a congressional probe in the very same week that ACORN criminal charges have been filed in Nevada and Pennsylvania?

What gives? Or who gives? …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/08/conyers-chickens-out-of-acorn-probe/

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act

“The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (commonly referred to as RICO Act or RICO) is a United States federal law that provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization. RICO was enacted by section 901(a) of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 (Pub.L. 91-452, 84 Stat. 922, enacted October 15, 1970). RICO is codified as Chapter 96 of Title 18 of the United States Code, 18 U.S.C. § 1961–1968. While its intended use was to prosecute the Mafia as well as others who were actively engaged in organized crime, its application has been more widespread.

It has been speculated that the name and acronym were selected in a sly reference to the movie Little Caesar, which featured a notorious gangster named Rico. The original drafter of the bill, G. Robert Blakey, refused to firm or deny this.^[1]

^…”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act

Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now

“ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, is a community-based organization that advocates for low- and moderate-income families by working on neighborhood safety, voter registration, health care, affordable housing, and other social issues. ACORN has over 400,000 members and more than 850 neighborhood chapters in over 100 cities across the United States, as well as in Argentina, Canada, Mexico, and Peru. ACORN was founded in 1970 by Wade Rathke and Gary Delgado.^[1] Maude Hurd has been National President of ACORN since 1990.

ACORN’s priorities have included: better housing and wages for the poor, more community development investment from banks and governments, and better public schools.^[2] ACORN pursues these goals through demonstration, negotiation, lobbying for legislation, and voter participation.^[2] ACORN is made up of several legally distinct parts including local non-profits, a national lobbying organization and the ACORN Housing Corporation. ACORN is a non-profit, non-partisan social justice organization, but its legally separate political action arm frequently champions liberal causes, and endorsed Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama in 2008.^[3]^[4]^[5]

^”’>

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Community_Organizations_for_Reform_Now}

ACORN Could Be Eligible for $8.5 Billion This Year

By Matthew Vadum

“…As I told the Washington Examiner a few hours ago after reviewing the Obama stimulus bill and the proposed fiscal 2010 budget for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), ACORN and other left-wing advocacy groups could have a shot at pocketing up to $8.5 billion this year.

Here’s how I arrived at the $8.5 billion figure.

The $800 billion-plus stimulus bill, which is now formally known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 or Public Law 111-5, originally set aside $5.2 billion that could flow directly or indirectly into the coffers of ACORN and its liberal friends. It appears the $5.2 billion was chopped down to $3 billion in the version of the bill that President Obama signed into law on February 17. The $3 billion consists of $2 billion in funds set aside for the redevelopment of abandoned and foreclosed homes and $1 billion in Community Development Block Grants (CDBG).

CDBG is good old-fashioned graft. Local politicians of both parties love CDBG because it is flexible. The program gives them wide latitude when spending grant money and allows local leaders to use federal dollars on local projects that they wouldn’t dream of spending their own local tax dollars on. ACORN loves CDBG because it is adept at lobbying for CDBG funds. …”

http://spectator.org/blog/2009/05/06/acorn-could-be-eligible-for-85

ACORN Whistle Blowers Multiply, Drummond Pike Buys Off Embezzlement, Rathke takes leave of absence from Tides Foundation

“…When the embezzlement of almost $1 million by the brother of the founder of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, better known as Acorn, surfaced last month, the organization announced that an anonymous supporter had agreed to make it whole.That supporter was Drummond Pike, the founder and chief executive of the Tides Foundation, which channels money to what it describes as progressive nonprofits, including some Acorn charitable affiliates.Mr. Pike is a friend of Wade Rathke, the founder of Acorn and its leader until the scandal broke, and he agreed to buy the promissory note that required the Rathke family to repay Acorn the money that Mr. Rathke’s brother, Dale, had stolen.Mr. Rathke is a member of the board of the Tides Foundation and other Tides-related organizations.Since 2000, the Tides Foundation has provided more than $400 million to nonprofit groups, with much of that money flowing out of donor-controlled accounts it manages in the same way that the Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund or a community foundation does.John A. Powell, board chairman of the Tides Network, the umbrella organization for various Tides affiliates, wrote in an e-mail message to The Times that Tides had no involvement in the matter and that none of its money was used to buy the Rathke family’s debt to Acorn.He said Mr. Rathke was on a leave of absence from all Tides boards.In 2000, Acorn discovered that Dale Rathke had embezzled $948,507.50 from it and affiliated charitable organizations. The management committee that controlled the organization decided not to alert law enforcement officials, and negotiated an agreement with the Rathke family to repay the money.That agreement was carried on the books of an affiliate, Citizens Consulting Inc., as a loan to an officer. Sometime in June, Mr. Pike bought the loan from the affiliate, according to e-mail messages between senior executives at Acorn that were provided to a reporter by Acorn employees, who requested anonymity because they feared losing their jobs.Mr. Pike refused to confirm or deny that he had bought the note. …”

http://waderathke.blogspot.com/2008/08/acorn-whistle-blowers-multiply-drummond.html

Members of Congress stop funding Acorn!

“…Barney Frank is at it again. Last year, Frank passed a bill in the House for a $4 billion slush fund that the corrupt left-win activist organization known as ACORN could have applied to for taxpayer funds. Frank was forced by the Senate to accept a provision barring taxpayer funds to organizations and employees of organizations, such as ACORN, that have been indicted for voter fraud. This year, with increased Liberal majorities in the House and Senate, Frank made sure ACORN remained eligible for funds from the Stimulus Bill. Now, Frank, the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, is using a mortgage reform bill due to be voted on this week to add another $180 million for “counseling” and “legal services” for people with mortgage problems. This time he ran up against Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN), a member of his committee. Citing numerous charges of voter fraud and tax violations against ACORN in a number of states, Bachmann proposed an amendment with the same language as last year’s law. Afraid of a debate and committee vote, Frank cut off debate and accepted the Bachmann amendment. Apparently this did not sit well with Franks’ left-wing friends because just hours later he announced he would try to gut the amendment when the bill is voted on by the whole House.

TAKE ACTION NOW! GO HERE AND TELL Rep. John B. Larson TO OPPOSE THE FRANK AMENDMENT TO H.R. 1728, THE MORTGAGE REFORM ACT

This is a rare opportunity to put every member of the House of Representatives on record as to where they stand on ACORN. Normally, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi could prevent a vote on the Bachmann provision but they are forced to have a vote because the provision is already in the bill and they want it out. …”

Stimulus bill funds ACORN despite its history of corruption

By: Kristen Lopez Eastlick, OpEd Contributor
-
02/09/09 12:05 AM EST

–

KEY DATA:

* ACORN could receive up to $4 billion under the economic stimulus legislation approved by the House of Representatives.
* ACORN has received an estimated $53 million in government funds since its founding in 1970.
* ACORN is under investigation in at least 14 states in connection with allegations of voter registration fraud in the 2008 campaign.

TAKE HOME:

ACORN claims to represent low-income workers but does not pay its own employees the minimum wage and in 1995 sued California for an exemption from its minimum wage requirement.

A multi-million dollar liberal non-profit activist conglomerate reportedly under federal investigation may get a big piece of the economic recovery stimulus pie now under consideration by Congress.

It’s the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now – the infamous ACORN.

That’s right. ACORN, the activist group that has been implicated in voter fraud and registration deception in at least 14 states may get the financial bailout it needs to pull off another round of schemes in the next election season. …”

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Stimulus-bill-funds-ACORN-despite-its-history-of-corruption-39288257.html

Congress Should Say Nuts to ACORN (updated)

Clarice Feldman

“…The Washington Examiner is quickly becoming a formidible publication with a bevy of first rate writers.

Today’s expose of Congressional largesse to ACORN by Kevin Mooney is a good example:

At least $53 million in federal funds have gone to ACORN activists since 1994, and the controversial group could get up to $8.5 billion more tax dollars despite being under investigation for voter registration fraud in a dozen states. The economic stimulus bill enacted in February contains $3 billion that the non-profit activist group (Snip) could receive, and 2010 federal budget contains another $5.5 billion that could also find its way into the group’s coffers.

Update – Clarice Feldman writes:

Days ago ACORN workers were indicted in Nevada. Today they are charged with registration wrongdoing in Pennsylvania….”

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/05/congress_should_say_nuts_to_ac.html

ACORN: Labor’s Ally Is a Bad Seed

by Ivan Osorio

“…But particularly galling is ACORN’s receipt of taxpayer funds and its hypocritical refusal to practice what it preaches.

ACORN is a beneficiary of federal government largess. During 2003-2004, it received $2.6 million in federal grants to support its housing programs. But its political activism has led Republican lawmakers to forbid Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from funding ACORN’s voter registration drives. ACORN has a history of using federal grants to subsidize its political activities. According to the Wall Street Journal, a 1994 grant to the ACORN Housing Corp. from the federal volunteer agency AmeriCorps was terminated after an inspector general found that ACORN had used AmeriCorps volunteers for political purposes.

Despite these setbacks, ACORN has lobbied for access to more federal funds and it is likely to ask more of the Democrat-controlled Congress. In 2005, it actually helped convince the Republican-controlled House of Representatives to pass a bill creating an “affordable housing trust fund,” which would allocate up to 5% of profits generated by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to groups like ACORN to provide affordable housing. The bill went nowhere in the Senate, but it is likely to be reintroduced in the new Congress. Given its history, it’s not unreasonable to expect ACORN to use these funds to subsidize its ongoing political activities. Even with legal and accounting controls, money is always fungible. …”

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19737

SEIU – Service Employees International Union

“…With 2 million members in Canada, the United States and Puerto Rico, SEIU is the fastest-growing union in the Americas. Focused on uniting workers in healthcare, public services and property services, SEIU members are winning better wages, healthcare and more secure jobs for our communities, while uniting their strength with their counterparts around the world to help ensure that workers—not just corporations and CEOs—benefit from today’s global economy. …”

ttp://www.seiu.org/index.php

Hang On To Your Wallets! Democrats Hidden Soros Slush Fund

“…George Soros the “financial puppeteer” for the Obama campaign…..ACORN for the voter registrations from Mickey Mouse and DEAD people……

Is George Soros actually the “behind the scenes” director for the Obama Administration?

It seems like this might be a possibility. Most nominations for cabinet positions by this Administration have some kind of ties to Soros or World Socialists or are avid United Nations supporters……

“Shadow Party”…….”Democracy Alliance”……both tied to George Soros.

Shadow Party network at link below:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/ShadowParty.asp

Democracy Alliance network at link below:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/16/AR2006071600882_pf.html

…”

http://romanticpoet.wordpress.com/2009/03/18/hang-on-to-your-wallets-democrats-hidden-soros-slush-fund/Workers

Allege ACORN actively campaigned for Senate candidate Claire McCaskill

Special Prosecutor

“A special prosecutor generally is a lawyer from outside the government appointed by an attorney general or Congress to investigate a government official for misconduct while in office. A reasoning for such an appointment is that the governmental branch or agency may have political connections to those it might be asked to investigate. Inherently, this creates a conflict of interest and a solution is to have someone from outside the department lead the investigation. The term “special prosecutor” may have a variety of meanings from one country to the next, from one government branch to the next within the same country, and within different agencies within each government branch. Critics of the use of special prosecutors argue that these investigators act as a “4th branch” to the government because they are not subject to limitations in spending or have deadlines to meet. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_prosecutor

SEIU Staff Union Pickets the SEIU!

Report On Employee Free Choice Act

Worker Advocate Comments on Obama’s Secretary of Labor Appointment

Lou Dobbs Criticizes Appointment of Pro-Union Labor Secretary

Heritage In Focus: Voting Down the Union Bosses

Employee Free Choice Act

Barack Obama on the Employee Free Choice Act

Lou Dobbsa: The Employee Free Choice Act

The Card Check Reality

EFCA Means Intimidation

Coercive “Card Check” Union Organizing Victims Speak Out

George Soros and Acorn in the 2008 Elections

Background Articles and Videos

THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: APRIL 2009

“Nonfarm payroll employment continued to decline in April (-539,000), and
the unemployment rate rose from 8.5 to 8.9 percent, the Bureau of Labor Sta-
tistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported today. Since the recession
began in December 2007, 5.7 million jobs have been lost. In April, job los-
ses were large and widespread across nearly all major private-sector indus-
tries. Overall, private-sector employment fell by 611,000.

Unemployment (Household Survey Data)

The number of unemployed persons increased by 563,000 to 13.7 million in
April, and the unemployment rate rose to 8.9 percent. Over the past 12 months,
the number of unemployed persons has risen by 6.0 million, and the unemployment
rate has grown by 3.9 percentage points. (See table A-1.)

Unemployment rates rose in April for adult men (9.4 percent) and blacks
(15.0 percent). The jobless rates for adult women (7.1 percent), teenagers
(21.5 percent), whites (8.0 percent), and Hispanics (11.3 percent) were little
changed over the month. The unemployment rate for Asians was 6.6 percent in
April, not seasonally adjusted, up from 3.2 percent a year earlier. (See
tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

Among the unemployed, the number of job losers and persons who completed
temporary jobs rose by 571,000 in April to 8.8 million. This group has more
than doubled in size over the past 12 months. (See table A-8.)

The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more)
increased by 498,000 to 3.7 million over the month and has risen by 2.4 mil-
lion since the start of the recession in December 2007. (See table A-9.) …”

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htmTable

A-12. Alternative measures of labor underutilization (Percent)

Not seasonally adjusted Seasonally adjusted

Measure

Apr. Mar. Apr. Apr. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr.
2008 2009 2009 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009

U-1 Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent
of the civilian labor force………………….. 1.9 4.1 4.5 1.7 2.9 3.0 3.4 3.7 4.0

U-2 Job losers and persons who completed temporary
jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force…. 2.6 6.1 5.6 2.6 4.2 4.5 5.0 5.4 5.7

U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian
labor force (official unemployment rate)………. 4.8 9.0 8.6 5.0 7.2 7.6 8.1 8.5 8.9

U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a
percent of the civilian labor force plus
discouraged workers…………………………. 5.0 9.4 9.0 5.2 7.6 8.0 8.5 8.9 9.3

U-5 Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus
all other marginally attached workers, as a
percent of the civilian labor force plus all
marginally attached workers………………….. 5.6 10.3 9.8 5.9 8.3 8.8 9.3 9.8 10.1

U-6 Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached
workers, plus total employed part time for
economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian
labor force plus all marginally attached workers.. 8.9 16.2 15.4 9.2 13.5 13.9 14.8 15.6 15.8

NOTE: Marginally attached workers are persons who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and
are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the recent past. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached,
have given a job-market related reason for not looking currently for a job. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those
who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule. For more information, see “BLS intro-
duces new range of alternative unemployment measures,” in the October 1995 issue of the Monthly Labor Review. Updated population con-
trols are introduced annually with the release of January data.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm

Another snort-inducer: Obama to crack down on tax cheats

By Michelle Malkin

“…Treasury Department tax cheat Tim Geithner already announced this knee-slapper initiative in March. The White House follows up today with the details of the crackdown on corporate tax cheats:

President Obama on Monday spelled out his plans to close corporate tax loopholes on U.S. multinational corporations and crack down on overseas tax havens.

The goal is to help create new jobs in the United States and make the tax code fairer.

But tax policy experts and corporate lobbyists say such measures, unless accompanied by a reduction in the corporate tax rate, will push more companies to move their operations — and jobs – overseas to more tax friendly countries. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/04/another-snort-inducer-obama-to-crack-down-on-tax-cheats/

Hey, let’s throw another $19 billion down the rat hole!

By Michelle Malkin

“…The fraud-ridden money pit known as Fannie Mae needs more of your money.

Who among the Fannie-kissers in Congress will say no?

Say goodbye to another $19 billion:

Fannie Mae (FNM.P), the largest provider of U.S. home mortgage funding, said on Friday it needs more capital from the U.S. Treasury after a $23.2 billion loss in the first quarter, and warned government housing programs would cut deeper into its profitability.

The government-controlled company said its regulator requested $19 billion from the Treasury under a funding commitment that on Wednesday was doubled to $200 billion. The credit, in the form of senior preferred stock purchases, was established as soaring losses led the government to push the company into conservatorship in September.

As the nation’s housing market reels in its worst downturn since the 1930s, credit-related expenses accounted for the majority of Fannie Mae’s loss, at $20.9 billion. It also took a $5.7 billion loss on mortgage securities. …”

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/08/hey-lets-throw-another-19-billion-down-the-rat-hole/

Dear tech execs, you reap what you sow

By Michelle Malkin

Yesterday, I noted that Silicon Valley expressed its displeasure with President Obama’s plans to require corporations to pay billions of dollars in U.S. taxes on foreign earnings that they have previously been allowed to defer.

Today, there’s more whining from the tech companies that boosted Obama’s campaign and filled his coffers.

Call the wahmbulance (hat tip – William Amos):

Carl Guardino usually comes across as an amenable, mild-mannered Silicon Valley executive. But not on Monday. Not when he watched President Obama promising to end overseas tax breaks for U.S. companies that “create a job in Bangalore, India, (rather than) one in Buffalo, N.Y.” Guardino, CEO of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, angrily described Obama’s language as “not only discouraging, but divisive.” The president’s implication that companies such as Cisco Systems and Hewlett-Packard merely “ship jobs overseas,” and are being rewarded in the bargain, came as a shock to Guardino, who otherwise described the president as “brilliant and respected by so many in the tech sector who are counting on the administration as their ally.”

Indeed, Obama’s proposal to limit U.S. companies’ ability to defer paying U.S. taxes on offshore earnings does put Bay Area companies doing a lot of business overseas directly in the crosshairs. “It would adversely impact our ability to invest and grow our business in the (United States) and to compete against our foreign competitors,” said a spokesman for Cisco.

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/05/dear-tech-execs-you-reap-what-you-sow/

Why the Meltdown Should Have Surprised No One

Ron Paul – End The Fed – Mises Institute (1/3)

Ron Paul – End The Fed – Mises Institute (2/3)

Ron Paul – End The Fed – Mises Institute (3/3)

Government Highways – Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

Public Education – Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

The Borg Documentary part 3

Borg

“The Borg are a fictional pseudo-race of cybernetic organisms depicted in the Star Trek franchise. The Borg play major roles in The Next Generation and Voyager television series, primarily as an invasion threat to the United Federation of Planets and the means of return to the Alpha Quadrant for isolated Federation starship Voyager, respectively. The Borg have become a symbol in popular culture for any juggernaut against whom “resistance is futile”.

The Borg manifest as cybernetically enhanced humanoid drones of multiple species, organized as an interconnected collective, the decisions of which are made by a hive mind. The Borg inhabit a vast region of space in the Delta Quadrant of the galaxy, possessing millions of vessels and having conquered thousands of systems. They operate solely toward the fulfilling of one purpose: to “add the biological and technological distinctiveness of other species to their own” in pursuit of perfection. This is achieved through forced assimilation, a process which transforms individuals and technology into Borg, enhancing, and simultaneously controlling, individuals by implanting or appending synthetic components.

In their first introduction to the franchise, little information is forthcoming about the Borg or their origins and intents. In alien encounters, they exhibit no desire for negotiation or reason, only to assimilate. Exhibiting a rapid adaptability to any situation or threat, with encounters characterized by matter of fact imperative ‘resistance is futile’, the Borg develop into one of the greatest threats to Starfleet and the Federation. Originally perceived on screen as a homogeneous and anonymous entity, the concepts of a Borg Queen and central control are later introduced, while representatives for the Borg collective are occasionally employed to act as a go-between in more complicated plot lines.

In Star Trek, attempts to resist the Borg become one of the central themes, with many examples of successful resistance to the collective, both from existing or former drones, and assimilation targets, with at least one species being shown as having superior capabilities to the Borg. It is also demonstrated that it is possible to survive assimilation (most notably Jean-Luc Picard), and that drones can escape the collective (most notably Seven of Nine), and become individuals, or exist collectively without forced assimilation of others. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borg_(Star_Trek

BOB DYLAN LYRICS

“It’s All Over Now, Baby Blue”

You must leave now, take what you need, you think will last
But whatever you wish to keep, you better grab it fast
Yonder stands your orphan with his gun
Crying like a fire in the sun
Look out the saints are comin’ through
And it’s all over now, Baby Blue.

The highway is for gamblers, better use your sense
Take what you have gathered from coincidence
The empty handed painter from your streets
Is drawing crazy patterns on your sheets
This sky, too, is folding under you
And it’s all over now, Baby Blue.

All your seasick sailors, they are rowing home
Your empty handed armies, are all going home
Your lover who just walked out the door
Has taken all his blankets from the floor
The carpet, too, is moving under you
And it’s all over now, Baby Blue.

Leave your stepping stones behind, something calls for you
Forget the dead you’ve left, they will not follow you
The vagabond who’s rapping at your door
Is standing in the clothes that you once wore
Strike another match, go start a new
And it’s all over now, Baby Blue.

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/bobdylan/itsallovernowbabyblue.html

Background Articles and Videos

Bob Dylan

“…Bob Dylan (born Robert Allen Zimmerman on May 24, 1941) is an American singer-songwriter, author, poet and painter who has been a major figure in popular music for five decades. Much of Dylan’s most celebrated work dates from the 1960s, when he became an informal chronicler and a reluctant figurehead of American unrest. A number of his songs, such as “Blowin’ in the Wind” and “The Times They Are a-Changin’”, became anthems of both the civil rights movements^[2] and of the opposition to the Vietnam War.^[3]

Dylan’s latest studio album, Together Through Life, was released on April 28, 2009.^[4]^[5] In its first week of release, the album reached the number one spot on the Billboard 200 chart of top selling albums.^[6] It also reached number one on the UK album charts in its first week of release, 39 years after Dylan’s previous UK album chart topper New Morning. This meant that Dylan currently holds the record for the longest gap between solo number one albums on the UK chart.^[7]

Dylan’s early lyrics incorporated political, social, philosophical, and literary influences, defying existing pop music conventions and appealing widely to the counterculture. While expanding and personalizing musical styles, he has explored many traditions of American song, from folk, blues and country to gospel, rock and roll and rockabilly to English, Scottish and Irish folk music, and even jazz and swing.^[8] Dylan performs with the guitar, piano and harmonica. Backed by a changing line-up of musicians, he has toured steadily since the late 1980s on what has been dubbed the “Never Ending Tour”. Although his accomplishments as performer and recording artist have been central to his career, his songwriting is generally regarded as his greatest contribution.^[9]

Throughout his career, Dylan has won many awards for his songwriting, performing, and recording. His records have earned Grammy, Golden Globe, and Academy Awards, and he has been inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, Nashville Songwriters Hall of Fame and Songwriters Hall of Fame. In 2008, a “Cultural Pathway” was named in Dylan’s honor in his birthplace, Duluth.^[10]^[11] In 2008, he was awarded a Pulitzer Prize Special Citation for his “profound impact on popular music and American culture, marked by lyrical compositions of extraordinary poetic power.”^[12]

^…”

^{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Dylan}

Exclusive Bob Dylan Interview

Interview by Bill Flanagan

“… BF: Which singers do you associate with Christmas?

BD: Johnny Mathis and Nat King Cole. Doris Day.

BF: What about Bing Crosby?

BD: Sure, White Christmas was always a big song.

BF: I always get choked up at the end of GOING MY WAY when the old priest’s mother comes walking toward him on Christmas Eve and Bing watches from the door of the church then picks up his suitcase and walks off into the snow – TURA, LURA, LURA playing in the background. You can’t get any more Christmasy than that.

BF: Did movies have a big effect on how you saw the world growing up?

BD: I think so. I lived in a small town and movies were a window into the outside world. …”

http://streetnewspapers.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/sns-exclusive-bob-dylan-interview/

bob dylan – press conference san francisco 1965 1/6

bob dylan – press conference san francisco 1965 2/6

bob dylan – press conference san francisco 1965 3/6

bob dylan – press conference san francisco 1965 4/6

bob dylan – press conference san francisco 1965 5/6

bob dylan – press conference san francisco 1965 6/6

Bob Dylan Interview 1984 – About being a Legend

Bob Dylan – Interview (1985)

Bob Dylan – Interview, Australia (1986)

Bob Dylan (Time Magazine Interview)

Bob Dylan – 2004 – “60 Minutes” interview pt.1

Bob Dylan – 2004 – “60 Minutes” interview pt.2

Bob Dylan interview

Bob Dylan Chronicles, Volume 1 Interview

Bob Dylan on Roy Orbison – Running Scared

Background Articles and Videos

The Founding of the Federal Reserve

Money, Banking and the Federal Reserve

How Abolishing the Fed Would Change Everything

How to Abolish the Federal Reserve

Who owns the Federal Reserve?

Barack obama and The Federal Reserve 1 of 5

Barack obama and The Federal Reserve 2 of 5

Barack obama and The Federal Reserve 3 of 5

Barack obama and The Federal Reserve 4 of 5

Barack obama and The Federal Reserve 5 of 5

What Has Government Done to Our Money? [Chapter 2]

	FY 2000	FY 2001	FY 2002	FY 2003	FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007	FY 2008	FY 2009
All Awards	Recovery Act Awards only
Contracts	$208.314	$219.231	$258.980	$297.828	$343.228	$385.148	$423.430	$456.979	$517.898	$146.322	$1.802
Grants	$294.511	$330.738	$406.158	$493.317	$449.656	$441.122	$489.194	$417.279	$404.978	$197.608	$36.230
Loans²	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	$0.409	$0.626	$-0.005	$0.008
Insurance	$431.320	$492.207	$556.586	$567.211	$603.890	$653.229	$771.275	$2.265	$4.482	$1.378	$0.00
Direct Payments (e.g. Social Security)	$768.254	$839.649	$841.514	$947.943	$965.484	$1,004.074	$1,092.687	$10.487	$42.642	$22.314	$1.777
Other type of Assistance	$2.816	$2.675	$0.233	$0.663	$0.379	$0.300	$3.847	$25.498	$40.487	$27.332	$17.098
Total	$1,705.215	$1,884.501	$2,063.471	$2,306.962	$2,362.637	$2,483.873	$2,780.433	$912.917	$1,011.113	$394.950	$56.915

Background Articles and Videos

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA)

“…The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance is a government-wide compendium of Federal programs,

projects, services, and activities that provide assistance or benefits to the American public. It contains

financial and nonfinancial assistance programs administered by departments and establishments of the

Federal government.

In 1984, Public Law 98-169 authorized the transfer of responsibilities of the Federal Program Information

Act from the Office of Management and Budget to the General Services Administration (GSA). The

transfer took place in July 1984. These responsibilities include the dissemination of Federal domestic

assistance program information through the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, pursuant to the

Federal Program Information Act, Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law 98-169. GSA now

maintains the Federal assistance information database from which program information is obtained. The

Office of Management and Budget serves as an intermediary agent between the Federal agencies and GSA,

thus providing oversight to the necessary collection of Federal domestic assistance program data. …”

https://cfda.symplicity.com/index?s=main&mode=list&tab=listAll

Subsidy

“…In economics, a subsidy (also known as a subvention) is a form of financial assistance paid to a business or economic sector. A subsidy can be used to support businesses that might otherwise fail, or to encourage activities that would otherwise not take place.

Subsidies can be regarded as a form of protectionism or trade barrier by making domestic goods and services artificially competitive against imports. Subsidies may distort markets, and can impose large economic costs.^[1] Financial assistance in the form of a subsidy may come from one’s government, but the term subsidy may also refer to assistance granted by others, such as individuals or non-governmental institutions, although these would be more commonly described as charity. …”

“… Types of subsidies

There are many different ways to classify subsidies, such as the reason behind them, the recipients of the subsidy, the source of the funds (government, consumer, general tax revenues, etc). In economics, one of the primary ways to classify subsidies is the means of distributing the subsidy.

In economics, the term subsidy may or may not have a negative connotation: that is, the use of the term may not be prescriptive but descriptive. In economics, a subsidy may nonetheless be characterized as inefficient relative to no subsidies; inefficient relative to other means of producing the same results; “second-best”, implying an inefficient but feasible solution (contrasted with an efficient but not feasible ideal), among other possible terminology. In other cases, a subsidy may be an efficient means of correcting a market failure.

For example, economic analysis may suggest that direct subsidies (cash benefits) would be more efficient than indirect subsidies (such as trade barriers); this does not necessarily imply that direct subsidies are good, but that they may be more efficient or effective than other mechanisms to achieve the same (or better) results.

Insofar as they are inefficient, however, subsidies would generally be considered by economists to be bad, as economics is the study of efficient use of limited resources. Ultimately, however, the choice to enact a subsidy is a political choice. Note that subsidies are linked to the concept of economic transfers from one group to another.

Economics has also explicitly identified a number of areas where subsidies are entirely justified by economics, particularly in the area of provision of public goods.

Direct subsidies

Direct subsidies are the most simple, and arguably the least frequently used^{[citation needed]}. They involve a direct cash transfer to the recipient, for example an unemployed person or an agricultural corporation.

Indirect Subsidies

Indirect subsidy is a term sufficiently broad that it may cover most other forms of subsidy. The term would cover any form of subsidy that does not involve a direct transfer.

Labor subsidies

A labor subsidy is any form of subsidy where the recipients receive subsidies to pay for labor costs. Examples may include labor subsidies and tax deductions for workers in industries, such as the film and/or television industries. (see: Runaway production)

Tax Subsidy

A tax subsidy is any form of subsidy where the recipients receive the benefit through the tax system, usually through the income tax, profit tax, or consumption tax systems. Examples may include tax deductions for workers in certain industries, accelerated depreciation for certain industries or types of equipment, or exemption from consumption tax (sales tax or value added tax).

Perverse subsidies

The term “perverse” can be applied to a subsidy by its opponents if they believe that it encourages undesirable actions with social costs. Possible examples, suggested by environmentalist Norman Myers, are German subsidies on coal mining and American gasoline subsidies.^[2]

Production subsidies

In certain cases (to encourage the development of a particular industry, for example), governments may provide direct production subsidies—cash payments for production of a given good or service. Frequently, production subsidies are easily identifiable, such as minimum price policies. Indirect production subsidies may be less easy to identify, such as infrastructure subsidies.

Regulatory advantages

Policy may directly or indirectly favour one industry, company, product, or class of producer over another by means of regulations. For example, a requirement that full-time government inspectors (at company expense) be present to inspect meat may favor large producers; conversely, if small producers were not required to undergo meat inspections at all, this may constitute a subsidy to that class of producer. It may not be evident or clear that there is a subsidy in many cases.

Infrastructure subsidies

Infrastructure subsidies may be used to refer to a form of indirect production subsidy, whereby the provision of infrastructure (at public expense) may effectively be useful for only a limited group of potential users, such as construction of roads at government expense for a single logging company. The implication is that those users or industries benefit disproportionately from the provision of that infrastructure, at the expense of taxpayers.

In some cases, the “subsidy” may refer to favoring one type of production or consumption over another, effectively reducing the competitiveness or retarding the development of potential substitutes. For example, it has been argued that the use of petroleum, and particularly gasoline, has been “subsidized” or favored by U.S. defense policy, reducing the use of alternative energy sources and delaying their commercial development.

In other cases, the government may need to improve the public transport to ensure pareto improvement is attanied and sustained.This can therefore be done by subsidising those transit agencies that provide the public services so that the services can be affordable for everyone.This is the best way of helping different groups of disabled and low income families in the society.

Trade protection (Import)

Measures used to limit imports from other countries may constitute another form of hidden subsidy. The economic argument is that consumers of a given product are forced to pay higher prices for a given good than they would pay without the trade barrier; the protected industry has effectively received a subsidy. Such measures include import quotas, import tariffs, import bans, and others.

Export subsidies (trade promotion)

Various tax or other measures may be used to promote exports that constitute subsidies to the industries favored. In other cases, tax measures may be used to ensure that exports are treated “fairly” under the tax system. The determination of what constitutes a subsidy (or the size of that subsidy) may be complex. In many cases, export subsidies are justified as a means of compensating for the subsidies or protections provided by a foreign state to its own producers.

Procurement subsidies

Governments everywhere are relatively large consumers of various goods and services. Subsidies may occur in this process by choice of the products consumed, the producer, the nature of the product itself, and by other means, including payment of higher-than-market prices for goods purchased.

Consumption subsidies

Governments everywhere provide consumption subsidies in a number of ways: by actually giving away a good or service, providing use of government assets, property, or services at lower than the cost of provision, or by providing economic incentives (cash subsidies) to purchase or use such goods. In most countries, consumption of education, health care, and infrastructure (such as roads) are heavily subsidized, and in many cases provided free of charge. In other cases, governments literally purchase or produce a good (such as bread, wheat, gasoline, or electricity) at higher prices than the cost of sale to the public (which may require rationing to control the cost).

The provision of true public goods through consumption subsidies is an example of a type of subsidy that economics may recognize as efficient. In other cases, such subsidies may be reasonable second-best solutions; for example, while it may be theoretically efficient to charge for all use of public roads, in practice, the cost of implementing a system to charge for such use may be unworkable or unjustified.

In other cases, consumption subsidies may be targeted at a specific group of users, such as large utilities, residential home-owners, and others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidy

Aboard the Gravy Train
Federal spending is not only increasing but working its way deeper into our lives.

By Chris Edwards

“…When filling out your tax forms, you might want to think for a second about where all that money is going. After federal spending roughly doubled in the Bush years, it is growing by leaps and bounds under President Obama. What’s more, the federal government is increasing the scope of its activities — it is intervening in many areas that used to be left to state and local governments, businesses, charities, and individuals.

There are now a staggering 1,804 subsidy programs in the federal budget. Hundreds of programs were added this decade, and the recent stimulus bill added even more. The result is that we are in the midst of the largest federal gold rush at taxpayer expense since the 1960s. …”

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODZmNTg2ZWUyMTA1ZDU5N2MyYzhkNjFjZWMyZGI5NTc=

Agricultural Subsidies

by Chris Edwards

“…The USDA distributes between $10 billion and $30 billion in cash subsidies to farmers and owners of farmland each year.¹ The particular amount depends on market prices for crops, the level of disaster payments, and other factors. More than 90 percent of agriculture subsidies go to farmers of five crops—wheat, corn, soybeans, rice, and cotton.² Roughly a million farmers and landowners receive subsidies, but the payments are heavily tilted toward the largest producers.

In addition to routine cash subsidies, the USDA provides subsidized crop insurance, marketing support, and other services for farm businesses. The USDA also performs extensive agricultural research and generates statistical data for the industry. These indirect subsidies and services cost taxpayers about $5 billion each year, putting total farm support at between $15 billion and $35 billion annually.

Agriculture has long attracted federal government support. The first subsidy program for agriculture was the Morrill Act of 1862, which established the land-grant colleges. That was followed by the Hatch Act of 1887, which funded agricultural research, and by the Smith-Lever Act of 1914, which funded agriculture education. Still, the subsidies remained small, and until the 1930s the USDA’s agriculture efforts were mainly focused on producing statistics, funding research, and responding to problems such as pest infestations.

A large array of farm subsidy programs was enacted during the 1930s, beginning with the Agriculture Adjustment Act of 1933. New Deal programs included commodity price supports and production controls, marketing orders to limit competition, import barriers, and crop insurance. The particular structures of farm programs have changed over time, but the central planning philosophies behind them have changed little in seven decades. Dozens of other industries have been deregulated and opened to domestic and global competition in recent decades. But agricultural policies remain stuck in the 1930s, despite the failures of those policies. …

http://www.cato.org/downsizing/agriculture/agriculture_subsidies.html

Agricultural Subsidy

“An agricultural subsidy is a governmental subsidy paid to farmers and agribusinesses to supplement their income, manage the supply of agricultural commodities, and influence the cost and supply of such commodities. Examples of such commodities include wheat, feed grains (grain used as fodder, such as maize, sorghum, barley, and oats), cotton, milk, rice, peanuts, sugar, tobacco, and oilseeds such as soybeans. …”

“…The U.S. Agricultural Department is required by law (various U.S. farm bills which are passed every few years) to subsidize over two dozen commodities. Between 1996 and 2002, an average of $16 billion/year was paid by programs authorized by various U.S. farm bills dating back to the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, the Agricultural Act of 1949, and the Commodity Credit Corporation (created in 1933), among others.^{[citation needed]}

The beneficiaries of the subsidies have changed as agriculture in the United States has changed. In the 1930s, about 25% of the country’s population resided on the nation’s 6,000,000 small farms. By 1997, 157,000 large farms accounted for 72% of farm sales, with only 2% of the U.S. population residing on farms.

The subsidy programs give farmers extra money for their crops and guarantee a price floor. For instance in the 2002 Farm Bill, for every bushel of wheat sold farmers were paid an extra 52 cents and guaranteed a price of 3.86 from 2002–03 and 3.92 from 2004–2007.^[4] That is, if t

Archive for May, 2009

~Sonia Sotomayor

~ Rush Limbaugh

Rush Limbaugh May 29 2009 Morning Update

~ Rush Limbaugh

Racism on the Supreme Court…

Tom Tancredo Still Thinks La Raza Is “Latino KKK” & Limbaugh: ‘Obama Hates White People’

Obama appoints a racists to the supreme court

Fox Anchor Wonders If GOP Can “Shut Down” Sotomayor Nomination

Fox News Digs Dirt On Sonia Sotomayor

Sonia Sotomayor

2001 speech at the University of California’s Berkeley School of Law.

The lecture was published the following year in the Berkeley La Raza Law Journal.

Sonia Sotomayor: Courts make policy full clip

Coulter On Sotomayor: Clarence Thomas & Miguel Estrada’s Backgrounds Didn’t Impress Democrats

Media Matters’ Boehlert goes head-to-head with Tancredo over Sotomayor on CNN

Tom DeLay Attacks Sonia Sotomayor & La Raza On CNN

Part 1: Rev. Jeremiah Wright In His Own Words

Part 2: Rev. Jeremiah Wright In His Own Words

Part 3: Rev. Jeremiah Wright In His Own Words

Barack Obama at Annual NCLR Conference

Press Conference -Janet Murguía, National Council of La Raza

Lou Dobbs slams Janet Murguia of La Raza 1 of 3

Lou Dobbs slams Janet Murguia of La Raza 2 of 3

Lou Dobbs slams Janet Murguia of La Raza 3 of 3

Cost of Illegal Immigration

CNN’s Lou Dobbs – “Hate Crimes Going Down, Not Up”

Lou Dobbs Tonight – 03.28.07 – Lou Takes on Leftist SPLC

Aztlan Rising

What the Local News Doesn’t Show You

Illegal immigrant supporters harass American citizens

Join the Second American Revolution

The Meaning of Independence Day

Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

Please Spread The Message of Liberty

“Proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.”

Thomas Paine on to Washington

switchfoot-dare you to move(live)

Background Articles and Videos

Sonia Sotomayor ‘La Raza member’ American Bar Association lists Obama choice as part of group

By Joe Kovacs

National Council of La Raza

National Council of La Raza

NCLR LAUDS HISTORIC APPOINTMENT OF SOTOMAYOR TO NATION’S HIGHEST COURT

Judge Sonia Sotomayor Would Be the First Hispanic on the Supreme Court if Confirmed

M.E.Ch.A.

M.E.Ch.A.

NCLR AND DEMOCRACIA U.S.A. LAUNCH A NEW PARTNERSHIP TO INCREASE LATINO VOTER PARTICIPATION

Janet Murguia, President and CEO NCLR

It’s not just ACORN: La Raza partner caught red-handed

By Michelle Malkin

LOL

Obama’s Supreme Court Pick: Racist?

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Archie Bunker on Democrats

Switchfoot – This Is Home

John Avlon on Fox News Channel’s “Glenn Beck”

UPDATE

Glenn Beck Interviews Craig T. Nelson About Government Responsibilty”

Glenn Beck Clips 05-29-09 Ghandi Said Way to Topple Government Is To Withhold Taxes

US Federal Government Deficits

Stop Spending Our Future – The Crisis

I.O.U.S.A. Bonus Reel: A $53 Trillion Federal Financial Hole

Our Country is Broke – How You Can Fix It

Obama’s taxes will create mass unemployment

(4 of 14) MAJOR REDUCTIONS IN CARBON EMISSIONS ARE NOT WORTH THE MONEY DEBATE: PETER HUBER

Cap and Trade: It’s an Energy Tax

Obama’s Value Added Tax VAT On American Goods

Join the Second American Revolution

The Meaning of Independence Day

Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights

Please Spread The Message of Liberty

“Proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.”

Thomas Paine on to Washington

switchfoot-dare you to move(live)

Background Articles and Videos

Independents outnumber Democrats, Republicans

by Liz Sidoti/ Associated Press

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Sonia Sotomayor ‘La Raza member’
American Bar Association lists Obama choice as part of group