Quotations

Breaking News: Second Confirmed Ebola Case of Health Care Worker in Dallas Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital — Ebola Is Airborne and Spreading — Center for Disease Control (CDC) Blames It on Breach of Protocol — CDC’s Deep Denial Delusions — World Health Organization (WHO): Aerosolized Ebola Virus droplets produced from coughing or sneezing. –Videos

Posted on October 12, 2014. Filed under: American History, Biology, Blogroll, Books, Business, Chemistry, Climate, Communications, Disease, Documentary, Ebola, Economics, Education, Employment, European History, Freedom, government spending, Health Care, history, Illegal, Immigration, Law, liberty, Life, media, Medical, Medicine, People, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Science, Security, Terrorism, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Weather, Welfare, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 347: October 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 346: October 9, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 345: October 8, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 344: October 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 343: October 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 342: October 2, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 341: October 1, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 340: September 30, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 339: September 29, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 338: September 26, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 337: September 25, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 336: September 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 335: September 23 2014

Pronk Pops Show 334: September 22 2014

Pronk Pops Show 333: September 19 2014

Pronk Pops Show 332: September 18 2014

Pronk Pops Show 331: September 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 330: September 16, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 329: September 15, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 328: September 12, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 327: September 11, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 326: September 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 325: September 9, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 324: September 8, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 323: September 5, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 322: September 4, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 321: September 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 320: August 29, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 319: August 28, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 318: August 27, 2014 

Pronk Pops Show 317: August 22, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 316: August 20, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 315: August 18, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 314: August 15, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 313: August 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 312: August 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 311: August 11, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 310: August 8, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 309: August 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 308: August 4, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 307: August 1, 2014 

Pronk Pops Show 306: July 31, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 305: July 30, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 304: July 29, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 303: July 28, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 302: July 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 301: July 23, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 300: July 22, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 299: July 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 298: July 18, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 297: July 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 296: July 16, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 295: July 15, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 294: July 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 293: July 11, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 292: July 9, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 291: July 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 290: July 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 289: July 2, 2014

Story 1: Breaking News: Second Confirmed Ebola Case of Health Care Worker in Dallas Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital  — Ebola Is Airborne and Spreading — Center for Disease Control (CDC) Blames It on Breach of Protocol — CDC’s Deep Denial Delusions — World Health Organization (WHO): Aerosolised Ebola Virus droplets produced from coughing or sneezing. –Videos

Texas-Hospital-Patient-Confirmed

I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.

Oliver Cromwell

What Happens When You Are Infected With The Ebola Virus? Common Cold,Bleeding Out The Ears And Eyes

Ebola Outrage as Outbreak Officially Begins In U.S.

Dallas Dog Raises Questions About Animals And Ebola

Ebola: The Undocumented Pandemic

#Ebola outbreak: Texas nurse tests positive & Suspected Case in Boston

CDC investigating Ebola protocol, as second U.S. patient confirmed

SouthCom Issues Stark Ebola Warning: “Katie Bar the Door”

Marine Corps general who leads America’s Southern Command warned Tuesday that the U.S. could face an unprecedented flood of immigrants from the south if the Ebola virus epidemic hits Central America.

‘If it breaks out, it’s literally, “Katie bar the door”,’ Gen John Kelly told said during a public discussion at the National Defense University. ‘And there will be mass migration into the United States.’

US Army: Ebola like FLU needs Winter Weather to go AIRBORNE

CDC Warns On AIRBORNE EBOLA

Max Alert! EBOLA Bodily Fluids Readily Airborne Weaponizable

Second CONFIRMED Case Of Ebola In The U.S. Texas hospital worker tests positive for Ebola

Pestilence : Health Care worker at Dallas Texas Hospital tests positive for Ebola (Oct 12, 2014)

Ebola Health care worker tests positive at Texas hospital

Pestilence : Press Conference of Second Confirmed Diagnosed Case in Texas (Oct 12, 2014)

Ebola – The Truth About the Outbreak (Documentary)

What Pisses Me Off About Ebola

Science Today: Virus Mutation | California Academy of Sciences

Antigenic Shift

Influenza: Get the (Antigenic) Drift

Flu Shift and Drift

Virus Basics

Introduction to Viruses and Viral Replication

Antigenic Shift – the Spread of a New, Mutated Virus

Ebola: The world’s most dangerous Virus (full documentary)

Texas nurse fighting Ebola receives blood transfusion from survivor Dr Kent Brantly – who also matched blood types with two others struck by the deadly virus in the U.S.

  • Nina Pham, 26, has received blood transfusion from Dr Kent Brantly
  • Survivor Brantly also donated to Dr Nick Sacra and NBC’s Ashoka Mukpo
  • Antibodies in his blood could help the patients fight the disease
  • Pham caught the Ebola virus while treating Thomas Eric Duncan in Dallas
  • Second person who some identified as Miss Pham’s boyfriend is being monitored for symptoms  
  • Miss Pham raised in Vietnamese family in Fort Worth and graduated from Texas Christian University in 2010 with Bachelor of Science in Nursing 
  • HazChem teams spent the weekend fumigating her Dallas apartment 
  • Authorities have blamed a ‘breach of protocol’ – but nursing leaders have criticized the CDC for making her a scapegoat 
  • About 70 staff members at Texas hospital were involved in the care of first Ebola patient Thomas Eric Duncan after he was hospitalized

The Texan nurse diagnosed with Ebola has received a blood transfusion from survivor Dr Kent Brantly.

It is the third time Dr Brantly has donated blood to an Ebola victim after medics discovered he had the same blood type as previous patient Dr Nick Sacra and NBC cameraman Ashoka Mukpo, who is still being treated.

Incredibly, nurse Nina Pham, 26, has also matched with Dr Brantly and on Monday received a transfusion of his blood in a move that doctors believe could save her life.

Lifeline: Dr Kent Brantly (left), who has been cleared of Ebola, has match blood types with Nina Pham (right) and donated so she can receive a blood transfusion to battle the deadly virus she caught treating a patient

Lifeline: Dr Kent Brantly (left), who has been cleared of Ebola, has match blood types with Nina Pham (right) and donated so she can receive a blood transfusion to battle the deadly virus she caught treating a patient

Lifeline: Dr Kent Brantly (left), who has been cleared of Ebola, has match blood types with Nina Pham (right) and donated so she can receive a blood transfusion to battle the deadly virus she caught treating a patient

Miss Pham has been in quarantine since Friday after catching the disease from ‘patient zero’ Thomas Eric Duncan – the man who brought the deadly virus to America.

About 70 staff members at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital were involved in the care of Mr Duncan after he was hospitalized, including the 26-year-old.

Brantly is believed to have traveled to Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital, where Pham worked, to make the donation on Sunday night.

Miss Pham’s condition was described as ‘clinically stable’ on Tuesday morning. She is believed to be in good spirits and had spoken to her mother via Skype.

A second person who came in contact with the nurse is being monitored for Ebola symptoms in an isolation unit at Texas Presbyterian. He is reportedly Miss Pham’s boyfriend according to Dallas News.

The individual works at Alcon in Fort Worth, according to a staff email seen by CBS. MailOnline was awaiting confirmation from the global eye care products company.

Those who have survived Ebola have antibodies in their blood which can help new sufferers beat the disease.

Dr Kent Brantly was flown back from Liberia to the U.S. after contracting Ebola during his missionary work for Samaritan’s Purse.

He survived after receiving a dose of the experimental serum Z-Mapp and round-the-clock care at Emory University Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia.

On September 10, Dr Brantly donated blood to a fellow doctor, Dr Rick Sacra, who also contracted Ebola during his work in West Africa and survived the disease.

Last Tuesday, he was on a road trip from Indiana to Texas when he received a call from Ashoka Mukpo’s medical center in Nebraska telling him his blood type matched Mukpo’s.

He also offered his blood to Thomas Eric Duncan but their blood types didn’t match.

Cured: Dr Nick Sacra was cleared of Ebola after receiving a blood transfusion from Dr Kent Brantly

Being treated: On Tuesday, Dr Brantly pulled over during a road trip to give blood to NBC's Ashoka Mukpo

Being treated: On Tuesday, Dr Brantly pulled over during a road trip to give blood to NBC’s Ashoka Mukpo

Within minutes, he stopped off at the Community Blood Center in Kansas City, Missouri, and his donation was flown to Omaha.

Pham was diagnosed after admitting herself to hospital on Friday when her temperature spiked – one of the first symptoms of the deadly virus. 

HOW COMMON IS IT FOR TWO PEOPLE TO MATCH BLOOD TYPE?

There are four major blood types: A, B, AB, and O. They divide into positive and negative categories.

It is not known what blood type the four Ebola patients have in common.

The most common blood type in the US is O positive, although ethnic groups normally differ.

The majority of African Americans and Hispanics have O positive.

Around 37 per cent of Caucasians do too, but 33 per cent have A positive.

There is more variety among Asian people. A quarter are listed as B positive, according to the Red Cross, but many also have a high number of Os and As.

A blood test confirmed she had the disease and she is now being treated in an isolation ward.

The Emergency Room where she was admitted was cleared and decontaminated.

Nina Pham’s uncle confirmed to MailOnline that she is the nurse who has contracted Ebola while treating patient zero Thomas Eric Duncan.

Jason Nguyen told MailOnline: ‘Nina has contracted Ebola, she is my niece. Her mother called me on Saturday and told me; ‘Nina has caught Ebola.’

‘My sister is very upset, we all are. She said she was going up to the hospital in Dallas and I haven’t heard from her since. I’ve tried to call but I can’t get through. It’s very shocking. I don’t know any of the details, only what I hear on the news. It’s frightening.’

He added: ‘Nina is very hard working. She is always up at the hospital in Dallas.’

A friend added: ‘You always hear it on the news, but you don’t expect someone you know so well to have it.’

HazChem teams spent the weekend fumigating her apartment in Dallas while health officials have ordered an investigation into how she contracted the disease.

Texas nurse with Ebola identified as 26-yr-old Nina Pham

Tragic: Nina Pham, 26, is fighting for her life after contracting Ebola from Thomas Eric Duncan. Here she is pictured with her beloved King Charles Spaniel clled Bentley who is not expected to be destroyed

Tragic: Nina Pham, 26, is fighting for her life after contracting Ebola from Thomas Eric Duncan. Here she is pictured with her beloved King Charles Spaniel clled Bentley who is not expected to be destroyed

Kind-hearted: Raised in Vietnamese family in Fort Worth, Miss Pham graduated from Texas Christian University in 2010 with a Bachelor of Science in Nursing

Kind-hearted: Raised in Vietnamese family in Fort Worth, Miss Pham graduated from Texas Christian University in 2010 with a Bachelor of Science in Nursing

Kind-hearted: Raised in Vietnamese family in Fort Worth, Miss Pham graduated from Texas Christian University in 2010 with a Bachelor of Science in Nursing

Her beloved King Charles Spaniel Bentley will not be destroyed and is being quarantined, Dallas mayor Mike Rawlings has assured.

Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Protection (CDC) Dr Thomas Frieden has blamed a ‘breach in protocol’ of infection control lead Miss Pham to catch Ebola.

Mr Duncan arrived in Texas from Liberia on September 20. He began showing symptoms of Ebola three days after his arrival and was admitted to Texas Presbyterian Hospital on Sunday 28. He died on Wednesday October 8.

Presbyterian’s chief clinical officer, Dr Dan Varga, said all staff had followed CDC recommended precautions – ‘gown, glove, mask and shield’ – while treating Mr Duncan.

CDC chief backtracks after blaming nurse who got Ebola

And on Monday the CDC said that a critical moment may have come when Miss Pham took off her equipment.

Ebola victims suffer chronic diarrhea and bleeding. But blood and feces from an Ebola patient are considered the most infectious bodily fluids.

Mr Duncan also underwent two surgical procedures in a bid to keep him alive but which are particularly high-risk for transmitting the virus – kidney dialysis and intubation to help him to breathe – due to the spread of blood and saliva.

Nurses’ leader Bonnie Castillo has criticized the CDC for blaming the nurse for the spread of the disease.

Ms Castillo, of the National Nurses United, said: ‘You don’t scapegoat and blame when you have a disease outbreak. We have a system failure. That is what we have to correct.’

In response to the criticism, Frieden clarified his comments to say that he did not mean it was an error on Miss Pham’s part that led to the ‘breach of protocol.’

Hazard: Protect Environmental workers move disposal barrels to a staging area outside the Dallas apartment of Miss Pham

Clean up: A  man in full hazmat clothing walks in front of Pham's home after disinfecting the front porch

Clean up: A man in full hazmat clothing walks in front of Pham’s home after disinfecting the front porch

Compassion: Tom Ha, who taught Miss Pham bible class said: 'I expect, with the big heart she has, she went beyond what she was supposed to do to help anyone in need'

The CDC said on Monday it has launched a wholesale review of the procedures and equipment used by healthcare workers.

Dr Frieden added that the case ‘substantially’ changes how medical staff approach the control of the virus, adding that: ‘We have to rethink how we address Ebola control, because even a single infection is unacceptable.’

When she got accepted into nursing school she was really excited. Her mom would tell how it’s really hard and a bunch of her friends quit doing it because it was so stressful. But she was like, “This is what I want to do”
- Friend of Miss Pham

Friends and well-wishers have paid tribute to Miss Pham and praised her as a big-hearted, compassionate nurse dedicated to caring for other.

Raised in Vietnamese family in Fort Worth, she graduated from Texas Christian University in 2010 with a Bachelor of Science in Nursing.

She obtained her nursing license in August 2010 and recently qualified as a critical care nurse.

A friend told the Dallas Morning News: ‘When she got accepted into nursing school she was really excited. Her mom would tell how it’s really hard and a bunch of her friends quit doing it because it was so stressful. But she was like, “This is what I want to do”.’

A devout Christian she regularly attends mass at the Lady of Fatima Church.

Tom Ha, who taught her bible class, told the paper: ‘The family is very dedicated and go out of their way to help people. I expect, with the big heart she has, she went beyond what she was supposed to do to help anyone in need.’

Aid:  Miss Pham had treated Mr Duncan multiple times after he was diagnosed with the disease and the CDC has claimed that a 'breach of protocol' meant the nurse contracted Ebola. However, nursing leaders attacked the authorities for apparently making Miss Pham a scapegoat

Aid:  Miss Pham had treated Mr Duncan multiple times after he was diagnosed with the disease and the CDC has claimed that a ‘breach of protocol’ meant the nurse contracted Ebola. However, nursing leaders attacked the authorities for apparently making Miss Pham a scapegoat

Hung Le, who is president and counselor at Our Lady of Fatima, said parishioners are uniting in prayer for Miss Pham.

He said: ‘Our most important concern as a church is to help the family as they are coping with this. As a parish, we are praying for them.’

Ha, who taught the woman in Bible classes, said he and others are translating health information into Vietnamese to help others learn about the illness.

‘People are more worried for the family than for themselves, but some have questions because they don’t really understand what it is or how it is transmitted.’

SPREAD OF A DEADLY PLAGUE: HOW WILL AMERICA CONTAIN EBOLA?

WHEN IS EBOLA CONTAGIOUS?

Only when someone is showing symptoms, which can start with vague symptoms including a fever, flu-like body aches and abdominal pain, and then vomiting and diarrhea.

HOW DOES EBOLA SPREAD?

Through close contact with a symptomatic person’s bodily fluids, such as blood, sweat, vomit, feces, urine, saliva or semen. Those fluids must have an entry point, like a cut or scrape or someone touching the nose, mouth or eyes with contaminated hands, or being splashed. That’s why health care workers wear protective gloves and other equipment.

The World Health Organization says blood, feces and vomit are the most infectious fluids, while the virus is found in saliva mostly once patients are severely ill and the whole live virus has never been culled from sweat.

WHAT ABOUT MORE CASUAL CONTACT?

Ebola isn’t airborne. Dr. Tom Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has said people don’t get exposed by sitting next to someone on the bus.

‘This is not like flu. It’s not like measles, not like the common cold. It’s not as spreadable, it’s not as infectious as those conditions,’ he added.

WHO GETS TESTED WHEN EBOLA IS SUSPECTED?

Hospitals with a suspected case call their health department or the CDC to go through a checklist to determine the person’s level of risk. Among the questions are whether the person reports a risky contact with a known Ebola patient, how sick they are and whether an alternative diagnosis is more likely. Most initially suspicious cases in the U.S. haven’t met the criteria for testing.

HOW IS IT CLEANED UP?

The CDC says bleach and other hospital disinfectants kill Ebola. Dried virus on surfaces survives only for several hours.

The World Health Organization on Monday called the Ebola outbreak ‘the most severe, acute health emergency seen in modern times’.

It added that economic disruption can be curbed if people are educated so they don’t make any irrational moves to dodge infection.

WHO Director-General Margaret Chan, citing World Bank figures, said 90 per cent of economic costs of any outbreak ‘come from irrational and disorganised efforts of the public to avoid infection.’

‘We are seeing, right now, how this virus can disrupt economies and societies around the world,’ she said, but added that adequately educating the public was a ‘good defense strategy’ and would allow governments to prevent economic disruptions.

Ebola screening of passengers arriving from three West African countries began at New York’s JFK airport on Saturday.

Medical teams equipped with temperature guns and questionnaires are monitoring arrivals from Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone – countries at the centre of the Ebola outbreak.

Screening at Newark Liberty, Washington Dulles, Chicago O’Hare and Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta will begin later this week.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2791089/first-picture-devoted-texas-nurse-fighting-life-catching-ebola-treating-man-brought-dreaded-virus-america-beloved-dog-s-quarantine.html

Key Question: How Did Dallas Worker Contract Ebola?

How did it happen?

That’s the big question as U.S. health officials investigate the case of a Dallas health worker who treated an Ebola patient and ended up with the disease herself.

These are professionals and this is the United States, where the best conditions and protective gear are available, unlike in West Africa, where the Ebola epidemic is raging in much poorer conditions.

Ebola-Nurse

The health worker wore protective gear while having extensive contact with Thomas Eric Duncan, the Liberian man who died Wednesday of Ebola at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital.

Officials say she has not been able to pinpoint any breach in infection control protocols, although there apparently was a breach, they say.

 

Experience shows that health workers can safely care for Ebola patients, “but we also know that it’s hard and that even a single breach can result in contamination,” Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said Sunday on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

The situation also raises fresh concerns about whether any U.S. hospital can safely handle Ebola patients, as health officials have insisted is possible.

“A breach in protocol could be anything from not taking your gloves off the right way to taking a dialysis catheter out of a dialysis patient and not disposing of it the right way,” explains Dr. Darrin D’Agostino, Chair of Internal Medicine UNT.

According to Dr. D’Agostino those are just some of the multitude of scenarios.
He says these incidents don’t happen often, but accidents do occur.

“We can be as diligent and meticulous as we want to be but occasionally things happen that expose to risk,” said Dr. D’Agostino.

While the fight to eradicate Ebola in Dallas and internationality Dr. D’Agostino is reminding us the battle will be long.

“The fact of the matter is that we do have a lot to learn about this virus and all the viruses that are in this family…this one is particularly infectious.”

Despite the uncertainty Dr. D’Agostino says he is confident that we have the proper infrastructure and resources to handle these cases.

 

Some questions and answers about the new case.

Q: What protection do health workers have?

A: The exact gear can vary. A hazardous material type suit usually includes a gown, two sets of gloves, a face mask, and an eye shield. There are strict protocols for how to use it correctly.

“When you put on your garb and you take off your garb, it’s a buddy system,” with another health worker watching to make sure it’s done right, said Dr. Dennis Maki, University of Wisconsin-Madison infectious disease specialist and former head of hospital infection control.

Q: How might infection have occurred?

A: Officials are focusing on two areas: How the garb was removed, and the intensive medical procedures Duncan received, which included kidney dialysis and a breathing machine. Both involve inserting tubes — into blood vessels or an airway. That raises the risk a health worker will have contact with the patient’s bodily fluids, which is how Ebola spreads.

“Removing the equipment can really be the highest risk. You have to be extremely careful and have somebody watching you to make sure you remember all the steps,” said Dr. Eileen Farnon, a Temple University doctor who formerly worked at the CDC and led teams investigating past Ebola outbreaks in Africa.

“After every step you usually would do hand hygiene,” washing your hands with antiseptic or being sprayed with a chlorine spray, she said.

Q: How else could infection have happened?

A: Some of the garb the health worker takes off might brush against a surface and contaminate it. New data suggest that even tiny droplets of a patient’s body fluids can contain the virus, Maki said.

“I can have on the suit and be very careful, but I can pick up some secretions or body fluids on a surface” and spread it that way, he said.

Q: Can any U.S. hospital safely treat Ebola patients?

A: Frieden and other health officials say yes, but others say the new case shows the risks.

“We can’t control where the Ebola patient appears,” so every hospital’s emergency room needs to be prepared to isolate and take infection control precautions, Maki said.

That said, “I don’t think we should expect that small hospitals take care of Ebola patients. The challenge is formidable,” and only large hospitals like those affiliated with major universities truly have enough equipment and manpower to do it right, Maki said.

“If we allow it to be taken care of in hospitals that have less than optimal resources, we will promote the spread,” he warned.

The case heightens concern for health workers’ safety, and nurses at many hospitals “are alarmed at the inadequate preparation they see,” says a statement from Rose Ann DeMoro, executive director of the trade union, National Nurses United.

Q: Should Ebola patients be transferred to one of the specialized centers that have treated others in the U.S.?

A: Specialized units are the ideal, but there are fewer than half a dozen in the nation and they don’t have unlimited beds. “It is also a high-risk activity to transfer patients,” potentially exposing more people to the virus, Farnon said.

Q. What is CDC recommending that a hospital do?

A. Training has been ramped up, and the CDC now recommends that a hospital minimize the number of people caring for an Ebola patient, perform only procedures essential to support the patient’s care, and name a fulltime infection control supervisor while any Ebola patient is being cared for. Frieden also said the agency was taking a new look at personal protective equipment, “understanding that there is a balance and putting more on isn’t always safer — it may make it harder to provide effective care.”

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2014/10/12/key-question-how-did-dallas-worker-contract-ebola/

 

Health care worker at Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas tests positive for Ebola

A Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital health care worker in Dallas who had “extensive contact” with the first Ebola patient to die in the United States has contracted the disease.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta confirmed the news Sunday afternoon after an official test.

The infected person detected a fever Friday night and drove herself to the Presbyterian emergency room, where she was placed in isolation 90 minutes later. A blood sample sent to the state health lab in Austin confirmed Saturday night that she had Ebola — the first person to contract the disease in the United States.

The director for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Sunday that the infection in the health care worker, who was not on the organization’s watch list for people who had contact with Ebola patient Thomas Eric Duncan, resulted from a “breach in protocol.”

“We have spoken with the health care worker,” who cannot “identify the specific breach” that allowed the infection to spread, said CDC director Dr. Tom Frieden. The CDC has sent additional staff members to Dallas to “assist with the response,” he said.

Frieden said exposure can result from a “single inadvertent slip.” He cautioned: “Unfortunately it is possible in the coming days we will see additional cases of Ebola” in health care workers.

Texas health commissioner David Lakey said the health care worker had “extensive contact” with Duncan. The nurse, who missed two days of work before going to the emergency room, is believed to have had contact with one person while symptomatic. Ebola, which is spread through direct contact with bodily fluids of a sick person, can only be transmitted from infected people showing symptoms.

“We have been preparing for an event like this,” Lakey said.

Presbyterian chief clinical officer Daniel Varga said the exposure occurred during Duncan’s second visit to the hospital. Duncan, the first person to die of Ebola in the United States, went to the Presbyterian emergency room Sept. 25 and was sent home with antibiotics only to return to the hospital on Sept. 28. He was diagnosed with Ebola and died Oct. 8.

It is not clear how the health care provider contracted Ebola. According to Duncan’s patient records released by the family to The Associated Press, this is what happened at Presbyterian:

— On Sept. 28, an ambulance with Duncan arrived at the hospital’s emergency bay shortly after 10 a.m.

— Doctors performed tests on Duncan, who told them he had recently arrived from Africa, and determined he had sinusitis.

— Now in isolation, Duncan was projectile vomiting, having explosive diarrhea and his temperature was 103.1 degrees.

— On Sept. 29, as his condition worsened, Duncan asked the nurse to put him in a diaper.

— On Sept. 30, tests results confirmed Duncan had Ebola. Only then did staff treating Duncan trade their gowns and scrubs for hazmat suits, and the room was cleaned with bleach.

Varga at Presbyterian said the worker was wearing protective gear, including a gown, glove, mask and shield, when she came into contact with Duncan. “This individual was following full CDC precautions,” Varga said

Officials haven’t released the name of the health care worker or her job description. Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins said he has spoken to the health care worker’s parents, who have asked for privacy.

“Let’s remember that this is a real person who is going through a great ordeal. So is that person’s family,” Jenkins said.

The second Ebola patient lives in the 5700 block of  Marquita Avenue in East Dallas, where the person’s apartment was going to be decontaminated Sunday. While the CDC didn’t consider the person to be at “high risk” of contracting Ebola, the health care worker had been monitoring for signs of the disease, including checking for fever twice daily.

The person’s car was decontaminated and the common area of an apartment complex was going to be cleaned by a hazardous-material team Sunday.

A crew of 15 people from the Cleaning Guys was going to decontaminate the person’s apartment Sunday afternoon, said company owner Erick McCallum. “Our main objective is for this to go away and to be eradicated,” he said.

Staff writers Melissa Repko, Sherry Jacobson, Claire Cardona, Eva-Marie Ayala and Matthew Haag contributed to this report.

=====

Update at 2:59 p.m.

Brad Smith, Vice President of CG Environmental-Cleaning Guys, a hazardous material company, was hired to clean the apartment unit of the ill health care worker.

He said the hazmat crew will begin cleaning in the next hour or two. They are not sure how long it will take. The crew will include up to 15 people.

He said he’s not concerned about the safety of the crew. He heard the health care worker contracted Ebola after “there was something that went wrong in her PPE” or “personal protective equipment.”

“I’m not sure how it happened,” he said. “But we will not let that happen to our guys.”Smith said the company was hoping not to get any more calls about an Ebola case.

“I was speechless. I don’t know what my thoughts were,” he said. “I just knew we had to react and gear up and do it again.”

Smith said the crew plans to clean the exterior today and clean the interior tomorrow. It will be similar to the cleanup of the apartment where Thomas Eric Duncan stayed.

“We won’t do anything different,” he said. “We think the last time we went out we were successful in cleaning it up. We will continue to so the same thing.”

Update at 12:21 p.m.

At the end of Marquita, morning services were underway at Skillman Church of Christ. The congregation first became aware of the deadly disease when medical missionary Dr. Kent Brantly, who many congregants know, contracted the illness.

Then many became close to the son of Thomas Eric Duncan, who died of the disease. Now pastor Joel Sanchez was telling the church that a healthcare worker just a few blocks away has Ebola.

“As much as we are connected to the world, it’s easy to see something on the television and think of it as happening over yonder, over there,” he said. “But when it hits close to home, it becomes real.”

The congregation prayed for the healthcare worker who Sanchez said put another in front of herself because he had a need. They prayed for the family of Duncan. But then Sanchez asked his congregation not to forget the thousands suffering in West Africa, an area with limited medical resources  where nearly 4,000 people have died from Ebola.

“We can’t forget those people whose only course of action is to pray that they don’t get it,” Sanchez said.

Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins, Mayor Mike Rawlings and Dr. Daniel Varga held a news conference Sundaymorning to inform the public that a health care worker at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas test positive for the Ebola virus after coming in close contact with Ebola patient Thomas Eric Duncan.

 http://www.dallasnews.com/news/local-news/20141012-health-care-worker-at-presbyterian-hospital-tests-positive-for-ebola.ece

Health care worker at Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas tests positive for Ebola

Police guard the residence at 5700 block of Marquita, where reportedly a person diagnosed with Ebola lived, photographed in Dallas on Sunday, October 12, 2014. (Louis DeLuca/The Dallas Morning News)
Louis DeLuca/Staff Photographer
Police guard the residence at 5700 block of Marquita, where reportedly a person diagnosed with Ebola lived, photographed in Dallas on Sunday, October 12, 2014. (Louis DeLuca/The Dallas Morning News)

The infected person detected a fever Friday night and drove herself to the Presbyterian emergency room, where she was placed in isolation 90 minutes later. A blood sample sent to the state health lab in Austin confirmedSaturday night that she had Ebola — the first person to contract the disease in the United States.

The director for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Sunday that the infection in the health care worker, who was not on the organization’s watch list for people who had contact with Ebola patient Thomas Eric Duncan, resulted from a “breach in protocol.”

“We have spoken with the health care worker,” who cannot “identify the specific breach” that allowed the infection to spread, said CDC director Dr. Tom Frieden. The CDC has sent additional staff members to Dallas to “assist with the response,” he said.

Frieden said exposure can result from a “single inadvertent slip.” He cautioned: “Unfortunately it is possible in the coming days we will see additional cases of Ebola” in health care workers.

Texas health commissioner David Lakey said the health care worker had “extensive contact” with Duncan. The nurse, who missed two days of work before going to the emergency room, is believed to have had contact with one person while symptomatic. Ebola, which is spread through direct contact with bodily fluids of a sick person, can only be transmitted from infected people showing symptoms.

“We have been preparing for an event like this,” Lakey said.

Presbyterian chief clinical officer Daniel Varga said the exposure occurred during Duncan’s second visit to the hospital. Duncan, the first person to die of Ebola in the United States, went to the Presbyterian emergency room Sept. 26 and was sent home with antibiotics only to return to the hospital on Sept. 28. He was diagnosed with Ebola and died Oct. 8

Officials haven’t released the name of the health care worker or her job description. Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins said he has spoken to the health care worker’s parents, who have asked for privacy.

“Let’s remember that this is a real person who is going through a great ordeal. So is that person’s family,” Jenkins said.

The second Ebola patient lives in the 5700 block of  Marquita Avenue in East Dallas, where the person’s apartment was decontaminated Sunday. While the CDC didn’t consider the person to be at “high risk” of contracting Ebola, the health care worker had been monitoring for signs of the disease, including checking for fever twice daily.

The person’s car was decontaminated and the common area of an apartment complex was cleaned by a hazardous-material team Sunday. A pet also lived in the person’s apartment.

Dallas police have cordoned off the East Dallas apartment, where a frenzy of news media and helicopters circling above have drawn neighbors outside. Police officers and a CDC representative talked to residents Sundaymorning and distributing papers about Ebola symptoms. Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings also visited with residents.

“It just breaks my heart. … She was just an innocent woman who took care of someone who was sick,” said neighbor Colleen Watson said. “She did her job, and probably with full empathy and kindness, and for this to happen to her is so much sadder than any other case.”

Dina Smith was holding her 3-year-old daughter, still in disbelief that the first contracted case was just a block away. She said Mayor Mike Rawlings and staff members from the mayor’s office visited Sunday morning and talked to residents.

“I’m not particularly concerned because from everything I heard, she was a nurse and took every precaution,” Smith said. “But you hear the helicopters overhead and see the news, and it makes you pay more attention.”

Lindsey Carpenter, 33, said her roommate had searched on the Internet to find out why news helicopters were flying over their neighborhood. He barged into her room at 9:30 a.m. when he found an answer: “There’s an Ebola patient in the neighborhood.”

Carpenter, who works in a hospital in Lewisville, said she hopes Presbyterian investigates how the nurse contracted Ebola — especially because she was exposed to Duncan during his second visit to the hospital.

“They were prepared with hazmat suits and everything,” she said. “I wonder how she got it. It’s really puzzling. There’s probably more to the story that we don’t know.”

Texas Health says “the Emergency Department at Texas Health Dallas is diverting ambulance traffic with the exception of patients showing symptoms of  Ebola Virus Disease. The ED is open and seeing patients arriving by any other means.”

Staff writers Melissa Repko, Sherry Jacobson, Claire Cardona, Eva-Marie Ayala and Matthew Haag contributed to this report.

Update at 12:21 p.m.

At the end of Marquita, morning services were underway at Skillman Church of Christ. The congregation first became aware of the deadly disease when medical missionary Dr. Kent Brantly, who many congregants know, contracted the illness.

Then many became close to the son of Thomas Eric Duncan, who died of the disease. Now pastor Joel Sanchez was telling the church that a healthcare worker just a few blocks away has Ebola.

“As much as we are connected to the world, it’s easy to see something on the television and think of it as happening over yonder, over there,” he said. “But when it hits close to home, it becomes real.”

The congregation prayed for the healthcare worker who Sanchez said put another in front of herself because he had a need. They prayed for the family of Duncan. But then Sanchez asked his congregation not to forget the thousands suffering in West Africa, an area with limited medical resources  where nearly 4,000 people have died from Ebola.

“We can’t forget those people whose only course of action is to pray that they don’t get it,” Sanchez said.

WATCH: Dallas mayor, hospital doctors give details on Ebola patient No. 2

Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins, Mayor Mike Rawlings and Dr. Daniel Varga held a news conference Sundaymorning to inform the public that a health care worker at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas test positive for the Ebola virus after coming in close contact with Ebola patient Thomas Eric Duncan.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/local-news/20141012-health-care-worker-at-presbyterian-hospital-in-dallas-tests-positive-for-ebola.ece

TEXAS EBOLA HOSPITAL CAFETERIA BECOMES GHOST TOWN

 By Bob Price

The cafeteria, where employees and patients at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital normally take a meal break, is looking more like a ghost town since the outbreak of Ebola. A cafeteria worker said their business had taken a major hit in the wake of Nina Pham’s becoming symptomatic after treating Thomas Eric Duncan while he was ill at this hospital.

Breitbart Texas visited Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital on Monday to check out the mood of workers in the hospital. While visiting the various café’s throughout the hospital, there was a severe shortage of customers. A worker in “Café Presby” said their business is down by 25 percent over the past two weeks.

“I am concerned for our workers,” the employee said. “I hope we don’t have to lay anyone off or cut their hours because of this.”

A nurse who spoke with Breitbart Texas said they are very concerned for Nina Pham. “We aren’t as concerned for ourselves as we are for her. Exposure is one of the risks that comes with our job. We take all the precautions we can but there is always a risk of exposure.”

Another nurse who works for a different hospital but was visiting Texas Health Presbyterian said Nina Pham is a friend of one of her friends. “We are all praying for Nina,” she said. “She is a very sweet and caring nurse. We know she is strong and will recover from this.”

Breitbart Texas spoke with a doctor in the hospital about employee morale. “We are doing fine,” the doctor said. “The real enemy here is the media.” He expressed concern about some outlets sensationalized coverage of the Texas Ebola cases.

While exiting the hospital’s parking lot, the parking toll attendant wore protective gloves while handling the cash handed to her by people leaving the hospital.\

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/10/14/Texas-Ebola-Hospital-Cafeteria-Becomes-Ghost-Town

WHO: EBOLA IS MODERN ERA’S WORST HEALTH EMERGENCY

BY JIM GOMEZ

The World Health Organization called the Ebola outbreak “the most severe, acute health emergency seen in modern times” on Monday but also said that economic disruptions can be curbed if people are adequately informed to prevent irrational moves to dodge infection.

WHO Director-General Margaret Chan, citing World Bank figures, said 90 percent of economic costs of any outbreak “come from irrational and disorganized efforts of the public to avoid infection.”

Staffers of the global health organization “are very well aware that fear of infection has spread around the world much faster than the virus,” Chan said in a statement read out to a regional health conference in the Philippine capital, Manila.

“We are seeing, right now, how this virus can disrupt economies and societies around the world,” she said, but added that adequately educating the public was a “good defense strategy” and would allow governments to prevent economic disruptions.

The Ebola epidemic has killed more than 4,000 people, mostly in the West African countries of Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea, according to WHO figures published last week.

Chan did not specify those steps but praised the Philippines for holding an anti-Ebola summit last week which was joined by government health officials and private sector representatives, warning that the Southeast Asian country was vulnerable due to the large number of Filipinos working abroad.

While bracing for Ebola, health officials should continue to focus on major health threats, including non-communicable diseases, she said.

Philippine Health Secretary Enrique Ona said authorities will ask more than 1,700 Filipinos working in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea to observe themselves for at least 21 days for Ebola symptoms in those countries first if they plan to return home.

Once home, they should observe themselves for another 21 days and then report the result of their self-screening to health authorities to be doubly sure they have not been infected, he said, adding that hospitals which would deal with any Ebola patients have already been identified in the Philippines.

Last month, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged leaders in the most affected countries to establish special centers that aim to isolate infected people from non-infected relatives in an effort to stem the spread of Ebola.

Ban has also appealed for airlines and shipping companies not to suspend services to countries affected by Ebola. Doing so, he said, hinders delivery of humanitarian and medical assistance.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_WHO_EBOLA?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-10-13-07-29-36

U.S. lacks a single standard for Ebola response

Larry Copeland

As Thomas Eric Duncan’s family mourns the USA’s first Ebola death in Dallas, one question reverberates over a series of apparent missteps in the case: Who is in charge of the response to Ebola?

The answer seems to be — there really isn’t one person or agency. There is not a single national response.

The Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has emerged as the standard-bearer — and sometimes the scapegoat — on Ebola.

Public health is the purview of the states, and as the nation anticipates more Ebola cases, some experts say the way the United States handles public health is not up to the challenge.

“One of the things we have to understand is the federal, state and local public health relationships,” says Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. “Public health is inherently a state issue. The state really is in charge of public health at the state and local level. It’s a constitutional issue. The CDC can’t just walk in on these cases. They have to be invited in.”

The CDC deployed a team of 10 — three senior epidemiologists, a communication officer, a public health adviser and five epidemic intelligence officers, or “disease detectives” — to Dallas on the night of Sept. 30, hours after the agency announced that Duncan, a Liberian national who traveled to Dallas, had the Ebola virus. The next afternoon, Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins, head of the Dallas County Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Management; CDC director Tom Frieden; and David Lakey, commissioner of the Texas Department of State Health Services, agreed during a conference call to set up an Emergency Operations Center in Dallas County with Jenkins in charge.

The EOC was staffed by officials from Dallas County, the city of Dallas, the CDC, the county and state health departments and the Dallas County Sheriff’s Department, among others.

This was the team that made decisions on matters such as isolating people who had been in direct contact with Duncan, including his fiancée, Louise Troh, her teenage son and two other male relatives. Because they were not sick, they couldn’t technically be quarantined, Jenkins said Friday. Instead, Lakey issued a “control order” to keep them at home, where they could be monitored for signs of Ebola. Jenkins and Texas Gov. Rick Perry agreed to the order.

Texas officials were criticized for keeping the family inside the apartment where Duncan first showed signs of the disease, potentially exposing them to the virus. The family worried about Duncan’s soiled sheets and other waste in the apartment. The response team located a private home where the family could move and got permits to clean the apartment and truck 140 55-gallon barrels of waste to an incinerator 400 miles away.

Jenkins says he has a working model for how to respond to Ebola cases. Others aren’t so confident.

“In Texas, they really were slow to the plate,” said Robert Murphy, director of the Center for Global Health at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. “Texas is going to be the example of what not to do.”

Duncan, who arrived in Dallas on Sept. 20, somehow slipped through a Liberian airport screening process that allowed him into the country. He became ill several days later and went to the emergency room at Texas Health Presbyterian hospital Sept. 25; he was prescribed antibiotics, told to take Tylenol and sent home early on the morning of Sept. 26..

According to medical records provided to the Associated Press by Duncan’s family, his temperature spiked at 103 degrees during that visit. Duncan told a nurse that he had recently been in Africa, and he showed symptoms that can indicate Ebola: fever, sharp headache and abdominal pain. He was given a battery of tests and sent to his sister’s apartment with antibiotics. He returned by ambulance Sept. 28, was admitted to the hospital and placed in isolation. On Sept. 30, the CDC confirmed that he had Ebola.

In a statement Friday, the hospital said it had made procedural changes and continues to “review and evaluate” decisions surrounding Duncan’s case.

Murphy says some of the issues in Texas stem from a “system problem” in the way public health care is managed in the USA. The Centers for Disease Control provides only guidance for infection prevention and management. “What they do in Texas, what they do in Illinois, it’s up to the state,” he says.

“The question is, who’s in charge?” Murphy says. “The states can follow all the guidelines and take the advice, which they usually do, but they don’t have to. It’s not a legal requirement. So there really is no one entity that’s controlling things.”

Though the CDC is tasked with readying the nation for an Ebola outbreak, then leading the national response, the Department of Homeland Security is responsible for protecting the borders, according to Thomas Skinner, a spokesman for the CDC, which is under the auspices of the Department of Health and Human Services.

The CDC collaborates with health departments and laboratories around the USA to make sure they are able to test for Ebola and respond rapidly if there is a case in their state, CDC spokeswoman Kirsten Nordlund said.

The agency is working to educate U.S. health care workers on how to isolate patients and protect themselves from infection; it developed a Web-based document that identifies rapidly emerging CDC guidelines for Ebola applicable to public health preparedness national standards for state and local planning.

The agency developed an introductory training course for licensed clinicians who intend to work in Ebola treatment units in Africa, and at any given time, it has 300-500 people working at CDC headquarters to support its Ebola response, Nordlund said.

Homeland Security “is focused on protecting the air traveling public and is taking steps to ensure that passengers with communicable diseases like Ebola are screened, isolated and quickly and safely referred to medical personnel,” deputy secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said Thursday.

That includes issuing “do not board” orders to airlines if the CDC and State Department determine a passenger is a risk to the traveling public; providing information and guidance about Ebola to the airlines; posting notices at airports to raise awareness about Ebola; and providing a health notice called a care sheet to travelers entering the USA that have traveled from or through affected countries.

In addition, Health and Human Services has the authority to suspend the entry of persons into the USA based on outbreaks of disease in other countries and when necessary to protect public health.

Screening started Saturday at New York’s John F. Kennedy airport. Medical workers will take the temperature of airline passengers originating from Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, and Customs and Border Protection staffers will ask questions about their health and possible exposure to Ebola. Those suspected of possible Ebola exposure will be referred to a CDC public health officer for additional screening.

The testing will expand in the next few days to four more airports: Washington Dulles, Newark, Chicago’s O’Hare and Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson airports.

Osterholm and Murphy say the nation’s public health system leaves room for a broad array of Ebola responses from state to state.

“We have to have more clarity,” Osterholm says. “We have to have a level of excellence. If that means putting the CDC in charge of these departments of public health, that means we have to find a way to do that. We can have agreements (between the states and the CDC). … We can’t leave it up to the whims of the state to do it right or not do it right.”

He acknowledges that no one has called for such a change.

“Not yet,” he says. “But we need it, though. Texas was an example of how not to do it.”

Contributing: Rick Jervis in Dallas, Gregory Korte

W.H.O. contradicts CDC, admits Ebola can spread via coughing, sneezing and by touching contaminated surfaces

The World Health Organization has issued a bulletin which confirms what Natural News has been asserting for weeks: that Ebola can spread via indirect contact with contaminated surfaces and aerosolized droplets produced from coughing or sneezing.

“…wet and bigger droplets from a heavily infected individual, who has respiratory symptoms caused by other conditions or who vomits violently, could transmit the virus — over a short distance — to another nearby person,” says a W.H.O. bulletin released this week. [1] “This could happen when virus-laden heavy droplets are directly propelled, by coughing or sneezing…”

That same bulletin also says, “The Ebola virus can also be transmitted indirectly, by contact with previously contaminated surfaces and objects.”

In other words, the WHO just confirmed what the CDC says is impossible — that Ebola can be acquired by touching a contaminated surface.

CDC remains in total denial, spreading dangerous disinformation about Ebola transmission vectors

This information published by the WHO directly contradicts the ridiculous claims of the CDC which continues to insist Ebola cannot spread through “indirect” means.

According to the CDC, Ebola can only spread via “direct contact,” but the CDC is basing this assumption on the behavior of the Ebola outbreak from 1976 — nearly four decades ago.

The CDC, in fact, continues to push five deadly assumptions about Ebola, endangering the lives of Americans in the process by failing to communicate accurate safety information to health professionals and the public.

Because of the CDC’s lackadaisical attitude about Ebola transmission, the Dallas Ebola outbreak may have been made far worse by people walking in and out of the Ebola-contaminated Duncan apartment while wearing no protective gear whatsoever.

Because the CDC sets the standards for dealing with infectious disease in the United States, when the CDC claims Ebola can only spread via “direct contact,” that causes emergency responders, Red Cross volunteers and even family members to conclude, “Then we don’t even need to wear latex gloves as long as we’re not touching the patient!”

Not “airborne” but can spread through the air

Both the CDC and the WHO continue to aggressively insist that Ebola is not an “airborne” disease. “Ebola virus disease is not an airborne infection,” says the WHO bulletin. But that same bulletin describes the ability of Ebola to spread through the air via aerosolized droplets.

The medical definition of “airborne,” it turns out, is a specific, narrow definition that defies the common understanding of the term. To most people, “airborne” means it can spread through the air, and Ebola most certainly can spread through the air when it is attached to aerosolized particles of spit, saliva, mucus, blood or other body fluids.

The CDC has now admitted there is a slight possibility of Ebola mutating to become “airborne” but says that chance is very small. [2] However, all honest virologists agree that the longer Ebola remains in circulation in West Africa, replicating among human hosts, the more chances it has to mutate into an airborne strain.

But the virus doesn’t need to mutate to continue to spread. It has already proven quite capable of spreading via indirect contact in a way that all the governments of the world have been utterly unable to stop. Despite the best efforts of the CDC and WHO, Ebola continues to replicate out of control across West African nations. Even in the United States, the Dallas “patient zero” incident has reportedly caused 100 people to be monitored for possible Ebola infections.

This is why government claims that “we have this under control” are just as much hogwash as the claim that Ebola can only spread via “direct contact.”

But that seems to be the default response of government to all legitimate threats: first, deny reality and misinform the public. Keep people in the dark and maybe the whole thing can be swept under the rug… at least until the mid-term elections.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/047177_ebola_transmission_direct_contact_aerosolized_particles.html##ixzz3FxuMpXzU

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 346-347

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 338-345

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 328-337

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 319-327

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 307-318

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 296-306

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 287-295

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 277-286

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 264-276

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 250-263

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 236-249

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 222-235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or DownloadShow 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

NSA Metadata To Be Held By Telephone Companies — Great Distraction — Still Collecting and Intercepting All Americans Telephone Calls and All Information Transmitted Over The Internet and Telephone Exchanges — Stop Deceiving The American People Mr. President — Videos

Posted on March 30, 2014. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Comedy, Communications, Computers, Constitution, Demographics, Diasters, Economics, Employment, European History, Family, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Illegal, Immigration, Islam, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, National Security Agency (NSA_, People, Philosophy, Politics, Press, Programming, Psychology, Quotations, Radio, Rants, Raves, Security | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 233: March 27, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 232: March 26, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 231: March 25, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 230: March 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 229: March 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 228: March 20, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 227: March 19, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 226: March 18, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 225: March 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 224: March 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 223: March 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 222: March 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 221: February 28, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 220: February 27, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 219: February 26, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 218: February 25, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 217: February 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 216: February 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 215: February 20, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 214: February 19, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 213: February 18, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 212: February 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 211: February 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 210: February 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 209: February 12, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 208: February 11, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 207: February 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 206: February 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 205: February 5, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 204: February 4, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 203: February 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 202: January 31, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 201: January 30, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 200: January 29, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 199: January 28, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 198: January 27, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 197: January 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 196: January 22, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 195: January 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 194: January 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 193: January 16, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 192: January 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 191: January 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 190: January 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 189: January 9, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 188: January 8, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 187: January 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 186: January 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 185: January 3, 2014

Story 1: NSA Metadata To Be Held By Telephone Companies — Great Distraction — Still Collecting and Intercepting All Americans Telephone Calls and All Information Transmitted Over The Internet and Telephone Exchanges — Stop Deceiving The American People Mr. President — Videos

Obama: NSA Proposal Satisfies Public Concerns

 

Obama announces overhaul of NSA metadata collection

NSA – Changes To Metadata Program – Special Report All Star

President Obama Names Michael Rogers As New Head Of The NSA

Background Articles and Videos

nsa_logo

flowchart_final_008acronyms_003130607_PRISM_ppt_1.jpg.CROP.original-original

prism-slide-2

nsa-prism-slide

prism_vendor_slide

prism-slide-6

top-secret-nsa-prism-slide-7

prism-slide-8

top-secret-nsa-prism-slide-9

xkeyscore_cover_slide

x-keyscore

keystore_slidexkeyscore_slide

NSA-X-Keyscore-slide-003

Screen-Shot

xkeyscore_slideNSA-X-Keyscore-slide-004

XKS_Future_Slide

xkeyscore_plugins

screen-shot-2013-07-31-at-8-01-30-pm

screen-shot-2013-07-31-at-8-03-13-pm

data-mining-and-terrorists-apprehended

xks_map

Through a PRISM, Darkly – Everything we know about NSA spying [30c3]

Published on Dec 30, 2013

Through a PRISM, Darkly
Everything we know about NSA spying

From Stellar Wind to PRISM, Boundless Informant to EvilOlive, the NSA spying programs are shrouded in secrecy and rubber-stamped by secret opinions from a court that meets in a faraday cage. The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Kurt Opsahl explains the known facts about how the programs operate and the laws and regulations the U.S. government asserts allows the NSA to spy on you.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a non-profit civil society organization, has been litigating against the NSA spying program for the better part of a decade. EFF has collected and reviewed dozens of documents, from the original NY Times stories in 2005 and the first AT&T whistleblower in 2006, through the latest documents released in the Guardian or obtained through EFF’s Freedom of Information (government transparency) litigation. EFF attorney Kurt Opsahl’s lecture will describe how the NSA spying program works, the underlying technologies, the targeting procedures (how they decide who to focus on), the minimization procedures (how they decide which information to discard), and help you makes sense of the many code names and acronyms in the news. He will also discuss the legal and policy ramifications that have become part of the public debate following the recent disclosures, and what you can do about it. After summarizing the programs, technologies, and legal/policy framework in the lecture, the audience can ask questions.

Speaker: Kurt Opsahl
EventID: 5255
Event: 30th Chaos Communication Congress [30c3] by the Chaos Computer Club [CCC]
Location: Congress Centrum Hamburg (CCH); Am Dammtor; Marseiller Straße; 20355 Hamburg; Germany
Language: english

Glenn Becks “SURVEILLANCE STATE”

Inside the NSA

Ed Snowden, NSA, and Fairy Tales

AT&T Spying On Internet Traffic

For years the National Securities Agency, has been spying on each & every keystroke. The national headquarters of AT&T is in Missouri, where ex-employees describe a secret room. The program is called “Splitter Cut-In & Test Procedure.”

NSA Whistle-Blower Tells All – Op-Docs: The Program

The filmmaker Laura Poitras profiles William Binney, a 32-year veteran of the National Security Agency who helped design a top-secret program he says is broadly collecting Americans’ personal data.

NSA Whistleblower: Everyone in US under virtual surveillance, all info stored, no matter the post

He told you so: Bill Binney talks NSA leaks

William Benny – The Government is Profiling You (The NSA is Spying on You)

‘After 9/11 NSA had secret deal with White House’

The story of Whistleblower Thomas Drake

Whistleblowers, Part Two: Thomas Drake

NSA Whistleblower Thomas Drake speaks at National Press Club – March 15, 2013

Meet Edward Snowden: NSA PRISM Whistleblower

The Truth About Edward Snowden

N.S.A. Spying: Why Does It Matter?

Inside The NSA~Americas Cyber Secrets

NSA Whistleblower Exposes Obama’s Dragnet

AT&T whistleblower against immunity for Bush spy program-1/2

AT&T Whistleblower Urges Against Immunity for Telecoms in Bush Spy Program

The Senate is expected to vote on a controversial measure to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act tomorrow. The legislation would rewrite the nation’s surveillance laws and authorize the National Security Agency’s secret program of warrantless wiretapping. We speak with Mark Klein, a technician with AT&T for over twenty-two years. In 2006 Klein leaked internal AT&T documents that revealed the company had set up a secret room in its San Francisco office to give the National Security Agency access to its fiber optic internet cables.

AT&T whistleblower against immunity for Bush spy program-2/2

Enemy Of The State 1998 (1080p) (Full movie)

Background Articles and Videos

Stellar Wind

Stellar Wind was the open secret code name for four surveillance programs by the United States National Security Agency (NSA) during the presidency of George W. Bush and revealed by Thomas Tamm to The New York Times reporters James Risen and Eric Lichtblau.[1] The operation was approved by President George W. Bush shortly after the September 11 attacks in 2001.[2] Stellar Wind was succeeded during the presidency of Barack Obama by four major lines of intelligence collection in the territorial United States, together capable of spanning the full range of modern telecommunications.[3]

The program’s activities involved data mining of a large database of the communications of American citizens, including e-mail communications, phone conversations, financial transactions, and Internet activity.[1] William Binney, a retired Technical Leader with the NSA, discussed some of the architectural and operational elements of the program at the 2012 Chaos Communication Congress.[4]

There were internal disputes within the Justice Department about the legality of the program, because data are collected for large numbers of people, not just the subjects of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants.[4]

During the Bush Administration, the Stellar Wind cases were referred to by FBI agents as “pizza cases” because many seemingly suspicious cases turned out to be food takeout orders. According to Mueller, approximately 99 percent of the cases led nowhere, but “it’s that other 1% that we’ve got to be concerned about”.[2] One of the known uses of these data were the creation of suspicious activity reports, or “SARS”, about people suspected of terrorist activities. It was one of these reports that revealed former New York governor Eliot Spitzer’s use of prostitutes, even though he was not suspected of terrorist activities.[1]

In March 2012 Wired magazine published “The NSA Is Building the Country’s Biggest Spy Center (Watch What You Say)” talking about a vast new NSA facility in Utah and says “For the first time, a former NSA official has gone on the record to describe the program, codenamed Stellar Wind, in detail,” naming the official William Binney, a former NSA code breaker. Binney went on to say that the NSA had highly secured rooms that tap into major switches, and satellite communications at both AT&T and Verizon.[5] The article suggested that the otherwise dispatched Stellar Wind is actually an active program.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_Wind_%28code_name%29

PRISM

PRISM is a clandestine national security electronic surveillance program operated by the United States National Security Agency (NSA) since 2007.[1][2][3][Notes 1] PRISM is a government codename for a data collection effort known officially as US-984XN.[8][9] It is operated under the supervision of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).[10] The existence of the program was leaked by NSA contractor Edward Snowden and published by The Guardian and The Washington Post on June 6, 2013.

A document included in the leak indicated that the PRISM SIGAD was “the number one source of raw intelligence used for NSA analytic reports.”[11] The President’s Daily Brief, an all-source intelligence product, cited PRISM data as a source in 1,477 items in 2012.[12] The leaked information came to light one day after the revelation that the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court had been requiring the telecommunications company Verizon to turn over to the NSA logs tracking all of its customers’ telephone calls on an ongoing daily basis.[13][14]

According to the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, PRISM cannot be used to intentionally target any Americans or anyone in the United States. Clapper said a special court, Congress, and the executive branch oversee the program and extensive procedures ensure the acquisition, retention, and dissemination of data accidentally collected about Americans is kept to a minimum.[15] Clapper issued a statement and “fact sheet”[16] to correct what he characterized as “significant misimpressions” in articles by The Washington Post and The Guardian newspapers.[17]

History

Slide showing that much of the world’s communications flow through the US

Details of information collected via PRISM

PRISM is a “Special Source Operation” in the tradition of NSA’s intelligence alliances with as many as 100 trusted U.S. companies since the 1970s.[1] A prior program, the Terrorist Surveillance Program, was implemented in the wake of the September 11 attacks under the George W. Bush Administration but was widely criticized and had its legality questioned, because it was conducted without approval of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).[18][19][20][21] PRISM was authorized by an order of the FISC.[11] Its creation was enabled by the Protect America Act of 2007 under President Bush and the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, which legally immunized private companies that cooperated voluntarily with US intelligence collection and was renewed by Congress under President Obama in 2012 for five years until December 2017.[2][22] According to The Register, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 “specifically authorizes intelligence agencies to monitor the phone, email, and other communications of U.S. citizens for up to a week without obtaining a warrant” when one of the parties is outside the U.S.[22]

PRISM was first publicly revealed on June 6, 2013, after classified documents about the program were leaked to The Washington Post and The Guardian by American Edward Snowden.[2][1] The leaked documents included 41 PowerPoint slides, four of which were published in news articles.[1][2] The documents identified several technology companies as participants in the PRISM program, including (date of joining PRISM in parentheses) Microsoft (2007), Yahoo! (2008), Google (2009), Facebook (2009), Paltalk (2009), YouTube (2010), AOL (2011), Skype (2011), and Apple (2012).[23] The speaker’s notes in the briefing document reviewed by The Washington Post indicated that “98 percent of PRISM production is based on Yahoo, Google and Microsoft.”[1]

The slide presentation stated that much of the world’s electronic communications pass through the United States, because electronic communications data tend to follow the least expensive route rather than the most physically direct route, and the bulk of the world’s internet infrastructure is based in the United States.[11] The presentation noted that these facts provide United States intelligence analysts with opportunities for intercepting the communications of foreign targets as their electronic data pass into or through the United States.[2][11]

According to The Washington Post, the intelligence analysts search PRISM data using terms intended to identify suspicious communications of targets whom the analysts suspect with at least 51 percent confidence to not be United States citizens, but in the process, communication data of some United States citizens are also collected unintentionally.[1] Training materials for analysts tell them that while they should periodically report such accidental collection of non-foreign United States data, “it’s nothing to worry about.”[1]

Response from companies

The original Washington Post and Guardian articles reporting on PRISM noted that one of the leaked briefing documents said PRISM involves collection of data “directly from the servers” of several major internet services providers.[2][1]

Initial Public Statements

Corporate executives of several companies identified in the leaked documents told The Guardian that they had no knowledge of the PRISM program in particular and also denied making information available to the government on the scale alleged by news reports.[2][24] Statements of several of the companies named in the leaked documents were reported by TechCrunch and The Washington Post as follows:[25][26]

Slide listing companies and the date that PRISM collection began

  • Microsoft: “We provide customer data only when we receive a legally binding order or subpoena to do so, and never on a voluntary basis. In addition we only ever comply with orders for requests about specific accounts or identifiers. If the government has a broader voluntary national security program to gather customer data we don’t participate in it.”[25]
  • Yahoo!: “Yahoo! takes users’ privacy very seriously. We do not provide the government with direct access to our servers, systems, or network.”[25] “Of the hundreds of millions of users we serve, an infinitesimal percentage will ever be the subject of a government data collection directive.”[26]
  • Facebook: “We do not provide any government organization with direct access to Facebook servers. When Facebook is asked for data or information about specific individuals, we carefully scrutinize any such request for compliance with all applicable laws, and provide information only to the extent required by law.”[25]
  • Google: “Google cares deeply about the security of our users’ data. We disclose user data to government in accordance with the law, and we review all such requests carefully. From time to time, people allege that we have created a government ‘back door’ into our systems, but Google does not have a backdoor for the government to access private user data.”[25] “[A]ny suggestion that Google is disclosing information about our users’ Internet activity on such a scale is completely false.”[26]
  • Apple: “We have never heard of PRISM. We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any government agency requesting customer data must get a court order.”[27]
  • Dropbox: “We’ve seen reports that Dropbox might be asked to participate in a government program called PRISM. We are not part of any such program and remain committed to protecting our users’ privacy.”[25]

In response to the technology companies’ denials of the NSA being able to directly access the companies’ servers, The New York Times reported that sources had stated the NSA was gathering the surveillance data from the companies using other technical means in response to court orders for specific sets of data.[13] The Washington Post suggested, “It is possible that the conflict between the PRISM slides and the company spokesmen is the result of imprecision on the part of the NSA author. In another classified report obtained by The Post, the arrangement is described as allowing ‘collection managers [to send] content tasking instructions directly to equipment installed at company-controlled locations,’ rather than directly to company servers.”[1] “[I]n context, ‘direct’ is more likely to mean that the NSA is receiving data sent to them deliberately by the tech companies, as opposed to intercepting communications as they’re transmitted to some other destination.[26]

“If these companies received an order under the FISA amendments act, they are forbidden by law from disclosing having received the order and disclosing any information about the order at all,” Mark Rumold, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told ABC News.[28]

Slide showing two different sources of NSA data collection. The first source the fiber optic cables of the internet handled by the Upstream program and the second source the servers of major internet companies handled by PRISM.[29]

On May 28, 2013, Google was ordered by United States District Court Judge Susan Illston to comply with a National Security Letter issued by the FBI to provide user data without a warrant.[30] Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, in an interview with VentureBeat said, “I certainly appreciate that Google put out a transparency report, but it appears that the transparency didn’t include this. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were subject to a gag order.”[31]

The New York Times reported on June 7, 2013, that “Twitter declined to make it easier for the government. But other companies were more compliant, according to people briefed on the negotiations.”[32] The other companies held discussions with national security personnel on how to make data available more efficiently and securely.[32] In some cases, these companies made modifications to their systems in support of the intelligence collection effort.[32] The dialogues have continued in recent months, as General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has met with executives including those at Facebook, Microsoft, Google and Intel.[32] These details on the discussions provide insight into the disparity between initial descriptions of the government program including a training slide which states “Collection directly from the servers”[29] and the companies’ denials.[32]

While providing data in response to a legitimate FISA request approved by FISC is a legal requirement, modifying systems to make it easier for the government to collect the data is not. This is why Twitter could legally decline to provide an enhanced mechanism for data transmission.[32] Other than Twitter, the companies were effectively asked to construct a locked mailbox and provide the key to the government, people briefed on the negotiations said.[32] Facebook, for instance, built such a system for requesting and sharing the information.[32] Google does not provide a lockbox system, but instead transmits required data by hand delivery or secure FTP.[33]

Post-PRISM Transparency Reports

In response to the publicity surrounding media reports of data-sharing, several companies requested permission to reveal more public information about the nature and scope of information provided in response to National Security requests.

On June 14, 2013, Facebook reported that the U.S. Government had authorized the communication of “about these numbers in aggregate, and as a range.” In a press release posted to their web site, Facebook reported, “For the six months ending December 31, 2012, the total number of user-data requests Facebook received from any and all government entities in the U.S. (including local, state, and federal, and including criminal and national security-related requests) – was between 9,000 and 10,000.” Facebook further reported that the requests impacted “between 18,000 and 19,000″ user accounts, a “tiny fraction of one percent” of more than 1.1 billion active user accounts.[34]

Microsoft reported that for the same period, it received “between 6,000 and 7,000 criminal and national security warrants, subpoenas and orders affecting between 31,000 and 32,000 consumer accounts from U.S. governmental entities (including local, state and federal)” which impacted “a tiny fraction of Microsoft’s global customer base”.[35]

Google issued a statement criticizing the requirement that data be reported in aggregated form, stating that lumping national security requests with criminal request data would be “a step backwards” from its previous, more detailed practices on its site transparency report. The company said that it would continue to seek government permission to publish the number and extent of FISA requests.[36]

Response from United States government

Executive branch

Shortly after publication of the reports by The Guardian and The Washington Post, the United States Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, on June 7 released a statement confirming that for nearly six years the government of the United States had been using large internet services companies such as Google and Facebook to collect information on foreigners outside the United States as a defense against national security threats.[13] The statement read in part, “The Guardian and The Washington Post articles refer to collection of communications pursuant to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. They contain numerous inaccuracies.”[37] He went on to say, “Section 702 is a provision of FISA that is designed to facilitate the acquisition of foreign intelligence information concerning non-U.S. persons located outside the United States. It cannot be used to intentionally target any U.S. citizen, any other U.S. person, or anyone located within the United States.”[37] Clapper concluded his statement by stating “The unauthorized disclosure of information about this important and entirely legal program is reprehensible and risks important protections for the security of Americans.”[37] On March 12, 2013, Clapper had told the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that the NSA does “not wittingly” collect any type of data on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans.[38] In an NBC News interview, Clapper said he answered Senator Wyden’s question in the “least untruthful manner by saying no”.[39]

Clapper also stated that “the NSA collects the phone data in broad swaths, because collecting it (in) a narrow fashion would make it harder to identify terrorism-related communications. The information collected lets the government, over time, make connections about terrorist activities. The program doesn’t let the U.S. listen to people’s calls, but only includes information like call length and telephone numbers dialed.”[15]

On June 8, 2013, Clapper said “the surveillance activities published in The Guardian and The Washington Post are lawful and conducted under authorities widely known and discussed, and fully debated and authorized by Congress.”[40][10] The fact sheet described PRISM as “an internal government computer system used to facilitate the government’s statutorily authorized collection of foreign intelligence information from electronic communication service providers under court supervision, as authorized by Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) (50 U.S.C. § 1881a).”[10]

The National Intelligence fact sheet further stated that “the United States Government does not unilaterally obtain information from the servers of U.S. electronic communication service providers. All such information is obtained with FISA Court approval and with the knowledge of the provider based upon a written directive from the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence.” It said that the Attorney General provides FISA Court rulings and semi-annual reports about PRISM activities to Congress, “provid[ing] an unprecedented degree of accountability and transparency.”[10]

The President of the United States, Barack Obama, said on June 7 “What you’ve got is two programs that were originally authorized by Congress, have been repeatedly authorized by Congress. Bipartisan majorities have approved them. Congress is continually briefed on how these are conducted. There are a whole range of safeguards involved. And federal judges are overseeing the entire program throughout.”[41] He also said, “You can’t have 100 percent security and then also have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience. You know, we’re going to have to make some choices as a society.”[41]

In separate statements, senior (not mentioned by name in source) Obama administration officials said that Congress had been briefed 13 times on the programs since 2009.[42]

Legislative branch

In contrast to their swift and forceful reactions the previous day to allegations that the government had been conducting surveillance of United States citizens’ telephone records, Congressional leaders initially had little to say about the PRISM program the day after leaked information about the program was published. Several lawmakers declined to discuss PRISM, citing its top-secret classification,[43] and others said that they had not been aware of the program.[44] After statements had been released by the President and the Director of National Intelligence, some lawmakers began to comment:

Senator John McCain (R-AZ)

  • June 9 “We passed the Patriot Act. We passed specific provisions of the act that allowed for this program to take place, to be enacted in operation,”[45]

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee

  • June 9 “These programs are within the law”, “part of our obligation is keeping Americans safe”, “Human intelligence isn’t going to do it”.[46]
  • June 9 “Here’s the rub: the instances where this has produced good — has disrupted plots, prevented terrorist attacks, is all classified, that’s what’s so hard about this.”[47]
  • June 11 “It went fine…we asked him[ Keith Alexander ] to declassify things because it would be helpful (for people and lawmakers to better understand the intelligence programs).” “I’ve just got to see if the information gets declassified. I’m sure people will find it very interesting.”[48]

Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), member of Senate Intelligence Committee and past member of Homeland Security Committee

  • June 11 “I had, along with Joe Lieberman, a monthly threat briefing, but I did not have access to this highly compartmentalized information” and “How can you ask when you don’t know the program exists?”[49]

Representative John Boehner (R-OH), Speaker of the House of Representatives

  • June 11 “He’s a traitor”[50] (referring to Edward Snowden)

Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), principal sponsor of the Patriot Act

  • June 9, “This is well beyond what the Patriot Act allows.”[51] “President Obama’s claim that ‘this is the most transparent administration in history’ has once again proven false. In fact, it appears that no administration has ever peered more closely or intimately into the lives of innocent Americans.”[51]

Representative Mike Rogers (R-MI), a Chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

  • June 9 “One of the things that we’re charged with is keeping America safe and keeping our civil liberties and privacy intact. I think we have done both in this particular case,”[46]
  • June 9 “Within the last few years this program was used to stop a program, excuse me, to stop a terrorist attack in the United States we know that. It’s, it’s, it’s important, it fills in a little seam that we have and it’s used to make sure that there is not an international nexus to any terrorism event that they may believe is ongoing in the United States. So in that regard it is a very valuable thing,”[52]

Senator Mark Udall (D-CO)

  • June 9 “I don’t think the American public knows the extent or knew the extent to which they were being surveilled and their data was being collected.” “I think we ought to reopen the Patriot Act and put some limits on the amount of data that the National Security (Agency) is collecting,” “It ought to remain sacred, and there’s got to be a balance here. That is what I’m aiming for. Let’s have the debate, let’s be transparent, let’s open this up”.[46]

Representative Todd Rokita (R-IN)

  • June 10 “We have no idea when they [ FISA ] meet, we have no idea what their judgments are”,[53]

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)

  • June 6 “When the Senate rushed through a last-minute extension of the FISA Amendments Act late last year, I insisted on a vote on my amendment (SA 3436) to require stronger protections on business records and prohibiting the kind of data-mining this case has revealed. Just last month, I introduced S.1037, the Fourth Amendment Preservation and Protection Act,”[54]
  • June 9 “I’m going to be seeing if I can challenge this at the Supreme Court level. I’m going to be asking the Internet providers and all of the phone companies: ask your customers to join me in a class-action lawsuit.”[45]

Representative Luis Gutierrez (D-IL)

  • June 9 “We will be receiving secret briefings and we will be asking, I know I’m going to be asking to get more information. I want to make sure that what they’re doing is harvesting information that is necessary to keep us safe and not simply going into everybody’s private telephone conversations and Facebook and communications. I mean one of the, you know the terrorists win when you debilitate freedom of expression and privacy.”[52]

Judicial branch

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) has not acknowledged, denied or confirmed any involvement in the PRISM program at this time. It has not issued any press statement or release relating to the current situation and uncertainty.

Applicable law and practice

On June 8, 2013, the Director of National Intelligence issued a fact sheet stating that PRISM “is not an undisclosed collection or data mining program”, but rather computer software used to facilitate the collection of foreign intelligence information “under court supervision, as authorized by Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) (50 U.S.C. § 1881a).”[10] Section 702 provides that “the Attorney General [A.G.] and the Director of National Intelligence [DNI] may authorize jointly, for a period of up to 1 year from the effective date of the authorization, the targeting of persons reasonably believed to be located outside the United States to acquire foreign intelligence information.”[55] In order to authorize the targeting, the A.G. and DNI need to get an order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) pursuant to Section 702 or certify that “intelligence important to the national security of the United States may be lost or not timely acquired and time does not permit the issuance of an order.”[55] When asking for an order, the A.G. and DNI must certify to FISC that “a significant purpose of the acquisition is to obtain foreign intelligence information.”[55] They do not need to specify which facilities or property that the targeting will be directed at.[55]

After getting a FISC order or determining that there are emergency circumstances, the A.G. and DNI can direct an electronic communication service provider to give them access to information or facilities to carry out the targeting and keep the targeting secret.[55] The provider then has the option to: (1) comply with the directive; (2) reject it; or (3) challenge it to FISC.

If the provider complies with the directive, it is released from liability to its users for providing the information and reimbursed for the cost of providing it.[55]

If the provider rejects the directive, the A.G. may request an order from FISC to enforce it.[55] A provider that fails to comply with FISC’s order can be punished with contempt of court.[55]

Finally, a provider can petition FISC to reject the directive.[55] In case FISC denies the petition and orders the provider to comply with the directive, the provider risks contempt of court if it refuses to comply with FISC’s order.[55] The provider can appeal FISC’s denial to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review and then appeal the Court of Review’s decision to the Supreme Court by a writ of certiorari for review under seal.[55]

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the FISA Courts had been put in place to oversee intelligence operations in the period after the death of J. Edgar Hoover. Beverly Gage of Slate said, “When they were created, these new mechanisms were supposed to stop the kinds of abuses that men like Hoover had engineered. Instead, it now looks as if they have come to function as rubber stamps for the expansive ambitions of the intelligence community. J. Edgar Hoover no longer rules Washington, but it turns out we didn’t need him anyway.”[56]

Involvement of other countries

Australia

The Australian government has said it will investigate the impact of the PRISM program and the use of the Pine Gap surveillance facility on the privacy of Australian citizens.[57]

Canada

Canada’s national cryptologic agency, the Communications Security Establishment, said that commenting on PRISM “would undermine CSE’s ability to carry out its mandate”. Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart lamented Canada’s standards when it comes to protecting personal online privacy stating “We have fallen too far behind,” Stoddart wrote in her report. “While other nations’ data protection authorities have the legal power to make binding orders, levy hefty fines and take meaningful action in the event of serious data breaches, we are restricted to a ‘soft’ approach: persuasion, encouragement and, at the most, the potential to publish the names of transgressors in the public interest.” And, “when push comes to shove,” Stoddart wrote, “short of a costly and time-consuming court battle, we have no power to enforce our recommendations.”[58]

Germany

Germany did not receive any raw PRISM data, according to a Reuters report.[59]

Israel

Israeli newspaper Calcalist discussed[60] the Business Insider article[61] about the possible involvement of technologies from two secretive Israeli companies in the PRISM program – Verint Systems and Narus.

New Zealand

In New Zealand, University of Otago information science Associate Professor Hank Wolfe said that “under what was unofficially known as the Five Eyes Alliance, New Zealand and other governments, including the United States, Australia, Canada, and Britain, dealt with internal spying by saying they didn’t do it. But they have all the partners doing it for them and then they share all the information.”[62]

United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom, Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) has had access to the PRISM program on or before June 2010 and wrote 197 reports with it in 2012 alone. PRISM may have allowed GCHQ to circumvent the formal legal process required to seek personal material.[63][64]

Domestic response

Unbalanced scales.svg
The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (June 2013)

The New York Times editorial board charged that the Obama administration “has now lost all credibility on this issue,”[65] and lamented that “for years, members of Congress ignored evidence that domestic intelligence-gathering had grown beyond their control, and, even now, few seem disturbed to learn that every detail about the public’s calling and texting habits now reside in a N.S.A. database.”[66]

Republican and former member of Congress Ron Paul said, “We should be thankful for individuals like Edward Snowden and Glenn Greenwald who see injustice being carried out by their own government and speak out, despite the risk…. They have done a great service to the American people by exposing the truth about what our government is doing in secret.”[67] Paul denounced the government’s secret surveillance program: “The government does not need to know more about what we are doing…. We need to know more about what the government is doing.”[67] He called Congress “derelict in giving that much power to the government,” and said that had he been elected president, he would have ordered searches only when there was probable cause of a crime having been committed, which he said was not how the PRISM program was being operated.[68]

In response to Obama administration arguments that it could stop terrorism in the cases of Najibullah Zazi and David Headley, Ed Pilkington and Nicholas Watt of The Guardian said in regards to the role of PRISM and Boundless Informant interviews with parties involved in the Zazi scheme and court documents lodged in the United States and the United Kingdom indicated that “conventional” surveillance methods such as “old-fashioned tip-offs” of the British intelligence services initiated the investigation into the Zazi case.[69] An anonymous former CIA agent said that in regards to the Headley case, “That’s nonsense. It played no role at all in the Headley case. That’s not the way it happened at all.”[69] Pilkington and Watt concluded that the data-mining programs “played a relatively minor role in the interception of the two plots.”[69] Michael Daly of The Daily Beast stated that even though Tamerlan Tsarnaev had visited Inspire and even though Russian intelligence officials alerted U.S. intelligence officials about Tsarnaev, PRISM did not prevent him from carrying out the Boston bombings, and that the initial evidence implicating him came from his brother Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and not from federal intelligence. In addition Daly pointed to the fact that Faisal Shahzad visited Inspire but that federal authorities did not stop his attempted terrorist plot. Daly concluded “The problem is not just what the National Security Agency is gathering at the risk of our privacy but what it is apparently unable to monitor at the risk of our safety.”[70] In addition, political commentator Bill O’Reilly criticized the government, saying that PRISM did not stop the Boston bombings.[71]

In a blog post, David Simon, the creator of The Wire, compared the NSA’s programs, including PRISM, to a 1980s effort by the City of Baltimore to add dialed number recorders to all pay phones to know which individuals were being called by the callers;[72] the city believed that drug traffickers were using pay phones and pagers, and a municipal judge allowed the city to place the recorders. The placement of the dialers formed the basis of the show’s first season. Simon argued that the media attention regarding the NSA programs is a “faux scandal.”[72][73] George Takei, an actor who had experienced Japanese American internment, said that due to his memories of the internment, he felt concern towards the NSA surveillance programs that had been revealed.[74]

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), an international non-profit digital-rights group based in the U.S., is hosting a tool, by which an American resident can write to their government representatives regarding their opposition to mass spying.[75]

On June 11, 2013, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against the NSA citing that PRISM “violates Americans’ constitutional rights of free speech, association, and privacy”.[76]

International response

Reactions of Internet users in China were mixed between viewing a loss of freedom worldwide and seeing state surveillance coming out of secrecy. The story broke just before US President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping met in California.[77][78] When asked about NSA hacking China, the spokeswoman of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China said “China strongly advocates cybersecurity”.[79] The party-owned newspaper Liberation Daily described this surveillance like Nineteen Eighty-Four-style.[80] Hong Kong legislators Gary Fan and Claudia Mo wrote a letter to Obama, stating “the revelations of blanket surveillance of global communications by the world’s leading democracy have damaged the image of the U.S. among freedom-loving peoples around the world.”[81]

Sophie in ‘t Veld, a Dutch Member of the European Parliament, called PRISM “a violation of EU laws”.[82]

Protests at Checkpoint Charlie in Berlin

The German Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information, Peter Schaar, condemned the program as “monstrous”.[83] He further added that White House claims do “not reassure me at all” and that “given the large number of German users of Google, Facebook, Apple or Microsoft services, I expect the German government […] is committed to clarification and limitation of surveillance.” Steffen Seibert, press secretary of the Chancellor’s office, announced that Angela Merkel will put these issues on the agenda of the talks with Barack Obama during his pending visit in Berlin.[84]

The Italian president of the Guarantor for the protection of personal data, Antonello Soro, said that the surveillance dragnet “would not be legal in Italy” and would be “contrary to the principles of our legislation and would represent a very serious violation”.[85]

William Hague, the foreign secretary of the United Kingdom, dismissed accusations that British security agencies had been circumventing British law by using information gathered on British citizens by Prism[86] saying, “Any data obtained by us from the United States involving UK nationals is subject to proper UK statutory controls and safeguards.”[86] David Cameron said Britain’s spy agencies that received data collected from PRISM acted within the law: “I’m satisfied that we have intelligence agencies that do a fantastically important job for this country to keep us safe, and they operate within the law.”[86][87] Malcolm Rifkind, the chairman of parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee, said that if the British intelligence agencies were seeking to know the content of emails about people living in the UK, then they actually have to get lawful authority.[87] The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office was more cautious, saying it would investigate PRISM alongside other European data agencies: “There are real issues about the extent to which U.S. law agencies can access personal data of UK and other European citizens. Aspects of U.S. law under which companies can be compelled to provide information to U.S. agencies potentially conflict with European data protection law, including the UK’s own Data Protection Act. The ICO has raised this with its European counterparts, and the issue is being considered by the European Commission, who are in discussions with the U.S. Government.”[82]

Ai Weiwei, a Chinese dissident, said “Even though we know governments do all kinds of things I was shocked by the information about the US surveillance operation, Prism. To me, it’s abusively using government powers to interfere in individuals’ privacy. This is an important moment for international society to reconsider and protect individual rights.”[88]

Kim Dotcom, a German-Finnish Internet entrepreneur who owned Megaupload, which was closed by the U.S. federal government, said “We should heed warnings from Snowden because the prospect of an Orwellian society outweighs whatever security benefits we derive from Prism or Five Eyes.”[89] The Hong Kong law firm representing Dotcom expressed a fear that the communication between Dotcom and the firm had been compromised by U.S. intelligence programs.[90]

Russia has offered to consider an asylum request from Edward Snowden.[91]

Taliban spokesperson Zabiullah Mujahid said “We knew about their past efforts to trace our system. We have used our technical resources to foil their efforts and have been able to stop them from succeeding so far.”[92][93]

Related government Internet surveillance programs

A parallel program, code-named BLARNEY, gathers up metadata as it streams past choke points along the backbone of the Internet. BLARNEY’s summary, set down in the slides alongside a cartoon insignia of a shamrock and a leprechaun hat, describes it as “an ongoing collection program that leverages IC [intelligence community] and commercial partnerships to gain access and exploit foreign intelligence obtained from global networks.”[94]

A related program, a big data visualization system based on cloud computing and free and open-source software (FOSS) technology known as “Boundless Informant”, was disclosed in documents leaked to The Guardian and reported on June 8, 2013. A leaked, top secret map allegedly produced by Boundless Informant revealed the extent of NSA surveillance in the U.S.[95]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29

ThinThread

ThinThread is the name of a project that the United States National Security Agency (NSA) pursued during the 1990s, according to a May 17, 2006 article in The Baltimore Sun.[1] The program involved wiretapping and sophisticated analysis of the resulting data, but according to the article, the program was discontinued three weeks before the September 11, 2001 attacks due to the changes in priorities and the consolidation of U.S. intelligence authority.[2] The “change in priority” consisted of the decision made by the director of NSA General Michael V. Hayden to go with a concept called Trailblazer, despite the fact that ThinThread was a working prototype that protected the privacy of U.S. citizens.

ThinThread was dismissed and replaced by the Trailblazer Project, which lacked the privacy protections.[3] A consortium led by Science Applications International Corporation was awarded a $280 million contract to develop Trailblazer in 2002.[4]

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

Trailblazer

Trailblazer was a United States National Security Agency (NSA) program intended to develop a capability to analyze data carried on communications networks like the Internet. It was intended to track entities using communication methods such as cell phones and e-mail.[1][2] It ran over budget, failed to accomplish critical goals, and was cancelled.

NSA whistleblowers J. Kirk Wiebe, William Binney, Ed Loomis, and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence staffer Diane Roark complained to the Department of Defense’s Inspector General (IG) about waste, fraud, and abuse in the program, and the fact that a successful operating prototype existed, but was ignored when the Trailblazer program was launched. The complaint was accepted by the IG and an investigation began that lasted until mid-2005 when the final results were issued. The results were largely hidden, as the report given to the public was heavily (90%) redacted, while the original report was heavily classified, thus restricting the ability of most people to see it.

The people who filed the IG complaint were later raided by armed Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents. While the Government threatened to prosecute all who signed the IG report, it ultimately chose to pursue an NSA Senior Executive — Thomas Andrews Drake — who helped with the report internally to NSA and who had spoken with a reporter about the project. Drake was later charged under the Espionage Act of 1917. His defenders claimed this was retaliation.[3][4] The charges against him were later dropped, and he agreed to plead guilty to having committed a misdemeanor under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, something that Jesselyn Radack of the Government Accountability Project (which helped represent him) called an “act of civil disobedience”.[5]

Background

Trailblazer was chosen over a similar program named ThinThread, a less costly project which had been designed with built-in privacy protections for United States citizens.[4][3] Trailblazer was later linked to the NSA electronic surveillance program and the NSA warrantless surveillance controversy.[3]

In 2002 a consortium led by Science Applications International Corporation was chosen by the NSA to produce a technology demonstration platform in a contract worth $280 million. Project participants included Boeing, Computer Sciences Corporation, and Booz Allen Hamilton. The project was overseen by NSA Deputy Director William B. Black, Jr., an NSA worker who had gone to SAIC, and then been re-hired back to NSA by NSA director Michael Hayden in 2000.[6][7][8] SAIC had also hired a former NSA director to its management; Bobby Inman.[9] SAIC also participated in the concept definition phase of Trailblazer.[10][11]

Redacted version of the DoD Inspector General audit, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act by the Project on Government Oversight and others. [12][5]

The NSA Inspector General issued a report on Trailblazer that “discussed improperly based contract cost increases, non-conformance in the management of the Statement of Work, and excessive labor rates for contractor personnel.” [13]

In 2004 the DoD IG report criticized the program (see the Whistleblowing section below). It said that the “NSA ‘disregarded solutions to urgent national security needs'” and “that TRAILBLAZER was poorly executed and overly expensive …” Several contractors for the project were worried about cooperating with DoD’s audit for fear of “management reprisal.”[5] The Director of NSA “nonconcurred” with several statements in the IG audit, and the report contains a discussion of those disagreements.[14]

In 2005, NSA director Michael Hayden told a Senate hearing that the Trailblazer program was several hundred million dollars over budget and years behind schedule.[15] In 2006 the program was shut down,[3] after having cost billions of US Dollars.[16] Several anonymous NSA sources told Hosenball of Newsweek later on that the project was a “wasteful failure”.[17]

The new project replacing Trailblazer is called Turbulence.[3]

Whistleblowing

According to a 2011 New Yorker article, in the early days of the project several NSA employees met with Diane S Roark, an NSA budget expert on the House Intelligence Committee. They aired their grievances about Trailblazer. In response, NSA director Michael Hayden sent out a memo saying that “individuals, in a session with our congressional overseers, took a position in direct opposition to one that we had corporately decided to follow … Actions contrary to our decisions will have a serious adverse effect on our efforts to transform N.S.A., and I cannot tolerate them.”[3]

In September 2002, several people filed a complaint with the Department of Defense IG’s office regarding problems with Trailblazer: they included Roark (aforementioned), ex-NSA senior analysts Bill Binney, Kirk Wiebe, and Senior Computer Systems Analyst Ed Loomis, who had quit the agency over concerns about its mismanagement of acquisition and allegedly illegal domestic spying.[3][18][19] A major source for the report was NSA senior officer Thomas Andrews Drake. Drake had been complaining to his superiors for some time about problems at the agency, and about the superiority of ThinThread over Trailblazer, for example, at protecting privacy.[19] Drake gave info to DoD during its investigation of the matter.[19] Roark also went to her boss at the House committee, Porter Goss, about problems, but was rebuffed.[20] She also attempted to contact William Renquist, the Supreme Court Chief Justice at the time.[19]

Drake’s own boss, Maureen Baginski, the third-highest officer at NSA, quit partly over concerns about the legality of its behavior.[3]

In 2003, the NSA IG (not the DoD IG)[19] had declared Trailblazer an expensive failure.[21] It had cost more than $1 billion.[8][22][23]

In 2005, the DoD IG produced a report on the result of its investigation of the complaint of Roark and the others in 2002. This report was not released to the public, but it has been described as very negative.[18] Mayer writes that it hastened the closure of Trailblazer, which was at the time in trouble from congress for being over budget.[3]

In November 2005, Drake contacted Siobhan Gorman, a reporter of The Baltimore Sun.[24][17][25] Gorman wrote several articles about problems at the NSA, including articles on Trailblazer. This series got her an award from the Society of Professional Journalists.[17]

In 2005, President George W. Bush ordered the FBI to find whoever had disclosed information about the NSA electronic surveillance program and its disclosure in the New York Times. Eventually, this investigation led to the people who had filed the 2002 DoD IG request, even though they had nothing to do with the New York Times disclosure. In 2007, the houses of Roark, Binney, and Wiebe were raided by armed FBI agents. According to Mayer, Binney claims the FBI pointed guns at his head and that of his wife. Wiebe said it reminded him of the Soviet Union.[3][18] None of these people were ever charged with any crime. Four months later, Drake was raided in November 2007 and his computers and documents were confiscated.

In 2010 Drake was indicted by the U.S. Department of Justice on charges of obstructing justice, providing false information, and violating the Espionage Act of 1917,[17][26][27] part of President Barack Obama’s crackdown on whistleblowers and “leakers”.[24][17][28][18] The government tried to get Roark to testify to a conspiracy, and made similar requests to Drake, offering him a plea bargain. They both refused.[3]

In June 2011, the ten original charges against Drake were dropped, instead he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor.[5]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AXwwSq_me4

Boundless Informant

Boundless Informant is a big data analysis and data visualization system used by the United States National Security Agency (NSA) to give NSA managers summaries of NSA’s world wide data collection activities.[1] It is described in an unclassified, For Official Use Only Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) memo published by The Guardian.[2] According to a Top Secret heat map display also published by The Guardian and allegedly produced by the Boundless Informant program, almost 3 billion data elements from inside the United States were captured by NSA over a 30-day period ending in March 2013.

Data analyzed by Boundless Informant includes electronic surveillance program records (DNI) and telephone call metadata records (DNR) stored in an NSA data archive called GM-PLACE. It does not include FISA data, according to the FAQ memo. PRISM, a government codename for a collection effort known officially as US-984XN, which was revealed at the same time as Boundless Informant, is one source of DNR data. According to the map, Boundless Informant summarizes data records from 504 separate DNR and DNI collection sources (SIGADs). In the map, countries that are under surveillance are assigned a color from green, representing least coverage to red, most intensive.[3][4]

History

Slide showing that much of the world’s communications flow through the US.

Intelligence gathered by the United States government inside the United States or specifically targeting US citizens is legally required to be gathered in compliance with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) and under the authority of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA court).[5][6][7]

NSA global data mining projects have existed for decades, but recent programs of intelligence gathering and analysis that include data gathered from inside the United States such as PRISM were enabled by changes to US surveillance law introduced under President Bush and renewed under President Obama in December 2012.[8]

Boundless Informant was first publicly revealed on June 8, 2013, after classified documents about the program were leaked to The Guardian.[1][9] The newspaper identified its informant, at his request, as Edward Snowden, who worked at the NSA for the defense contractor Booz Allen Hamilton.[10]

Technology

According to published slides, Boundless Informant leverages Free and Open Source Software—and is therefore “available to all NSA developers”—and corporate services hosted in the cloud. The tool uses HDFS, MapReduce, and Cloudbase for data processing.[11]

Legality and FISA Amendments Act of 2008

The FISA Amendments Act (FAA) Section 702 is referenced in PRISM documents detailing the electronic interception, capture and analysis of metadata. Many reports and letters of concern written by members of Congress suggest that this section of FAA in particular is legally and constitutionally problematic, such as by targeting U.S. persons, insofar as “Collections occur in U.S.” as published documents indicate.[12][13][14][15]

The ACLU has asserted the following regarding the FAA: “Regardless of abuses, the problem with the FAA is more fundamental: the statute itself is unconstitutional.”[16]

Senator Rand Paul is introducing new legislation called the Fourth Amendment Restoration Act of 2013 to stop the NSA or other agencies of the United States government from violating the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution using technology and big data information systems like PRISM and Boundless Informant.[17][18]

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

ECHELON

ECHELON is a name used in global media and in popular culture to describe a signals intelligence (SIGINT) collection and analysis network operated on behalf of the five signatory states to the UKUSA Security Agreement[1] (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States, referred to by a number of abbreviations, including AUSCANNZUKUS[1] and Five Eyes).[2][3] It has also been described as the only software system which controls the download and dissemination of the intercept of commercial satellite trunk communications.[4]

ECHELON, according to information in the European Parliament document, “On the existence of a global system for the interception of private and commercial communications (ECHELON interception system)” was created to monitor the military and diplomatic communications of the Soviet Union and its Eastern Bloc allies during the Cold War in the early 1960s.[5]

The system has been reported in a number of public sources.[6] Its capabilities and political implications were investigated by a committee of the European Parliament during 2000 and 2001 with a report published in 2001,[5] and by author James Bamford in his books on the National Security Agency of the United States.[4] The European Parliament stated in its report that the term ECHELON is used in a number of contexts, but that the evidence presented indicates that it was the name for a signals intelligence collection system. The report concludes that, on the basis of information presented, ECHELON was capable of interception and content inspection of telephone calls, fax, e-mail and other data traffic globally through the interception of communication bearers including satellite transmission, public switched telephone networks (which once carried most Internet traffic) and microwave links.[5]

Bamford describes the system as the software controlling the collection and distribution of civilian telecommunications traffic conveyed using communication satellites, with the collection being undertaken by ground stations located in the footprint of the downlink leg.

Organization

UKUSA Community
Map of UKUSA Community countries with Ireland

Australia
Canada
New Zealand
United Kingdom
United States of America

The UKUSA intelligence community was assessed by the European Parliament (EP) in 2000 to include the signals intelligence agencies of each of the member states:

  • the Government Communications Headquarters of the United Kingdom,
  • the National Security Agency of the United States,
  • the Communications Security Establishment of Canada,
  • the Defence Signals Directorate of Australia, and
  • the Government Communications Security Bureau of New Zealand.
  • the National SIGINT Organisation (NSO) of The Netherlands

The EP report concluded that it seemed likely that ECHELON is a method of sorting captured signal traffic, rather than a comprehensive analysis tool.[5]

Capabilities

The ability to intercept communications depends on the medium used, be it radio, satellite, microwave, cellular or fiber-optic.[5] During World War II and through the 1950s, high frequency (“short wave”) radio was widely used for military and diplomatic communication,[7] and could be intercepted at great distances.[5] The rise of geostationary communications satellites in the 1960s presented new possibilities for intercepting international communications. The report to the European Parliament of 2001 states: “If UKUSA states operate listening stations in the relevant regions of the earth, in principle they can intercept all telephone, fax and data traffic transmitted via such satellites.”[5]

The role of satellites in point-to-point voice and data communications has largely been supplanted by fiber optics; in 2006, 99% of the world’s long-distance voice and data traffic was carried over optical-fiber.[8] The proportion of international communications accounted for by satellite links is said to have decreased substantially over the past few years[when?] in Central Europe to an amount between 0.4% and 5%.[5] Even in less-developed parts of the world, communications satellites are used largely for point-to-multipoint applications, such as video.[9] Thus, the majority of communications can no longer be intercepted by earth stations; they can only be collected by tapping cables and intercepting line-of-sight microwave signals, which is possible only to a limited extent.[5]

One method of interception is to place equipment at locations where fiber optic communications are switched. For the Internet, much of the switching occurs at relatively few sites. There have been reports of one such intercept site, Room 641A, in the United States. In the past[when?] much Internet traffic was routed through the U.S. and the UK, but this has changed; for example, in 2000, 95% of intra-German Internet communications was routed via the DE-CIX Internet exchange point in Frankfurt.[5] A comprehensive worldwide surveillance network is possible only if clandestine intercept sites are installed in the territory of friendly nations, and/or if local authorities cooperate. The report to the European Parliament points out that interception of private communications by foreign intelligence services is not necessarily limited to the U.S. or British foreign intelligence services.[5]

Most reports on ECHELON focus on satellite interception; testimony before the European Parliament indicated that separate but similar UK-US systems are in place to monitor communication through undersea cables, microwave transmissions and other lines.[10]

Controversy

See also: Industrial espionage

Intelligence monitoring of citizens, and their communications, in the area covered by the AUSCANNZUKUS security agreement has caused concern. British journalist Duncan Campbell and New Zealand journalist Nicky Hager asserted in the 1990s that the United States was exploiting ECHELON traffic for industrial espionage, rather than military and diplomatic purposes.[10] Examples alleged by the journalists include the gear-less wind turbine technology designed by the German firm Enercon[5][11] and the speech technology developed by the Belgian firm Lernout & Hauspie.[12] An article in the US newspaper Baltimore Sun reported in 1995 that European aerospace company Airbus lost a $6 billion contract with Saudi Arabia in 1994 after the US National Security Agency reported that Airbus officials had been bribing Saudi officials to secure the contract.[13][14]

In 2001, the Temporary Committee on the ECHELON Interception System recommended to the European Parliament that citizens of member states routinely use cryptography in their communications to protect their privacy, because economic espionage with ECHELON has been conducted by the US intelligence agencies.[5]

Bamford provides an alternative view, highlighting that legislation prohibits the use of intercepted communications for commercial purposes, although he does not elaborate on how intercepted communications are used as part of an all-source intelligence process.

Hardware

According to its website, the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) is “a high technology organization … on the frontiers of communications and data processing”. In 1999 the Australian Senate Joint Standing Committee on Treaties was told by Professor Desmond Ball that the Pine Gap facility was used as a ground station for a satellite-based interception network. The satellites were said to be large radio dishes between 20 and 100 meters in diameter in geostationary orbits.[citation needed] The original purpose of the network was to monitor the telemetry from 1970s Soviet weapons, air defence radar, communications satellites and ground based microwave communications.[15]

Name

The European Parliament’s Temporary Committee on the ECHELON Interception System stated: “It seems likely, in view of the evidence and the consistent pattern of statements from a very wide range of individuals and organisations, including American sources, that its name is in fact ECHELON, although this is a relatively minor detail.”[5] The U.S. intelligence community uses many code names (see, for example, CIA cryptonym).

Former NSA employee Margaret Newsham claims that she worked on the configuration and installation of software that makes up the ECHELON system while employed at Lockheed Martin, for whom she worked from 1974 to 1984 in Sunnyvale, California, US, and in Menwith Hill, England, UK.[16] At that time, according to Newsham, the code name ECHELON was NSA’s term for the computer network itself. Lockheed called it P415. The software programs were called SILKWORTH and SIRE. A satellite named VORTEX intercepted communications. An image available on the internet of a fragment apparently torn from a job description shows Echelon listed along with several other code names.[17]

Ground stations

The 2001 European Parliamentary (EP) report[5] lists several ground stations as possibly belonging to, or participating in, the ECHELON network. These include:

Likely satellite intercept stations

The following stations are listed in the EP report (p. 54 ff) as likely to have, or to have had, a role in intercepting transmissions from telecommunications satellites:

  • Hong Kong (since closed)
  • Australian Defence Satellite Communications Station (Geraldton, Western Australia)
  • Menwith Hill (Yorkshire, U.K.) Map (reportedly the largest Echelon facility)[18]
  • Misawa Air Base (Japan) Map
  • GCHQ Bude, formerly known as GCHQ CSO Morwenstow, (Cornwall, U.K.) Map
  • Pine Gap (Northern Territory, Australia – close to Alice Springs) Map
  • Sugar Grove (West Virginia, U.S.) Map
  • Yakima Training Center (Washington, U.S.) Map
  • GCSB Waihopai (New Zealand)
  • GCSB Tangimoana (New Zealand)
  • CFS Leitrim (Ontario, Canada)
  • Teufelsberg (Berlin, Germany) (closed 1992)

Other potentially related stations

The following stations are listed in the EP report (p. 57 ff) as ones whose roles “cannot be clearly established”:

  • Ayios Nikolaos (Cyprus – U.K.)
  • BadAibling Station (BadAibling, Germany – U.S.)
    • relocated to Griesheim in 2004[19]
    • deactivated in 2008[20]
  • Buckley Air Force Base (Aurora, Colorado)
  • Fort Gordon (Georgia, U.S.)
  • Gander (Newfoundland & Labrador, Canada)
  • Guam (Pacific Ocean, U.S.)
  • Kunia Regional SIGINT Operations Center (Hawaii, U.S.)
  • Lackland Air Force Base, Medina Annex (San Antonio, Texas)

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

Room 641A

Room 641A is a telecommunication interception facility operated by AT&T for the U.S. National Security Agency that commenced operations in 2003 and was exposed in 2006.[1][2]

Description

Room 641A is located in the SBC Communications building at 611 Folsom Street, San Francisco, three floors of which were occupied by AT&T before SBC purchased AT&T.[1] The room was referred to in internal AT&T documents as the SG3 [Study Group 3] Secure Room. It is fed by fiber optic lines from beam splitters installed in fiber optic trunks carrying Internet backbone traffic[3] and, as analyzed by J. Scott Marcus, a former CTO for GTE and a former adviser to the FCC, who has access to all Internet traffic that passes through the building, and therefore “the capability to enable surveillance and analysis of internet content on a massive scale, including both overseas and purely domestic traffic.”[4] Former director of the NSA’s World Geopolitical and Military Analysis Reporting Group, William Binney, has estimated that 10 to 20 such facilities have been installed throughout the United States.[2]

The room measures about 24 by 48 feet (7.3 by 15 m) and contains several racks of equipment, including a Narus STA 6400, a device designed to intercept and analyze Internet communications at very high speeds.[1]

The very existence of the room was revealed by a former AT&T technician, Mark Klein, and was the subject of a 2006 class action lawsuit by the Electronic Frontier Foundation against AT&T.[5] Klein claims he was told that similar black rooms are operated at other facilities around the country.

Room 641A and the controversies surrounding it were subjects of an episode of Frontline, the current affairs documentary program on PBS. It was originally broadcast on May 15, 2007. It was also featured on PBS’s NOW on March 14, 2008. The room was also covered in the PBS Nova episode “The Spy Factory”.

Lawsuit

Basic diagram of how the alleged wiretapping was accomplished. From EFF court filings[4]

More complicated diagram of how it allegedly worked. From EFF court filings.[3] See bottom of the file page for enlarged and rotated version.

Main article: Hepting v. AT&T

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) filed a class-action lawsuit against AT&T on January 31, 2006, accusing the telecommunication company of violating the law and the privacy of its customers by collaborating with the National Security Agency (NSA) in a massive, illegal program to wiretap and data-mine Americans’ communications. On July 20, 2006, a federal judge denied the government’s and AT&T’s motions to dismiss the case, chiefly on the ground of the States Secrets Privilege, allowing the lawsuit to go forward. On August 15, 2007, the case was heard by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and was dismissed on December 29, 2011 based on a retroactive grant of immunity by Congress for telecommunications companies that cooperated with the government. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case.[6] A different case by the EFF was filed on September 18, 2008, titled Jewel v. NSA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A

List of government surveillance projects for the United States

United States

A top secret document leaked by Edward Snowden to The Guardian in 2013, originally due to be declassified on 12 April 2038.

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

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

James Bamford — The National Security Agency (NSA) — Videos

National Security Agency (NSA) Wants To Build Supercomputer To Crack All Encryption — Videos

National Security Agency (NSA) Intercepts FedX and UPS Packages To Install Malware Software — Bugs iPhones and Laptops — Videos

No Such Agency — NSA — National Security Agency — Threat To The Liberty and Privacy of The American People — None Of Their Damn Business — Still Trust The Federal Government? — Videos

Enemy Of The State: Life Imitating Art –National Security Agency Targets American People — Vidoes

Big Brother Barack Targets All The American People As Enemies of The State and Democratic Party — National Security Agency’s PRISM Is The Secret Security Surveillance State (S4) Means of Invading Privacy and Limiting Liberty — Outrageous Overreach–Videos

National Security Agency (NSA) and Federal Bureau Investigation (FBI) Secret Security Surveillance State (S4) Uses Stellar Wind and PRISM To Create Secret Dossiers On All American Citizen Targets Similar To East Germany Stasi Files–Videos

NSA’s PRISM Political Payoff: 40 Million Plus Foreigners Are In USA As Illegal Aliens! — 75% Plus Lean Towards Democratic Party — Pathway To One Party Rule By 2025 If Senate Bill Becomes Law Giving Illegal Aliens Legal Status — 25 Million American Citizens Looking For Full Time Jobs! — Videos

Amnesty Before Enforcement — Congressional Gangsters’ Comprehensive Immigration “Reform” Bill Targets American Citizens For Unemployment — American Citizens Want All Illegal Aliens Deported Not Rewarded With Legal Status — Target The Amnesty Illegal Alien Gangsters For Defeat — Videos

U.S. Hacking China and Hong Kong — Videos

Digital Campaigns Using Microtargeting and Data Mining To Target Voters — Videos

Sasha Issenberg — The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns — Videos

Related Posts on Pronk Pops

Pronk Pops Show 112, June 7, 2013, Segment 0: Marxist-Leninists Go To The Wall With Holder — The Man Who Knows Where The Bodies Are Buried Enjoys President Obama’s Full Confidence Says Political Fixer Valerie Jarrett — Wall Street Wants Holder To Hang On — American People Say Hit The Road Jack — Videos

Pronk Pops Show 112, June 7, 2013: Segment 1: U.S. Real Gross Domestic Product Growth Still Stagnating At 2.4% in First Quarter of 2013 As Institute for Supply Management Factory Index Sinks to 49.0 Lowest Since June 2009 — Videos

Pronk Pops Show 112, June 7, 2013, Segment 2: Federal Advisory Council (FAC) May 17, 2013 Report — No Exit To A Bridge Over Troubled Waters — Keyboarding Money — We’re screwed! — Videos

Pronk Pops Show 112, June 7, 2013, Segment 3: Official Unemployment Rate Rises To 7.6% with 11.8 Million Americans Unemployed and Only 175,000 Jobs Created in May — Videos

Pronk Pops Show 112, June 7, 2013, Segment 4: No Such Agency — NSA — National Security Agency — Threat To The Liberty and Privacy of The American People — None Of Their Damn Business — Still Trust The Federal Government? — Videos

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 222-233

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or DownloadShow 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

President Obama’s State of the Union 2014 Address — The Young and The Jobless Betrayed By Obama — Videos

Posted on January 29, 2014. Filed under: Agriculture, American History, Babies, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Constitution, Crime, Culture, Demographics, Diasters, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Farming, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Food, Foreign Policy, Fraud, government, government spending, Health Care, history, History of Economic Thought, Illegal, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, IRS, Language, Law, Legal, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Macroeconomics, media, Narcissism, Obamacare, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Press, Private Sector, Psychology, Public Sector, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Resources, Reviews, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Terrorism, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 200: January 29, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 199: January 28, 2014 

Pronk Pops Show 198: January 27, 2014 

Pronk Pops Show 197: January 24, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 196: January 22, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 195: January 21, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 194: January 17, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 193: January 16, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 192: January 14, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 191: January 13, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 190: January 10, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 189: January 9, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 188: January 8, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 187: January 7, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 186: January 6, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 185: January 3, 2014

Pronk Pops Show 184: December 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 183: December 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 182: December 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 181: December 13, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 180: December 12, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 179: December 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 178: December 5, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 177: December 2, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 176: November 27, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 175: November 26, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 174: November 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 173: November 22, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 172: November 21, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 171: November 20, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 170: November 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 169: November 18, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 168: November 15, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 167: November 14, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 166: November 13, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 165: November 12, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 164: November 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 163: November 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 162: November 7, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 161: November 4, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 160: November 1, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 159: October 31, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 158: October 30, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 157: October 28, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 156: October 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 155: October 24, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 154: October 23, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 153: October 21, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 152: October 18, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 151: October 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 150: October 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 149: October 14, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 148: October 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 147: October 10, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 146: October 9, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 145: October 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 144: October 7, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 143: October 4 2013

Pronk Pops Show 142: October 3, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 141: October 2, 2013

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-200

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

unemployment_minimum_wage

illegal_immigration

2011-0318-origins

USA-Immigration-by-Decadeimmigration_against_population

Story 1: President Obama’s State of the Union 2014 Address — The Young and The Jobless Betrayed By Obama — Videos

Watch the State of the Union – 2014

State of the Union 2014 Address: President Obama’s Full Speech – New York Times

Obama Urges Immigration Reform | State of the Union 2014

STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS – OBAMA wants to REBUILD the PEOPLES TRUST

State of the Union 2014 Address: Obama on Raising the Minimum Wage – New York Times

Frank Luntz State of the Union Focus Group on The Kelly File – Jan. 28, 2014

Rand Paul Sotu Reaction. Rand Paul State Of The Union Reaction

Sen. Ted Cruz Reaction to the State of the Union Address

FULL SPEECH: Tea Party Response to 2014 State of the Union – Senator Mike Lee

Gohmert’s Reaction to The 2014 State of the Union

Watch the Republican Response to the 2014 State of the Union

Maximum Rage Over The Minimum Wage

Glenn Beck: Obama Became America’s First Dictator During State of the Union 2014

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

America’s Choice: Liberty or Sustainable Development? — Videos

Posted on November 10, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Constitution, Demographics, Diasters, Economics, Education, Employment, Enivornment, Farming, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Food, Genocide, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Homes, Illegal, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, Legal, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, media, Narcissism, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Programming, Psychology, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Resources, Reviews, Security, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Unemployment, Video, War, Weapons | Tags: , , , , , , , |

America’s Choice: Liberty or Sustainable Development? (Part 1 of 4)

America’s Choice: Liberty or Sustainable Development? (Part 2 of 4)

America’s Choice: Liberty or Sustainable Development? (Part 3 of 4)

America’s Choice: Liberty or Sustainable Development? (Part 4 of 4)

Agenda 21 For Dummies

How your community is implementing AGENDA 21

Agenda 21, Glenn Beck’s Latest Book Talks w/ UN A21 Expert Rose Koire a Democrat

The Glenn Beck Program – Air Date: Monday, November 19, 2012

The Depopulation Agenda For a New-World-Order Agenda 21

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

United Nations Agenda 21 — Sustainable Development — Videos

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

United Nations Earth Summit Agenda 21 — Sustainable Development — Videos

Posted on November 5, 2013. Filed under: Agriculture, American History, Banking, Biology, Blogroll, Books, Business, Chemistry, Climate, College, Communications, Computers, Constitution, Culture, Demographics, Diasters, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Enivornment, European History, Farming, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Food, Foreign Policy, Genocide, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Homes, Illegal, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, Legal, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, media, Medicine, Monetary Policy, Money, Natural Gas, Nuclear Power, Oil, People, Philosophy, Photos, Physics, Politics, Press, Programming, Psychology, Quotations, Radio, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Resources, Science, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Unemployment, Video, War, Water, Wealth, Weather, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , |

9781482672770

Sustainability

Glenn Beck – Agenda 21 On O’Reilly

Glenn Beck Supports Agenda 21…His Book that is!

UN Agenda 21 ~ The End of Freedom

Agenda 21 EXPLAINED, full version

Agenda 21 -Progress 2/24/13

TrutherGirl Infiltrates NWO Conference!

Agenda 21- Codex- Fema Camps-80% Depopulation = New World Order (Terror Camps: The Global Agenda)

Honourable Ann Bressington Exposes UN Agenda 21 Club of Rome Population Control World Government

Whistleblower Scientist Exposing Secrets of Agenda 21 Part1

Whistleblower Scientist Exposing Secrets of Agenda 21 Part 2

H.A.A.R.P., Agenda 21 and Google’s Role In The Sinister DNA Plan – Mature Content

Agenda 21: Global Control Starts Here – An Interview with Glenn Beck

Agenda 21 The Depopulation Agenda For a New World Order

► Agenda 21, the NWO, Executive Order 13575, Sustainable Development, and Population Reduction

UN AGENDA 21 ” Sustainable Development “…..For Dummies. (Low).flv

Agenda 21 in Less Than 5 Minutes

Agenda 21 Sustainable Development States Block Communist Socialist Land Grab

United Nations Agenda 21

Nature of Sustainable Development / United Nations AGENDA 21

John Birch Society on Agenda 21

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Growth Gap Widens As U.S. Heads Into Another Recession: Real Gross Domestic Product Down From 3.1% in Third Quarter to .1% in Fourth Quarter 2012! — Videos

Posted on February 28, 2013. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Demographics, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, history, Inflation, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Quotations, Raves, Regulations, Reviews, Tax Policy, Taxes, Unemployment, Video, Wealth | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

us-economy-2012

GDP-10-recoveries-10-2012

gdp_large

US-GDP-dec232010013013gdp-600x445

gdp-components-since-2007 (1)

debt-and-gdp-main6

US_jobs_January_2013_Jan312013

gdpoilprice

Gerald Celente Predicts Economic Recession

Gerald Celente – Yahoo!’s The Daily Ticker – February 20, 2013

Gerald Celente: World Bank, Banksters, Coming Collapse.

Peter Schiff – Economic Collapse 2013

Peter Schiff: It’s Going To Hit The Fan During Obama’s Second Term – Fox Business

Peter Schiff: Wall Street’s rising back thanks to the taxpayers

Jim Rogers Asks Whether Obama Is ‘Delusional’ Or ‘Lying’

Chairman Kevin Brady presents his Opening Statement During JEC Hearing

Congressman Paulsen questions witnesses during Hearing on State of US Economy

Rep, Campbell during Joint Economic Committee Hearing on State of US Economy

Bill Gross Warns of Fed Easing ‘Irrational Exuberance Has Unduly Escalated Asset V

Harvey Golub on Fed Monetary Policy: We’re Creating a Series of Bubbles

Marc Faber Odds of World Heading Into Global Recession By 2013 Is 100% Certainty

JIM ROGERS – ‘If You Are Not Worried About 2013, Please – Get Worried’

Jim Rogers author of “Street Smarts” sits down w Glenn Beck on The Blaze TV re.

US to go into recession: Danielle Park

fiscal policy & automatic stabilizers

Austrian Economics versus Mainstream Economics | Mark Thornton

Econ Crisis 2 – Recessions

Old School Macro

Fiscal Policy

Deficits & The Debt

How Do Banks Work?

Central Bank & Monetary Policy

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 A.M. EST, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2013
BEA 13-06

* See the navigation bar at the right side of the news release text for links to data tables,
contact personnel and their telephone numbers, and supplementary materials.

Lisa S. Mataloni: (202) 606-5304 (GDP) gdpniwd@bea.gov
Recorded message: (202) 606-5306
Ralph Stewart: (202) 606-2649 (News Media)
Jeannine Aversa: (202) 606-2649 (News Media)
National Income and Product Accounts
Gross Domestic Product, 4th quarter and annual 2012 (second estimate)
      Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property
located in the United States -- increased at an annual rate of 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter of 2012
(that is, from the third quarter to the fourth quarter), according to the "second" estimate released by the
Bureau of Economic Analysis.  In the third quarter, real GDP increased 3.1 percent.

      The GDP estimate released today is based on more complete source data than were available for
the "advance" estimate issued last month.  In the advance estimate, real GDP declined 0.1 percent.  The
upward revision to the percent change in real GDP is smaller than the average revision from the advance
to second estimate of 0.5 percentage point.  While today’s release has revised the direction of change in
real GDP, the general picture of the economy for the fourth quarter remains largely the same as what
was presented last month (for more information, see "Revisions" on page 3).

      The increase in real GDP in the fourth quarter primarily reflected positive contributions from
personal consumption expenditures (PCE), nonresidential fixed investment, and residential fixed
investment that were partly offset by negative contributions from private inventory investment, federal
government spending, exports, and state and local government spending.  Imports, which are a
subtraction in the calculation of GDP, decreased.

	The deceleration in real GDP in the fourth quarter primarily reflected downturns in private
inventory investment, in federal government spending, in exports, and in state and local government
spending that were partly offset by an upturn in nonresidential fixed investment, a larger decrease in
imports, and an acceleration in PCE.

_______

FOOTNOTE.  Quarterly estimates are expressed at seasonally adjusted annual rates, unless otherwise
specified.  Quarter-to-quarter dollar changes are differences between these published estimates.  Percent
changes are calculated from unrounded data and are annualized.  "Real" estimates are in chained (2005)
dollars.  Price indexes are chain-type measures.

      This news release is available on BEA’s Web site along with the Technical Note and Highlights
 related to this release.  For information on revisions, see "Revisions to GDP, GDI, and Their Major
 Components".
_______

      Final sales of computers added 0.10 percentage point to the fourth-quarter change in real GDP
after adding 0.11 percentage point to the third-quarter change.  Motor vehicle output added 0.19
percentage point to the fourth-quarter change in real GDP after subtracting 0.25 percentage point from
the third-quarter change.

      The price index for gross domestic purchases, which measures prices paid by U.S. residents,
increased 1.5 percent in the fourth quarter, 0.2 percentage point more than in the advance estimate; this
index increased 1.4 percent in the third quarter.  Excluding food and energy prices, the price index for
gross domestic purchases increased 1.1 percent in the fourth quarter, compared with an increase of 1.2
percent in the third.

      Real personal consumption expenditures increased 2.1 percent in the fourth quarter, compared
with an increase of 1.6 percent in the third.  Durable goods increased 13.8 percent, compared with an
increase of 8.9 percent.  Nondurable goods increased 0.1 percent, compared with an increase of 1.2
percent.  Services increased 0.9 percent, compared with an increase of 0.6 percent.

      Real nonresidential fixed investment increased 9.7 percent in the fourth quarter, in contrast to a
decrease of 1.8 percent in the third.  Nonresidential structures increased 5.8 percent; it was unchanged in
the third quarter.  Equipment and software increased 11.3 percent in the fourth quarter, in contrast to a
decrease of 2.6 percent in the third.  Real residential fixed investment increased 17.5 percent, compared
with an increase of 13.5 percent.

      Real exports of goods and services decreased 3.9 percent in the fourth quarter, in contrast to an
increase of 1.9 percent in the third.  Real imports of goods and services decreased 4.5 percent, compared
with a decrease of 0.6 percent.

      Real federal government consumption expenditures and gross investment decreased 14.8 percent
in the fourth quarter, in contrast to an increase of 9.5 percent in the third.  National defense decreased
22.0 percent, in contrast to an increase of 12.9 percent.  Nondefense increased 1.8 percent, compared
with an increase of 3.0 percent.  Real state and local government consumption expenditures and gross
investment decreased 1.3 percent, in contrast to an increase of 0.3 percent.

      The change in real private inventories subtracted 1.55 percentage points from the fourth-quarter
change in real GDP, after adding 0.73 percentage point to the third-quarter change.  Private businesses
increased inventories $12.0 billion in the fourth quarter, following increases of $60.3 billion in the third
and $41.4 billion in the second.

      Real final sales of domestic product -- GDP less change in private inventories -- increased 1.7
percent in the fourth quarter, compared with an increase of 2.4 percent in the third.

Gross domestic purchases

      Real gross domestic purchases -- purchases by U.S. residents of goods and services wherever
produced -- decreased 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter, in contrast to an increase of 2.6 percent in the
third.
Current-dollar GDP

      Current-dollar GDP -- the market value of the nation's output of goods and services -- increased
1.0 percent, or $40.2 billion, in the fourth quarter to a level of $15,851.2 billion.  In the third quarter,
current-dollar GDP increased 5.9 percent, or $225.4 billion.

Revisions

      The "second" estimate of the fourth-quarter percent change in GDP is 0.2 percentage point, or
$9.2 billion, more than the advance estimate issued last month, primarily reflecting an upward revision
to exports, a downward revision to imports, and an upward revision to nonresidential fixed investment
that were partly offset by a downward revision to private inventory investment.

                                                                     Advance Estimate             Second Estimate
                                                                       (Percent change from preceding quarter)

Real GDP.......................................                            -0.1                         0.1
Current-dollar GDP.............................                             0.5                         1.0
Gross domestic purchases price index...........                             1.3                         1.5

2012 GDP

      Real GDP increased 2.2 percent in 2012 (that is, from the 2011 annual level to the 2012 annual
level), compared with an increase of 1.8 percent in 2011.

      The increase in real GDP in 2012 primarily reflected positive contributions from personal
consumption expenditures (PCE), nonresidential fixed investment, exports, residential fixed investment,
and private inventory investment that were partly offset by negative contributions from federal
government spending and from state and local government spending. Imports, which are a subtraction in
the calculation of GDP, increased.

      The acceleration in real GDP in 2012 primarily reflected a deceleration in imports, upturns in
residential fixed investment and in private inventory investment and smaller decreases in state and local
government spending and in federal government spending that were partly offset by decelerations in
PCE, exports, and nonresidential fixed investment.

      The price index for gross domestic purchases increased 1.7 percent in 2012, compared with an
increase of 2.5 percent in 2011.

      Current-dollar GDP increased 4.0 percent, or $605.8 billion, in 2012 to a level of $15,681.5
billion, compared with an increase of 4.0 percent, or $576.8 billion, in 2011.

	During 2012 (that is, measured from the fourth quarter of 2011 to the fourth quarter of 2012),
real GDP increased 1.6 percent.  Real GDP increased 2.0 percent during 2011.  The price index for gross
domestic purchases increased 1.5 percent during 2012, compared with an increase of 2.5 percent during
2011.

                                            *          *          *

      BEA's national, international, regional, and industry estimates; the Survey of Current Business;
and BEA news releases are available without charge on BEA's Web site at www.bea.gov.  By visiting
the site, you can also subscribe to receive free e-mail summaries of BEA releases and announcements.

                                           *          *          *

                             Next release -- March 28, 2013 at 8:30 A.M. EDT for:
                Gross Domestic Product:  Fourth Quarter and Annual 2012 (Third Estimate)
                              Corporate Profits:  Fourth Quarter and Annual 2012

gdp_large

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

President Barack Obama’s State of The Union Address, February 12, 2013– Rand Paul’s Tea Party Response and Marc Rubio’s Republican Response–Videos

Posted on February 12, 2013. Filed under: Banking, Blogroll, College, Communications, Culture, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Enivornment, Entertainment, Farming, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Food, Foreign Policy, Golf, government, government spending, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Money, Narcissism, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Public Sector, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Transportation, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , |

Newtown-residents-invited-to-President-Obamas-State-of-the-Union-Address

how_congress_spends_your_money_chart

SurplusDeficitGDP

us_president_barack_obama_spending_money_for_debt_policy_speech_strategy_comic_political_cartoon_economist_funny_best_top_free_greatest1

The 2013 State of the Union Address

Rand Paul Gives The Tea Party Response To The President’s State of the Union Address

Marco Rubio – 2013 State of the Union – GOP Response w/ Water Break (12:01) (English)

Obama--State-of-the-Union-2013-4-jpg


Transcript: Obama’s State Of The Union Address As Prepared For Delivery

 

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, Members of Congress, fellow citizens:


Fifty-one years ago, John F. Kennedy declared to this Chamber that “the Constitution makes us not rivals for power but partners for progress…It is my task,” he said, “to report the State of the Union – to improve it is the task of us all.”


Tonight, thanks to the grit and determination of the American people, there is much progress to report. After a decade of grinding war, our brave men and women in uniform are coming home. After years of grueling recession, our businesses have created over six million new jobs. We buy more American cars than we have in five years, and less foreign oil than we have in twenty. Our housing market is healing, our stock market is rebounding, and consumers, patients, and homeowners enjoy stronger protections than ever before.


Together, we have cleared away the rubble of crisis, and can say with renewed confidence that the state of our union is stronger.


But we gather here knowing that there are millions of Americans whose hard work and dedication have not yet been rewarded. Our economy is adding jobs – but too many people still can’t find full-time employment. Corporate profits have rocketed to all-time highs – but for more than a decade, wages and incomes have barely budged.


It is our generation’s task, then, to reignite the true engine of America’s economic growth – a rising, thriving middle class.


It is our unfinished task to restore the basic bargain that built this country – the idea that if you work hard and meet your responsibilities, you can get ahead, no matter where you come from, what you look like, or who you love.


It is our unfinished task to make sure that this government works on behalf of the many, and not just the few; that it encourages free enterprise, rewards individual initiative, and opens the doors of opportunity to every child across this great nation.


The American people don’t expect government to solve every problem. They don’t expect those of us in this chamber to agree on every issue. But they do expect us to put the nation’s interests before party. They do expect us to forge reasonable compromise where we can. For they know that America moves forward only when we do so together; and that the responsibility of improving this union remains the task of us all.


Our work must begin by making some basic decisions about our budget – decisions that will have a huge impact on the strength of our recovery.


Over the last few years, both parties have worked together to reduce the deficit by more than $2.5 trillion – mostly through spending cuts, but also by raising tax rates on the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans. As a result, we are more than halfway towards the goal of $4 trillion in deficit reduction that economists say we need to stabilize our finances.


Now we need to finish the job. And the question is, how?


In 2011, Congress passed a law saying that if both parties couldn’t agree on a plan to reach our deficit goal, about a trillion dollars’ worth of budget cuts would automatically go into effect this year. These sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts would jeopardize our military readiness. They’d devastate priorities like education, energy, and medical research. They would certainly slow our recovery, and cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs. That’s why Democrats, Republicans, business leaders, and economists have already said that these cuts, known here in Washington as “the sequester,” are a really bad idea.


Now, some in this Congress have proposed preventing only the defense cuts by making even bigger cuts to things like education and job training; Medicare and Social Security benefits.


That idea is even worse. Yes, the biggest driver of our long-term debt is the rising cost of health care for an aging population. And those of us who care deeply about programs like Medicare must embrace the need for modest reforms – otherwise, our retirement programs will crowd out the investments we need for our children, and jeopardize the promise of a secure retirement for future generations.


But we can’t ask senior citizens and working families to shoulder the entire burden of deficit reduction while asking nothing more from the wealthiest and most powerful. We won’t grow the middle class simply by shifting the cost of health care or college onto families that are already struggling, or by forcing communities to lay off more teachers, cops, and firefighters. Most Americans – Democrats, Republicans, and Independents – understand that we can’t just cut our way to prosperity. They know that broad-based economic growth requires a balanced approach to deficit reduction, with spending cuts and revenue, and with everybody doing their fair share. And that’s the approach I offer tonight.


On Medicare, I’m prepared to enact reforms that will achieve the same amount of health care savings by the beginning of the next decade as the reforms proposed by the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles commission. Already, the Affordable Care Act is helping to slow the growth of health care costs. The reforms I’m proposing go even further. We’ll reduce taxpayer subsidies to prescription drug companies and ask more from the wealthiest seniors. We’ll bring down costs by changing the way our government pays for Medicare, because our medical bills shouldn’t be based on the number of tests ordered or days spent in the hospital – they should be based on the quality of care that our seniors receive. And I am open to additional reforms from both parties, so long as they don’t violate the guarantee of a secure retirement. Our government shouldn’t make promises we cannot keep – but we must keep the promises we’ve already made.


To hit the rest of our deficit reduction target, we should do what leaders in both parties have already suggested, and save hundreds of billions of dollars by getting rid of tax loopholes and deductions for the well-off and well-connected. After all, why would we choose to make deeper cuts to education and Medicare just to protect special interest tax breaks? How is that fair? How does that promote growth?


Now is our best chance for bipartisan, comprehensive tax reform that encourages job creation and helps bring down the deficit. The American people deserve a tax code that helps small businesses spend less time filling out complicated forms, and more time expanding and hiring; a tax code that ensures billionaires with high-powered accountants can’t pay a lower rate than their hard-working secretaries; a tax code that lowers incentives to move jobs overseas, and lowers tax rates for businesses and manufacturers that create jobs right here in America. That’s what tax reform can deliver. That’s what we can do together.


I realize that tax reform and entitlement reform won’t be easy. The politics will be hard for both sides. None of us will get 100 percent of what we want. But the alternative will cost us jobs, hurt our economy, and visit hardship on millions of hardworking Americans. So let’s set party interests aside, and work to pass a budget that replaces reckless cuts with smart savings and wise investments in our future. And let’s do it without the brinksmanship that stresses consumers and scares off investors. The greatest nation on Earth cannot keep conducting its business by drifting from one manufactured crisis to the next. Let’s agree, right here, right now, to keep the people’s government open, pay our bills on time, and always uphold the full faith and credit of the United States of America. The American people have worked too hard, for too long, rebuilding from one crisis to see their elected officials cause another.


Now, most of us agree that a plan to reduce the deficit must be part of our agenda. But let’s be clear: deficit reduction alone is not an economic plan. A growing economy that creates good, middle-class jobs – that must be the North Star that guides our efforts. Every day, we should ask ourselves three questions as a nation: How do we attract more jobs to our shores? How do we equip our people with the skills needed to do those jobs? And how do we make sure that hard work leads to a decent living?


A year and a half ago, I put forward an American Jobs Act that independent economists said would create more than one million new jobs. I thank the last Congress for passing some of that agenda, and I urge this Congress to pass the rest. Tonight, I’ll lay out additional proposals that are fully paid for and fully consistent with the budget framework both parties agreed to just 18 months ago. Let me repeat – nothing I’m proposing tonight should increase our deficit by a single dime. It’s not a bigger government we need, but a smarter government that sets priorities and invests in broad-based growth.


Our first priority is making America a magnet for new jobs and manufacturing.


After shedding jobs for more than 10 years, our manufacturers have added about 500,000 jobs over the past three. Caterpillar is bringing jobs back from Japan. Ford is bringing jobs back from Mexico. After locating plants in other countries like China, Intel is opening its most advanced plant right here at home. And this year, Apple will start making Macs in America again.


There are things we can do, right now, to accelerate this trend. Last year, we created our first manufacturing innovation institute in Youngstown, Ohio. A once-shuttered warehouse is now a state-of-the art lab where new workers are mastering the 3D printing that has the potential to revolutionize the way we make almost everything. There’s no reason this can’t happen in other towns. So tonight, I’m announcing the launch of three more of these manufacturing hubs, where businesses will partner with the Departments of Defense and Energy to turn regions left behind by globalization into global centers of high-tech jobs. And I ask this Congress to help create a network of fifteen of these hubs and guarantee that the next revolution in manufacturing is Made in America.


If we want to make the best products, we also have to invest in the best ideas. Every dollar we invested to map the human genome returned $140 to our economy. Today, our scientists are mapping the human brain to unlock the answers to Alzheimer’s; developing drugs to regenerate damaged organs; devising new material to make batteries ten times more powerful. Now is not the time to gut these job-creating investments in science and innovation. Now is the time to reach a level of research and development not seen since the height of the Space Race. And today, no area holds more promise than our investments in American energy.


After years of talking about it, we are finally poised to control our own energy future. We produce more oil at home than we have in 15 years. We have doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas, and the amount of renewable energy we generate from sources like wind and solar – with tens of thousands of good, American jobs to show for it. We produce more natural gas than ever before – and nearly everyone’s energy bill is lower because of it. And over the last four years, our emissions of the dangerous carbon pollution that threatens our planet have actually fallen.


But for the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change. Yes, it’s true that no single event makes a trend. But the fact is, the 12 hottest years on record have all come in the last 15. Heat waves, droughts, wildfires, and floods – all are now more frequent and intense. We can choose to believe that Superstorm Sandy, and the most severe drought in decades, and the worst wildfires some states have ever seen were all just a freak coincidence. Or we can choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science – and act before it’s too late.


The good news is, we can make meaningful progress on this issue while driving strong economic growth. I urge this Congress to pursue a bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change, like the one John McCain and Joe Lieberman worked on together a few years ago. But if Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will. I will direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy.


Four years ago, other countries dominated the clean energy market and the jobs that came with it. We’ve begun to change that. Last year, wind energy added nearly half of all new power capacity in America. So let’s generate even more. Solar energy gets cheaper by the year – so let’s drive costs down even further. As long as countries like China keep going all-in on clean energy, so must we.


In the meantime, the natural gas boom has led to cleaner power and greater energy independence. That’s why my Administration will keep cutting red tape and speeding up new oil and gas permits. But I also want to work with this Congress to encourage the research and technology that helps natural gas burn even cleaner and protects our air and water.


Indeed, much of our new-found energy is drawn from lands and waters that we, the public, own together. So tonight, I propose we use some of our oil and gas revenues to fund an Energy Security Trust that will drive new research and technology to shift our cars and trucks off oil for good. If a non-partisan coalition of CEOs and retired generals and admirals can get behind this idea, then so can we. Let’s take their advice and free our families and businesses from the painful spikes in gas prices we’ve put up with for far too long. I’m also issuing a new goal for America: let’s cut in half the energy wasted by our homes and businesses over the next twenty years. The states with the best ideas to create jobs and lower energy bills by constructing more efficient buildings will receive federal support to help make it happen.


America’s energy sector is just one part of an aging infrastructure badly in need of repair. Ask any CEO where they’d rather locate and hire: a country with deteriorating roads and bridges, or one with high-speed rail and internet; high-tech schools and self-healing power grids. The CEO of Siemens America – a company that brought hundreds of new jobs to North Carolina – has said that if we upgrade our infrastructure, they’ll bring even more jobs. And I know that you want these job-creating projects in your districts. I’ve seen you all at the ribbon-cuttings.


Tonight, I propose a “Fix-It-First” program to put people to work as soon as possible on our most urgent repairs, like the nearly 70,000 structurally deficient bridges across the country. And to make sure taxpayers don’t shoulder the whole burden, I’m also proposing a Partnership to Rebuild America that attracts private capital to upgrade what our businesses need most: modern ports to move our goods; modern pipelines to withstand a storm; modern schools worthy of our children. Let’s prove that there is no better place to do business than the United States of America. And let’s start right away.


Part of our rebuilding effort must also involve our housing sector. Today, our housing market is finally healing from the collapse of 2007. Home prices are rising at the fastest pace in six years, home purchases are up nearly 50 percent, and construction is expanding again.


But even with mortgage rates near a 50-year low, too many families with solid credit who want to buy a home are being rejected. Too many families who have never missed a payment and want to refinance are being told no. That’s holding our entire economy back, and we need to fix it. Right now, there’s a bill in this Congress that would give every responsible homeowner in America the chance to save $3,000 a year by refinancing at today’s rates. Democrats and Republicans have supported it before. What are we waiting for? Take a vote, and send me that bill. Right now, overlapping regulations keep responsible young families from buying their first home. What’s holding us back? Let’s streamline the process, and help our economy grow.


These initiatives in manufacturing, energy, infrastructure, and housing will help entrepreneurs and small business owners expand and create new jobs. But none of it will matter unless we also equip our citizens with the skills and training to fill those jobs. And that has to start at the earliest possible age.


Study after study shows that the sooner a child begins learning, the better he or she does down the road. But today, fewer than 3 in 10 four year-olds are enrolled in a high-quality preschool program. Most middle-class parents can’t afford a few hundred bucks a week for private preschool. And for poor kids who need help the most, this lack of access to preschool education can shadow them for the rest of their lives.


Tonight, I propose working with states to make high-quality preschool available to every child in America. Every dollar we invest in high-quality early education can save more than seven dollars later on – by boosting graduation rates, reducing teen pregnancy, even reducing violent crime. In states that make it a priority to educate our youngest children, like Georgia or Oklahoma, studies show students grow up more likely to read and do math at grade level, graduate high school, hold a job, and form more stable families of their own. So let’s do what works, and make sure none of our children start the race of life already behind. Let’s give our kids that chance.


Let’s also make sure that a high school diploma puts our kids on a path to a good job. Right now, countries like Germany focus on graduating their high school students with the equivalent of a technical degree from one of our community colleges, so that they’re ready for a job. At schools like P-Tech in Brooklyn, a collaboration between New York Public Schools, the City University of New York, and IBM, students will graduate with a high school diploma and an associate degree in computers or engineering.


We need to give every American student opportunities like this. Four years ago, we started Race to the Top – a competition that convinced almost every state to develop smarter curricula and higher standards, for about 1 percent of what we spend on education each year. Tonight, I’m announcing a new challenge to redesign America’s high schools so they better equip graduates for the demands of a high-tech economy. We’ll reward schools that develop new partnerships with colleges and employers, and create classes that focus on science, technology, engineering, and math – the skills today’s employers are looking for to fill jobs right now and in the future.


Now, even with better high schools, most young people will need some higher education. It’s a simple fact: the more education you have, the more likely you are to have a job and work your way into the middle class. But today, skyrocketing costs price way too many young people out of a higher education, or saddle them with unsustainable debt.


Through tax credits, grants, and better loans, we have made college more affordable for millions of students and families over the last few years. But taxpayers cannot continue to subsidize the soaring cost of higher education. Colleges must do their part to keep costs down, and it’s our job to make sure they do. Tonight, I ask Congress to change the Higher Education Act, so that affordability and value are included in determining which colleges receive certain types of federal aid. And tomorrow, my Administration will release a new “College Scorecard” that parents and students can use to compare schools based on a simple criteria: where you can get the most bang for your educational buck.


To grow our middle class, our citizens must have access to the education and training that today’s jobs require. But we also have to make sure that America remains a place where everyone who’s willing to work hard has the chance to get ahead.


Our economy is stronger when we harness the talents and ingenuity of striving, hopeful immigrants. And right now, leaders from the business, labor, law enforcement, and faith communities all agree that the time has come to pass comprehensive immigration reform.


Real reform means strong border security, and we can build on the progress my Administration has already made – putting more boots on the southern border than at any time in our history, and reducing illegal crossings to their lowest levels in 40 years.


Real reform means establishing a responsible pathway to earned citizenship – a path that includes passing a background check, paying taxes and a meaningful penalty, learning English, and going to the back of the line behind the folks trying to come here legally.


And real reform means fixing the legal immigration system to cut waiting periods, reduce bureaucracy, and attract the highly-skilled entrepreneurs and engineers that will help create jobs and grow our economy.


In other words, we know what needs to be done. As we speak, bipartisan groups in both chambers are working diligently to draft a bill, and I applaud their efforts. Now let’s get this done. Send me a comprehensive immigration reform bill in the next few months, and I will sign it right away.


But we can’t stop there. We know our economy is stronger when our wives, mothers, and daughters can live their lives free from discrimination in the workplace, and free from the fear of domestic violence. Today, the Senate passed the Violence Against Women Act that Joe Biden originally wrote almost 20 years ago. I urge the House to do the same. And I ask this Congress to declare that women should earn a living equal to their efforts, and finally pass the Paycheck Fairness Act this year.


We know our economy is stronger when we reward an honest day’s work with honest wages. But today, a full-time worker making the minimum wage earns $14,500 a year. Even with the tax relief we’ve put in place, a family with two kids that earns the minimum wage still lives below the poverty line. That’s wrong. That’s why, since the last time this Congress raised the minimum wage, nineteen states have chosen to bump theirs even higher.


Tonight, let’s declare that in the wealthiest nation on Earth, no one who works full-time should have to live in poverty, and raise the federal minimum wage to $9.00 an hour. This single step would raise the incomes of millions of working families. It could mean the difference between groceries or the food bank; rent or eviction; scraping by or finally getting ahead. For businesses across the country, it would mean customers with more money in their pockets. In fact, working folks shouldn’t have to wait year after year for the minimum wage to go up while CEO pay has never been higher. So here’s an idea that Governor Romney and I actually agreed on last year: let’s tie the minimum wage to the cost of living, so that it finally becomes a wage you can live on.


Tonight, let’s also recognize that there are communities in this country where no matter how hard you work, it’s virtually impossible to get ahead. Factory towns decimated from years of plants packing up. Inescapable pockets of poverty, urban and rural, where young adults are still fighting for their first job. America is not a place where chance of birth or circumstance should decide our destiny. And that is why we need to build new ladders of opportunity into the middle class for all who are willing to climb them.


Let’s offer incentives to companies that hire Americans who’ve got what it takes to fill that job opening, but have been out of work so long that no one will give them a chance. Let’s put people back to work rebuilding vacant homes in run-down neighborhoods. And this year, my Administration will begin to partner with 20 of the hardest-hit towns in America to get these communities back on their feet. We’ll work with local leaders to target resources at public safety, education, and housing. We’ll give new tax credits to businesses that hire and invest. And we’ll work to strengthen families by removing the financial deterrents to marriage for low-income couples, and doing more to encourage fatherhood – because what makes you a man isn’t the ability to conceive a child; it’s having the courage to raise one.


Stronger families. Stronger communities. A stronger America. It is this kind of prosperity – broad, shared, and built on a thriving middle class – that has always been the source of our progress at home. It is also the foundation of our power and influence throughout the world.


Tonight, we stand united in saluting the troops and civilians who sacrifice every day to protect us. Because of them, we can say with confidence that America will complete its mission in Afghanistan, and achieve our objective of defeating the core of al Qaeda. Already, we have brought home 33,000 of our brave servicemen and women. This spring, our forces will move into a support role, while Afghan security forces take the lead. Tonight, I can announce that over the next year, another 34,000 American troops will come home from Afghanistan. This drawdown will continue. And by the end of next year, our war in Afghanistan will be over.


Beyond 2014, America’s commitment to a unified and sovereign Afghanistan will endure, but the nature of our commitment will change. We are negotiating an agreement with the Afghan government that focuses on two missions: training and equipping Afghan forces so that the country does not again slip into chaos, and counter-terrorism efforts that allow us to pursue the remnants of al Qaeda and their affiliates.


Today, the organization that attacked us on 9/11 is a shadow of its former self. Different al Qaeda affiliates and extremist groups have emerged – from the Arabian Peninsula to Africa. The threat these groups pose is evolving. But to meet this threat, we don’t need to send tens of thousands of our sons and daughters abroad, or occupy other nations. Instead, we will need to help countries like Yemen, Libya, and Somalia provide for their own security, and help allies who take the fight to terrorists, as we have in Mali. And, where necessary, through a range of capabilities, we will continue to take direct action against those terrorists who pose the gravest threat to Americans.


As we do, we must enlist our values in the fight. That is why my Administration has worked tirelessly to forge a durable legal and policy framework to guide our counterterrorism operations. Throughout, we have kept Congress fully informed of our efforts. I recognize that in our democracy, no one should just take my word that we’re doing things the right way. So, in the months ahead, I will continue to engage with Congress to ensure not only that our targeting, detention, and prosecution of terrorists remains consistent with our laws and system of checks and balances, but that our efforts are even more transparent to the American people and to the world.


Of course, our challenges don’t end with al Qaeda. America will continue to lead the effort to prevent the spread of the world’s most dangerous weapons. The regime in North Korea must know that they will only achieve security and prosperity by meeting their international obligations. Provocations of the sort we saw last night will only isolate them further, as we stand by our allies, strengthen our own missile defense, and lead the world in taking firm action in response to these threats.


Likewise, the leaders of Iran must recognize that now is the time for a diplomatic solution, because a coalition stands united in demanding that they meet their obligations, and we will do what is necessary to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon. At the same time, we will engage Russia to seek further reductions in our nuclear arsenals, and continue leading the global effort to secure nuclear materials that could fall into the wrong hands – because our ability to influence others depends on our willingness to lead.


America must also face the rapidly growing threat from cyber-attacks. We know hackers steal people’s identities and infiltrate private e-mail. We know foreign countries and companies swipe our corporate secrets. Now our enemies are also seeking the ability to sabotage our power grid, our financial institutions, and our air traffic control systems. We cannot look back years from now and wonder why we did nothing in the face of real threats to our security and our economy.


That’s why, earlier today, I signed a new executive order that will strengthen our cyber defenses by increasing information sharing, and developing standards to protect our national security, our jobs, and our privacy. Now, Congress must act as well, by passing legislation to give our government a greater capacity to secure our networks and deter attacks.


Even as we protect our people, we should remember that today’s world presents not only dangers, but opportunities. To boost American exports, support American jobs, and level the playing field in the growing markets of Asia, we intend to complete negotiations on a Trans-Pacific Partnership. And tonight, I am announcing that we will launch talks on a comprehensive Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union – because trade that is free and fair across the Atlantic supports millions of good-paying American jobs.


We also know that progress in the most impoverished parts of our world enriches us all. In many places, people live on little more than a dollar a day. So the United States will join with our allies to eradicate such extreme poverty in the next two decades: by connecting more people to the global economy and empowering women; by giving our young and brightest minds new opportunities to serve and helping communities to feed, power, and educate themselves; by saving the world’s children from preventable deaths; and by realizing the promise of an AIDS-free generation.


Above all, America must remain a beacon to all who seek freedom during this period of historic change. I saw the power of hope last year in Rangoon – when Aung San Suu Kyi welcomed an American President into the home where she had been imprisoned for years; when thousands of Burmese lined the streets, waving American flags, including a man who said, “There is justice and law in the United States. I want our country to be like that.”


In defense of freedom, we will remain the anchor of strong alliances from the Americas to Africa; from Europe to Asia. In the Middle East, we will stand with citizens as they demand their universal rights, and support stable transitions to democracy. The process will be messy, and we cannot presume to dictate the course of change in countries like Egypt; but we can – and will – insist on respect for the fundamental rights of all people. We will keep the pressure on a Syrian regime that has murdered its own people, and support opposition leaders that respect the rights of every Syrian. And we will stand steadfast with Israel in pursuit of security and a lasting peace. These are the messages I will deliver when I travel to the Middle East next month.


All this work depends on the courage and sacrifice of those who serve in dangerous places at great personal risk – our diplomats, our intelligence officers, and the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. As long as I’m Commander-in-Chief, we will do whatever we must to protect those who serve their country abroad, and we will maintain the best military in the world. We will invest in new capabilities, even as we reduce waste and wartime spending. We will ensure equal treatment for all service members, and equal benefits for their families – gay and straight. We will draw upon the courage and skills of our sisters and daughters, because women have proven under fire that they are ready for combat. We will keep faith with our veterans – investing in world-class care, including mental health care, for our wounded warriors; supporting our military families; and giving our veterans the benefits, education, and job opportunities they have earned. And I want to thank my wife Michelle and Dr. Jill Biden for their continued dedication to serving our military families as well as they serve us.


But defending our freedom is not the job of our military alone. We must all do our part to make sure our God-given rights are protected here at home. That includes our most fundamental right as citizens: the right to vote. When any Americans – no matter where they live or what their party – are denied that right simply because they can’t wait for five, six, seven hours just to cast their ballot, we are betraying our ideals. That’s why, tonight, I’m announcing a non-partisan commission to improve the voting experience in America. And I’m asking two long-time experts in the field, who’ve recently served as the top attorneys for my campaign and for Governor Romney’s campaign, to lead it. We can fix this, and we will. The American people demand it. And so does our democracy.


Of course, what I’ve said tonight matters little if we don’t come together to protect our most precious resource – our children.


It has been two months since Newtown. I know this is not the first time this country has debated how to reduce gun violence. But this time is different. Overwhelming majorities of Americans – Americans who believe in the 2nd Amendment – have come together around commonsense reform – like background checks that will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on a gun. Senators of both parties are working together on tough new laws to prevent anyone from buying guns for resale to criminals. Police chiefs are asking our help to get weapons of war and massive ammunition magazines off our streets, because they are tired of being outgunned.


Each of these proposals deserves a vote in Congress. If you want to vote no, that’s your choice. But these proposals deserve a vote. Because in the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand birthdays, graduations, and anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun.


One of those we lost was a young girl named Hadiya Pendleton. She was 15 years old. She loved Fig Newtons and lip gloss. She was a majorette. She was so good to her friends, they all thought they were her best friend. Just three weeks ago, she was here, in Washington, with her classmates, performing for her country at my inauguration. And a week later, she was shot and killed in a Chicago park after school, just a mile away from my house.


Hadiya’s parents, Nate and Cleo, are in this chamber tonight, along with more than two dozen Americans whose lives have been torn apart by gun violence. They deserve a vote.


Gabby Giffords deserves a vote.


The families of Newtown deserve a vote.


The families of Aurora deserve a vote.


The families of Oak Creek, and Tucson, and Blacksburg, and the countless other communities ripped open by gun violence – they deserve a simple vote.


Our actions will not prevent every senseless act of violence in this country. Indeed, no laws, no initiatives, no administrative acts will perfectly solve all the challenges I’ve outlined tonight. But we were never sent here to be perfect. We were sent here to make what difference we can, to secure this nation, expand opportunity, and uphold our ideals through the hard, often frustrating, but absolutely necessary work of self-government.


We were sent here to look out for our fellow Americans the same way they look out for one another, every single day, usually without fanfare, all across this country. We should follow their example.


We should follow the example of a New York City nurse named Menchu Sanchez. When Hurricane Sandy plunged her hospital into darkness, her thoughts were not with how her own home was faring – they were with the twenty precious newborns in her care and the rescue plan she devised that kept them all safe.


We should follow the example of a North Miami woman named Desiline Victor. When she arrived at her polling place, she was told the wait to vote might be six hours. And as time ticked by, her concern was not with her tired body or aching feet, but whether folks like her would get to have their say. Hour after hour, a throng of people stayed in line in support of her. Because Desiline is 102 years old. And they erupted in cheers when she finally put on a sticker that read “I Voted.”


We should follow the example of a police officer named Brian Murphy. When a gunman opened fire on a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, and Brian was the first to arrive, he did not consider his own safety. He fought back until help arrived, and ordered his fellow officers to protect the safety of the Americans worshiping inside – even as he lay bleeding from twelve bullet wounds.


When asked how he did that, Brian said, “That’s just the way we’re made.”


That’s just the way we’re made.


We may do different jobs, and wear different uniforms, and hold different views than the person beside us. But as Americans, we all share the same proud title:


We are citizens. It’s a word that doesn’t just describe our nationality or legal status. It describes the way we’re made. It describes what we believe. It captures the enduring idea that this country only works when we accept certain obligations to one another and to future generations; that our rights are wrapped up in the rights of others; and that well into our third century as a nation, it remains the task of us all, as citizens of these United States, to be the authors of the next great chapter in our American story.


Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.

http://www.npr.org/2013/02/12/171841852/transcript-obamas-state-of-the-union-as-prepared-for-delivery


Full Text of Rand Paul’s Tea Party Response to State of the Union

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul delivered the Tea Party rebuttal to Obama’s State of the Union speech


These are the prepared remarks of Rand Paul’s Tea Party rebuttal to President Obama’s State of the Union Speech. Follow U.S. News’s live coverage here.


I speak to you tonight from Washington, D.C. The state of our economy is tenuous but our people remain the greatest example of freedom and prosperity the world has ever known.


People say America is exceptional. I agree, but it’s not the complexion of our skin or the twists in our DNA that make us unique. America is exceptional because we were founded upon the notion that everyone should be free to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.


For the first time in history, men and women were guaranteed a chance to succeed based NOT on who your parents were but on your own initiative and desire to work.


We are in danger, though, of forgetting what made us great. The President seems to think the country can continue to borrow $50,000 per second. The President believes that we should just squeeze more money out of those who are working.

The path we are on is not sustainable, but few in Congress or in this Administration seem to recognize that their actions are endangering the prosperity of this great nation.

Ronald Reagan said, government is not the answer to the problem, government is the problem.

Tonight, the President told the nation he disagrees. President Obama believes government is the solution: More government, more taxes, more debt.

What the President fails to grasp is that the American system that rewards hard work is what made America so prosperous.

What America needs is not Robin Hood but Adam Smith. In the year we won our independence, Adam Smith described what creates the Wealth of Nations.

He described a limited government that largely did not interfere with individuals and their pursuit of happiness.

All that we are, all that we wish to be is now threatened by the notion that you can have something for nothing, that you can have your cake and eat it too, that you can spend a trillion dollars every year that you don’t have.

I was elected to the Senate in 2010 by people worried about our country, worried about our kids and their future. I thought I knew how bad it was in Washington. But it is worse than I ever imagined.

Congress is debating the wrong things.

Every debate in Washington is about how much to increase spending – a little or a lot.

About how much to increase taxes – a little or a lot.

The President does a big “woe is me” over the $1.2 trillion sequester that he endorsed and signed into law. Some Republicans are joining him. Few people understand that the sequester doesn’t even cut any spending. It just slows the rate of growth. Even with the sequester, government will grow over $7 trillion over the next decade.

Only in Washington could an increase of $7 trillion in spending over a decade be called a cut.

So, what is the President’s answer? Over the past four years he has added over $6 trillion in new debt and may well do the same in a second term. What solutions does he offer? He takes entitlement reform off the table and seeks to squeeze more money out of the private sector.

He says he wants a balanced approach.

What the country really needs is a balanced budget.

Washington acts in a way that your family never could – they spend money they do not have, they borrow from future generations, and then they blame each other for never fixing the problem.

Tonight I urge you to demand a new course.

Demand Washington change their ways, or be sent home.

To begin with, we absolutely must pass a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution!

The amendment must include strict tax and spending limitations.

Liberals complain that the budget can’t be balanced but if you cut just one penny from each dollar we currently spend, the budget would balance within six or seven years.

The Penny Plan has been crafted into a bill that millions of conservatives across the country support.

It is often said that there is not enough bipartisanship up here.

That is not true.

In fact, there is plenty.

Both parties have been guilty of spending too much, of protecting their sacred cows, of backroom deals in which everyone up here wins, but every taxpayer loses.

It is time for a new bipartisan consensus.

It is time Democrats admit that not every dollar spent on domestic programs is sacred. And it is time Republicans realize that military spending is not immune to waste and fraud.

Where would we cut spending; well, we could start with ending all foreign aid to countries that are burning our flag and chanting death to America.

The President could begin by stopping the F-16s and Abrams tanks being given to the radical Islamic government of Egypt.

Not only should the sequester stand, many pundits say the sequester really needs to be at least $4 trillion to avoid another downgrade of America’s credit rating.

Both parties will have to agree to cut, or we will never fix our fiscal mess.

Bipartisanship is not what is missing in Washington. Common sense is.

Trillion-dollar deficits hurt us all.

Printing more money to feed the never-ending appetite for spending hurts us all.

We pay higher prices every time we go to the supermarket or the gas pump. The value of the dollar shrinks with each new day.

Contrary to what the President claims, big government and debt are not a friend to the poor and the elderly. Big-government debt keeps the poor poor and saps the savings of the elderly.

This massive expansion of the debt destroys savings and steals the value of your wages.

Big government makes it more expensive to put food on the table. Big government is not your friend. The President offers you free stuff but his policies keep you poor.

Under President Obama, the ranks of America’s poor swelled to almost 1 in 6 people last year, reaching a new high as long-term unemployment left millions of Americans struggling and out of work.

The cycle must be broken.

The willpower to do this will not come from Congress. It must come from the American people.

Next month, I will propose a five-year balanced budget, a budget that last year was endorsed by taxpayer groups across the country for its boldness, and for actually solving the problem.

I will work with anyone on either side of the aisle who wants to cut spending.

But in recent years, there has been no one to work with.

The President’s massive tax hikes and spending increases have caused his budgets to get ZERO votes in both houses of Congress. Not a single Democrat voted for the President’s budget!

But at least he tried.

Senate Democrats have not even produced a budget in the time I have been in office, a shameful display of incompetence that illustrates their lack of seriousness.

This year, they say they will have a budget, but after just recently imposing hundreds of billions in new taxes, they now say they will include more tax hikes in their budget.

We must stand firm. We must say NO to any MORE tax hikes!

Only through lower taxes, less regulation and more freedom will the economy begin to grow again.

Our party is the party of growth, jobs and prosperity, and we will boldly lead on these issues.

Under the Obama economy, 12 million people are out of work. During the President’s first term 800,000 construction workers lost their jobs and another 800,000 simply gave up on looking for work.

With my five-year budget, millions of jobs would be created by cutting the corporate income tax in half, by creating a flat personal income tax of 17%, and by cutting the regulations that are strangling American businesses.

The only stimulus ever proven to work is leaving more money in the hands of those who earned it!

For those who are struggling we want to you to have something infinitely more valuable than a free phone, we want you to have a job and pathway to success.

We are the party that embraces hard work and ingenuity, therefore we must be the party that embraces the immigrant who wants to come to America for a better future.

We must be the party who sees immigrants as assets, not liabilities.

We must be the party that says, “If you want to work, if you want to become an American, we welcome you.”

For those striving to climb the ladder of success we must fix our schools.

America’s educational system is leaving behind anyone who starts with disadvantages.

We have cut classroom size in half and tripled spending on education and still we lag behind much of the world.

A great education needs to be available for everyone, whether you live on country club lane or in government housing.

This will only happen when we allow school choice for everyone, rich or poor, white, brown, or black.

Let the taxes you pay for education follow each and every student to the school of your choice.

Competition has made America the richest nation in history. Competition can make our educational system the envy of the world.

The status quo traps poor children in a crumbling system of hopelessness.

When every child can, like the President’s kids, go to the school of their choice, then will the dreams of our children come true!

Washington could also use a good dose of transparency, which is why we should fight back against middle of the night deals that end with massive bills no one has read.

We must continue to fight for legislation that forces Congress to read the bills!

We must continue to object when Congress sticks special interest riders on bills in the dead of night!

And if Congress refuses to obey its own rules, if Congress refuses to pass a budget, if Congress refuses to read the bills, then I say:

Sweep the place clean. Limit their terms and send them home!

I have seen the inner sanctum of Congress and believe me there is no monopoly on knowledge there.

If they will not listen, if they will not balance the budget, then we should limit their terms.

We are the party that adheres to the Constitution. We will not let the liberals tread on the Second Amendment!

We will fight to defend the entire Bill of Rights from the right to trial by jury to the right to be free from unlawful searches.

We will stand up against excessive government power wherever we see it.

We cannot and will not allow any President to act as if he were a king.

We will not let any President use executive orders to impinge on the Second Amendment.

We will not tolerate secret lists of American citizens who can be killed without trial.

Montesquieu wrote that there can be no liberty when the executive branch and the legislative branch are combined. Separation of powers is a bedrock principle of our Constitution.

We took the President to court over his unconstitutional recess appointments and won.

If necessary, we will take him to court again if he attempts to legislate by executive order.

Congress must reassert its authority as the protector of these rights, and stand up for them, no matter which party is in power.

Congress must stand as a check to the power of the executive, and it must stand as it was intended, as the voice of the people.

The people are crying out for change. They are asking for us to hear their voices, to fix our broken system, to right our economy and to restore their liberty.

Let us tonight let them know that we hear their voices. That we can and must work together, that we can and must re-chart our course toward a better future.

America has much greatness left in her. We will begin to thrive again when we begin to believe in ourselves again, when we regain our respect for our founding documents, when we balance our budget, when we understand that capitalism and free markets and free individuals are what creates our nation’s prosperity.

Thank you and God Bless America.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/02/12/full-text-of-rand-pauls-tea-party-response-to-state-of-the-union?page=4

Text of Senator Marc Rubio’s response to the Union address on Tuesday night

Good evening. I’m Marco Rubio. I’m blessed to represent Florida in the United States Senate. Let me begin by congratulating President Obama on the start of his second term. Tonight, I have the honor of responding to his State of the Union address on behalf of my fellow Republicans.  And I am especially honored to be addressing our brave men and women serving in the armed forces and in diplomatic posts around the world. You may be thousands of miles away, but you are always in our prayers.

The State of the Union address is always a reminder of how unique America is. For much of human history, most people were trapped in stagnant societies, where a tiny minority always stayed on top, and no one else even had a chance.

But America is exceptional because we believe that every life, at every stage, is precious, and that everyone everywhere has a God-given right to go as far as their talents and hard work will take them.

Like most Americans, for me this ideal is personal. My parents immigrated here in pursuit of the opportunity to improve their life and give their children the chance at an even better one. They made it to the middle class, my dad working as a bartender and my mother as a cashier and a maid. I didn’t inherit any money from them. But I inherited something far better – the real opportunity to accomplish my dreams.

This opportunity – to make it to the middle class or beyond no matter where you start out in life – it isn’t bestowed on us from Washington.  It comes from a vibrant free economy where people can risk their own money to open a business. And when they succeed, they hire more people, who in turn invest or spend the money they make, helping others start a business and create jobs.

Presidents in both parties – from John F. Kennedy to Ronald Reagan – have known that our free enterprise economy is the source of our middle-class prosperity.

But President Obama?  He believes it’s the cause of our problems.  That the economic downturn happened because our government didn’t tax enough, spend enough and control enough. And, therefore, as you heard tonight, his solution to virtually every problem we face is for Washington to tax more, borrow more and spend more.

This idea – that our problems were caused by a government that was too small – it’s just not true. In fact, a major cause of our recent downturn was a housing crisis created by reckless government policies.

And the idea that more taxes and more government spending is the best way to help hardworking middle-class taxpayers – that’s an old idea that’s failed every time it’s been tried.

More government isn’t going to help you get ahead.  It’s going to hold you back.

More government isn’t going to create more opportunities.  It’s going to limit them.

And more government isn’t going to inspire new ideas, new businesses and new private sector jobs.  It’s going to create uncertainty.

Because more government breeds complicated rules and laws that a small business can’t afford to follow.

Because more government raises taxes on employers who then pass the costs on to their employees through fewer hours, lower pay and even layoffs.

And because many government programs that claim to help the middle class, often end up hurting them instead.

For example, Obamacare was supposed to help middle-class Americans afford health insurance.  But now, some people are losing the health insurance they were happy with.  And because Obamacare created expensive requirements for companies with more than 50 employees, now many of these businesses aren’t hiring.  Not only that; they’re being forced to lay people off and switch from full-time employees to part-time workers.

Now does this mean there’s no role for government?  Of course not.  It plays a crucial part in keeping us safe, enforcing rules, and providing some security against the risks of modern life. But government’s role is wisely limited by the Constitution. And it can’t play its essential role when it ignores those limits.

There are valid reasons to be concerned about the president’s plan to grow our government. But any time anyone opposes the president’s agenda, he and his allies usually respond by falsely attacking their motives.

When we point out that no matter how many job-killing laws we pass, our government can’t control the weather – he accuses us of wanting dirty water and dirty air.

When we suggest we strengthen our safety net programs by giving states more flexibility to manage them – he accuses us of wanting to leave the elderly and disabled to fend for themselves.

And tonight, he even criticized us for refusing to raise taxes to delay military cuts – cuts that were his idea in the first place.

But his favorite attack of all is that those who don’t agree with him – they only care about rich people.

Mr. President, I still live in the same working-class neighborhood I grew up in. My neighbors aren’t millionaires. They’re retirees who depend on Social Security and Medicare. They’re workers who have to get up early tomorrow morning and go to work to pay the bills. They’re immigrants, who came here because they were stuck in poverty in countries where the government dominated the economy.

The tax increases and the deficit spending you propose will hurt middle-class families. It will cost them their raises. It will cost them their benefits. It may even cost some of them their jobs.

And it will hurt seniors because it does nothing to save Medicare and Social Security.

So Mr. President, I don’t oppose your plans because I want to protect the rich. I oppose your plans because I want to protect my neighbors.

Hard-working middle-class Americans who don’t need us to come up with a plan to grow the government. They want a plan to grow the middle class.

Economic growth is the best way to help the middle class.  Unfortunately, our economy actually shrank during the last three months of 2012.

But if we can get the economy to grow at just 4 percent a year, it would create millions of middle class jobs. And it could reduce our deficits by almost $4 trillion dollars over the next decade.

Tax increases can’t do this. Raising taxes won’t create private-sector jobs. And there’s no realistic tax increase that could lower our deficits by almost $4 trillion. That’s why I hope the president will abandon his obsession with raising taxes and instead work with us to achieve real growth in our economy.

One of the best ways to encourage growth is through our energy industry. Of course solar and wind energy should be a part of our energy portfolio. But God also blessed America with abundant coal, oil and natural gas. Instead of wasting more taxpayer money on so-called “clean energy” companies like Solyndra, let’s open up more federal lands for safe and responsible exploration. And let’s reform our energy regulations so that they’re reasonable and based on common sense. If we can grow our energy industry, it will make us energy independent, it will create middle-class jobs and it will help bring manufacturing back from places like China.

Simplifying our tax code will also help the middle class, because it will make it easier for small businesses to hire and grow.

And we agree with the president that we should lower our corporate tax rate, which is one of the highest in the world, so that companies will start bringing their money and their jobs back here from overseas.

We can also help our economy grow if we have a legal immigration system that allows us to attract and assimilate the world’s best and brightest. We need a responsible, permanent solution to the problem of those who are here illegally. But first, we must follow through on the broken promises of the past to secure our borders and enforce our laws.

Helping the middle class grow will also require an education system that gives people the skills today’s jobs entail and the knowledge that tomorrow’s world will require.

We need to incentivize local school districts to offer more advanced placement courses and more vocational and career training.

We need to give all parents, especially the parents of children with special needs, the opportunity to send their children to the school of their choice.

And because tuition costs have grown so fast, we need to change the way we pay for higher education.

I believe in federal financial aid. I couldn’t have gone to college without it. But it’s not just about spending more money on these programs; it’s also about strengthening and modernizing them.

A 21st century workforce should not be forced to accept 20th century education solutions. Today’s students aren’t only 18-year-olds.  They’re returning veterans. They’re single parents who decide to get the education they need to earn a decent wage. And they’re workers who have lost jobs that are never coming back and need to be retrained.

We need student aid that does not discriminate against programs that non-traditional students rely on – like online courses, or degree programs that give you credit for work experience.

When I finished school, I owed over $100,000 in student loans, a debt I paid off just a few months ago. Today, many graduates face massive student debt. We must give students more information on the costs and benefits of the student loans they’re taking out.

All these measures are key to helping the economy grow. But we won’t be able to sustain a vibrant middle class unless we solve our debt problem.

Every dollar our government borrows is money that isn’t being invested to create jobs. And the uncertainty created by the debt is one reason why many businesses aren’t hiring.

The president loves to blame the debt on President Bush. But President Obama created more debt in four years than his predecessor did in eight.

The real cause of our debt is that our government has been spending $1 trillion more than it takes in every year. That’s why we need a balanced budget amendment.

The biggest obstacles to balancing the budget are programs where spending is already locked in. One of these programs, Medicare, is especially important to me. It provided my father the care he needed to battle cancer and ultimately die with dignity. And it pays for the care my mother receives now.

I would never support any changes to Medicare that would hurt seniors like my mother. But anyone who is in favor of leaving Medicare exactly the way it is right now, is in favor of bankrupting it.

Republicans have offered a detailed and credible plan that helps save Medicare without hurting today’s retirees. Instead of playing politics with Medicare, when is the president going to offer his plan to save it? Tonight would have been a good time for him to do it.

Of course, we face other challenges as well. We were all heart broken by the recent tragedy in Connecticut. We must effectively deal with the rise of violence in our country. But unconstitutionally undermining the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans is not the way to do it.

On foreign policy, America continues to be indispensable to the goal of global liberty, prosperity and safeguarding human rights. The world is a better place when America is the strongest nation on earth. But we can’t remain powerful if we don’t have an economy that can afford it.

In the short time I’ve been here in Washington, nothing has frustrated me more than false choices like the ones the president laid out tonight.

The choice isn’t just between big government or big business. What we need is an accountable, efficient and effective government that allows small and new businesses to create middle class jobs.

We don’t have to raise taxes to avoid the president’s devastating cuts to our military. Republicans have passed a plan that replaces these cuts with responsible spending reforms.

In order to balance our budget, the choice doesn’t have to be either higher taxes or dramatic benefit cuts for those in need.  Instead we should grow our economy so that we create new taxpayers, not new taxes, and so our government can afford to help those who truly cannot help themselves.

And the truth is every problem can’t be solved by government. Many are caused by the moral breakdown in our society. And the answers to those challenges lie primarily in our families and our faiths, not our politicians.

Despite our differences, I know that both Republicans and Democrats love America. I pray we can come together to solve our problems, because the choices before us could not be more important.

If we can get our economy healthy again, our children will be the most prosperous Americans ever.

And if we do not, we will forever be known as the generation responsible for America’s decline.

At a time when one showdown after another ends in short-term deals that do little or nothing about our real problems, some are starting to believe that our government leaders just can’t or won’t make the right choices anymore.

But our strength has never come from the White House or the Capitol.  It’s always come from our people. A people united by the American idea that, if you have a dream and you are willing to work hard, nothing should be impossible.

Americans have always celebrated and been inspired by those who succeed. But it’s the dreams of those who are still trying to make it that sets our nation apart.

Tonight, all across this land, parents will hold their newborn children in their arms for the first time. For many of these parents, life has not gone the way they had planned.

Maybe they were born into circumstances they’ve found difficult to escape. Maybe they’ve made some mistakes along the way. Maybe they’re young mothers, all alone, the father of their child long gone.

But tonight, when they look into the eyes of their child for the first time, their lives will change forever. Because in those eyes, they will see what my parents saw in me, and what your parents saw in you. They will see all the hopes and dreams they once had for themselves.

This dream – of a better life for their children – it’s the hope of parents everywhere. Politicians here and throughout the world have long promised that more government can make those dreams come true.

But we Americans have always known better. From our earliest days, we embraced economic liberty instead. And because we did, America remains one of the few places on earth where dreams like these even have a chance.

Each time our nation has faced great challenges, what has kept us together was our shared hope for a better life.

Now, let that hope bring us together again.  To solve the challenges of our time and write the next chapter in the amazing story of the greatest nation man has ever known.

Thank you for listening.  May God bless all of you. May God bless our president. And may God continue to bless the United States of America.

http://www.sfltimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12438&Itemid=199

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE
                                                  STAR - TREASURY FINANCIAL DATABASE
             TABLE 1.  SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS AND THE DEFICIT/SURPLUS BY MONTH OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (IN MILLIONS)

                                                        ACCOUNTING DATE:  01/13

   PERIOD                                                                     RECEIPTS                OUTLAYS    DEFICIT/SURPLUS (-)
+  ____________________________________________________________  _____________________  _____________________  _____________________
   PRIOR YEAR

     OCTOBER                                                                   163,072                261,539                 98,466
     NOVEMBER                                                                  152,402                289,704                137,302
     DECEMBER                                                                  239,963                325,930                 85,967
     JANUARY                                                                   234,319                261,726                 27,407
     FEBRUARY                                                                  103,413                335,090                231,677
     MARCH                                                                     171,215                369,372                198,157
     APRIL                                                                     318,807                259,690                -59,117
     MAY                                                                       180,713                305,348                124,636
     JUNE                                                                      260,177                319,919                 59,741
     JULY                                                                      184,585                254,190                 69,604
     AUGUST                                                                    178,860                369,393                190,533
     SEPTEMBER                                                                 261,566                186,386                -75,180

       YEAR-TO-DATE                                                          2,449,093              3,538,286              1,089,193

   CURRENT YEAR

     OCTOBER                                                                   184,316                304,311                119,995
     NOVEMBER                                                                  161,730                333,841                172,112
     DECEMBER                                                                  269,508                270,699                  1,191
     JANUARY                                                                   272,225                269,342                 -2,883

       YEAR-TO-DATE                                                            887,778              1,178,193                290,415
 http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts0113.txt
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Go See Lincoln — Now — Now — Now –Videos

Posted on February 2, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, College, Culture, Economics, Education, Entertainment, government spending, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Movies, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Quotations, Raves, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , |

Go see Lincoln — now, now, now!

Raymond Thomas Pronk

Lincoln_meeting_advisers

President Lincoln meets with advisers to discuss the timing for passing the 13th Amendment

Credit: http://www.examiner.com

“Lincoln,” the film, is a riveting and moving masterpiece of an historical drama that covers the last four months of Abraham Lincoln’s life and his efforts to pass through Congress the 13th Amendment and end the Civil War.

Lincoln is played by Daniel Day-Lewis, who spent a year researching the life and time of the president. Lewis’s memorable performance transforms Lincoln from a white marble statue in Washington, D.C., to an in-the-flesh father, husband, lawyer, storyteller, politician, strategist and visionary on the screen. His performance should earn Day-Lewis another Oscar, which would be his third Academy Award for best actor.

The focus of the movie is Lincoln’s efforts in January 1865, with the assistance of his close adviser and Secretary of State William Seward (played by David Strathairn), to round up enough Democratic and Republican votes to pass a bill in the House of Representatives that would lead to the passage of the 13th Amendment that would abolish slavery in the United States.  Lincoln directs Seward to enlist three unscrupulous political agents to offer patronage jobs, once they leave Congress in March, to lame-duck Democrats, who lost their seats in the November 1864 election, in exchange for their voting for the bill in January.

Lincoln seeks the assistance of Radical Republican Thaddeus Stevens (Tommy Lee Jones), leader of the abolitionist movement and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, to secure the votes of radical Republicans in the House.

Lincoln also needs the votes of all the conservative Republicans in the House. To accomplish this, Lincoln seeks the help of Preston Blair (Hal Holbrook), founder of the Republican Party, and unofficial adviser to Lincoln. Blair gives Lincoln his support provided he is given the authority to go to Richmond, Va., the capitol of the Confederacy, to initiate peace talks.

Blair is successful in getting the Confederacy to send a three-man peace delegation headed by the Confederate States vice president Alexander Stephens (Jackie Earle Haley), that is delayed en route by Lincoln in order to first get the emancipation bill through Congress. The bill almost fails at the last moment when the Democrats disclose to the House the rumor that a Confederate peace delegation is in Washington. Lincoln replies to the rumor by sending a misleading message to the House and the historic bill passes on Jan. 31.

Lincoln finally meets with the Confederate peace delegation on Feb. 3, 1865, in Hampton Roads on the River Queen steamboat. The meeting ends in failure because Lincoln offers no concessions and demands the end of slavery as a condition for peace — the unconditional surrender of the South.

The Civil War’s massive death toll exceeding 600,000 and destruction are graphically illustrated on screen with Lincoln’s visit on April 3 to the Petersburg battlefield after the Union victory to meet with Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant (Jared Harris).

“Lincoln” is a Hollywood blockbuster film with record box-office receipts of more than $175 million and 12 Academy Award nominations. The film faces stiff competition at the box office and at the Academy Awards from the films “Argo”, “Les Miserables”, “Life of Pi,” “Silver Linings Playbook” and “Zero Dark Thirty”.

I believe Lincoln will win at least five Academy Awards including best picture, actor (Day-Lewis), director (Steven Spielberg), adapted screenplay (Tony Kushner), and cinematography (Janusz Kamiński) at the 85th Academy Awards ceremony on Feb. 24.

Celebrate the anniversary of the birth of this historic president on Feb. 12, 1809 or the Presidents’ Day and the Washington’s Birthday holiday on Feb. 18 by seeing “Lincoln”.

Film rating: A

Raymond Thomas Pronk is host of the Pronk Pops Show on KDUX web radio from 3-5 p.m. Fridays and author of the companion blog http://www.pronkpops.wordpress.com/

Lincoln Official Trailer #1 (2012) Steven Spielberg Movie HD 

Steven Spielberg Talks to TIME About ‘Lincoln’

Lincoln Interview – Daniel Day-Lewis (2012) – Steven Spielberg Movie HD 

Lincoln Interview – Sally Field (2012) – Steven Spielberg Movie HD

DP/30: Lincoln, actor Sally Field

Sally Field “Lincoln” Interview

DP/30: Lincoln, screenwriter Tony Kushner

Tommy Lee Jones’ Official ‘Lincoln’ Interview

Lincoln Q&A – Full Interview (2012) – Steven Spielberg, Daniel Day-Lewis Movie HD

Beyond The Trailer:        Lincoln 2012 Movie Review – Steven Spielberg & Daniel Day

DP/30: Lincoln: Below The Line – Cinematographer, Costumer, Production dsigner

(l-r) cinematographer Janusz Kaminski, costume designer Joanna Johnston, production designer Rick Carter, make-up designer Lois Burwell

Lincoln – Movie Review

Persons of the Week: Steven Spielberg and Daniel Day-Lewis of New ‘Lincoln’

Film History: Columnists and Historians Assess Spielberg’s “Lincoln”

by Kelly Candaele

“…ONE OF THE MOST gratifying aspects of Steven Spielberg’s movie Lincoln has been the debate that its release has generated among historians and journalists, a debate more important than the movie itself. What were the complex dilemmas that Lincoln faced as President? What were the political realities and conduct of the time? How should we interpret the decisions that Lincoln and others made? What role did slaves and free blacks play in their own liberation?

Despite the fact that the film focuses on a short period of time in Lincoln’s presidency and deals primarily with the political cut and thrust associated with the passage of the 13th Amendment, there is a real sense in which the film can be described as deeply philosophical. Lincoln is portrayed as a man of discipline, concentration, and energy, all characteristics that sociologist Max Weber defined as part of the serious politician’s vocation. By forging an effective and realized political character — one aspect of Weber’s definition of charismatic authority — an astute politician can change the nature of power in society. By controlling his all-too-human vanity, he can avoid the two deadly political sins of lack of objectivity and irresponsibility. For Weber, a certain “distance to things and men” was required to abide by an “ethic of responsibility” for the weighty decisions that leaders are often required to make.

Lincoln has always been a man for all political seasons. There is Lincoln the principled politician, who believed that war was a necessary and legitimate means to sustain the Union; Lincoln the timid compromiser, who as late as 16 months into the war declared that if he “could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it”; and Lincoln the reconciling healer of “With malice toward none, with charity for all,” of the Second Inaugural.

Conservative New York Times writer David Brooks argued in a November 22 column that it was Lincoln’s internal strength and ability to compromise that allowed for the possibility of public good. For Brooks, the temptations of fame and ideological rigidity are what undermine the average politician’s ability to compromise. Weber called the losers in that wrestling match with fame, political “windbags.”

But for liberal Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne, it was Lincoln’s principled stand on the 13th Amendment and the need to ban slavery that accounts for his iconic status as one of our greatest Presidents. In an October 19 piece, Dionne encouraged Obama to “follow Lincoln’s example” by refusing to compromise with current economic and financial injustice.

While most political journalists have viewed the film with an eye on the current political stalemate, our most prominent historians have looked for accuracy and context.

Columbia University Professor Eric Foner, one of the most eminent historians of the Civil War and Reconstruction, sees the film as an “inside the beltway” rendition of the period. In a recent interview on Jon Wiener’s KPFK radio show, Foner points out that during the period that the movie covers, General William Tecumseh Sherman’s Union Army was marching through South Carolina. Slaves, in full-scale rebellion, were seizing plantations and “occupying” the land that they had worked. Slavery was “dying on the ground,” Foner insisted, not just in the House of Representatives. In Lincoln, “We are back to the old idea of Lincoln freeing the slaves by himself,” Foner says, reinforcing a one-dimensional view of a complicated historical process. The problem is not what the movie shows but what it doesn’t show. Additionally, as Foner points out in his Pulitzer Prize wining book, The Fiery Trial, Lincoln was “non-committal” during the failed 1864 attempt by Congress to pass the 13th Amendment. This was at a time when abolitionists, including the Women’s National Loyal League headed by Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, were delivering “monster” petitions to congress urging them to pass the amendment. They had gathered 400,000 signatures by mid 1864, but Lincoln was pushing for state-enacted emancipation in the border-states and occupied south.

Lincoln was also a “passive observer” of Senator Charles Sumner’s “crusade” to pass legislation that would allow blacks to carry mail, ride on streetcars, and testify in Federal courts in the District of Columbia, although he signed the bills that managed to pass in Congress. It was not until John C. Fremont was nominated for President in May 1864 — as a challenge to Lincoln — that Lincoln encouraged his party to embrace a constitutional amendment abolishing slavery.

Foner also challenges the “race against time” plot of the movie, whereby recalcitrant Republicans and pro-slavery Democrats stall the work of Congress while a Confederate peace initiative threatens to undermine the amendment’s only chance at passage. In reality, Lincoln had told the lame-duck congress that if they did not pass the amendment he would call a special session of the new Congress in March of 1865, made up of enough Republicans (elected that November) to easily pass the amendment.

Historian James Oakes, in his book Freedom National — The Destruction of Slavery in the United States, published in early December, suggests that Lincoln screenwriter Tony Kushner might have that part of the history right. Oakes points out that a large number of Republicans felt that the amendment abolishing slavery was a “civil” rather than “military” measure, and that the basis for changing the constitution was thus linked to the winning of the war. As the war’s end drew closer, the justification for the 13th Amendment was potentially undermined.

In an email exchange with me about his book and the movie, Oakes speculates that Lincoln and his Republican allies were worried that public support for the passage of the amendment would dissipate as the exigencies of war diminished. “If abolition were imposed AFTER [Oakes’s caps] the South surrendered it might seem vindictive to northern voters, or voters might think Republicans were liars or were disingenuous for having claimed that abolition was a war measure,” Oakes wrote. Although this argument does not appear in the film, it was a central theme for New York Congressman Fernando Wood, the Democratic attack dog in Congress and in the film.

What Oakes finds more troubling in terms of historical accuracy is the scenario set up by Kushner, whereby conservative Republicans (represented in the film by Montgomery Blair) and Radical Republicans had to be brought in line to defeat the Democrats and pass the amendment. Oakes points out that the Republicans were united all along, as demonstrated by the House vote to pass the 13th Amendment that took place the previous July. There was only one Republican “no” vote at that time, cast by Ohio Republican James M. Ashley. Ashley was a strong supporter of the amendment, but realizing the amendment was about to lose, he voted no as a procedural maneuver that would allow him to call for reconsideration of the amendment when Congress returned in December.

Blair, who had represented Dred Scott in the famous Supreme Court case, was Lincoln’s Postmaster General until he was replaced in late 1864. Blair had influence in Maryland and Missouri and was called upon to secure Border State Unionist votes, not to cajole conservative Republicans. Between July 1864 — when Democrats and Border State congressman had defeated the amendment — and January 1865, both Maryland and Missouri had abolished slavery. So Congressmen who had represented slave states the previous July were representing free states in January. They were the Congressmen that Blair went after.

Historians and journalists will and should continue debating the historical accuracy and limited context of the film, especially the invisibility of blacks as central participants in their own liberation.

In his blog, Brooklyn College Professor Corey Robin quotes from the 1992 book Slaves No More (by Ira Berlin et.al.), making it clear that despite Lincoln’s great accomplishment, historians overturned long ago a Lincoln-centered view of emancipation. The destruction of slavery was:

[A] process by which slavery collapsed under the pressure of federal arms and the slaves’ determination to place their own liberty on the wartime agenda. In documenting the transformation of a war for the Union into a war against slavery, it shifts the focus from the halls of power in Washington and Richmond to the plantations, farms, and battlefields of the South and demonstrates how slaves accomplished their own liberation and shaped the destiny of a nation.

The relegating of African Americans to secondary roles, even in films where black civil rights is the central topic (2011’s The Help is a recent example) is unfortunately the rule rather than the exception. But on the positive side, Lincoln has accomplished something that historian and literary critic Irving Howe suggested is very rare for American artists: the ability to portray politics as “a distinctive mode of social existence with manners and values of its own.”

The history of slavery, its origins, extirpation, and consequences, becomes more fascinating and illuminating once the context is expanded. Robin Blackburn’s new book The American Crucible — Slavery, Emancipation and Human Rights argues that the success of anti-slavery movements involved some combination of class struggle, war, and a re-casting of the state’s relationship to the claims of property — New York Congressman Fernando Wood, for instance, spoke against the 13th Amendment as a “tyrannical destruction of individual property.” Wood was pointing to the broader underpinnings of both the Constitution and state law.

For Blackburn, who writes in a Marxist vein, dominant economic interests, both North and South, needed a “different type of state.” In the South, slaves, who were legally property, could run away, while northern manufacturing demanded state regulation of finance, funding for internal transportation and communications infrastructure, and tariff protection. These Unionist and Confederate “rival nationalisms” were both expansionist, the Union looking to overtake the continent and the Confederacy eyeing new slave territory in the West, the South and in Cuba. The clash, according to Blackburn, “was thus one of rival empires, as well as competing nationalisms.”

Foner also places the state in the center of Civil War and Reconstruction history, focusing on how shifting political dynamics shaped the economic and social relations that followed the abolition of slavery. Slavery was a mode of racial domination but also a system of labor that a “distinctive ruling class” was fighting to retain. The “labor question,” and what role the state would play in re-constituting a disciplined and docile labor force after the Civil War became central to the battle between former master and former slave.

It was Radical Republican Thaddeus Stevens (portrayed by Tommy Lee Jones in Lincoln), Foner points out, who recognized the “hollow victory” that liberation would bring unless accompanied by the “destruction of the land-based political power” of the agrarian ruling classes. In Nothing but Freedom — Emancipation and Its Legacy, Foner reveals some striking similarities between post-emancipation southern politics and similar developments in the Caribbean and Africa. Struggles over immigration, labor laws, taxation, fiscal policy and the definition of property rights “reveal how much of post-emancipation politics was defined by the ‘labor problem.’ In the southern United States, sharecropping became the common solution to an economic struggle whereby resilient planters and large landowners where eventually (after Radical Reconstruction) able to deny blacks access to productive land, capital, and political power.

If this seems a bit far afield from the central focus of Lincoln, it shows how difficult — how impossible — it is to present complex historical “moments” through film. History is not a series of “moments” but is, as the recently deceased historian E.J. Hobsbawn reminded us, something that surrounds us. “We swim in the past as fish do in water, and cannot escape from it,” Hobsbawm wrote in On History. The historian’s role — from Hobsbawn’s (and Marx’s) point of view — is the examination of how societies transform themselves and how social structures factor in that process.

Getting history wrong, as Ernest Renan noted over a century ago, is an essential element in the formation of a nation. Historians will continue to inform us about whether Spielberg and Kushner got Lincoln wrong in the service of polishing a national myth. Perhaps it is an unfair criticism to direct at a two and-a-half-hour movie on one of our most important political figures, but this story of emancipation is woefully incomplete. How could it be otherwise?

Tragedy very often accompanies politics practiced a high level. Has any American President avoided making decisions about the life and death of others? Lincoln was a man able to control his vanity by casting a cold eye upon both the virtues and the corruptions of human beings. He was able to reject cynicism, that reliable psychological shield for feelings of political impotence, and this the movie demonstrates clearly.

The film succeeds in portraying Lincoln as a political man in Weber’s sense, a man of ambition who was willing to be held responsible for the results of his decisions.

Moving away from the sterile debate over whether he was a “compromiser” or a man of “principle,” the film shows he accepted the fact that, in his political life at least, there would be a constant tension between the two. …”

http://lareviewofbooks.org/article.php?type=&id=1251&fulltext=1&media=#article-text-cutpoint

Spielberg’s Lincoln: A Historian’s Review

By Nicholas Roland

“… Steven Spielberg’s latest historical drama chronicles the 16th president’s final months and his struggle for passage of the 13th Amendment by the House of Representatives in 1865. Lincoln’s enduring popularity means that this film will be subjected to intense scrutiny and debate by historians, movie reviewers, and culture warriors alike.

Fortunately, Lincoln is blessed with a remarkably accomplished cast. Daniel Day Lewis is Abraham Lincoln. Having supposedly read over 100 books on Lincoln in preparation for the role, he manages to convincingly replicate many aspects of Lincoln’s persona and physical aura: Lincoln’s purportedly high voice, his wry sense of humor and knack for storytelling, his slouched posture and awkward gait, and the overwhelming weariness incurred by the “fiery trial” of war all ring true.

Mary Todd Lincoln (Sally Fields) is portrayed as a more or less sympathetic character, in accordance with more recent scholarship rejecting long-standing depictions of Mrs. Lincoln as a shrew, possibly suffering from a mental illness. Fields plays a First Lady who is grief-stricken over the loss of her son Willie and weary from the stress of a wartime presidential marriage. During a scene at a White House reception, she draws on her social training as a daughter of the Kentucky elite to skillfully defend against political critics.

Secretary of State William H. Seward (David Strathairn) also appears as an important source of support for Lincoln. Seward cuts patronage deals with lame duck Democratic Congressmen in order to help secure the passage of the 13th Amendment and acts as a sort of political muse to Lincoln. Seward harangues and cajoles Lincoln on policy and political strategy but ultimately serves as a loyal ally in carrying out Lincoln’s intent, a depiction born out in the historical record.

Thaddeus Stevens (Tommy Lee Jones) is also a convincing secondary character, albeit with some historical problems. A leader of the radical wing of the Republican Party, Stevens is accurately portrayed as an advocate of racial equality and a vehement opponent of secessionists. However, a scene revealing the purported relationship between Stevens and his African-American housekeeper risks conveying the sense that this relationship was the primary motivation for Stevens’ crusade for the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments.

Despite the excellent performances turned in by the star-studded cast, Lincoln has a number of shortcomings from a historian’s point of view. Based on Doris Kearns-Goodwin’s Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, the film is at times a taut political thriller and at times the inspirational story of the final abolition of American slavery. The choice to focus on the last few months of Lincoln’s presidency is appropriate given the ultimate outcome of the American Civil War: the defeat of the Confederacy and the end of legal slavery. However, this narrow focus glosses over Lincoln’s famously ambiguous views on slavery and racial equality.

Spielberg’s Lincoln appears committed to rapidly ending slavery and even suggests that suffrage might eventually be extended to black men. In his lifetime, Lincoln was consistently criticized by radical Republicans and African-American leaders such as Frederick Douglass for his equivocation on slavery and lenient plans for Reconstruction. Lincoln seems to have held a lifelong commitment to the free-soil ideology that every man, white or black, has the right to earn for himself by the sweat of his brow. Despite this conviction, Lincoln repeatedly stated that he wished to preserve the Union, either with or without slavery. Lincoln viewed the Emancipation Proclamation and the enlistment of black troops as a wartime expedient to preserve the Union.

To its credit, Lincoln does make some references to contradictory statements Lincoln made earlier in his presidency about slavery.

Despite this nod toward the complexity of Lincoln’s political career, Spielberg risks reviving the Great Emancipator myth. The best evidence suggests that Abraham Lincoln personally abhorred slavery as an institution while simultaneously denying the concept of racial equality.

Some historians have argued that Lincoln’s personal beliefs underwent a significant change during the last year of the Civil War, and Lincoln did in fact suggest to the reconstructed government of Louisiana in 1864 that “very intelligent” black men and “those who have fought gallantly in our ranks” might be given access to the ballot box. As depicted by the film, during the 1864 Presidential campaign Lincoln threw his support behind passage of the 13th Amendment and was active in securing its passage in 1865. But he never became a radical abolitionist like Thaddeus Stevens, or an outright advocate of racial equality. Lincoln continued to put forth plans for the resettlement of freedmen to the Caribbean even after issuing the Emancipation Proclamation and possibly even after the passage of the 13th Amendment.

Too narrow of a focus on the actions of Lincoln and other white politicians unfortunately downplays the role played by both enslaved and free African Americans in the Civil War-era struggle for freedom. Black characters largely appear passive in Spielberg’s account. Kate Masur points out that White House servants Elizabeth Keckley and William Slade were deeply involved in the free black activist community of Washington, D.C. Instead of appearing as dynamic characters within the President’s household, they are relegated to cardboard roles as domestics. The most assertive black character in the movie is a soldier who confronts the President about past ill-treatment and future aspirations. Lincoln artfully deflects the soldier’s concerns and the scene ends with the soldier quoting the Gettysburg Address. The one-dimensional black characters in Lincoln are unrecognizable as depictions of African Americans during the Civil War.

Early in the war, when Lincoln strenuously wished to avoid confronting slavery, black enslaved workers fled to federal lines and congregated around federal camps such as Fortress Monroe, Va. Congress passed the Confiscation Act of 1861 in reaction to this development, marking the first movement by the federal government to separate rebellious slaveholders from their enslaved workers. While Lincoln continued to insist that the war was a struggle to preserve the Union, African Americans did not wait for the Emancipation Proclamation to turn the war into much more than a sectional conflict. Slavery was destroyed as much by their individual actions as by the political workings of white politicians.

The film also has a number of smaller inaccuracies and stylistic issues. For example, Alexander H. Coffroth is depicted as a nervous Pennsylvania Democrat pressured into voting for the 13th Amendment. Coffroth actually served as a pallbearer at Lincoln’s funeral, indicating that he was more than a simple political pawn of the White House. And in a scene supposedly taking place after the fall of Richmond and Petersburg, Lincoln solemnly rides through a horrific battlefield heaped with hundreds of bodies. A battlefield such as this would likely represent one of the worst instances of combat in the Civil War. Richmond and Petersburg fell primarily due to General Ulysses S. Grant’s maneuvering to cut Confederate supply lines rather than through bloody fighting on the scale Spielberg depicts. Lincoln did in fact visit Richmond after it had fallen and was greeted there by hundreds of jubilant freed slaves in the streets of the former Confederate capital. The chance to depict such a poignant scene is not taken up by the filmmakers in favor of a continued focus on the political and military struggle waged by white Americans.

Perhaps most inexplicably, the movie does a poor job of identifying the various cabinet officials and Congressmen central to the plot. The average moviegoer is likely to be somewhat unsure of the exact role or importance of several characters. This is especially curious given the fact that obscure members of a Confederate peace delegation such as Confederate Senator R.M.T. Hunter and Assistant Secretary of War John A. Campbell are explicitly identified onscreen.

On the whole, Spielberg’s Lincoln is a masterful politician and a dynamic character, able to carefully mediate between his own evolving beliefs and the political realities of his age. This interpretation falls solidly in line with the mainstream of Lincoln scholarship. For an incredibly complex, sphinxlike figure such as Abraham Lincoln, perhaps we shouldn’t expect a more thorough interpretation from Hollywood.

http://alcalde.texasexes.org/2012/11/spielbergs-lincoln-a-historians-review/

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Argo — Takes Off — Videos

Silver Linings Playbook — Crazy Love — Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

America’s Dilemma: Citizenship or Deportation?—President Barack Obama’s Speech On Illegal Immigration in Las Vegas–January 29, 2013–Videos

Posted on January 30, 2013. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, history, Immigration, Inflation, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Programming, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Security, Strategy, Taxes, Technology, Unemployment, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Obama-Time-to-fix-immigration

President Obama Las Vegas speech on comprehensive immigration reform on Jan. 29

Credit: http://www.upi.com

reagan

FULL SPEECH – US President Obama Immigration Reform from LAS VEGAS 1/29/2013

1984 – Ronald Reagan on Amnesty

Sessions Warns Washington Elites Against Rush To Amnesty

Amnesty – Not the Solution: Talk Border

Immigration: The real Third Rail of politics on TalkBorder

Talk Border: Safe Borders, Not Racism

Immigration by the Numbers — Off the Charts 

Immigration, World Poverty and Gumballs – Updated 2010

David Meir-Levi on Talk Border 

Martin Sieff on TalkBorder.com

Lou Barletta on Talk Border 

Michael Cutler, INS Special Agent

Charles Faddis, CIA (Ret), speaks with Michael Cutler, INS (Ret) on National Security and more in one part of a three-part interview for The United States of Common Sense, hosted by Charles Faddis..

Michael Cutler, a Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, an advisor to the 911 Families for a Secure America, and a consultant, retired in 2002 after a distinguished career with the INS of over 30 years, including 26 as a Special Agent. In 1991, he was promoted to the position of Senior Special Agent and was assigned to the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force and worked with members of other federal and state law enforcement agencies as well as law enforcement organizations of other countries. The task force’s investigations of aliens involved in major drug trafficking organizations ultimately resulted in the seizure of their assets and prosecutions for a wide variety of criminal violations.

Mr. Cutler has testified as an expert witness at nine Congressional hearings on issues relating to the enforcement of immigration laws having been called by members of both political parties. Mr. Cutler also furnished testimony to the Presidential Commission on the Terrorist Attacks of September 11. Mr. Cutler has appeared on numerous television and radio programs including the OReilly Radio Factor, OReillys No Spin Zone, Fox News and the Lou Dobbs Tonight Program on CNN to discuss the enforcement of immigration laws and has participated in various public debates and panel discussions on issues involving the enforcement and administration of immigration laws. Among the areas of concern that he is able to speak about authoritatively are the nexus between immigration and national security, the impact of immigration on the criminal justice system, strategies to combat illegal immigration, and why amnesty for illegal aliens is wrong.

Roy talks about ICE lawsuit with FNC’s Neil Cavuto

The Dangers of Unlimited Legal & Illegal Immigration

Stop Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants – Expert Reveals the True Cost of Amnesty

Path to illegal citizenship: The high cost of Illegal and legal lImmigration for U.S. Citizens 

Why Oppose the DREAM Act?

 

The E-Verify Solution for Illegal Hiring 

How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the US?  – Walsh – 2

How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the United States? Presentation by James H. Walsh, Associate General Counsel of the former INS – part 2.
Census Bureau estimates of the number of illegals in the U.S. are suspect and may represent significant undercounts.  The studies presented by these authors show that the numbers of illegal aliens in the U.S. could range from 20 to 38 million.

America’s dilemma: citizenship or deportation?

By Raymond Thomas Pronk            

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” – Albert Einstein

President Barack Obama flew to Las Vegas last week to give a speech at a local school outlining his views and principles for comprehensive immigration reform. “Right now, we have 11 million undocumented immigrants in America; 11 million men and women from all over the world who live their lives in the shadows.  Yes, they broke the rules.  They crossed the border illegally.  Maybe they overstayed their visas.  Those are facts.  Nobody disputes them.  But these 11 million men and women are now here,” Obama said.

Why are there more than 11 million illegal aliens in the United States? Simply, the federal government under both Democratic and Republican progressive presidents has refused to vigorously enforce existing immigration law as set forth in federal statutes and regulations and failed to control and secure U.S. borders against a massive invasion of illegal aliens. These presidents betrayed their oath of office to defend and protect the Constitution.

In a debate with Democratic presidential candidate Walter Mondale in 1984, President Ronald Reagan said, “I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though some time back they may have entered illegally.”

On Nov. 6, 1986, Congress enacted the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), also known as the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, to reform immigration law and control the number of illegal immigrants entering the country. Reagan signed the bill.

Under this law approximately three million illegal aliens who had continuously resided in the U.S. before Jan.1, 1982 were granted legal status and eventually citizenship — amnesty for illegal aliens.

Since then the federal government has failed to control and secure the borders and by so doing, the 1986 law by granting amnesty created a strong magnet or incentive for future illegal aliens. Both Reagan and the American people were double-crossed by progressive Democrats and Republicans in Congress who really wanted open borders and unlimited illegal immigration.

The American people are asking for immigration law enforcement and secure borders and not Obama’s comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to citizenship. Americans favor limited controlled legal immigration but oppose open borders with unlimited illegal immigration. So-called “undocumented workers” or more accurately illegal aliens should, as required by federal law, be removed from their place of work and deported to their country of origin.

Why? First, aliens broke into the country illegally when they entered the U.S. without a valid visa or over stayed their visas and did not return to the country of origin. Second, aliens broke the law when they either stole identities of U.S. citizens or purchased fraudulent documents such as driver’s licenses and Social Security cards in order to obtain employment in the U.S. Third, aliens broke the law when they worked in the U.S. without having the legal status to do so. Fourth, many employers broke the law when they knowingly hired illegal aliens. You do not reward criminal behavior by granting a pathway to citizenship. The rule of law requires federal government enforcement of immigration law by deporting illegal aliens.

When you multiple these crimes by millions, you are dealing with a crime wave and mass invasion that has been sanctioned by the progressive ruling elites in Washington D.C. from both the Democratic and Republican parties who favor open borders and token enforcement of existing federal immigration law.

Why did these ruling elites ignore the will of the American people? The Democratic Party favors open borders and a pathway to citizenship or amnesty for illegal aliens because they believe the overwhelming majority of these illegal aliens will, when they become citizens, vote for Democratic candidates.

Progressive Republicans likewise favored open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens because many of the businesses that employ illegal aliens also contribute to the campaigns of Republican candidates.

Both political parties could care less that millions of American citizens are unemployed as a direct result of policies that encouraged massive illegal immigration. Staying in power, not the welfare of the American people, was and is the top priority of these politicians.

The 11 million illegal aliens and their dependents should be given the choice to either voluntarily return to their country of origin by a certain date or face deportation under existing federal immigration law. With over 25 million American citizens seeking permanent full time jobs, this would immediately reduce the number of unemployed citizens by millions.

Most Americans would agree with two of Obama’s principles of comprehensive immigration reform namely “to stay focused on enforcement” and “to bring our legal immigration system into the 21st century.”  However, most Americans would not agree with Obama to first give the 11 million plus illegal aliens a pathway to citizenship or amnesty for illegal aliens before first controlling and securing the borders and enforcing existing immigration law.

There is a saying in Texas, “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.”

“You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.” — Abraham Lincoln

Raymond Thomas Pronk is host of the Pronk Pops Show on KDUX web radio from 3-5 p.m. Fridays and author of the companion blog http://www.pronkpops.wordpress.com/

Background Articles and Videos

Opinion: Will Obama Poison Immigration Reform?

Reagan on immingration 2 

Numbers USA – Immigration By the Numbers – Part 1

Numbers USA – Immigration By the Numbers – Part 2 of 2

E-Verify: Employment Verification 

How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the US?  – Walsh – 1 

How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the US?  – Walsh – 2

How Many Illegal Aliens Are in the United States? Presentation by James H. Walsh, Associate General Counsel of the former INS – part 2.

Census Bureau estimates of the number of illegals in the U.S. are suspect and may represent significant undercounts.  The studies presented by these authors show that the numbers of illegal aliens in the U.S. could range from 20 to 38 million.

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
______________________
For Immediate Release                          January 29, 2013
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
ON COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM
Del Sol High School
Las Vegas, Nevada

11:40 A.M. PST

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you!  (Applause.)  Thank you!  Thank you so much.  (Applause.)  It is good to be back in Las Vegas!  (Applause.)  And it is good to be among so many good friends.

Let me start off by thanking everybody at Del Sol High School for hosting us.  (Applause.)  Go Dragons!  Let me especially thank your outstanding principal, Lisa Primas.  (Applause.)

There are all kinds of notable guests here, but I just want to mention a few.  First of all, our outstanding Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, is here.  (Applause.)  Our wonderful Secretary of the Interior, Ken Salazar.  (Applause.)  Former Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solis.  (Applause.)  Two of the outstanding members of the congressional delegation from Nevada, Steve Horsford and Dina Titus.  (Applause.)  Your own mayor, Carolyn Goodman.  (Applause.)

But we also have some mayors that flew in because they know how important the issue we’re going to talk about today is.  Marie Lopez Rogers from Avondale, Arizona.  (Applause.)  Kasim Reed from Atlanta, Georgia.  (Applause.)  Greg Stanton from Phoenix, Arizona.  (Applause.)  And Ashley Swearengin from Fresno, California.  (Applause.)

And all of you are here, as well as some of the top labor leaders in the country.  And we are just so grateful.  Some outstanding business leaders are here as well.  And of course, we’ve got wonderful students here, so I could not be prouder of our students.  (Applause.)

Now, those of you have a seat, feel free to take a seat.  I don’t mind.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  I love you, Mr. President!

THE PRESIDENT:  I love you back.  (Applause.)

Now, last week, I had the honor of being sworn in for a second term as President of the United States.  (Applause.)  And during my inaugural address, I talked about how making progress on the defining challenges of our time doesn’t require us to settle every debate or ignore every difference that we may have, but it does require us to find common ground and move forward in common purpose.  It requires us to act.

I know that some issues will be harder to lift than others.  Some debates will be more contentious.  That’s to be expected.  But the reason I came here today is because of a challenge where the differences are dwindling; where a broad consensus is emerging; and where a call for action can now be heard coming from all across America.  I’m here today because the time has come for common-sense, comprehensive immigration reform.  (Applause.)  The time is now.  Now is the time.  Now is the time.  Now is the time.

AUDIENCE:  Sí se puede!  Sí se puede!

THE PRESIDENT:  Now is the time.

I’m here because most Americans agree that it’s time to fix a system that’s been broken for way too long.  I’m here because business leaders, faith leaders, labor leaders, law enforcement, and leaders from both parties are coming together to say now is the time to find a better way to welcome the striving, hopeful immigrants who still see America as the land of opportunity.  Now is the time to do this so we can strengthen our economy and strengthen our country’s future.

Think about it — we define ourselves as a nation of immigrants.  That’s who we are — in our bones.  The promise we see in those who come here from every corner of the globe, that’s always been one of our greatest strengths.  It keeps our workforce young.  It keeps our country on the cutting edge.  And it’s helped build the greatest economic engine the world has ever known.

After all, immigrants helped start businesses like Google and Yahoo!.  They created entire new industries that, in turn, created new jobs and new prosperity for our citizens.  In recent years, one in four high-tech startups in America were founded by immigrants.  One in four new small business owners were immigrants, including right here in Nevada — folks who came here seeking opportunity and now want to share that opportunity with other Americans.

But we all know that today, we have an immigration system that’s out of date and badly broken; a system that’s holding us back instead of helping us grow our economy and strengthen our middle class.

Right now, we have 11 million undocumented immigrants in America; 11 million men and women from all over the world who live their lives in the shadows.  Yes, they broke the rules.  They crossed the border illegally.  Maybe they overstayed their visas.  Those are facts.  Nobody disputes them.  But these 11 million men and women are now here.  Many of them have been here for years.  And the overwhelming majority of these individuals aren’t looking for any trouble.  They’re contributing members of the community.  They’re looking out for their families.  They’re looking out for their neighbors.  They’re woven into the fabric of our lives.

Every day, like the rest of us, they go out and try to earn a living.  Often they do that in a shadow economy — a place where employers may offer them less than the minimum wage or make them work overtime without extra pay.  And when that happens, it’s not just bad for them, it’s bad for the entire economy.  Because all the businesses that are trying to do the right thing — that are hiring people legally, paying a decent wage, following the rules — they’re the ones who suffer.   They’ve got to compete against companies that are breaking the rules.  And the wages and working conditions of American workers are threatened, too.

So if we’re truly committed to strengthening our middle class and providing more ladders of opportunity to those who are willing to work hard to make it into the middle class, we’ve got to fix the system.

We have to make sure that every business and every worker in America is playing by the same set of rules.  We have to bring this shadow economy into the light so that everybody is held accountable — businesses for who they hire, and immigrants for getting on the right side of the law.  That’s common sense.  And that’s why we need comprehensive immigration reform.  (Applause.)

There’s another economic reason why we need reform.  It’s not just about the folks who come here illegally and have the effect they have on our economy.  It’s also about the folks who try to come here legally but have a hard time doing so, and the effect that has on our economy.

Right now, there are brilliant students from all over the world sitting in classrooms at our top universities.  They’re earning degrees in the fields of the future, like engineering and computer science.  But once they finish school, once they earn that diploma, there’s a good chance they’ll have to leave our country.  Think about that.

Intel was started with the help of an immigrant who studied here and then stayed here.  Instagram was started with the help of an immigrant who studied here and then stayed here.  Right now in one of those classrooms, there’s a student wrestling with how to turn their big idea — their Intel or Instagram — into a big business.  We’re giving them all the skills they need to figure that out, but then we’re going to turn around and tell them to start that business and create those jobs in China or India or Mexico or someplace else?  That’s not how you grow new industries in America.  That’s how you give new industries to our competitors.   That’s why we need comprehensive immigration reform.  (Applause.)

Now, during my first term, we took steps to try and patch up some of the worst cracks in the system.

First, we strengthened security at the borders so that we could finally stem the tide of illegal immigrants.  We put more boots on the ground on the southern border than at any time in our history.  And today, illegal crossings are down nearly 80 percent from their peak in 2000.  (Applause.)

Second, we focused our enforcement efforts on criminals who are here illegally and who endanger our communities.  And today, deportations of criminals is at its highest level ever.  (Applause.)

And third, we took up the cause of the DREAMers — (applause) — the young people who were brought to this country as children, young people who have grown up here, built their lives here, have futures here.  We said that if you’re able to meet some basic criteria like pursuing an education, then we’ll consider offering you the chance to come out of the shadows so that you can live here and work here legally, so that you can finally have the dignity of knowing you belong.

But because this change isn’t permanent, we need Congress to act — and not just on the DREAM Act.  We need Congress to act on a comprehensive approach that finally deals with the 11 million undocumented immigrants who are in the country right now.  That’s what we need.  (Applause.)

Now, the good news is that for the first time in many years, Republicans and Democrats seem ready to tackle this problem together.  (Applause.)  Members of both parties, in both chambers, are actively working on a solution.  Yesterday, a bipartisan group of senators announced their principles for comprehensive immigration reform, which are very much in line with the principles I’ve proposed and campaigned on for the last few years.  So at this moment, it looks like there’s a genuine desire to get this done soon, and that’s very encouraging.

But this time, action must follow.  (Applause.)  We can’t allow immigration reform to get bogged down in an endless debate.  We’ve been debating this a very long time.  So it’s not as if we don’t know technically what needs to get done.  As a consequence, to help move this process along, today I’m laying out my ideas for immigration reform.  And my hope is that this provides some key markers to members of Congress as they craft a bill, because the ideas I’m proposing have traditionally been supported by both Democrats like Ted Kennedy and Republicans like President George W. Bush.  You don’t get that matchup very often.  (Laughter.)  So we know where the consensus should be.

Now, of course, there will be rigorous debate about many of the details, and every stakeholder should engage in real give and take in the process.  But it’s important for us to recognize that the foundation for bipartisan action is already in place.  And if Congress is unable to move forward in a timely fashion, I will send up a bill based on my proposal and insist that they vote on it right away.  (Applause.)

So the principles are pretty straightforward.  There are a lot of details behind it.  We’re going to hand out a bunch of paper so that everybody will know exactly what we’re talking about.  But the principles are pretty straightforward.

First, I believe we need to stay focused on enforcement.  That means continuing to strengthen security at our borders.  It means cracking down more forcefully on businesses that knowingly hire undocumented workers.  To be fair, most businesses want to do the right thing, but a lot of them have a hard time figuring out who’s here legally, who’s not.  So we need to implement a national system that allows businesses to quickly and accurately verify someone’s employment status.  And if they still knowingly hire undocumented workers, then we need to ramp up the penalties.

Second, we have to deal with the 11 million individuals who are here illegally.  We all agree that these men and women should have to earn their way to citizenship.  But for comprehensive immigration reform to work, it must be clear from the outset that there is a pathway to citizenship.  (Applause.)

We’ve got to lay out a path — a process that includes passing a background check, paying taxes, paying a penalty, learning English, and then going to the back of the line, behind all the folks who are trying to come here legally.  That’s only fair, right?  (Applause.)

So that means it won’t be a quick process but it will be a fair process.  And it will lift these individuals out of the shadows and give them a chance to earn their way to a green card and eventually to citizenship.  (Applause.)

And the third principle is we’ve got to bring our legal immigration system into the 21st century because it no longer reflects the realities of our time.  (Applause.)  For example, if you are a citizen, you shouldn’t have to wait years before your family is able to join you in America.  You shouldn’t have to wait years.  (Applause.)

If you’re a foreign student who wants to pursue a career in science or technology, or a foreign entrepreneur who wants to start a business with the backing of American investors, we should help you do that here.  Because if you succeed, you’ll create American businesses and American jobs.  You’ll help us grow our economy.  You’ll help us strengthen our middle class.

So that’s what comprehensive immigration reform looks like:  smarter enforcement; a pathway to earned citizenship; improvements in the legal immigration system so that we continue to be a magnet for the best and the brightest all around the world.  It’s pretty straightforward.

The question now is simple:  Do we have the resolve as a people, as a country, as a government to finally put this issue behind us?  I believe that we do.  I believe that we do.  (Applause.)  I believe we are finally at a moment where comprehensive immigration reform is within our grasp.

But I promise you this:  The closer we get, the more emotional this debate is going to become.  Immigration has always been an issue that enflames passions.  That’s not surprising.  There are few things that are more important to us as a society than who gets to come here and call our country home; who gets the privilege of becoming a citizen of the United States of America.  That’s a big deal.

When we talk about that in the abstract, it’s easy sometimes for the discussion to take on a feeling of “us” versus “them.”  And when that happens, a lot of folks forget that most of “us” used to be “them.”  We forget that.  (Applause.)

It’s really important for us to remember our history.  Unless you’re one of the first Americans, a Native American, you came from someplace else.  Somebody brought you.  (Applause.)

Ken Salazar, he’s of Mexican American descent, but he points that his family has been living where he lives for 400 years, so he didn’t immigrate anywhere.  (Laughter.)

The Irish who left behind a land of famine.  The Germans who fled persecution.  The Scandinavians who arrived eager to pioneer out west.  The Polish.  The Russians.  The Italians.  The Chinese.  The Japanese.  The West Indians.  The huddled masses who came through Ellis Island on one coast and Angel Island on the other.  (Applause.)  All those folks, before they were “us,” they were “them.”

And when each new wave of immigrants arrived, they faced resistance from those who were already here.  They faced hardship.  They faced racism.  They faced ridicule.  But over time, as they went about their daily lives, as they earned a living, as they raised a family, as they built a community, as their kids went to school here, they did their part to build a nation.

They were the Einsteins and the Carnegies.  But they were also the millions of women and men whose names history may not remember, but whose actions helped make us who we are; who built this country hand by hand, brick by brick.  (Applause.)  They all came here knowing that what makes somebody an American is not just blood or birth, but allegiance to our founding principles and the faith in the idea that anyone from anywhere can write the next great chapter of our story.

And that’s still true today.  Just ask Alan Aleman.  Alan is here this afternoon — where is Alan?  He’s around here — there he is right here.  (Applause.)  Alan was born in Mexico.  (Applause.)  He was brought to this country by his parents when he was a child.  Growing up, Alan went to an American school, pledged allegiance to the American flag, felt American in every way — and he was, except for one:  on paper.

In high school, Alan watched his friends come of age — driving around town with their new licenses, earning some extra cash from their summer jobs at the mall.  He knew he couldn’t do those things.  But it didn’t matter that much.  What mattered to Alan was earning an education so that he could live up to his God-given potential.

Last year, when Alan heard the news that we were going to offer a chance for folks like him to emerge from the shadows — even if it’s just for two years at a time — he was one of the first to sign up.  And a few months ago he was one of the first people in Nevada to get approved.  (Applause.)  In that moment, Alan said, “I felt the fear vanish.  I felt accepted.”

So today, Alan is in his second year at the College of Southern Nevada.  (Applause.)  Alan is studying to become a doctor.  (Applause.)  He hopes to join the Air Force.  He’s working hard every single day to build a better life for himself and his family.  And all he wants is the opportunity to do his part to build a better America.  (Applause.)

So in the coming weeks, as the idea of reform becomes more real and the debate becomes more heated, and there are folks who are trying to pull this thing apart, remember Alan and all those who share the same hopes and the same dreams.  Remember that this is not just a debate about policy.  It’s about people.  It’s about men and women and young people who want nothing more than the chance to earn their way into the American story.

Throughout our history, that has only made our nation stronger.  And it’s how we will make sure that this century is the same as the last:  an American century welcoming of everybody who aspires to do something more, and who is willing to work hard to do it, and is willing to pledge that allegiance to our flag.

Thank you.  God bless you.  And God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)

END                12:05 P.M. PST

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Clint Eastwood–Speaks To Empty Chair and Empty Suit Obama–Go Head Make My Day–Let Him Go–Videos

Posted on August 31, 2012. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Culture, Employment, Foreign Policy, government spending, Law, liberty, Links, media, Movies, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Raves, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , |

Full Clint Eastwood KILLS IT at the Republican National Convention RNC Eastwooding

40 Clint Eastwood Quotes Illustrating the Obama Years

Clint Eastwood Sudden Impact Coffee

Dirty Harry movies (Some famous Quotes)

170 Greatest Clint Eastwood Quotes

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Excellent Powder–Saving Millions of Lives With DDT–Videos

Posted on August 8, 2012. Filed under: Agriculture, American History, Babies, Biology, Blogroll, Business, Chemistry, College, Communications, Diasters, Economics, Education, Energy, Federal Government, Food, government, Health Care, High School, history, Inflation, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Programming, Psychology, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Religion, Resources, Science, Strategy, Video, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , |

John Stossel – DDT

Demonizing DDT: Challenging The Scare Campaign That Has Cost Millions of Lives

“In The Excellent Powder: DDT’s Political and Scientific History, Richard Tren and Donald Roberts argue that the infamous insecticide is the world’s greatest public-health success stories, saving millions of lives by preventing insect-borne disease. Unfortunately for those in areas still infested with mosquitoes and other flying bugs, DDT is also the world’s most-misunderstood substance, the target of a decades-long scientifically ignorant and ideologically motivated campaign that has vastly limited its use and applications.

From Rachel Carson in the 1960s to contemporary critics, DDT has been the object of what Roberts, a professor of tropical public health at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, calls “scare campaigns” that link DDT to “theoretical harms to wildlife and human life that simply don’t exist.”

Dubbed “the excellent powder” by Winston Churchill for its life-saving qualities, DDT has the potential to transform the developing world from a malarial hell into something else again. Yet as Tren, the winner of the 2009 Julian L. Simon Award, warns, under current international conventions, global DDT production is scheduled to be halted in 2017, thereby consigning much of the world to less-effective and more-expensive alternatives that will consign millions of poor people to living hell.

Reason.tv’s Nick Gillespie sat down with Tren and Roberts, who are part of Africa Fighting Malaria, to talk about how DDT got such a bad rap and what can be done to set the record straight.”

15-108 Science Matters:DDT & Modern Environmental Movement II

Malaria

“…Malaria is a mosquito-borne infectious disease of humans and other animals caused by protists (a type of microorganism) of the genus Plasmodium. The protists first infect the liver, then act as parasites within red blood cells, causing symptoms that typically include fever and headache, in severe cases progressing to coma or death. The disease is widespread in tropical and subtropical regions in a broad band around the equator, including much of Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, and the Americas.

Five species of Plasmodium can infect and be transmitted by humans. Severe malaria is largely caused by P. falciparum while the disease caused by P. vivax, P. ovale, and P. malariae is generally a milder form that is rarely fatal. The zoonotic species P. knowlesi, prevalent in Southeast Asia, causes malaria in macaques but can also cause severe infections in humans. Malaria is prevalent in tropical regions because the significant amounts of rainfall, consistently high temperatures and high humidity, along with stagnant waters in which mosquito larvae readily mature, provide them with the environment they need for continuous breeding. Disease transmission can be reduced by preventing mosquito bites by distribution of mosquito nets and insect repellents, or with mosquito-control measures such as spraying insecticides and draining standing water.

The World Health Organization has estimated that in 2010, there were 216 million documented cases of malaria. Around 655,000 people died from the disease, many of whom were children under the age of five.[1] The actual number of deaths may be significantly higher, as precise statistics are unavailable in many rural areas, and many cases are undocumented. P. falciparum — responsible for the most severe form of malaria — causes the vast majority of deaths associated with the disease. Malaria is commonly associated with poverty, and can indeed be a cause of poverty and a major hindrance to economic development.

Despite a clear need, no vaccine offering a high level of protection currently exists. Efforts to develop one are ongoing. Several medications are available to prevent malaria in travelers to malaria-endemic countries (prophylaxis). A variety of antimalarial medications are available. Severe malaria is treated with intravenous or intramuscular quinine or, since the mid-2000s, the artemisinin derivative artesunate, which is superior to quinine in both children and adults and is given in combination with a second anti-malarial such as mefloquine. Resistance has developed to several antimalarial drugs, most notably chloroquine and artemisinin.

Signs and symptoms

Main symptoms of malaria[2]

Typical fever patterns of malaria

The signs and symptoms of malaria typically begin 8–25 days following infection.[3] However, symptoms may occur later in those who have taken antimalarial medications as prevention.[4] The presentation may include fever, shivering, arthralgia (joint pain), vomiting, hemolytic anemia, jaundice, hemoglobinuria, retinal damage,[5] and convulsions. Approximately 30% of people however will no longer have a fever upon presenting to a health care facility.[4]

The classic symptom of malaria is cyclical occurrence of sudden coldness followed by rigor and then fever and sweating lasting about two hours or more, occurring every two days in P. vivax and P. ovale infections, and every three days for P. malariae. P. falciparum infection can cause recurrent fever every 36–48 hours or a less pronounced and almost continuous fever.[6] For reasons that are poorly understood, but that may be related to high intracranial pressure, children with malaria frequently exhibit abnormal posturing, a sign indicating severe brain damage.[7] Cerebral malaria is associated with retinal whitening, which may be a useful clinical sign in distinguishing malaria from other causes of fever.[8]

Severe malaria is usually caused by P. falciparum, and typically arises 6–14 days after infection.[9] Non-falciparum species have however been found to be the cause of ~14% of cases of severe malaria in some groups.[4] Consequences of severe malaria include coma and death if untreated—young children and pregnant women are especially vulnerable. Splenomegaly (enlarged spleen), severe headache, cerebral ischemia, hepatomegaly (enlarged liver), hypoglycemia, and hemoglobinuria with renal failure may occur. Renal failure is a feature of blackwater fever, where hemoglobin from lysed red blood cells leaks into the urine.[9]

Cause

A Plasmodium sporozoite traverses the cytoplasm of a mosquito midgut epithelial cell in this false-colour electron micrograph.

Malaria parasites are from the genus Plasmodium (phylum Apicomplexa). In humans, malaria is caused by P. falciparum, P. malariae, P. ovale, P. vivax and P. knowlesi.[10][11] Among those infected, P. falciparum is the most common species identified (~75%) followed by P. vivax (~20%).[4] P. falciparum accounts for the majority of deaths.[12] P. vivax proportionally is more common outside of Africa.[13] There have been documented human infections with several species of Plasmodium from higher apes; however, with the exception of P. knowlesi—a zoonotic species that causes malaria in macaques[11]—these are mostly of limited public health importance.[14]

Life cycle

The definitive hosts for malaria parasites are female mosquitoes of the Anopheles genus, which act as transmission vectors to humans and other vertebrates, the secondary hosts. Young mosquitoes first ingest the malaria parasite by feeding on an infected vertebrate carrier and the infected Anopheles mosquitoes eventually carry Plasmodium sporozoites in their salivary glands. A mosquito becomes infected when it takes a blood meal from an infected vertebrate. Once ingested, the parasite gametocytes taken up in the blood will further differentiate into male or female gametes and then fuse in the mosquito’s gut. This produces an ookinete that penetrates the gut lining and produces an oocyst in the gut wall. When the oocyst ruptures, it releases sporozoites that migrate through the mosquito’s body to the salivary glands, where they are then ready to infect a new human host. The sporozoites are injected into the skin, alongside saliva, when the mosquito takes a subsequent blood meal. This type of transmission is occasionally referred to as anterior station transfer.[15]

Only female mosquitoes feed on blood; male mosquitoes feed on plant nectar, and thus do not transmit the disease. The females of the Anopheles genus of mosquito prefer to feed at night. They usually start searching for a meal at dusk, and will continue throughout the night until taking a meal.[16] Malaria parasites can also be transmitted by blood transfusions, although this is rare.[17]

Recurrent malaria

Malaria recurs after treatment for three reasons. Recrudescence occurs when parasites are not cleared by treatment, whereas reinfection indicates complete clearance with new infection established from a separate infective mosquito bite; both can occur with any malaria parasite species. Relapse is specific to P. vivax and P. ovale and involves re-emergence of blood-stage parasites from latent parasites (hypnozoites) in the liver.[4] Describing a case of malaria as cured by observing the disappearance of parasites from the bloodstream can, therefore, be deceptive. The longest incubation period reported for a P. vivax infection is 30 years.[9] Approximately one in five of P. vivax malaria cases in temperate areas involve overwintering by hypnozoites, with relapses beginning the year after the mosquito bite.[18]

Pathogenesis

The life cycle of malaria parasites. A mosquito causes infection by taking a blood meal. First, sporozoites enter the bloodstream, and migrate to the liver. They infect liver cells, where they multiply into merozoites, rupture the liver cells, and return to the bloodstream. Then, the merozoites infect red blood cells, where they develop into ring forms, trophozoites and schizonts that in turn produce further merozoites. Sexual forms are also produced, which, if taken up by a mosquito, will infect the insect and continue the life cycle.

Malaria infection develops via two phases: one that involves the liver or hepatic system (exoerythrocytic), and one which involves red blood cells, or erythrocytes (erythrocytic). When an infected mosquito pierces a person’s skin to take a blood meal, sporozoites in the mosquito’s saliva enter the bloodstream and migrate to the liver where they infect hepatocytes, multiplying asexually and asymptomatically for a period of 8–30 days.[19] After a potential dormant period in the liver, these organisms differentiate to yield thousands of merozoites, which, following rupture of their host cells, escape into the blood and infect red blood cells to begin the erythrocytic stage of the life cycle.[19] The parasite escapes from the liver undetected by wrapping itself in the cell membrane of the infected host liver cell.[20]

Within the red blood cells, the parasites multiply further, again asexually, periodically breaking out of their hosts to invade fresh red blood cells. Several such amplification cycles occur. Thus, classical descriptions of waves of fever arise from simultaneous waves of merozoites escaping and infecting red blood cells.[19]

Some P. vivax sporozoites do not immediately develop into exoerythrocytic-phase merozoites, but instead produce hypnozoites that remain dormant for periods ranging from several months (6–12 months is typical) to as long as three years. After a period of dormancy, they reactivate and produce merozoites. Hypnozoites are responsible for long incubation and late relapses in P. vivax infections, although their existence in P. ovale is uncertain.[21]

The parasite is relatively protected from attack by the body’s immune system because for most of its human life cycle it resides within the liver and blood cells and is relatively invisible to immune surveillance. However, circulating infected blood cells are destroyed in the spleen. To avoid this fate, the P. falciparum parasite displays adhesive proteins on the surface of the infected blood cells, causing the blood cells to stick to the walls of small blood vessels, thereby sequestering the parasite from passage through the general circulation and the spleen.[22] The blockage of the microvasculature causes symptoms such as in placental and cerebral malaria. In cerebral malaria the sequestrated red blood cells can breach the blood–brain barrier possibly leading to coma.[23]

Micrograph of a placenta from a stillbirth due to maternal malaria. H&E stain. Red blood cells are anuclear; blue/black staining in bright red structures (red blood cells) indicate foreign nuclei from the parasites

Although the red blood cell surface adhesive proteins (called PfEMP1, for P. falciparum erythrocyte membrane protein 1) are exposed to the immune system, they do not serve as good immune targets, because of their extreme diversity; there are at least 60 variations of the protein within a single parasite and even more variants within whole parasite populations.[22] The parasite switches between a broad repertoire of PfEMP1 surface proteins, thus staying one step ahead of the pursuing immune system.[24]

Some merozoites turn into male and female gametocytes. If a mosquito pierces the skin of an infected person, it potentially picks up gametocytes within the blood. Fertilization and sexual recombination of the parasite occurs in the mosquito’s gut. New sporozoites develop and travel to the mosquito’s salivary gland, completing the cycle. Pregnant women are especially attractive to the mosquitoes, and malaria in pregnant women is an important cause of stillbirths, infant mortality and low birth weight,[25] particularly in P. falciparum infection, but also in other species infection, such as P. vivax.[26]

Genetic resistance

Main article: Genetic resistance to malaria

Due to the high levels of mortality and morbidity caused by malaria—especially the P. falciparum species—it is thought to have placed the greatest selective pressure on the human genome in recent history. Several diseases may provide some resistance to it including sickle cell disease, thalassaemias, glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency as well as the presence of Duffy antigens on the subject’s red blood cells.[27][28]

The impact of sickle cell anemia on malaria immunity is of particular interest. Sickle cell anemia causes a defect to the hemoglobin molecule in the blood. Instead of retaining the biconcave shape of a normal red blood cell, the modified hemoglobin S molecule causes the cell to sickle or distort into a curved shape. Due to the sickle shape, the molecule is not as effective in taking or releasing oxygen, and therefore malaria parasites cannot complete their life cycle in the cell. Individuals who are homozygous for sickle cell anemia seldom survive this defect, while those who are heterozygous experience immunity to the disease. Although the potential risk of death for those with the homozygous condition seems to be unfavorable to population survival, the trait is preserved because of the benefits provided by the heterozygous form.[29]

Malarial hepatopathy

Hepatic dysfunction as a result of malaria is rare and is usually a result of a coexisting liver condition such as viral hepatitis and chronic liver disease.[30] Hepatitis, which is characterized by inflammation of the liver, is not actually present in what is called malarial hepatitis; the term as used here invokes the reduced liver function associated with severe malaria.[30] While traditionally considered a rare occurrence, malarial hepatopathy has seen an increase in malaria endemic areas, particularly in Southeast Asia and India.[30] Liver compromise in people with malaria correlates with a greater likelihood of complications and death.[30]

Diagnosis

Main article: Diagnosis of malaria

Malaria is typically diagnosed by the microscopic examination of blood using blood films or using antigen-based rapid diagnostic tests.[31][32] Rapid diagnostic tests that detect P. vivax are not as effective as those targeting P. falciparum.[33] They also are unable to tell how many parasites are present.[4] Areas that cannot afford laboratory diagnostic tests often use only a history of subjective fever as the indication to treat for malaria.[34] Polymerase chain reaction based tests have been developed, though these are not widely implemented in malaria-endemic regions as of 2012, due to their complexity.[4]

Classification

Malaria is divided into severe and uncomplicated by the World Health Organization (WHO).[4] Severe malaria is diagnosed when any of the following criteria are present, otherwise it is considered uncomplicated.[35]

  • Decreased consciousness
  • Significant weakness such that the person is unable to walk
  • Inability to feed
  • Two or more convulsions
  • Low blood pressure (less than 70 mmHg in adults or 50 mmHg in children)
  • Breathing problems
  • Circulatory shock
  • Kidney failure or hemoglobin in the urine
  • Bleeding problems, or hemoglobin less than 5 g/dl
  • Pulmonary edema
  • Low blood glucose (less than 2.2 mmol/l / 40 mg/dl)
  • Acidosis or lactate levels of greater than 5 mmol/l
  • A parasite level in the blood of greater than 2%

Prevention

Anopheles albimanus mosquito feeding on a human arm. This mosquito is a vector of malaria and mosquito control is an effective way of reducing the incidence of malaria.

Methods used to prevent malaria include medications, mosquito eradication and the prevention of bites. The presence of malaria in an area requires a combination of high human population density, high mosquito population density and high rates of transmission from humans to mosquitoes and from mosquitoes to humans. If any of these is lowered sufficiently, the parasite will eventually disappear from that area, as happened in North America, Europe and much of the Middle East. However, unless the parasite is eliminated from the whole world, it could become re-established if conditions revert to a combination that favours the parasite’s reproduction.[36] Many countries are seeing an increasing number of imported malaria cases owing to extensive travel and migration.

Many researchers argue that prevention of malaria may be more cost-effective than treatment of the disease in the long run, but the capital costs required are out of reach of many of the world’s poorest people. There is a wide disparity in the costs of control (i.e. maintenance of low endemicity) and elimination programs between countries. For example, in China—whose government in 2010 announced a strategy to pursue malaria elimination in the Chinese provinces—the required investment is a small proportion of public expenditure on health. In contrast, a similar program in Tanzania would cost an estimated one-fifth of the public health budget.[37]

Vector control

Further information: Mosquito control

Man spraying kerosene oil to protect against mosquitoes carrying malaria, Panama Canal Zone 1912

Efforts to eradicate malaria by eliminating mosquitoes have been successful in some areas. Malaria was once common in the United States and southern Europe, but vector control programs, in conjunction with the monitoring and treatment of infected humans, eliminated it from those regions. In some areas, the draining of wetland breeding grounds and better sanitation were adequate. Malaria was eliminated from most parts of the USA in the early 20th century by such methods, and the use of the pesticide DDT and other means eliminated it from the remaining pockets in the South by 1951.[38] (see National Malaria Eradication Program)

Before DDT, malaria was successfully eradicated or controlled in tropical areas like Brazil and Egypt by removing or poisoning the breeding grounds of the mosquitoes or the aquatic habitats of the larva stages, for example by applying the highly toxic arsenic compound Paris Green to places with standing water. This method has seen little application in Africa for more than half a century.[39]

A more targeted and ecologically friendly vector control strategy involves genetic manipulation of malaria mosquitoes. Advances in genetic engineering technologies make it possible to introduce foreign DNA into the mosquito genome and either decrease the lifespan of the mosquito, or make it more resistant to the malaria parasite.[40] Sterile insect technique is a genetic control method whereby large numbers of sterile males mosquitoes are reared and released. Mating with wild females reduces the wild population in the subsequent generation; repeated releases eventually eradicate the target population. Progress towards transgenic, or genetically modified, insects suggests that wild mosquito populations could be made malaria resistant. Successful replacement of current populations with a new genetically modified population relies upon a drive mechanism, such as transposable elements to allow for non-Mendelian inheritance of the gene of interest. Although this approach has been used successfully to eradicate some parasitic diseases of veterinary importance, technological problems have hindered its effective deployment with malaria vector species.[40]

Indoor residual spraying

Further information: Indoor residual spraying and DDT and malaria

Indoor residual spraying (IRS) is the practice of spraying insecticides on the interior walls of homes in malaria-affected areas. After feeding, many mosquito species rest on a nearby surface while digesting the bloodmeal, so if the walls of dwellings have been coated with insecticides, the resting mosquitoes will be killed before they can bite another victim and transfer the malaria parasite.[41]

The first pesticide used for IRS was DDT.[38] Although it was initially used exclusively to combat malaria, its use quickly spread to agriculture. In time, pest control, rather than disease control, came to dominate DDT use, and this large-scale agricultural use led to the evolution of resistant mosquitoes in many regions. The DDT resistance shown by Anopheles mosquitoes can be compared to antibiotic resistance shown by bacteria. The overuse of antibacterial soaps and antibiotics led to antibiotic resistance in bacteria, similar to how overspraying of DDT on crops led to DDT resistance in Anopheles mosquitoes. During the 1960s, awareness of the negative consequences of its indiscriminate use increased, ultimately leading to bans on agricultural applications of DDT in many countries in the 1970s.[42]

The World Health Organization currently advises the use of 12 insecticides in IRS operations, including DDT as well as alternative insecticides (such as the pyrethroids permethrin and deltamethrin).[43] This public health use of small amounts of DDT is permitted under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), which prohibits the agricultural use of DDT.[42] However, because of its legacy, many developed countries previously discouraged DDT use even in small quantities.[44]

One problem with all forms of IRS is insecticide resistance via evolution. Mosquitoes that are affected by IRS tend to rest and live indoors, and due to the irritation caused by spraying, their descendants tend to rest and live outdoors, meaning that they are not as affected—if affected at all—by the IRS, which greatly reduces its effectiveness as a defense mechanism.[45]

Mosquito nets

Main article: Mosquito net

Mosquito nets create a protective barrier against malaria-carrying mosquitoes that bite at night.

Mosquito nets help keep mosquitoes away from people and significantly reduce infection rates and transmission of malaria. The nets are not a perfect barrier and they are often treated with an insecticide designed to kill the mosquito before it has time to search for a way past the net. Insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) are estimated to be twice as effective as untreated nets and offer greater than 70% protection compared with no net.[40] Although ITNs are proven to be very effective against malaria, only about 13% of households in sub-Saharan countries own them.[46] Since the Anopheles mosquitoes feed at night, the preferred method is to hang a large “bed net” above the center of a bed to drape over it completely.[47]

Other methods

Community participation and health education strategies promoting awareness of malaria and the importance of control measures have been successfully used to reduce the incidence of malaria in some areas of the developing world.[48] Recognizing the disease in the early stages can stop the disease from becoming fatal. Education can also inform people to cover over areas of stagnant, still water, such as water tanks that are ideal breeding grounds for the parasite and mosquito, thus cutting down the risk of the transmission between people. This is generally used in urban areas where there are large centers of population in a confined space and transmission would be most likely in these areas.[49]

Other interventions for the control of malaria include mass drug administrations[33] and intermittent preventive therapy.[50]

Medications

Main article: Malaria prophylaxis

Several drugs, most of which are used for treatment of malaria, can be taken to prevent contracting the disease during travel to endemic areas. Chloroquine may be used where the parasite is still sensitive.[51] However, due to resistance one of three medications—mefloquine (Lariam), doxycycline (available generically), or the combination of atovaquone and proguanil hydrochloride (Malarone)—is frequently needed.[51] Doxycycline and the atovaquone and proguanil combination are the best tolerated; mefloquine is associated with higher rates of neurological and psychiatric symptoms.[51]

The prophylactic effect does not begin immediately upon starting the drugs, so people temporarily visiting malaria-endemic areas usually begin taking the drugs one to two weeks before arriving and should continue taking them for four weeks after leaving (with the exception of atovaquone proguanil that only needs to be started two days prior and continued for seven days afterwards). Generally, these drugs are taken daily or weekly, at a lower dose than is used for treatment of a person who contracts the disease. Use of prophylactic drugs is seldom practical for full-time residents of malaria-endemic areas, and their use is usually restricted to short-term visitors and travelers to malarial regions. This is due to the cost of purchasing the drugs, negative adverse effects from long-term use, and because some effective anti-malarial drugs are difficult to obtain outside of wealthy nations.[52] The use of prophylactic drugs where malaria-bearing mosquitoes are present may encourage the development of partial immunity.[53]

Treatment

Further information: Antimalarial medication

The treatment of malaria depends on the severity of the disease; whether people can take oral drugs or must be admitted depends on the assessment and the experience of the clinician.

Uncomplicated malaria

Uncomplicated malaria may be treated with oral medications. The most effective strategy for P. falciparum infection is the use of artemisinins in combination with other antimalarials (known as artemisinin-combination therapy).[54] This is done to reduce the risk of resistance against artemisinin.[54] These additional antimalarials include amodiaquine, lumefantrine, mefloquine or sulfadoxine/pyrimethamine.[35] Another recommended combination is dihydroartemisinin and piperaquine.[35] In the 2000s (decade), malaria with partial resistance to artemisins emerged in Southeast Asia.[55][56]

Severe malaria

Severe malaria requires the parenteral administration of antimalarial drugs. Until the mid-2000s the most used treatment for severe malaria was quinine, but artesunate has been shown to be superior to quinine in both children[57] and adults.[58][59] Treatment of severe malaria also involves supportive measures that are optimally performed in a critical care unit, including management of high fevers (hyperpyrexia) and the subsequent seizures that may result from it, and monitoring for respiratory depression, hypoglycemia, and hypokalemia.[60] Infection with P. vivax, P. ovale or P. malariae is usually treated on an outpatient basis (while a person is at home). Treatment of P. vivax requires both treatment of blood stages (with chloroquine or ACT) as well as clearance of liver forms with primaquine.[61]

Prognosis

Disability-adjusted life yearfor malaria per 100,000 inhabitants in 2004.

   no data
   <10
   10–100
   100–500
   500–1000
   1000–1500
   1500–2000
   2000–2500
   2500–2750
   2750–3000
   3000–3250
   3250–3500
   ≥3500

Severe malaria can progress extremely rapidly and cause death within hours or days.[9] In the most severe cases of the disease, fatality rates can reach 20%, even with intensive care and treatment.[4] Over the longer term, developmental impairments have been documented in children who have suffered episodes of severe malaria.[62] It causes widespread anemia during a period of rapid brain development and also direct brain damage. This neurologic damage results from cerebral malaria to which children are more vulnerable.[62] When properly treated, people with malaria can usually expect a complete recovery.[63]

Epidemiology

Map showing the distribution of malaria in the world.[64]  :  Elevated occurrence of chloroquine- or multi-resistant malaria :  Occurrence of chloroquine-resistant malaria :  No plasmodium falciparum or chloroquine-resistance :  No malaria

Based on documented cases, the WHO estimates that there were 216 million cases of malaria in 2010 resulting in 655,000 deaths.[1] An estimate in The Lancet, based on a systematic analysis of all available mortality data combined with empirical methods for estimating causes of death, places the number of deaths in 2010 at 1.24 million.[65][66] The majority of cases occur in children under five years old;[67] pregnant women are also especially vulnerable. Despite efforts to reduce transmission and increase treatment, there has been little change in which areas are at risk of this disease since 1992.[68] Indeed, if the prevalence of malaria stays on its present upwards course, the death rate could double in the next twenty years.[69] Precise statistics are unknown because many cases occur in rural areas where people do not have access to hospitals or the means to afford health care. As a consequence, the majority of cases are undocumented.[69]

Although coinfection with HIV and malaria does increase mortality, this is less of a problem than with HIV/tuberculosis coinfection, due to the two diseases usually attacking different age ranges, with malaria being most common in the young and active tuberculosis most common in the old.[70] Although HIV/malaria coinfection produces less severe symptoms than the interaction between HIV and TB, HIV and malaria do contribute to each other’s spread. This effect comes from malaria increasing viral load and HIV infection increasing a person’s susceptibility to malaria infection.[71]

Malaria is presently endemic in a broad band around the equator, in areas of the Americas, many parts of Asia, and much of Africa; however, it is in sub-Saharan Africa where 85–90% of malaria fatalities occur.[72] The geographic distribution of malaria within large regions is complex, and malaria-afflicted and malaria-free areas are often found close to each other.[73] Malaria is prevalent in tropical regions because of the significant amounts of rainfall, consistent high temperatures and high humidity, along with stagnant waters in which mosquito larvae readily mature, providing them with the environment they need for continuous breeding.[74] In drier areas, outbreaks of malaria have been predicted with reasonable accuracy by mapping rainfall.[75] Malaria is more common in rural areas than in cities; this is in contrast to dengue fever where urban areas present the greater risk.[76] For example, several cities in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia are essentially malaria-free, but the disease is present in many rural regions.[77] By contrast, malaria in Africa is present in both rural and urban areas, though the risk is lower in the larger cities.[78] The Wellcome Trust, UK, has funded the Malaria Atlas Project to map global endemic levels of malaria, providing a more contemporary and robust means with which to assess current and future malaria disease burden.[79] This effort led to the publication of a map of P. falciparum endemicity in 2010.[80] As of 2010, countries with the highest death rate per 100,000 population are Cote d’Ivoire with (86.15), Angola (56.93) and Burkina Faso (50.66) – all in Africa.[81]

History

Main article: History of malaria

Malaria has infected humans for over 50,000 years, and Plasmodium may have been a human pathogen for the entire history of the species.[82] Close relatives of the human malaria parasites remain common in chimpanzees. Some new evidence suggests that the most virulent strain of human malaria may have originated in gorillas.[83]

References to the unique periodic fevers of malaria are found throughout recorded history, beginning in 2700 BC in China.[84] Malaria may have contributed to the decline of the Roman Empire,[85] and was so pervasive in Rome that it was known as the “Roman fever”.[86] Several regions in ancient Rome were considered at-risk for the disease because of the favorable conditions present for malaria vectors. This included areas such as southern Italy, the island of Sardinia, the Pontine Marshes, the lower regions of coastal Etruria and the city of Rome along the Tiber River. The presence of stagnant water in these places was preferred by mosquitoes for breeding grounds. Irrigated gardens, swamp-like grounds, runoff from agriculture, and drainage problems from road construction led to the increase of standing water.[87]

The term malaria originates from Medieval Italian: mala aria — “bad air”; the disease was formerly called ague or marsh fever due to its association with swamps and marshland.[88] Malaria was once common in most of Europe and North America,[89] where it is no longer endemic,[90] though imported cases do occur.[91]

British doctor Ronald Ross received the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1902 for his work on malaria.

Malaria was the most important health hazard encountered by U.S. troops in the South Pacific during World War II, where about 500,000 men were infected.[92] According to Joseph Patrick Byrne, “Sixty thousand American soldiers died of malaria during the African and South Pacific campaigns.”[93] Scientific studies on malaria made their first significant advance in 1880, when a French army doctor working in the military hospital of Constantine in Algeria named Charles Louis Alphonse Laveran observed parasites for the first time, inside the red blood cells of people suffering from malaria. He therefore proposed that malaria is caused by this organism, the first time a protist was identified as causing disease.[94] For this and later discoveries, he was awarded the 1907 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine. The malarial parasite was called Plasmodium by the Italian scientists Ettore Marchiafava and Angelo Celli.[95] A year later, Carlos Finlay, a Cuban doctor treating people with yellow fever in Havana, provided strong evidence that mosquitoes were transmitting disease to and from humans.[96] This work followed earlier suggestions by Josiah C. Nott,[97] and work by Sir Patrick Manson, the “father of tropical medicine”, on the transmission of filariasis.[98]

In April 1894, a Scottish physician Sir Ronald Ross visited Sir Patrick Manson at his house on Queen Anne Street, London. This visit was the start of four years of collaboration and fervent research that culminated in 1898 when Ross, who was working in the Presidency General Hospital in Calcutta, proved the complete life-cycle of the malaria parasite in mosquitoes. He thus proved that the mosquito was the vector for malaria in humans by showing that certain mosquito species transmit malaria to birds. He isolated malaria parasites from the salivary glands of mosquitoes that had fed on infected birds.[99] For this work, Ross received the 1902 Nobel Prize in Medicine. After resigning from the Indian Medical Service, Ross worked at the newly established Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and directed malaria-control efforts in Egypt, Panama, Greece and Mauritius.[100] The findings of Finlay and Ross were later confirmed by a medical board headed by Walter Reed in 1900. Its recommendations were implemented by William C. Gorgas in the health measures undertaken during construction of the Panama Canal. This public-health work saved the lives of thousands of workers and helped develop the methods used in future public-health campaigns against the disease.[101]

The first effective treatment for malaria came from the bark of cinchona tree, which contains quinine. This tree grows on the slopes of the Andes, mainly in Peru. The indigenous peoples of Peru made a tincture of cinchona to control malaria. The Jesuits noted the efficacy of the practice and introduced the treatment to Europe during the 1640s, where it was rapidly accepted.[102] It was not until 1820 that the active ingredient, quinine, was extracted from the bark, isolated and named by the French chemists Pierre Joseph Pelletier and Joseph Bienaimé Caventou.[103][104] Quinine become the predominant malarial medication until the 1920s, when other medications began to be developed. In the 1940s, chloroquine replaced quinine as the treatment of both uncomplicated and severe falciparum malaria until resistance supervened, first in Southeast Asia and South America in the 1950s and then globally in the 1980s.[59] Artemisinins, discovered by Chinese scientists in the 1970s, are now the recommended treatment for falciparum malaria, administered in combination with other antimalarials as well as in severe disease.[105]

Society and culture

Malaria is not just a disease commonly associated with poverty but also a cause of poverty and a major hindrance to economic development.[106] Tropical regions are affected most; however, malaria’s furthest extent reaches into some temperate zones with extreme seasonal changes. The disease has been associated with major negative economic effects on regions where it is widespread. During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, it was a major factor in the slow economic development of the American southern states.[107] A comparison of average per capita GDP in 1995, adjusted for parity of purchasing power, between countries with malaria and countries without malaria gives a fivefold difference ($1,526 USD versus $8,268 USD). In countries where malaria is common, average per capita GDP has risen (between 1965 and 1990) only 0.4% per year, compared to 2.4% per year in other countries.[108]

Poverty is both a cause and effect of malaria, since the poor do not have the financial capacities to prevent or treat the disease. In its entirety, the economic impact of malaria has been estimated to cost Africa $12 billion USD every year. The economic impact includes costs of health care, working days lost due to sickness, days lost in education, decreased productivity due to brain damage from cerebral malaria, and loss of investment and tourism.[67] In some countries with a heavy malaria burden, the disease may account for as much as 40% of public health expenditure, 30–50% of admissions to hospital, and up to 50% of outpatient visits.[109] The slow demographic transition in Africa may be partly attributed to malaria. Total fertility rates were best explained by child mortality, as measured indirectly by infant mortality, in a 2007 study.[110]

A study on the effect of malaria on IQ in a sample of Mexicans found that exposure during the birth year to malaria eradication was associated with increases in IQ. It also increased the probability of employment in a skilled occupation. The author suggests that this may be one explanation for the Flynn effect and that this may be an important explanation for the link between national malaria burden and economic development.[111] The cognitive abilities and school performance are impaired in sub-groups of people (with either cerebral malaria or uncomplicated malaria) when compared with healthy controls. Studies comparing cognitive functions before and after treatment for acute malarial illness continued to show significantly impaired school performance and cognitive abilities even after recovery. Malaria prophylaxis was shown to improve cognitive function and school performance in clinical trials when compared to placebo groups.[62] April 25 is World Malaria Day.[81]

Counterfeit and substandard drugs

Sophisticated counterfeits have been found in several Asian countries such as Cambodia,[112] China,[113] Indonesia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam, and are an important cause of avoidable death in those countries.[114] The WHO said that studies indicate that up to 40% of artesunate based malaria medications are counterfeit, especially in the Greater Mekong region and have established a rapid alert system to enable information about counterfeit drugs to be rapidly reported to the relevant authorities in participating countries.[115] There is no reliable way for doctors or lay people to detect counterfeit drugs without help from a laboratory. Companies are attempting to combat the persistence of counterfeit drugs by using new technology to provide security from source to distribution.[116]

Another clinical and public health concern is the proliferation of substandard antimalarial medicines resulting from inappropriate concentration of ingredients, contamination with other drugs or toxic impurities, poor quality ingredients, poor stability and inadequate packaging.[117] A 2012 study demonstrated that roughly one-third of antimalarial medications in Southeast Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa failed chemical analysis, packaging analysis, or were falsified.[118]

War

Throughout history, the contraction of malaria (via natural outbreaks as well as via infliction of the disease as a biological warfare agent) has played a prominent role in the fortunes of government rulers, nation-states, military personnel, and military actions. “Malaria Site: History of Malaria During Wars” addresses the devastating impact of malaria in numerous well-known conflicts, beginning in June 323 B.C. That site’s authors note: “Many great warriors succumbed to malaria after returning from the warfront and advance of armies into continents was prevented by malaria. In many conflicts, more troops were killed by malaria than in combat.”[119] The Centers for Disease Control (“CDC”) traces the history of malaria and its impacts farther back, to 2700 BCE.[120]

In 1910, Nobel Prize in Medicine-winner Ronald Ross (himself a malaria survivor), published a book titled The Prevention of Malaria that included a chapter titled “The Prevention of Malaria in War.” The chapter’s author, Colonel C. H. Melville, Professor of Hygiene at Royal Army Medical College in London, addressed the prominent role that malaria has historically played during wars and advised: “A specially selected medical officer should be placed in charge of these operations with executive and disciplinary powers [...].”

Significant financial investments have been made to procure existing and create new anti-malarial agents. During World War I and World War II, the supplies of the natural anti-malaria drugs, cinchona bark and quinine, proved to be inadequate to supply military personnel and substantial funding was funneled into research and development of other drugs and vaccines. American military organizations conducting such research initiatives include the Navy Medical Research Center, Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, and the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases of the US Armed Forces.[119]

Additionally, initiatives have been founded such as Malaria Control in War Areas (MCWA), established in 1942, and its successor, the Communicable Disease Center (now known as the Centers for Disease Control) established in 1946. According to the CDC, MCWA “was established to control malaria around military training bases in the southern United States and its territories, where malaria was still problematic” and, during these activities, to “train state and local health department officials in malaria control techniques and strategies.” The CDC’s Malaria Division continued that mission, successfully reducing malaria in the United States, after which the organization expanded its focus to include “prevention, surveillance, and technical support both domestically and internationally.”[120]

Eradication efforts

Several notable attempts are being made to eliminate the parasite from sections of the world, or to eradicate it worldwide. In 2006, the organization Malaria No More set a public goal of eliminating malaria from Africa by 2015, and the organization plans to dissolve if that goal is accomplished.[121] Several malaria vaccines are in clinical trials, which are intended to provide protection for children in endemic areas and reduce the speed of transmission of the disease. As of 2012, The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria has distributed 230 million insecticide-treated nets intended to stop mosquito-born transmission of malaria.[122] According to director Inder Singh, the U.S.-based Clinton Foundation has significantly reduced the cost of drugs to treat malaria, and is working to further reduce the spread of the disease.[123] Other efforts, such as the Malaria Atlas Project focus on analyzing climate and weather information required to accurately predict the spread of malaria based on the availability of habitat of malaria-carrying parasites.[79]

Malaria has been successfully eradicated in certain areas. The Republic of Mauritius, a tropical island located in the western Indian Ocean, considered ecological connections to malaria transmission when constructing their current plan for malaria control. To prevent mosquitoes from breeding in aquatic areas, DDT is used in moderate amounts. Additionally, larvae-eating fish are placed in water sources to remove the malaria vectors before they become a threat to the human population. Obstructions are also removed from these sources to maintain water flow and reduce stagnant water. Similarly, marsh or swamp-like environments are drained and filled to diminish mosquito breeding grounds. These actions have produced positive results. The program has cut infection and death rates tremendously, and is cost effective, only requiring $1USD per head each year. This success is a clear indication that responses to adverse environmental conditions can decrease rates of disease.[124]

Research

With the onset of drug-resistant Plasmodium parasites, new strategies are required to combat the widespread disease. One such approach lies in the introduction of synthetic pyridoxal-amino acid adducts, which are channeled into the parasite. Thus, trapped upon phosphorylation by plasmodial PdxK (pyridoxine/pyridoxal kinase), the proliferation of Plasmodium parasites is effectively hindered by a novel compound, PT3, a cyclic pyridoxyl-tryptophan methyl ester, without harming human cells.[125]

Malaria parasites contain apicoplasts, an organelle usually found in plants, complete with their own functioning genomes. These apicoplasts are thought to have originated through the endosymbiosis of algae and play a crucial role in various aspects of parasite metabolism, for example in fatty acid biosynthesis.[126] As of 2003, 466 proteins have been found to be produced by apicoplasts[127] and these are now being investigated as possible targets for novel anti-malarial drugs.[126]

Malaria vaccines have been an elusive goal of research. The first promising studies demonstrating the potential for a malaria vaccine were performed in 1967 by immunizing mice with live, radiation-attenuated sporozoites, which provided significant protection to the mice upon subsequent injection with normal, viable sporozoites.[128] Since the 1970s, there has been a considerable effort to develop similar vaccination strategies within humans. It was determined that an individual can be protected from a P. falciparum infection if they receive over 1,000 bites from infected yet irradiated mosquitoes.[129]

Immunization

Main article: Malaria vaccine

Immunity (or, more accurately, tolerance) does occur naturally, but only in response to repeated infection with multiple strains of malaria.[130] A completely effective vaccine is not yet available for malaria, although several vaccines are under development.[131] SPf66 was tested extensively in endemic areas in the 1990s, but clinical trials showed it to be insufficiently effective.[132] Other vaccine candidates, targeting the blood-stage of the parasite’s life cycle, have also been insufficient on their own.[133] Several potential vaccines targeting the pre-erythrocytic stage are being developed, with RTS,S showing the most promising results so far.[129]

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

DDT

‘…DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) is an organochlorine insecticide which is a white, crystalline solid, tasteless, and almost odorless. Technical DDT has been formulated in almost every conceivable form including solutions in xylene or petroleum distillates, emulsifiable concentrates, water-wettable powders, granules, aerosols, smoke candles, and charges for vaporisers and lotions.[2]

First synthesized in 1874, DDT’s insecticidal properties were not discovered until 1939, and it was used with great success in the second half of World War II to control malaria and typhus among civilians and troops. The Swiss chemist Paul Hermann Müller was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1948 “for his discovery of the high efficiency of DDT as a contact poison against several arthropods.”[3] After the war, DDT was made available for use as an agricultural insecticide, and soon its production and use skyrocketed.[4]

In 1962, Silent Spring by American biologist Rachel Carson was published. The book catalogued the environmental impacts of the indiscriminate spraying of DDT in the US and questioned the logic of releasing large amounts of chemicals into the environment without fully understanding their effects on ecology or human health. The book suggested that DDT and other pesticides may cause cancer and that their agricultural use was a threat to wildlife, particularly birds. Its publication was one of the signature events in the birth of the environmental movement, and resulted in a large public outcry that eventually led to DDT being banned in the US in 1972.[5] DDT was subsequently banned for agricultural use worldwide under the Stockholm Convention, but its limited use in disease vector control continues to this day and remains controversial.[6][7]

Along with the passage of the Endangered Species Act, the US ban on DDT is cited by scientists as a major factor in the comeback of the bald eagle, the national bird of the United States, from near-extinction in the contiguous US.[8]

Properties and chemistry

DDT is similar in structure to the insecticide methoxychlor and the acaricide dicofol. It is a highly hydrophobic, nearly insoluble in water but has a good solubility in most organic solvents, fats, and oils. DDT does not occur naturally, but is produced by the reaction of chloral (CCl3CHO) with chlorobenzene (C6H5Cl) in the presence of sulfuric acid, which acts as a catalyst. Trade names that DDT has been marketed under include Anofex (Geigy Chemical Corp.), Cezarex, Chlorophenothane, Clofenotane, Dicophane, Dinocide, Gesarol (Syngenta Crop.), Guesapon, Guesarol, Gyron (Ciba-Geigy Corp. – now Novartis), Ixodex, Neocid (Reckitt & Colman, Ltd), Neocidol (Ciba-Geigy Corp. – now Novartis), and Zerdane.[4]

Isomers and related compounds

o,p’ -DDT, a minor component in commercial DDT.

Commercial DDT is a mixture of several closely–related compounds. The major component (77%) is the p,p’ isomer which is pictured at the top of this article. The o,p’ isomer (pictured to the right) is also present in significant amounts (15%). Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDE) and dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane (DDD) make up the balance. DDE and DDD are also the major metabolites and breakdown products in the environment.[4] The term “total DDT” is often used to refer to the sum of all DDT related compounds (p,p’-DDT, o,p’-DDT, DDE, and DDD) in a sample.

Production and use statistics

From 1950 to 1980, DDT was extensively used in agriculture—more than 40,000 tonnes were used each year worldwide[9]—and it has been estimated that a total of 1.8 million tonnes have been produced globally since the 1940s.[1] In the U.S., where it was manufactured by Ciba,[10] Montrose Chemical Company, Pennwalt[11] and Velsicol Chemical Corporation,[12] production peaked in 1963 at 82,000 tonnes per year.[4] More than 600,000 tonnes (1.35 billion lbs) were applied in the U.S. before the 1972 ban. Usage peaked in 1959 at about 36,000 tonnes.[13]

In 2009, 3314 tonnes were produced for the control of malaria and visceral leishmaniasis. India is the only country still manufacturing DDT, with China having ceased production in 2007.[14] India is the largest consumer.[15]

Mechanism of insecticide action

In insects it opens sodium ion channels in neurons, causing them to fire spontaneously, which leads to spasms and eventual death. Insects with certain mutations in their sodium channel gene are resistant to DDT and other similar insecticides. DDT resistance is also conferred by up-regulation of genes expressing cytochrome P450 in some insect species.[16]

In humans, however, it may affect health through genotoxicity or endocrine disruption. See Effects on human health.

History

Commercial product containing 5% DDT

Commercial product (Powder box, 50 g) containing 10% DDT ; Néocide. CibaGeigy DDT ; “Destroys parasites such as fleas, lice, ants, bedbugs, cockroaches, flies, etc.. Néocide Sprinkle caches of vermin and the places where there are insects and their places of passage. Leave the powder in place as long as possible. ” “Destroy the parasites of man and his dwelling”. “Death is not instantaneous, it follows inevitably sooner or later. ” “French manufacturing” ; “harmless to humans and warm-blooded animals” “sure and lasting effect. Odorless.

First synthesized in 1874 by Othmar Zeidler,[4] DDT’s insecticidal properties were not discovered until 1939 by the Swiss scientist Paul Hermann Müller, who was awarded the 1948 Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine for his efforts.[3]

Use in the 1940s and 1950s

DDT is the best-known of several chlorine-containing pesticides used in the 1940s and 1950s. With pyrethrum in short supply, DDT was used extensively during World War II by the Allies to control the insect vectors of typhus — nearly eliminating the disease in many parts of Europe. In the South Pacific, it was sprayed aerially for malaria and dengue fever control with spectacular effects. While DDT’s chemical and insecticidal properties were important factors in these victories, advances in application equipment coupled with a high degree of organization and sufficient manpower were also crucial to the success of these programs.[17] In 1945, it was made available to farmers as an agricultural insecticide,[4] and it played a minor role in the final elimination of malaria in Europe and North America.[6] By the time DDT was introduced in the U.S., the disease had already been brought under control by a variety of other means.[18] One CDC physician involved in the United States’ DDT spraying campaign said of the effort that “we kicked a dying dog.”[19]

In 1955, the World Health Organization commenced a program to eradicate malaria worldwide, relying largely on DDT. The program was initially highly successful, eliminating the disease in “Taiwan, much of the Caribbean, the Balkans, parts of northern Africa, the northern region of Australia, and a large swath of the South Pacific”[20] and dramatically reducing mortality in Sri Lanka and India.[21] However widespread agricultural use led to resistant insect populations. In many areas, early victories partially or completely reversed, and in some cases rates of transmission even increased.[22] The program was successful in eliminating malaria only in areas with “high socio-economic status, well-organized healthcare systems, and relatively less intensive or seasonal malaria transmission”.[23]

DDT was less effective in tropical regions due to the continuous life cycle of mosquitoes and poor infrastructure. It was not applied at all in sub-Saharan Africa due to these perceived difficulties. Mortality rates in that area never declined to the same dramatic extent, and now constitute the bulk of malarial deaths worldwide, especially following the disease’s resurgence as a result of resistance to drug treatments and the spread of the deadly malarial variant caused by Plasmodium falciparum. The goal of eradication was abandoned in 1969, and attention was focused on controlling and treating the disease. Spraying programs (especially using DDT) were curtailed due to concerns over safety and environmental effects, as well as problems in administrative, managerial and financial implementation, but mostly because mosquitoes were developing resistance to DDT.[22] Efforts shifted from spraying to the use of bednets impregnated with insecticides and other interventions.[23][24]

Silent Spring and the U.S. ban

As early as the 1940s, scientists in the U.S. had begun expressing concern over possible hazards associated with DDT, and in the 1950s the government began tightening some of the regulations governing its use.[13] However, these early events received little attention, and it was not until 1957, when the New York Times reported an unsuccessful struggle to restrict DDT use in Nassau County, New York, that the issue came to the attention of the popular naturalist-author, Rachel Carson. William Shawn, editor of The New Yorker, urged her to write a piece on the subject, which developed into her famous book Silent Spring, published in 1962. The book argued that pesticides, including DDT, were poisoning both wildlife and the environment and were also endangering human health.[5]

Silent Spring was a best seller, and public reaction to it launched the modern environmental movement in the United States. The year after it appeared, President Kennedy ordered his Science Advisory Committee to investigate Carson’s claims. The report the committee issued “add[ed] up to a fairly thorough-going vindication of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring thesis,” in the words of the journal Science,[25] and recommended a phaseout of “persistent toxic pesticides”.[26] DDT became a prime target of the growing anti-chemical and anti-pesticide movements, and in 1967 a group of scientists and lawyers founded the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) with the specific goal of winning a ban on DDT. Victor Yannacone, Charles Wurster, Art Cooley and others associated with inception of EDF had all witnessed bird kills or declines in bird populations and suspected that DDT was the cause. In their campaign against the chemical, EDF petitioned the government for a ban and filed a series of lawsuits.[27] Around this time, toxicologist David Peakall was measuring DDE levels in the eggs of peregrine falcons and California condors and finding that increased levels corresponded with thinner shells.

In response to an EDF suit, the U.S. District Court of Appeals in 1971 ordered the EPA to begin the de-registration procedure for DDT. After an initial six-month review process, William Ruckelshaus, the Agency’s first Administrator rejected an immediate suspension of DDT’s registration, citing studies from the EPA’s internal staff stating that DDT was not an imminent danger to human health and wildlife.[13] However, the findings of these staff members were criticized, as they were performed mostly by economic entomologists inherited from the United States Department of Agriculture, whom many environmentalists felt were biased towards agribusiness and tended to minimize concerns about human health and wildlife. The decision not to ban thus created public controversy.[17]

The EPA then held seven months of hearings in 1971–1972, with scientists giving evidence both for and against the use of DDT. In the summer of 1972, Ruckelshaus announced the cancellation of most uses of DDT—an exemption allowed for public health uses under some conditions.[13] Immediately after the cancellation was announced, both EDF and the DDT manufacturers filed suit against the EPA, with the industry seeking to overturn the ban, and EDF seeking a comprehensive ban. The cases were consolidated, and in 1973 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the EPA had acted properly in banning DDT.[13]

The U.S. DDT ban took place amidst a growing public mistrust of industry, with the Surgeon General issuing a report on smoking in 1964, the Cuyahoga River catching fire in 1969, the fiasco surrounding the use of diethylstilbestrol (DES), and the well-publicized decline in the bald eagle population.[26]

Some uses of DDT continued under the public health exemption. For example, in June 1979, the California Department of Health Services was permitted to use DDT to suppress flea vectors of bubonic plague.[28] DDT also continued to be produced in the US for foreign markets until as late as 1985, when over 300 tons were exported.[1]

Restrictions on usage

In the 1970s and 1980s, agricultural use was banned in most developed countries, beginning with Hungary in 1968[29] then in Norway and Sweden in 1970, Germany and the United States in 1972, but not in the United Kingdom until 1984. Vector control use has not been banned, but it has been largely replaced by less persistent alternative insecticides.

The Stockholm Convention, which took effect in 2004, outlawed several persistent organic pollutants, and restricted DDT use to vector control. The Convention has been ratified by more than 170 countries and is endorsed by most environmental groups. Recognizing that total elimination in many malaria-prone countries is currently unfeasible because there are few affordable or effective alternatives, public health use is exempt from the ban pending acceptable alternatives. Malaria Foundation International states, “The outcome of the treaty is arguably better than the status quo going into the negotiations…For the first time, there is now an insecticide which is restricted to vector control only, meaning that the selection of resistant mosquitoes will be slower than before.”[30]

Despite the worldwide ban, agricultural use continues in India[31] North Korea, and possibly elsewhere.[15]

Today, about 3-4,000 tonnes each year are produced for vector control.[14] DDT is applied to the inside walls of homes to kill or repel mosquitoes. This intervention, called indoor residual spraying (IRS), greatly reduces environmental damage. It also reduces the incidence of DDT resistance.[32] For comparison, treating 40 hectares (99 acres) of cotton during a typical U.S. growing season requires the same amount of chemical as roughly 1,700 homes.[33]

Environmental impact

Degradation of DDT to form DDE (by elimination of HCl, left) and DDD (by reductive dechlorination, right)

DDT is a persistent organic pollutant that is readily adsorbed to soils and sediments, which can act both as sinks and as long-term sources of exposure contributing to terrestrial organisms [2]. Depending on conditions, its soil half life can range from 22 days to 30 years. Routes of loss and degradation include runoff, volatilization, photolysis and aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation. Due to hydrophobic properties, in aquatic ecosystems DDT and its metabolites are absorbed by aquatic organisms and adsorbed on suspended particles, leaving little DDT dissolved in the water itself. Its breakdown products and metabolites, DDE and DDD, are also highly persistent and have similar chemical and physical properties.[1] DDT and its breakdown products are transported from warmer regions of the world to the Arctic by the phenomenon of global distillation, where they then accumulate in the region’s food web.[34]

Because of its lipophilic properties, DDT has a high potential to bioaccumulate, especially in predatory birds.[35] DDT, DDE, and DDD magnify through the food chain, with apex predators such as raptor birds concentrating more chemicals than other animals in the same environment. They are very lipophilic and are stored mainly in body fat. DDT and DDE are very resistant to metabolism; in humans, their half-lives are 6 and up to 10 years, respectively. In the United States, these chemicals were detected in almost all human blood samples tested by the Centers for Disease Control in 2005, though their levels have sharply declined since most uses were banned in the US.[36] Estimated dietary intake has also declined,[36] although FDA food tests commonly detect it.[37]

Marine macroalgae (seaweed) help reduce soil toxicity by up to 80% within six weeks.[38]

Effects on wildlife and eggshell thinning

DDT is toxic to a wide range of living organisms, including marine animals such as crayfish, daphnids, sea shrimp and many species of fish. It is less toxic to mammals, but may be moderately toxic to some amphibian species, especially in the larval stage. DDT, through its metabolite DDE, caused eggshell thinning and resulted in severe population declines in multiple North American and European bird of prey species.[39] Eggshell thinning lowers the reproductive rate of certain bird species by causing egg breakage and embryo deaths. DDE related eggshell thinning is considered a major reason for the decline of the bald eagle,[8] brown pelican,[40] peregrine falcon, and osprey.[1] However, different groups of birds vary greatly in their sensitivity to these chemicals. [2] Birds of prey, waterfowl, and song birds are more susceptible to eggshell thinning than chickens and related species, and DDE appears to be more potent than DDT.[1] Even in 2010, more than forty years after the U.S. ban, California condors which feed on sea lions at Big Sur which in turn feed in the Palos Verdes Shelf area of the Montrose Chemical Superfund site seemed to be having continued thin-shell problems. Scientists with the Ventana Wildlife Society and others are intensifying studies and remediations of the condors’ problems.[41]

The biological thinning mechanism is not entirely known, but there is strong evidence that p,p’-DDE inhibits calcium ATPase in the membrane of the shell gland and reduces the transport of calcium carbonate from blood into the eggshell gland. This results in a dose-dependent thickness reduction.[1][42][43][44] There is also evidence that o,p’-DDT disrupts female reproductive tract development, impairing eggshell quality later.[45] Multiple mechanisms may be at work, or different mechanisms may operate in different species.[1] Some studies show that although DDE levels have fallen dramatically, eggshell thickness remains 10–12 percent thinner than before DDT was first used.[46]

Effects on human health

Potential mechanisms of action on humans are genotoxicity and endocrine disruption. DDT may be directly genotoxic,[47] but may also induce enzymes to produce other genotoxic intermediates and DNA adducts.[47] It is an endocrine disruptor; The DDT metabolite DDE acts as an antiandrogen (but not as an estrogen). p,p’-DDT, DDT’s main component, has little or no androgenic or estrogenic activity.[47] Minor component o,p’-DDT has weak estrogenic activity.

Acute toxicity

DDT is classified as “moderately toxic” by the United States National Toxicology Program (NTP)[48] and “moderately hazardous” by the World Health Organization (WHO), based on the rat oral LD50 of 113 mg/kg.[49] DDT has on rare occasions been administered orally as a treatment for barbiturate poisoning.[50]

Chronic toxicity

Diabetes

DDT and DDE have been linked to diabetes. A number of studies from the US, Canada, and Sweden have found that the prevalence of the disease in a population increases with serum DDT or DDE levels.[51][52][53][54][55][56]

Developmental toxicity

DDT and DDE, like other organochlorines, have been shown to have xenoestrogenic activity, meaning they are chemically similar enough to estrogens to trigger hormonal responses in animals. This endocrine disrupting activity has been observed in mice and rat toxicological studies, and available epidemiological evidence indicates that these effects may be occurring in humans as a result of DDT exposure. The US Environmental Protection Agency states that DDT exposure damages the reproductive system and reduces reproductive success. These effects may cause developmental and reproductive toxicity:

  • A review article in The Lancet states, “research has shown that exposure to DDT at amounts that would be needed in malaria control might cause preterm birth and early weaning … toxicological evidence shows endocrine-disrupting properties; human data also indicate possible disruption in semen quality, menstruation, gestational length, and duration of lactation.”[24]
  • Human epidemiological studies suggest that exposure is a risk factor for premature birth and low birth weight, and may harm a mother’s ability to breast feed.[57] Some 21st-century researchers argue that these effects may increase infant deaths, offsetting any anti-malarial benefits.[58] A 2008 study, however, failed to confirm the association between exposure and difficulty breastfeeding.[59]
  • Several recent studies demonstrate a link between in utero exposure to DDT or DDE and developmental neurotoxicity in humans. For example, a 2006 University of California, Berkeley study suggests that children exposed while in the womb have a greater chance of development problems,[60] and other studies have found that even low levels of DDT or DDE in umbilical cord serum at birth are associated with decreased attention at infancy[61] and decreased cognitive skills at 4 years of age.[62] Similarly, Mexican researchers have linked first trimester DDE exposure to retarded psychomotor development.[63]
  • Other studies document decreases in semen quality among men with high exposures (generally from IRS).[64][65][66]
  • Studies generally find that high blood DDT or DDE levels do not increase time to pregnancy (TTP.)[67] There is some evidence that the daughters of highly exposed women may have more difficulty getting pregnant (i.e. increased TTP).[68]
  • DDT is associated with early pregnancy loss, a type of miscarriage. A prospective cohort study of Chinese textile workers found “a positive, monotonic, exposure-response association between preconception serum total DDT and the risk of subsequent early pregnancy losses.”[69] The median serum DDE level of study group was lower than that typically observed in women living in homes sprayed with DDT.[70]
  • A Japanese study of congenital hypothyroidism concluded that in utero DDT exposure may affect thyroid hormone levels and “play an important role in the incidence and/or causation of cretinism.”[71] Other studies have also found the DDT or DDE interfere with proper thyroid function.[72][73]

Other

Occupational exposure in agriculture and malaria control has been linked to neurological problems (i.e. Parkinsons)[74] and asthma.[75]

Carcinogenicity

DDT is suspected to cause cancer. The NTP classifies it as “reasonably anticipated to be a carcinogen,” the International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies it as a “possible” human carcinogen, and the EPA classifies DDT, DDE, and DDD as class B2 “probable” carcinogens. These evaluations are based mainly on the results of animal studies.[1][24]

There is evidence from epidemiological studies (i.e. studies in human populations) that indicates that DDT causes cancers of the liver,[24][36] pancreas[24][36] and breast.[36] There is mixed evidence that it contributes to leukemia,[36] lymphoma[36][76] and testicular cancer.[24][36][77] Other epidemiological studies suggest that DDT/DDE does not cause multiple myeloma,[24] or cancers of the prostate,[24] endometrium,[24][36] rectum,[24][36] lung,[36] bladder,[36] or stomach.[36]

Breast cancer

The question of whether DDT or DDE are risk factors of breast cancer has been repeatedly studied. While individual studies conflict, the most recent reviews of all the evidence conclude that pre-puberty exposure increases the risk of subsequent breast cancer.[36][78] Until recently, almost all studies measured DDT or DDE blood levels at the time of breast cancer diagnosis or after. This study design has been criticized, since the levels at diagnosis do not necessarily correspond to levels when the cancer started.[79] Taken as a whole such studies “do not support the hypothesis that exposure to DDT is an important risk factor for breast cancer.”[47] The studies of this design have been extensively reviewed.[24][80][81]

In contrast, a study published in 2007 strongly associated early exposure (the p,p’- isomer) and breast cancer later in life. Unlike previous studies, this prospective cohort study collected blood samples from young mothers in the 1960s while DDT was still in use, and their breast cancer status was then monitored over the years. In addition to suggesting that the p,p’- isomer is the more significant risk factor, the study also suggests that the timing of exposure is critical. For the subset of women born more than 14 years before agricultural use, there was no association between DDT and breast cancer. However, for younger women—exposed earlier in life—the third who were exposed most to p,p’-DDT had a fivefold increase in breast cancer incidence over the least exposed third, after correcting for the protective effect of o,p’-DDT.[47][82][83] These results are supported by animal studies.[36]

Use against malaria

Malaria remains a major public health challenge in many countries. 2008 WHO estimates were 243 million cases, and 863,000 deaths. About 89% of these deaths occur in Africa, and mostly to children under the age of 5.[84] DDT is one of many tools that public health officials use to fight the disease. Its use in this context has been called everything from a “miracle weapon [that is] like Kryptonite to the mosquitoes,”[85] to “toxic colonialism.”[86]

Before DDT, eliminating mosquito breeding grounds by drainage or poisoning with Paris green or pyrethrum was sometimes successful in fighting malaria. In parts of the world with rising living standards, the elimination of malaria was often a collateral benefit of the introduction of window screens and improved sanitation.[20] Today, a variety of usually simultaneous interventions is the norm. These include antimalarial drugs to prevent or treat infection; improvements in public health infrastructure to quickly diagnose, sequester, and treat infected individuals; bednets and other methods intended to keep mosquitoes from biting humans; and vector control strategies[84] such as larvaciding with insecticides, ecological controls such as draining mosquito breeding grounds or introducing fish to eat larvae, and indoor residual spraying with insecticides, possibly including DDT. IRS involves the treatment of all interior walls and ceilings with insecticides, and is particularly effective against mosquitoes, since many species rest on an indoor wall before or after feeding. DDT is one of 12 WHO–approved IRS insecticides. How much of a role DDT should play in this mix of strategies is still controversial.[87]

WHO’s anti-malaria campaign of the 1950s and 1960s relied heavily on DDT and the results were promising, though temporary. Experts tie the resurgence of malaria to multiple factors, including poor leadership, management and funding of malaria control programs; poverty; civil unrest; and increased irrigation. The evolution of resistance to first-generation drugs (e.g. chloroquine) and to insecticides exacerbated the situation.[15][88] Resistance was largely fueled by often unrestricted agricultural use. Resistance and the harm both to humans and the environment led many governments to restrict or curtail the use of DDT in vector control as well as agriculture.[22]

Once the mainstay of anti-malaria campaigns, as of 2008 only 12 countries used DDT, including India and some southern African states,[84] though the number is expected to rise.[15]

Effectiveness of DDT against malaria

When it was first introduced in World War II, DDT was very effective in reducing malaria morbidity and mortality.[17] The WHO’s anti-malaria campaign, which consisted mostly of spraying DDT, was initially very successful as well. For example, in Sri Lanka, the program reduced cases from about 3 million per year before spraying to just 18 in 1963[89][90] and 29 in 1964. Thereafter the program was halted to save money and malaria rebounded to 600,000 cases in 1968 and the first quarter of 1969. The country resumed DDT vector control but the mosquitoes had acquired resistance in the interim, presumably because of continued agricultural use. The program switched to malathion, which though more expensive proved effective.[21]

Today, DDT remains on the WHO’s list of insecticides recommended for IRS. Since the appointment of Arata Kochi as head of its anti-malaria division, WHO’s policy has shifted from recommending IRS only in areas of seasonal or episodic transmission of malaria, to also advocating it in areas of continuous, intense transmission.[91] The WHO has reaffirmed its commitment to eventually phasing out DDT, aiming “to achieve a 30% cut in the application of DDT world-wide by 2014 and its total phase-out by the early 2020s if not sooner” while simultaneously combating malaria. The WHO plans to implement alternatives to DDT to achieve this goal.[92]

South Africa is one country that continues to use DDT under WHO guidelines. In 1996, the country switched to alternative insecticides and malaria incidence increased dramatically. Returning to DDT and introducing new drugs brought malaria back under control.[93] According to DDT advocate Donald Roberts, malaria cases increased in South America after countries in that continent stopped using DDT. Research data shows a significantly strong negative relationship between DDT residual house sprayings and malaria rates. In a research from 1993 to 1995, Ecuador increased its use of DDT and resulted in a 61% reduction in malaria rates, while each of the other countries that gradually decreased its DDT use had large increase in malaria rates.[33]

Mosquito resistance

Resistance has greatly reduced DDT’s effectiveness. WHO guidelines require that absence of resistance must be confirmed before using the chemical.[94] Resistance is largely due to agricultural use, in much greater quantities than required for disease prevention. According to one study that attempted to quantify the lives saved by banning agricultural use and thereby slowing the spread of resistance, “it can be estimated that at current rates each kilo of insecticide added to the environment will generate 105 new cases of malaria.”[22]

Resistance was noted early in spray campaigns. Paul Russell, a former head of the Allied Anti-Malaria campaign, observed in 1956 that “resistance has appeared after six or seven years.”[20] DDT has lost much of its effectiveness in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Turkey and Central America, and it has largely been replaced by organophosphate or carbamate insecticides, e.g. malathion or bendiocarb.[95]

In many parts of India, DDT has also largely lost its effectiveness.[96] Agricultural uses were banned in 1989, and its anti-malarial use has been declining. Urban use has halted completely.[97] Nevertheless, DDT is still manufactured and used,[98] and one study had concluded that “DDT is still a viable insecticide in indoor residual spraying owing to its effectivity in well supervised spray operation and high excito-repellency factor.”[99]

Studies of malaria-vector mosquitoes in KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa found susceptibility to 4% DDT (the WHO susceptibility standard), in 63% of the samples, compared to the average of 86.5% in the same species caught in the open. The authors concluded that “Finding DDT resistance in the vector An. arabiensis, close to the area where we previously reported pyrethroid-resistance in the vector An. funestus Giles, indicates an urgent need to develop a strategy of insecticide resistance management for the malaria control programmes of southern Africa.”[100]

DDT can still be effective against resistant mosquitoes,[101] and the avoidance of DDT-sprayed walls by mosquitoes is an additional benefit of the chemical.[99] For example, a 2007 study reported that resistant mosquitoes avoided treated huts. The researchers argued that DDT was the best pesticide for use in IRS (even though it did not afford the most protection from mosquitoes out of the three test chemicals) because the others pesticides worked primarily by killing or irritating mosquitoes—encouraging the development of resistance to these agents.[101] Others argue that the avoidance behavior slows the eradication of the disease.[102] Unlike other insecticides such as pyrethroids, DDT requires long exposure to accumulate a lethal dose; however its irritant property shortens contact periods. “For these reasons, when comparisons have been made, better malaria control has generally been achieved with pyrethroids than with DDT.”[95] In India, with its outdoor sleeping habits and frequent night duties, “the excito-repellent effect of DDT, often reported useful in other countries, actually promotes outdoor transmission.”[103]

Residents’ concerns

Main article: Indoor residual spraying#Residents’s opposition to IRS

For IRS to be effective, at least 80% of homes and barns in an area must be sprayed.[94] Lower coverage rates can jeopardize program effectiveness. Many residents resist DDT spraying, objecting to the lingering smell, stains on walls, and may exacerbate problems with other insect pests.[95][102][104] Pyrethroid insecticides (e.g. deltamethrin and lambda-cyhalothrin) can overcome some of these issues, increasing participation.[95]

Human exposure

People living in areas where DDT is used for IRS have high levels of the chemical and its breakdown products in their bodies. Compared to contemporaries living where DDT is not used, South Africans living in sprayed homes have levels that are several orders of magnitude greater.[36] Breast milk in regions where DDT is used against malaria greatly exceeds the allowable standards for breast-feeding infants.[105][106][107] These levels are associated with neurological abnormalities in babies.[95][105][106]

Most studies of DDT’s human health effects have been conducted in developed countries where DDT is not used and exposure is relatively low. Many experts urge that alternatives be used instead of IRS.[24][36] Epidemiologist Brenda Eskenazi argues, “We know DDT can save lives by repelling and killing disease-spreading mosquitoes. But evidence suggests that people living in areas where DDT is used are exposed to very high levels of the pesticide. The only published studies on health effects conducted in these populations have shown profound effects on male fertility. Clearly, more research is needed on the health of populations where indoor residual spraying is occurring, but in the meantime, DDT should really be the last resort against malaria rather than the first line of defense.”[108]

Illegal diversion to agriculture is also a concern, as it is almost impossible to prevent, and its subsequent use on crops is uncontrolled. For example, DDT use is widespread in Indian agriculture,[109] particularly mango production,[110] and is reportedly used by librarians to protect books.[111] Other examples include Ethiopia, where DDT intended for malaria control is reportedly being used in coffee production,[112] and Ghana where it is used for fishing.”[113][114] The residues in crops at levels unacceptable for export have been an important factor in recent bans in several tropical countries.[95] Adding to this problem is a lack of skilled personnel and supervision.[102]

Criticism of restrictions on DDT use

Critics claim that restricting DDT in vector control have caused unnecessary deaths due to malaria. Estimates range from hundreds of thousands,[115] to millions. Robert Gwadz of the National Institutes of Health said in 2007, “The ban on DDT may have killed 20 million children.”[116] These arguments have been dismissed as “outrageous” by former WHO scientist Socrates Litsios. May Berenbaum, University of Illinois entomologist, says, “to blame environmentalists who oppose DDT for more deaths than Hitler is worse than irresponsible.”[85] Investigative journalist Adam Sarvana and others characterize this notion as a “myth” promoted principally by Roger Bate of the pro-DDT advocacy group Africa Fighting Malaria (AFM).[117][118]

Criticisms of a DDT “ban” often specifically reference the 1972 US ban (with the erroneous implication that this constituted a worldwide ban and prohibited use of DDT in vector control). Reference is often made to Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring even though she never pushed for a ban on DDT. John Quiggin and Tim Lambert wrote, “the most striking feature of the claim against Carson is the ease with which it can be refuted.”[119] Carson actually devoted a page of her book to considering the relationship between DDT and malaria, warning of the evolution of DDT resistance in mosquitoes and concluding:

It is more sensible in some cases to take a small amount of damage in preference to having none for a time but paying for it in the long run by losing the very means of fighting [is the advice given in Holland by Dr Briejer in his capacity as director of the Plant Protection Service]. Practical advice should be “Spray as little as you possibly can” rather than “Spray to the limit of your capacity.”

It has also been alleged that donor governments and agencies have refused to fund DDT spraying, or made aid contingent upon not using DDT. According to a report in the British Medical Journal, use of DDT in Mozambique “was stopped several decades ago, because 80% of the country’s health budget came from donor funds, and donors refused to allow the use of DDT.”[120] Roger Bate asserts, “many countries have been coming under pressure from international health and environment agencies to give up DDT or face losing aid grants: Belize and Bolivia are on record admitting they gave in to pressure on this issue from [USAID].”[121]

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has been the focus of much criticism. While the agency is currently funding the use of DDT in some African countries,[122] in the past it did not. When John Stossel accused USAID of not funding DDT because it wasn’t “politically correct,” Anne Peterson, the agency’s assistant administrator for global health, replied that “I believe that the strategies we are using are as effective as spraying with DDT … So, politically correct or not, I am very confident that what we are doing is the right strategy.”[123] USAID’s Kent R. Hill states that the agency has been misrepresented: “USAID strongly supports spraying as a preventative measure for malaria and will support the use of DDT when it is scientifically sound and warranted.”[124] The Agency’s website states that “USAID has never had a ‘policy’ as such either ‘for’ or ‘against’ DDT for IRS. The real change in the past two years [2006/07] has been a new interest and emphasis on the use of IRS in general—with DDT or any other insecticide—as an effective malaria prevention strategy in tropical Africa.”[122] The website further explains that in many cases alternative malaria control measures were judged to be more cost-effective that DDT spraying, and so were funded instead.[125]

Alternatives

Other insecticides

Main article: Indoor residual spraying

Advocates of increased use of DDT in IRS claim that alternative insecticides are more expensive, more toxic, or not as effective. As discussed above, susceptibility of mosquitoes to DDT varies geographically. The same is true for alternative insecticides, so its relative effectiveness varies. Toxicity and cost-effectiveness comparisons lack data. Relative insecticide costs vary by location and ease of access, the habits of the local mosquitoes, the degrees of resistance exhibited by the mosquitoes, and the habits and compliance of the population, among other factors. The choice of insecticide has little impact on the total cost of a round of spraying, since product costs are only a fraction of campaign costs. IRS coverage needs to be maintained throughout the malaria season, making DDT’s relatively long life an important cost savings.

Organophosphate and carbamate insecticides, e.g. malathion and bendiocarb, respectively, are more expensive than DDT per kilogram and are applied at roughly the same dosage. Pyrethroids such as deltamethrin are also more expensive than DDT, but are applied more sparingly (0.02-0.3 g/m2 vs 1-2 g/m2), so the net cost per house is about the same over 6 months.[23]

Non-chemical vector control

Before DDT, malaria was successfully eradicated or curtailed in several tropical areas by removing or poisoning mosquito breeding grounds and larva habitats, for example by filling or applying oil to standing water. These methods have seen little application in Africa for more than half a century.[126]

The relative effectiveness of IRS (with DDT or alternative insecticides) versus other malaria control techniques (e.g. bednets or prompt access to anti-malarial drugs) varies greatly and is highly dependent on local conditions.[23]

A WHO study released in January 2008 found that mass distribution of insecticide-treated mosquito nets and artemisinin–based drugs cut malaria deaths in half in Rwanda and Ethiopia, countries with high malaria burdens. IRS with DDT did not play an important role in mortality reduction in these countries.[127][128]

Vietnam has enjoyed declining malaria cases and a 97% mortaility reduction after switching in 1991 from a poorly funded DDT-based campaign to a program based on prompt treatment, bednets, and pyrethroid group insecticides.[129]

In Mexico, effective and affordable chemical and non-chemical strategies against malaria have been so successful that the Mexican DDT manufacturing plant ceased production due to lack of demand.[130]

While the increased numbers of malaria victims since DDT usage collapsed document its value, many other factors contributed to the rise in cases.

A review of fourteen studies on the subject in sub-Saharan Africa, covering insecticide-treated nets, residual spraying, chemoprophylaxis for children, chemoprophylaxis or intermittent treatment for pregnant women, a hypothetical vaccine, and changing front–line drug treatment, found decision making limited by the gross lack of information on the costs and effects of many interventions, the very small number of cost-effectiveness analyses available, the lack of evidence on the costs and effects of packages of measures, and the problems in generalizing or comparing studies that relate to specific settings and use different methodologies and outcome measures. The two cost-effectiveness estimates of DDT residual spraying examined were not found to provide an accurate estimate of the cost-effectiveness of DDT spraying; furthermore, the resulting estimates may not be good predictors of cost-effectiveness in current programs.[131]

However, a study in Thailand found the cost per malaria case prevented of DDT spraying ($1.87 US) to be 21% greater than the cost per case prevented of lambda-cyhalothrin–treated nets ($1.54 US),[132] at very least casting some doubt on the unexamined assumption that DDT was the most cost-effective measure to use in all cases. The director of Mexico’s malaria control program finds similar results, declaring that it is 25% cheaper for Mexico to spray a house with synthetic pyrethroids than with DDT.[130] However, another study in South Africa found generally lower costs for DDT spraying than for impregnated nets.[133]

A more comprehensive approach to measuring cost-effectiveness or efficacy of malarial control would not only measure the cost in dollars of the project, as well as the number of people saved, but would also consider ecological damage and negative aspects of insecticide use on human health. One preliminary study regarding the effect of DDT found that it is likely the detriment to human health approaches or exceeds the beneficial reductions in malarial cases, except perhaps in malarial epidemic situations. It is similar to the earlier mentioned study regarding estimated theoretical infant mortality caused by DDT and subject to the criticism also mentioned earlier.[134]

A study in the Solomon Islands found that “although impregnated bed nets cannot entirely replace DDT spraying without substantial increase in incidence, their use permits reduced DDT spraying.”[135]

A comparison of four successful programs against malaria in Brazil, India, Eritrea, and Vietnam does not endorse any single strategy but instead states, “Common success factors included conducive country conditions, a targeted technical approach using a package of effective tools, data-driven decision-making, active leadership at all levels of government, involvement of communities, decentralized implementation and control of finances, skilled technical and managerial capacity at national and sub-national levels, hands-on technical and programmatic support from partner agencies, and sufficient and flexible financing.”[136]

DDT resistant mosquitoes have generally proved susceptible to pyrethroids. Thus far, pyrethroid resistance in Anopheles has not been a major problem.[95] …”

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

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

David Hart on Frédéric Bastiat–Videos

Posted on April 30, 2012. Filed under: Agriculture, American History, Banking, Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Culture, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Farming, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, history, History of Economic Thought, Homes, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, Language, liberty, Life, Links, media, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Public Sector, Quotations, Raves, Regulations, Security, Tax Policy, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , |

David Hart on Frederic Bastiat

The Bastiat Collection | Mark Thornton

That Which is Seen and That Which is Not Seen by Frederic Bastiat

That Which Is Seen, and That Which Is Not Seen Frederic Bastiat

Private and Public Services Frederic Bastiat 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Frédéric Bastiat–The Law–Videos 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Contraceptive Coverage–Student Subsidized Sex–Reproductive Rights–Mass Murder–Government Genocide–Planned Parenthood–Videos

Posted on March 5, 2012. Filed under: Babies, Biology, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Demographics, Economics, Education, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Religion, Science, Security, Taxes, Technology, Video, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , |


WE’VE BEEN GUTTMACHER’d

BLACK BABIES TARGETED BY PLANNED PARENTHOOD ABORTION CLINICS

SILENT GENOCIDE IN AMERICA

“… Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in America.  78% of their clinics are in minority communities. Blacks make up 12% of the population, but 35% of the abortions in America. Are we being targeted? Isn’t that genocide? We are the only minority in America that is on the decline in population. If the current trend continues, by 2038 the black vote will be insignificant. Did you know that the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was a devout racist who created the Negro Project designed to sterilize unknowing black women and others she deemed as undesirables of society? The founder of Planned Parenthood said, “Colored people are like human weeds and are to be exterminated.” How is her vision being fulfilled today?Minority women constitute only about 26% of the female population (age 15-44) in the United States, but they underwent approximately 36% of the abortions. According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, black women are more than 3 times as likely as white women to have an abortion. On average, 1,452 black babies are aborted every day in the United States.

This incidence of abortion has resulted in a tremendous loss of life. It has been estimated that since 1973 Black women have had over 13 million abortions. Michael Novak had calculated “Since the number of current living Blacks (in the U.S.) is 31 million, the missing 10 million represents an enormous loss, for without abortion, America’s Black community would now number 41 million persons. It would be 35% larger than it is. Abortion has swept through the Black community like a scythe, cutting down every fourth member.”

A highly significant 1993 Howard University study showed that African American women over age 50 were 4.7 times more likely to get breast cancer if they had had any abortions compared to women who had not had any abortions. …”

http://factreal.wordpress.com/2011/01/17/black-babies-targeted-by-planned-parenthood-abortion-clinics-statistics-non-graphic-video/

Cummings & Sandra Fluke on Contraception

Leftist Sandra Fluke testifies, “Birth Control Is a Medicine… Religious Schools Should Pay”

Bill O’Reilly — Contraception Conundrum

“…Sandra Fluke is a student at Georgetown Law. She’s also a “reproductive rights activist” who agrees wholeheartedly with the Obama administration’s controversial contraceptive mandate. Her reasoning, though, is likely to enrage some critics.

During a testimony in front of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee on Monday (a meeting that was held by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi), Fluke — who was coincidentally the only witness heard — described the financial constraints that purchasing birth control puts on her peers.

“Forty percent of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggled financially as a result of this policy,” Fluke said, referring to the fact that the university doesn’t pay for contraception. “Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school.”

She detailed, among other stories, how one woman felt “embarrassed” and “powerless” at the pharmacy counter when she “learned for the first time” that contraceptives weren’t covered by the university’s health care plan.

CNS News’ Craig Bannister, though, challenged Fluke’s $3,000 figure and came up with some pretty interesting numbers: $3,000 for birth control in three years? That’s a thousand dollars a year of sex — and, she wants us to pay for it. [...] At a dollar a condom if she shops at CVS pharmacy’s website, that $3,000 would buy her 3,000 condoms — or, 1,000 a year… Assuming it’s not a leap year, that’s 1,000 divided by 365 — or having sex 2.74 times a day, every day, for three straight years. And, I thought Georgetown was a Catholic university where women might be prone to shun casual, unmarried sex. At least its health insurance doesn’t cover contraception (that which you subsidize, you get more of, you know).

This isn’t the first time Fluke has made her voice heard in the halls of Congress. Earlier this month, it was reported that Democrat Representatives Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Eleanor Norton (D-DC) and their anger over the lack of female witnesses present at a previous contraceptive hearing.

The congresswomen wanted Fluke to be permitted to speak at the event, but Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) declined to allow it, stating that Fluke was not an expert in religious freedom, which was the issue being investigated.

Fluke, though, responded by claiming that women should be included in the discussion. She also alleged that a friend of hers died because of a lack of access to contraception and accused Issa of silencing the people who have the most authority to speak on the subject.Sandra Fluke Opening Statement (C-SPAN) …”

Lawmakers Walk Out on Congressional Contraception Rule Hearing After Female Witness Barred

Senate Narrowly Defeats Anti-Contraception Bill as Reproductive Rights Face Sustained Attack

Rush Limbaugh Gives You The Reason Sandra Fluke Is Going To A Catholic College

Mark Levin on Sandra Fluke

Rush Limbaugh Calls Sandra Fluke a “SLUT” [Real Audio & Video]

Left Freaks Out Over My Fluke Remarks

“… Are we supposed to believe that it’s impossible to find free condoms in Washington? And it’s a good question. Where are the guys that these women at Georgetown Law are having sex with? Where’s their responsibility? I mean, these guys are gonna learn (if they haven’t already) they’re gonna be buying a lot more for sex than just birth control pills. Why the exemption here on birth control pills? What makes birth control pills so unique that the insurance company — government, somebody, taxpayers — has to provide this? We all know the answer here. This allows them to talk “women’s freedom,” and “women’s reproductive rights.” But it’s also the expansion of government.

Let’s listen to some Sandra Fluke. By the way, did you know CBS ripped me for calling Danica Patrick “a woman driver.” What is she? Is she a male driver and I’ve missed it? What is she? Look at what’s happening to our language. I called Danica Patrick “a woman driver…” (interruption) Well, because she had said that she thinks the government is perfectly responsible in making these decisions for us; she trusts the government. I said, “Well, okay, she’s a woman driver. That makes sense.” What is she? Here’s Sandra Fluke before this committee, the House Democrat Steering and Policy Committee Hearing on Contraception. Here’s a portion of her opening remarks.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/03/01/left_freaks_out_over_my_fluke_remarks

Rush Limbaugh’s on-air apology to Sandra Fluke

Why I Apologized to Sandra Fluke

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/03/05/why_i_apologized_to_sandra_fluke

Sandra Fluke Gets A Call From Obama, 3/2/12

Rush Limbaugh Apologizes: Too Little, Too Late?

Barack Obama and Margaret Sanger’s “Negro Project”

Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood’s Racist Founder

Obama: Babies are a “punishment”

Barack Obama Promises to Sign FOCA

“…Last year before the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Barack Obama told pro-abortion activists: “The first thing I’d do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.”

FOCA would establish the right to abortion as a fundamental right (like the right to free speech) and wipe away every restriction on abortion nationwide.

It will eradicate state and federal abortion laws that the majority of Americans support and prevent states from enacting similar protective measures in the future. …”

Barack Obama Addresses Planned Parenthood

OBAMA SUPPORTED INFANTICIDE IN 02 AS SENATOR…

Obama And Infanticide – Part 1 – 45 Minutes / Documentary Video / Why Was There The Need For The Born

Obama And Infanticide – Part 2 – 23 Minutes / Documentary Video / The Evidence Against Obama / Illinois

Abortion Inc: Promoting Black Genocide in US?

Maafa 21

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 1/13)

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 2/13)

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 3/13)

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 4/13)

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 5/13)

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 6/13)

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 7/13)

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 8/13)

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 9/13)

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 10/13)

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 11/13)

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 12/13)

Abortion: Black Genocide in 21st Century America (Part 13/13)

Repealing Obamacare and Restoring a Free Market in Healthcare 

The Elite’s Plan for Global Extermination(Depopulation Eugenics) Exposed by Webster Tarpley 1 of 4

The Elite’s Plan for Global Extermination(Depopulation Eugenics) Exposed by Webster Tarpley 2 of 4

The Elite’s Plan for Global Extermination(Depopulation Eugenics) Exposed by Webster Tarpley 3 of 4

The Elite’s Plan for Global Extermination(Depopulation Eugenics) Exposed by Webster Tarpley 4 of 4

GlennBeck Eugenics part1 Short History

GlennBeck Eugenics part2 Healthcare Czars

Glenn Beck Eugenics part3 Healthcare Tree

Obama’s Eugenics Hoax Exposed

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

I Got The Obama Gasoline Price Blues–From $1.79 Per Gallon in January 2009 to $3.59 Per Gallon in February 2012–$5 Per Gallon By July 4, 2012!–Purchasing Power Plummets–Speculation Starves Society–Hope for Regime Change–Videos

Posted on February 24, 2012. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Books, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, Natural Gas, Nuclear, Nuclear Power, Oil, People, Philosophy, Politics, Public Sector, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Transportation, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Government Theft May 1, 1933

http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx

http://gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx

Quantitative Easing Explained

http://www.aier.org/research/briefs/1826-the-long-goodbye-the-declining-purchasing-power-of-the-dollar

U.S. Inflation Calculator

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

U.S. Debt Clock 

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Ron Paul: The Worst Thing You Can Do For A People Is Purposely Devalue The Dollar

Obama’s Got America Singin’ the Blues

As Gas Prices Rise, White House Goes on Offensive, Defensive

Ron Paul tells the real reason for the oil prices in 2007 and today 

END FED: Bernanke Explains How To Devalue the Dollar, Quantitative Easing AKA Asset Purchase

Glenn Beck – Devaluing The Dollar 

Beck: Devaluing the Dollar

Iran Sanctions, War, Israel & Gas Prices

Ron Paul Doubles Down On War Stance

Armed Chinese Troops in Texas!

Why Gas Prices Are Rising

Playing the oil prices money game

Secret Exemptions Allowed Speculators to Distort Futures Markets

Regulations on Speculation Weak, But Better Than Nothing

The Price Of Oil

Bill Black: What I’d Demand of the Fed

Bill Black’s eye-popping opening statement at House FinServ hearing on Lehman Bros.

END FED: Goldman Sachs To Blame For Global Food-Oil Price Crisis; Speculators Outnumber Hedgers

CFTC Commissioner: “A Hair Trigger Away from Economic Calamity”

Will CFTC Limit Excessive Speculation?

Oil Supply and Demand and the Next Oil Price Spike

Bio-fuels, Speculation, Land Grabs = Food Crisis

Speculation And The Frenzy In Food Markets

Food, Speculation and Parasitical Trading

Speculation Drives Up Coffee Prices

Food Speculation

Oil Speculators

Oil speculation and oil prices

The Real TRUTH Behind The OIL PRICES 

Banks Behind High Gas Prices? 

Rising Gas Prices Slowing Economy

Gas Prices Soaring 

Ripple Effect Of Rising Gas Prices Hits Consumers

Krauthammer: Obama’s “war on fossil fuels” causes rising gas prices 

Obama Wanted High Gas Prices…Gradually (2008 Election Campaign) 

Ron Paul Expains High Gas Prices & War in 2008

Can We Stop A War With Iran? 

Obama admits his intentions are to skyrocket oil prices 

Ford O’Connell On Fox News – February 24, 2012 

Ron Paul Expains High Gas Prices & War in 2007

Obama gas prices

A Coincidence Over High Gasoline Prices- MoneyTV with Donald Baillargeon

Obama Admits the Truth: He Can’t Do Much about Gas Prices

James Grant

Jim Grant – Bloomberg Interview (30/6/11)

Government Theft 2012

Press Conference with Chairman of the FOMC, Ben S. Bernanke

 Blame High Oil Prices on Speculators and Bernanke

Seven Bucks A Gallon For Gas!

2012 Energy Prices

Ed Wallace 

“…That’s right, we not only reduced our overall gasoline use in America, reversing a century-long trend, but in 2011 we dropped our demand for gasoline once again. This likely explains why in December WTI oil jumped by close to $7 a barrel, but the futures market for gasoline barely budged, moving just a few cents in either direction.

Another way to look at it is in the percentage of utilization of our refineries for this time of year. According to the government’s data, the last week of December our refineries ran at 84.2 percent of capacity. But if one compares that week to the same week in the boom years, 2003 to 2007, our refineries were running at 91.7 percent, 94.2 percent, 88.9 percent, 90.9 percent and 89.4 percent. For those who have forgotten, that last figure in that chain, marking the last week of December 2007, also denotes the month we officially slipped into a recession. Interestingly, data released by the International Energy Agency in September of 2008 showed oil and fuel demand falling worldwide starting in August of 2007.

And yet with our refinery utilization running at far below normal, we managed to have the all-time-record year for the exportation of refined fuels. While the media speculation on where oil’s price is going is almost solely based on “Asian Demand” or the prospect of a total embargo on Iranian oil, the real problem is something completely different.

What is it? It’s refiners trying to find ways to get the price of gasoline on the futures market more in line with the high price of oil. To this end it appears that three refineries in the Northeast, including Sunoco’s Marcus Hook and Philadelphia refinery, along with Conoco’s Trainer unit, will be closed. To be sure, both Conoco and Sunoco claim their first choice is to sell those refineries, but failing that they will be closed.

What does that mean to you and me?

Dow Jones Newswire quoted Gene McGillian, an energy analyst with Tradition Energy, as saying, “Gasoline futures prices are based on New York Harbor prices. When you start to see disruptions in that Northeast market, it’s definitely reflected in gasoline futures.”

Translation: Close refineries and you can bump the futures price of gasoline – and by extension the retail price – regardless of where the price of oil is.

How does oil speculation raise gas prices?

by Josh Clark

“…An oil futureis simply a contract between a buyer and seller, where the buyer agrees to purchase a certain amount of a commodity — in this case oil — at a fixed price

. Futures offer a way for a purchaser to bet on whether a commodity will increase in price down the road. Once locked into a contract, a futures buyer would receive a barrel of oil for the price dictated in the future contract, even if the market price was higher when the barrel was actually delivered.

­As in all cases, Wall Street heard the word &quot;bet&quot; and flocked to futures, taking the market to strange new places on the fringe of legality. In the 19th and early 20th centuries it bet on grain. In the 21st century it was oil. Despite U.S. petroleum reserves being at an eight-year high, the price of oil rose dramatically beginning in 2006. While demand rose, supply kept pace. Yet, prices still skyrocketed. This means that the laws of supply and demand no longer applied in the oil markets. Instead, an artificial market developed.

Artificial markets are volatile; they’re difficult to predict and can turn on a dime. As a result of the artificial oil market, the average price per barrel of crude oil increased from $31.61 in July 2004 to $137.11 in July 2008 1. The average cost for a gallon of regular unleaded gas in the United States grew from $1.93 to $4.09 over the same period 1.

So what happened? …&quot;

&quot;…What speculators do is bet on what price a commodity will reach by a future date, through instruments called &lt;strong&gt;derivatives&lt;/strong&gt;. Unlike an investment in an actual commodity (such as a barrel of oil), a derivative’s value is based on the value of a commodity (for example, a bet on whether a barrel of oil will increase or decrease in price). Speculators have no hand in the sale of the commodity they’re betting on; they’re not the buyer or the seller.

By betting on the price outcome with only a single futures contract, a speculator has no effect on a market. It’s simply a bet. But a speculator with the capital to purchase a sizeable number of futures derivatives at one price can actually sway the market. As energy researcher F. William Engdahl put it, &quot;[s]peculators trade on rumor, not fact&quot; 1. A speculator purchasing vast futures at higher than the current market price can cause oil producers to horde their commodity in the hopes they’ll be able to sell it later on at the future price. This drives prices up in reality — both future and present prices — due to the decreased amount of oil currently available on the market.

Investment firms that can influence the oil futures market stand to make a lot; oil companies that both produce the commodity and drive prices up of their product up through oil futures derivatives stand to make even more. Investigations into the unregulated oil futures exchanges turned up major financial institutions like Goldman Sachs and Citigroup. But it also revealed energy producers like Vitol, a Swiss company that owned 11 percent of the oil futures contracts on the New York Mercantile Exchange alone 1.

As a result of speculation among these and other major players, an estimated 60 percent of the price of oil per barrel was added; a $100 barrel of oil, in reality, should cost $40 1. And despite having an agency created to prevent just such speculative price inflation, by the time oil prices skyrocketed, the government had made a paper tiger out of it. …&quot;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://money.howstuffworks.com/oil-speculation-raise-gas-price.htm&quot;&gt;http://money.howstuffworks.com/oil-speculation-raise-gas-price.htm&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;It’s no secret that speculators are driving up fuel prices. The surprise? It’s the Fed’s fault, writes Ed Wallace&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;&quot;…The Fed’s Cheap Liquidity Flood&lt;/h4&gt;
The problem starts with Ben Bernanke, no matter how many of his Fed presidents claim they are not to blame for the high price of oil. The fact is that when you flood the market with far too much liquidity at virtually no interest, funny things happen in commodities and equities. It was true in the 1920s, it was true in the last decade, and it’s still true today.

When Richard Fisher, president of the Dallas Federal Reserve, spoke in Germany late in March, Reuters quoted him as saying: &quot;We are seeing speculative activity that may be exacerbating price rises in commodities such as oil.&quot; Fisher added that he was seeing the signs of the same speculative trading that had fueled the first financial meltdown.

Here Fisher is in good company. Kansas City Fed President Thomas Hoenig, who has been a vocal critic of the current Fed policy of zero interest and high liquidity, has suggested that markets don’t function correctly under those circumstances. And David Stockman, Ronald Reagan’s former budget director, recently wrote a scathing article for MarketWatch, &quot;Federal Reserve’s Path of Destruction,&quot; in which he criticizes current Fed policy even more pointedly. Stockman wrote: &quot;This destruction is namely the exploitation of middle-class savers; the current severe food and energy squeeze on lower income households … and the next round of bursting bubbles building up among the risk asset classes.&quot;

Let’s not kid ourselves. Oil in today’s world is worth far more than the $25 a barrel it sold for over a decade ago. But the ability of markets to function properly, based on real supply and demand equations, has been destroyed by allowing ridiculous leverage and the unlimited ability to borrow the leverage at historically low interest rates.

Fortunately for our elected officials, they’ve got the public convinced that the biggest threat from government is taxation and deficits. In reality the public should be infuriated with the rising costs of nondiscretionary items such as food and gasoline, which current Fed policy actively enables. …&quot;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/apr2011/pi20110419_786652_page_2.htm&quot;&gt;http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/apr2011/pi20110419_786652_page_2.htm&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;p style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Price of petroleum&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&quot;…The &lt;strong&gt;price of petroleum&lt;/strong&gt; as quoted in news generally refers to the spot price per barrel (159 liters) of either WTI/light crude as traded on the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) for delivery at Cushing, Oklahoma, or of Brent as traded on the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE, into which the International Petroleum Exchange has been incorporated) for delivery at Sullom Voe.

The price of a barrel of oil is highly dependent on both its grade, determined by factors such as its specific gravity or API and its sulphur content, and its location. Other important benchmarks include Dubai, Tapis, and the OPEC basket. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) uses the imported refiner acquisition cost, the weighted average cost of all oil imported into the US, as its &quot;world oil price&quot;.

The demand for oil is highly dependent on global macroeconomic conditions. According to the International Energy Agency, high oil prices generally have a large negative impact on the global economic growth.&lt;sup&gt;[1]&lt;/sup&gt;

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was formed in 1960&lt;sup&gt;[2]&lt;/sup&gt; to try and counter the oil companies cartel, which had been controlling posted prices since the so-called 1927 Red Line Agreement and 1928 Achnacarry Agreement, and had achieved a high level of price stability until 1972.

The price of oil underwent a significant decrease after the record peak of US$145 it reached in July 2008. On December 23, 2008, WTI crude oil spot price fell to US$30.28 a barrel, the lowest since the financial crisis of 2007–2010 began, and traded at between US$35 a barrel and US$82 a barrel in 2009.&lt;sup&gt;[3]&lt;/sup&gt; On 31 January 2011, the Brent price hit $100 a barrel for the first time since October 2008, on concerns about the political unrest in Egypt.&lt;sup&gt;[4]&lt;/sup&gt;

Price history before 2003

A low point was reached in January 1999 of 17 USD per barrel, after increased oil production from Iraq coincided with the Asian Financial Crisis, which reduced demand. Prices then increased rapidly, more than doubling by September 2000 to $35, then fell until the end of 2001 before steadily increasing, reaching $40–50 by September 2004.&lt;sup&gt;[5]&lt;/sup&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;Price history from 2003 onwards&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Main article: 2003 to 2011 world oil market chronology&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Further information: 2000s energy crisis&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;Benchmark pricing&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Main article: Benchmark (crude oil)&lt;/div&gt;
After the collapse of the OPEC-administered pricing system in 1985, and a short lived experiment with netback pricing, oil-exporting countries adopted a market-linked pricing mechanism.&lt;sup&gt;[6]&lt;/sup&gt; First adopted by PEMEX in 1986, market-linked pricing received wide acceptance and by 1988 became and still is the main method for pricing crude oil in international trade.&lt;sup&gt;[6]&lt;/sup&gt; The current reference, or pricing markers, are Brent, WTI, and Dubai/Oman.&lt;sup&gt;[6]&lt;/sup&gt;
&lt;h4&gt; Market listings&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Main article: Commodities markets&lt;/div&gt;
Oil is marketed among other products in commodities markets. See above for details. Widely traded oil futures, and related natural gas futures, include:&lt;sup&gt;[7]&lt;/sup&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Petroleum
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Nymex Crude Future&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Dated Brent Spot&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;WTI Cushing Spot&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Nymex Heating Oil Future&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Nymex RBOB Gasoline Future&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Natural gas
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Nymex Henry Hub Future&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Henry Hub Spot&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;New York City Gate Spot&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;
Most of the above oil futures have delivery dates in all 12 months of the year.&lt;sup&gt;[8]&lt;/sup&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;Speculation&lt;/h4&gt;
The surge in oil prices in the past several years has led some commentators to argue that at least some of the rise is due to speculation in the futures markets.&lt;sup&gt;[9]&lt;/sup&gt;
&lt;h4&gt; Future price changes&lt;/h4&gt;
In 2009, Seismic Micro-Technology conducted a survey of geophysicists and geologists about the future of crude oil. Of the survey participants 80 percent predicted the price for a barrel of oil will rise to be somewhere between $50 and $100 per barrel by June 2010.&lt;sup&gt;[10]&lt;/sup&gt; Another 50 percent saying it will rise even further to $100 to $150 a barrel in the next five years.&lt;sup&gt;[10]&lt;/sup&gt;

Oil prices could go to $200- $300 a barrel if the world’s top crude exporter Saudi Arabia is hit by serious political unrest, according to former Saudi oil minister Sheikh Yamani. Yamani has said that underlying discontent remained unresolved in Saudi Arabia. &quot;If something happens in Saudi Arabia it will go to $200 to $300. I don’t expect this for the time being, but who would have expected Tunisia?&quot; Yamani told Reuters on the sidelines of a conference of the Centre for Global Energy Studies (CGES) which he chaired on April 5th 2011.&lt;sup&gt;[11]&lt;/sup&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;CFTC investigation&lt;/h4&gt;
The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) announced &quot;Multiple Energy Market Initiatives&quot; on May 29, 2008. Part 1 is &quot;Expanded International Surveillance Information for Crude Oil Trading.&quot; The CFTC announcement stated it has joined with the United Kingdom Financial Services Authority and ICE Futures Europe in order to expand surveillance and information sharing of various futures contracts.&lt;sup&gt;[12]&lt;/sup&gt; This announcement has received wide coverage in the financial press, with speculation about oil futures price manipulation.&lt;sup&gt;[13]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;sup&gt;[14]&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;sup&gt;[15]&lt;/sup&gt;

The interim report by the Interagency Task Force, released in July, found that speculation had not caused significant changes in oil prices and that fundamental supply and demand factors provide the best explanation for the crude oil price increases. The report found that the primary reason for the price increases was that the world economy had expanded at its fastest pace in decades, resulting in substantial increases in the demand for oil, while the oil production grew sluggishly, compounded by production shortfalls in oil-exporting countries.

The report stated that as a result of the imbalance and low price elasticity, very large price increases occurred as the market attempted to balance scarce supply against growing demand, particularly in the last three years. The report forecast that this imbalance would persist in the future, leading to continued upward pressure on oil prices, and that large or rapid movements in oil prices are likely to occur even in the absence of activity by speculators. The task force continues to analyze commodity markets and intends to issue further findings later in the year.
&lt;h4&gt;Future projections&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Main article: Oil depletion&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Main article: Peak oil&lt;/div&gt;
Peak oil is the period when the maximum rate of global petroleum extraction is reached, after which the rate of production enters terminal decline. It relates to a long term decline in the available supply of petroleum. This, combined with increasing demand, will significantly increase the worldwide prices of petroleum derived products. Most significant will be the availability and price of liquid fuel for transportation.

The US Department of Energy in the Hirsch report indicates that “The problems associated with world oil production peaking will not be temporary, and past “energy crisis” experience will provide relatively little guidance.”&lt;sup&gt;[16] …&quot;&lt;/sup&gt;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_of_petroleum&quot;&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_of_petroleum&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;p style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Gas prices soar on dollar devaluation even as consumption drops to 10-year lows &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Written By Kenneth Schortgen Jr on Monday, February 13, 2012&lt;/strong&gt;

&quot;…One of the biggest misnomers in finance and economics today is that prices work according to supply and demand.  This was true when America performed in actual capitalist system, but since we moved to both fascism and crony capitalism, where corporations, banks, and government all work together at the betterment of themselves and not society, prices are fixed due to other factors such as dollar devaluation.
&lt;div style=&quot;padding-left: 30px;&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;U.S. drivers used 2.8 percent less motor gasoline last year and consumed the smallest amount since 1999, the U.S. Department of Energy said Wednesday. Officials credited the decrease to more fuel-efficient cars and an aging population taking few trips.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;padding-left: 30px;&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Meanwhile, U.S. domestic oil production increased by more than 2 percent last year to 5.6 million barrels per day. – &lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20120209/BUSINESS/302090065/-1/TERMSOFSERVICE/Gas-consumption-lowest-since-1999&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Des Moines Register&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
So… if consumption is way down, and production is actually up, should not gasoline prices be falling?  They should, except if you take into consideration the amount of money printing and currency devaluation being done by the Federal Reserve over the past four years, the amount of  inflation is being created by our own banking system, and not by a lack of products, or by higher demand.
In the end, Americans are being deceived by Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke. …&quot;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.thedailyeconomist.com/2012/02/gas-prices-soar-on-dollar-devaluation.html&quot;&gt;http://www.thedailyeconomist.com/2012/02/gas-prices-soar-on-dollar-devaluation.html&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;h3 style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;h3 style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Gasoline Prices Are Not Rising, the Dollar Is Falling&lt;/h3&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.forbes.com/louiswoodhill/&quot;&gt;Louis Woodhill&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;

&quot;…Panic is in the air as gasoline prices move above $4.00 per gallon. Politicians and pundits are rounding up the usual suspects, looking for someone or something to blame for this latest outrage to middle class family budgets. In a rare display of bipartisanship, President Obama and Speaker of the House &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.forbes.com/profile/john-boehner/&quot;&gt;John Boehner&lt;/a&gt; are both wringing their hands over the prospect of seeing their newly extended Social &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.forbes.com/security/&quot;&gt;Security&lt;/a&gt; tax cut gobbled up by rising gasoline costs.

Unfortunately, the talking heads that are trying to explain the reasons for high oil prices are missing one tiny detail. Oil prices aren’t high right now. In fact, they are unusually low. Gasoline prices would have to rise by another $0.65 to $0.75 per gallon from where they are now just to be “normal”. And, because gasoline prices are low right now, it is very likely that they are going to go up more—perhaps a lot more.

What the politicians, analysts, and pundits are missing is that prices are ratios. Gasoline prices reflect crude oil prices, so let’s use West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil to illustrate this crucial point.

As this is written, West Texas Intermediate crude oil (WTI) is trading at $105.88/bbl. All this means is that the market value of a barrel of WTI is 105.88 times the market value of “the dollar”. It is also true that WTI is trading at €79.95/bbl, ¥8,439.69/barrel, and £67.13/bbl. In all of these cases, the market value of WTI is the same. What is different in each case is the value of the monetary unit (euros, yen, and British pounds, respectively) being used to calculate the ratio that expresses the price.

In terms of judging whether the price of WTI is high or low, here is the price that truly matters: 0.0602 ounces of gold per barrel (which can be written as Au0.0602/bbl). What this number means is that, right now, a barrel of WTI has the same market value as 0.0602 ounces of gold.

During the 493 months since January 1, 1971, the price of WTI has averaged Au0.0732/bbl. It has been higher than that during 225 of those months and lower than that during 268 of those months. Plotted as a graph, the line representing the price of a barrel of oil in terms of gold has crossed the horizontal line representing the long-term average price (Au0.0732/bbl) 29 times.

At Au0.0602/bbl, today’s WTI price is only 82% of its average over the past 41+ years. Assuming that gold prices remained at today’s $1,759.30/oz, WTI prices would have to rise by about 22%, to $128.86/bbl, in order to reach their long-term average in terms of gold. As mentioned earlier, such an increase would drive up retail gasoline prices by somewhere between $0.65 and $0.75 per gallon.

At this point, we can be certain that, unless gold prices come down, gasoline prices are going to go up—by a lot. And, because the dollar is currently a floating, undefined, fiat currency, there is no inherent limit to how far the price of gold in dollars can rise, and therefore no ultimate ceiling on gasoline prices. …&quot;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2012/02/22/gasoline-prices-are-not-rising-the-dollar-is-falling/&quot;&gt;http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoodhill/2012/02/22/gasoline-prices-are-not-rising-the-dollar-is-falling/&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;strong&gt;Why Gas Prices Are Actually Falling   &lt;/strong&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;strong&gt;By Gary Gibson&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&quot;…It’s not gold and silver prices that are volatile. Those have been incredibly consistent for thousands of years in terms of commodities they could buy. And because of the increasing standard of living being raised by free market economies, in a very real sense these eternal monies actually buy more. It’s the dollar that has been erratic in its overall declining trend ever since it’s been cut loose from gold (and silver).

Again, people looking at the cost of a gallon of gas, or of milk, or the cost of a nice suit, or rent from behind their piles of gold and silver are finding very little to worry about. In fact, to them, prices are lower than normal and declining.

Also the price of oil has tended to track the price of silver awfully closely for about as long as oil has been industrially useful. And so it’s no mistake that you can still get a gallon of gas for about about $0.20…as long as that $0.20 is composed of a pre-1964 90% silver dimes. …&quot;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://raymondpronk.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/silver_quarter.png&quot;&gt;&lt;img class=&quot;aligncenter size-full wp-image-55554&quot; title=&quot;silver_quarter&quot; src=&quot;http://raymondpronk.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/silver_quarter.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; width=&quot;544&quot; height=&quot;195&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;

&quot;…You see, the pre-1965 quarter is worth $6.38 as I type this. The pre-1965 dime is worth $2.55. These coins hail from a time when the dollar was still tied to gold (at the official price of $35 per ounce prior to Nixon nixing the gold standard). The dollar was still as good as gold — even though Americans themselves were forbidden to own gold bullion from 1933 till 1974 — and there was actual silver in the coinage until that content was reduced in 1964 and eliminated in 1965.

Those old silver coins shine the harsh light on the strength of the currency and the abuse that currency suffers from the feds and the Federal Reserve.

If you’d been saving in gold, then from your point of view gas prices have been coming down for the past few years. If you’d been saving in that old “junk” silver (pre-1965 quarters, dimes and half dollars), then gas prices are a downright bargain, too. …&quot;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/why-gas-prices-are-actually-falling/&quot;&gt;http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/why-gas-prices-are-actually-falling/&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Consequences to Expect if the U.S. Invades Iran   &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;&lt;strong&gt;By Whiskey Contributor&lt;small&gt;Feb 22nd, 2012&lt;/small&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Exploding Oil Prices&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;
The U.S. has had a ban on Iranian oil imports since 1979, however, Iran still supplies about 5% of the global oil market. This might not seem like much, but Iran also has the means and ability to shut down the Straight of Hormuz, which is one of two major petroleum choke points in the world. Around 17 million barrels of oil per day are shipped through the Straight of Hormuz, or about 20% of all oil traded worldwide.
&lt;p align=&quot;center&quot;&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.ezimages.net/WHISKEY/022212_pic2.png&quot; alt=&quot;&quot; width=&quot;363&quot; height=&quot;208&quot; /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&quot;…In 2006, during the last major Iran war scare, experts predicted gasoline price increases in excess of &lt;a href=&quot;http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/07/news/international/iran_oil/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;$10 a gallon if Iran was invaded.&lt;/a&gt;

This would devastate the U.S. economy, which is already hanging by a thin thread. Iran has announced this past weekend it will cease all oil shipments to Britain and France in protest of their support of economic sanctions. This alone is causing oil to spike today. A global energy crisis will financially decimate average citizens who will have their savings sapped by extreme price inflation, not just in gasoline, but in all goods that require the use of gasoline in their production and shipping. If you like this idea, then by all means, support an invasion of Iran.

&lt;strong&gt;War Domino Effect&lt;/strong&gt;

In January of 2010, I wrote an article for Neithercorp Press entitled &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.alt-market.com/neithercorp/press/2010/01/will-globalists-trigger-yet-another-world-war/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;“Will Globalists Trigger Yet Another World War&lt;/a&gt;“. In that article, I warned about the dangers of an invasion of Iran or Syria being used to foment a global conflict, in order to create a crisis large enough to distract the masses away from the international banker created economic collapse.

In 2006, Iran signed a mutual defense pact with its neighbor, Syria, which is also in the middle of its own turmoil and possible NATO intervention. Syria has strong ties to Russia, and even has a revamped Russian naval base off its coast, a fact rarely mentioned by the mainstream media. Both Russia and China have made their opposition clear in the case of any Western intervention in Iran or Syria. An invasion by the U.S. or Israel in these regions could quickly intensify into wider war between major world powers. If you like the idea of a world war which could eventually put you and your family in direct danger, then by all means, support an invasion of Iran.

&lt;strong&gt;Dollar Collapse&lt;/strong&gt;

Make no mistake, the U.S. dollar is already on the verge of collapse, along with the U.S. economy. Bilateral trade agreements between BRIC and ASEAN nations are sprouting up everywhere the past couple months, and these agreements are specifically designed to end the dollar’s status as the world reserve currency. An invasion of Iran will only expedite this process. If global anger over the resulting chaos in oil prices doesn’t set off a dump of the dollar, the eventual debt obligation incurred through the overt costs of war will. Ron Paul has always been right; it doesn’t matter whether you think invasion is a good idea or not. We simply CANNOT afford it. America is bankrupt. Our only source of income is our ability to print money from thin air. Each dollar created to fund new wars brings our currency ever closer to its demise. …&quot;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/consequences-to-expect-if-the-u-s-invades-iran/&quot;&gt;http://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/consequences-to-expect-if-the-u-s-invades-iran/&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;h1 style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Background Articles and Videos&lt;/h1&gt;
&lt;h4 style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h4 style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h4 id=&quot;watch-headline-title&quot; style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Introduction to Futures&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;p style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h4 id=&quot;watch-headline-title&quot; style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;What is a Future?&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;p style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h4 id=&quot;watch-headline-title&quot; style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Investopedia Video: How Do Futures Contracts Work?&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;p style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h4 id=&quot;watch-headline-title&quot; style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;Commodity futures margin accounts&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;p style=&quot;text-align: center;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div&gt;&lt;strong&gt; Security Futures—Know Your Risks, or Risk Your Future&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;

&lt;strong&gt;&quot;…Margin &amp; Leverage&lt;/strong&gt;

When a brokerage firm lends you part of the funds needed to purchase a security, such as common stock, the term &quot;margin&quot; refers to the amount of cash, or down payment, the customer is required to deposit. By contrast, a security futures contract is an obligation not an asset and has no value as collateral for a loan. When you enter into a security futures contract, you are required to make a payment referred to as a &quot;margin payment&quot; or &quot;performance bond&quot; to cover potential losses.

For a relatively small amount of money (the margin requirement), a futures contract worth several times as much can be bought or sold. The smaller the margin requirement in relation to the underlying value of the futures contract, the greater the leverage. Because of this leverage, small changes in price can result in large gains and losses in a short period of time.

&lt;strong&gt;Example:&lt;/strong&gt; Assuming a security futures contract is for 100 shares of stock, if a security futures contract is established at a contract price of $50, the contract has a nominal value of $5,000 (see definition below). The margin requirement may be as low as 20 percent, which would require a margin deposit of $1,000. Assume the contract price rises from $50 to $52 (a $200 increase in the nominal value). This represents a $200 profit to the buyer of the futures contract, and a 20 percent return on the $1,000 deposited as margin.

The reverse would be true if the contract price decreased from $50 to $48. This represents a $200 loss to the buyer, or 20 percent of the $1,000 deposited as margin. Thus, leverage can either benefit or harm an investor.
Note that a 4 percent decrease in the value of the contract resulted in a loss of 20 percent of the margin deposited. A 20 percent decrease in the contract price ($50 to $40) would mean a drop in the nominal value of the contract from $5,000 to $4,000, thereby wiping out 100 percent of the margin deposited on the security futures contract. …&quot;

&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.finra.org/Investors/InvestmentChoices/P005912&quot;&gt;http://www.finra.org/Investors/InvestmentChoices/P005912&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;Futures Margins&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dpbolvw.net/click-2519541-10992963&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt; &lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;!– google_ad_section_start –&gt;Participants in a futures contract are required to post performance bond margins in order to open and maintain a futures position.

Futures margin requirements are set by the exchanges and are typically only 2 to 10 percent of the full value of the futures contract.

Margins are financial guarantees required of both buyers and sellers of futures contracts to ensure that they fulfill their futures contract obligations.
&lt;h4&gt;Initial Margin&lt;/h4&gt;
Before a futures position can be opened, there must be enough available balance in the futures trader’s margin account to meet the initial margin requirement. Upon opening the futures position, an amount equal to the initial margin requirement will be deducted from the trader’s margin account and transferred to the exchange’s clearing firm. This money is held by the exchange clearinghouse as long as the futures position remains open.
&lt;h4&gt;Maintenance Margin&lt;/h4&gt;
The maintenance margin is the minimum amount a futures trader is required to maintain in his margin account in order to hold a futures position. The maintenance margin level is usually slightly below the initial margin.

If the balance in the futures trader’s margin account falls below the maintenance margin level, he or she will receive a margin call to top up his margin account so as to meet the initial margin requirement.
&lt;h4&gt;Example&lt;/h4&gt;
Let’s assume we have a speculator who has $10000 in his trading account. He decides to buy August Crude Oil at $40 per barrel. Each Crude Oil futures contract represents 1000 barrels and requires an initial margin of $9000 and has a maintenance margin level set at $6500.

Since his account is $10000, which is more than the initial margin requirement, he can therefore open up one August Crude Oil futures position.

One day later, the price of August Crude Oil drops to $38 a barrel. Our speculator has suffered an open position loss of $2000 ($2 x 1000 barrels) and thus his account balance drops to $8000.

Although his balance is now lower than the initial margin requirement, he did not get the margin call as it is still above the maintenance level of $6500.

Unfortunately, on the very next day, the price of August Crude Oil crashed further to $35, leading to an additional $3000 loss on his open Crude Oil position. With only $5000 left in his trading account, which is below the maintenance level of $6500, he received a call from his broker asking him to top up his trading account back to the initial level of $9000 in order to maintain his open Crude Oil position.

This means that if the speculator wishes to stay in the position, he will need to deposit an additional $4000 into his trading account.

Otherwise, if he decides to quit the position, the remaining $5000 in his account will be available to use for trading once again. …&quot;
&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.theoptionsguide.com/futures-margin.aspx&quot;&gt;http://www.theoptionsguide.com/futures-margin.aspx&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Federal Regulation of Margin in the Commodities Futures Industry: History and Theory&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/bibarticles/markham_margin.pdf&quot;&gt;http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/bibarticles/markham_margin.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;How does oil speculation raise gas prices?&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;h4&gt;by Josh Clark&lt;/h4&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;left&quot;&gt;

&quot;…The next time you drive to the gas station, only to find prices are still sky high compared to just a few years ago, take notice of the rows of &lt;a href=&quot;http://money.howstuffworks.com/personal-finance/debt-management/foreclosure.htm&quot;&gt;foreclosed&lt;/a&gt; houses you’ll pass along the way. They may seem like two parts of a spell of economic bad luck, but high gas prices and home foreclosures are actually very much interrelated. Before most people were even aware there was an &lt;a href=&quot;http://money.howstuffworks.com/government-bailout.htm&quot;&gt;economic crisis&lt;/a&gt;, investment managers abandoned failing &lt;a href=&quot;http://money.howstuffworks.com/mortgage-backed-security.htm&quot;&gt;mortgage-backed securities&lt;/a&gt; and looked for other lucrative investments. What they settled on was oil futures.

An &lt;strong&gt;oil future&lt;/strong&gt; is simply a contract between a buyer and seller, where the buyer agrees to purchase a certain amount of a commodity — in this case &lt;a href=&quot;http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/energy/oil-refining.htm&quot;&gt;oil&lt;/a&gt;&#8211; at a fixed price

1

. Futures offer a way for a purchaser to bet on whether a commodity will increase in price down the road. Once locked into a contract, a futures buyer would receive a barrel of oil for the price dictated in the future contract, even if the market price was higher when the barrel was actually delivered. …”

“…What speculators do is bet on what price a commodity will reach by a future date, through instruments called derivatives. Unlike an investment in an actual commodity (such as a barrel of oil), a derivative’s value is based on the value of a commodity (for example, a bet on whether a barrel of oil will increase or decrease in price). Speculators have no hand in the sale of the commodity they’re betting on; they’re not the buyer or the seller.

By betting on the price outcome with only a single futures contract, a speculator has no effect on a market. It’s simply a bet. But a speculator with the capital to purchase a sizeable number of futures derivatives at one price can actually sway the market. As energy researcher F. William Engdahl put it, “[s]peculators trade on rumor, not fact”

. A speculator purchasing vast futures at higher than the current market price can cause oil producers to horde their commodity in the hopes they’ll be able to sell it later on at the future price. This drives prices up in reality — both future and present prices — due to the decreased amount of oil currently available on the market.

Investment firms that can influence the oil futures market stand to make a lot; oil companies that both produce the commodity and drive prices up of their product up through oil futures derivatives stand to make even more. Investigations into the unregulated oil futures exchanges turned up major financial institutions like Goldman Sachs and Citigroup. But it also revealed energy producers like Vitol, a Swiss company that owned 11 percent of the oil futures contracts on the New York Mercantile Exchange alone

.

As a result of speculation among these and other major players, an estimated 60 percent of the price of oil per barrel was added; a $100 barrel of oil, in reality, should cost $40

. And despite having an agency created to prevent just such speculative price inflation, by the time oil prices skyrocketed, the government had made a paper tiger out of it. …”

http://money.howstuffworks.com/oil-speculation-raise-gas-price.htm

Weekly Petroleum Status Report

Highlights

“…U.S. crude oil refinery inputs averaged just under 14.9 million barrels per

day during the week ending February 17, 170 thousand barrels per day

above the previous week’s average. Refineries operated at 85.5 percent

of their operable capacity last week. Gasoline production increased

last week, averaging nearly 9.0 million barrels per day. Distillate fuel

production decreased last week, averaging just under 4.3 million barrels

per day.

U.S. crude oil imports averaged nearly 9.1 million barrels per day last

week, up by 335 thousand barrels per day from the previous week. Over

the last four weeks, crude oil imports have averaged about 8.8 million

barrels per day, 211 thousand barrels per day above the same four-week

period last year. Total motor gasoline imports (including both finished

gasoline and gasoline blending components) last week averaged 845

thousand barrels per day. Distillate fuel imports averaged 122 thousand

barrels per day last week.

U.S. commercial crude oil inventories (excluding those in the Strategic

Petroleum Reserve) increased by 1.6 million barrels from the previous

week. At 340.7 million barrels, U.S. crude oil inventories are in the

upper limit of the average range for this time of year. Total motor

gasoline inventories decreased by 0.6 million barrels last week and are

in the upper limit of the average range. Finished gasoline inventories

decreased while blending components inventories increased last week.

Distillate fuel inventories decreased by 0.2 million barrels last week and

are in the middle of the average range for this time of year. Propane/

propylene inventories decreased by 1.6 million barrels last week and are

above the upper limit of the average range. Total commercial petroleum

inventories increased by 3.3 million barrels last week.

Total products supplied over the last four-week period have averaged

about 18.1 million barrels per day, down by 6.7 percent compared to

the similar period last year. Over the last four weeks, motor gasoline

product supplied has averaged 8.2 million barrels per day, down by 6.1

percent from the same period last year. Distillate fuel product supplied

has averaged about 3.6 million barrels per day over the last four weeks,

down by 5.9 percent from the same period last year. Jet fuel product

supplied is 9.1 percent lower over the last four weeks compared to the

same four-week period last year.

WTI was $103.27 per barrel on February 17, 2012, $4.59 more than

last week’s price and $18.24 above a year ago. The spot price for

conventional gasoline in the New York Harbor was $3.023 per gallon,

$0.022 more than last week’s price and $0.483 above last year. The

spot price for No. 2 heating oil in the New York Harbor was $3.185 per

gallon, $0.002 less than last week’s price but $0.474 above a year ago.

The national average retail regular gasoline price increased for the fourth

week in a row to $3.591 per gallon on February 20, 2012, $0.068 per

gallon more than last week and $0.402 above a year ago. The national

average retail diesel fuel price also increased for the fourth straight week

in a row to $3.960 per gallon, $0.017 per gallon more than last week and

$0.387 above a year ago. …”

http://www.eia.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/weekly_petroleum_status_report/current/pdf/highlights.pdf

Inflation:  Calculating the rate of inflation

Historical CPI-U data from 1913 to the present

“…For just current CPI data, see CPI page. The following table provides all the Consumer Price Index data CPI-U from 1913 to the Present.

The Consumer Price Index (CPI-U)  is compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and is based upon a 1982 Base of 100. A Consumer Price Index of 158 indicates 58% inflation since 1982. The commonly quoted inflation rate of say 3% is actually the change in the Consumer Price Index from a year earlier. By looking at the change in the Consumer Price Index we can see that what cost an average of 9.9 cents in 1913 would cost us about $1.82 in 2003 and $2.02 in 2007.

To find Prior Consumer Price Index (CPI) data on this table (back through 1913) click on the date range links below the table.

For Inflation data rather than Consumer Price Index data go to the Historical Inflation page. If you would like to calculate the inflation rate between two dates using the Consumer Price Index data from this chart, use our handy easy to use Inflation calculator or you might prefer to use our Cost of Living Calculator to compare the costs in two cities. You can find links to Inflation and Consumer Price Index data for other countries HERE. A chart of Inflation by decade, Annual Inflation and Confederate Inflation is also available. Menu navigation is available on the menu bar on the left of every page. We have a complete listing of all of our Articles on inflation, including Inflation Definitions, Which is better High or Low Inflation, and How to Calculate Inflation.

You might also be interested in the wide variety of articles on our sister site Financial Trend Forecaster a complete list of the articles on Financial Trend Forecaster is at the FTF Article Archives.

Note Effective January 2007 the BLS began publishing the CPI index to three decimal places (prior to that it was only one decimal place).  But InflationData.com is still the only place to get the Inflation Rate calculated to two decimal places.

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2012 226.665
2011 220.223 221.309 223.467 224.906 225.964 225.722 225.922 226.545 226.889 226.421 226.230 225.672 224.939
2010 216.687 216.741 217.631 218.009 218.178 217.965 218.011 218.312 218.439 218.711 218.803 219.179 218.056
2009 211.143 212.193 212.709 213.240 213.856 215.693 215.351 215.834 215.969 216.177 216.330 215.949 214.537
2008 211.080 211.693 213.528 214.823 216.632 218.815 219.964 219.086 218.783 216.573 212.425 210.228 215.303
2007 202.416 203.499 205.352 206.686 207.949 208.352 208.299 207.917 208.490 208.936 210.177 210.036 207.342
2006 198.300 198.700 199.800 201.500 202.500 202.900 203.500 203.900 202.900 201.800 201.500 201.800 201.600
2005 190.700 191.800 193.300 194.600 194.400 194.500 195.400 196.400 198.800 199.200 197.600 196.800 195.300
2004 185.200 186.200 187.400 188.000 189.100 189.700 189.400 189.500 189.900 190.900 191.000 190.300 188.900
2003 181.700 183.100 184.200 183.800 183.500 183.700 183.900 184.600 185.200 185.000 184.500 184.300 183.960
2002 177.100 177.800 178.800 179.800 179.800 179.900 180.100 180.700 181.000 181.300 181.300 180.900 179.880
2001 175.100 175.800 176.200 176.900 177.700 178.000 177.500 177.500 178.300 177.700 177.400 176.700 177.100
2000 168.800 169.800 171.200 171.300 171.500 172.400 172.800 172.800 173.700 174.000 174.100 174.000 172.200
1999 164.300 164.500 165.000 166.200 166.200 166.200 166.700 167.100 167.900 168.200 168.300 168.300 166.600
1998 161.600 161.900 162.200 162.500 162.800 163.000 163.200 163.400 163.600 164.000 164.000 163.900 163.000
1997 159.100 159.600 160.000 160.200 160.100 160.300 160.500 160.800 161.200 161.600 161.500 161.300 160.500
1996 154.400 154.900 155.700 156.300 156.600 156.700 157.000 157.300 157.800 158.300 158.600 158.600 156.900
1995 150.300 150.900 151.400 151.900 152.200 152.500 152.500 152.900 153.200 153.700 153.600 153.500 152.400
1994 146.200 146.700 147.200 147.400 147.500 148.000 148.400 149.000 149.400 149.500 149.700 149.700 148.200
1993 142.600 143.100 143.600 144.000 144.200 144.400 144.400 144.800 145.100 145.700 145.800 145.800 144.500
1992 138.100 138.600 139.300 139.500 139.700 140.200 140.500 140.900 141.300 141.800 142.000 141.900 140.300
1991 134.600 134.800 135.000 135.200 135.600 136.000 136.200 136.600 137.200 137.400 137.800 137.900 136.200
1990 127.400 128.000 128.700 128.900 129.200 129.900 130.400 131.600 132.700 133.500 133.800 133.800 130.700
1989 121.100 121.600 122.300 123.100 123.800 124.100 124.400 124.600 125.000 125.600 125.900 126.100 124.000
1988 115.700 116.000 116.500 117.100 117.500 118.000 118.500 119.000 119.800 120.200 120.300 120.500 118.300
1987 111.200 111.600 112.100 112.700 113.100 113.500 113.800 114.400 115.000 115.300 115.400 115.400 113.600
1986 109.600 109.300 108.800 108.600 108.900 109.500 109.500 109.700 110.200 110.300 110.400 110.500 109.600
1985 105.500 106.000 106.400 106.900 107.300 107.600 107.800 108.000 108.300 108.700 109.000 109.300 107.600
1984 101.900 102.400 102.600 103.100 103.400 103.700 104.100 104.500 105.000 105.300 105.300 105.300 103.900
1983 97.800 97.900 97.900 98.600 99.200 99.500 99.900 100.200 100.700 101.000 101.200 101.300 99.600
1982 94.300 94.600 94.500 94.900 95.800 97.000 97.500 97.700 97.900 98.200 98.000 97.600 96.500
1981 87.000 87.900 88.500 89.100 89.800 90.600 91.600 92.300 93.200 93.400 93.700 94.000 90.900
1980 77.800 78.900 80.100 81.000 81.800 82.700 82.700 83.300 84.000 84.800 85.500 86.300 82.400
1979 68.300 69.100 69.800 70.600 71.500 72.300 73.100 73.800 74.600 75.200 75.900 76.700 72.600
1978 62.500 62.900 63.400 63.900 64.500 65.200 65.700 66.000 66.500 67.100 67.400 67.700 65.200
1977 58.500 59.100 59.500 60.000 60.300 60.700 61.000 61.200 61.400 61.600 61.900 62.100 60.600
1976 55.600 55.800 55.900 56.100 56.500 56.800 57.100 57.400 57.600 57.900 58.000 58.200 56.900
1975 52.100 52.500 52.700 52.900 53.200 53.600 54.200 54.300 54.600 54.900 55.300 55.500 53.800
1974 46.600 47.200 47.800 48.000 48.600 49.000 49.400 50.000 50.600 51.100 51.500 51.900 49.300
1973 42.600 42.900 43.300 43.600 43.900 44.200 44.300 45.100 45.200 45.600 45.900 46.200 44.400
1972 41.100 41.300 41.400 41.500 41.600 41.700 41.900 42.000 42.100 42.300 42.400 42.500 41.800
1971 39.800 39.900 40.000 40.100 40.300 40.600 40.700 40.800 40.800 40.900 40.900 41.100 40.500
1970 37.800 38.000 38.200 38.500 38.600 38.800 39.000 39.000 39.200 39.400 39.600 39.800 38.800
1969 35.600 35.800 36.100 36.300 36.400 36.600 36.800 37.000 37.100 37.300 37.500 37.700 36.700
1968 34.100 34.200 34.300 34.400 34.500 34.700 34.900 35.000 35.100 35.300 35.400 35.500 34.800
1967 32.900 32.900 33.000 33.100 33.200 33.300 33.400 33.500 33.600 33.700 33.800 33.900 33.400
1966 31.800 32.000 32.100 32.300 32.300 32.400 32.500 32.700 32.700 32.900 32.900 32.900 32.400
1965 31.200 31.200 31.300 31.400 31.400 31.600 31.600 31.600 31.600 31.700 31.700 31.800 31.500
1964 30.900 30.900 30.900 30.900 30.900 31.000 31.100 31.000 31.100 31.100 31.200 31.200 31.000
1963 30.400 30.400 30.500 30.500 30.500 30.600 30.700 30.700 30.700 30.800 30.800 30.900 30.600
1962 30.000 30.100 30.100 30.200 30.200 30.200 30.300 30.300 30.400 30.400 30.400 30.400 30.200
1961 29.800 29.800 29.800 29.800 29.800 29.800 30.000 29.900 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 29.900
1960 29.300 29.400 29.400 29.500 29.500 29.600 29.600 29.600 29.600 29.800 29.800 29.800 29.600
1959 29.000 28.900 28.900 29.000 29.000 29.100 29.200 29.200 29.300 29.400 29.400 29.400 29.100
1958 28.600 28.600 28.800 28.900 28.900 28.900 29.000 28.900 28.900 28.900 29.000 28.900 28.900
1957 27.600 27.700 27.800 27.900 28.000 28.100 28.300 28.300 28.300 28.300 28.400 28.400 28.100
1956 26.800 26.800 26.800 26.900 27.000 27.200 27.400 27.300 27.400 27.500 27.500 27.600 27.200
1955 26.700 26.700 26.700 26.700 26.700 26.700 26.800 26.800 26.900 26.900 26.900 26.800 26.800
1954 26.900 26.900 26.900 26.800 26.900 26.900 26.900 26.900 26.800 26.800 26.800 26.700 26.900
1953 26.600 26.500 26.600 26.600 26.700 26.800 26.800 26.900 26.900 27.000 26.900 26.900 26.700
1952 26.500 26.300 26.300 26.400 26.400 26.500 26.700 26.700 26.700 26.700 26.700 26.700 26.500
1951 25.400 25.700 25.800 25.800 25.900 25.900 25.900 25.900 26.100 26.200 26.400 26.500 26.000
1950 23.500 23.500 23.600 23.600 23.700 23.800 24.100 24.300 24.400 24.600 24.700 25.000 24.100
1949 24.000 23.800 23.800 23.900 23.800 23.900 23.700 23.800 23.900 23.700 23.800 23.600 23.800
1948 23.700 23.500 23.400 23.800 23.900 24.100 24.400 24.500 24.500 24.400 24.200 24.100 24.100
1947 21.500 21.500 21.900 21.900 21.900 22.000 22.200 22.500 23.000 23.000 23.100 23.400 22.300
1946 18.200 18.100 18.300 18.400 18.500 18.700 19.800 20.200 20.400 20.800 21.300 21.500 19.500
1945 17.800 17.800 17.800 17.800 17.900 18.100 18.100 18.100 18.100 18.100 18.100 18.200 18.000
1944 17.400 17.400 17.400 17.500 17.500 17.600 17.700 17.700 17.700 17.700 17.700 17.800 17.600
1943 16.900 16.900 17.200 17.400 17.500 17.500 17.400 17.300 17.400 17.400 17.400 17.400 17.300
1942 15.700 15.800 16.000 16.100 16.300 16.300 16.400 16.500 16.500 16.700 16.800 16.900 16.300
1941 14.100 14.100 14.200 14.300 14.400 14.700 14.700 14.900 15.100 15.300 15.400 15.500 14.700
1940 13.900 14.000 14.000 14.000 14.000 14.100 14.000 14.000 14.000 14.000 14.000 14.100 14.000
1939 14.000 13.900 13.900 13.800 13.800 13.800 13.800 13.800 14.100 14.000 14.000 14.000 13.900
1938 14.200 14.100 14.100 14.200 14.100 14.100 14.100 14.100 14.100 14.000 14.000 14.000 14.100
1937 14.100 14.100 14.200 14.300 14.400 14.400 14.500 14.500 14.600 14.600 14.500 14.400 14.400
1936 13.800 13.800 13.700 13.700 13.700 13.800 13.900 14.000 14.000 14.000 14.000 14.000 13.900
1935 13.600 13.700 13.700 13.800 13.800 13.700 13.700 13.700 13.700 13.700 13.800 13.800 13.700
1934 13.200 13.300 13.300 13.300 13.300 13.400 13.400 13.400 13.600 13.500 13.500 13.400 13.400
1933 12.900 12.700 12.600 12.600 12.600 12.700 13.100 13.200 13.200 13.200 13.200 13.200 13.000
1932 14.300 14.100 14.000 13.900 13.700 13.600 13.600 13.500 13.400 13.300 13.200 13.100 13.700
1931 15.900 15.700 15.600 15.500 15.300 15.100 15.100 15.100 15.000 14.900 14.700 14.600 15.200
1930 17.100 17.000 16.900 17.000 16.900 16.800 16.600 16.500 16.600 16.500 16.400 16.100 16.700
1929 17.100 17.100 17.000 16.900 17.000 17.100 17.300 17.300 17.300 17.300 17.300 17.200 17.100
1928 17.300 17.100 17.100 17.100 17.200 17.100 17.100 17.100 17.300 17.200 17.200 17.100 17.100
1927 17.500 17.400 17.300 17.300 17.400 17.600 17.300 17.200 17.300 17.400 17.300 17.300 17.400
1926 17.900 17.900 17.800 17.900 17.800 17.700 17.500 17.400 17.500 17.600 17.700 17.700 17.700
1925 17.300 17.200 17.300 17.200 17.300 17.500 17.700 17.700 17.700 17.700 18.000 17.900 17.500
1924 17.300 17.200 17.100 17.000 17.000 17.000 17.100 17.000 17.100 17.200 17.200 17.300 17.100
1923 16.800 16.800 16.800 16.900 16.900 17.000 17.200 17.100 17.200 17.300 17.300 17.300 17.100
1922 16.900 16.900 16.700 16.700 16.700 16.700 16.800 16.600 16.600 16.700 16.800 16.900 16.800
1921 19.000 18.400 18.300 18.100 17.700 17.600 17.700 17.700 17.500 17.500 17.400 17.300 17.900
1920 19.300 19.500 19.700 20.300 20.600 20.900 20.800 20.300 20.000 19.900 19.800 19.400 20.000
1919 16.500 16.200 16.400 16.700 16.900 16.900 17.400 17.700 17.800 18.100 18.500 18.900 17.300
1918 14.000 14.100 14.000 14.200 14.500 14.700 15.100 15.400 15.700 16.000 16.300 16.500 15.100
1917 11.700 12.000 12.000 12.600 12.800 13.000 12.800 13.000 13.300 13.500 13.500 13.700 12.800
1916 10.400 10.400 10.500 10.600 10.700 10.800 10.800 10.900 11.100 11.300 11.500 11.600 10.900
1915 10.100 10.000 9.900 10.000 10.100 10.100 10.100 10.100 10.100 10.200 10.300 10.300 10.100
1914 10.000 9.900 9.900 9.800 9.900 9.900 10.000 10.200 10.200 10.100 10.200 10.100 10.000
1913 9.800 9.800 9.800 9.800 9.700 9.800 9.900 9.900 10.000 10.000 10.100 10.000 9.900

To calculate inflation from a month and year to a later month and year, try our Inflation calculator

http://inflationdata.com/Inflation/Consumer_Price_Index/HistoricalCPI.aspx

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Newt Gingrich Attacks Short-Sighted Stunningly Stupid Socialist: Comrade Obama Rejects Canadian Keystone XL Pipeline–Job Creator and Energy Supplier For Communist China!–Barack Hussein Obama–The Redistributor–Videos

Posted on January 19, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Enivornment, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Oil, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Resources | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , |

“…The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win.

  WORKING MEN OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE.”

~Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto

Newt calls Obama’s Pipeline decision “stupidity” – like he’s “governing Mars”

Obama Nixes Keystone Pipeline 

Barack Obama Admits: Energy Prices Will Skyrocket Under Cap And Trade

Obama rejects Canada pipeline plan

Glimmer of Hope: Obama Admin Rejects Keystone XL

Speaker Boehner: “This is Not the End of the Fight” for Keystone Energy Jobs

Rep. Fred Upton discusses Keystone pipeline project with CNBC’s Larry Kudlow

Flores Denounces Obama’s Decision to Reject the Job-Creating Keystone XL Pipeline

Canada Will Sell Oil To China If US Keeps Delaying The Pipeline

Keystone XL Pipeline Controversy

Keystone Pipeline: No Brainer

Keystone pipeline fallout

[youtube-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lT1EeEb1DGg&feature=related]

Obama faces Canadian pipeline dilemma

Energy Security: Rep. Barton urges President to approve Keystone XL Pipeline

Government is the worst failure of civilized man.

~H.L. Mencken

America will never be destroyed from the outside.

If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.

~Abraham Lincoln

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Republican Party Presidential Candidates Race to Win 1,144 Delegates–Updated Delegate Count–Videos

Posted on January 12, 2012. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Demographics, Economics, Fiscal Policy, Inflation, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Monetary Policy, Money, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Security, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , |

Latest Update February 1, 2012

Who is winning the race for the 2012 Republican Party presidential nomination?

Revised, Updated and Expanded January 22 and 26, 2012

Ron Paul: Getting More Delegates Is ‘The Name Of The Game’

How Are Delegates Counted in 2012’s Republican Primaries?

How America Votes – RNC changes rules – Talk of Brokered Convention!

How to Get Ron Paul Elected: Infowars Nightly News 

Blue Reps — an End To War, a Revival of Liberty

GOP Presidential candidates, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum

Credit: http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2011/12/09/202865-mitt-romney-ron-paul-newt-gingrich.jpg

Republican Party presidential candidates race to win 1,144 delegates

Are the Republican Party presidential candidates running a 440-yard dash or a 26-mile marathon?

The finish line is the Republican National Convention scheduled to meet in Tampa, Fla. starting on Aug. 27 for the purpose of nominating the party’s 2012 presidential candidate and adopting the party platform. The Republican Party has a total of 2,286 delegates with 1,144 votes (50 percent plus 1) needed to win the party’s presidential nomination. The first candidate to receive 1,144 delegate votes becomes the party’s presidential nominee, who then selects a vice-presidential candidate as their running mate. The convention delegates must approve this selection by giving the vice-president candidate 1,144 votes.

Five Republican candidates have already dropped out of the race. Former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman and Texas Gov. Rick Perry suspended their campaigns before the South Carolina primary. Huntsman endorsed Romney and Perry endorsed Gingrich. Minnesota Rep. Bachmann suspended her campaign after the Iowa caucus when she received less than 5 percent of the vote. Businessman Herman Cain suspended his campaign prior to the Iowa caucus due to allegations, which he denied, of sexual harassment of two women and an alleged thirteen year affair with another woman. Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty withdrew from the race when he came in third in the Aug. 13, 2011 Iowa straw poll behind Bachmann and Paul.

The Republican candidates still running for the nomination are former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and Texas Rep. Ron Paul. By March 7, the day after Super Tuesday, the field should be narrowed to at most three candidates.

Both Romney and Paul have the money, organization and message required to make it a two-man marathon race for the 1,144 delegates needed to win the party presidential nomination. If Gingrich and Santorum are not running a close second to Romney by then, both are expected to drop out of the race because they lack both the money and organization to continue the race to 1,144.

Each state receives a number of delegates based on the following rules:

  1. Each state Congressional district gets three delegates.
  2. Each state gets 10 at-large delegates or five delegates per senator.
  3. Each state gets three party leader delegates for the state party chairman, state national committeeman and national committeewoman.
  4. Each state gets bonus delegates for each elected Republican senator, governor, legislative chamber with a majority and for electing 50 percent or more of the House congressional delegation.
  5. President bonus delegates: States casting a majority of their 2008 electoral votes for the Republican candidate receive 4.5 + 0.60 × the Jurisdiction’s Total 2012 electoral vote in bonus delegates.

For example, Texas receives 34 bonus delegates as follow:

  • 2008 presidential election (28): 4.5 + (0.6 × 38 [2012 electoral votes]) = 27.3
  • Governor (1): Rick Perry (re-elected 2010)
  • U.S. Senate delegation (2): Kay Bailey Hutchison (re-elected 2006); John Cornyn (re-elected 2008)
  • U.S. House delegation (1): January 2009: House 20 of 32; January 2011: House 23 of 32
  • Republican control of state legislature
  • One chamber (1): January 2009: House 76 of 150
  • All chambers (1): January 2009: House 76 of 150, Senate 19 of 31

Texas has a total of 155 delegates consisting of 108 district delegates (36 congressional districts times three), 10 at large delegates, three party leader delegates and 34 bonus delegates.

Each state’s Republican Party decides whether they will use either a primary or caucus to determine the number of candidates’ delegates, whether this event will be open to all registered voters or closed to only Republican registered voters and whether it is winner-take-all delegates or a proportional allocation of the delegates based upon the number of votes cast for each candidate.

In primary states registered voters select the candidate they want to be the party’s presidential nominee by secret ballot. Voters select from registered candidates on the ballot or can write in a name. In closed primaries, only registered voters of the Republican Party can vote in primary elections. In open primaries, registered voters can vote in the primary of either party but can vote in only one primary. Most primary states have closed primaries.

Also, most primary states have the presidential candidates’ names on the ballot. A few states have the name of the delegates that are committed to a candidate as well as the name of any uncommitted delegates on the ballot. In some states the delegates are pledged or bound to a candidate. In other states the delegates are unpledged and can vote for any candidate.

In caucus states, registered voters of the party attend a meeting to select candidate delegates. At the start of a caucus meeting, voters divide into groups for each candidate, as well as a group for undecided voters. Then spokesmen for each candidate give brief speeches in support of their candidates in order to try to persuade other voters to join their candidate’s groups. At the end of the meeting, votes are counted by party organizers for each candidate group to determine how many delegates to the county convention the candidate has won. The delegates selected can be either pledged delegates bound to a candidate or unpledged or uncommitted delegates.

In both primary and caucus states, the Republican state party chooses either a “winner-take-all” or a proportional method to determine how many delegates are awarded to each candidate. In a winner-take-all state, the candidate that receives the most votes in the primary or caucus receives all of the state’s delegates to the national convention. In states that use the proportional method, candidates above a certain threshold of votes cast receive a proportion of the convention delegates based on the number votes cast for a candidate to the total number of votes cast.

Texas is an open primary state because it does not have voter registration by political party. A registered voter can vote in either a Republican Party primary or a Democratic Party primary, but can vote in only one primary. A voter becomes a Republican by voting in either a Republican primary or Republican primary run-off. Voters who did not vote in a Republican primary may vote in a Republican primary run-off.

Presidential candidates are allocated national convention delegates in direct proportion to the statewide popular vote they receive in the Texas Republican primary originally scheduled for Mar. 6 but now changed to April 3. Each of Texas’ 36 congressional districts gets three delegates for a total of 108 delegates. The 44 at-large and bonus delegates are selected by a nominating committee at the convention; three delegate spots are reserved for Texas’ National Committeeman, National Committeewoman and State Chairman.

Texans may register to vote in the Texas primaries by going to the Texas Secretary of State website: http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/voter/reqvr.shtml.

 Register to vote and then vote on April 3 for the candidate of your choice for President.

Who is winning the Republican Party Presidential candidate race for 1,144 delegates as of January 21, 2012?

The estimated total delegate count in the race for 1,144 delegates needed to win the nomination is summarized in the table below:

Republican Party U.S. Presidential 2012

Estimated Delegate Count By Candidate and State

State

Gingrich

Romney

Paul

Santorum

Perry

Totals

Iowa

4

6

6

6

3

25

New Hampshire

0

9

3

0

0

12

South Carolina

23

2

0

0

0

25

Totals

27

17

9

6

3

62

Source: The Green Papers, 2012 Presidential Primaries, Caucuses and Conventions.      www.thegreenpapers.com

These preliminary estimates will change as candidates drop out of the race and actual delegates are selected at state party conventions.

The estimated popular vote count is set forth in the table below:

Republican Party U.S. Presidential 2012

Estimated Popular Vote By Candidate and State

State

Gingrich

Romney

Paul

Santorum

Perry

Totals*

Iowa

16,163

29,805

26,036

29,839

12,557

121,479

New Hampshire

23,421

97,591

56,872

23,405

1,764

248,448

South Carolina

243,153

167,280

77,993

102,057

2,491

601,166

Total Popular Vote*

282,737

294,676

160,901

155,301

16,812

971,729

Popular Vote Percentage

29.09%

30.32%

16.55%

15.98%

1.73%

100.00%

Source: The Green Papers, 2012 Presidential Primaries, Caucuses and Conventions. www.thegreenpapers.com

*Total popular votes cast for all candidates including others not listed in the table.

On Jan. 21 the voters of South Carolina voted in the second open primary state where the candidate with the most votes statewide  receives 11 delegates and the winner in each congressional district receives two delegates. Gingrich won statewide and received 11 delegates and won six congressional districts for additional 12 delegates for a total of 23 delegates. Romney won one congressional district and received two delegates.

Results for South Carolina Republican Primary

U.S. Presidential Jan. 21, 2012

Candidate

Popular Vote

Percentage

Delegates*

Newton Leroy “Newt” Gingrich

243,153

40.45%

23

Willard “Mitt” Romney

167,280

27.83%

2

.Richard J. “Rick” Santorum

102,057

16.89%

0

Ronald E. “Ron” Paul

77,993

12.97%

0

Hermain Cain

23,405

9.42%

0

James Richard “Rick” Perry

2,491

0.41%

0

Jon M. Huntsman, Jr.

1,161

0.14%

0

Michele M. Bachmann

494

0.08

0

Totals

601,166

100.00%

25

Source: The Green Papers, 2012 Presidential Primaries, Caucuses and Conventions.     http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/SC-R#0121

*South Carolina would have had a total of 50 delegates consisting of 21 congressional district delegates, 10 at-large delegates, 3 party leader delegates and 16 bonus delegates. However, the state rescheduled the state primary to Jan. 22 and under the Rules of the Republican Party forfeited 50 percent of its delegates. Also, the three state party leader delegates attend the national convention as guests.

On Jan. 10 the voters of New Hampshire voted in the first state primary where the states 12 delegates were bound proportionally to presidential contenders based on the primary vote statewide.

Results for New Hampshire Republican Primary

U.S. Presidential Jan. 10, 2012

Candidate

Popular Vote

Percentage

Delegates*

Willard “Mitt” Romney

97,591

39.28%

9

Ronald E. “Ron” Paul

56,872

22.89%

3

Jon M. Huntsman, Jr.

41,964

16.89%

0

Newton Leroy “Newt” Gingrich

23,421

9.43%

0

Richard J. “Rick” Santorum

23,405

9.42%

0

James Richard “Rick” Perry

1,764

.71%

0

Michele M. Bachmann

350

.14%

0

Available

3

Totals

248,448

100.00%

15

Source: The Green Papers, 2012 Presidential Primaries, Caucuses and Conventions.     http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/NH-R

*New Hampshire would have had a total of 23 delegates consisting of 6 district delegates, 10 at-large delegates, 3 party leader delegates and 4 bonus delegates. However, the state rescheduled the state primary to Jan. 10 and under the Rules of the Republican Party forfeited 50 percent of its delegates. Also, the three state party leader delegates attend the national convention as non-voting delegates.

On Jan. 3 the voters of Iowa met in 1,774 precinct caucuses to vote for their choice for the Republican presidential candidate by electing delegates to their county conventions.  The 99 county conventions then select delegates to the Iowa Congressional District Convention and the State Convention on June 12. This convention determines the delegates to the Republican National Convention. In 2012 Iowa will send 28 delegates to the nominating convention including 10 base at-large, 12 for the four congressional districts (three per district), three party and three bonus. However, unlike other states where delegates are usually bound for the first vote, Iowa delegates are soft-pledged or not bound to vote for a particular candidate.

Results for Iowa Republican Caucus

U.S. Presidential Jan. 03, 2012

Candidate

Popular Vote

Percentage

Delegates*

Richard J. “Rick” Santorum

29,839

24.56%

6

Willard “Mitt” Romney

29,805

24.54%

6

Ronald E. “Ron” Paul

26,036

21.43%

6

Newton Leroy “Newt” Gingrich

16,163

13.31%

4

Richard J. “Rick” Perry

12,557

10.34%

3

Michele M. Bachmann

6,046

4.98%

0

Jon M. Huntsman, Jr.

739

0.61%

0

Available

3

Totals

121,479

100.000%

28

Source: The Green Papers, 2012 Presidential Primaries, Caucuses and Conventions.http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P12/IA-R#0103

*Iowa has a total of 28 delegates consisting of 12 district delegates, 10 at-large delegates, 3 party leader delegates and 3 bonus delegates. The 25 non party leader delegates were allocated to the candidates with more than 5 percent of the popular vote. This is an estimate that will change by the time of the state convention meets.

This first closed primary is in Florida on Tuesday, Jan. 31 for 50 delegates with the statewide winner being awarded all the delegates. Florida forfeited 50 percent of their delegates to the national convention for violating Republican Party rules by changing the timing of their primaries.

Register to vote and then go vote in the Texas primary on April 3.

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Who is winning the race for the 2012 Republican Party presidential nomination?

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Ross Perot And The American Dream–Vote Your Conscience–Vote For Ron Paul–Videos

Posted on November 29, 2011. Filed under: Banking, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Economics, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Public Sector, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Religion, Resources, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

“I’d never knowingly hire a man that cheats on his wife. If the wife can’t trust ya, why should I?”

~Ross Perot

Jesse Ventura on Thrid Party Voting and Ross Perot

It’s A Free Country: There Will Never Be Another Ross Perot

The first question you should ask about any of the Presidential candidates is: “Can I trust this person?”

The only person running for President in 2012 that I can definitely answer yes to is Ron Paul.

Thanksgiving Family Forum – Ron Paul Highlights

Ron Paul Family – How’s this for consistency?

The last time I said this was when Ross Perot was running for President in 1992.

Twenty years is a long time.

The American people made a mistake in 1992 in not electing Ross Perot.

I hope and pray they do not make the same mistake again in 2012.

Stop the Republican Party Establishment!

Prove them wrong.

Dick Armey: Ron Paul can’t win–“The Republican Establishment Will Not Allow Ron Paul To Be Their Standard Bearer”

Vote your conscience.

Vote your heart.

Vote for Ron Paul.

Perot political ad

Ross Perot Campaign Ad 1992

Perot for 92 Campaign Ad 10/1992

Ross Perot & The American Dream Pt 1

Ross Perot & The American Dream Pt 2

Ross Perot & The American Dream Pt 3

Ross Perot & The American Dream Pt 4

Ross Perot – ECONOMIC crisis 2008

Background Articles and Videos

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Ron Paul’s Address At 29th Cato Institute’s Monetary Conference And Remarks At Thanksgiving Family Forum–The Reason Ron Paul Will Be Elected President–Video


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Objective Journalism–Propaganda/Public Relations Techniques–The Power of Nazi Propaganda–The Triumph of The Will—-Videos

Posted on September 6, 2011. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Books, Communications, Economics, Employment, European History, Films, history, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Music, People, Philosophy, Politics, Programming, Psychology, Quotations, Raves, Talk Radio, Technology, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

“When I came back to the United States, I decided that if you could use propaganda for war, you could certainly use it for peace. And ‘propaganda’ got to be a bad word because of the Germans using it, so what I did was to try and find some other words so we found the words ‘public relations’.”

~ Edward Bernays

How to produce objective journalism

SA@Takimag – The Myth of Objective Journalism

Chet Huntley talks about journalistic objectivity

Susan Jacoby – The Problem of Journalistic Objectivity

Steve Dunleavy on objectivity

Alex Jones: Objectivity in Journalism

Journalistic objectivity: official sources

Facts

How Propaganda Became Known As “Public Relations” (1of2)

How Propaganda Became Known As “Public Relations” (2of2)

What is Propaganda?

Propaganda Transfer Technique

Propaganda Testimonials

Propaganda Glittering Generalities

Propaganda  Bandwagon

Propaganda  Plain Folks

Propaganda  Name Calling

Propaganda  Card Stacking

The Power of Nazi Propaganda

Triumph des Willens (Full movie – English subbed)

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Remembering The 9/11 First Responders–Videos

Posted on August 29, 2011. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Education, government, government spending, Language, Law, liberty, Life, media, People, Philosophy, Quotations, Raves, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

North Moore and Varick co-named LIEUTENANT VINCENT  G. HALLORAN STREET

Credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/sheenachi/3270140277/

November 11, 2001

“I live near Union Square, the site of so many posters in the wake of the WTC tragedy. All of them quickly became a blur in my mind, all except one attached to a fence near East 16th Street. It read, “Lt. Vincent Halloran, NYFD. Hang On, Vinny.” That was it. No photograph, no decorations, just a simple handdrawn poster that will remain in my memory forever. I never knowingly met Lt. Halloran, of blessed memory, but from now on whenever I need some self-encouragement, his name and “Hang On, Vinny” will get me focused on the task at hand. May his memory be a blessing for his entire family and fellow firemen.”

~ Alan Forman, nyc, New York

Source: Guest Book, http://www.legacy.com/guestbook/guestbook-entry-print.aspx?n=vincent-halloran&pid=128619

There is a street in lower Manhattan next to the Hook and Ladder 8 firehouse at 14 North Moore and Varick co-named after Lieutenant Vincent G. Halloran–a first responder.

First responders are emergency service personnel whose job requires them being one of the first on the scene of fires, medical emergencies or large-scale disasters. They are responsible for the protection and preservation of life and property. First responders include firefighters, police officers, and emergency medical technicians or ambulance technicians.

When thousands were fleeing from the burning Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, the first responders were running toward the fires to help people evacuate from the buildings and extinguish the fires.

The street named after one of 9/11’s first responders honors his supreme sacrifice and that of 343 New York City Fire Department (FDNY) firemen,  23 New York City Police Department officers,  37 Port of Authority Police officers and 15 Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) who died on September 11, 2011. In addition it honors the service of all the 9/11 first responders including about 2,000 who were injured that day.

On Sept. 5, 2011 Lieutenant Halloran had completed his twentieth year of service with the New York City Fire Department.

FDNY Hook & Ladder 8 Firehouse at 14 North Moore

A few days later on Sept. 11 Halloran led Ladder 8 into the North Tower of the World Trade Center to assist with the evacuation of the building.

After the South Tower collapsed, the order was given to evacuate the North Tower and the Ladder 8 firemen were ordered out.

“When the order came for Ladder 8 to get out of the building, he was on the 30th floor,” said Lt. Larry Mack. “Ladder 8 made it out, but he probably stopped to help someone.” It was a tragic “last act of compassion” for a man known around the firehouse as someone who would go the extra mile, even for a stranger, Mack said.

Source: http://www.tribecatrib.com/newsmay04/street-naming.htm

Lt. Vincent G. Halloran

Credit: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/images/full-size/halloran.vincent.jpg

FDNY Hook & Ladder 8 Firehouse DedicationFDNY Hook & Ladder Engine 8 Dedication

Credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/flickr4jazz/4060792844/

Credit: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/images/full-size/halloran.vincent.jpg

Lieutenant Halloran was 43 and the father of five boys Jake, Connor, Aidan, Kieran and Declan.

A sixth child, Phaelan, his only daughter, was born to his wife, Marie Halloran, on what would have been the couple’s sixteenth wedding anniversary in May 2002.

In a New York Times Dec. 29, 2001 profile of Lt. Halloran, his wife Marie reflecting on Vinnie said it best, “What can I say, he just loved kids.”

In a Sept. 2006 online story posted at http://www.LoHud.com entitled Firefighter’s family learns to keep going, Marie Halloran said, “We try to dwell on what we have, not what we lost. I really do believe you have to live your life so you don’t have regrets. Be kind to others, help others, give back. Be a good person. If I knew what was going to happen, I would not remake any decision.”

On the tenth anniversary of 9/11 we honor the memory of all the 9/11 first responders as well as those who tragically died that day.

Two years ago I learned of Lieutenant Halloran and his family by participating in Project 2,996.

I encourage others to become involved with Project 2,996 on this the ten-year anniversary of 9/11:

“We Remember…

On September 11, 2001 almost 3,000 of the world’s citizens were brutally, and publicly, murdered. We all cried,
and we all swore that we’d never forget. But a few years later I realized that I knew nothing about those people who were doing nothing more than living their lives. In 2006 I asked other bloggers if they thought it would be a good idea
to take the time to learn about the victims and try to keep their individual memories alive. The response I got was overwhelming. And Project 2,996 is the result. …”

Source: http://project2996.wordpress.com/

FDNY Ladder 8

FDNY – Hook & Ladder 8 In The House – 5/9/11

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Project 2,996: Remembering Lt. Vincent Gerard Halloran

Project 2996–Remembering A Life Ended On 9/11 With A Post On Your Blog Or Web Site–Call For Volunteers

Remembering September 11, 2001

Remembering September 11, 2001–Duty, Honor, Country–Your Rallying Point

Remembering September 11, 2001 On The Eighth Anniversary

Judy Collins–Videos

The Voice of An Angel–Hayley Westenra–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Pronk Pops Show 1-38, Podcasts and Download–Give It A Listen–Videos

Posted on July 28, 2011. Filed under: Agriculture, American History, Babies, Banking, Baseball, Blogroll, Books, Business, Climate, College, Comedy, Communications, Computers, Crime, Culture, Demographics, Diasters, Drug Cartels, Economics, Education, Employment, Energy, Enivornment, Entertainment, European History, Farming, Films, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Homes, Immigration, Inflation, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, Microeconomics, Mobile Phones, Monetary Policy, Money, Movies, Music, Natural Gas, Nuclear Power, Oil, People, Philosophy, Pistols, Politics, Private Sector, Psychology, Public Sector, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Religion, Resources, Reviews, Rifles, Science, Security, Sports, Strategy, Talk Radio, Taxes, Technology, Transportation, Unemployment, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , |

Raymond Thomas Pronk’s Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 38:July 27, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 37:July 20, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 36:July 13, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 35:July 6, 2011

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 22 (Part 2)-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22 (Part 1)

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Give it a listen!

Pronk Pops Show 38

July 27, 2011 03:17 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 38, July 27, 2011

Segment 0: Tea Party Democrats, Republicans, and Independents Betrayed–Tell The Democratic and Republican Establishments To Balance The Budget and Cut The Debt Ceiling–Just Say No To Obama, Reid, Boehner and Ryan Unbalanced Budgets–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/27/pronk-pops-show-38-july-27-2011-segment-0-tea-party-democrats-republicans-and-independents-betrayed-tell-the-democratic-and-republican-establishments-to-balance-the-budget-and-cut-the-debt-ceil/

Segment 1: It’s Time For A Permanent, Prevasive and Predictable Stimulus Package–The FairTax–Launching A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/27/pronk-pops-show-38-july-27-2011-segment-1-segment-1-it%E2%80%99s-time-for-a-permanent-prevasive-and-predictable-stimulus-package%E2%80%93the-fairtax%E2%80%93launching-a-peace-and-prosperity-econ/

Pronk Pops Show 37

July 21, 2011 03:44 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 37, July 21, 2011, Part 1

Segment 0: President Obama Lies and Scares People On Social Security–Stop Spending and Balance The Budget!–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/pronk-pops-show-37-july-20-2011-segment-0-president-obama-lies-and-scares-people-on-social-security-stop-spending-and-balance-the-budget-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 37, July 20, 2011: Segment 1: The American People’s Solution To Economic Stagnation: Increase National Debt Ceiling By $2,000 Billion To $16,300 Billion In Exchange For Passage of A Balanced Budget Amendment And The FairTax Bills And Repealing The Income Tax 16th Amendment To U.S. Constitution–A Balanced, Fair And Transparent Approach To Creating Jobs and Growing A Peace and Prosperity Economy–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/pronk-pops-show-37-july-20-2011-segment-1-the-american-people%E2%80%99s-solution-to-economic-stagnation-increase-national-debt-ceiling-by-2000-billion-to-16300-billion-in-exchange-for-passage/

Part 2 Segments 2, 3 and 4 will be broadcast next Wednesday, July 27, 2011 from 3-5pm and posted on Thursday, July 28, 2011

Pronk Pops Show 36

July 13, 2011 04:23 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 36, July 13, 2011

Segment 0: Lipstick On A Pig–Great Obama Depression– Deeper and Longer–Official U-3 Unemployment Rate Hits 9.2% In June 2011 With 14 Million Unemployed and Total Unemployment Rate U-6 Hits 16.2% With Over 24.8 Million Americans Seeking Full Time Job–Obama Is Not Working–2012–End An Error!–Fire Obama–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/pronk-pops-show-36-july-13-2011-segment-0-lipstick-on-a-pig-great-obama-depression-deeper-and-longer-official-u-3-unemployment-rate-hits-9-2-in-june-2011-with-14-million-unemployed-and-total-u/?preview=true&preview_id=1359&preview_nonce=35f48d29ca

Segment 1: Gretchen Morgenson & Joshua Rosner–Reckless Endangerment: How Outsized Ambition, Greed, and Corruption Led To Economic Armageddon–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/pronk-pops-show-36-july-13-2011-segment-1-gretchen-morgenson-joshua-rosner-reckless-endangerment-how-outsized-ambition-greed-and-corruption-led-to-economic-armageddon-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1370&preview_nonce=a92ff3f2ca

Segment 2: Jim Rogers, Peter Schiff, Marc Farber and Ron Paul On The National Debt Ceiling and Balancing The Budget–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/pronk-pops-show-36-july-3-2011-segment-2-ron-paul-on-the-national-debt-ceiling-and-balancing-the-budget-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1377&preview_nonce=51b47fd93e

Segment 3: Obama’s Gungate: Operation Fast and Furious–Arming Mexican Drug Cartels and Criminals–Killing American and Mexican Citizens–A Pretext For The Ultimate Aim of Disarming The American People and Repealing the Second Amendment–Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, FBI, BATFE, ICE and DEA Coverup and Stonewalling–Call For Special Prosecutor–President Obama and Attorney General Holder Should Be Impeached For Obstruction of Justice–Videos–Updated

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/12/pronk-pops-show-36-july-13-2011-segment-3-obamas-gungate-operation-fast-and-furious-arming-mexican-drug-cartels-and-criminals-killing-american-and-mexican-citizens-a-pretext-for-the-ultimate/?preview=true&preview_id=1366&preview_nonce=811986bc80

Segment 4: Ron Paul won’t seek re election for Congress–Why? Can You Say–President Ron Paul–Vote For A Committed and Principled Constitutionalist–The Peace and Prosperity Candidate For President–Ron Paul–Videos

For additional information and videos:
http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/13/pronk-pops-show-36-july-13-2011-segment-4-ron-paul-won%E2%80%99t-seek-re-election-for-congress%E2%80%93why-can-you-say%E2%80%93president-ron-paul%E2%80%93vote-for-a-committed-and-principled-const/?preview=true&preview_id=1406&preview_nonce=16c661faf2

Pronk Pops Show 35

July 06, 2011 03:44 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 35, July 6, 2015

Segment 0: The Meaning of Independence Day–Videos

For additional information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/pronk-pops-show-35-july-6-2011-segment-0-the-meaning-of-independence-day-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1327&preview_nonce=d099da9d31

Segment 1: The Legal Standard In A Murder Case: Prove It Beyond A Reasonable Doubt–Suspicion And Opinion Is Not Enough–Casey Anthony Murder Case–Not Guilty–Videos

For additional information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/pronk-pops-show-35-july-5-2011-segment-1-the-legal-standard-in-a-murder-case-prove-it-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt-suspicion-and-opinion-is-not-enough-casey-anthony-murder-case-not-quilty-videos/

Segment 2: George Bureau of Investigations Finds Atlanta School Teachers and Principals Cheating Scandal:Raised Students Scores On Tests –Government Corrupt Schools–

For additional information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/pronk-pops-show-35-july-6-2011-segment-2-george-bureau-of-investigations-finds-atlanta-school-teachers-and-principals-cheating-scandalraised-students-scores-on-tests-government-corrupt-schools/

Segment 3: Obama’s Marxist Class Warfare On Millionaires and Billionaires–Tax The Job Creators–President’s Unbalanced Budget Would Result In A Big $1,100 Billion Deficit In Fiscal Year 2012–This Is Obama’s So-Called Balanced Approach–Obama Is Not Working–Fire Obama Right Now!–Videos

For additional information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/pronk-pops-show-35-july-6-2011-segment-3-obamas-marxist-class-warfare-on-millionaires-and-billionaires-tax-the-job-creators-presidents-unbalanced-budget-would-result-in-a-big-1100-billion/

Pronk Pops Show 34

June 29, 2011 03:38 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 34, June 29, 2011

Segment 0: Sexist Elitist Chris Wallace Asks Michele Backmann Are You A Flake?–Chris, Are You A Wimp?–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/pronk-pops-show-34-june-29-2011-segment-0-sexist-elitist-chris-wallace-asks-michele-backmann-are-you-a-flake-chris-are-you-a-wimp-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1287&preview_nonce=d47e8281df

Segment 1: Is Ron Paul An Isolationist–No–He Is For Free Trade and A Nonterventionist Foreign Policy–Are The NeoCons Warmongers–Yes–Aggressive Interventionist Foreign Policy–Empire or Nation Building!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/pronk-pops-show-34-june-29-2011-segment-1-is-ron-paul-an-isolationist-no-he-is-for-free-trade-and-a-nonterventionist-foreign-policy-are-the-neocons-warmongers-yes-aggressive-interventist-fore/?preview=true&preview_id=1295&preview_nonce=17ff44ad0c

Segment 2: Cut, Cap, And Balance Pledge–The Washington D.C. Howdy Doody Debt Ceiling Show–“Say Kids What Time Is It?”–Howdy Doody Time–Fiscal Year 2020 Balanced Budget Time–Not Serious–Send In The Clowns–There Already There!– Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/29/pronk-pops-show-34-june-29-2011-segment-2-cut-cap-and-balance-pledge-the-washington-d-c-howdy-doody-debt-ceiling-show-say-kids-what-time-is-it-howdy-doody-time-fiscal-year-2020-balance/

Pronk Pops Show 33

June 22, 2011 03:21 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 33, June 22, 2011

Segment 0: Jon Huntsman Launches 2012 Candidacy for President At Liberty Park–Should Become A Democrat Like John V. Lindsay And Run Against President Obama in 2012!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/pronk-pops-show-june-22-2011-segment-0-jon-huntsman-launches-2012-candidacy-for-president-at-liberty-park%e2%80%93should-become-a-democrat-like-john-v-lindsay-and-run-against-president-obama-in-2/

Segment 1: Republican Candidates For President Romney, Cain, and Johnson Refuse To Sign Pro-Life Citizen’s Pledge–While Sarah Palin’s Trig’s Creator E-Mail Moves Millions–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/pronk-pops-show-june-22-2011-segment-1-republican-candidates-for-president-romney-cain-and-johnson-refuse-to-sign-pro-life-citizens-pledge-while-sarah-palins-trigs-creator-e-mail-moves-mi/

Segment 2: Rick Perry/Sarah Palin Republican Establishment Candidate Ticket vs. Ron Paul/Michele Bachmann Republican Constitutional Candidate Ticket for the 2012 Presidential Race–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pronk-pops-show-33-june-22-2011-segment-2-rick-perrysarah-palin-republican-establishment-candidate-ticket-vs-ron-paulmichele-bachmann-republican-constitutional-candidate-ticket-for-the-2012-pr/

Segment 3: The Next President Of The United States Tells Truth To Power At Republican Leadership Conference–Great Speech!

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pronk-pops-show-33-june-22-2011-segment-3-the-next-president-of-the-united-states-tells-truth-to-power-at-republican-leadership-conference-great-speech/

Segment 4: Bloomberg Poll Bad News For Obama–Only 30% Certain They Will Vote For Obama in 2012!–66% Think Country On The Wrong Track!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/22/pronk-pops-show-33-june-22-2011-segment-4-bloomberg-poll-bad-news-for-obama-only-30-certain-they-will-vote-for-obama-in-2012-66-think-country-on-the-wrong-track-videos/

Pronk Pops Show 32

June 15, 2011 03:10 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 32, June 15, 2011

Segment 0: Money, Organization, Message, Momentum, Ambition–MOMMA–You Need MOMMA To Win A Presidential Race!–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/pronk-pops-show-32-june-15-2011-segment-0-money-organization-message-momentum-ambition-momma-you-need-momma-to-win-a-presidential-race-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1173&preview_nonce=d056ccee9f

Segment 1: Republican Presidential Debate In New Hampshire June 13, 2011–American People The Winner–Obama The Loser–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/pronk-pops-show-32-june-15-2011-segment-1-republican-presidential-debate-in-new-hampshire-june-13-2011%E2%80%93american-people-the-winner%E2%80%93obama-the-loser%E2%80%93videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1176&preview_nonce=0196810e90

Segment 2: The Political Issues of 2012 Elections: #1–Unemployment–Jobs, #2–Government Spending–Balanced Budgets, #3-Tax Reform–The FairTax, #4-Inflation–End The Fed, #5-Wars–Bring The Troops Home–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/pronk-pops-show-32-june-15-2011-
segment-2-1-the-issues-unemployment-jobs-2-government-spending-balanced-budgets-3-tax-reform-the-fairtax-4-inflation-end-the-fed-5-wars-bring-the-t/?preview=true&preview_id=1183&preview_nonce=577da72775

Segment 3: Pronk Presidential Prediction–The Winner Is?–The American People!–Videos

For Additional Information and Videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/15/pronk-pops-show-32-june15-2011-segment-3-pronk-presidential-prediction-the-winner-is-the-american-people-videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1169&preview_nonce=52b4648eff

Pronk Pops Show 31

June 08, 2011 03:17 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 31: June 8, 2011

Segment 0: ENTJ–Know Thyself–This above all: to thine own self be true–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/pronk-pops-show-31-segment-0-entj%E2%80%93know-thyself%E2%80%93this-above-all-to-thine-own-self-be-true%E2%80%93videos/?preview=true&preview_id=1122&preview_nonce=938bb3c129

Segment 1: A Breach of Public Trust–Hound Dogs–Clinton, Weiner, and Obama–Notorious Habitual Liars–Wake Up–Start A Revolution–Ron Paul–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/pronk-pops-show-31-segment-1-a-breach-of-public-trust%E2%80%93hound-dogs%E2%80%93clinton-weiner-and-obama%E2%80%93notorious-habitual-liars%E2%80%93wake-up%E2%80%93start-a-revolution%E2%80%93ron-pa/

Segment 2: June 2011–Unemployment Situation Worsens–9.1% Official Unemployment Rate (U-3) with 13,900,000 Unemployed and 15.8% Total Unemployment Rate (U-6) With 24,283,000 Americans Looking For Full Time Jobs!–Great Obama Depression (GOD)!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/pronk-pops-show-31-segment-2-june-2011-unemployment-situation-worsens-9-1-official-unemployment-rate-u-3-with-13900000-unemployed-and-15-8-total-unemployment-rate-u-6-with-24283000-america/

Pronk Pops Show 30

June 02, 2011 01:26 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show, June 2, 2011

Segment 0: The Facebook Effect–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/pronk-pops-show-30-june-2-2011-segment-0-the-facebook-effect-videos/

Segment 2: Paul Allen–Idea Man: A Memoir By The Cofounder of Microsoft–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/pronk-pops-show-30-june-6-2011-segment-1-paul-allen%E2%80%93idea-man-a-memoir-by-the-cofounder-of-microsoft%E2%80%93videos/

Segment 3: Last Dance For Love–Congress Blocks Debt Limit Hike–For Now–Who Is The Political Class Fooling–Bring The Troops and Jobs Home and Send The Bureaucrats and Big Spenders Home–Save Medicare and Social Security–Hot Stuff–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/pronk-pops-show-30-june-2-2011-segment-3-last-dance-for-love%E2%80%93congress-blocks-debt-limit-hike%E2%80%93for-now%E2%80%93who-is-the-political-class-fooling%E2%80%93bring-the-troops-and-jobs-ho/

Pronk Pops Show 29

May 26, 2011 01:12 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 29, May 26, 2011

Segment 1: Herman Cain–The Tea Party Movement Candidate–Running On Cutting Spending, Opposing Higher Debt Ceiling, Enforcing Immigration Laws, Defunding Planned Parenthood, Nominating Pro Life Judges, And Passing The FairTax–Common Sense Solutions!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/23/pronk-pops-show-29-may-25-2011-segment-1-herman-cain-the-tea-party-movement-candidate-running-on-cutting-spending-opposing-higher-debt-ceiling-enforcing-immigration-laws-defunding-planned-pa/?preview=true&preview_id=1018&preview_nonce=3fac63d9d6

Segment 2: Taxman Obama’s Hidden Tax Increase On The Rich That Results In Fewer Jobs And Lower Economic Growth vs. Ryan’s Long and Winding Road To Economic Stagnation vs. Senators Lee, DeMint and Paul’s Stairway To Peace and Prosperity With A Balanced Budget!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/24/pronk-pops-show-29-may-25-2011-segment-2-taxman-obamas-hidden-tax-increase-on-the-rich-that-results-in-fewer-jobs-and-lower-economic-growth-vs-ryans-long-and-winding-road-to-economic-stagnat/

Segment 3: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Addresses Congress–A Lesson In Leadership–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/24/pronk-pops-show-29-may-25-2011-segment-3-israeli-prime-minister-benjamin-netanyahu-addresses-congress-a-lesson-in-leadership-videos/

Segment 4: Memo To Washington Republican Party Establishment–You Are Not Listening To The American People–Read Our Lips–“Cut Spending and Balance The Budget Starting With Fiscal Year 2012″–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/25/pronk-pops-show-29-may-25-2011-segment-4-memo-to-washington-republican-party-establishment-you-are-not-listening-to-the-american-people-read-our-lips-cut-spending-and-balance-the-budget-start/

Pronk Pops Show 28

May 18, 2011 04:26 PM PDT

Pronk Pops Show 28, May 18, 2011

Segment 1: Segment 1: Newt Gingrich Running For President As A Big Government Interventionist Republican Progressive aka Green “Compassionate” Conservative?–Favors Individual Health Care Mandates While Attacking Paul Ryan As A Right Wing Radical Social Engineer For Proposing A Premium Support or $15,000 Voucher System To Save Medicare From Bankruptcy!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pronk-pops-show-28-may-18-2011-segment-1-newt-gingrich-running-for-president-as-a-big-govenment-interventionist-republican-progressive-aka-green-compassionate-conservative-favors-individual/

Segment 2: Leave It To Beaver–Newt Gingrich–The Beaver Puppet of The Republican Washington D.C. Establishment Political Class With It Social Engineered Warfare and Welfare Economy with A $3,500 Billion Unbalanced Budget For Fiscal Year 2012 with Nearly $1,000 Billion In Deficit Spending!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pronk-pops-show-28-may-18-2011-segment-2leave-it-to-beaver-newt-gingrich-the-beaver-puppet-of-the-republican-washington-d-c-establishment-political-class-with-it-social-engineered-warfare-and-w/

Segment 3: Ron Paul Running For President Of The United States in 2012–It Is Official–The Third Time Is The Charm!–Videos

For additional information and videos:

http://pronkpops.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pronk-pops-show-28-may-28-2011-segment-3-ron-paul-running-for-president-of-the-united-states-in-2012-it-is-official-the-third-time-is-the-charm-videos/

Segment 4: Ron Paul Is Running For President of The United States In 2012!–The Third Time Is The Charm–A Man Of Integrity–A Candidate For Peace and Prosperity–Neither A Big Government Warfare Republican Nor A Massive Government Welfare Democrat–A Man Of And For The American People–A Tea Party Patriot–Ron Paul–Videos

<