Archive for June, 2010

Thomas E. Woods–Nullification–Videos

Posted on June 30, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Economics, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, history, Immigration, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Monetary Policy, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Technology, Video, Wisdom | Tags: Federal Government, government spending, Nullification, Thomas E. Woods |

Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

http://www.thomasewoods.com/books/nullification/

Tom Woods: “Nullification and State Resistance to Federal Tyranny” Pt. 1

Tom Woods: “Nullification and State Resistance to Federal Tyranny” Pt. 2

Tom Woods: “Nullification and State Resistance to Federal Tyranny” Pt. 3

Tom Woods: “Nullification and State Resistance to Federal Tyranny” Pt. 4

Tom Woods: “Nullification and State Resistance to Federal Tyranny” Pt. 5

Tom Woods: “Nullification and State Resistance to Federal Tyranny” Pt. 6

Background Articles and Videos

THE BORDERS ARE QUITE SECURE. Congressman Pete Stark’s Town hall meeting in Fremont CA

Rush Limbaugh / Maxine Waters /socializing “big oil”

Maxine Waters (D) Slip of the Tongue Reveals True Intentions (Socialism for America)

Background Articles and Videos

Kagan Confirmation Hearings Are a Joke…

Pro Life Action

http://www.prolifeaction.org/faq/abortion.php

Roe v. Wade in PBS’ The Supreme Court

Roe V. Wade

Dr. Lile PBA Partial Birth Abortion Demo Pro-Life

Obama & Live Birth Abortion / Induced Labor Abortions / Infanticide Pro-Life Anti-Abortion Video

Obama Votes Against Born Alive Babies. Jill Stanek Tells All.

Abortion -This is a Suction Abortion

Abortion -This is a Dismemberment Abortion

Abortion – This is a Dilation and Extraction Abortion

Elena Kagan: No Respect for Science
Mary L. Davenport, MD

“…Incendiary memos written by Elena Kagan in 1996 have surfaced from her stint as President Clinton’s domestic policy adviser. At that time, Congress was in an uproar over the recently invented technique of partial birth abortion. Many Americans were horrified when they learned about this brutal abortion procedure, in which second and third trimester fetuses were killed by having their brains sucked out and skulls collapsed.

At that time there were no studies on partial birth abortion. It is clear from these documents that a “select panel” convened by ACOG (the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology) did not believe that the partial birth abortion was necessary to safeguard maternal life or health. The American Medical Association opposed the procedure. However, President Clinton himself had insisted (inaccurately) that these abortions were done only in extreme circumstances and were necessary to prevent adverse health consequences for women and preserve their future fertility. For ACOG to have asserted that there was no medical necessity for the partial birth abortion procedure would have been a political disaster for the Clinton administration.

So Elena Kagan induced ACOG to alter its position. We see in her handwriting the statement

“Although other options are available to save the life or preserve the health of the mother, whether or not the intact D and X (ACOG’s name for partial birth abortion) is the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance is a decision that must be made by the doctor.”

Her formulation was adopted almost verbatim by ACOG. It was cited in subsequent court decisions striking down versions of the partial birth abortion bans. One judge’s decision presumed ACOG’s opinion was the deliberation of an august scientific body, rather than the reflections of a clever political activist .

Of course the illusion that partial birth abortion is a medically necessary procedure could never have been sustained without the willing collusion of ACOG. ACOG, the principal professional organization of the 52,000 U.S. OBGYN physicians, claims to serve as a “strong advocate for quality health care for women.” Yet its policies have consistently mirrored the most radical elements of reproductive health ideology, rather than mainstream medical opinion. …”

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/06/elena_kagan_no_respect_for_sci.html

Roe v. Wade

Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973),^[1] was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion. The Court held that the constitutional right to privacy, articulated in Griswold v. Connecticut, extends to a woman’s decision to have an abortion. It added, however, that this right must be balanced against the state’s two legitimate interests for regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting the mother’s health. Noting that these state interests become stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the mother’s current trimester of pregnancy:

In the first trimester, the state’s two interests in regulating abortions are at their weakest, and so the state cannot restrict a woman’s right to an abortion in any way.
In the second trimester, there is an increase in the risks that an abortion poses to maternal health, and so the state may regulate the abortion procedure only “in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health” (defined in the companion case of Doe v. Bolton).
In the third trimester, there is an increase in viability rates and a corresponding greater state interest in prenatal life, and so the state can choose to restrict or proscribe abortion as it sees fit (“except where it is necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother”).

In disallowing many state and federal restrictions on abortion in the United States,^[2] Roe v. Wade prompted a national debate that continues today, about issues including whether and to what extent abortion should be legal, who should decide the legality of abortion, what methods the Supreme Court should use in constitutional adjudication, and what the role should be of religious and moral views in the political sphere. Roe v. Wade reshaped national politics, dividing much of the nation into pro-choice and pro-life camps, while activating grassroots movements on both sides. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade

Ten Legal Reasons to Reject Roe

by Susan E. Wills, Esq.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1058038/posts

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS A BABY KILLER PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION

Background Articles and Videos

Obama & Friends – A History Of Radicalism (Part 1 of 6)

Barack Obama Friends Sean Hannity Special Part 2

Barack Obama Friends Sean Hannity Special Part 3

Barack Obama Friends Sean Hannity Special Part 4

Barack Obama Friends Sean Hannity Special Part 5

Barack Obama Friends Sean Hannity Special Part 6

The rise and fall of the British Empire (Jomo Kenyatta and the Mau Mau oath)

Mau Mau rebellion…kibaki abaki

Mau Mau in Kenya

Kenyan Mau Maus seek UK damages for torture – 23 Jun 09

Kenya a White Mans Country (Pt1/5)

Kenya a White Mans Country (Pt2/5)

British and Kenyans [Mau Mau] vs. Ottomans and Armenians

MALCOLM X PREDICTED THE OBAMA PRESIDENCY – A MUST VIEW

Barack Obama’s grandfather ‘tortured by the British’ during Kenya’s Mau Mau rebellion

“…Barack Obama’s grandfather was imprisoned for two years and tortured by white British soldiers during Kenya’s bloody fight for independence, his family have said.

Hussein Onyango Obama, the U.S. President-Elect’s paternal grandfather, worked as a cook for a British army officer after the war.

He became involved in Kenya’s independence movement, which spiralled into a terrifying uprising by guerilla fighters known by the mysterious name ‘Mau Mau’.

Hussein Onyango was arrested in 1949 and jailed for two years …”

December 3, 2008

Beatings and abuse made Barack Obama’s grandfather loathe the British

The President-elect’s relatives have told how the family was a victim of the Mau Mau revolt

Ben Macintyre and Paul Orengoh

“…Barack Obama’s grandfather was imprisoned and brutally tortured by the British during the violent struggle for Kenyan independence, according to the Kenyan family of the US President-elect.

Hussein Onyango Obama, Mr Obama’s paternal grandfather, became involved in the Kenyan independence movement while working as a cook for a British army officer after the war. He was arrested in 1949 and jailed for two years in a high-security prison where, according to his family, he was subjected to horrific violence to extract information about the growing insurgency.

“The African warders were instructed by the white soldiers to whip him every morning and evening till he confessed,” said Sarah Onyango, Hussein Onyango’s third wife, the woman Mr Obama refers to as “Granny Sarah”.

Mrs Onyango, 87, described how “white soldiers” visited the prison every two or three days to carry out “disciplinary action” on the inmates suspected of subversive activities.

“He said they would sometimes squeeze his testicles with parallel metallic rods. They also pierced his nails and buttocks with a sharp pin, with his hands and legs tied together with his head facing down,” she said The alleged torture was said to have left Mr Onyango permanently scarred, and bitterly antiBritish. “That was the time we realised that the British were actually not friends but, instead, enemies,” Mrs Onyango said. “My husband had worked so diligently for them, only to be arrested and detained.”

Mr Obama refers briefly to his grandfather’s imprisonment in his best-selling memoir, Dreams from My Father, but states that his grandfather was “found innocent” and held only for “more than six months”. …”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article5276010.ece

Obama’s Grandfather Tortured During Kenyan Struggle for Independence

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/03/obamas-grandfather-tortured-kenyan-struggle-independence/

Background Articles and Videos

Peter Schiff on Goldseek Radio 26 June 2010

Jim Rogers Buy Silver CNN Money 22 June 2010

Background Articles and Videos

George Nash on Herbert Hoover and the Great Depression

Glenn Beck – Reasonable Questions for Unreasonable Times – Day 4, Part 3

Background Articles and Videos

Obama Fires General McChrystal

The Pentagon’s New Map

General McChrystal Speech

General McChrystal Speech Part 2

General McChrystal Speech Part 3

General McChrystal Last Afghanistan Press Conference

A Sad Day

Thomas Sowell

“…This is, after all, an administration that waited for months last year before acting on General McChrystal’s urgent request for 40,000 more troops, which he warned would be necessary to prevent the failure of the mission in Afghanistan. He got 30,000 eventually– and a public statement by President Obama about when he wants to start withdrawing American troops from that country.

In no previous period of history has an American president announced a timetable for pulling out troops. They may have had a timetable in mind, but none of these presidents was irresponsible enough to tell the world– including our enemies– when our troops would be leaving.

Such information encourages our enemies, who know that they need only wait us out before they can take over, whether in Afghanistan or elsewhere. At the same time, it undermines our allies, who know that relying on the United States is dangerous in the long run, and that they had better make the best deal they can get with our enemies. …”

“…Some people see a parallel between McChrystal’s “resignation” and President Harry Truman’s firing of General Douglas MacArthur. No two situations are ever exactly the same, but some of the parallels are striking.

MacArthur was proud not only of his military victories but also of the fact that he won those victories with lower casualty rates among his troops than other generals had. But General MacArthur too was not always discreet in what he said, and also had reasons to have contempt for politicians, going all the way back to FDR, who cut the army’s budget in the 1930s, while Nazi Germany and imperial Japan were building up huge military machines that would kill many an American before it was all over.

If we are creating an environment where only political generals can survive, what will that mean for America’s ability to win military victories without massive casualty rates? Or to win military victories at all?”

http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2010/06/23/a_sad_day

The Runaway General

By Michael Hastings

Jun 22, 2010

“…From the start, McChrystal was determined to place his personal stamp on Afghanistan, to use it as a laboratory for a controversial military strategy known as counterinsurgency. COIN, as the theory is known, is the new gospel of the Pentagon brass, a doctrine that attempts to square the military’s preference for high-tech violence with the demands of fighting protracted wars in failed states. COIN calls for sending huge numbers of ground troops to not only destroy the enemy, but to live among the civilian population and slowly rebuild, or build from scratch, another nation’s government – a process that even its staunchest advocates admit requires years, if not decades, to achieve. The theory essentially rebrands the military, expanding its authority (and its funding) to encompass the diplomatic and political sides of warfare: Think the Green Berets as an armed Peace Corps. In 2006, after Gen. David Petraeus beta-tested the theory during his “surge” in Iraq, it quickly gained a hardcore following of think-tankers, journalists, military officers and civilian officials. Nicknamed “COINdinistas” for their cultish zeal, this influential cadre believed the doctrine would be the perfect solution for Afghanistan. All they needed was a general with enough charisma and political savvy to implement it.

As McChrystal leaned on Obama to ramp up the war, he did it with the same fearlessness he used to track down terrorists in Iraq: Figure out how your enemy operates, be faster and more ruthless than everybody else, then take the fuckers out. After arriving in Afghanistan last June, the general conducted his own policy review, ordered up by Defense Secretary Robert Gates. The now-infamous report was leaked to the press, and its conclusion was dire: If we didn’t send another 40,000 troops – swelling the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan by nearly half – we were in danger of “mission failure.” The White House was furious. McChrystal, they felt, was trying to bully Obama, opening him up to charges of being weak on national security unless he did what the general wanted. It was Obama versus the Pentagon, and the Pentagon was determined to kick the president’s ass. …”

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/119236

General McChrystal: the fall guy for the president’s failure?

By Con Coughlin

“…In time of war – particularly one as challenging as the brutal conflict currently being fought by Nato forces in Afghanistan – you would expect an American president to give the campaign his undivided attention. But the fact that Mr Obama could hardly be bothered to contact the commander of the most important military campaign of his presidency tells its own story.

If Mr Obama had devoted more time to working with senior commanders such as General McChrystal, he would have a more profound understanding of the enormous strains and pressures they endure. He might then have been inclined to take a more lenient approach to a magazine article that did little more than reflect the every day tittle-tattle that goes on in any officers’ mess. Gen McChrystal was clearly out of order, but after he issued a fulsome apology, a severe reprimand, rather than outright dismissal, would have sufficed.

But that is not this president’s style. Ever since he entered office seventeen months ago, Mr Obama has proved to be exceptionally thin-skinned when it comes to handling criticism, as revealed by his administration’s long-running feud with the Fox News network.

A president who actively encourages the relaxed “no drama Obama” image of his administration, and who heads for the nearest golf course whenever the opportunity presents itself, is prone to the most spectacular hissy-fits the moment he finds himself under pressure. And his over-the-top “kick ass” response to BP’s involvement in the Gulf oil spill has displayed to a wider audience the more truculent side of this president’s nature.

But it also reveals how Mr Obama’s laid-back approach has created a dangerous erosion of political authority at the White House. While Mr Obama is busy with his golf buggy, his senior advisers spend their time indulging in titanic power struggles over policy. So far as Afghanistan is concerned, this week it resulted in the dismissal of the man who had become synonymous with the success of the Nato effort. …”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/7854963/General-McChrystal-the-fall-guy-for-the-presidents-failure.html

Background Articles and Video

The Trial (1962) Trailer

Anthony Perkins in CABIN FEVER ( The Trial )

Anthony Perkins and Romy Schneider LOVE SCENE ( The Trial )

Anthony Perkins VS Orson Welles : Attractive Guilt

The Most Fortunate and Unfortunate of Men

Kafka Biography

“…Kafka’s success may be measured by his presence in popular culture as well – almost every student knows the story of the guy who turns into a bug, and Kafka is one of the few writers to be truly a “household name.” Indeed, he has become the embarrassed father of the word “Kafkaesque.”
It’s a strange adjective, one supposed to express the feeling that something in our great mechanical city is simply not right. In the curvature of the letters we find a labyrinthine line of desks, where the sacred names of people are stamped, shoved into drawers, and forgotten. Somewhere, maybe behind the word or above it, is a distant law telling us that this isn’t the way things should be; but we, unfortunately, are stuck in the middle of it, perhaps between the a and the e, wondering where we’re to go and laughing at our situation – just to be able to laugh at something.
What makes matters even more hopeless is that “Kafkaesque” is so overused, it has become a cliché to talk about how the word “Kafkaesque” is a cliché. When, in Raiders of the Lost Ark, the Ark of the Covenant gets “filed” in a warehouse in Washington DC, we can make ourselves look smart by turning to each other and saying, “Hmmm . . . very Kafkaesque.” And when we find out that the men in black in The Matrix are machines dressed up like pale CIA desk-jockeys, we can dance in circles and sing, “It’s just like Kaaaaaafka….” When we get lost in a maze of tax forms, read about the latest dictator executing people who haven’t done a thing, or just wake up feeling guilty and paranoid, we can tap our copies of The Trial and mutter, “Yup, it’s all in here.” The concept has become so overdone that the word “Kafkaesque” means practically nothing . . . and isn’t that nothing so very Kafkaesque?
Whether we like it or not, Kafka has become an indelible part of our culture. His insecurities are what self-help books have been trying to brush beneath the carpet. His sense of humor shows us how comically mistaken we are. His spiritual quest is ours. The problems he faced in his life and illustrated in his work are the same that we must face today. In Kafka, we have the heart of our humanity beat down into a few slim volumes. It might be beneficial to find out what we’re all about. …”

http://www.themodernword.com/kafka/kafka_biography.html

Franz Kafka

http://www.themodernword.com/kafka/kafka_images.html

Franz Kafka
“…Franz Kafka (German pronunciation: [ˈfʁants ˈkafka]; 3 July 1883 – 3 June 1924) is one of the most influential fiction writers of the early 20th century; a novelist and writer of short stories whose works, only after his death, came to be regarded as one of the major achievements of 20th century literature.

He was born to middle class German-speaking Jewish parents in Prague, Bohemia, now part of the Czech Republic, in what was then the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The house in which he was born, on the Old Town Square next to Prague’s Church of St Nicholas, today contains a permanent exhibition devoted to the author.[1]

Kafka’s work—the novels The Trial (1925), The Castle (1926) and Amerika (1927), as well as short stories including The Metamorphosis (1915) and In the Penal Colony (1914)—is now collectively considered to be among the most original bodies of work in modern Western literature. Much of his work, unfinished at the time of his death, was published posthumously.[2]

The writer’s name has led to the term “Kafkaesque” being used in the English language. …”

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

The Trial

“…The Trial (German: Der Prozess) is a novel by Franz Kafka, first published in 1925. One of Kafka’s best-known works, it tells the story of a man arrested and prosecuted by a remote, inaccessible authority, with the nature of his crime never revealed either to him or the reader.

Like Kafka’s other novels, The Trial was never completed, although it does include a chapter which brings the story to an end. After his death in 1924, Kafka’s friend and literary executor Max Brod edited the text for publication.

The Trial was filmed and released in 1962 by director Orson Welles, starring Anthony Perkins (as Josef K.) and Romy Schneider. A more recent remake was released in 1993 and featured Kyle MacLachlan in the star role. In 1999, it was adapted for comics by Italian artist Guido Crepax. …”

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

Background Articles and Videos

Against the USA, Naked Communist Conspiracy Theory, NWO, Mind Control Report

Mind Control Hate Propaganda, Hate Speech & Crime, Black PR

Fit vs. UnFit, Eugenics, Planned Parenthood & Psychology, Mind Control Report

The Naked Communist #1

The Naked Communist #2

The Naked Communist #3

M. Stanton Evans is the author of “Blacklisted by History”

Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America

Stand Up for Freedom- Ezra T. Benson

Stand up for Freedom – Part 6 – Ezra Taft Benson

What is The John Birch Society?

The John Birch Society vs. The Communists

Robert Welch Founder of The John Birch Society 1974

John Birch Society – Overview of America – Part 1

John Birch Society – Overview of America – Part 2

John Birch Society – Overview of America – Part 3

John Birch Society – Overview of America – Part 4

Beyond The Fringe–MSNBC Rachel Maddow–The Progressive/Communist Smear Campaign

John Birch Society Rides again @ CPAC Rachel Maddow

US Patriots Always Smeared for being “Controversial” in Defense of Freedom, Ezra Taft Benson

Background Articles and Videos

Stop Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants – Expert Reveals the True Cost of Amnesty

The Dangers of Unlimited Legal & Illegal Immigration

Support a Moratorium on All Immigration, Legal and Illegal

Ambassador Alan Keyes on Stopping Illegal Immigration

Rush Limbaugh on Illegal Immigration

US Government is MUY LOCO…

Illegal Immigration Perks…

We Need an American President…

MICHAEL SAVAGE – IMPEACH OBAMA NOW!!! BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE!!! BEFORE AMERICA IS FINISHED!!

Senators Challenge Pres. Obama on Rumors of Amnesty Thorugh Executive Actions

“…Several Senators have learned of a possible plan by the Obama Administration that would provide a mass Amnesty for the nation’s 11-18 million illegal aliens. Led by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), eight Senators addressed a letter to the President asking for answers to questions about a plan that would allow DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano to provide an amnesty if they can’t secure enough votes for a bill in the Senate. …”

“…Here is the text of the letter signed by Sens. Grassley, Hatch (R-Utah), Vitter (R-La.), Bunning (R-Ky.), Chambliss (R-Ga.), Isakson (R-Ga.), Inhofe (R-Okla.), and Cochran (R-Miss.).

Dear President Obama:

We understand that there’s a push for your Administration to develop a plan to unilaterally extend either deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens in the United States. We understand that the Administration may include aliens who have willfully overstayed their visas or filed for benefits knowing that they will not be eligible for a status for years to come. We understand that deferred action and parole are discretionary actions reserved for individual cases that present unusual, emergent or humanitarian circumstances. Deferred action and parole were not intended to be used to confer a status or offer protection to large groups of illegal aliens, even if the agency claims that they look at each case on a “case-by-case” basis.

While we agree our immigration laws need to be fixed, we are deeply concerned about the potential expansion of deferred action or parole for a large illegal alien population. While deferred action and parole are Executive Branch authorities, they should not be used to circumvent Congress’ constitutional authority to legislate immigration policy, particularly as it relates to the illegal population in the United States.

The Administration would be wise to abandon any plans for deferred action or parole for the illegal population. Such a move would further erode the American public’s confidence in the federal government and its commitment to securing the borders and enforcing the laws already on the books.

We would appreciate receiving a commitment that the Administration has no plans to use either authority to change the current position of a large group of illegal aliens already in the United States, and ask that you respond to us about this matter as soon as possible. …”

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/news/june-21-2010/senators-challenge-pres-obama-rumors-executive-order-amnesty.html

58% Say No to Citizenship for Children of Illegal Immigrants

“…Fifty-eight percent (58%) of U.S. voters say a child born to an illegal immigrant in this country should not automatically become a citizen of the United States, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey.

Thirty-three percent (33%) disagree and say if a women enters the United States as an illegal alien and gives birth to a child here, that child should automatically be a U.S. citizen. That’s what the current law allows and many believe it would require a Constitutional Amendment to change the law.

Voter sentiments are basically unchanged from four years ago when the Senate was considering the immigration issue. The Senate was eventually forced to drop its plans and surrender to public opinion on the topic.

On another aspect of the debate, voters overwhelmingly oppose allowing illegal immigrants to be eligible for state and federal government benefits. Just nine percent (9%) say illegals should receive such benefits, but 85% say they should not. …”

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/58_say_no_to_citizenship_for_children_of_illegal_immigrants

Impeachment: The Unthinkable Process

“…Impeachable Offenses

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution says, “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” In his report, Independent Counsel, Starr accuses President Clinton of committing eleven acts for which he could be removed from office by impeachment. Are any of those acts “Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors?” Well, that’s up to the members of the House of Representatives. According to Constitutional Lawyers, “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” are (1) real criminality — breaking a law; (2) abuses of power; (3) “violation of public trust” as defined by Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers. In 1970, then Representative Gerald R. Ford defined impeachable offenses as “whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.” An excellent definition, Mr. Former President. In the past, Congress has issued Articles of Impeachment for acts in three general categories:

Exceeding the constitutional bounds of the powers of the office.

Behavior grossly incompatible with the proper function and purpose of the office.

Employing the power of the office for an improper purpose or for personal gain.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepresidentandcabinet/a/impeachment.htm

End Illegal Immigration

“…POLLS AND SURVEYS

Seventy-eight percent (78%) of likely voters were opposed to legalizing the status of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. with only 19% supporting it. 88% of African-Americans were opposed to legalization. Pulse Opinion Research, LLC, September, 2009

71% of Americans want to see the bosses who hire illegal immigrants arrested while 64 percent support police conducting surprise raids on businesses suspected of hiring illegal immigrants (The Raids Obama has stopped) Rasmussen Reports poll, October, 2009.

80 percent of U.S. voters oppose proposals for government-backed health-care plans for illegal immigrants Rasmussen Reports poll, June, 2009.

78 percent of Americans believe that high immigration numbers have had a negative impact on the cost and quality of the nation’s health care system and 78% of likely voters were opposed to legalizing the status of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. American Council for Immigration Reform, September, 2009

73% of Americans called for a drop in the number of illegal immigrants CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll, October, 2009.

58% of Arizona voters say the policies and activities of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio have had a positive impact on the state’s image, [May 2009, Rasmussen Reports]

74% of Americans think the government is not doing enough to keep illegal immigrants from coming into this country, [Washington Post-ABC News poll, April 2009]

66% of likely voters nationwide say it is Very Important for the government to improve its enforcement of the borders and reduce illegal immigration, [April 2009, Rasmussen Reports]

73% of U.S. voters believe that a police officer should automatically check to see if someone is in this country legally when the officer pulls that person over for a traffic violation, [March 2009, Rasmussen Reports]

67% of voters also say that if law enforcement officers know of places where immigrants gather to find work, they should sometimes conduct surprise raids to identify and deport illegal immigrants,[March 2009, Rasmussen Reports]

68% of Arizona voters have a favorable view of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, [March 2009, Rasmussen Reports]

68% of U.S. voters favor strict government sanctions on employers who hire illegal immigrants, [March 2009, Rasmussen Reports]

62% of New Jersey Residents oppose offering illegal immigrants some type of driver’s licenses. Just 33% favor this proposal, [March 2009, Monmouth University/Gannett New Jersey Poll]

Only 20% of New Jersey residents favor extending in-state college tuition rates to undocumented immigrants living in the state compared to 37% who say illegal immigrants should pay higher out-of-state rates. 39% say that illegal immigrants should not even be allowed to attend New Jersey’s public colleges and universities at all, [March 2009, Monmouth University/Gannett New Jersey Poll]

78% of registered Utah voters want to see SB81 implemented. The bill would, among other provisions, require all companies that contract with the state to check the immigration status of their employees and allow local police to enforce immigration law, [January 2009, The Salt Lake Tribune]

74% of U.S. voters continue to believe the federal government is not doing enough to secure the country’s borders, [December 2008, Rasmussen Reports]

63% of voters say gaining control of the border is more important than legalizing the status of undocumented workers in the country, [December 2008, Rasmussen Reports]

Only 32% of Obama voters considered his support for amnesty as a factor in their decisions to vote for him. 67% said it was either not a factor at all, or they voted for Obama in spite of his stance on amnesty, [November 2008, Zogby Interactive Survey of Likely Voters]

60% of voters said reducing illegal immigration and cracking down on employers who hire them is important to them, while only 21% supported “legalizing or creating a pathway to citizenship” for illegal aliens, [November 2008, Zogby Interactive Survey of Likely Voters]

Transatlantic Trends: when asked about what governments should do to address illegal immigration, 83% of respondents supported stronger border controls, 74% supported cracking down on employers, and 68% supported deportation, [November 2008, TNS Opinion]

71.5% of likely voters said they agree (including 47.8% who strongly agree) that local law enforcement officers should enforce federal immigration laws, including 51.5% of Hispanics and 56.2% of self-described “liberals.” [October 2008, Judicial Watch/Zogby International]

57.1% of likely voters said more law enforcement is needed to address the issue of illegal immigration while only 7.1% said they believe less law enforcement should be used. 34.7% of Hispanics support more law enforcement while 15.5% said less, [October 2008, Judicial Watch/ Zogby International]

69% of voters say controlling the border is more important than legalizing the status of undocumented workers, while just 21% think legalization is more important, [August 2008, Rasmussen Reports]

Ohio voters prefer strict enforcement over integration of illegal immigrants 71 – 20 % and 22% say they would vote against a candidate who disagrees with them only on the immigration issue, [December 2007, Quinnipiac University poll]

77% of American voters say companies should be allowed to require employees to speak English while on the job, [November 2007, Rasmussen Reports]

77% of American adults are opposed to making drivers licenses available to people who are in the country illegally, [November 2007, Rasmussen Reports]

Only 22% of voters support the Dream Act proposal introduced by Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and 59% of all voters oppose the Dream Act concept, [October 2007, Rasmussen Reports]

68% of North Carolinians disagree (including 41.6% who strongly disagree) with proposals that would allow undocumented immigrants to stay in this country for several years as long as they have a job, [September 2007, Elon University Poll]

58% of voters nationwide favor cutting off federal funds for “sanctuary cities” that offer protection to illegal immigrants, [August 2007, Rasmussen Reports]

79% of American adults favor a proposal requiring employers to fire workers who falsify identity documents, [August 2007, Rasmussen Reports]

Just 22% of American voters currently favor the “comprehensive” immigration reform bill in the U.S. Senate despite a despite a massive White House effort, [June 2007, Rasmussen Reports]

2007 Senate amnesty bill: just 16% of American voters believe illegal immigration will decline if the bill is passed. If voters had a chance to improve the legislation, 75% would make changes to increase border security measures and reduce illegal immigration and just 19% would make it easier for illegal immigrants to stay in the country and eventually become citizens, [May 2007, Rasmussen Reports]

When presented by itself, 79% of likely voters supported reducing the illegal immigrant population by increasing border enforcement, penalizing employers, and increasing cooperation with local law enforcement, while 15 percent were opposed. No other proposal had near this level of support, [May 2007, Pulse Opinion Research]

Which approach do you prefer – enforcing the law and cause illegal immigrants to go home over time or granting legal status and citizenship to those who meet certain requirements? 56% prefer “Enforce the law” while 35% prefer “Grant legal status.” [May 2007, Pulse Opinion Research]

58% of likely voters prefer that the 12 million illegal immigrants in the country go home as opposed to 30% who prefer they be allowed to stay legally, [May 2007, Pulse Opinion Research]

59% of Americans believe the more effective way to deal with the potential treat to national security posed by millions of illegal immigrants living within the United States is to crack down on illegal immigration by toughening the enforcement of existing laws, deporting illegal immigrants and prosecuting the employers who illegally employ workers, [April 2007, UPI/Zogby Poll]

61% of likely American voters oppose providing a path to US citizenship for those illegal immigrants who entered the United States illegally, and who fraudulently obtained green cards and Social Security numbers, when millions are playing by the rules and waiting in their countries to enter the United States legally, [April 2007, McLaughlin & Associates Poll]

A poll of likely voters, using neutral language, found that Americans prefer the House of Representatives’ enforcement-only bill by 2-1 over Senate proposals to legalize illegal immigrants and greatly increase legal immigration, [April 2006, Zogby America] …”

http://www.endillegalimmigration.com/illegal_immigration_polls_surveys/index.shtml

Ray Stevens – Come to the USA

Background Articles and Videos

Historians, the State and Liberty [Robert Higgs]

The New Deal [Robert Higgs]

The National Security State [Robert Higgs]

Robert Higgs

“…Robert Higgs (born 1 February 1944) is an American economist of the Austrian School and a libertarian anarchist. His writings in economics and economic history have most often focused on the causes, means, and effects of government growth.

He is a Senior Fellow in Political Economy at the Independent Institute (since September 1994), and is editor of Independent Review (since 1995).^[1] He is an adjunct faculty member of the Ludwig von Mises Institute^[2] and is an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute.^[3] Higgs is also a contributor to LewRockwell.com.^[4]

Higgs has held teaching positions at University of Washington, Lafayette College, and Seattle University. He has also been a visiting scholar at Oxford University and Stanford University. Higgs held a visiting professorship at the University of Economics, Prague in 2006,^[1] and has supervised dissertations in the Ph.D. program at Universidad Francisco Marroquín.^[5]

…”

“…Books

As author

The Transformation of the American Economy, 1865-1914 (1971)
Competition and Coercion: Blacks in the American Economy, 1865-1914 (1977; paperback edition 1980) Nominated for the American Historical Association’s Beveridge Award
Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government (1987)
Against Leviathan: Government Power and a Free Society (2004)
Resurgence of the Warfare State: The Crisis Since 9/11 (2005)
Depression, War and Cold War: Studies in Political Economy (2006)
Politická ekonomie strachu (“The Political Economy of Fear”) (Czech language; 2006)
Neither Liberty Nor Safety: Fear, Ideology, and the Growth of Government (2007)

As editor

Emergence of the Modern Political Economy (1985)
Arms, Politics, and the Economy: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives (1990)
Hazardous to Our Health? FDA Regulation of Health Care Products (1995)
Re-Thinking Green: Alternatives to Environmental Bureaucracy with Carl P. Close (2005)
The Challenge of Liberty: Classical Liberalism Today with Carl P. Close (2006)
Opposing the Crusader State: Alternatives to Global Interventionism with Carl P. Close (2007)…”

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

Robert Higgs: Archives

Past articles by Robert Higgs on LewRockwell.com

http://www.lewrockwell.com/higgs/higgs-arch.html

Crisis and Leviathan: Observations amid the Current Episode

by Robert Higgs

“…Since the early twentieth century, periods of real or perceived national emergency have been “critical episodes” in the growth of government’s size, scope, and power in the United States and in many other countries. Hence, the concise conceptualization: Crisis and Leviathan (the main title of my 1987 book on the growth of government in the United States from the late nineteenth century to the late twentieth century).

In the past century, the first five such critical episodes in the United States were: World War I; the Great Depression; World War II; a multi-faceted set of crises associated with the civil-rights revolution and the Vietnam War, roughly coincident with the presidencies of Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon; and the post 9/11 events associated with the so-called War on Terror and the U.S. attacks on and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq. We are now amid another such critical episode, which springs from the housing bust that began in 2006, the economic recession that began late in 2007, and the financial debacle that reached its climax in September 2008.

The current troubles are complex and raise a multitude of questions. Many books and articles no doubt will be written to analyze these various issues in scholarly depth and detail, and certainly anything we might say today must be regarded as preliminary, at best. I focus here on a few aspects of the present episode that relate closely to my own research on the growth of government, a field of study to which I have returned again and again over the past thirty years. …”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/higgs/higgs151.html

Background Articles and Videos

Crime, Inc.— The Movement Toward Global Government

“…Twenty years ago, when anyone talked about an agenda that would ultimately lead to a global government, people scoffed at the possibility, ascribing it as a “conspiracy theory.” For even longer than that, The John Birch Society has been warning us about such a threat to American sovereignty, and while they’ve acquired a following of their own, most of their warnings were unheeded. Now that the United States of America is on its way to becoming the United States of the World, people are starting to pay attention, but is it too late?

Over the past few months, Glenn Beck has also made clear his belief that not only is global government a possibility, but that the process of achieving it is near fruition if not stopped in its tracks. Ironically, just one year ago, Beck refused believe such a theory. In his 2009 book Common Sense, Beck wrote, “It’s not just the political class who has mastered the art of deception. There are other potentially deadly masters who will seek to exploit your frustration and sense of desperation. Many will warn you of government tyranny; they’ll talk of secret societies, vast conspiracies, shadow governments…. There is no global conspiracy playing out.” Within the past year for Beck, however, evidence to the contrary has become insurmountable. It is amazing, and terrifying, what a little bit of research can uncover.

Fortunately, Glenn Beck has been informing his audience about this global scheme, which he has named “Crime, Inc.” Every day, his viewers are left feeling overwhelmed and frightened by what they learn, not because he is a fearmonger, but because he allows the viewers to hear the truth right from the horses’ mouths.

Crime Inc. is centered around the Chicago Climate Exchange and involves major participants like Barack Obama, Joel Rogers (top organizer for the Progressive movement in the United States), Al Gore, Goldman Sachs, Van Jones, Maurice Strong (head of the United Nations Environmental Program), Union Leader Andy Stearn, Anita Dunn (Senior Communications Strategist for Obama), and John Holdren (Advisor to Obama for Science and Technology). These are just to name a few. …”

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/3553-crime-inc-the-movement-towards-global-government

Crime Inc.

by Chris Bounds on May 6, 2010

“…In short, you have The Joyce Foundation (Obama, Jarrett) , GIM (Al Gore, Goldman Sachs executives), and Goldman Sachs giving money to fund the CCX. Then Franklin Raines with his patent on carbon trading technology and millions he siphoned through Fannie Mae, uses Enterprise Community Partners to funnel money from TJF to the ECC. The ECC, whose goal is the “rapidly greening of American’s cities” has Joel Rogers as a board member, who is connected to Barak Obama and the White House.

What does Joel Rogers have to do with all of this? Well, Joel Rogers may very well be the ‘Wizard’ behind the entire modern progressive movement. He is the Director of the Center of Wisconsin Strategy (COWS) Director, a progressive think tank. He founded the New Party (a Marxist coalition that endorsed Barak Obama in 1996, since reorganized under the Working Families Party, a front for ACORN) and the Apollo Alliance. He has been claimed to be responsible for every policy decision in the White House. Watch what Van Jones (self-proclaimed communist, former Green Czar for Obama), Barak Obama, and even Joel Rogers himself have to say: …”

http://www.libertyjuice.com/2010/05/06/crime-inc/

Background Articles and Videos

David Kilcullen

“…David Kilcullen (born 1967) is an author and a consultant on counterinsurgency and counterterrorism. A former Australian Army officer, he left that army as a lieutenant colonel in 2005 and now works for the United States State Department. During 2007 he served in Iraq as Senior Counterinsurgency Adviser, Multi-National Force – Iraq — a civilian position on the personal staff of U.S. Army General David Petraeus, responsible for planning and executing the 2007-08 Joint Campaign Plan which drove the Iraq War troop surge of 2007.

Kilcullen is also an advisor to the United States; British and Australian governments; the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and several private sector institutions (including the Australian-based Noetic Corporation), on counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency issues. A former Senior Fellow of the Center for a New American Security, he is now on the CNAS’s Advisory Board.^[1]

Biography

Kilcullen has a doctorate in politics from the University of New South Wales at the Australian Defence Force Academy, focusing on the effects of guerrilla warfare on non-state political systems in traditional societies. His thesis is titled “The political consequences of military operations in Indonesia 1945-99: a fieldwork analysis of the political power-diffusion effects of guerilla conflict”. He applied ethnographic fieldwork methods and involved extended residential fieldwork that focused on the political power-diffusion effects of successful and failed counter-insurgency operations on traditional societies in Indonesia and East Timor. He has served in several counterinsurgency and guerrilla warfare campaigns in Southeast Asia and the Middle East — including tours in both Iraq and Afghanistan — as well as in peacekeeping and peace enforcement operations.

While at the US State Department in 2005-06 he served as Chief Strategist in the Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism, and has worked in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, the Horn of Africa and Southeast Asia. He has also written several papers on the Iraqi insurgency after the fall of Saddam Hussein.[citation needed]

He is one of a group of civilian specialists and military officers, including Colonel H.R. McMaster and others, who were seconded in late 2006 to the personal staff of General Petraeus to oversee the specialized counterinsurgency aspects of the Iraq campaign in 2007.^[2] He previously contributed to the new United States Counterinsurgency Field Manual FM 3-24, published in December 2006, of which he authored a chapter entitled “A Guide to Action”. His book The Accidental Guerrilla: Fighting Small Wars in the Midst of a Big One was published in early 2009. (See External Links.) …”

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

The Counterinsurgency Reading List

The Bare Bones Essentials

David Galula, Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice
David Kilcullen, “28 Articles”, Military Review, May-June 2006
Kalev Sepp, “Best and Worst Practices in COIN”, Military Review, May-June 2005

Intermediate Reading

Colonial Era
Robert Bateman, “Lawrence and his Message”
C.E. Callwell, Small Wars
John Cann, Counterinsurgency in Africa: The Portuguese Way of War 1961-1974
Carl von Clausewitz, On War
Bernard Fall, The Street without Joy
David Galula, Pacification in Algeria: 1956-1958
Tony Geraghty, The Irish War
Charles Gwynn, Imperial Policing
Alistair Horne, A Savage War of Peace: Algeria 1954-1962
Frank Kitson, Gangs and Counter-Gangs
Robert Komer, Bureaucracy Does its Thing
Andrew Krepinevich, The Army and Vietnam
John Nagl, Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife: Counterinsurgency Lessons from Malaya and Vietnam
Neil Sheehan, A Bright Shining Lie
Robert Taber, War of the Flea
Robert Thompson, Defeating Communist Insurgency
Roger Trinquier, Modern Warfare
Mao Tse-Tung, On Guerrilla Warfare
Bing West, The Village

Modern Day
Ralph Baker, “The Decisive Weapon”, Military Review, May-June 2006
David Barno, “Fighting ‘The Other War’: Counterinsurgency in Afghanistan, 2003-2005,” Military Review, September-October 2007
Stephen Biddle, “Seeing Baghdad, Thinking Saigon,” Foreign Affairs, March-April 2006
Burgoyne & Marckwardt, The Defense of Jisr al-Doreaa
Peter Chiarelli, “Winning the Peace”, Military Review, July-August 2005
Nigel Alwyn Foster, “Changing the Army for COIN Operations”, Military Review, November-December 2005
Les Grau, The Bear Went Over the Mountain
T.X. Hammes, The Sling and the Stone: On War in the 21st Century
T.X. Hammes, “Fourth Generation Evolves, Fifth Emerges,” Military Review, May-June 2007
Hecker & Rid, War 2.0: Irregular Warfare in the Information Age
Chris Hickey, “Principles and Priorities for Training in Iraq”, Military Review, March-April 2007
Frank Hoffman, “Hybrid Threats”
David Kilcullen, The Accidental Guerrilla
David Kilcullen, “Anatomy of a Tribal Revolt”
David Kilcullen, “Counterinsurgency Redux,” Survival, Winter, 2006
John Kizley, “Learning About Counterinsurgency”, Military Review, March-April 2007
Sean MacFarland and Niel Smith, “Anbar Awakens,” Military Review, March-April 2008
Marston & Malkasian, Counterinsurgency in Modern Warfare
H.R. McMaster, “On War: Lessons to be Learned.” Survival, February-March 2008
Steven Metz, Rethinking Insurgency
Elizabeth Rubin, “Battle Company Is Out There”
Rupert Smith, The Utility of Force
Various, FM 3-24, “Counterinsurgency”

Advanced Reading

Hannah Arendt, On Revolution
Hannah Arendt, On Violence
Robert Asprey, War in the Shadows
Robert Bates, Prosperity and Violence
Jarret M. Brachman and William F. McCants, “Stealing Al-Qaeda’s Playbook,” CTC Report, February 2006
Scott A. Cuomo and Brian J. Donlon, “Training a ‘Hybrid’ Warrior,” Marine Corps Gazette
Loup Francart, Maitriser la violence
Robert M. Gates, “Beyond Guns and Steel: Reviving the Nonmilitary Instruments of American Power”
Antonio Giustozzi, Koran, Kalashnikov, and the Laptop: The Neo Taliban Insurgency in Afghanistan
John Bagot Glubb, War in the Desert
Daniel Helmer, “Flipside of the COIN: Israel’s Lebanese Incursion Between 1982-2000”
Stathis Kalyvas, The Logic of Violence in Civil Wars
Alan B. Krueger, What Makes a Terrorist
Mark Lichbach, The Rebel’s Dilemma
Yezid Sayigh, Armed Struggle and the Search for State: The Palestinian National Movement, 1949-1993
James Scott, Moral Economy of the Peasant
Frederic M. Wehrey, “A Clash of Wills: Hizballah’s Psychological Campaign Against Israel in South Lebanon.”
Jeremy Weinstein, Inside Rebellion: Politics of Insurgent Violence

Fiction

Graham Greene, The Quiet American
Rudyard Kipling, Kim
Jean Larteguy, The Centurions
Leon Uris, Trinity

Films

The Battle of Algiers
Go Tell The Spartans
The Wind that Shakes the Barley

http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2007/10/counterinsurgency-reading-list.html

Background Articles and Videos

Robert Higgs on C-SPAN2’s Book TV, Part 1 of 3

Robert Higgs on C-SPAN2’s Book TV, Part 2 of 3

Robert Higgs on C-SPAN2’s Book TV, Part 3 of 3

Obama: U.S. security is still at stake

AFGHAN WAR TO ESCALATE
30,000 more troops; pullout begins mid-2011

“…Adding 30,000 U.S. troops to the roughly 70,000 that are in Afghanistan now amounts to most of what Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the commander of U.S. and NATO forces there, requested at the end of August. But by setting a date for when he will begin removing U.S. troops, scheduled to number about 100,000 by next summer, Obama is effectively holding McChrystal to the urgent timeline that the general laid out in a bleak assessment of the situation.

Obama’s simultaneous escalation of the war effort and presentation of an exit plan reflects the divisions that emerged within his administration during the strategy review and the difficult politics he faces in selling his plan at home and abroad. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and other senior officials who participated in that review, sometimes in opposition to one another, watched his speech from the front row of the academy’s Eisenhower Hall.

As details of his strategy emerged Tuesday, some Republicans accused Obama of aiding the Taliban insurgency by setting a date to begin a withdrawal, even though administration officials said the pace will be determined by the country’s security and political stability. Democrats criticized Obama for an expensive, if time-limited, expansion of an unpopular conflict at a time of economic hardship at home. …”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/01/AR2009120101231.html

Background Articles and Videos

Niall Ferguson–”The Ascent of Money–Videos

Background Articles and Videos

US Army- Special Forces- Training

US Army Special Forces Afghanistan Video

Special Forces Training

U.S. Army Special forces creed

Combat In Afghanistan

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

Progressive Radical Socialists–Mock The Dummy–Ahaaa–Videos

Posted on June 23, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, Comedy, Communications, Culture, Demographics, Economics, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, Health Care, Immigration, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Monetary Policy, People, Philosophy, Politics, Video, Wisdom | Tags: Mock The Dummy, Prgreeisve RAdical Socialist |

Does Fox News Employ Dummies?

How Dummies Respond to Oil Spills

How to use Talking Points to Scare Dummies

How to Recruit Dummies for your Tea Party or Suicide Mission

Why Dummies Believe Fake Movements are Real

How to get Dummies to Give you Money

Does the Tea Party need a Leader?

Why Dummies Want to Forget the Tea Party Ancestry

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

Niall Ferguson–“The Ascent of Money–Videos

Posted on June 22, 2010. Filed under: Blogroll, Books, Communications, Economics, Fiscal Policy, government, government spending, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Monetary Policy, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Resources, Technology, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: Banking, Economic, Financial Economic, Financial History, history, Monetary Aggregates, monetary policy, Money, Niall Ferguson, The Ascent of Money |

Conversations with History – Niall Ferguson

Background Articles and Videos

The Ascent of Money–Videos

Harvard Prof. Niall Ferguson on Decline of America and Rise of a New Global Economic Order 1/3

Harvard Prof. Niall Ferguson on Decline of America and Rise of a New Global Economic Order 2/3

Harvard Prof. Niall Ferguson on Decline of America and Rise of a New Global Economic Order 3/3

The Descent of Finance

Niall Ferguson: Don’t Trust Democrats to Fix Economy

Conversations with History – Niall Ferguson

Background Articles and Videos

Niall Ferguson on the Financial Crisis

Harvard Prof. Niall Ferguson on Decline of America and Rise of a New Global Economic Order 1/3

Harvard Prof. Niall Ferguson on Decline of America and Rise of a New Global Economic Order 2/3

Harvard Prof. Niall Ferguson on Decline of America and Rise of a New Global Economic Order 3/3

Niall Ferguson: Don’t Trust Democrats to Fix Economy

Niall Ferguson

“…Niall Campbell Douglas Ferguson (born April 18, 1964, in Glasgow)^[1] is a British historian who specialises in financial and economic history as well as the history of colonialism. He is the Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University^[2] and the William Ziegler Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School. He was educated at the private Glasgow Academy in Scotland, and at Magdalen College, Oxford.

He is best known outside academia for his revisionist views rehabilitating imperialism and colonialism; within academia, his championing of counterfactual history is a subject of some considerable controversy^{[citation needed]}. In 2008, Ferguson published his most recent book, The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World^[3] which he also presented as a Channel 4 television series. At Harvard College, Ferguson teaches a popular undergraduate class entitled “Western Ascendancy: The Mainsprings of Global Power from 1600 to the Present.” …”

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

Background Articles and Videos

Rodney Dangerfield Tonight Show graffagbg

RODNEY DANGERFIELD INTERVIEW ON CONAN O’BRIEN

Rodney Dangerfield – Kilburn summer 2004

Background Articles and Videos

Big Oil strikes back, slams Obama’s drilling ban

“…Obama slapped a six-month moratorium on deepwater drilling in the Gulf as part of his struggle to show that his administration is responding forcefully to the disaster. The decision halted the approval of any new permits for deepwater drilling and suspended drilling at 33 existing exploratory wells in the Gulf.

The ban, which is being contested in a U.S. court, reflects growing unease about oil companies seeking to drill farther out to sea and deeper than ever before. The process is expensive, risky and largely uncharted — but the industry argues it is also necessary in a world where land and shallow water oil supplies are running out. …”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eu_britain_gulf_oil_spill;_ylt=AnEnphSOeYrY.FIox8OFbpmWwvIE;_ylu=X3oDMTNlcDBjODFjBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNjIyL2V1X2JyaXRhaW5fZ3VsZl9vaWxfc3BpbGwEY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBvcHVsYXIEY3BvcwMyBHBvcwMyBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcmllcwRzbGsDYmlnb2lsc3RyaWtl

Offshore Drilling Ban Lifted by President Obama

Bush Lifts Executive Ban on Offshore Drilling

Background Articles and Videos

DR. PAUL RAHE in the movie “A New America”.

WGN Radio- Paul Rahe

Dr. Paul A. Rahe
http://www.hillsdalesites.org/personal/prahe/

We’re All Fascists Now II: American Tyranny

Michael Ledeen

“…The tyranny he foresees for us does not have much in common with the vicious dictatorships of the last century, or with contemporary North Korea, Iran, or Saudi Arabia. He apologizes for lacking the proper words with which to define it. He hesitates to call it either tyranny or despotism, because it does not rule by terror or oppression. There are no secret police, no concentration camps, and no torture. “The nature of despotic power in democratic ages is not to be fierce or cruel, but minute and meddling.” The vision and even the language anticipate Orwell’s 1984, or Huxley’s Brave New World. Tocqueville describes the new tyranny as “an immense and tutelary power,” and its task is to watch over us all, and regulate every aspect of our lives.

It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd.

We will not be bludgeoned into submission; we will be seduced. He foresees the collapse of American democracy as the end result of two parallel developments that ultimately render us meekly subservient to an enlarged bureaucratic power: the corruption of our character, and the emergence of a vast welfare state that manages all the details of our lives. His words are precisely the ones that best describe out current crisis:

That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks, on the contrary, to keep them in perpetual childhood: it is well content that the people should rejoice, provided they think of nothing but rejoicing. For their happiness such a government willingly labors, but it chooses to be the sole agent and the only arbiter of that happiness; it provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, regulates the descent of property, and subdivides their inheritances: what remains, but to spare them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of living? …”

http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2009/02/14/were-all-fascists-now-ii-american-tyranny/

Soft Despotism

“…Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by “a network of small complicated rules” might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called ‘hard despotism’) in the sense that it is not obvious to the people. Soft despotism gives people the illusion that they are in control, when in fact they have very little influence over their government. Soft despotism breeds fear, uncertainty, and doubt in the general populace. Alexis de Tocqueville observed that this trend was avoided in America only by the “habits of the heart” of its 19th-century populace.

Dr. Samuel Gregg of The Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty (a religious^[1] institute), explains:

In Democracy in America, Tocqueville suggested that democracy was capable of breeding its own form of despotism, albeit one without the edges of Jacobin or Bonapartist dictatorship with which Europeans were all too familiar. The book spoke of “an immense protective power” which took all responsibility for everyone’s happiness-just so long as this power remained “sole agent and judge of it.” This power, Tocqueville wrote, would “resemble parental authority” but would try to keep people “in perpetual childhood” by relieving people “from all the trouble of thinking and all the cares of living.”

Such circumstances might arise, Tocqueville noted, if democracy’s progress was accompanied by demands for a leveling of social conditions. The danger was that an obsession with equality was very compatible with increasingly centralized state-power. Leveling social conditions, Tocqueville observed, usually involved using the state to subvert those intermediate associations that reflected social differences, but also limited government-power.

Tocqueville’s vision of “soft-despotism” is thus one of arrangements that mutually corrupt citizens and the democratic state. Citizens vote for those politicians who promise to use the state to give them whatever they want. The political-class delivers, so long as citizens do whatever it says is necessary to provide for everyone’s desires. The “softness” of this despotism consists of people’s voluntary surrender of their liberty and their tendency to look habitually to the state for their needs.^[2]

In Volume II, Book 4, Chapter 6 of Democracy in America, de Tocqueville writes the following about soft despotism:

Thus, After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

I have always thought that servitude of the regular, quiet, and gentle kind which I have just described might be combined more easily than is commonly believed with some of the outward forms of freedom, and that it might even establish itself under the wing of the sovereignty of the people.

Our contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions: they want to be led, and they wish to remain free. As they cannot destroy either the one or the other of these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once. They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people. They combine the principle of centralization and that of popular sovereignty; this gives them a respite: they console themselves for being in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own guardians. Every man allows himself to be put in leading-strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of persons, but the people at large who hold the end of his chain.

By this system the people shake off their state of dependence just long enough to select their master and then relapse into it again. A great many persons at the present day are quite contented with this sort of compromise between administrative despotism and the sovereignty of the people; and they think they have done enough for the protection of individual freedom when they have surrendered it to the power of the nation at large. This does not satisfy me: the nature of him I am to obey signifies less to me than the fact of extorted obedience. I do not deny, however, that a constitution of this kind appears to me to be infinitely preferable to one which, after having concentrated all the powers of government, should vest them in the hands of an irresponsible person or body of persons. Of all the forms that democratic despotism could assume, the latter would assuredly be the worst. ^[3] …”

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

Background Articles and Videos

President Obama s Pledge Never to Raise Taxes on Anyone Making Less Than 250 000 a Year

Obama Cap And Trade My Plan Makes Electricity Rates Skyrocket

Cap & Trade Bill Cannibalism Against Capitalism

Cap and Trade Biggest Tax Increase since World War II

CarbonGate: Rep. Barton attacks Cap & Trade, hidden costs on American people

Inhofe Explains the High Cost of Cap and Trade on Fox News

President Obama’s Oval Office Address on BP Oil Spill & Energy

President Obama Opens Atlantic Coastal Waters to Offshore Drilling

Barack Obama on Offshore Oil Drilling

Obama Lifts Ban on Offshore Drilling

Petrobras’ Gabrielli Sees More Long-Term Output, Hiring

Pr. Obama Export Initiative (1 of 3) for Growth of Jobs, Economy, Business

Pr. Obama Export Initiative (2 of 3) for Growth of Jobs, Economy, Business

Pr. Obama Export Initiative (3 of 3) for Growth of Jobs, Economy, Business

The Right Reasons

“…Within 48 hours after President Obama issued the six-month moratorium on deep-water drilling, the George Soros-backed Brazilian oil company, Petrobras, contacted a large New Orleans company, Laborde Marine, which services the deep-water drilling market. The company was seeking to lease all its vessels. “If the moratorium on deep-water drilling is not lifted, 33 semi-submersible rigs and/or drill ships affected will simply go to other countries where they will be well received, such as Brazil,” Cliffe F. Laborde and J. Peter Laborde, Jr. wrote in a June 4 letter to their Louisiana Senators.

Could this be merely a happy coincidence for George Soros, the major financial backer of Obama’s presidential campaign who also has $811 million invested in the Brazilian oil company, Petrobras? Wasn’t it enough of a payback to Soros when the Obama Administration loaned up to $10 billion to Petrobras? Soros, with his far left-wing organization, MoveOn, is called the Godfather of world socialism. But most relevant currently is that he has been an enthusiastic proponent of global warming and environmental liberalism. He has urged adoption of a global carbon tax. Could it be more than coincidence that his position is strikingly similar to what Obama called for in his June 14 Oval Office speech on the Gulf oil spill and future energy actions? …”

http://www.therightreasons.net/index.php?/topic/21934-george-soross-oil-spill-payoff/

Soros reports 73.5% increase in Petrobras stake

By Tony Cooke

“…Billionaire investor George Soros on Tuesday reported that during the fourth quarter he increased his already considerable stakes in Brazilian state-controlled oil company Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. /quotes/comstock/13*!pbr/quotes/nls/pbr (PBR 37.99, -0.68, -1.75%) and Potash Corp. of Saskatchewan Inc. /quotes/comstock/13*!pot/quotes/nls/pot (POT 98.50, -0.09, -0.09%) .

Soros, through his Soros Fund Management LLC, reported holding 36.8 million American depositary receipts of the Brazilian oil company known as Petrobras as of Dec. 31 – a holding valued at about $900 million at the time. Soros held 21.2 million ADRs at Sept. 30, according to his disclosure filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Soros also reported holding $434 million in Potash shares as of Dec. 31 – a total of about 5.9 million shares. He reported holding 3.3 million Potash shares as of Sept. 30.

Petrobras and Potash were the two largest stakes reported by the Soros fund as of Dec. 30. …”

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/soros-reports-735-increase-petrobras-stake

OFF-SHORE OIL-DRILLING, OBAMA, SOROS, PETROBRAS: CONNECTING THE DOTS

“…The U.S. is going to lend billions of dollars to Brazil’s state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration of the huge offshore discovery in Brazil’s Tupi oil field in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro. Brazil’s planning minister confirmed that White House National Security Adviser James Jones met this month with Brazilian officials to talk about the loan.

The U.S. Export-Import Bank tells us it has issued a “preliminary commitment” letter to Petrobras in the amount of $2 billion and has discussed with Brazil the possibility of increasing that amount. Ex-Im Bank says it has not decided whether the money will come in the form of a direct loan or loan guarantees. Either way, this corporate foreign aid may strike some readers as odd, given that the U.S. Treasury seems desperate for cash and Petrobras is one of the largest corporations in the Americas. …”

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1101837/pg1

Petrobras May Borrow $5 Billion From U.S. Ex-Im Bank (Update2)

“…July 30 (Bloomberg) — Petroleo Brasileiro SA said it may more than double its borrowings from the U.S. Export-Import Bank to as much as $5 billion, following a $10 billion loan from China.

Petrobras, as the state-controlled oil company is known, may increase the loans from $2 billion now, Chief Financial Officer Almir Barbassa said today at a press conference in Rio de Janeiro. The initial loan made in April was an “opening amount,” Fred Hochberg, president of the U.S. bank, said earlier today in an interview in Rio.

“The Export-Import Bank met yesterday with Petrobras, and it offered more resources to the company,” Brazilian Energy Minister Edison Lobao said at the press conference.

Investment in Brazil’s oil industry is expected to surge to more than $200 billion over the next five years, buoyed by spending on the Americas’ largest oil find since 1976. Petrobras in February secured $10 billion in financing from the China Development Bank Corp.

China replaced the U.S. as Brazil’s biggest trading partner this year, after the global recession choked sales to the U.S. The Chinese bank, which plans to open an office in Rio de Janeiro next year, has also agreed to lend $800 million to Brazil’s state development bank, known as BNDES.

The U.S. and Chinese loans will help Petrobras pay for part of its $174 billion, five-year investment plan to expand output. …”

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aogq9sBiBhYo

Shakedown

“Shakedown” is a 1987 single by Bob Seger that is from the soundtrack of the film Beverly Hills Cop II. The music was written by Harold Faltermeyer, who wrote the score for the film, and Keith Forsey, and the lyrics by Seger.

The music video featured scenes from the film intercut with Seger and the band performing it, with some members approaching glam metal moves. “Shakedown” became a number-one hit on the Billboard Hot 100, Seger’s only such top mark singles-wise, as well as the Album Rock Tracks chart, where it became his second number-one hit, spending four weeks at the top.

Cover versions by an uncredited artist appeared in two episodes of the animated series Captain N: The Game Master. However, due to legal issues, these songs have been edited out of the DVD releases of the show. …”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakedown_(Bob_Seger_song)

Archive for June, 2010

Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Tom Woods: “Nullification and State Resistance to Federal Tyranny” Pt. 1

Tom Woods: “Nullification and State Resistance to Federal Tyranny” Pt. 2

Tom Woods: “Nullification and State Resistance to Federal Tyranny” Pt. 3

Tom Woods: “Nullification and State Resistance to Federal Tyranny” Pt. 4

Tom Woods: “Nullification and State Resistance to Federal Tyranny” Pt. 5

Tom Woods: “Nullification and State Resistance to Federal Tyranny” Pt. 6

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Books

Progressive F.D.R. SOCIAL(ism) SECURITY FAILS!! Marxist Obama Repeats FAILED POLICIES OF THE PAST!

Glenn Beck-06/30/10-A

Glenn Beck-06/30/10-B

Glenn Beck-06/30/10-C

Glenn Beck-06/30/10-D

Glenn Beck-06/30/10-E

Glenn Beck-06/30/10-F

Glenn Beck-06/30/10-G

CommieTunes – OBAMA’s END GAME REVEALED – Obama Socialist / Communist / Marxist / Maoist

Background Articles and Videos

THE BORDERS ARE QUITE SECURE. Congressman Pete Stark’s Town hall meeting in Fremont CA

Rush Limbaugh / Maxine Waters /socializing “big oil”

Maxine Waters (D) Slip of the Tongue Reveals True Intentions (Socialism for America)

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Collectivism: Socialism, Communism, Progressivism and Fascism

~C. S. Lewis

Sen. Hatch and Elena Kagan Discuss Abortion

Kagan’s Abortion Distortion

Shannen W. Coffin

Elena Kagan In Her Own Words

Kagan on Abortion

Obama Promises Abortion in Public Plan

Rush Limbaugh: Elena Kagan & Cass Sustein to REGULATE “POLITICAL SPEECH”

Savage’s Five Reason To Oppose Kagan

Mark Levin – No Senator Should Vote For Kagan

Mark Levin Radio Show (May 10 2010) Who Is Elena Kagan? Part One

Michael Savage – Un-American Background

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 / Why Was There The Need For The Born

Interview with Prof. Hadley Arkes On Kagan’s Supreme Court hearings and the tough questions Republicans should be asking.

Background Articles and Videos

Kagan Confirmation Hearings Are a Joke…

Pro Life Action

Roe v. Wade in PBS’ The Supreme Court

Roe V. Wade

Dr. Lile PBA Partial Birth Abortion Demo Pro-Life

Obama & Live Birth Abortion / Induced Labor Abortions / Infanticide Pro-Life Anti-Abortion Video

Obama Votes Against Born Alive Babies. Jill Stanek Tells All.

Abortion -This is a Suction Abortion

Abortion -This is a Dismemberment Abortion

Abortion – This is a Dilation and Extraction Abortion

Elena Kagan: No Respect for Science Mary L. Davenport, MD

Roe v. Wade

Ten Legal Reasons to Reject Roe

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS A BABY KILLER PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Eugenics and Population Control

Interview with Prof. Hadley Arkes
On Kagan’s Supreme Court hearings and the tough questions Republicans should be asking.

Elena Kagan: No Respect for Science
Mary L. Davenport, MD