President Obama’s Plan of Massive Deficit Spending Is Destroying The US Economy–The American People Say Stop Socialism BS Now!

Posted on July 20, 2009. Filed under: Blogroll, Economics, Employment, Fiscal Policy, government spending, Health Care, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Medicine, Monetary Policy, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Taxes, Uncategorized, Video, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , |



“A man who chooses between drinking a glass of milk and a glass of a solution of potassium cyanide does not choose between two beverages; he chooses between life and death. A society that chooses between capitalism and socialism does not choose between two social systems; it chooses between social cooperation and the disintegration of society. Socialism is not an alternative to capitalism; it is an alternative to any system under which men can live as human beings.”

~Ludwig von Mises, Human Action, pages 676 and 680


Hannity: Sean & Dick Morris Talk Barack Obama and His Health Care Plan Strategy [FOX News]

Hurdles For Healthcare Reform.

Senator DeMint Speaks Against President’s Government Takeover of Health Care

The “Public Option” Myth

Democrats Destroying America by destroying Small Business with massive Taxes and Regulations

Glenn Beck – The One Thing – Obama “I Want To Remake America”


Democratic Socialists Support Single Payer Health Care

Mark Levin – Health care bill to give care to illegal immigrants

E-VERIFY: Sessions speaks to Senate about his E-Verify Amendment.

Stop The Spending and Deficits

US Federal Government Deficits



Stop Spending Our Future – The Crisis

Former KGB Bezmenov continues on demoralization in America


The time has come to send a clear and concise communication from the American people to the political class and elites in Washington D. C..

 We The People will vote out of office those elected civil servants who blatantly and arrogantly disregard the will of the people and their oaths of office to faithfully defend and protect the Constitution of the United States of America. 

With both Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid facing financial difficulties and huge shortfalls or deficits in coming years, no politician of either political party should be recommending a major expansion of so-called entitlement programs.

I.O.U.S.A. Bonus Reel: Deficits and Social Security


I.O.U.S.A. Bonus Reel: Social Security+Medicare Projections


The U.S. Economy is Unsustainable 


Yet President Obama and the Radical Socialist  Democratic Party are trying to pass a compulsory  government single payer socialized medicine and outlawing private individual health insurance!

When Obama gets into trouble the lying increases as does the shrillness of the rhetoric.

Both the cap and trade energy tax and the single payer government socialize medicine bills are in big trouble with the American people–the voters.

Barack Obama is in big trouble both economically and politically.

The Democrats are worried that the American people are not buying into the Obama high preasure sales pitch for both bills.

The progressive radical socialist Demoratic Party should be worried big time.

There are between 15,000,000 t0 25,000,000 Americans seeking full time jobs depending upon which Bureau of Labor statistic you want to use.

This is highest number of unemployed Americans in United States history and exceeds the 13,000,000 previous record unemployment of 1933 at the height of the Great Depression.

The Obama Depression arrived on July 4, 2009.

The national rate of unemployment should hit 10% either in July or August and is expected to hit 13% by the end of the year.

Yet both Democrats and Republicans persist in breaking their oaths of office by selective enforcement of the nation’s laws and ignoring the vast majority of American citizens who oppose illegal immigration, Open Borders, amnesty and driver licenses for aliens living and working here illegally.

There are currently between 20,000,000 to 30,000,000 illegal aliens living in the United States of which 15,000,000 to 20,000,000 are working at jobs American citizens did only a decade ago.

The number of Americans unemployed could be rapidly reduced if  the Federal Government would simply enforce current immigration laws and require all employers and not just Federal contractors to use E-Verify.

Obama Admin wants to kill E-Verify

E-Verify finally mandatory to federal contractors

As more and more Americans become unemployed, they will have time to take a close look at the progressive radical socialist Democratic plan that will bankrupt the US.

Most Americans understand that it is small to medium size businesses that generate nearly all of the new jobs and employ most Americans.

Most Americans understand that raising taxes during a recession or a depression will mean that these business will raise prices–inflation–and/or layoff workers to pay the taxes owed to the Federal government.

Most Americans understand that you do not create jobs or wealth by bailing out failing businesses and banks that have lost trillions of dollars in risky investment.

Most Americans understand that massive levels of Federal Government budget deficits and National Debt means that their children and grandchildren will be taxed in the future to pay the interest on this debt and eventually pay the debt off.

When the politicians return home to their districts and states they will be hearing from the American people.

The American people like their private health care plans and do not want to pay higher taxes to pay for health insurance for illegal aliens or for other American that chose not to purchase health insurance.

If they are unemployed they want government policies that increase job creation and lowers the rate of unemployment.

The bailouts, stimulus spending, the proposed cap and trade energy tax, and the taxes needed to pay for single payer socialized medicine are not and will not work to create jobs and wealth.

The American people say stop the socialism bullshit.

You will be voted out of office in November 2010 , 2012 and 2014.


If instead of paying off their campaign contributors–the large banks, big insurance companies, unions and trial lawyers–President Obama and the progressive radical socialist Democratic Party  had advocated the  passage of the FairTax and a six month tax holiday, the economy would be improving now.

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


While it is not too late to change course, President Obama lacks the experience, understanding and wisdom to  do so.

Economic illiteracy is not a valid excuse when you are President of the United States.

President Obama Responds To DeMint’s “Waterloo” Comment

Abba – Waterloo

Yes, Mr. President it is all about you.

You are unqualified to be President of the United States and the American people are paying the price for your ignorance, arrogance and lack of experience and wisdom.

Two of this nation’s most respected economists Martin Feldstein and Thomas Sowell gave Obama sound advice that he chose to ignore at your peril.

Martin Feldstein’s Plan (part 1)

Martin Feldstein’s Plan (part 2)

Thomas Sowell and a Conflict of Visions

Obama like Napoleon has met his Waterloo. 

The American people will understand that  Obama is out to destroy America’s middle class by burdening them with massive tax increases, unprecedented deficit spending, a huge national debt and irresponsible government intervention into the economy.

The American people will change their minds and vote for candidates that understand and are interested real job and wealth creation.

Drs. Coburn and Barrasso Discuss “The Senate Doctors Show” on “Morning Joe”

Obama Approval Rating Is Tanking


The American people will reject the unconstrained vision of the progressive radical socialist and their income redistribution with single payer government socialized medicine and a new cap and trade energy tax.

The American people will stop the socialism BS!

“Socialism and interventionism. Both have in common the goal of subordinating the individual unconditionally to the state.”

~Ludwig von Mises, Omnipotent Government , page 44




Background Articles and Videos

America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, H. R.

Obamacare: Code Blue

By Michelle Malkin  

Photoshop credit: Reader Dave

“…We need a Do Not Resuscitate order for the flailing Democrats’ health care takeover plan.

It’s Code Blue and Team Obama is in panic mode.

Certain sign of desperation: Summoning the nutroots to help.

And another from Mark Knoller, who reports that the White House has moved up Obama’s health care statement today to 12:15pm in the Rose Garden.

And now this from Reuters:

The House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee has canceled its Tuesday debate and vote on healthcare legislation but has kept a Wednesday meeting on its schedule.

Good. This will give Obama time to study the plan he supports — a plan that he admitted he’s not familiar with when asked about the provision that would effectively kill off the individual insurance market.


Philip Klein tosses the politics card back at the White House:

Obama’s health care push is hitting a rough patch because moderates in his own party are skittish about the price tag and tax increases. The Congressional Budget Office determined that none of the Democratic bills do anything to rein in costs — the primary rationale for his health care drive. And the Mayo Clinic, which Obama has routinely praised as a model for the health care system, has blasted the House legislation. Yet Obama wants to rush legislation through so he has a victory going into an election year.

In fact, as CNN reported, “The Senate Democratic leadership and the White House are putting heavy pressure on the Finance Committee to adopt its health care plan before the president speaks to the nation (on Wednesday).” So in other words, Obama is trying to pressure the Finance Committee not to write the best legislation its members can, not to reach a bipartisan compromise, but to pass whatever bill they can before he goes in front of the television cameras to give a prime-time news conference.

Yes, it is about him. …”

Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine

Battle of Waterloo: Napoleon commits the Guard

The Obama Agenda Bogs Down

Democrats got what they wanted in the stimulus bill. The public knows it.

By Fred Barnes

“…It usually doesn’t happen this quickly in Washington. But President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats are finding that the old maxim that what goes around, comes around applies to them, too. Less than six months into his term, Mr. Obama’s top initiatives — health-care reform and “cap and trade” energy legislation — are in serious jeopardy and he has himself and his congressional allies to blame.

Their high-pressure tactics in promoting and passing legislation, most notably the economic “stimulus” enacted in February, have backfired. Those tactics include unbridled partisanship, procedural short cuts, demands for swift passage of bills, and promises of quick results.

With large majorities in Congress and an obsequious press corps, Mr. Obama was smitten with the idea of emulating President Franklin Roosevelt’s First 100 Days of legislative success in 1933. Like FDR, Mr. Obama tried to push as many liberal bills through Congress in as brief a time as possible.

He made a rookie mistake early on. He let congressional Democrats draft the bills. They’re as partisan as any group that has ever controlled Congress, and as impatient. They have little interest in the compromises needed to attract Republican support. As a consequence, what they passed — especially the $787 billion stimulus — belongs to Democrats alone. They own the stimulus outright. …”

Mayo Clinic calls House plan bad medicine

Obama loses support on reform

By Christina Bellantoni (Contact) and Jennifer Haberkorn (Contact)

“…A world-renowned clinic that President Obama held up as an example of good medicine said Monday that the American people would be “losers” under the House’s health care proposal, joining the growing chorus of critics the Obama administration is trying to fend off as the debate intensifies from Capitol Hill to Main Street.

Minnesota’s not-for-profit Mayo Clinic, which Mr. Obama has repeatedly hailed as offering top quality care at affordable costs, blasted the House Democrats’ version of the health care plan as lawmakers continue to grapple with several bills from each chamber and multiple committees.

The Mayo Clinic said there are some positive elements of the bill, but overall “the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable health care for patients.”

“In fact, it will do the opposite,” clinic officials said, because the proposals aren’t [R]patient-focused or results-oriented. “The real losers will be the citizens of the United States.” …”

The Psychology of DebtObama’s Rendezvous with Political Reality
by Victor Davis Hanson
Pajamas MediaDebt Matters

“…George W. Bush pleaded that deficits — and unprecedented large ones at that — were necessary in light of the downturn after 9/11, Katrina, the expense of two wars, and the new programs such as Homeland Security, No Child Left Behind, and the Medicare Prescription Drug benefit entitlement.

Yet what is forgotten is that Bush paid a terrible price for his deficit spending. His unpopularity was not entirely due to Iraq, but finally in large part to the notion that our national debt after eight years of unprecedented borrowing has soared to $11 trillion. He desperately tried to convince Americans that his tax cuts had stimulated the economy (quite true), and had led to greater aggregate revenue than ever before (quite amazingly so).

No matter. Spending increased, especially in the first term, to such levels that it nullified the revenue bonanzas from a growing economy stimulated by tax cuts, and left us larger in debt than ever before. Instead, the entire notion of supply-side economics was unduly discredited, as voters blamed tax cuts, not out of control spending, for the new unsustainable deficits. …”

“…Right now various members of the Obama team promiscuously toss out ideas like lifting the income caps on payroll FICA tax, or adjusting the brackets up to nearly 40 percent, or adding a 2-4 percent surcharge on the “wealthy” — all on top of increases recently in state income and sales taxes. Do the math — as are small businesses that are putting off hiring and purchasing in fear that they may well be subject to an aggregate state and federal rate of nearly 70 percent on their income. Obama acts as if business has nowhere else to go, as if the only gate out of the corral for the proverbial lamb leads to the slaughterhouse.

Add in the depression-era rhetoric of ‘”spread the wealth” and “pay your fair share” talk, along with the idea that the new taxes will not even pay down the deficit, which will in fact soar and require both inflation and higher interest to pay it down. The result is a growing anger that higher taxes in this administration somehow still ensure higher deficits. So Clinton gave us high taxes and finally a surplus. Bush at least gave us tax cuts — but a large deficit. Obama gave us the highest taxes in recent memory and the highest deficits in our history. That is not a winning combination.

Balance the budget — and President Obama could, as Clinton, be forgiven for quite a lot. Run up record deficits, and the voters will give him even less empathy than they did George Bush. Just watch …


Martin Feldstein

“…Martin Stuart “Marty” Feldstein (born November 25, 1939 in New York City) is a conservative[1] American economist. He is currently the George F. Baker Professor of Economics at Harvard University, and the president and CEO of the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). From 1982 to 1984, Feldstein served as chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers and as chief economic advisor to President Ronald Reagan (where his deficit hawk views clashed with Reagan administration economic policies). He has also been a member of the Washington-based financial advisory body the Group of Thirty since 2003. …”


Thomas Sowell

“…Thomas Sowell (born June 30, 1930), is an American economist, social commentator, and author of dozens of books. He often writes from an economically laissez-faire perspective. He is currently a senior fellow of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. In 1990, he won the Francis Boyer Award, presented by the American Enterprise Institute. In 2002 he was awarded the National Humanities Medal for prolific scholarship melding history, economics, and political science. In 2003, he was awarded the the Bradley Prize for intellectual achievement[1]. …”

Glimpse of Obamacare future: 83 million would lose private coverage

By Michelle Malkin  

“…B-b-b-b-but I thought the Democrats’ plan was all about enhancing “choices” and “options”…

“Democrats and President Obama have denied that the creation of a new government-run health care plan would be a Trojan Horse for single-payer health care, but a new report by the Lewin Group (comissioned by the Heritage Foundation) finds that the House Democrats’ health care bill would shift more 83.4 million Americans from private health care coverage to the government plan. To put that in perspective, that would mean that nearly half (48.4 percent) would lose their private health coverage.”

Philip Klein, TAS


Related: Read Cliff Asness on health care mythology.

The government does not co-exist or compete fairly with private enterprise. It does not play well with others. The regulator cannot be a competitor at the same time. It cannot compete fairly while it owns the armed forces and courts. Finally, it cannot be a fair competitor if when the “public option” screws up (can’t pay its bills), the government implicitly or explicitly guarantees its debts. We have seen what happens in that case and don’t need a re-run.

The first thing the government does is underprice the private system. You can easily be forgiven for thinking this is a good thing. Why not, cheaper is better right? Wrong. They will underprice private enterprise by charging less to the purchaser of health insurance, not by actually creating it cheaper. Who makes up the difference? Well, you and your family do if you pay taxes, or your kids will pay taxes, or their kids will pay taxes. The government can always underprice competition, not through the old fashioned way of doing it better, they never do that, but by robbing Peter to pay for Paul. They are taking money from your left pocket and giving you a small portion of it back in your right pocket. They do it every day before breakfast, and take a victory lap for the small portion they return.

Second, the government ultimately always cheats when it’s involved in “honest” competition. Try mailing a first class letter through Fed-Ex, or placing an off-track bet with a bookie, or playing a lottery through a private company. Uh, you can’t, so please stop trying. I don’t want you to hurt yourself. Once the government discovers it cannot win, it changes the rules. You see, the government has the power to legislate, steal, imprison, and kill. Those are advantages most private firms do not have, save Google, and you didn’t hear that from me (we all know the Google guy with one eye-brow would crush your larynx for creating a competing search engine). …”


Today: Nationwide protest against socialized medicine & cap-and-tax

By Michelle Malkin 


Happening at congressional offices across the country right now: Taxpayers are saying no to the Democrats’ government health care takeover plans. Tea Party protests are just getting underway. I’ll post more pics ad reports as they come in. Guess who won’t be there: CNN superhack Susan Roesgen.

From Shirley, here’s the scene at Sen. Claire McCaskill’s office in St. Louis: …”

Barack Obama speaks the truth! Update: Mayo not okay-o with Obamacare

By Michelle Malkin  

“…Team Obama’s gaffetastic moments are their most honest ones. Here is the president warning that the government health care take over will create “inefficiencies.”

Uhhhh, you can say that again, champ (click to watch):

Jinx, you owe me a Coke, Mr. President.


Snort: Obama invokes the Mayo Clinic to bolster his health care takeover plans…but Mayo doesn’t support Obamacare.

More from Mary Katharine Ham: Obama Loves Mayo, But Mayo Does Not Love Him (Update: Gibbs Responds, Badly) …” 

Reformers’ Claims Just Don’t Add Up


“…Health Reform: Many extravagant claims have been made on behalf of the various health care “reforms” now emerging from Congress and the White House. But on closer inspection, virtually all prove to be false.

“…Still, lawmakers and the White House press on, relying on GOP weakness in the House and a new veto-proof majority in the Senate. They’re also relying on a lack of awareness that claims made on behalf of national health care may be mostly false. Among them:

• America has a health care crisis.

No, we don’t. Forty-seven million people lack insurance. Of the remaining 85% of the population, or 258 million people, polls show high satisfaction with the current coverage. Indeed, a 2006 poll by ABC News, the Kaiser Family Foundation and USA Today found 89% of Americans were happy with their own health care.

As for the estimated 47 million not covered by health insurance, 20 million can afford to buy it, according to a study by former CBO Director June O’Neill. Most of the other 27 million are single and under 35, with as many as a third illegal aliens.

When it’s all whittled down, as few as 12 million are unable to buy insurance — less than 4% of a population of 305 million. For this we need to nationalize 17% of our nation’s $14 trillion economy and change the current care that 89% like?

• Health care reform will save money.

Few of the plans now coming out of Congress will save anything, says the CBO’s current chief, Douglas Elmendorf. In fact, he says, they’ll lead to substantially higher costs in the future — costs that will be “unsustainable.”

As it is, estimates for reforming health care range from $1 trillion to $3.6 trillion. Much will be spent on subsidies to make a so-called public option more attractive to consumers than private plans.

To pay for it, the president has suggested about $600 billion in new taxes, meaning that $500 billion to $2.1 trillion in new health care spending over the next decade will be unfunded. This could push up the nation’s already soaring deficit, expected to reach $10 trillion through 2019 without health care reform. Massive new tax hikes will probably be needed to close the gap.

• Only the rich will pay for reform.

The 5.4% surtax on millionaires the president is pushing gets all the attention, but everyone down to $280,000 in income will pay more. Doesn’t that still leave out the middle class and poor? Sorry. Workers who decline to take part will pay a tax of up to 2% of earnings. And small-businesses must pony up 8% of their payrolls.

The poor and middle class must pay in other ways, without knowing it. The biggest hit will be on small businesses, which, due to new payroll taxes, will be less likely to hire workers. Today’s 9.5% jobless rate may become a permanent feature of our economy — just as it is in Europe, where nationalized health care is common. …”


I.O.U.S.A. Chaper 1

I.O.U.S.A. Chaper 2 and 3


I.O.U.S.A. Chaper 4

I.O.U.S.A.: Byte-Sized – The 30 Minute Version

Martin Feldstein Economy Speaker

The Obama Deception HQ Full length version


Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

The Heritage Foundation

Heritage Foundation 2010 Budget Charts–Federal Spending

Heritage Foundation 2010 Budget Charts–Federal Revenue 

Heritage Foundation 2010 Budget Charts–Federal Debt and Deficits

Heritage Foundation 2010 Budget Charts–Federal Entitlements

Medical Doctor and Senator Tom Coburn On Health Care–Videos

Obama’s Waterloo– Government Compulsory Single Payer Socialized Medicine!–Videos

President Obama’s Plan of Massive Deficit Spending Is Destroying The US Economy–The American People Say Stop Socialism BS Now!

The Bum’s Rush of The American People: The Totally Irresponsible Democratic Party Health Care Bill and Obama’s Big Lie Exposed

Chairman Obama’s Progressive Radical Socialist Health Care Bill Kills Individual Private Health Care Insurance–Join The Second American Revolution!

The Obama Big Lie and Inconvenient Truth About Health Care–The Public Option Trojan Horse–Leads To A Single Payor Goverment Monopoly of Health Care and The Bankruptcy of USA!

The Obama Public Option Poison Pill For A Government Health Care Monopoly–Single Payer System–Betting Your Life and Paying Though The Nose

Dr. Robert W. Christensen–Videos

John Stossel–Sick In America–Videos


President Obama’s Cloward-Piven Strategy of Controlled Crisis Creation Crippling Capitalism–Coup D-Etat On America

President Obama–Killer of The American Dream and Market Capitalism–Stop The Radical Socialists Before They Kill You!

Barack Obama America’s Puppet President Pinocchio –The Transparent Lies–Ears and Nose Are Growing? 

Discover The Left’s Organized Crime Network–Crime Pays–Organized Crimes Pays More–Apply for Census Taker Jobs!

Chairman Obama’s Progressive Radical Socialist Health Care Bill Kills Individual Private Health Care Insurance–Join The Second American Revolution!

President Barack Obama Beats It–President Franklin Roosevelt Record–Worse Unemployment Numbers Since 1933–14,700,000 Unemployed Americans Greater than 13,000,000 in 1933!

The Obama Depression (OD) Starts July 4, 2009–30 Million Americans March To Tea Parties In Washington D.C. and Over 1,000 Cities and Towns Across America!

United States Economic Depressions–The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly–Obama’s Depression–Over 15,000,000 Americans Seek Full Time Job!

President Obama and His Keynesian Spending Cult of The Fascist Democrat Radicals–FDRs 

Obama’s Opague Oppression–Collectivist Czars Or Commissars–Terminate Tyrants Tea Parties–Join The Second American Revolution

President Obama Fires Inspector General Gerald Walpin–Teapot Scandle Slowly Simmers!

Obama Throws The American People Under The Government Motors Bus!–Ice Tea Party Time!

Obama’s Organized Crime Syndicate: ACORN, CCI, SEIU, TARP, GE, Cap and Trade?–Video Exposé

Obama Fully Supports Ending Secret Ballot For All Employees–Are Voters Next?–Employee Free Choice Act a.k.a. Card Check is Ballot Check Next?

President Obama Is Driving The American People Down The Highway to Socialism and Serfdom–Stop The Bus!

CIA Old Boy Network–Walking Back The Cat–Barack Obama–Who Recruited Him and For What End?

President Obama Delays E-Verify–Shame On You Mr. President!

George Soros: Barack Obama’s Money Man and Agenda Puppeter

President Doom and Panic Obama’s Big Lie: More Government Spending Works and Tax Cuts Do Not Work

A Fiscally Responsible President or The Flim-Flam Man–Never Trust A Lying Radical Socialist!

New Presidential Helicopters Modified for Conformal Fuel Tanks That Will Dispense Money!

President Obama’s Internet Attack On The American Family, Marriage and Values

Cap and Trade Carbon Dioxide Tax: Gore’s and Obama’s Revenge on The American People–Let Them Freeze and Sweat!

Al Gore 2.0 and The Coming Renewable Energy Ice Age–The Big Chill

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 62 so far )

The Racist Test for Judge Sonya Sotomayor and President Obama–Racism Unmasked!–Obama Flips Off White Middle Class America–Videos

Posted on July 14, 2009. Filed under: Blogroll, Economics, Education, Employment, Law, liberty, Links, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Video, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |


Martin Luther King Jr – I Have a Dream


Krauthammer: Sotomayor is a leftist militant third-world race supremacist, not an impartial judge


US Supreme Court Again Reverses Radical Barack Obama Nominee Sonia Sotomayor [FOX News]


White Firefighters Prevail in Supreme Court Case


Sotomayor Decision Overruled by Supreme Court – justice for white firefighters


Glenn Beck: Sotomayer Hearings Like a Cartoon Show!


Racism on the Supreme Court…


Tancredo vs Tan Klan & Sotomayor


Tom DeLay Attacks Sonia Sotomayor & La Raza On CNN


cnn – lou dobbs – sotomayor on immigration


Beck & Sowell Discuss ‘Racist’ Sotomayor


Obama’s Supreme Court Nominee is a Racist Activist Policy making Judge, by her own admission


Time for The Racist Test…


Obama’s Supreme Court Pick: Racist?


Obama the Trickster

By James Lewis


“…Her job on the Supremes will be to keep the Affirmative Action Establishment in power. Those are the race/gender/sexuality statist demagogues who seized power when the Boomer Left took over. That is why we have Leftists in control of the Democrats, the universities, and the Chicago Machine. It’s why the deeply dishonest ideologue James Hansen has a fat salary at NASA while systematically lying about global warming.  It’s why the newspapers are crashing and the Democrats still win elections. It’s why California, blessed with resources, is broke and all the big cities are begging for Federal handouts.

Affirmative Action is the new American spoils system — and race, gender, and sexual demagoguery are always the key. It works by intimidating middle class whites. The Left has taken over Europe with the exactly same tactics. Just read the UK news.


Anti-white racists must be worried about their hold on power, because the US Supreme Court has heard of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Even Justice Ginsburg keeps saying that legalized racial discrimination is only temporary, because, yes, it’s obviously unconstitutional. It’s affirmative racism.


Well, you can bet that the race/gender/gay industry isn’t going to go quietly into that dark night. Sotomayor’s nomination is a sign to the racism industry that it is still in power, and that its future is assured if Obama has anything to say about it. It’s a payoff to the race industry, and an invitation by Obama to expand racial protections to Hispanics and illegals.


Sotomayor’s mission on SCOTUS is to dig Affirmative Action into solid rock, to keep it entangled so deeply in the network of SCOTUS decisions that this country will never return to the equal protection of the laws. She will work to give illegal aliens all their “rights” under the UN Human Rights Charter — which nobody voted for except the unelected transnational Ruling Class.  But the American taxpayer will pay for it, oh, many times over.


It’s all a gargantuan finger to White Middle Class America. If you don’t get it he still gets the last laugh at your stupidity. …”


Obama Flips Off Hillary Clinton? Slow Motion!




Background Articles and Videos


Day Two: Sotomayor and ritual reassurances

By Michelle Malkin  

“…Today, it’s the SCOTUS ceremonial dance with the Senate.

Republicans will delicately challenge Sonia Somotmayor on racial preferences, Second Amendment rights, property rights, sovereignty issues, and her extracurricular speechifying.

Democrats will bloviate about pet causes (”consumer-friendly” laws, the environment).

Sonia the Wise will assuage skeptics with repeated insistences that she’s “fair,” “impartial,” and committed to the rule of law.

Absent that “meltdown,” Lindsay Graham will pronounce himself satisfied with her ritual reassurances.

And Sotomayor will be one cleared hurdle closer to overcoming yet another set of “incredible odds” to complete her “compelling personal story.”

The morning news round-up:

WaPo: Sotomayor and the search for bipartisanship

Dallas Morning News: “Jane Roe” — Norma McCorvey — was one of the protesters arrested yesterday for disrupting the opening day of hearings.

Paul Mirengoff at Power Line zeroes in on Sotomayor’s incoherence:

The real question is this: if Sotomayor’s practice is to “strengthen both the rule of law and faith in the impartiality of our justice system” by carefully addressing the “arguments and concerns” of the parties, why did she depart so fundamentally from this practice in the Ricci case? …”


Day One: Spotlight on Sotomayor

By Michelle Malkin  

“…It’s opening day of the Senate SCOTUS hearings on the Sonia Sotomayor nomination. We’ll get gavel-to-gavel coverage this morning on all major networks and CSPAN starting at 10am Eastern.

The good news: At least we’ll be spared Joe Biden’s bloviations.

That’s about the only positive thing I can say about a day that will be dripping in the politics of racial identity and judicial nomination-as-high-hurdles-contest rhetoric.

Wonder which Senator will be the first to bring up her “history-making” status as a Wise, History-Making Person Living With Diabetes?

Latinos are putting conservatives “on notice” and will watch Republicans “like hawks.” Estuardo V. Rodriguez, director of something called “Hispanics for a Fair Judiciary,” told ABC News: “We accept tough questions. But what we are going to object to are questions that misrepresent the judge or that distort her record.” (The group includes the pro-racial/ethnic preference Hispanic National Bar Association, U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund.)

Translation: Be quiet about Ricci, the Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund, and the Wise Latina Woman remarks — or else!

I’m reminded of a good column a few months ago by Rachel Campos-Duffy, who happens to be a wise conservative Latina woman:

For conservative minorities, especially conservative minority women, Sonia Sotomayor’s nomination and the warnings from the left not to “bully” her are a reminder of the double standard with which we live out our social and political lives. The recognition that there are two separate rulebooks for minorities: one for liberals and one for conservatives. In the liberal rulebook, whites must be sensitive and considerate of a minority’s life story and the unique obstacles he or she faced and/or overcame. In the conservative rulebook, well, there really is no rulebook because there are no rules. It’s always open season on conservative minorities. …”

What Ricci Says About Sotomayor – and Obama

By David Gibberman

“… The specific legal question in Ricci was: May an employer disregard the results of a promotion exam because too many individuals of one race had the best scores?

When New Haven firefighters took the lieutenant promotion test, only whites scored high enough to fill the eight current vacancies (for details about these exams, see Justice Kennedy’s opinion). At least three African-American candidates would have been eligible for subsequent vacancies during the two years that the test results would have been valid. With respect to the captain promotion test, seven whites and two Hispanics did well enough to be eligible for promotion to current vacancies.

All nine Supreme Court justices tried to reconcile New Haven’s legal obligation not to intentionally discriminate against firefighters on the basis of their race with its obligation not to unintentionally discriminate against them.

An employer can be liable for unintentionally discriminating when a job test adversely affects a disproportionate number of individuals of a particular race unless (1) the test measures the skills required to perform the job successfully and (2) those adversely affected can’t point to an equally good alternative with less adverse impact (42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(k)(1)(A), (C), available, like other U.S. Code provisions).

New Haven made a conscientious effort not to unintentionally discriminate. It  paid $100,000 to Industrial/Organizational Solutions, Inc. (IOS), a company specializing in designing entry-level and promotion tests for fire and police departments, to develop lieutenant and captain promotion exams. IOS interviewed and observed lieutenants and captains at work to identify the tasks, knowledge, skills, and abilities essential for them to perform their jobs successfully. Minority firefighters were oversampled so that white candidates would not be unintentionally favored.

IOS prepared for each position a multiple-choice test (each question written below the 10th-grade reading level) and an oral exam consisting of hypothetical situations testing skills identified as needed to successfully perform as a lieutenant or captain. Each panel grading a candidate’s oral exam included one white, one African-American, and one Hispanic. Candidates were given three months to prepare for the exams and told which chapters in the source materials they should study.

All nine Supreme Court justices agreed that it wasn’t okay for New Haven to discard the test results merely because there was a racial disparity in test scores. Five justices decided that an employer can intentionally discriminate against employees by disregarding test results only if the facts show that it has a “strong basis in evidence” to believe that it otherwise will be liable for unintentional discrimination (Justice Kennedy’s opinion, p. 26 ).

The other four justices would have set a lower threshold. They argued that an employer should be able to disregard test results if the facts show that it has “good cause” to believe that it otherwise will be liable for unintentional discrimination (Justice Ginsburg’s opinion, p. 19). …”

“…President Obama’s selection of Judge Sotomayor should disappoint white supporters who saw his election as absolving them from the sin of racism. His selection of Judge Sotomayor shows that he still considers whites to have unfairly benefited from racism and that it’s still okay to discriminate against whites to remedy past sins. …”

“…Considering that it’s been more than 45 years since passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it’s sad that those in power still are looking for “quick fixes,” like quotas and preferences, instead of tackling the hard work, like improving education, to overcome the lingering effects of racism. …”


Sotomayor and International Law

If other countries have ‘good ideas’ it’s up to Congress, not the courts, to copy them.

“…Judge Sotomayor insists in the ACLU speech that the brouhaha about foreign and international law is due to a misunderstanding about how she and others like Justices Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg would propose to use it. The point, she says, isn’t that judges actually use foreign decisions as precedent (er, well, of course they don’t), but that they open their minds to the intellectual force of their foreign counterparts.

But either foreign ideas carry weight by butressing judicial arguments, or they don’t. Judicial opinions are written with great precision and care because they matter, and each strand of argument becomes a part of the grit and texture of American law.

No one is suggesting that judges stop reading or learning in ways that help expand their understanding of the law and the cases they are hearing. But that is an altogether different matter than official citation in a decision.

Our system of government has stood the test of time not in spite of but because it is uniquely drawn from the priorities of our own citizens, and them alone. The responsibility of the Supreme Court is neither to win an international beauty pageant, nor to encourage the export of our ideas. It is to extend principles of the Founders and the words of the Constitution into a world that still needs their wisdom. …”


Sessions: Sotomayor and Foreign Law


Sonia Sotomayor: Courts make policy full clip


Rush Limbaugh – Judge Sonya Sotomayor (First Comments)


Rush limbaugh On Supreme Court Pick Sonia Sotomayor and her Racist Case against White men


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


Part 1: Rev. Jeremiah Wright In His Own Words


Part 2: Rev. Jeremiah Wright In His Own Words


Part 3: Rev. Jeremiah Wright In His Own Words


Barack Obama plays the RACE CARD…


Barack Obama at La Raza Conference


Lou Dobbs – 2-2-9 -Obama Admin wants to kill E-Verify


E-Verify & Border Fence may be canceled




CNN- Obama = Amnesty For Illegal Aliens


Obama and his outrageous amnesty agenda


Sotomayor A Member Of La Raza, A Near Terrorist Organization?


Sonia Sotomayor Berkeley speech 2001

“A Latina Judge’s Voice”

By Sonia Sotomayor

Note: Federal Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor, nominated by President Obama on May 26, 2009, to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court, delivered this talk on Oct. 26, 2001, as the Judge Mario G. Olmos Memorial Lecture. She spoke at a UC Berkeley School of Law symposium titled “Raising the Bar: Latino and Latina Presence in the Judiciary and the Struggle for Representation.” The symposium was co-hosted by the La Raza Law Journal, the Berkeley La Raza Law Students Association, the Boalt Hall Center for Social Justice, and the Center for Latino Policy Research. The text below is from the archives of the La Raza Law Journal.

Judge Reynoso, thank you for that lovely introduction. I am humbled to be speaking behind a man who has contributed so much to the Hispanic community. I am also grateful to have such kind words said about me.  

I am delighted to be here. It is nice to escape my hometown for just a little bit. It is also nice to say hello to old friends who are in the audience, to rekindle contact with old acquaintances and to make new friends among those of you in the audience. It is particularly heart warming to me to be attending a conference to which I was invited by a Latina law school friend, Rachel Moran, who is now an accomplished and widely respected legal scholar. I warn Latinos in this room: Latinas are making a lot of progress in the old-boy network.

I am also deeply honored to have been asked to deliver the annual Judge Mario G. Olmos lecture. I am joining a remarkable group of prior speakers who have given this lecture. I hope what I speak about today continues to promote the legacy of that man whose commitment to public service and abiding dedication to promoting equality and justice for all people inspired this memorial lecture and the conference that will follow. I thank Judge Olmos’ widow Mary Louise’s family, her son and the judge’s many friends for hosting me. And for the privilege you have bestowed on me in honoring the memory of a very special person. If I and the many people of this conference can accomplish a fraction of what Judge Olmos did in his short but extraordinary life we and our respective communities will be infinitely better.

I intend tonight to touch upon the themes that this conference will be discussing this weekend and to talk to you about my Latina identity, where it came from, and the influence I perceive it has on my presence on the bench.

Who am I? I am a “Newyorkrican.” For those of you on the West Coast who do not know what that term means: I am a born and bred New Yorker of Puerto Rican-born parents who came to the states during World War II.

Like many other immigrants to this great land, my parents came because of poverty and to attempt to find and secure a better life for themselves and the family that they hoped to have. They largely succeeded. For that, my brother and I are very grateful. The story of that success is what made me and what makes me the Latina that I am. The Latina side of my identity was forged and closely nurtured by my family through our shared experiences and traditions.

For me, a very special part of my being Latina is the mucho platos de arroz, gandoles y pernir – rice, beans and pork – that I have eaten at countless family holidays and special events. My Latina identity also includes, because of my particularly adventurous taste buds, morcilla, — pig intestines, patitas de cerdo con garbanzo — pigs’ feet with beans, and la lengua y orejas de cuchifrito, pigs’ tongue and ears. I bet the Mexican-Americans in this room are thinking that Puerto Ricans have unusual food tastes. Some of us, like me, do. Part of my Latina identity is the sound of merengue at all our family parties and the heart wrenching Spanish love songs that we enjoy. It is the memory of Saturday afternoon at the movies with my aunt and cousins watching Cantinflas, who is not Puerto Rican, but who was an icon Spanish comedian on par with Abbot and Costello of my generation. My Latina soul was nourished as I visited and played at my grandmother’s house with my cousins and extended family. They were my friends as I grew up. Being a Latina child was watching the adults playing dominos on Saturday night and us kids playing lotería, bingo, with my grandmother calling out the numbers which we marked on our cards with chick peas.

Now, does any one of these things make me a Latina? Obviously not because each of our Caribbean and Latin American communities has their own unique food and different traditions at the holidays. I only learned about tacos in college from my Mexican-American roommate. Being a Latina in America also does not mean speaking Spanish. I happen to speak it fairly well. But my brother, only three years younger, like too many of us educated here, barely speaks it. Most of us born and bred here, speak it very poorly.

If I had pursued my career in my undergraduate history major, I would likely provide you with a very academic description of what being a Latino or Latina means. For example, I could define Latinos as those peoples and cultures populated or colonized by Spain who maintained or adopted Spanish or Spanish Creole as their language of communication. You can tell that I have been very well educated. That antiseptic description however, does not really explain the appeal of morcilla – pig’s intestine – to an American born child. It does not provide an adequate explanation of why individuals like us, many of whom are born in this completely different American culture, still identify so strongly with those communities in which our parents were born and raised.

America has a deeply confused image of itself that is in perpetual tension. We are a nation that takes pride in our ethnic diversity, recognizing its importance in shaping our society and in adding richness to its existence. Yet, we simultaneously insist that we can and must function and live in a race and color-blind way that ignore these very differences that in other contexts we laud. That tension between “the melting pot and the salad bowl” — a recently popular metaphor used to described New York’s diversity – is being hotly debated today in national discussions about affirmative action. Many of us struggle with this tension and attempt to maintain and promote our cultural and ethnic identities in a society that is often ambivalent about how to deal with its differences. In this time of great debate we must remember that it is not political struggles that create a Latino or Latina identity. I became a Latina by the way I love and the way I live my life. My family showed me by their example how wonderful and vibrant life is and how wonderful and magical it is to have a Latina soul. They taught me to love being a Puerto Riqueña and to love America and value its lesson that great things could be achieved if one works hard for it. But achieving success here is no easy accomplishment for Latinos or Latinas, and although that struggle did not and does not create a Latina identity, it does inspire how I live my life.

I was born in the year 1954. That year was the fateful year in which Brown v. Board of Education was decided. When I was eight, in 1961, the first Latino, the wonderful Judge Reynaldo Garza, was appointed to the federal bench, an event we are celebrating at this conference. When I finished law school in 1979, there were no women judges on the Supreme Court or on the highest court of my home state, New York. There was then only one Afro-American Supreme Court Justice and then and now no Latino or Latina justices on our highest court. Now in the last twenty plus years of my professional life, I have seen a quantum leap in the representation of women and Latinos in the legal profession and particularly in the judiciary. In addition to the appointment of the first female United States Attorney General, Janet Reno, we have seen the appointment of two female justices to the Supreme Court and two female justices to the New York Court of Appeals, the highest court of my home state. One of those judges is the Chief Judge and the other is a Puerto Riqueña, like I am. As of today, women sit on the highest courts of almost all of the states and of the territories, including Puerto Rico. One Supreme Court, that of Minnesota, had a majority of women justices for a period of time.

As of September 1, 2001, the federal judiciary consisting of Supreme, Circuit and District Court Judges was about 22% women. In 1992, nearly ten years ago, when I was first appointed a District Court Judge, the percentage of women in the total federal judiciary was only 13%. Now, the growth of Latino representation is somewhat less favorable. As of today we have, as I noted earlier, no Supreme Court justices, and we have only 10 out of 147 active Circuit Court judges and 30 out of 587 active district court judges. Those numbers are grossly below our proportion of the population. As recently as 1965, however, the federal bench had only three women serving and only one Latino judge. So changes are happening, although in some areas, very slowly. These figures and appointments are heartwarming. Nevertheless, much still remains to happen.

Let us not forget that between the appointments of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor in 1981 and Justice Ginsburg in 1992, eleven years passed. Similarly, between Justice Kaye’s initial appointment as an Associate Judge to the New York Court of Appeals in 1983, and Justice Ciparick’s appointment in 1993, ten years elapsed. Almost nine years later, we are waiting for a third appointment of a woman to both the Supreme Court and the New York Court of Appeals and of a second minority, male or female, preferably Hispanic, to the Supreme Court. In 1992 when I joined the bench, there were still two out of 13 circuit courts and about 53 out of 92 district courts in which no women sat. At the beginning of September of 2001, there are women sitting in all 13 circuit courts. The First, Fifth, Eighth and Federal Circuits each have only one female judge, however, out of a combined total number of 48 judges. There are still nearly 37 district courts with no women judges at all. For women of color the statistics are more sobering. As of September 20, 1998, of the then 195 circuit court judges only two were African-American women and two Hispanic women. Of the 641 district court judges only twelve were African-American women and eleven Hispanic women. African-American women comprise only 1.56% of the federal judiciary and Hispanic-American women comprise only 1%. No African-American, male or female, sits today on the Fourth or Federal circuits. And no Hispanics, male or female, sit on the Fourth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, District of Columbia or Federal Circuits.

Sort of shocking, isn’t it? This is the year 2002. We have a long way to go. Unfortunately, there are some very deep storm warnings we must keep in mind. In at least the last five years the majority of nominated judges the Senate delayed more than one year before confirming or never confirming were women or minorities. I need not remind this audience that Judge Paez of your home Circuit, the Ninth Circuit, has had the dubious distinction of having had his confirmation delayed the longest in Senate history. These figures demonstrate that there is a real and continuing need for Latino and Latina organizations and community groups throughout the country to exist and to continue their efforts of promoting women and men of all colors in their pursuit for equality in the judicial system.

This weekend’s conference, illustrated by its name, is bound to examine issues that I hope will identify the efforts and solutions that will assist our communities. The focus of my speech tonight, however, is not about the struggle to get us where we are and where we need to go but instead to discuss with you what it all will mean to have more women and people of color on the bench. The statistics I have been talking about provide a base from which to discuss a question which one of my former colleagues on the Southern District bench, Judge Miriam Cederbaum, raised when speaking about women on the federal bench. Her question was: What do the history and statistics mean? In her speech, Judge Cederbaum expressed her belief that the number of women and by direct inference people of color on the bench, was still statistically insignificant and that therefore we could not draw valid scientific conclusions from the acts of so few people over such a short period of time. Yet, we do have women and people of color in more significant numbers on the bench and no one can or should ignore pondering what that will mean or not mean in the development of the law. Now, I cannot and do not claim this issue as personally my own. In recent years there has been an explosion of research and writing in this area. On one of the panels tomorrow, you will hear the Latino perspective in this debate.

For those of you interested in the gender perspective on this issue, I commend to you a wonderful compilation of articles published on the subject in Vol. 77 of the Judicature, the Journal of the American Judicature Society of November-December 1993. It is on Westlaw/Lexis and I assume the students and academics in this room can find it.

Now Judge Cedarbaum expresses concern with any analysis of women and presumably again people of color on the bench, which begins and presumably ends with the conclusion that women or minorities are different from men generally. She sees danger in presuming that judging should be gender or anything else based. She rightly points out that the perception of the differences between men and women is what led to many paternalistic laws and to the denial to women of the right to vote because we were described then “as not capable of reasoning or thinking logically” but instead of “acting intuitively.” I am quoting adjectives that were bandied around famously during the suffragettes’ movement.

While recognizing the potential effect of individual experiences on perception, Judge Cedarbaum nevertheless believes that judges must transcend their personal sympathies and prejudices and aspire to achieve a greater degree of fairness and integrity based on the reason of law. Although I agree with and attempt to work toward Judge Cedarbaum’s aspiration, I wonder whether achieving that goal is possible in all or even in most cases. And I wonder whether by ignoring our differences as women or men of color we do a disservice both to the law and society. Whatever the reasons why we may have different perspectives, either as some theorists suggest because of our cultural experiences or as others postulate because we have basic differences in logic and reasoning, are in many respects a small part of a larger practical question we as women and minority judges in society in general must address. I accept the thesis of a law school classmate, Professor Steven Carter of Yale Law School, in his affirmative action book that in any group of human beings there is a diversity of opinion because there is both a diversity of experiences and of thought. Thus, as noted by another Yale Law School Professor — I did graduate from there and I am not really biased except that they seem to be doing a lot of writing in that area — Professor Judith Resnik says that there is not a single voice of feminism, not a feminist approach but many who are exploring the possible ways of being that are distinct from those structured in a world dominated by the power and words of men. Thus, feminist theories of judging are in the midst of creation and are not and perhaps will never aspire to be as solidified as the established legal doctrines of judging can sometimes appear to be.

That same point can be made with respect to people of color. No one person, judge or nominee will speak in a female or people of color voice. I need not remind you that Justice Clarence Thomas represents a part but not the whole of African-American thought on many subjects. Yet, because I accept the proposition that, as Judge Resnik describes it, “to judge is an exercise of power” and because as, another former law school classmate, Professor Martha Minnow of Harvard Law School, states “there is no objective stance but only a series of perspectives — no neutrality, no escape from choice in judging,” I further accept that our experiences as women and people of color affect our decisions. The aspiration to impartiality is just that — it’s an aspiration because it denies the fact that we are by our experiences making different choices than others. Not all women or people of color, in all or some circumstances or indeed in any particular case or circumstance but enough people of color in enough cases, will make a difference in the process of judging. The Minnesota Supreme Court has given an example of this. As reported by Judge Patricia Wald formerly of the D.C. Circuit Court, three women on the Minnesota Court with two men dissenting agreed to grant a protective order against a father’s visitation rights when the father abused his child. The Judicature Journal has at least two excellent studies on how women on the courts of appeal and state supreme courts have tended to vote more often than their male counterpart to uphold women’s claims in sex discrimination cases and criminal defendants’ claims in search and seizure cases. As recognized by legal scholars, whatever the reason, not one woman or person of color in any one position but as a group we will have an effect on the development of the law and on judging.

In our private conversations, Judge Cedarbaum has pointed out to me that seminal decisions in race and sex discrimination cases have come from Supreme Courts composed exclusively of white males. I agree that this is significant but I also choose to emphasize that the people who argued those cases before the Supreme Court which changed the legal landscape ultimately were largely people of color and women. I recall that Justice Thurgood Marshall, Judge Connie Baker Motley, the first black woman appointed to the federal bench, and others of the NAACP argued Brown v. Board of Education. Similarly, Justice Ginsburg, with other women attorneys, was instrumental in advocating and convincing the Court that equality of work required equality in terms and conditions of employment.

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

Let us not forget that wise men like Oliver Wendell Holmes and Justice Cardozo voted on cases which upheld both sex and race discrimination in our society. Until 1972, no Supreme Court case ever upheld the claim of a woman in a gender discrimination case. I, like Professor Carter, believe that we should not be so myopic as to believe that others of different experiences or backgrounds are incapable of understanding the values and needs of people from a different group. Many are so capable. As Judge Cedarbaum pointed out to me, nine white men on the Supreme Court in the past have done so on many occasions and on many issues including Brown.

However, to understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give. For others, their experiences limit their ability to understand the experiences of others. Other simply do not care. Hence, one must accept the proposition that a difference there will be by the presence of women and people of color on the bench. Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage.

I also hope that by raising the question today of what difference having more Latinos and Latinas on the bench will make will start your own evaluation. For people of color and women lawyers, what does and should being an ethnic minority mean in your lawyering? For men lawyers, what areas in your experiences and attitudes do you need to work on to make you capable of reaching those great moments of enlightenment which other men in different circumstances have been able to reach. For all of us, how do change the facts that in every task force study of gender and race bias in the courts, women and people of color, lawyers and judges alike, report in significantly higher percentages than white men that their gender and race has shaped their careers, from hiring, retention to promotion and that a statistically significant number of women and minority lawyers and judges, both alike, have experienced bias in the courtroom?

Each day on the bench I learn something new about the judicial process and about being a professional Latina woman in a world that sometimes looks at me with suspicion. I am reminded each day that I render decisions that affect people concretely and that I owe them constant and complete vigilance in checking my assumptions, presumptions and perspectives and ensuring that to the extent that my limited abilities and capabilities permit me, that I reevaluate them and change as circumstances and cases before me requires. I can and do aspire to be greater than the sum total of my experiences but I accept my limitations. I willingly accept that we who judge must not deny the differences resulting from experience and heritage but attempt, as the Supreme Court suggests, continuously to judge when those opinions, sympathies and prejudices are appropriate.

here is always a danger embedded in relative morality, but since judging is a series of choices that we must make, that I am forced to make, I hope that I can make them by informing myself on the questions I must not avoid asking and continuously pondering. We, I mean all of us in this room, must continue individually and in voices united in organizations that have supported this conference, to think about these questions and to figure out how we go about creating the opportunity for there to be more women and people of color on the bench so we can finally have statistically significant numbers to measure the differences we will and are making.

I am delighted to have been here tonight and extend once again my deepest gratitude to all of you for listening and letting me share my reflections on being a Latina voice on the bench. Thank you.” 


Martin Luther King “I have a dream”


Related Post On Pronk Palisades

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

Outting Obama: Radical Racist Rabble Rouser Reader

The Progressive Radical Socialist Family Tree–ACORN & AmeriCorps–Time To Chop It Down

Voters Beware: The Radical Rules of Saul Alinsky and Leftist Democrats

Clinton & Obama: First They Lie To You and Then They Steal Your Property!

Barack Obama: A Watermellon Man–Green on The Outside–Red on The Inside

Barack Obama Throws His White Grandma Under The Bus–Backs Up and Does It Again–Amazing!

Barack Obama–Damaged Goods–Birds of A Feather Flock Together

Barack Obama Cult?

US Immigration Videos

Borderline Chaos: Immigration Out of Control–Videos

The Hyphenated American and The Hyphen

The Signed “Stimulus Package” Did Not Include Funding for E-Verify and Border Fence Construction–Less Jobs And Security for American Citizens

President Obama Delays E-Verify–Shame On You Mr. President!

The Issue of The United States 2008 Presidential Election–Criminal Alien Removal (CAR) and A Border Security Fence (BSF)

The Cost of Comprehensive Immigration Reform–McCain and Obama Are Hopeless–It is the Economy Stupid!

Appeasers and Oath Breakers All: Bush, Clinton, Bush, McCain, Clinton, Obama…Who is next?

Why immigration will be the number 1 political issue in the 2008 Presidential Election! — Gum Balls

Presidential Candidates on Illegal Immigration, Criminal Alien Removal and Social Service Benefits

John McCain’s Position on Illegal Immigration and Criminal Alien Removal?

Alan Keyes on Immigration

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

The Obama Big Lie and Inconvenient Truth About Health Care–The Public Option Trojan Horse–Leads To A Single Payor Goverment Monopoly of Health Care and The Bankruptcy of USA!

Posted on July 7, 2009. Filed under: Blogroll, Communications, Computers, Employment, Health Care, Links, Medicine, People, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Science, Technology, Video, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |



M3, longer term chart



“…M3 consists of M2, institutional money market mutual funds, time deposits in amounts of $100,000 or more, repurchase agreement liabilities of depository institutions (in denominations of $100,000 or more) on U.S. government and federal agency securities, and Eurodollars.

For reference, and as of early 2007, M3 is about $11.5 trillion, M2 about $7.1 trillion, institutional money markets funds about $1.4 trillion, jumbo CDs about $1.7 trillion, repos about $.67 trillion ($670 billion) and estimated Eurodollars are about $.61 trillion ($610 billion).
11/30/2007 – Note that much of the large growth in M3 lately has been in flows into CDs and Money Market Funds, a normal occurrence during financial turmoil. See our financial crisis page for more detail, and a picture of the current level of a U.S. financial crisis.  …”


Glenn Beck on the US Financial crisis

U.S. Headed For Fiscal Crisis?

I.O.U.S.A.: Byte-Sized – The 30 Minute Version 


Stop Spending Our Future – The Crisis

The leaders and political elites of both political parties, Democrats and Republicans, are not telling the American people the truth–the United States is broke and cannot afford any new entitlement programs.

The United States cannot grow its way out the financial crisis to provide the funding for the liabilities the Federal Government already promised to pay for Social Security and Medicare entitlement programs.

Any politican who proposes either new entitlement programs or the expansion of existing programs such as Social Security or Medicare is fiscally irresponsible and is pandering and lying to the American people.

Both former President Bush and now President Obama are two of the most fiscally irresponsible Presidents this nation’s voters foolishly elected to the office of President.

Stop The Spending and Deficits

US Federal Government Deficits




Our first Green On The Outside and Red On The Inside President Obama only makes a  huge and unsustainable entitlement problem and crisis infinitely worse.

By proposing a new entitlement program–universal health care with a public option of a government insurer–Presidemt Obama is now threatening all those Americans who are satisfied with their health care and insurance plan.

A public option leads slowly and surely to Socialized Medicine or a Government Single Payer health care system and the bankruptcy of the United States!

The cost of such a new entitlement program is beyond the means of the American people and the US economy to pay for and sustain.

It would add trillions  of dollars to the already bloated US deficits.

Kill the Obama Universal Health Care bill before it kills you and bankrupts the United States of America.

Both the Federal Government Medicare and Medcaid pay less than the cost of the services provided by doctors and hospitals.

This results in doctors and hospitals shifting the unreimbused cost to private insurers.

Rep. Paul Ryan points out that Health Care Reform will be the most Important Vote

Rep. Brady (R-TX) asks CBO Director Elmendorf if we know the cost of the Dems Health Care Bill

The Federal Government is the problem not the solution.

One of the primary reasons private insurance premiums are rising is the Federal Government does not pay the full bill.

Will Fox testifies before Congress

Government caused the uninsured

When you need medical care for a serious condition, the Government will make you wait until it is too late.

Dead men tell no tales.

The Federal Government will use rationing and long waits to cut the cost of medical care.

Yaron Brook’s Call to Action – July 2009

This will result in the killing and torture of old people and those with serious medical conditions that would be too expensive to treat. 

The old and infirm will have to sit and wait for care, surgery and drugs that are never provided in a timely manner,  if at all.

The Downside Of British Health Care

This is exactly what happens now in countries that have socialized medicine or a single payer system.

The government simply waits you out so that they do not have to pay for your health care in a timely manner.

Canada Is A Perfect Example Of The Free Health Care Failing

Canadians to Americans: Don’t make your healthcare like ours

The Down Side of the Canadian Healthcare System

Why do you think people from all around the world come to the United States for treatment?

They know that if they wait for their country’s health care system to provide the care, they may die or be in pain for months or years.

In the United States they will be treated quickly to avoid unnecessay pain and suffering.

Obama’s Health Care Deception

Obama on single payer health insurance

SEIU, the White House & ACORN


Health Care Forum: Barack Obama (1 of 3)

Health Care Forum: Barack Obama (2 of 3)


Health Care Forum: Barack Obama (3 of 3)

Any candidate of any political party that gives any indication to the American people that they are going  to replace, tax, or threaten the American  people’s health care and insurance coverage, can deservedly expect to be defeated in the next election.

The progressive radical socialists lead by President Obama are a clear and present danager to your life, health care and current insurance plan.

Send a message both to President Obama and your Senators and Representative by signing the Free Our Health Care Petition:


Please take a minute to sign this petition keeping Government control OUT of healthcare.


When you are not treated for a heart attack, the red line will flatten out on the monitor.

You may very well die if you do not stop the passage of President Obama’s universal health care plan.

The American people and economy cannot pay for the medical care of illegal aliens who work in the United States.

The United States Federal Government could go a long way in lowering the number of Americans unemployed now exceeding 15,000,000 as well as lowering the number of uninsured Americans by simply enforcing the immigration laws.

Require all businesses to use E-Verify to determine the legal status of a person to work in the United States.

Attempt to Block E-Verify

E-Verify & Border Fence may be canceled

Obama Admin wants to kill E-Verify

Obama Adm Favors Illegal Immigration

All illegal aliens now working in the US would be replaced by American citizens.

All illegal aliens would be removed from their work place and deported to their country of origin.

All illegal aliens would have to pay upfront the cost of medical care.

Unless the Federal Government starts enforcing immigration laws, more and more hospitals will be closing throughout the United States.

Again the Federal Government is the problem for not paying their medical bills in full and not stopping illegal aliens from working in the United States.

Health care and illegal immigration TV ad in California

Giving Up California to the Illegal Invaders

With the Federal Reserve rapdily increasing the money supply as measured by M3 (green line)–inflation will soon be coming back as measured by the CPI-U–Consumer Price Index (black line).


The result is your own money is worth less as its purchasing power declines.

This is a hidden tax.

Time for the American people to get mad and tell off their Representatives and the Senators.

Time for the Representatives and Senators to earn their pay and actually read the billl, balance the budget and pay down the national debt with budget surpluses and not massive deficits.

Time for the Federal Government to close down entire Departments not expand their budgets and programs.

The Federal Government like families and businesses needs to live within its means.

Reform and save both the Social Security and Medicare programs by letting the American people have ownership over their retirement and health insurance program instead of relying upon the mere promises of the Federal Government.

Stop messing with the American people’s health care insurance plans and running up huge budgetary deficits by spending more than the tax revenues collected each year.

If the progressive radical socialists of the Democratic Party really wanted more competition in the health care insurance market to “keep them honest”,  they would provide the same tax-advantages to individuals that employers have in providing a group plan by making individual premium payments tax deductible.

Next the Federal Government should permit employers to offer as an option of an individual health insurance plan as an alternative to group health insurance.

Health savings accounts should be encouraged with higher annual contribution limits and letting individuals and families with individual health insurance plans to have a health savings account.

These three reforms would encourage more people to become insured that currently elect not to purchase coverage and would address their portability concerns as they move from job to job.

Individuals would be permitted to purchase individual health insurance from companies doing business in any state and not just the state where they call home.

Insurance companies would provide individual plans that could be customized to the needs of the individual and their families.

Act responsibly for a change and keep the Federal Government out of the insurance business.


Like the backloaded stimulus bill, the proposed healthcare bill is also backloaded with most of the cost impact taking place after 2012 with a five year cost of $979 billion or nearly $200 billion per year:

“…It’s important to keep in mind that the most costly aspects of the legislation involve providing subsidies to individuals to purchase health care ($773 billion) and to expand Medicaid ($438 billion), but it takes several years for those provisions to kick in. As you can see from the chart below, that means that the costs start out relatively modest but ramp up over time. In the first three years of the plan the cost of the subsidies and Medicaid expansion is just $8 billion; in the first five years, it’s $202 billion; but in the last five years, it’s $979 billion. Put another way, 17 percent of the spending comes in the first five years, while 83 percent comes in the second five years. What this means is that the American people see $1 trillion over 10 years and they think that means the bill would cost about $100 billion a year — but the reality is more than double that. In the final year of the CBO estimates, 2019, the spending hits $230 billion….”


Put this kill the old people with health care rationing   out of its misery by defeatiing the bill now.

The life you save may be your own.

Do not let Obama kill you softly with his song of  socialized medicine.



Roberta Flack-Killing Me Softly With His Song


Background Articles and Videos


Document drop: CBO scores the health care takeover

By Michelle Malkin  

“…A Senate staffer passes along the CBO/Joint Committee on Taxation report scoring the House health care takeover.

Bottom line from the staffer:

$1.042 trillion over “ten years”, though the program really gets going in 2015 so its more like a 5 year score. Also, don’t forget most bills carve out unions so that they have a reprieve. Who needs card check [with] US government health insurance as a recruiting tool.

I’ve uploaded the full report: Read it here.

From the caveats section of the report intro:

Important Caveats Regarding This Preliminary Analysis

There are several reasons why the preliminary analysis that is provided in this letter and its attachments does not constitute a comprehensive cost estimate for the coverage provisions of America’s Affordable Health Choices Act:

• First, our analysis was based on specifications regarding insurance coverage that were provided by the tri-committee group and that differ in important ways from the “discussion draft” version of legislative language that was released on June 19, 2009. The specifications that we analyzed are supposed to be reflected in the draft language released by the three committees today, but we have not yet been able to analyze that language to determine whether it conforms to those specifications. Our review of that language could have a significant effect on our analysis. More generally, as our understanding of the specifications improves, that also could affect our future estimates.

• Second, some effects of the proposal have not yet been fully captured in our analysis. In particular, we have not yet estimated the administrative costs to the federal government of implementing the specified policies, nor have we accounted for all of the proposal’s likely effects on spending for other federal
programs. We expect to include those effects in the near future, but we also expect that they will not have a sizable impact on our analysis.

• Third, the budgetary information shown in the attached table reflects many of the major cash flows that would affect the federal budget as a result of implementing the specified policies, and it provides our preliminary assessment of the proposal’s net effects on the federal budget deficit (subject to the caveats listed above). Some additional cash flows would appear in the budget—either as outlays and offsetting receipts or outlays and revenues—but would net to zero and thus would not affect the deficit. CBO and the JCT staff have not yet estimated all of those cash flows but expect to do so in the near
future.2 Those additional cash flows would include the premiums collected by the public plan and its outlays as well as risk-adjustment transfers from plans with relatively healthy enrollees to plans with relatively unhealthy enrollees. …”


Warning: More Obamacare/MSM theater on the way

By Michelle Malkin 


Photoshop credit: The People’s Cube

“…The Democrats’ government health care takeover plans are flailing. What to do? What to do? Enlist every willing MSM lackey, of course.

We had the All Barack Channel special. The Obamacare Theater production. And now a trifecta of dinosaur broadcast media interviews. Noel Sheppard reports: “All Three Nets To Interview Obama About Healthcare Wednesday.”


Tax-maniacs backing off health benefits?

By Michelle Malkin  

“…Looks like there’s trouble in Beltway taxaholics’ paradise. There are multiple reports that Democrats are backing off a key proposal to tax health benefits to pay for the trillion-dollar government takeover of health care.

WSJ: “A Senate Democrat involved in negotiations on legislation to overhaul the health-care system said senators may be souring on a plan to tax some employer-provided health benefits. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., said that public polls conducted over the July 4 congressional recess and reviewed by senators are causing lawmakers to have second thoughts about limiting the tax exclusion for employer health plans.”

Bloomberg: Senators May Drop Tax Plan for Worker Health Benefits

AP: “Tax on health benefits fading?”

But hey, don’t worry. They’ll find something else to tax. Just give ‘em time.

*** …”


Get ready for health care tax-apalooza

By Michelle Malkin  

Photoshop: Reader Rachael in Ky

“…The Democrats are preparing for their Big Reveal on how to pay for their trillion-dollar government takeover of health care.

Gird your loins and say goodbye to your wallets:

By the end of this week, House Democrats may have answered the biggest question looming in the healthcare debate – how they plan to pay for their overhaul.

Leadership aides say they will introduce a bill by Thursday or Friday, in preparation for votes in committee next week. And that bill, they say, will include a way to pay for the bill…

…Leadership aides stress that no final decision has been made on how to pay the tab. The Democrats on Rangel’s committee will hold a marathon meeting all day Tuesday where healthcare and the “pay-for,” as it’s called, are sure to come up.

A large portion is expected to come from reductions in Medicare and Medicaid. But that won’t pay for the full overhaul. As for raising money, ideas have included a national sales tax, taxing soda and a “surtax” on people making more than $250,000. …”

Not a surprise: SEIU & Wal-Mart unite behind Obamacare

By Michelle Malkin  

“… Wal-Mart announced today that it was backing Obama’s government health care plan. The discount retail giant was joined by the Service Employees International Union and the left-wing Center for American Progress. CQ reports:

Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, announced Tuesday that it would support a mandate on businesses to help expand health care coverage, an about-face from other business interests that have strongly opposed any such requirement.

But this is not a sudden “about-face.” Wal-Mart and the SEIU, still bitter enemies on most other policy and employment matters, first joined hands on health care two years ago. The unholy alliance was forged out of mutual desperation and political expediency.

More from Forbes, USAToday. And AP:

Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest private employer, announced its position in a letter to congressional and administration officials Tuesday. It was joined by a major labor union that sometimes has criticized Wal-Mart as stingy with employee benefits.

“We are for an employer mandate which is fair and broad in its coverage,” the letter said. “Any alternative to an employer mandate should not create barriers to hiring entry-level employees.”

That was a reference to some proposals in Congress to have employers pay the Medicaid costs of new hires. Critics say that would discourage the hiring of low-income people.

The letter was also signed by Andrew L. Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, which has more than a million members and counts more U.S. health workers than any other union. Also signing it was John Podesta, who headed Obama’s transition team and is president of the Center for American Progress.

Wal-Mart wants the union thugs off its back. Stern wants more power and publicity.

Take this marriage for what it’s worth.

*** …”

The House Health Care Bill: A Blueprint for Federal Control


by Robert E. Moffit, Ph.D.

“…Like the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee bill,[1] the House bill would create a new public plan to compete with private health insurance in a national health insurance exchange; impose mandates on individuals and businesses to buy health insurance coverage or be subject to tax penalties; and allow the federal government to control, standardize, and regulate health insurance, defining what is and is not “acceptable coverage” for American citizens.The “Public” Plan

The bill would require the secretary of health and human services (HHS) to establish a “public health insurance option” to compete against private health plans on a “level playing field” in a national health insurance exchange. It would also expand eligibility for the existing Medicaid program up the income scale to 133 percent of the federal poverty level.

The public plan’s payment to providers would be based on Medicare payment rates plus 5 percent. The Lewin Group estimates that, by using the Medicare payment rates and opening up the plan to all employees, as the bill would provide, the House bill could result in up to 113.5 million people losing private coverage.[2] Lewin estimates that cost shifting to private plans from the public plan would amount to an additional $460 per person for those remaining in private insurance,[3] while physician and hospital revenues, under such a scenario, would decline significantly.

Contrary to the House sponsors’ claims, it is hard to imagine a “level playing field” where Congress creates a special government plan to compete against private health plans while also creating the rules for its competitors.

While the House bill would set up an account within the Treasury for the deposit of startup funds and premiums, the bill would also require taxpayers to retain the risks and depend on congressional restraint in the appropriation of additional taxpayer funds for the public plan. In light of recent congressional bailouts of automakers and financial institutions, belief in such restraint would amount to a triumph of imagination over experience. …”

“…Promises, Promises

The President has said repeatedly that if Americans like their private health insurance coverage, they would be able to keep it. But in fact, the incentives built into the House bill–a combination of mandates and the provision of a public plan–would guarantee that millions of Americans would lose their private coverage, regardless of their personal preferences.

In the Senate, the leading bill would add $1 trillion to the deficit over 10 years, while pushing millions of Americans out of their employer-based coverage. While the President insists that health care reform should be “deficit neutral,” the cost of the House bill–both quantifiable and not–is yet unknown. …” 


Donald S. McAlvany

“…Donald S. McAlvany is an American Christian conservative political and economics commentator, podcaster, and newsletter author.

McAlvany attended the University of Texas. In 1972, McAlvany founded International Collectors Associates (ICA), headquartered in Durango, Colorado. The firm is described as a “securities, precious metals brokerage, insurance and consultation firm serving clients in over 20 countries.” In 1976 McAlvany began publishing the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor, a monthly newsletter that analyzes economic, political, and financial issues, globally. in recent years he has also produced a monthly podcast on economic and “hard money” investing.[1]

He has been a lecturer at Christian, political, monetary and investment conferences “in Western Europe, Africa, Australia, the Middle East, Hong Kong, Singapore, as well as all over the North American continent and Latin America.”

He serves on the board of The Conservative Caucus, is a member of the Council for National Policy[2], is chairman of the Council on Southern Africa, was “a founder of the Industry Council on Tangible Assets (ICTA), and one of the founding directors of the fellowship of Christian Financial Advisors.”[3]

He was formerly the editor of The African Intelligence Digest.[4] …”

“…McAlvany gained some notoriety for his prediction of a possible Y2K catastrophe, before 2000. In 1999, McAlvany self-published the book Y2K Tidal Wave: Year 2000 Economic Survival[5]. Like economists Dr. Gary North, Ed Yourdon[6] and Ed Yardeni[7], and many others, McAlvany suggested that a Y2K date-rollover failure of the global Information Technology (IT) infrastructure might precipitate severe disruption and perhaps even an economic collapse. A concerted last-minute effort by IT professionals prevented this catastrophe, but McAlvany later described Y2K as “a close one.” …”

ICA, a McAlvany Financial Company

America’s Financial Future (Part 1)

America’s Financial Future (Part 2)

U.S. Economy and Financial System Bankrupt–What’s next?

U.S. Economy and Financial System BankruptPt.2–What’s next?


U.S.Real Estate:How it affects your financial future

Economic implications of the real estate bubble


The Ultimate American Dollar Collapse

China: What every investor should know

Soaring U.S. Global Inflation 


Gold: The Ultimate investment for capital preservation.

McAlvany DVD 2009 “Deflation or Inflation? What’s Next?”

McAlvany Seminar 2008:Protect Your Assets Now, Pt.1

McAlvany Seminar 2008:Protect Your Assets Now, Pt.2

Wall Street’s Schemes Part I: Mcalvany 2008

Wall Street’s Schemes Part II: Mcalvany 2008

Transitions Ahead Part I: Mcalvany 2008

Transitions Ahead Part II: Mcalvany 2008

Middle East Turmoil Part I: Mcalvany 2008

Middle East Turmoil Part II: Mcalvany 2008

US Dollar Cave-In Part I: Mcalvany 2008

US Dollar Cave-In Part II: Mcalvany 2008

An Inflationary Recession Part I: Mcalvany 2008

An Inflationary Recession Part II: Mcalvany 2008

McAlvany DVD 2009 “Deflation or Inflation? What’s Next?”

McAlvany DVD 2009 “How bad is it?”

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Medical Doctor and Senator Tom Coburn On Health Care–Videos

Obama’s Waterloo– Government Compulsory Single Payer Socialized Medicine!–Videos

President Obama’s Plan of Massive Deficit Spending Is Destroying The US Economy–The American People Say Stop Socialism BS Now!

The Bum’s Rush of The American People: The Totally Irresponsible Democratic Party Health Care Bill and Obama’s Big Lie Exposed

Chairman Obama’s Progressive Radical Socialist Health Care Bill Kills Individual Private Health Care Insurance–Join The Second American Revolution!

The Obama Big Lie and Inconvenient Truth About Health Care–The Public Option Trojan Horse–Leads To A Single Payor Goverment Monopoly of Health Care and The Bankruptcy of USA!

The Obama Public Option Poison Pill For A Government Health Care Monopoly–Single Payer System–Betting Your Life and Paying Though The Nose

Dr. Robert W. Christensen–Videos

John Stossel–Sick In America–Videos


President Obama’s Cloward-Piven Strategy of Controlled Crisis Creation Crippling Capitalism–Coup D-Etat On America

President Obama–Killer of The American Dream and Market Capitalism–Stop The Radical Socialists Before They Kill You!

Barack Obama America’s Puppet President Pinocchio –The Transparent Lies–Ears and Nose Are Growing? 

President Barack Obama Beats It–President Franklin Roosevelt Record–Worse Unemployment Numbers Since 1933–14,700,000 Unemployed Americans Greater than 13,000,000 in 1933!

Time To Sound The Alarm: Call Your Representative and Senators–Cap and Trade Bill to be Voted in U.S. House on Friday–Kill The Cap and Trade Energy Tax Today! UPDATED

Peter Schiff–Videos

Schiff, Forbers and Bloomberg Nail The Financial Crisis and Recession–Mistakes Were Made–Greed, Arrogance, Stupidity–Three Chinese Curses!

L. William Seidman on The Economic Crisis: Causes and Cures–Videos

The 12 Trillion–$12,000,000,000,000 Crime of The Century: The Decline and Fall of United States of America By Radical Socialist Spending–Look Before You Leap!

The Financial Crime of The Century: William K. Black On Massive Mortgage Fraud –Videos

Bailed Out Bank Trillion Dollar Derivative Exposure

The Big Economic Picture–Some Perspectives–Videos

Amity Shlaes–Videos

Thomas Sowell and Conflict of Visions–Videos

Thomas E. Woods, Jr.–Videos 


Creature from Jekyll Island: The Federal Reserve System–Videos

The Monopoly Men: The Federal Reserve Bank Cartel–Videos

The Mother of All Bailouts–2 to 3 Trillion Dollars–$2,000,000,000–$3,000,000,000!–Rewarding Greed, Arrogance and Stupidity–Pay for Play!

Federal Government Extortion Of Sound Banks–You Decide?–Take This TARP and Shove It!

Boycott Bailedout Businesses and Banks

Ban Bailouts–Stop Inflation Now (SIN)–Stop Socialism of Losses!

The United States is Broke!–Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Time For GM and Ford Is Now!

The Sovereign Wealth Fund Threat: Are Chinese Communists Behind Rush In Passing Bailout Bill?

Pelosi’s Porky Pigout Poison Package–Economy Wrecker and Job Destroyer–Have A Blue Christmas 2009!

United States Economic Depressions–The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly–Obama’s Depression–Over 15,000,000 Americans Seek Full Time Job!

The Triumph of Capitalism and The Power of Consumer Sovereignty Over Massive Government Failure–Bankruptcy of General Motors–Now Government Motors! 

BO’s Raw Deal: Obama’s Two Year Recession and Two Year Hyperinflation–Hopeless & Small Change!

It Is Official–The U.S. Economy Has Been In A Recession for 11 Months and Continuing!

Recession–Recession–Recession–Scaring People–Have A Hot Dog!

Rush Limbaugh: Obama is Destroying the Economy!–Videos

President Barack Obama Beats It–President Franklin Roosevelt Record–Worse Unemployment Numbers Since 1933–14,700,000 Unemployed Americans Greater than 13,000,000 in 1933!

Wealth, Income and Job Creation: Let A 1000 Microsofts Bloom

Bill Gates–Hope, Change and Rapid Affluence Development–Creative Capitalism!

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 58 so far )

Bailedout Banks Outrageous and Irresponsible Behaviour–E-Verify All Their Employees Now!

Posted on February 2, 2009. Filed under: Blogroll, Computers, Economics, Immigration, Regulations, Science, Security, Technology, Video | Tags: , , , , |


Obama Blasts Wall Street Bonuses

Obama Blasts Wall Street Bonuses

Wall Street Execs Get $61.2 Billion Glad You Bailed Them Out?



President Obama Gives the Business to “Shameful” Wall Street 

For a new era of responsibility–E-Verify All Bank Employees Now!

How dare they?

Require any business in the U.S. to E-Verify all new hires and then E-Verify all existing employees.

Remove all illegal immigrants employed at the business to their country of origin and replace the workers with Americans! 

The reality is the Federal Government should not be bailing out any companies, businesses and banks.

Also, it is not the Federal Government’s business to set wages or prices or bonuses–it is none of the Federal Government’s business.

The Federal Government, namely, Congress, created this mess in the first place by insisting that banks make mortage loans to people who should not have gotten loans in the first place.

Then the loans were packaged and sold to Fannie May and Freddie Mac as well as investors world wide.

These toxic loans were the direct result of an irresponsible Congress insisting on wide home ownership:


The Democrats and Obama caused the financial crisis of 08 by supporting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and covering up their bad books.


Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis


 EVIDENCE FOUND!!! Clinton administration’s “BANK AFFIRMATIVE ACTION” They forced banks to make BAD LOANS and ACORN and Obama’s tie to all of it!!!


Explosive Video, Fannie Mae CEO calling Obama and the Dems the “Family” and “Conscience” of Fannie Mae


Follow the Money: How Fannie Mae Bought the Democrat Party


Mark Zandi on the Risky Loans Behind the Meltdown


How dare you Mr. President and those in Congress be outraged–you are responsible for this mess as our the bastards on Wall Street that contributed to your campaign.

The American people are outraged at the politcal elites irresponsible behaviour including yours and both the Democratic and Republican Parties.

The bonuses you are so outraged about are partially used to make campaign contributations–most to the Democratic Party.

Give me a break.

You are all a bunch of hypocrites.

Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions


Obama: Self-Righteous Clown Hurt FanMae


ACORN caused mortgage crisis and bailout

Looks like the drug cartels may be making payoffs to politicians, given the lack of funds for enforcing the drug laws along the US border.

Cash connects cartels, crime and corruption.

Where do you think all those cash campaign contributions were coming from besides Wall Street?


Glenn Beck On Mexico Border Wars


The Mexico Drug Cartel Methamphetamine Connection


Mexican Drug Smugglers Routinely Released in Arizona


LOU DOBBS TONIGHT 03.14.07 – Drug Smugglers Get a Pass



AP Investigation: Bailed-out banks sought to hire 21,800 foreign workers in past 6 years

“…SANTA CLARA, Calif. – Major U.S. banks sought government permission to bring thousands of foreign workers into the country for high-paying jobs even as the system was melting down last year and Americans were getting laid off, according to an Associated Press review of visa applications.

The dozen banks now receiving the biggest rescue packages, totaling more than $150 billion, requested visas for more than 21,800 foreign workers over the past six years for positions that included senior vice presidents, corporate lawyers, junior investment analysts and human resources specialists. The average annual salary for those jobs was $90,721, nearly twice the median income for all American households.

As the economic collapse worsened last year — with huge numbers of bank employees laid off — the numbers of visas sought by the dozen banks in AP’s analysis increased by nearly one-third, from 3,258 in the 2007 budget year to 4,163 in fiscal 2008.  …”



Background Articles and Videos


Obama Blasts Wall Street Bonuses

The President calls payouts as firms seek bailouts “the height of irresponsibility”

On Jan. 29, in brief but stern remarks in the Oval Office, President Barack Obama called the bonuses “shameful” and “the height of irresponsibility.” Obama, sitting with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, made clear that executive compensation—already expected to be a central focus of the new Congress—would be a key factor in his economic team’s proposals to stabilize the financial system and improve regulation in the sector. But “part of what we’re going to need is for folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint, and show some discipline, and show some sense of responsibility,” he said.  …”


Banks Try New Ways to Handle Bonuses


“…But this bonus season is shaping up to be like no other. The normal buzz of money — big money — is all but silenced. While many bankers will still collect six- or even seven-figure bonuses, the average payout for rank-and-file employees will be cut substantially.

The changes are palpable. Like a growing number of senior executives, Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase and Robert E. Rubin of Citigroup will not request bonuses, people familiar with their plans said.

Goldman Sachs will cap its partners’ cash payouts at $222,000, although it will also pay them in stock.



It’s Not the Bonus Money. It’s the Principle.

“…And on the ninth day, the president jawboned.

How else to describe what President Obama did on Thursday, his ninth day in office? Angered by news that Wall Street was doling out $18.4 billion in bonuses for 2008 — “the sixth-largest haul on record,” according to a front-page article in The New York Times, despite billions upon billions in losses — the president called reporters in and looked sternly into the cameras. Then he unloaded on Wall Street executives, just as President John F. Kennedy once unloaded on the country’s steel barons.

“That is the height of irresponsibility,” Mr. Obama said sharply, referring to the bonuses. “It is shameful.” Wall Street, he said, was coming to the government for badly needed help — which taxpayers were providing because otherwise “the entire system could come down on top of our heads” — and the government had a right to expect in return that Wall Street would “show some restraint and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility.” After going on in this vein for a while, he slapped around Citigroup for agreeing to take that new $50 million corporate jet after agreeing to a huge bailout in November. The government’s demand that the plane be canceled should have been unnecessary “because they should know better,” he scolded. …”


Malkin, Moore, and Kirsten Powers Talk Border with Beck!


Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

President Obama Delays E-Verify–Shame On You Mr. President!


Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

President Obama Delays E-Verify–Shame On You Mr. President!

Posted on February 2, 2009. Filed under: Blogroll, Computers, Economics, Education, Employment, Immigration, People, Politics, Quotations, Raves, Security, Technology, Video | Tags: , , , , , , |


Reps. Roskam and Shuler urge Obama not to delay E-Verify Requirement


The E-Verify program


The E-Verify program – fast, easy and accurate


The E-Verify program


NumbersUSA Action 


Phone your Representative in Congress and Senator and ask if they support  making E-Verify mandatory to determine whether an employee is legally authorized to work in the United States.

Call the White House and ask why President Obama needs time to rethink E-Verify?

With over 11 million unemployed Americans, all illegal immigrants not authorized to work in the United States should be removed to their country of origin.

The first step is to use E-Verify to determine whether an employee is authorized to work in the United States.

What is there to think about Mr. President?

The Executive Order should not be delayed, it should be expedited.

Appears President Obama is worried about offending all his future illegal alien voters.

I guess if you are an unemployed American you are now a second class citizen.

Illegal aliens working in the US are protected by corrupt businessmen and politicians.

President Obama  must protect all that cheap illegal immigrants labor working in the United States by not requiring businesses to use E-Verify.

Aiding and abetting a crime–illegal immigrants working in the US– is a crime and an impeachable offense.

Shame on you Mr. Obama.

Barack Obama: Immigration

Business as usual–this is neither hope nor change for millions of unemployed Americans.

If this is your idea of change Mr. President–give me a break.

President Obama enforce the law and honor the oath of office you took on January 20, 2009–twice!

Enforcing the law actually works in Del Rio,Texas.

Zero tolerance for illegal aliens in Del Rio.

Cconvicted illegal aliens arrested in US are sent to jail for six-months:


Glenn Beck:Texas Officials Begin Jailing Illegal Aliens



Amnesty Anarchy


Why E-Verify? 

E-Verify is a free Internet-based system that allows employers to confirm the legal working status of new hires in seconds. With one click, E-Verify can match your new hire’s Social Security Number and other Form I-9 information.

E-Verify reduces unauthorized employment, minimizes verification-related discrimination, is quick and non-burdensome to employers, and protects civil liberties and employee privacy.

Initial verification returns results within 3 to 5 seconds.

Employers ran nearly 2 million employment eligibility verification queries in Fiscal Year 2006.

The top industries using E-Verify include food services and drinking places, administrative and support services, professional and technical services, other information services, and clothing and accessories stores.


Background Articles and Videos 

Feds Delay E-Verify Deadline to May 21

By Roy Mark

“…Following an Obama government administration request for all executive departments and agencies to consider extending the effective date of published regulations that have not yet taken effect, federal authorities agree to postpone a Feb. 20 deadline for federal contractors and subcontractors to start using the controversial E-Verify program. The Internet-based electronic verification system would confirm that prospective employees are legally eligible to work.


Federal officials have agreed to postpone the start of the controversial E-Verify program until May 21 at the earliest. E-Verify would require federal contractors and subcontractors to use an Internet-based electronic verification system to confirm that prospective employees are legally eligible to work.

The Jan. 28 announcement by the Department of Homeland Security of the delay marks the second time the government has postponed the implementation of the mandate. It was originally set to go into effect Jan. 15, but the feds moved the date to Feb. 20 after the U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed suit Dec. 23 challenging the legality of the program.

The Obama administration Jan. 20 urged all executive departments and agencies to consider extending the effective date of published regulations that have not yet taken effect. The Chamber of Commerce then requested that the federal government postpone the new rule requiring federal contractors to use E-Verify.

“The federal government agreed that the new administration needs time to rethink mandatory E-Verify use, particularly in light of the stressed economy,” Robin Conrad, executive vice president of the National Chamber Litigation Center, said in a statement. “We are hopeful that the incoming administration will agree that E-Verify is the wrong solution at the wrong time.”


Senators Sessions and Nelson Urge Senate Leadership to Include E-Verify in Stimulus Plan


“…In a co-authored letter sent earlier today, Senators Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Ben Nelson (D-NE) urged the Senate leadership to include provisions in the economic stimulus package that would require businesses using stimulus money to use E-Verify to ensure the jobs are going to American citizens. The House version of the bill, which passed last night, included an amendment requiring the use of E-Verify, but the current Senate version does not include it.

The letter comes one day after federal authorities agreed to delay the start of an order requiring federal contractors to use E-Verify. The start date was moved from Feb. 20 to no sooner than May 21. …”



“…E-Verify is currently a voluntary program run by the United States government to help certify that employees hired by companies are legally authorized to work in the United States. Formerly known as the Basic Pilot/Employment Eligibility Verification Program, the program is operated by the Department of Homeland Security in partnership with the Social Security Administration.

The program was set to expire in November 2008. The expiration period reflects uncertainty in Congress about the accuracy and collateral consequences of the verification program. New rules promulgated by the Department of Homeland Security presume that this program remains in effect for the foreseeable future. On September 30, 2008, President George W. Bush signed a continuing resolution (H.R. 2638) that would, among other things, extend the E-Verify program until March 6, 2009 with $100 million in funding. …”


E-Verify Program Update: 100,000 Employers Signed Up

“…US Dept of Homeland Security reports:


  • E-Verify is an Internet-based system operated by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in partnership with the Social Security Administration

    (SSA) that allows participating employers to electronically verify the employment eligibility of their newly hired employees.   U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) administers the program.

  • Free, safe, secure and simple to use, E-Verify is the best means available for determining employment eligibility of new hires and the validity of their Social Security Numbers.  The program provides participating employers an automated Internet-based resource to verify the employment eligibility of newly hired employees.   Participating employers run authorization checks on all newly hired employees, including U.S. citizens and non-U.S. citizens, against SSA and DHS databases (about 449 million, and 60 million records respectively).  Through this process, E-Verify assists employers in maintaining a legal workforce and protects jobs for authorized U.S. workers.
  • USCIS began testing a photo screening tool enhancement to E-Verify and formally launched it on Sept. 17, 2007.   The tool allows a participating employer to check the photos on Employment Authorization Documents (EAD) or Permanent Resident Cards (green cards) against images stored in USCIS databases.  The goal of the photo tool is to detect and deter identify fraud by helping employers determine whether the document presented is the same document issued by USCIS (e.g., that it is not a forgery involving photo-substitution).
  • More than 100,000 employers are currently using the E-Verify program to verify that their new hires are authorized to work in the United States.   For FY2009 to date, more than 2 million employment verification queries have been run.  During FY2008, approximately 6.6 million employment verification queries were run (as compared to a total of 3.27 million in all of FY2007).   …”



    Lou Dobbs – Federal e-Verify Mandate



    Lou Dobbs – Attempt to Block E-Verify



    KNXV ABC15 – EVerify Story


    Investigation finds illegal immigrants are often put back on US streets



    Who is the Illegal alien lobby?


    Out of Control: The Immigration Invasion (Part A / 1 of 3)


    Out of Control: The Immigration Invasion (Part A / 2 of 3)


    Out of Control: The Immigration Invasion (Part A / 3 of 3)



    Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

    Alan Keyes on Immigration

    The Cost of Comprehensive Immigration Reform–McCain and Obama Are Hopeless–It is the Economy Stupid!

    Presidential Candidates on Illegal Immigration, Criminal Alien Removal and Social Service Benefits

     US Immigration Videos

    Why immigration will be the number 1 political issue in the 2008 Presidential Election! — Gum Balls

    Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 75 so far )

    Liked it here?
    Why not try sites on the blogroll...