Edward Snowden — Videos

Posted on September 21, 2016. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), College, Communications, Computers, Computers, Congress, Constitution, Corruption, Crime, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Documentary, Drones, Education, External Hard Drives, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Government, Foreign Policy, Freedom, government spending, history, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, media, Media Streamers, Mobile Phones, Money, National Security Agency (NSA), National Security Agency (NSA_, People, Philosophy, Photos, Police, Political Correctness, Politics, Psychology, Raves, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Regulations, Resources, Spying, Strategy, Systems, Talk Radio, Technology, Television, Terrorism, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Welfare, Wisdom, Work, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Image result for National security agencyImage result for National security agency

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for National security agency Prism slides

Image result for edward snownden

‘State of Surveillance’ with Edward Snowden and Shane Smith (FULL EPISODE)

DOCUMENTARY: Edward Snowden – Terminal F (2015)

Edward Snowden Live From Russia

Edward Snowden Speaks About Hillary Clinton Emails, Trump And Freedom

The Truth About Edward Snowden

America’s Surveillance State (Full, Pt. 1-6)

NSA Secrets Uncovered Snowden Coverup 2015 FULL Documentary

The Silent Order NSA Sees Everything Hears Everything Documentary HD

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

NSA Whistleblower William Binney: The Future of FREEDOM

People Who Control America ? Mind Blowing Documentary HQ

The New World Order – Fall of the Republic 2016 Freedom or Slavery

Enemy of the State – Will Smith, Gene Hackman, Jon Voight Movies

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

It Is Time For A New Different Kind of President? Neither Democrat Nor Republican! — An Independent Constitutionalist — The Longer Senator Rand Paul Stays In Washington He Becomes More An Establishment Republican On Key Issues — Big Government Conservative Not Limited Government Libertarian — The Co-opting of Rand Paul — Videos

Posted on April 10, 2015. Filed under: American History, Articles, Babies, Banking, Blogroll, British History, Business, College, Communications, Constitution, Corruption, Crime, Crisis, Culture, Documentary, Drug Cartels, Economics, Education, Employment, European History, Faith, Family, Federal Government, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Fraud, Freedom, Friends, government, government spending, Health Care, history, Homicide, Illegal, Immigration, IRS, Law, Legal, liberty, Life, Links, media, Monetary Policy, Money, Money, National Security Agency (NSA_, Nuclear, Obamacare, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Press, Psychology, Radio, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Strategy, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Terrorism, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Welfare, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 441: April 6, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 440: April 2, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 439: April 1, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 438: March 31, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 437: March 30, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 436: March 27, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 435: March 26, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 434: March 25, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 433: March 24, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 432: March 23, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 431: March 20, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 430: March 19, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 429: March 18, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 428: March 17, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 427: March 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 426: March 6, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 425: March 4, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 424: March 2, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 423: February 26, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 422: February 25, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 421: February 20, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 420: February 19, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 419: February 18, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 418: February 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 417: February 13, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 416: February 12, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 415: February 11, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 414: February 10, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 413: February 9, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 412: February 6, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 411: February 5, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 410: February 4, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 409: February 3, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 408: February 2, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 407: January 30, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 406: January 29, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 405: January 28, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 404: January 27, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 403: January 26, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 402: January 23, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 401: January 22, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 400: January 21, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 399: January 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 398: January 15, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 397: January 14, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 396: January 13, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 395: January 12, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 394: January 7, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 393: January 5, 2015

Story 1: It Is Time For A New Different Kind of President? Neither Democrat Nor Republican! — An Independent Constitutionalist — The Longer Senator Rand Paul Stays In Washington He Becomes More An Establishment Republican On Key Issues — Big Government Conservative Not Limited Government Libertarian — The Co-opting of Rand Paul — Videos

Polling Data

Poll Date Bush Walker Cruz Paul Huckabee Carson Rubio Christie Perry Santorum Jindal Kasich Spread
RCP Average 2/26 – 3/31 16.8 16.2 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 6.5 6.0 2.5 1.8 1.5 1.3 Bush +0.6
FOX News 3/29 – 3/31 12 15 10 9 10 11 8 4 3 2 2 1 Walker +3
ABC/Wash Post 3/26 – 3/29 21 13 12 8 8 6 8 7 1 2 1 1 Bush +8
PPP (D) 3/26 – 3/31 17 20 16 10 6 10 6 4 3 Walker +3
CNN/ORC 3/13 – 3/15 16 13 4 12 10 9 7 7 4 1 1 2 Bush +3
McClatchy/Marist 3/1 – 3/4 19 18 4 7 10 9 5 6 3 2 Bush +1
Quinnipiac 2/26 – 3/2 16 18 6 6 8 7 5 8 1 2 2 1 Walker +2

All 2016 Republican Presidential Nomination Polling Data

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html

Rand Paul 2016 Speech – Senator Rand Paul Announces Running For U.S. President |FULL SPEECH

Rand Paul in 2016?

RAND PAUL Explains LIBERTARIANISM

Rand Paul: Ted Cruz’s Audience Was Required To Attend, I’m Not Interested In Throwing Out Red Meat

“A Different Kind of Republican Leader”

Rand Paul 2016 Campaign Promises

Rand Paul was for the Fair Tax before he was against it

Rand Paul says he supports the Fair Tax

Rand Paul explains the Flat Tax to Berkeley

Rand Paul on Tax Reform – Fox Business’ Cavuto 10/19/2012

Rand Paul proposes 17% Flat Tax that would lead to the “outright elimination of the IRS”

Rand Paul: More Immigrants, More Tax Revenue

Rand Paul: Obama Poured $1 Trillion Into Economy With His Stimulus Bill But It Didn’t Create Jobs

‘Ron Paul’s rEVOLution’ discussion w/ Rand Paul and Brian Doherty

Rand Paul Conservative Policy Summit FULL SPEECH

RAND PAUL TELLS US THE TRUTH “CIA FUNDED ISIS UNDER OBAMA ADMIN TO PROMOTE MORE WAR IN MIDDLE EAST”

Sean Hannity Shows His Influence

The Presidential Contenders: Rand Paul

Libertarianism: An Introduction

Jon Stewart’s 19 Tough Questions for Libertarians!

Ron Paul vs Rand Paul Stefan Molyneux Hosts the Peter Schiff Radio Show

Questions – Immigration Update – April 1-2, 2015

Most Voters Want More Aggressive Deportation Policies
See Toplines
See Crosstabs
Platinum Page

National Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters
Conducted April 1-2, 2015
By Rasmussen Reports

1* Is the U.S. government too aggressive or not aggressive enough in deporting those who are in this country illegally? Or is the number of deportations about right?

2* Suppose a woman enters the United States as an illegal alien and gives birth to a child in the United States. Should that child automatically become a citizen of the United States?

3* Should illegal immigrants who have American-born children be exempt from deportation?

4* Before anyone receives local, state or federal government services, should they be required to prove they are legally allowed to be in the United States?

5* How concerned are you that efforts to identify and deport illegal immigrants will also end up violating the civil rights of some U.S. citizens?

NOTE: Margin of Sampling Error, +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/questions/pt_survey_questions/april_2015/questions_immigration_update_april_1_2_2015

Immigration

Most Voters Want More Aggressive Deportation Policies

More voters than ever feel the United States is not aggressive enough in deporting those who are here illegally, even as President Obama continues to push his plan to make up to five million illegal immigrants safe from deportation.

Just 16% of Likely U.S. Voters think the U.S. government is too aggressive in deporting those who are in the country illegally. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 62% believe the government is not aggressive enough in deporting these illegal immigrants, up from 52% a year ago and 56%in November. Fifteen percent (15%) feel the current number of deportations is about right. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Thirty-two percent (32%) believe illegal immigrants who have American-born children should be exempt from deportation, an element of Obama’s plan, but 51% now disagree. In November, voters were much more closely divided: 38% said they should be exempt from deportation, and only 42% disagreed. Seventeen  percent (17%) remain undecided.

But then most voters (54%) continue to feel that a child born to an illegal immigrant mother in the United States should not automatically become a U.S. citizen, as is now the case.  Thirty-eight percent (38%) favor the current policy of automatic citizenship for these children. Opposition has ranged from 51% to 65% in surveys since April 2006. Support has been in the 28% to 41% range in that same period.

An overwhelming 83% of voters think someone should be required to prove they are legally allowed in the United States before receiving local, state or federal government services. Just 12% disagree. These findings have changed little over the past four years.

Still, 54% are concerned that efforts to identify and deport illegal immigrants will also end up violating the civil rights of some U.S. citizens. Forty-three percent (43%) don’t have that concern. This includes 25% who are Very Concerned about possible civil rights violations and 12% who are Not at All Concerned. This, too, is consistent with past surveying.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it’s in the news, it’s in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on April 1-2, 2015 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

Most voters continue to believe federal government policies encourage illegal immigration.

Most voters in nearly every demographic category agree that the federal government is not aggressive enough in its deportation policies. Most also believe very strongly that someone should have to prove they are a U.S. citizen before obtaining government benefits.

Most women and men agree that a child born to an illegal immigrant in this country should not automatically become a U.S. citizen.

Voters under 40 are only slightly less supportive than their elders of more aggressive deportation policies. But they are much more likely than those 40 and over to think that a child born to an illegal alien in this country should automatically become a U.S. citizen.

Sixty percent (60%) of whites oppose automatic citizenship; 51% of blacks and 56% of other minority voters favor it.

Eighty-one percent (81%) of Republicans and 68% of voters not affiliated with either major party think the government is not aggressive enough in deporting illegal immigrants. Just 40% of Democrats agree. But then Democrats are far more concerned than the others that deportation efforts may end up violating the civil rights of some U.S. citizens.

Democrats by a 51% to 33% margin believe illegals who have American-born children should be exempt from deportation. Sixty-two percent (62%) of GOP voters and 60% of unaffiliateds disagree.

Most voters continue to believe that securing the border is more important than legalizing the status of undocumented workers already here and think plans to offer legal status to such individuals will just encourage more illegal immigration.

More than half of voters remain opposed to Obama’s new plan that will allow nearly five million illegal immigrants to remain in this country legally and apply for jobs. Forty-seven percent (47%) think Congress should try to find ways to stop the president’s plan, while 41% believe Congress should allow this decision to stand.

Voters also continue to strongly support voter ID laws and don’t consider them discriminatory.

Additional information from this survey and a full demographic breakdown are available to Platinum Members only.

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

Voters Still Fault Feds For Illegal Immigration

Most voters continue to believe federal government policies encourage illegal immigration, but they still aren’t convinced states should go it alone in enforcing immigration laws.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters think the policies and practices of the federal government encourage people to enter the United States illegally, the highest level of cynicism since June 2012. Twenty-eight percent (28%) disagree, while 15% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

The number of voters who believe the federal government encourages illegal immigration reached a high of 62% in September 2010 but has mostly stayed in the mid-to high-50s in regular surveying for several years.

Still, 48% think relying on the federal government rather than states to enforce immigration laws is the best approach to dealing with illegal immigration. That’s down two points from last August  but is in line with findings since February 2011. Forty-two percent (42%) think it’s better to allow individual states to act on their own. Ten percent (10%) are undecided. Support for state action was slightly higher in 2011.

Most voters (61%) still favor strict government sanctions on employers who hire illegal immigrants. Twenty-four percent (24%) oppose such sanctions, while 15% are undecided. Support for these sanctions have run in the high 50s to low 60s for years, and Americans told us in a 2013 survey that employer sanctions are the most effective way to stop illegal immigration.

Voters remain more conflicted when it comes to landlords who rent or sell property to illegal immigrants. Forty-four percent (44%) favor strict government sanctions against them. Thirty-four percent (34%) are opposed, while 22% are undecided. These attitudes haven’t changed much over the years either.

But 57% believe if a police officer pulls someone over for a traffic violation, the officer should automatically check to see if that person is in the country legally. Thirty-three percent (33%) disagree, and 10% are not sure. These findings also have stayed fairly steady for years, although support for these checks hit a high of 73% in March 2009.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it’s in the news, it’s in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on March 4-5, 2015 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

Most voters continue to believe that securing the border is more important than legalizing the status of undocumented workers already here and think plans to offer legal status to such individuals will just encourage more illegal immigration.

Seventy-five percent (75%) of Republicans and 59% of voters not affiliated with either major political party believe the policies and practices of the federal government encourage illegal immigration. Democrats by a narrow 44% to 39% disagree. Most Republicans (62%) and unaffiliated voters by a 46% to 42% margin think states should be allowed to enforce immigration laws on their own, but 68% of Democrats think they should rely on the feds.

Sixty percent (60%) of voters who believe government policies encourage people to come here illegally favor allowing states to act on their own to enforce immigration laws. Seventy-eight percent (78%) of those who don’t believe government policies encourage illegal immigration think enforcement of such laws should be left to the federal government.

White voters are generally more supportive of strict sanctions against employers who hire illegal immigrants and landlords who rent or sell property to such individuals than black and other minority voters are. White voters also show stronger support for automatic police checks during traffic stops.

More than half of all voters remain opposed to President Obama’s new plan that will allow nearly five million illegal immigrants to remain in this country legally and apply for jobs. Forty-seven percent (47%) of voters think Congress should try to find ways to stop the president’s plan, while 41% believe Congress should allow this decision to stand.

Most voters continue to think the federal government should only do what the president and Congress agree on. They also still believe a president should not be able to change laws passed by Congress on his own.

However, just 17% of voters are even somewhat confident that the president and Republicans in Congress will be able to work together to do what’s best for the American people, and that includes only four percent (4%) who are Very Confident.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/archive/immigration_update_archive/voters_still_fault_feds_for_illegal_immigration

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 439-441

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 431-438

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 422-430

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 414-421

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 408-413

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 400-407

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 391-399

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 383-390

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 376-382

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 369-375

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 360-368

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 354-359

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 346-353

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 338-345

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 328-337

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 319-327

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 307-318

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 296-306

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 287-295

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 277-286

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 264-276

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 250-263

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 236-249

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 222-235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

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

U.S. Dirty Debt Bomb Exploding — The First Shock Wave Hits — National Debt Increases Record $328 Billion in One Day — National Debt Over $17 Trillion — By February Will Hit $17.5 Trillion — Videos

Posted on October 18, 2013. Filed under: Banking, Blogroll, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, government spending, Inflation, Investments, IRS, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Raves, Regulations, Tax Policy, Taxes, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

Pronk Pops Show 152: October 18, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 151: October 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 150: October 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 149: October 14, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 148: October 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 147: October 10, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 146: October 9, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 145: October 8, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 144: October 7, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 143: October 4 2013

Pronk Pops Show 142: October 3, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 141: October 2, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 140: September 30, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 139: September 27, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 138: September 26, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 137: September 25, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 136: September 24, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 135: September 23, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 134: September 20, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 133: September 19, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 132: September 18, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 131: September 17, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 130: September 16, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 129: September 13, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 128: September 12, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 127: September 11, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 126: September 10, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 125: September 9, 2013

Pronk Pops Show 124: September 6, 2013

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-152

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

Segment 0: U.S. Dirty Debt Bomb Exploding  — The First Shock Wave Hits — National Debt Increases Record $328 Billion in One Day — National Debt Over $17 Trillion — By February Will Hit $17.5 Trillion — Videos

U.S. Debt Clock

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Not Raising Debt Ceiling Won’t Put U.S. In Default – Ron Paul

tom_a_coburn_the_debt_bomb

Tom Coburn Tears Credit Card Poster On Senate Floor

GOP Sen. Tom Coburn Rips Up US Government Credit Card on TV, Gretchen Carlson Thanks Him

Coburn on Greatest Threat Facing the Country: Our Debt

Dr. Coburn addressing his colleagues in the Senate today, warning Congress of the dire consequences that will ensue if politics in Washington continues as usual: “Our country has a history of doing hard things. What we lack is leadership to call us to do those hard things. We find ourselves at a point in time where the greatest threat to our nation is our debt and our economy. We’re risking our future, not only our future economically but our future of liberty.”

Dr. Coburn on Charlie Rose on US Debt Crisis, Leadership Deficit in Washington

Senator Tom Coburn: Two Years Till Severe Debt Crisis

Senator Tom Coburn on the “Debt Bomb”

The Debt Bomb book Glenn Beck w/ Senator Tom Coburn on GBTV Stop Washington from Bankrupting America

Debt Ceiling, Gold, and Janet Yellen – Hype vs. Reality

“US’ DEBT BOMB CLOCK” IS TICKING!

Peter Schiff – Debt Ceiling Not The Problem; It’s the Lending Ceiling

Peter Schiff The Reality Is We’re Living In A Bubble And ALL

Bubbles Burst

[youtub3e=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCISlJ_qOtU]

Obama Lies About the Implications of Raising the Debt Ceiling

USA: A Nation In Debt- A Ticking Time Bomb

Will Higher Tax Rates Balance the Budget?

How Raising Taxes Will Not Balance the Budget: More Evidence

U.S. debt jumps $300 billion — tops $17 trillion for first time

Does Government Have a Revenue or Spending Problem?

What If the National Debt Were Your Debt?

What Are the Dangers of Too Much Debt?

Why Not Print More Money?

How to Fix Our Fiscal Crisis

How Big Is the U.S. Debt?

Uploaded on Feb 11, 2011

For more details on the total Federal debt, start on slide 35 of this PowerPoint presentation: http://www.antolin-davies.com/present…

Economics professor Antony Davies illustrates the size the U.S. federal government’s debt and unfunded obligations. He breaks down the total U.S. debt and obligations into parts and compares them with the size of the GDP of countries around the world, showing the magnitude of America’s fiscal situation.

Want to give that graph a closer look? Prof. Davies has made it available on his website here:
http://www.antolin-davies.com/convent…

By Stephen Dinan

U.S. debt jumped more than $300 billion on Thursday, the first day the federal government was able to borrow money under the deal President Obama and Congress sealed this week.

The debt now equals $17.075 trillion, according to figures the Treasury Department posted online on Friday.

The $328 billion increase is an all-time record, shattering the previous high of $238 billion set two years ago.

The giant jump comes because the government was replenishing its stock of “extraordinary measures” — the federal funds it borrowed from over the last five months as it tried to avoid bumping into the debt ceiling.

Under the law, that replenishing happens as soon as there is new debt space.

In this case, the Treasury Department borrowed $400 billion from other funds beginning in May, awaiting a final deal from Congress and Mr. Obama.

Usually Congress sets a borrowing limit, or debt ceiling, that caps the total amount the government can be in the red.

But under the terms of this week’s deal, Congress set a deadline instead of a dollar cap. That means debt can rise as much as Mr. Obama and Congress want it to, until the Feb. 7 deadline.

Judging by the rate of increase over the last five months, that could end up meaning Congress just granted Mr. Obama a debt increase of $700 billion or more.

Republicans initially sought to attach strings to the debt increase, but surrendered this week, instead settling on a bill that reopened the government and included some special earmark projects, but didn’t include any spending cuts.

Democrats insisted that the debt increase be “clean,” meaning without any strings attached. They say the debt increase only allows Mr. Obama to pay for the bills he and Congress already racked up, and that it doesn’t encourage new spending.

U.S. debt jumped more than $300 billion on Thursday, the first day the federal government was able to borrow money under the deal President Obama and Congress sealed this week.

The debt now equals $17.075 trillion, according to figures the Treasury Department posted online on Friday.

The $328 billion increase is an all-time record, shattering the previous high of $238 billion set two years ago.

The giant jump comes because the government was replenishing its stock of “extraordinary measures” — the federal funds it borrowed from over the last five months as it tried to avoid bumping into the debt ceiling.

Under the law, that replenishing happens as soon as there is new debt space.

In this case, the Treasury Department borrowed $400 billion from other funds beginning in May, awaiting a final deal from Congress and Mr. Obama.

Usually Congress sets a borrowing limit, or debt ceiling, that caps the total amount the government can be in the red.

But under the terms of this week’s deal, Congress set a deadline instead of a dollar cap. That means debt can rise as much as Mr. Obama and Congress want it to, until the Feb. 7 deadline.

Judging by the rate of increase over the last five months, that could end up meaning Congress just granted Mr. Obama a debt increase of $700 billion or more.

Republicans initially sought to attach strings to the debt increase, but surrendered this week, instead settling on a bill that reopened the government and included some special earmark projects, but didn’t include any spending cuts.

Democrats insisted that the debt increase be “clean,” meaning without any strings attached. They say the debt increase only allows Mr. Obama to pay for the bills he and Congress already racked up, and that it doesn’t encourage new spending.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/18/us-debt-jumps-400-billion-tops-17-trillion-first-t/

Analysis: Debt fight dings U.S. Treasury bills’ status

By Richard Leong

(Reuters) – The safe-haven reputation of U.S. Treasury bills took a beating during the latest debt ceiling fight in Washington, and it won’t be regained soon, even after the last-minute deal to avert a threatened default.

The temporary agreement to lift the government’s debt limit may only pave the way for another political struggle between President Barack Obama and Republican lawmakers in early 2014 over the federal budget and borrowing levels.

While others measure the toll on the economy from the 16-day federal government shutdown, Wall Street is fretting over the future appetite for U.S. debt and its effect on federal borrowing costs.

During the next three-and-a-half months before the next debt ceiling deadline, the U.S. government might pay higher interest rates on its short-term debt.

Before the shutdown, the Treasury was selling one-month debt at next to nothing. The rise in yields as a result of the crisis will cost the Treasury an estimated $56 million more in interest payments than it would have incurred had this month’s auctions been sold in September.

While some one-month T-bill rates saw their yields decline to 0.02 to 0.03 percent after jumping above 0.70 percent less than 24 hours earlier, bills maturing in February still showed modestly elevated yields. If Washington repeats the battle that ended on Wednesday, bill rates would likely jump again.

“There’s a fundamental change in their risk profile. There’s a growing lack of confidence. It’s going to be problematic,” said Tom Nelson, chief investment officer at Reich & Tang, a New York-based cash management firm that oversees more than $33 billion in assets.

Investors are frustrated that they are forced to shun certain T-bill issues because of the self-imposed fiscal deadlines of politicians. Some of them want additional compensation to buy T-bills given the possibility of default every few months, even though most think the risk is very low.

Chances of a default seemed almost unfathomable three weeks ago before the debt ceiling showdown that accompanied the first partial government shutdown in 17 years.

“The reason you’re holding short Treasuries is because of their unparalleled safety and liquidity. If you’re not getting safety and liquidity, there’s no point in having them,” said Gregory Whiteley, who manages a $53 billion government bond portfolio at DoubleLine Capital in Los Angeles.

Before the political impasse ended, interest rates on T-bill issues set to mature in the second half of October through the first half of November hit five-year highs.

“This is the kind of volatility we have never seen. I’m afraid this will get worse and worse,” Reich’s Nelson said.

DEFAULT SKITTISHNESS

The surge in T-bill rates stemmed partly from major money market fund operators, including Fidelity, JPMorgan, BlackRock and PIMCO, dumping their holdings of T-bill issues that mature in the next four weeks because they were seen most vulnerable if the government did not raise the debt ceiling in time.

Reich’s Nelson took more drastic action.

He said he cleared his funds of all T-bills that mature between now and the end of the year and did not jump back to buy them, even after President Obama signed the debt ceiling deal into law before midnight.

In the meantime, default anxiety caused retail investors to rush to redeem their money fund shares.

Money funds posted their biggest weekly outflows in nearly a year, as assets fell $44.77 billion to $2.606 trillion in the week ended October 15, according to iMoneynet’s Money Fund Report.

The asset drop, while large, was still much less than the $103.21 billion plunge in the week ended August 2, 2011 during the first debt ceiling showdown between the White House and top Republican lawmakers.

COST OF A SHORT-TERM DEAL

A pick-up in interest costs, if it persists, would be a setback for the government as its deficit has been shrinking.

“There are costs associated with going through this each time, costs embedded into Treasuries securities, costs the Treasury has to incur in higher risk premiums at auction,” said Rob Toomey, associate general counsel at the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), on a call with reporters on Wednesday.

Bidding at last week’s one-month T-bill sale was the weakest since March 2009. Demand at this week’s bill auctions improved on hopes of a debt agreement, but interest rates remained higher than where they were almost three weeks ago.

Fitch Ratings on Tuesday warned it might strip the United States of its top AAA-rating due to the debt ceiling fight.

“This highlights the risk in the United States. It’s not good for investors. If investors want to diversify from the U.S., this gives them a reason to,” said Brian Edmonds, head of rates trading at Cantor Fitzgerald in New York.

Skittishness in owning T-bills hurt Wall Street firms too. The 21 primary dealers, those top-tier investment banks that do business directly with the U.S. Federal Reserve, are required to buy the debt issued by the government at auctions.

“There are too much uncertainties. That’s dangerous especially if you are a primary dealer when you have to underwrite Treasury debt,” said Edmonds.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/17/us-usa-fiscal-debtrisk-analysis-idUSBRE99G12R20131017

Debt ceiling 101: What you need to know

By Alexandra Thomas

If you’ve kept up with U.S. news at all lately, you might’ve heard this: If Congress and the White House cannot reach a deal on the debt ceiling crisis by October 17, the U.S. government won’t have enough money to pay its bills. That sounds pretty scary — especially if you’re not quite sure what it all means.

So what exactly is the debt ceiling, anyway? And how can it affect you?

The debt ceiling crisis is not the same as the partial government shutdown

Yes, it’s confusing to other people as well. Two very complicated crises are happening in Washington simultaneously, and both are happening because lawmakers cannot come to an agreement.

The government shut down because lawmakers couldn’t agree on a deal to fund the government before the start of the new fiscal year. The debt ceiling refers to debt outstanding — bills for which the government has already approved the spending and has already committed to paying.

The shutdown only slightly changes the government’s payment schedule. When the government is closed, the number of daily payments the Department of the Treasury needs to make decreases, since many things are closed. But even during the shutdown, the U.S. government is still required to make a lot of other payments, including Social Security, Medicare and interest on the debt. And these are big payments that may impact the livelihood of millions of Americans.

The Treasury Department says if the limit (the debt ceiling) isn’t raised, the government could default on the bills it owes, which could then lead to a financial crisis similar to the events of 2008.

What is the debt ceiling?

The debt ceiling is the borrowing limit that Congress has set for itself as a way to control government spending. The difference between the amount of money the U.S. government takes in and the amount of money it spends each year is called the deficit. The ongoing deficit then adds up to the overall debt.

Congress usually approves more spending than it collects in tax revenue, so the Treasury has to borrow the rest of the money from other government accounts and by issuing IOUs, in order to pay those bills. Congress sets a cap on how much debt the government can have — called the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is the maximum amount the Treasury can borrow, and right now that limit is set at about $16.699 trillion.

Interactive: What’s up with the debt ceiling?

The U.S. government can borrow that amount, and no more, unless Congress votes to raise the debt ceiling.

In May, the government actually reached that limit, but over the past few months, the Treasury has been able to shuffle money around from various accounts to avoid taking on any more debt. That luxury is about to go away.

According to Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, the government will soon run out of money, except for about $30 billion, and the Treasury will either need to increase revenue or take on more debt — or it won’t be able to pay certain bills.

How the government funds its spending

The government funds its spending in two ways: taxes and borrowing. The government borrows money by issuing Treasury bonds, or IOUs. When someone buys a Treasury bond, they’re basically lending the government money and racking up interest on the loan, which the government pays each month. On October 17, the government owes an interest payment of about $13 billion — the first payment the government won’t be able to make without raising the debt ceiling.

The cap on borrowing applies to debt owed to the public, anyone who buys Treasury bonds and debt owed to federal government trust funds — such as those set up for Social Security and Medicare.

After October 17, the government will only be bringing in enough money to pay about 68% of its bills, according to a recent survey by the Bipartisan Policy Center. According to the center’s analysis, beginning on October 18, the Treasury will be about $106 billion short of making the $328 billion in payments that are already scheduled through November 15. Normally, when the debts are due, the government just issues new debts (by selling bonds), however if the government doesn’t have the full amounts it owes, certain payments will be delayed.

Who would be impacted if the government goes into default?

The government typically spends, or owes, about $10 billion per day for various things. And if the government can’t make those payments, the first people to be affected will be people who get pay or benefits from the government. That includes members of the military and people who receive benefits such as Social Security and Medicare. Here’s a breakdown of the dates when the government is supposed to pay some of its biggest bills:

Oct. 23: $12 billion in Social Security payments.

Oct. 31: $6 billion in interest on its debt.

Nov. 1: $58 billion in Social Security payments, disability benefits, Medicare payments, military pay and retiree pay.

So what happens if the government can’t pay those bills?

Ideally, the government would be able to prioritize which bills it pays first, but that’s not a realistic possibility because of how the Treasury payment system works. The Treasury issues about 100 million monthly payments through a computer system, which pays the bills automatically as they come due, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center. So, no one knows which checks will be issued at exactly what time. And if it begins making payments it doesn’t have the money for, checks will start bouncing. It’s just unclear at this point which ones would bounce.

So the government could pay some bills in full and delay others, or, it could delay all bills until it has enough money to pay each day’s bills in full. The problem with delaying them all is that, with each day that goes by, the total amount the government owes will continue to increase drastically.

Some federal contractors may accept an IOU, with higher interest, but people who depend on Social Security checks on a regular basis probably won’t want an IOU from the government that’s worth nothing right now. Plus, if the government misses a payment to bondholders, that could impact the stability of the U.S. bond market and confidence in the U.S. dollar.

If some payments are delayed, people could get payments, like Social Security checks, a few weeks late.

So what’s next?

Economists say missing the debt ceiling deadline won’t trigger an immediate recession. However, the longer Congress waits, the worse the problem could get.

According to Patrick O’Keefe, director of economic research at accounting firm Cohn Reznick, “Merely missing the debt ceiling deadline will not trigger a recession, but the risks will rise rapidly with each week after the deadline passes.”

Congress could agree on a short-term increase of the debt ceiling to allow the government to pay its bills, but a longer-term agreement must be reached eventually.

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/10/10/what-debt-ceiling-deadline-congress

BPC’s Debt Limit Projection: Key Takeaways

Unless the debt limit is increased, there will come a point when Treasury does not have enough cash to pay all bills in full and on time

On September 10, the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) released its comprehensive debt limit analysis for fall 2013. On May 19 of this year, the debt limit was reinstated at a new, higher level, after having been suspended since February. Upon its reinstatement, the U.S. found itself up against the debt limit with the Treasury Department continuing to operate through the limited borrowing authority provided by extraordinary measures.

In July, BPC had projected that the X Date – the point at which extraordinary measures and cash on hand are exhausted and Treasury can no longer meet all federal financial obligations in full and on time – would be reached between mid-October and mid-November. With updated government financial data and a more extensive analysis of daily transactions that will occur in September, October, and November, BPC has narrowed that projected window to October 18 – November 5. This range will be regularly updated in the coming weeks, as warranted by the data.

We have already hit the debt limit. The U.S. officially reached its statutory borrowing limit of about $16.699 trillion on May 19, 2013. (Technically, Treasury has stayed $25 million below the actual limit of $16,699,421,000,000 since that time). To raise additional funds for paying the nation’s obligations beyond that date, the Treasury Secretary has been using some of the approximately $303 billion in available extraordinary measures. As of August 31, roughly $108 billion of these measures remained. Unless the debt limit is increased, eventually there will come a point when Treasury does not have enough cash to pay all bills in full and on time, and the government will be forced to default on some of its obligations. BPC refers to this date as the “X Date.”

BPC now projects that the “X Date” will occur between October 18 and November 5. This represents a range, which can be thought of as a confidence interval. A more precise estimate is not yet appropriate due to the volatility of revenue and the nature of the government’s financial obligations leading up to and during this period. Furthermore, even BPC’s estimated range for the X Date is a projection, which is subject to some uncertainty. The most significant sources of uncertainty are the quarterly tax payments due in mid-September, which tend to be volatile, along with general economic conditions. While federal government revenue has been strong compared to the previous fiscal year – coinciding with greater employment, increased corporate earnings, and slow-but-steady economic growth – there is no guarantee that these trends will continue.

How will Treasury make payments on or after the X Date? We don’t know. This would be an unprecedented situation. If the X Date arrived on October 18 (the start of BPC’s X-Date window), we project that Treasury would be $106 billion short of making $328 billion in scheduled payments through November 15, meaning that 32 percent of those obligations would go unpaid.

In one scenario, Treasury might prioritize some payments over others; our full report provides an illustrative example. Treasury, however, may not find that it has the legal authority or the technical capability to do this (because such prioritization could require extensive reprogramming of computer systems, which may not be possible in a short timeframe). An alternative approach would be for Treasury to wait until enough revenue is collected to make an entire day’s worth of payments at a time, meaning that all payments would be made in turn, but everyone anticipating funds from the government would see delays. While payment delays would be short in the beginning (one or two days), they would quickly cascade. If Treasury were to delay payments in this manner, and the X Date were reached on October 18, for example, Social Security payments due on November 1 would not be received by beneficiaries until November 13.

In any scenario, we assume that Treasury would do whatever it could to ensure that interest on the debt is paid in full and on time.

Substantial debt is scheduled to roll over after the X Date. From October 18 through November 15, over $370 billion in debt is expected to mature. Normally, this would be rolled over in a standard procedure by issuing new debt. Uncertainty surrounding the debt limit, however, could force Treasury to pay higher interest rates on this newly issued debt. Also, while very unlikely, there is a possibility that in a post-X Date environment, Treasury may not have sufficient buyers to complete its standard auction operation.

How much would the debt limit need to be increased in order to get through next year? BPC has projected the magnitude of the debt limit increase necessary to enable Treasury to meet all obligations through calendar year 2014. An increase of approximately $1.1 trillion would be required. There is a great amount of uncertainty in this estimate, however, given the amount of time that is covered.

Expect more updates. BPC will continue to update and refine our X-Date estimates as new information becomes available. To learn more, view our full report.

http://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/2013/09/10/bpc%E2%80%99s-debt-limit-projection-key-takeaways

Dollar Slips as Fed Worries Continue

Treasury Yields Fall as Investors Focus on Effects of Government Shutdown

By

MICHELE MAATOUK

Expectations that the Federal Reserve will have to keep its easy-money policies in place for longer following the partial U.S. government shutdown pushed the dollar close to its lowest point of the year against the euro and U.S. Treasury debt prices to their highest point since July.

Yields on the 10-year Treasury note, which move inversely to prices, touched 2.538%, the lowest level since July 24, according to CQG. The dollar continued its slide against major rivals, including the euro, the yen and the pound. The euro recently bought $1.3686 from $1.3676 late Thursday, while the pound fetched $1.6186 from $1.6165. The greenback traded at ¥97.71 from ¥97.93.

The drop in the dollar and the rise in Treasury debt prices were set in train earlier this week after lawmakers reached a temporary solution to raise the so-called debt ceiling, showing that investors doubt the Fed can start to reel in its stimulus measures—a process dubbed tapering—for as long as economic performance and data is compromised by the now-ended shutdown, and as long as the risk of repeat shutdowns lingers.

“As policy remains uber accommodative, the dollar has adjusted downwards,” said Scott Jamieson, head of multi-asset investing at Kames Capital in London, with $24 billion under management.

“While we have been inclined to see tapering next year, the market is only now coming to appreciate this,” said analysts at Brown Brothers Harriman. “After the September disappointment, surveys suggest that a majority shifted their expectations to December. Now in light of the fiscal drag and new uncertainty, the mid-January and mid-February limits on spending and debt issuance will loom large at the December Federal Open Market Committee meeting, and likely reduces the possibility of tapering then. The focus is likely to shift to the March 2014 FOMC meeting for the first tapering,” they said.

U.S. stocks traded mostly higher. The S&P 500 added 0.4% to 1740, pushing further into record territory. The Nasdaq Composite Index rose 0.8% to 3893. The Dow Jones Industrial Average lagged behind, dropping 0.2% to 15370.

On Thursday, stocks staged a late-session comeback that helped push the S&P 500 to an all-time high close of 1733.15.

European stocks edged higher, supported by the late bounce in the U.S. and encouraging Chinese growth figures.

Now that Congress has temporarily approved a bill to raise the debt ceiling, attention is likely to shift back to earnings and fundamentals. And as investors reassess their expectations for any withdrawal of stimulus from the Fed, all eyes will be on the economic data that was delayed by the partial government shutdown. The next focus will beSeptember’s nonfarm payrolls report, which is due on Oct. 22.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303680404579142850162694282

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

GOP Will Take Off Gloves If Ron Paul Wins Iowa–Bring The Big Spending, Warmaking, Progressive Neoconservative Republican Establishment On–Videos

Posted on December 19, 2011. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, history, Law, liberty, Life, Links, People, Philosophy, Politics, Public Sector, Raves, Strategy, Taxes, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Rush Limbaugh – How About This Headline,GOP Will Take Off Gloves If Ron Paul Wins Iowa

RON PAUL on RUSH LIMBAUGH

Is the GOP Establishment Scared of Ron Paul?

Ron Paul Hate From Establishment Republicans 

Kid Gloves come off: Paul comes off swinging a devasting blow to Flip-flopping Puppet Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich: Selling Access   

New Ron Paul Ad – BIG DOG

Ron Paul: Foreign Policy & Israel

SA@TheDC – “I Like Ron Paul Except on Foreign Policy”

SA@The DC – Ron Paul’s Reaganesque Foreign Policy

You Like Ron Paul, Except on Foreign Policy

Ron Paul Predicts 2007 Housing Crash

SA@TheDC – Conservatism’s Future: Young Americans for Liberty

GOP will take off the gloves if Ron Paul wins Iowa

by Timothy P. Carney Senior Political Columnist

“…The Republican presidential primary has become a bit feisty, but it will get downright ugly if Ron Paul wins the Iowa caucuses.

The principled, antiwar, Constitution-obeying, Fed-hating, libertarian Republican congressman from Texas stands firmly outside the bounds of permissible dissent as drawn by either the Republican establishment or the mainstream media. (Disclosure: Paul wrote the foreword to my 2009 book.)

But in a crowded GOP field currently led by a collapsing Newt Gingrich and an uninspiring Mitt Romney, Paul could carry the Iowa caucuses, where supporter enthusiasm has so much value.

If Paul wins, how will the media and the GOP react? Much of the media will ignore him (expect headlines like “Romney Beats out Gingrich for Second Place in Iowa”). Some in the Republican establishment and the conservative media will panic. Others will calmly move to crush him, with the full cooperation of the liberal mainstream media.

For a historical analogy, study the aftermath of Pat Buchanan’s 1996 victory in the New Hampshire primary. “It was awful,” Buchanan told me this week when I asked him about his few days as the nominal GOP front-runner. “They come down on you with both feet.” …”

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/gop-will-take-gloves-if-ron-paul-wins-iowa/264111

Conservatives, libertarians and the tea party are watching the Republican Party establishment.

If they go after Ron Paul, we go after them.

The Chicago Way

Starting with their $1 trillion unbalanced budgets in 2012 and 2013.

Then we go after every Senator and Representatives in the primaries with challenges that voted for them starting with the Party leadership.

We know where the bodies are buried.

We will drain the swamp.

Want a fight, we are ready.

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

Progressive and Neoconservative Gingrich and Romney–Republican Party Establishment Losers–Videos

Posted on December 17, 2011. Filed under: American History, Banking, Blogroll, Books, Business, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Federal Government, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, Monetary Policy, Money, People, Philosophy, Politics, Raves, Taxes, Unemployment, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , |

Glenn Beck – The Case Against Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich: Serial Hypocrisy

Mainstream Media Admits Ron Paul is Booming

Ron Paul on Glenn Beck 6-27-11

Ron Paul Highlights Part 1 @ Iowa Family Forum GOP Debate (11/19/11)

Ron Paul Highlights Part 2 @ Iowa Family Forum GOP Debate (11/19/11)

You Like Ron Paul, Except on Foreign Policy 

SA@TheDC – “I Like Ron Paul Except on Foreign Policy”

Ron Paul Ad – Consistent

Ron Paul 2012 – Who Can You Trust?

Ron Paul Ad – Secure

Ron Paul Ad – Plan

New Ron Paul 2012 Ad – Big Dog

The Republican Party establishment prefers progressive Mitt Romney over progressive Newt Gingrich.

Unfortunately, the Republican base does not want Mitt Romney and prefers Gingrich.

The tea party, conservatives, libertarians, and independents do not want any progressive Republican candidates–neither Gingrich nor Romney.

Who do they trust?

Who wants to balance the budget and cut government spending?

Who would end the IRS , the income tax and repeal the 16th amendment?

Who wants to bring the troops home and cut military spending for policing the world and nation building?

Who wants to end bailouts, subsidies and the Federal Reserve?

Ron Paul.

The Republican establishment cannot stand Ron Paul.

Why?

He will try his very best to do what he says–balance the budget, cut spending, end the IRS and income tax, bring the troops home, and end the Fed.

Why does Glenn Beck oppose Ron Paul?

Beck is a pro-Israel neoconservative and not a libertarian.

Beck supports an interventionist foreign policy just like the progressives do.

True classical liberals or libertarians oppose government intervention at home and abroad.

Ron Paul is a true libertarian whose message is resonating with the American people.

Do not let Glenn Beck fool you.

The Republican establishment opposes Gingrich–so does Beck.

The Republican establishment opposes Paul–so does Beck.

The Republican establishment consists of progressives and neoconservatives.

This is the reason Mitt Romney is their favorite–he is both a progressive and a neoconservative.

Support and vote for Ron Paul.

Welcome to Dallas, Texas, Glenn. What took you so long to get here?

Progressives and neoconservatives are both collectivists and statists that support government intervention at home and abroad.

Eventually even Beck will figure out government intervention at home and abroad is detested by the people at home and abroad.

Suggest he read Ludwig von Mises’ Omnipotent Government written in 1944.

Hans F. Sennholz’s review of Ludwig von Mises’ Omnipotent Government

Beck goes after Gingrich.

Bennett  goes after Gingrich.

Levin goes after Paul.

Limbaugh goes after Paul.

Divide and conquer.

The big four of talk radio likes Bachmann, Santorium and Perry.

Tea party, conservatives and libertarians are leaving the Republican Party

If the Republican Party puts yet another progressive and/or neoconservative as their Presidential candidate, they will lose.

The Republican Establishment will be the real losers.

Congressman Ron Paul, MD – We’ve Been NeoConned

(2006) Ron Paul: Big Government Solutions Don’t Work [Part 1 ]

(2006) Ron Paul: Big Government Solutions Don’t Work [Part 2] 

(2006) Ron Paul: Big Government Solutions Don’t Work [Part 3] 

(2006) Ron Paul: Big Government Solutions Don’t Work [Part 4] 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Talk Radio Show “Conservatives” and “Neoconservatives” Hosts Rebel Against Republican Party Petulant Progressive Big Government Gingrich And Romney–Support Neoconservative and Pro Israel–Perry, Bachmann and Santorium–We The People Support and Trust The Champion of The Constitution–Ron Paul–Videos

Newt Gingrich Loves FDR–Progressive Prevaricators–Videos

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

G. William Domhoff: Who Runs America–Videos

Posted on September 30, 2009. Filed under: Blogroll, Culture, Demographics, Economics, Homes, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, People, Philosophy, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Reviews, Taxes, Video, War, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Who Rules America? (Part 1)

 

Who Rules America? (Part 2)

 

Who Rules America? (Part 3)

 

Who Rules America? (Part 4)

 

Who Rules America? (Part 5)

 

Who Rules America? (Part 6)

 

Who Rules America? (Part 7)

 

Who Rules America? (Part 8)

 

Who Rules America? (Part 9)

 

 

Background Articles and Videos

G. William Domhoff

“…George William (Bill) Domhoff (born August 6, 1936) is a Research Professor in psychology and sociology at the University of California, Santa Cruz. His first book, Who Rules America?, was a controversial 1960s bestseller which argued that the United States is dominated by an elite ownership class both politically and economically.[1]

He was born in Youngstown, Ohio, the son of George William and Helen S. (Cornet) Domhoff. He received a B.A. in Psychology at Duke University, a MA in psychology at Kent State University, and a Ph.D. in psychology at the University of Miami.

In the early 1960s, Domhoff served as an assistant professor of psychology at Los Angeles State College. In 1965, he became an assistant professor at the University of California, Cowell College, Santa Cruz, where he is now professor of psychology and sociology.

Domhoff is the author of Who Rules America? (1st ed. 1967, most recent edition 2009) and many other well-known books in sociology and power structure research, as well as Finding Meaning in Dreams (1996) and The Scientific Study of Dreams (2003). …”

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

 

There Are No Conspiracies

by G. William Domhoff

“…There are several problems with a conspiratorial view that don’t fit with what we know about power structures. First, it assumes that a small handful of wealthy and highly educated people somehow develop an extreme psychological desire for power that leads them to do things that don’t fit with the roles they seem to have. For example, that rich capitalists are no longer out to make a profit, but to create a one-world government. Or that elected officials are trying to get the constitution suspended so they can assume dictatorial powers. These kinds of claims go back many decades now, and it is always said that it is really going to happen this time, but it never does. Since these claims have proved wrong dozens of times by now, it makes more sense to assume that leaders act for their usual reasons, such as profit-seeking motives and institutionalized roles as elected officials. Of course they want to make as much money as they can, and be elected by huge margins every time, and that can lead them to do many unsavory things, but nothing in the ballpark of creating a one-world government or suspending the constitution.

Second, the conspiratorial view assumes that the behind-the-scenes leaders are extremely clever and knowledgeable, whereas social science and historical research shows that leaders often make shortsighted or mistaken decisions due to the limits placed on their thinking by their social backgrounds and institutional roles. When these limits are exposed through stupid mistakes, such as the failure of the CIA at the Bay of Pigs during the Kennedy Administration, then conspiratorial theorists assert that the leaders failed on purpose to fool ordinary people.

Third, the conspiratorial view places power in the hands of only a few dozen or so people, often guided by one strong leader, whereas sociologists who study power say that there is a leadership group of many thousands for a set of wealth-owning families that numbers several million. Furthermore, the sociological view shows that the groups or classes below the highest levels buy into the system in various ways and support it. For example, highly trained professionals in medicine, law, and academia have considerable control over their own lives, make a good living, and usually enjoy their work, so they go along with the system even though they do not have much political power. …”

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/theory/conspiracy.html

 

Interview: G. William Domhoff
by Chip Berlet, September 2004

“…New Internationalist: Don’t you study how power elites conspire? How can someone tell the difference between conspiracism and criticism of the status quo based on power structure research?

Domhoff: I think I study how elites strive to develop consensus, which is through such publicly observable organizations as corporate boards and the policy-planning network, which can be studied in detail, and which are reported on in the media in at least a halfway accurate manner. I think this is the opposite of a small, secretive, illegitimate conspiracy because this large group called the power elite is known to the public, clearly states its aims (profit, profit, and more profit, and less government), publishes its policy suggestions, and is seen as legitimate by a great majority of the public.

I also study the way in which elites in the United States and other democracies have agreed for a few hundred years now to settle the issues where they can’t reach complete consensus, namely, through elections, which are also public and legitimate, and which can be observed by researchers in a fair amount of detail, including on the issue of campaign finance, and which are reported on fairly well in the media.

The interesting thing with elections, in terms of addressing the conspiracy kind of stuff, is that rival elites have in effect agreed not to get into all out violence and war with each other, although Americans elites did so only 144 years ago in the bloody Civil War. Political scientist John Higley talks of elites coming to “settlements” or “pacts” that lead to elections, but this is not through conspiring, historically speaking, but through sitting down to talk in frustration and exhaustion, usually after fighting each other to a draw over decades. …”

http://www.publiceye.org/antisemitism/nw_domhoff.html

 

Related Posts On Pronk Palisades

Eugenics–Rockefeller–United Nations–Population Control–Holdren–Abortions/Sterilization–Browner–Cap and Trade–Obama–Compulsory Socialized Medicine–Euthanasia–Transhuman–Brave New World!–Videos

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 12 so far )

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