What was it that Obama said during the campaign about how he would bring the world together again as Bush had caused everyone to hate us. Obama has failed completely - the world not only hates us more but now they see us as weak and unable to make important decisions that will effect world outcomes now and into the distant future.
We have lost respect - we are no longer leader of the free world - this is just what our enemies have waited for as now they can have a free hand to take what ever they want from anyone they want because they know America will do nothing. America in retreat and surrender - the 'white flag' mentality - our congress is no better.
What will Russia do now? What will China do now that no one stands in their way? What about Latin America? Africa? What will Obama do - oh, I know, a quick flight to Chicago for a few laughs with friends and then guest on a television show.
Obama wants to join together with other socialist nations to suppress freedom in all countries that are now free - he thinks when this happens he will rule the world. Obama is insane, power mad and very dangerous.
Keep the faith - the battle rages on!
O'S FOREIGN FAILURES*
By RALPH PETERS March 25, 2009 --
AMERICA'S enemies smell blood and it's type "O."All new administrations stumble a bit as they seek their footing. But President Obama's foreign-policy botches have set new records for instant incompetence. Contrary to left-wing myths, I wasn't a fan of the Bush administration. (I called for Donald Rumsfeld to get the boot in mid-2001.) But fair's fair. Despite his many faults, Bush sought to do good. Obama just wants to look good.
Vice President Dick Cheney was arrogant. Vice President Joe Biden is arrogant and stupid. Take your pick. Don't worry about the new administration's ideology. Worry about its terrifying naivete. Consider a sampling of the goofs O and his crew have made in just two months:
*China*:
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (you know that gal married to the Saudi hireling) crawled to Beijing to tell the party bosses that human rights don't matter. Our "relationship" is more important than freedom and human dignity. Beijing's response? A staged military confrontation with an unarmed US Navy vessel; continued screw-America currency cheating; a renewed crackdown on dissidents and, yesterday, a call for a new global currency to replace the dollar.Thanks, Hill. You're a sweetheart.
*Pakistan:*
With viral corruption throughout and Islamist fanatics sweeping half of its territory, Pakistan's coming apart. Its Dem-adored prez tries to ban opposition parties and gut the judiciary. It has nukes and seethes with hatred of America. And Islamabad controls our primary supply route into Afghanistan, using it as an extortion tool. Obama's response? Billions in new aid for Pak pols to pocket. We'd be better off handing the money to AIG to pay out more bonuses.
*Afghanistan:*
Obama's Vietnam. Am I the only American who remembers that candidate Obama had a plan to capture Osama bin Laden and fix our previous "mistakes" in Afghanistan? President Obama doesn't have a clue.
*Iran:*
Obama tried to reach out, to talk. After all, talking got him to the White House. But America-bashing is what keeps Iran's leaders in office, it's their political essence. After 30 years of fierce hostility, hasn't anyone figured out that the senior mullahs need us as an enemy? Without the Great Satan America to blame, they'd have some real explaining to do to their homies. So O got the left-hand finger. He wanted to chat with the Taliban, too. They told him he could stick it where the sun don't shine.
*North Korea:*
Obama wanted a fresh start. North Korea's response? Threats of war with South Korea and the kidnapping of two American journalists. And the renewed pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, along with rocket tests.
*Cuba:*
Obama would like to liberalize our relationship. The Castro boys told him to kiss off. They need an enemy, too. (Dear Mr. President: It's not always about us or how evil America is.)
*Venezuela*:
Guess who else needs an enemy?
*Mexico:*
The good news: Obama knows where it is on a map and recognizes that Mexico's government faces a narco-insurgency that threatens our country, too. His first action? Cave to the Teamsters, violate a lawful treaty on cross-border trucking, reignite fading anti-Americanism and undercut President Felipe Calderon.
*Poland*:
Obama's stance on our bravest ally on the European continent? The Russians are more important than you are. He's sending the same message to Ukraine and Georgia.
*Russia:*
Bolshie Biden, the commuting commissar, knows he's the man who can turn Russia into our best pal. After "Friend of Bill" Strobe Talbott tried and failed disastrously. And after poor W saw into Putin's soul, only to get his butt handed to him. "Uncle Joe" Biden has nothing to learn from past failures, though: He's got a re-set button. Moscow's response to the Obama administration's bid for a new start? It threatens NATO members it once occupied and continues to back Iran's nuclear program. Plus, it bribes Kyrgystan to kick us off the critical-to-Afghanistan Manas airbase (then offers to help replace that supply lifeline, giving Russia a choke-hold on our troops).
Next, the Kremlin threatens massive re-armament and demands the abandonment of the dollar as the international reserve currency.Obama's response? Push that re-set button again. And again.
At what point does naivete become cowardice?As for our allies, Obama apparently needs them less than Bush did. O treated Britain's prime minister like the deputy Paraguayan veterinary inspector, and he blindsided the leaders of the Czech Republic, Poland, Mexico and Canada on issues ranging from missile defense to trade. But he'd like them to take the Gitmo terrorists off our hands, please.
The one bright spot thus far has been Iraq, where Obama quickly tossed aside his campaign promises. The O-man doesn't want to be on the blame-line for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory in Baghdad. And his MoveOn.org supporters can throw all the tantrums they want. (Breaking news, folks: O's a professional pol, not the messiah . . . )
Apart from Iraq, a success Sen. Obama did all he could to prevent, his foreign policy's an instant wasteland. By comparison, the Carter administration is starting to look like a model of manly strength, courage and patriotism.
Ralph Peters recently became Fox News' first "strategic analyst."
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
Golden Retriever Legend Dies But Not Forgotten : A Memorial
In our world of stress and frustration we can take a few minutes and reflect on how our four legged friends have enriched our lives and in many cases, saved us from a cruel and unfair world by their unflagging love and friendship.
Pagey Elliott was the foundation of the Golden Retriever in this country and will remain so - she is gone but not forgotten.
http://tinyurl.com/cmusrn
Pagey Elliott was the foundation of the Golden Retriever in this country and will remain so - she is gone but not forgotten.
http://tinyurl.com/cmusrn
Sunday, March 29, 2009
A Letter To President Obama : Thank you Mr. President
Some dear person thought it would be nice to send the president a letter to thank him for letting us all pay for all the people in our country that can't and or won't pay for anything that they have or will buy in the future.
As our vice president has indicated on several occasions, "it's our patriotic duty to pay taxes". He and other members of the Obama cabinet have other ideas about just who must or should pay taxes.
Socialism, according to Marx, makes this work for Obama.
This is 'tounge in cheek' but it still works.
Dear President Obama,
Thank you for helping my neighbors with their mortgage payments. You know the ones down the street who in the good times refinanced their house several times and bought SUVs, ATVs, RVs, a pool, a big screen TV, two Wave Runners and a Harley. But I was wondering, since I am paying my mortgage and theirs, could you arrange for me to borrow the Harley now and then?
RICHARD DELONG,
JOHNSONBURG, PA
P.S. They also need help with their credit cards, when do you want me to start making those payments?
P.P.S. I almost forgot - they didn't file their income tax return this year.
Should I go ahead and file for them or will you be appointing them to cabinet posts?
As our vice president has indicated on several occasions, "it's our patriotic duty to pay taxes". He and other members of the Obama cabinet have other ideas about just who must or should pay taxes.
Socialism, according to Marx, makes this work for Obama.
This is 'tounge in cheek' but it still works.
Dear President Obama,
Thank you for helping my neighbors with their mortgage payments. You know the ones down the street who in the good times refinanced their house several times and bought SUVs, ATVs, RVs, a pool, a big screen TV, two Wave Runners and a Harley. But I was wondering, since I am paying my mortgage and theirs, could you arrange for me to borrow the Harley now and then?
RICHARD DELONG,
JOHNSONBURG, PA
P.S. They also need help with their credit cards, when do you want me to start making those payments?
P.P.S. I almost forgot - they didn't file their income tax return this year.
Should I go ahead and file for them or will you be appointing them to cabinet posts?
700 Ligitimate Climate Scientists Say Global Warming A Fraud
More legitimate scientists are joining the 700 that have stood up against the fraud the is Al Gore and 'man made global warming'. Professionals wonder why those that believe so strongly in 'man made global warming' refuse to debate, or even discuss, the subject with others that have a different opinion.
It has been called the largest case ever known and witnessed by major researchers of "Mass hypnosis". This has occurred world wide and the researchers are trying to piece together what started this and then how it spread like some super contagious disease. The medical professionals are trying to understand the mechanism that was used to transform so many people so quickly.
The research is also looking at why some people weren't affected at all while others are totally transformed. What in the back grounds or personalities of these individuals that has allowed them to be so 'changed' so quickly.
Some in the National Security area are fearful that it could be used to generate other and more lethal hysteria. To date no firm conclusions have been reached.
More Scientists Rip Global Warming Hysteria (NewsMax)
Amid reports that President Barack Obama's climate plan could cost industry close to $2 trillion, 59 additional scientists skeptical of the threat of manmade global warming have been added to the U.S. Senate Minority Report on climate change.
They bring the total to more than 700 scientists from around the world who have spoken out against the hysteria created by Al Gore and other global warming alarmists, according to a statement issued by the office of Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, ranking Republican on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.
The latest Minority Report includes 300 scientists and climate researchers who have been added to the list since the initial report’s release in December 2007.
Many of the 59 additional scientists are affiliated with prestigious institutions including NASA, the U.S. Navy and Air Force, the Defense Department, Energy Department, Princeton University, Tulane University, the U.S. Naval Academy and the EPA.
“Unfortunately, climate science has become political science,” said award-winning Princeton physicist Dr. Robert Austin, a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.
He told the minority staff on the Committee on March 2: “It is tragic that some perhaps well-meaning but politically motivated scientists who should know better have whipped up a global frenzy about a phenomenon which is statistically questionable at best.”
Dr. Anastasios Tsonis of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee said the global temperature “has flattened and is actually going down. We are seeing a new shift toward cooler temperatures that will last for probably about three decades.”
As Newsmax.com reported, Obama's climate plan could cost industry nearly three times the $646 billion over eight years that the White House initially estimated for the so-called "cap-and-trade" legislation.
The plan seeks to reduce pollution by setting a limit on carbon emissions and allowing businesses and groups to buy allowances, although exact details have not been released.
But Dr. Diane Douglas, a climatologist who has worked for the Department of Energy, declared: “The recent ‘panic’ to control GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions and billions of dollars being dedicated for the task has me deeply concerned that the U.S. and other countries are spending precious global funds to stop global warming, when it is primarily being driven by natural forcing mechanisms.”
Among other comments from scientists included in the report:
“I am appalled at the state of discord in the field of climate science . . . There is no observational evidence that the addition of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have caused any temperature perturbations in the atmosphere.” — Award-winning atmospheric scientist Dr.
George T. Wolff, a former member of the EPA’s Science Advisory Board who served on a committee of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
“The sky is not burning, and to claim that it is amounts to journalistic malpractice . . . The press only promotes the global warming alarmists and ignores or minimizes those of us who are skeptical.” — Dr. Mark L. Campbell, a professor of chemistry at the U.S. Naval Academy.
“The cause of these global changes is fundamentally due to the sun and its effect on the Earth as it moves about in its orbit, not from man-made activities.”— Retired NASA atmospheric scientist Dr. William W. Vaughan, recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Medal.
It has been called the largest case ever known and witnessed by major researchers of "Mass hypnosis". This has occurred world wide and the researchers are trying to piece together what started this and then how it spread like some super contagious disease. The medical professionals are trying to understand the mechanism that was used to transform so many people so quickly.
The research is also looking at why some people weren't affected at all while others are totally transformed. What in the back grounds or personalities of these individuals that has allowed them to be so 'changed' so quickly.
Some in the National Security area are fearful that it could be used to generate other and more lethal hysteria. To date no firm conclusions have been reached.
More Scientists Rip Global Warming Hysteria (NewsMax)
Amid reports that President Barack Obama's climate plan could cost industry close to $2 trillion, 59 additional scientists skeptical of the threat of manmade global warming have been added to the U.S. Senate Minority Report on climate change.
They bring the total to more than 700 scientists from around the world who have spoken out against the hysteria created by Al Gore and other global warming alarmists, according to a statement issued by the office of Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, ranking Republican on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.
The latest Minority Report includes 300 scientists and climate researchers who have been added to the list since the initial report’s release in December 2007.
Many of the 59 additional scientists are affiliated with prestigious institutions including NASA, the U.S. Navy and Air Force, the Defense Department, Energy Department, Princeton University, Tulane University, the U.S. Naval Academy and the EPA.
“Unfortunately, climate science has become political science,” said award-winning Princeton physicist Dr. Robert Austin, a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.
He told the minority staff on the Committee on March 2: “It is tragic that some perhaps well-meaning but politically motivated scientists who should know better have whipped up a global frenzy about a phenomenon which is statistically questionable at best.”
Dr. Anastasios Tsonis of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee said the global temperature “has flattened and is actually going down. We are seeing a new shift toward cooler temperatures that will last for probably about three decades.”
As Newsmax.com reported, Obama's climate plan could cost industry nearly three times the $646 billion over eight years that the White House initially estimated for the so-called "cap-and-trade" legislation.
The plan seeks to reduce pollution by setting a limit on carbon emissions and allowing businesses and groups to buy allowances, although exact details have not been released.
But Dr. Diane Douglas, a climatologist who has worked for the Department of Energy, declared: “The recent ‘panic’ to control GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions and billions of dollars being dedicated for the task has me deeply concerned that the U.S. and other countries are spending precious global funds to stop global warming, when it is primarily being driven by natural forcing mechanisms.”
Among other comments from scientists included in the report:
“I am appalled at the state of discord in the field of climate science . . . There is no observational evidence that the addition of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have caused any temperature perturbations in the atmosphere.” — Award-winning atmospheric scientist Dr.
George T. Wolff, a former member of the EPA’s Science Advisory Board who served on a committee of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
“The sky is not burning, and to claim that it is amounts to journalistic malpractice . . . The press only promotes the global warming alarmists and ignores or minimizes those of us who are skeptical.” — Dr. Mark L. Campbell, a professor of chemistry at the U.S. Naval Academy.
“The cause of these global changes is fundamentally due to the sun and its effect on the Earth as it moves about in its orbit, not from man-made activities.”— Retired NASA atmospheric scientist Dr. William W. Vaughan, recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Medal.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Sweden's Immagration Policy Dooms Country
Sweden will have to do something to contain the violence from Muslim criminals or give up control of the country to them.
Again, one of the major factors in a minority having such power is the Marxist left press delivering only the information that is needed to support the violence against the population in general, spread it's Marxist socialist agenda and, at the same time, vilify anyone that speaks out against the invading hoard of Muslims as racists and bigots.
Sound familiar? If not you aren't paying attention to what is happening here at home with our own press with it's unflagging support of the left wing Marxist agenda.
Does history have to repeat it's self? I hope not but what we see in Sweden is just a glimpse of what is in store for us as Obama races forward with his radical left wing Marxist agenda to 'change' America into a third world socialist sump hole.
Remember, elections have consequences -
Sweden Rocked by Radical Muslims
(NewsMax)
A few years ago, the left-wing London Guardian newspaper called Sweden the most successful society the world has ever known. But Sweden today is being rocked by a large influx of Muslim immigrants and the growth of radical Islam.
Malmo is Sweden 's 3rd largest city and a major epicenter of the Islamization of Europe. Wide-open immigration policies have changed Sweden and have made Malmo, which is now one-quarter Muslim, one of the most racially divided cities in Europe.
Most Muslim immigrants are concentrated in one district, where the male unemployment rate is 82 percent. Crime affects one of three families in the city and rape has tripled in 20 years, according to the Christian Broadcasting Network.
In one housing project in the district, fire and emergency workers will no longer enter without police protection.
Malmo has been so accommodating toward immigrant Muslims that a local Muslim politician and imam has even declared, "The best Islamic state is Sweden !" But Malmo's Jews won’t give the city the same glowing assessment. Jews who dare to walk the streets wearing yarmulkes on their heads risk being beaten up.
When Israel recently played Sweden in a Davis Cup tennis match in Malmo, protesters demonstrated against the Israeli presence in the city, and hundreds attacked police.
Journalist Lars Hedegaard, who is based across a bridge-tunnel from Malmo in Copenhagen, Denmark , told CBN News that pro-Israeli demonstrators in Malmo were met with rocks, bottles and pipe bombs from Palestinians and other Arabs.
Right-wing Swedish Democrats, who support limits on immigration, have been stigmatized by the left-wing Swedish media as fascist and bigoted. But there is a growing acceptance that "the Swedish model" - generous welfare benefits combined with liberal immigration policies — is now unsustainable, according to CBN News.
Hedegaard said: “I think the best prediction is that Sweden will have a Muslim majority by 2049, so we know where that country’s going.”
Again, one of the major factors in a minority having such power is the Marxist left press delivering only the information that is needed to support the violence against the population in general, spread it's Marxist socialist agenda and, at the same time, vilify anyone that speaks out against the invading hoard of Muslims as racists and bigots.
Sound familiar? If not you aren't paying attention to what is happening here at home with our own press with it's unflagging support of the left wing Marxist agenda.
Does history have to repeat it's self? I hope not but what we see in Sweden is just a glimpse of what is in store for us as Obama races forward with his radical left wing Marxist agenda to 'change' America into a third world socialist sump hole.
Remember, elections have consequences -
Sweden Rocked by Radical Muslims
(NewsMax)
A few years ago, the left-wing London Guardian newspaper called Sweden the most successful society the world has ever known. But Sweden today is being rocked by a large influx of Muslim immigrants and the growth of radical Islam.
Malmo is Sweden 's 3rd largest city and a major epicenter of the Islamization of Europe. Wide-open immigration policies have changed Sweden and have made Malmo, which is now one-quarter Muslim, one of the most racially divided cities in Europe.
Most Muslim immigrants are concentrated in one district, where the male unemployment rate is 82 percent. Crime affects one of three families in the city and rape has tripled in 20 years, according to the Christian Broadcasting Network.
In one housing project in the district, fire and emergency workers will no longer enter without police protection.
Malmo has been so accommodating toward immigrant Muslims that a local Muslim politician and imam has even declared, "The best Islamic state is Sweden !" But Malmo's Jews won’t give the city the same glowing assessment. Jews who dare to walk the streets wearing yarmulkes on their heads risk being beaten up.
When Israel recently played Sweden in a Davis Cup tennis match in Malmo, protesters demonstrated against the Israeli presence in the city, and hundreds attacked police.
Journalist Lars Hedegaard, who is based across a bridge-tunnel from Malmo in Copenhagen, Denmark , told CBN News that pro-Israeli demonstrators in Malmo were met with rocks, bottles and pipe bombs from Palestinians and other Arabs.
Right-wing Swedish Democrats, who support limits on immigration, have been stigmatized by the left-wing Swedish media as fascist and bigoted. But there is a growing acceptance that "the Swedish model" - generous welfare benefits combined with liberal immigration policies — is now unsustainable, according to CBN News.
Hedegaard said: “I think the best prediction is that Sweden will have a Muslim majority by 2049, so we know where that country’s going.”
Friday, March 27, 2009
Is America Ready to Give Up The Fight?
We are making history in America - Obama is the first president that is willfully trying to destroy 250 years of Democracy and freedom, crushing the American dream and replacing it with Marxist socialism. He is the first president to knowingly want to enslave an entire population to a tyrannical all powerful government reminiscent of the old Soviet Union.
The article below is what is on a lot of peoples minds right now - the good part about Obama is he is awakening the real majority of Americas to what they will lose if he get his way with his Marxist agenda.
The question now is will we stand up and say no or will we just lay down and let him destroy our country? It's time to make a decision.
Is this the end of America?*
Posted: March 19, 2009, 7:38 PM
by NP Editor Terence Corcoran
, Ben Bernanke , inflation */
U.S. law-making is riddled with slapdash, incompetence and gamesmanship/*/
By Terence Corcoran /
Helicopter Ben Bernanke’s Federal Reserve is dropping trillions of fresh paper dollars on the world economy, the President of the United States is cracking jokes on late night comedy shows, his energy minister is threatening a trade war over carbon emissions, his treasury secretary is dithering over a banking reform program amid rising concerns over his competence and a monumentally dysfunctional U.S. Congress is launching another public jihad against corporations and bankers.
As an aghast world — from China to Chicago and Chihuahua — watches, the circus-like U.S. political system seems to be declining into near chaos. Through it all, stock and financial markets are paralyzed. The more the policy regime does, the worse the outlook gets. The multi-ringed spectacle raises a disturbing question in many minds: Is this the end of America? Probably not, if only because there are good reasons for optimism. The U.S. economy has pulled out of self-destructive political spirals in the past, spurred on by its business class and corporate leaders, the profit-making and market-creating people who rose above the political turmoil to once again lift the world out of financial crisis.
It’s happened many times before, except for once, when it took 20 years to rise out of the Great Depression.
Past success, however, is no guarantee of future recovery, especially now when there are daily disasters and new indicators of political breakdown. All developments are not disasters in themselves. The AIG bonus firestorm is a diversion from real issues , but it puts the ghastly political classes who make U.S. law on display for what they are: ageing self-serving demagogues who have spent decades warping the U.S. political system for their own ends.
We see the system up close, law-making that is riddled with slapdash, incompetence and gamesmanship. One test of whether we are witnessing the end of America is how many more times Americans put up with congressional show trials of individual business people and their employees, slandering and vilifying them for their actions and motives. And for how long will they tolerate a President who berates business and corporations as dens of crime and malfeasance?
If the majority of Americans come to accept the caricatures of business as true, then America is closer to the end of its life as a global leader, as a champion of markets and individualism.
But America is at risk in other ways, especially in the technical business of setting and executing policy. The presidency of Barack Obama has set out on a course that has no precedent in U.S. history. Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose New Deal transformed the U.S. economy during the Great Depression, pushed America off on a sharply different political and ideological course. The Obama administration is different in many ways, not least in its supreme self-confidence in its methods and objectives.
Reform of health care, environmental policy, education, energy, banking, regulation — every nook and cranny of the U.S. economy has been put on alert for major change. Expansion of government spending, plunging the U.S. into unprecedented deficits, is without parallel. In economic policy, through regulation and control of energy output, financial services and monetary expansion, the U.S. government has embarked on a fundamental reshaping of America.
It is designed, in short, to bring on the end of America.
The spillover effect of all this on the rest of the world promises to be dramatically disruptive. The greatest global risk is in monetary and currency policy. Below is a chart that graphically demonstrates the sharp deviation in monetary policy from past norms. Under the chairmanship of Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve is in the midst of a giant economic experiment, flooding the world with U.S. dollars, hoping that flood will stimulate economic activity.
The total monetary base, already at astronomical levels, is now expected to take another big hit with the new Fed policy of buying up U.S. longer-term treasury bills in a bid to drive down long-term interest rates. Mr. Bernanke is sometimes known as “Helicopter Ben” because he once in an academic paper referred to the use of “helicopters” full of money to rescue an economy from deflation.
In comments Wednesday to explain the Fed’s new policy of buying $300-billion in U.S. treasury bills, Mr. Bernanke noted that the Fed is now more worried about inflation being too low than about it getting too high in the future. For the rest of the world, however, the worry is that America is at risk of becoming the fountainhead of a new inflationary outburst. The U.S. dollar is now in decline, gold is moving sharply higher, and new global currency turmoil is on the horizon. It may not happen. A paper just published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, source of the chart above, says that the Fed will have to be prepared to absorb all the excess money it has poured into the U.S. economy.
It will be a technical and political challenge unlike any central bank has ever undertaken. The future of America is at stake
The article below is what is on a lot of peoples minds right now - the good part about Obama is he is awakening the real majority of Americas to what they will lose if he get his way with his Marxist agenda.
The question now is will we stand up and say no or will we just lay down and let him destroy our country? It's time to make a decision.
Is this the end of America?*
Posted: March 19, 2009, 7:38 PM
by NP Editor Terence Corcoran
U.S. law-making is riddled with slapdash, incompetence and gamesmanship/*/
By Terence Corcoran /
Helicopter Ben Bernanke’s Federal Reserve is dropping trillions of fresh paper dollars on the world economy, the President of the United States is cracking jokes on late night comedy shows, his energy minister is threatening a trade war over carbon emissions, his treasury secretary is dithering over a banking reform program amid rising concerns over his competence and a monumentally dysfunctional U.S. Congress is launching another public jihad against corporations and bankers.
As an aghast world — from China to Chicago and Chihuahua — watches, the circus-like U.S. political system seems to be declining into near chaos. Through it all, stock and financial markets are paralyzed. The more the policy regime does, the worse the outlook gets. The multi-ringed spectacle raises a disturbing question in many minds: Is this the end of America? Probably not, if only because there are good reasons for optimism. The U.S. economy has pulled out of self-destructive political spirals in the past, spurred on by its business class and corporate leaders, the profit-making and market-creating people who rose above the political turmoil to once again lift the world out of financial crisis.
It’s happened many times before, except for once, when it took 20 years to rise out of the Great Depression.
Past success, however, is no guarantee of future recovery, especially now when there are daily disasters and new indicators of political breakdown. All developments are not disasters in themselves. The AIG bonus firestorm is a diversion from real issues , but it puts the ghastly political classes who make U.S. law on display for what they are: ageing self-serving demagogues who have spent decades warping the U.S. political system for their own ends.
We see the system up close, law-making that is riddled with slapdash, incompetence and gamesmanship. One test of whether we are witnessing the end of America is how many more times Americans put up with congressional show trials of individual business people and their employees, slandering and vilifying them for their actions and motives. And for how long will they tolerate a President who berates business and corporations as dens of crime and malfeasance?
If the majority of Americans come to accept the caricatures of business as true, then America is closer to the end of its life as a global leader, as a champion of markets and individualism.
But America is at risk in other ways, especially in the technical business of setting and executing policy. The presidency of Barack Obama has set out on a course that has no precedent in U.S. history. Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose New Deal transformed the U.S. economy during the Great Depression, pushed America off on a sharply different political and ideological course. The Obama administration is different in many ways, not least in its supreme self-confidence in its methods and objectives.
Reform of health care, environmental policy, education, energy, banking, regulation — every nook and cranny of the U.S. economy has been put on alert for major change. Expansion of government spending, plunging the U.S. into unprecedented deficits, is without parallel. In economic policy, through regulation and control of energy output, financial services and monetary expansion, the U.S. government has embarked on a fundamental reshaping of America.
It is designed, in short, to bring on the end of America.
The spillover effect of all this on the rest of the world promises to be dramatically disruptive. The greatest global risk is in monetary and currency policy. Below is a chart that graphically demonstrates the sharp deviation in monetary policy from past norms. Under the chairmanship of Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve is in the midst of a giant economic experiment, flooding the world with U.S. dollars, hoping that flood will stimulate economic activity.
The total monetary base, already at astronomical levels, is now expected to take another big hit with the new Fed policy of buying up U.S. longer-term treasury bills in a bid to drive down long-term interest rates. Mr. Bernanke is sometimes known as “Helicopter Ben” because he once in an academic paper referred to the use of “helicopters” full of money to rescue an economy from deflation.
In comments Wednesday to explain the Fed’s new policy of buying $300-billion in U.S. treasury bills, Mr. Bernanke noted that the Fed is now more worried about inflation being too low than about it getting too high in the future. For the rest of the world, however, the worry is that America is at risk of becoming the fountainhead of a new inflationary outburst. The U.S. dollar is now in decline, gold is moving sharply higher, and new global currency turmoil is on the horizon. It may not happen. A paper just published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, source of the chart above, says that the Fed will have to be prepared to absorb all the excess money it has poured into the U.S. economy.
It will be a technical and political challenge unlike any central bank has ever undertaken. The future of America is at stake
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Congressional Bill on World Porverty : Insanity
If you have the guts to read something that will make you fall off your chair - read this from our government - this proves our legislators are insane. They are not from this part of the world or even this planet.
I can't come to grips with this - I can't comprehend how these people make decisions - what do they use as a reference? It's as though they have no idea what is going on out side of Washington. It's like they are having third graders make decisions for them. These people are completely worthless - totally without any idea of what they are doing. None!!
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-2433
I can't come to grips with this - I can't comprehend how these people make decisions - what do they use as a reference? It's as though they have no idea what is going on out side of Washington. It's like they are having third graders make decisions for them. These people are completely worthless - totally without any idea of what they are doing. None!!
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-2433
Party Affiliations Aside : Military Brass Ban Gone
This is incredible - two Democrats have come out of hiding to stand with the people on the second amendment - maybe there's hope for us yet -
Keep the faith
One Win For Our Side
At about five-thirty yesterday evening, the lengthy feature that was to have gone in today's editions of both the Outdoor and Shooting Wires was rendered unnecessary. Normally, that's not a reason for celebration. But this was no ordinary occurrence. After having spoken with Larry Haynie of Georgia Arms regarding the Department of Defense decision to require all once-fired military brass be shredded rather than sold for repurposing to consumers and domestic agencies, it seemed the set-piece battle over gun ownership was underway.
This morning, there is no discomfort whatsoever to report that the Department of Defense has been introduced to the idea that unilateral decisions of this magnitude don't come without consequences. The voice of reason came from the United States Senators from Montana. More accurately, the voices of reason came from the Democratic senators from Montana./Known for pushing ethics reform, Senator Jon Tester apparently isn't afraid to push for gun owners, too.//
Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) a hand on the purse strings gets everyone's attention - even at the DOD/
At approximately 4:15 p.m. Eastern yesterday afternoon, Senators Tester and Baucus of Montana faxed a cosigned letter to the Department of Defense asking DOD to reverse their new policy requiring "mutilation" of fired military cartridge brass. At approximately 5:30 p.m. Eastern our sources tell us, Senator Tester's office received a fax back from the Defense Department saying the brass destruction policy IS reversed. Already, websites that coordinate the sale of DOD surplus are beginning to remove the "Mutilation" requirement from their listings. This only hours after they began adding the mutilation stipulation.
In short, it seems a fax from the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and another Senator had considerable powers of persuasion. That translates to a win for the law-abiding gun owners of the United States. It is only appropriate that we recognize the party affiliation of both these men, because their willingness to go to bat for the ammunition industry demonstrates that, despite all the indications to the contrary, Washington is not irrevocably divided down party lines.
When it comes to firearms and Second Amendment rights, it seems party affiliations can still be disregarded.That is reassuring.Today, firearms owners owe these two gentlemen a vote of thanks. They didn't wait for an opinion poll, they acted. Still, this is still no time to relax when it comes to firearms. DOD has seen the light, but Attorney General Holder and the Justice Department seem determined to try and convince America the problems with Mexican drug smuggling and the related violence is due to the ease with which American arms are being purchased here and smuggled into Mexico.
Fortunately, not everyone is sitting still for that argument. Last week, Chris Cox, executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action warned a House subcommittee not to make American gun owners "scapegoats" for the Mexican crisis."
According to some, Cox said in a prepared statement, "the violence in Mexico is not the fault of the Mexican drug cartels or their American customers, nor is it the fault of decades of Mexican government corruption. In their views, the fault lies with American gun owners." That, Cox continued, "is an outrageous assertion."
But that assertion continues. And last week, three Democratic lawmakers were quick to notify Attorney General Holder of their "vigorous opposition" to any new gun restrictions the Obama administration might be considering. The three lawmakers were Alaska Senator Mark Begich and - you guessed it - Montana Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester. Despite some ugly times that will likely lie ahead, it seems it's not too-late to hope for some non-partisan common sense to be injected into Congress.
OK, maybe that's optimistic, but we'll take this win - and all the support we can muster. Thank you, Senators Tester and Baucus, for your unhesitating support. Oh yeah - the following note is up on the Georgia Arms website: "Dear Loyal Customers,Thanks to your voice, DOD has rescinded the order to mutilate all spent cases as of 4:30 pm on 3/17/09. We appreciate the time and effort that you expended, together we all made a difference. We will be posting the email we received from DOD as well as any additional information within the next 12-16 hours.
Thanks so much and lets get to work!!!"/--Jim Shepherd/
Keep the faith
One Win For Our Side
At about five-thirty yesterday evening, the lengthy feature that was to have gone in today's editions of both the Outdoor and Shooting Wires was rendered unnecessary. Normally, that's not a reason for celebration. But this was no ordinary occurrence. After having spoken with Larry Haynie of Georgia Arms regarding the Department of Defense decision to require all once-fired military brass be shredded rather than sold for repurposing to consumers and domestic agencies, it seemed the set-piece battle over gun ownership was underway.
This morning, there is no discomfort whatsoever to report that the Department of Defense has been introduced to the idea that unilateral decisions of this magnitude don't come without consequences. The voice of reason came from the United States Senators from Montana. More accurately, the voices of reason came from the Democratic senators from Montana./Known for pushing ethics reform, Senator Jon Tester apparently isn't afraid to push for gun owners, too.//
Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) a hand on the purse strings gets everyone's attention - even at the DOD/
At approximately 4:15 p.m. Eastern yesterday afternoon, Senators Tester and Baucus of Montana faxed a cosigned letter to the Department of Defense asking DOD to reverse their new policy requiring "mutilation" of fired military cartridge brass. At approximately 5:30 p.m. Eastern our sources tell us, Senator Tester's office received a fax back from the Defense Department saying the brass destruction policy IS reversed. Already, websites that coordinate the sale of DOD surplus are beginning to remove the "Mutilation" requirement from their listings. This only hours after they began adding the mutilation stipulation.
In short, it seems a fax from the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and another Senator had considerable powers of persuasion. That translates to a win for the law-abiding gun owners of the United States. It is only appropriate that we recognize the party affiliation of both these men, because their willingness to go to bat for the ammunition industry demonstrates that, despite all the indications to the contrary, Washington is not irrevocably divided down party lines.
When it comes to firearms and Second Amendment rights, it seems party affiliations can still be disregarded.That is reassuring.Today, firearms owners owe these two gentlemen a vote of thanks. They didn't wait for an opinion poll, they acted. Still, this is still no time to relax when it comes to firearms. DOD has seen the light, but Attorney General Holder and the Justice Department seem determined to try and convince America the problems with Mexican drug smuggling and the related violence is due to the ease with which American arms are being purchased here and smuggled into Mexico.
Fortunately, not everyone is sitting still for that argument. Last week, Chris Cox, executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action warned a House subcommittee not to make American gun owners "scapegoats" for the Mexican crisis."
According to some, Cox said in a prepared statement, "the violence in Mexico is not the fault of the Mexican drug cartels or their American customers, nor is it the fault of decades of Mexican government corruption. In their views, the fault lies with American gun owners." That, Cox continued, "is an outrageous assertion."
But that assertion continues. And last week, three Democratic lawmakers were quick to notify Attorney General Holder of their "vigorous opposition" to any new gun restrictions the Obama administration might be considering. The three lawmakers were Alaska Senator Mark Begich and - you guessed it - Montana Senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester. Despite some ugly times that will likely lie ahead, it seems it's not too-late to hope for some non-partisan common sense to be injected into Congress.
OK, maybe that's optimistic, but we'll take this win - and all the support we can muster. Thank you, Senators Tester and Baucus, for your unhesitating support. Oh yeah - the following note is up on the Georgia Arms website: "Dear Loyal Customers,Thanks to your voice, DOD has rescinded the order to mutilate all spent cases as of 4:30 pm on 3/17/09. We appreciate the time and effort that you expended, together we all made a difference. We will be posting the email we received from DOD as well as any additional information within the next 12-16 hours.
Thanks so much and lets get to work!!!"/--Jim Shepherd/
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
The War On Terror Is In America : Government Against the People
The underground war on the truth in this country is now all above ground as the media and the Marxists that were hidden in our government, and else where, are forging ahead with their agenda to crush freedom. As if changing the wording of the war on terror will some how change the out come is beyond the pale, but as we all know now, the American people will believe just about anything Obama says.
Even when it's too late, they will still believe -
This article might be a joke, but then everyone thought Obama was 'centrist' during the campaign to. No one is laughing now, are they, except Obama and his thug Friends from the swamps of Chicago and the media. They played their followers for fools and won.
Now we all pay the price for ignorance and complacency. Who knew? hmmmm
Keep the faith -
The End of the Global War on Terror
Updated 4:58 p.m. 3/24/09By Al Kamen
The end of the Global War on Terror -- or at least the use of that phrase -- has been codified at the Pentagon. Reports that the phrase was being retired have been circulating for some time amongst senior administration officials, and this morning speechwriters and other staff were notified via this e-mail to use "Overseas Contingency Operation" instead. "
Recently, in a LtGen [John] Bergman, USMC, statement for the 25 March [congressional] hearing, OMB required that the following change be made before going to the Hill," Dave Riedel, of the Office of Security Review, wrote in an e-mail. "OMB says: 'This Administration prefers to avoid using the term "Long War" or "Global War on Terror" [GWOT]. Please use "Overseas Contingency Operation.'"Riedel asked recipients to "Please pass on to your speech writers and try to catch this change before the statements make it to OMB."
An OMB spokesman took issue with the interpretation of OMB's wishes. "There was no memo, no guidance," said Kenneth Baer. "This is the opinion of a career civil servant."
Referring to the phrase "global war on terror," Baer said, "I have no reason to believe that would be stricken" from Hill testimony.
By way of history, senior Bush administration officials several years ago wanted to stop using the phrase and switch to something many felt might better reflect the realities of the fight against international terrorism.
One leading option was to change the name to GSAVE, or Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism. This was not as catchy an acronym as GWOT, but officials felt it more accurately described the battle.Then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld even used the GSAVE abbreviation publicly.
But, in a White House meeting, President Bush ruled that it was still a war for him, and Rumsfeld and everyone else went back to GWOT.
Even when it's too late, they will still believe -
This article might be a joke, but then everyone thought Obama was 'centrist' during the campaign to. No one is laughing now, are they, except Obama and his thug Friends from the swamps of Chicago and the media. They played their followers for fools and won.
Now we all pay the price for ignorance and complacency. Who knew? hmmmm
Keep the faith -
The End of the Global War on Terror
Updated 4:58 p.m. 3/24/09By Al Kamen
The end of the Global War on Terror -- or at least the use of that phrase -- has been codified at the Pentagon. Reports that the phrase was being retired have been circulating for some time amongst senior administration officials, and this morning speechwriters and other staff were notified via this e-mail to use "Overseas Contingency Operation" instead. "
Recently, in a LtGen [John] Bergman, USMC, statement for the 25 March [congressional] hearing, OMB required that the following change be made before going to the Hill," Dave Riedel, of the Office of Security Review, wrote in an e-mail. "OMB says: 'This Administration prefers to avoid using the term "Long War" or "Global War on Terror" [GWOT]. Please use "Overseas Contingency Operation.'"Riedel asked recipients to "Please pass on to your speech writers and try to catch this change before the statements make it to OMB."
An OMB spokesman took issue with the interpretation of OMB's wishes. "There was no memo, no guidance," said Kenneth Baer. "This is the opinion of a career civil servant."
Referring to the phrase "global war on terror," Baer said, "I have no reason to believe that would be stricken" from Hill testimony.
By way of history, senior Bush administration officials several years ago wanted to stop using the phrase and switch to something many felt might better reflect the realities of the fight against international terrorism.
One leading option was to change the name to GSAVE, or Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism. This was not as catchy an acronym as GWOT, but officials felt it more accurately described the battle.Then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld even used the GSAVE abbreviation publicly.
But, in a White House meeting, President Bush ruled that it was still a war for him, and Rumsfeld and everyone else went back to GWOT.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Dept.of Defense Bans Sale of Brass Casings to Civilian Mfgs.
The Marxist Obama administration moves forward into all aspects of our lives - sooner and not later we all will find freedom of choice, speech and just about every other form of freedom will be restricted or lost! The Department of Defense is just another area where the left has established a bunker of socialists like the State Department or Justice.
Who would have thought this could happen in America - Obama told everyone, that was willing to listen, what he would do to this country. This socialism didn't just pop up over night - this is who Obama is and always has been. The scary part is he is probably further left then we even know - he's just waiting for the right time and circumstances to come along - he's just waitng to connect with another big 'left' hook to our freedoms -
Remember, the next time you vote - 'elections have consequences' Think before about this before you get into the booth.
Keep the faith -
From: http://www.shootingwire.com/
No Longer Just Paranoia
Jim Shepherd
For months, anyone who's proffered the position that the Obama Administration was anti-gun has been dismissed as being a variety of things, from sore loser to rampant paranoid. Nonetheless, since assuming office, members of the Obama administration have steadily- and stealthily- moved against firearms and ammunition. Their only public blunder was Attorney General Holder's saying the "assault weapons ban" needed to be reinstated. Quickly, House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi - no friend of gun owners - went on record as opposing Holder'ssuggestion. She went as far as to parrot the words of pro-gun groups, saying the government should enforce the laws on the books today, rather than introducing new laws.
At the same time, the State Department notified Canadian authorities of plans to issue an export ban on "military caliber ammunition" to Canada. That proposed action would prevent the sales of .223, .308 and other military calibers. When Canadian authorities protested - and notified several members of rules and charges firearms exports-retroactively. While it seemed they had been headed off on one proposal, they had actually drawn attention away from other actions. If you're into incrementalism, that translates as a win. Anything passed brings the ultimate goal that much closer.
Last Friday, the anglers and hunters were notified that the National Park Service planned to make all lands under their control totally lead-free by 2010. No lead in ammo or fishing tackle. As we report in today's Outdoor Wire, that decision has kicked off howls of protests - and questions about the NPS trying to usurp states' rights by issuing their unilateral decision with no prior notification. It's definitely not going to be a decision without some serious discussions. That still doesn't mean the NPS will back off on their decision.
All these things are racing along on parallel tracks. Now, many observers -and not just those on the pro-gun side of the discussion - believe the country is hurtling toward a confrontation. The catalyst might be any one of several flashpoint issues, but both groups seem to believe a reckoning is unavoidable.
For months, I've gotten reports of everything from re-tasking of military heavy assault units for domestic violence scenarios to calls for "committees of correspondence" designed to spread news the way word was spread by citizens of the then-British colonies. In each instance, I've discounted the reports as internet hysteria that has produced breathless notices of "the real-deal on the new assault weapon ban"- or references to HR45 - a gun registration bill that is a prime example of "eyewash legislation". It's purpose has already been achieved.
Part of that discounting has been due to the fact that hot-blooded rhetoric seems to run along with fire arms ownership. To the chagrin of industry officials, there's never a shortage of people willing to go on camera, get red-faced and spout "from my cold dead hands"phrases. Admittedly, those people concern me, but more for their reinforcement of a negative stereotype to people who have no opinion one way or the other on firearms.
Today, however, a report that has nothing to do with rhetoric, hyperbole or rumor. A very disturbing report that points to a very real assault on ammunition supplies.The Department of Defense has issued a directive that bans the sale of military brass to ammunition re-manufacturers. Without that brass, a very large dent is put into civilian ammunition supplies.
New Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS) requirements call forthe "mutilation of shell casings". Mutilation, incidentally, is the destruction of the property "to the extent that prevents its reuse or reconstruction". Government officials will determine what constitutes "sufficient mutilation" but it's safe to say that it will no longer be suitable for remanufacturing.
The first word of this latest decision came over the weekend when Georgia Arms' Larry Haynie released a letter notifying him of the new requirement. For a company with an order in for 30,000 pounds of expended military brass in .223, .308 and .50 BMG, that was not a pleasant notification. Georgia Arms was remanufacturing more than one million rounds of .223 ammunition monthly; selling that ammo on the civilian market to resellers and to government agencies all over the country. Tomorrow, Georgia Arms will start sending cancellation notices for .223 ammunition to law enforcement agencies across the United States. Haynie sayshe may have to layoff half of his sixty-person workforce.
The message is simple. The implication is chilling. A new welcome page posted on Georgia Arms' website (www.georgia-arms.com)says simply "Due to new government regulations concerning the purchase ofsurplus brass, we are removing sales of all 223 and all 308 until furthernotice.">From there, it directs visitors to the government website for contactingelected representatives.All of us need to start contacting our elected representatives -and tellingthem, quite directly, that we're not going to put up with a move that notonly curtails access to ammunition (nearly all .223 and .308 manufacturingcapacity is tied up to satisfy the needs of the military) for civilians -but wastes taxpayers' money turning usable surplus into scrap metal.
Reducing the ammo brass to scrap reduces the value of the metal/surplus bynearly eighty percent. It also means that recast brass - in shippable form -may be shipped to China, one of the largest markets for U.S. metals on the world market. If this is allowed to go unchallenged, anyone who owns a modern or traditional rifle in .223 or .308 calibers will see the impact- probably sooner than later."Anyone" in this context means everyone from recreational shooters to law enforcement trainers. Pulling military brass out of the consumer supply chain means that all themanufacturing capacity being dedicated to meeting the military need will effectively become unavailable to civilians - forever.
Export rulings, lead bans, and brass mutilation orders from separate areas of the federal government look coincidental - on the surface. I'm not big onconspiracy theories - partially because I doubted the new administration would have gotten its collective act together so rapidly. Seems I've been wrong on that one - and mistakenly using the word "hoard" when talking about the nearly-insatiable demand for ammunition that continues across the country. Today, laying up of ammunition might be better described as prudent preparation for possible problems.
States are beginning to serve notice to the federal government they will not enforce laws that violate individual rights. The federal government seems intent on creating a society with increasingly higher numbers of people dependent on the government for either sustenance or employment. Average citizens are beginning to grow tired of being asked to "tote the note" for others' irresponsibility.
These are, indeed, uncertain times.Today, it's important that every reader take time to notify Congress that we- taxpayers - oppose this latest DOD move- and all the other not-so-subtle moves against gun owners.You can contact your elected officials in Washington by going to this webpage
http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
and following the links to your respective Senator or Congressman. One key member of the United States Senate is Montana's Senator Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. Baucus could make a call to the Pentagon and let them know their budgets might be reexamined if they don't reconsider this latest directive. At that point, the directive might labeled a "misunderstanding" and rescinded. But it is important that we keep pressure on Congress.
If that means phone calls, e-mails, and letters, let's get that done. If that doesn't produce results, we need to look beyond symbolic gestures like sending tea bags or bringing hundreds of thousands of gun owners to Washington and state capitols to protest. These are, indeed, uncertain times. But the time for uncertain actions maybe passing. We'll keep you posted. In the meantime, maintain situational awareness.--
Who would have thought this could happen in America - Obama told everyone, that was willing to listen, what he would do to this country. This socialism didn't just pop up over night - this is who Obama is and always has been. The scary part is he is probably further left then we even know - he's just waiting for the right time and circumstances to come along - he's just waitng to connect with another big 'left' hook to our freedoms -
Remember, the next time you vote - 'elections have consequences' Think before about this before you get into the booth.
Keep the faith -
From: http://www.shootingwire.com/
No Longer Just Paranoia
Jim Shepherd
For months, anyone who's proffered the position that the Obama Administration was anti-gun has been dismissed as being a variety of things, from sore loser to rampant paranoid. Nonetheless, since assuming office, members of the Obama administration have steadily- and stealthily- moved against firearms and ammunition. Their only public blunder was Attorney General Holder's saying the "assault weapons ban" needed to be reinstated. Quickly, House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi - no friend of gun owners - went on record as opposing Holder'ssuggestion. She went as far as to parrot the words of pro-gun groups, saying the government should enforce the laws on the books today, rather than introducing new laws.
At the same time, the State Department notified Canadian authorities of plans to issue an export ban on "military caliber ammunition" to Canada. That proposed action would prevent the sales of .223, .308 and other military calibers. When Canadian authorities protested - and notified several members of rules and charges firearms exports-retroactively. While it seemed they had been headed off on one proposal, they had actually drawn attention away from other actions. If you're into incrementalism, that translates as a win. Anything passed brings the ultimate goal that much closer.
Last Friday, the anglers and hunters were notified that the National Park Service planned to make all lands under their control totally lead-free by 2010. No lead in ammo or fishing tackle. As we report in today's Outdoor Wire, that decision has kicked off howls of protests - and questions about the NPS trying to usurp states' rights by issuing their unilateral decision with no prior notification. It's definitely not going to be a decision without some serious discussions. That still doesn't mean the NPS will back off on their decision.
All these things are racing along on parallel tracks. Now, many observers -and not just those on the pro-gun side of the discussion - believe the country is hurtling toward a confrontation. The catalyst might be any one of several flashpoint issues, but both groups seem to believe a reckoning is unavoidable.
For months, I've gotten reports of everything from re-tasking of military heavy assault units for domestic violence scenarios to calls for "committees of correspondence" designed to spread news the way word was spread by citizens of the then-British colonies. In each instance, I've discounted the reports as internet hysteria that has produced breathless notices of "the real-deal on the new assault weapon ban"- or references to HR45 - a gun registration bill that is a prime example of "eyewash legislation". It's purpose has already been achieved.
Part of that discounting has been due to the fact that hot-blooded rhetoric seems to run along with fire arms ownership. To the chagrin of industry officials, there's never a shortage of people willing to go on camera, get red-faced and spout "from my cold dead hands"phrases. Admittedly, those people concern me, but more for their reinforcement of a negative stereotype to people who have no opinion one way or the other on firearms.
Today, however, a report that has nothing to do with rhetoric, hyperbole or rumor. A very disturbing report that points to a very real assault on ammunition supplies.The Department of Defense has issued a directive that bans the sale of military brass to ammunition re-manufacturers. Without that brass, a very large dent is put into civilian ammunition supplies.
New Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS) requirements call forthe "mutilation of shell casings". Mutilation, incidentally, is the destruction of the property "to the extent that prevents its reuse or reconstruction". Government officials will determine what constitutes "sufficient mutilation" but it's safe to say that it will no longer be suitable for remanufacturing.
The first word of this latest decision came over the weekend when Georgia Arms' Larry Haynie released a letter notifying him of the new requirement. For a company with an order in for 30,000 pounds of expended military brass in .223, .308 and .50 BMG, that was not a pleasant notification. Georgia Arms was remanufacturing more than one million rounds of .223 ammunition monthly; selling that ammo on the civilian market to resellers and to government agencies all over the country. Tomorrow, Georgia Arms will start sending cancellation notices for .223 ammunition to law enforcement agencies across the United States. Haynie sayshe may have to layoff half of his sixty-person workforce.
The message is simple. The implication is chilling. A new welcome page posted on Georgia Arms' website (www.georgia-arms.com)says simply "Due to new government regulations concerning the purchase ofsurplus brass, we are removing sales of all 223 and all 308 until furthernotice.">From there, it directs visitors to the government website for contactingelected representatives.All of us need to start contacting our elected representatives -and tellingthem, quite directly, that we're not going to put up with a move that notonly curtails access to ammunition (nearly all .223 and .308 manufacturingcapacity is tied up to satisfy the needs of the military) for civilians -but wastes taxpayers' money turning usable surplus into scrap metal.
Reducing the ammo brass to scrap reduces the value of the metal/surplus bynearly eighty percent. It also means that recast brass - in shippable form -may be shipped to China, one of the largest markets for U.S. metals on the world market. If this is allowed to go unchallenged, anyone who owns a modern or traditional rifle in .223 or .308 calibers will see the impact- probably sooner than later."Anyone" in this context means everyone from recreational shooters to law enforcement trainers. Pulling military brass out of the consumer supply chain means that all themanufacturing capacity being dedicated to meeting the military need will effectively become unavailable to civilians - forever.
Export rulings, lead bans, and brass mutilation orders from separate areas of the federal government look coincidental - on the surface. I'm not big onconspiracy theories - partially because I doubted the new administration would have gotten its collective act together so rapidly. Seems I've been wrong on that one - and mistakenly using the word "hoard" when talking about the nearly-insatiable demand for ammunition that continues across the country. Today, laying up of ammunition might be better described as prudent preparation for possible problems.
States are beginning to serve notice to the federal government they will not enforce laws that violate individual rights. The federal government seems intent on creating a society with increasingly higher numbers of people dependent on the government for either sustenance or employment. Average citizens are beginning to grow tired of being asked to "tote the note" for others' irresponsibility.
These are, indeed, uncertain times.Today, it's important that every reader take time to notify Congress that we- taxpayers - oppose this latest DOD move- and all the other not-so-subtle moves against gun owners.You can contact your elected officials in Washington by going to this webpage
http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
and following the links to your respective Senator or Congressman. One key member of the United States Senate is Montana's Senator Max Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. Baucus could make a call to the Pentagon and let them know their budgets might be reexamined if they don't reconsider this latest directive. At that point, the directive might labeled a "misunderstanding" and rescinded. But it is important that we keep pressure on Congress.
If that means phone calls, e-mails, and letters, let's get that done. If that doesn't produce results, we need to look beyond symbolic gestures like sending tea bags or bringing hundreds of thousands of gun owners to Washington and state capitols to protest. These are, indeed, uncertain times. But the time for uncertain actions maybe passing. We'll keep you posted. In the meantime, maintain situational awareness.--
Monday, March 23, 2009
Liberal Marxism : Is This The Second American Revolution?
Did anyone in this country ever believe we would have another revolution? How is it possible that it came on us so fast and get so far along before we recognized it for what it is?
We as Americans have it so good that this kind of thing is unthinkable and very hard to understand or comprehend. This can happen elsewhere in the world but not in America, right?
Wrong - believe it because it's here now and it won't go away with wish full thinking. It demands every one's attention - take the ear buds out - shut off the music and look around at what is happening in our communities and nationally - is this what you want to happen? If not, demand your Representatives do the right thing for our country, future generations will depend on what we do now.
Remember, this government is suppose to work for us, the people, not the other way around.
Two paragraphs from Clay Shirky’s discussion, “Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable” posted on Instapundit, March 15, 2009.
“*That is what real revolutions are like. The old stuff gets broken faster than the new stuff is put in its place. The importance of any given experiment isn’t apparent at the moment it appears; big changes stall, small changes spread. Even the revolutionaries can’t predict what will happen. Agreements on all sides that core institutions must be protected are rendered meaningless by the very people doing the agreeing. (Luther and the Church both insisted, for years, that whatever else happened, no one was talking about a schism.) Ancient social bargains, once disrupted, can neither be mended nor quickly replaced, since any such bargain takes decades to solidify."
"And so it is today. When someone demands to know how we are going to replace newspapers, they are really demanding to be told that we are not living through a revolution. They are demanding to be told that old systems won’t break before new systems are in place. They are demanding to be told that ancient social bargains aren’t in peril, that core institutions will be spared, that new methods of spreading information will improve previous practice rather than upending it. They are demanding to be lied to."
"There are fewer and fewer people who can convincingly tell such a lie.”
We as Americans have it so good that this kind of thing is unthinkable and very hard to understand or comprehend. This can happen elsewhere in the world but not in America, right?
Wrong - believe it because it's here now and it won't go away with wish full thinking. It demands every one's attention - take the ear buds out - shut off the music and look around at what is happening in our communities and nationally - is this what you want to happen? If not, demand your Representatives do the right thing for our country, future generations will depend on what we do now.
Remember, this government is suppose to work for us, the people, not the other way around.
Two paragraphs from Clay Shirky’s discussion, “Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable” posted on Instapundit, March 15, 2009.
“*That is what real revolutions are like. The old stuff gets broken faster than the new stuff is put in its place. The importance of any given experiment isn’t apparent at the moment it appears; big changes stall, small changes spread. Even the revolutionaries can’t predict what will happen. Agreements on all sides that core institutions must be protected are rendered meaningless by the very people doing the agreeing. (Luther and the Church both insisted, for years, that whatever else happened, no one was talking about a schism.) Ancient social bargains, once disrupted, can neither be mended nor quickly replaced, since any such bargain takes decades to solidify."
"And so it is today. When someone demands to know how we are going to replace newspapers, they are really demanding to be told that we are not living through a revolution. They are demanding to be told that old systems won’t break before new systems are in place. They are demanding to be told that ancient social bargains aren’t in peril, that core institutions will be spared, that new methods of spreading information will improve previous practice rather than upending it. They are demanding to be lied to."
"There are fewer and fewer people who can convincingly tell such a lie.”
Sunday, March 22, 2009
A video : Stand and Deliever Now For America
What a powerful performance - it's take a stand now or all is lost for several generations or longer is for ever - it can't happen here but it has!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoXd7T4YJn4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoXd7T4YJn4
A video - Thomas Paine Speaks Again
Here is another great video from our history and Thomas Paine - this is a must watch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFKGrmsBDk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFKGrmsBDk
Pirate Problem Solved - Attack The Pirates
Don't you find it hard to believe it has taken this long for the crews and owners of ships that must traverse pirate infested waters to choice to fight back - and why haven't they armed that ships and crews with automatic weapons? Destroy the attackers before they even get close to the ship.
Oh sure, I know - it wouldn't be fair - after all, the pirates are in the water in small boats and the ships crew have to much of an advantage firing down on these poor souls. They're probably just victims of America's foreign policies forced on the world by that horrible George Bush.
If only we could sit down and have a meaningful dialogue with them, and explain that we just want to get along, maybe we could solve this problem without bloodshed. How cool is that - we can all, in the end, be friends.
Keep the faith - get on board, the battle is joined!
Fighting From the Stern Castle
Posted By James R. Rummel On March 13, 2009
In Crime and Punishment, Law Enforcement, Military Affairs, Transportation
Venturing out to sea on boats during the bad old days of Viking culture was tantamount to suicide.Their longboats were marvels of engineering. Shallow draft so they could travel up rivers, yet also able to operate in the open ocean, they were the perfect craft for lightning commando raids. They were also fast enough that they could catch any ship the Vikings could see, using oars for propulsion while larger ships were at the mercy of the wind.
If a band of Vikings set their sights on taking a ship, there wasn’t anything the merchant skippers of the day could do to prevent a screaming group of northmen from swarming aboard. But then some nameless genius, or more likely a group of geniuses, came up with a brilliant idea. If it was impossible to prevent the Vikings from boarding, why not build ships where the crew could fight them after the pirates were on deck? This simple concept led to a ship known as the Cog, or cog-built ships.
Ironically, the general design was adapted from the Vikings own merchant vessels, but there were two changes that proved to make all the difference. The European ship builders constructed little wooden forts in the front and rear of the ship. They called these wooden castles the [4] “stern castle” for the one in back, and the “forward castle”, or “fo’c’sle”. Quaint names that echo with past blood and terror. The idea was to let the Vikings come aboard if they so chose, while the crew retreated to their forts. The pirates would be out in the open, vulnerable to any sort of attack, while the crew fought from relative safety.
These new tactics by their former prey created problems for the Vikings that they never did manage to overcome. The best they could do was tie a bunch of longships together, forming a sort of floating roadblock to the merchant ship, and using the combined Viking crews to try and overwhelm the defenders through sheer numbers. The increased casualties that came from assaulting prepared defenses meant that going a-viking was nevermore as much fun as it used to be.The merchant crews, even if faced with overwhelming numbers, would often refuse to surrender, and fight to the death.
Word had gotten around from the few survivors and escaped sailors that managed to make their way back home that slavery, misery, and painful death awaited anyone who was captured alive by the Vikings. There just wasn’t any reason to give up.
I’m going over ancient history with you because It seems that the same tactics first developed to deal with berserk Norsemen coming over the side also apply when faced with modern day pirates.The crew of a Chinese merchant ship named the Zhenhua 4 managed to keep some pirates off the coast of Aden from taking their ship last December. When beset by armed gunmen in speedboats, the modern equivalent of Vikings in a longship, they took action.“The resolute crew retreated to their living quarters and called for help. As the pirates came aboard, the crew fought back with fire bombs and fire hoses, and refused to come out of the living quarters. The pirates fired at the crew, and were apparently perplexed at what to do.
Meanwhile, a nearby Malaysian warship dispatched a helicopter, which shot at the pirates and caused them to flee in their speedboats. The crew of the Zhenhua 4 patched up the bullet holes and resumed their voyage. “Ships are still built with raised areas to the rear, leaving an area of open deck. This is to make it easier to load and unload cargo, as well as for open air storage while the ship is under weigh. But it also leaves the pirates with little cover if the crew decides to barricade themselves in the stern castle and fight back.The weapons were most assuredly different from those used by the sailors manning the Medieval cogs, with fire hoses and fire bombs instead of arrows and boat hooks, but the result was the same.
It is ironic that the old ways, the ancient tactics, have been rediscovered in this age of high tech marvels. The main difference seems to be that communications have become essentially instantaneous, with the skipper of the Zhenhua 4 using the radio to call for assistance. It seems that the Internet is also taking a role, informing other crews that are at risk as to their options.“The Internet have proved an invaluable tool for ships planning for the Aden run.
Everyone knows of the measures used by the Zhenhua 4 and the North Koreans, but there are many more ideas that have not gotten much coverage in the mass media. For example, crews now make more use of the fire hoses, and collect large objects (sheets of metal, junked furniture and empty boxes) to be heaved overboard onto the pirate boats. Poles are fabricated for pushing away ladders pirates often use to get aboard. The captains and crew members on the Internet exchange techniques for training crews, and preparing “repel boarders” drills.”Notice, if you will, that even the lowly boat hook is enjoying a renewed popularity as an anti-piracy tool. Besides steel hulls and firearms, I really doubt that a 10th Century sailor would be all that out of sorts if they were called upon to repel boarders.
The crews of modern merchant vessels are held for ransom by the pirates, so they are not made into slaves like in days of old. But, even so, most find that coming under the control of armed pirates to be less than a happy experience, and the sailors who went through that ordeal are eager to spread the word.“Sailors that have been aboard captured ships, and spent months in captivity, relate what that experience was like, and let other sailors know what to expect. This encourages the merchant ship sailors to pay closer attention to the drills and techniques to be used to avoid capture in the first place. “The biggest value of resisting is to buy time so a warship can intervene.“These efforts by the crews have led to nearly 250 pirates being captured, in the past six months, by warships that often show up.”As Alphonse Karr once said, “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.”(Cross posted at Hell in a Handbasket.)
Oh sure, I know - it wouldn't be fair - after all, the pirates are in the water in small boats and the ships crew have to much of an advantage firing down on these poor souls. They're probably just victims of America's foreign policies forced on the world by that horrible George Bush.
If only we could sit down and have a meaningful dialogue with them, and explain that we just want to get along, maybe we could solve this problem without bloodshed. How cool is that - we can all, in the end, be friends.
Keep the faith - get on board, the battle is joined!
Fighting From the Stern Castle
Posted By James R. Rummel On March 13, 2009
In Crime and Punishment, Law Enforcement, Military Affairs, Transportation
Venturing out to sea on boats during the bad old days of Viking culture was tantamount to suicide.Their longboats were marvels of engineering. Shallow draft so they could travel up rivers, yet also able to operate in the open ocean, they were the perfect craft for lightning commando raids. They were also fast enough that they could catch any ship the Vikings could see, using oars for propulsion while larger ships were at the mercy of the wind.
If a band of Vikings set their sights on taking a ship, there wasn’t anything the merchant skippers of the day could do to prevent a screaming group of northmen from swarming aboard. But then some nameless genius, or more likely a group of geniuses, came up with a brilliant idea. If it was impossible to prevent the Vikings from boarding, why not build ships where the crew could fight them after the pirates were on deck? This simple concept led to a ship known as the Cog, or cog-built ships.
Ironically, the general design was adapted from the Vikings own merchant vessels, but there were two changes that proved to make all the difference. The European ship builders constructed little wooden forts in the front and rear of the ship. They called these wooden castles the [4] “stern castle” for the one in back, and the “forward castle”, or “fo’c’sle”. Quaint names that echo with past blood and terror. The idea was to let the Vikings come aboard if they so chose, while the crew retreated to their forts. The pirates would be out in the open, vulnerable to any sort of attack, while the crew fought from relative safety.
These new tactics by their former prey created problems for the Vikings that they never did manage to overcome. The best they could do was tie a bunch of longships together, forming a sort of floating roadblock to the merchant ship, and using the combined Viking crews to try and overwhelm the defenders through sheer numbers. The increased casualties that came from assaulting prepared defenses meant that going a-viking was nevermore as much fun as it used to be.The merchant crews, even if faced with overwhelming numbers, would often refuse to surrender, and fight to the death.
Word had gotten around from the few survivors and escaped sailors that managed to make their way back home that slavery, misery, and painful death awaited anyone who was captured alive by the Vikings. There just wasn’t any reason to give up.
I’m going over ancient history with you because It seems that the same tactics first developed to deal with berserk Norsemen coming over the side also apply when faced with modern day pirates.The crew of a Chinese merchant ship named the Zhenhua 4 managed to keep some pirates off the coast of Aden from taking their ship last December. When beset by armed gunmen in speedboats, the modern equivalent of Vikings in a longship, they took action.“The resolute crew retreated to their living quarters and called for help. As the pirates came aboard, the crew fought back with fire bombs and fire hoses, and refused to come out of the living quarters. The pirates fired at the crew, and were apparently perplexed at what to do.
Meanwhile, a nearby Malaysian warship dispatched a helicopter, which shot at the pirates and caused them to flee in their speedboats. The crew of the Zhenhua 4 patched up the bullet holes and resumed their voyage. “Ships are still built with raised areas to the rear, leaving an area of open deck. This is to make it easier to load and unload cargo, as well as for open air storage while the ship is under weigh. But it also leaves the pirates with little cover if the crew decides to barricade themselves in the stern castle and fight back.The weapons were most assuredly different from those used by the sailors manning the Medieval cogs, with fire hoses and fire bombs instead of arrows and boat hooks, but the result was the same.
It is ironic that the old ways, the ancient tactics, have been rediscovered in this age of high tech marvels. The main difference seems to be that communications have become essentially instantaneous, with the skipper of the Zhenhua 4 using the radio to call for assistance. It seems that the Internet is also taking a role, informing other crews that are at risk as to their options.“The Internet have proved an invaluable tool for ships planning for the Aden run.
Everyone knows of the measures used by the Zhenhua 4 and the North Koreans, but there are many more ideas that have not gotten much coverage in the mass media. For example, crews now make more use of the fire hoses, and collect large objects (sheets of metal, junked furniture and empty boxes) to be heaved overboard onto the pirate boats. Poles are fabricated for pushing away ladders pirates often use to get aboard. The captains and crew members on the Internet exchange techniques for training crews, and preparing “repel boarders” drills.”Notice, if you will, that even the lowly boat hook is enjoying a renewed popularity as an anti-piracy tool. Besides steel hulls and firearms, I really doubt that a 10th Century sailor would be all that out of sorts if they were called upon to repel boarders.
The crews of modern merchant vessels are held for ransom by the pirates, so they are not made into slaves like in days of old. But, even so, most find that coming under the control of armed pirates to be less than a happy experience, and the sailors who went through that ordeal are eager to spread the word.“Sailors that have been aboard captured ships, and spent months in captivity, relate what that experience was like, and let other sailors know what to expect. This encourages the merchant ship sailors to pay closer attention to the drills and techniques to be used to avoid capture in the first place. “The biggest value of resisting is to buy time so a warship can intervene.“These efforts by the crews have led to nearly 250 pirates being captured, in the past six months, by warships that often show up.”As Alphonse Karr once said, “Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.”(Cross posted at Hell in a Handbasket.)
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Thomas Paine On The 2nd American Revolution
With the news of the 'tea parties' across the country to protest our new government's insane activity, and more on the way, this video is just what we need to get us all off dead center and take a stand to get our country back.
Keep the faith - " - now is the time to come to the aid of our country" - the people are coming to join the battle!
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/thomas-paines-american-revolution/360288003075801368/?icid=VIDURVNWS01
Keep the faith - " - now is the time to come to the aid of our country" - the people are coming to join the battle!
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/thomas-paines-american-revolution/360288003075801368/?icid=VIDURVNWS01
Friday, March 20, 2009
Palin Still Very Popular AND A Force For GOP
No matter how the liberal Democrats spin who she is, the average citizen still find her one of them - someone that they can trust- something we can't do now -
Palin's Popularity Soars in Alaska
Thursday, March 19, 2009 8:19 PM
Alaskans aren’t fazed much by the ongoing Sarah Palin-bashing taking place in the Lower 48 -- a new poll indicates the governor’s popularity remains sky high among voters in her home state.
Anchorage-based pollster Hays Research Group says its March survey shows 61.3 percent -- nearly two out of every three Alaskans -- feel either “very positive” or “positive” about Gov. Palin.
Palin triggers a negative reaction from about one-third of Alaskans, however. The poll found some 32.7 percent of Alaskans rate Palin as either “somewhat negative” (12.5 percent) or “very negative” (20.2 percent).
Only 6 percent are undecided about her, suggesting that the GOP governor tends to evoke strong feelings one way or the other. The poll of 400 Alaskans has an error margin of plus or minus 4.9 percent.
Anchorage pollster Ivan Moore reported similar results in January. His survey showed Palin’s favorability rating at 63 percent.
Palin’s popularity has fallen well off her peak level of 89 percent. Palin reached that highpoint in an Ivan Moore survey conducted in May 2007, about 15 months before she was named GOP Sen. John McCain’s vice presidential running mate.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Palin's Popularity Soars in Alaska
Thursday, March 19, 2009 8:19 PM
Alaskans aren’t fazed much by the ongoing Sarah Palin-bashing taking place in the Lower 48 -- a new poll indicates the governor’s popularity remains sky high among voters in her home state.
Anchorage-based pollster Hays Research Group says its March survey shows 61.3 percent -- nearly two out of every three Alaskans -- feel either “very positive” or “positive” about Gov. Palin.
Palin triggers a negative reaction from about one-third of Alaskans, however. The poll found some 32.7 percent of Alaskans rate Palin as either “somewhat negative” (12.5 percent) or “very negative” (20.2 percent).
Only 6 percent are undecided about her, suggesting that the GOP governor tends to evoke strong feelings one way or the other. The poll of 400 Alaskans has an error margin of plus or minus 4.9 percent.
Anchorage pollster Ivan Moore reported similar results in January. His survey showed Palin’s favorability rating at 63 percent.
Palin’s popularity has fallen well off her peak level of 89 percent. Palin reached that highpoint in an Ivan Moore survey conducted in May 2007, about 15 months before she was named GOP Sen. John McCain’s vice presidential running mate.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
ACORN Using Taxpayer Money To Bastardize Elections
ACORN is under investigation in 15 states for voter fraud and it is one of the reasons we have the financial crisis we have today - the other is the liberal Democrats lead by Barnie Frank and Chris Dodd along with Bill Clinton, Janet Reno, and Jimmy Carter to mention just a few that declared Fannie and Freddie on the right track to allow everyone to have a home even if they couldn't afford it.
To allow ACORN to have a hand in the Census would be like allowing - - I guess I can't think of anything that would be worse as we are now in the throes of just about everything that is bad for our country - the Census being controlled by ACORN and the White House is just one more nail in our own coffin. This would be just another part of the Marxist socialist plan to fundamentally change America.
What in the world is going here here? Who are these people? Who voted for these guys?
ACORN to Partner With Government for 2010 Census
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 9:07 AM
By: Dave Eberhart
The Association of Community Organizations for Reform (ACORN) is now a “national partner” with the U.S. Census Bureau, soon to help the White House find 1.4 million workers to canvass for the country’s 2010 census.
If the acronym rings a bell, it’s because the organization has a history of voter fraud charges in the last election cycle, according to a report by FOXNews.com.
ACORN will be joining with more than 250 national partners, including TARGET and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), to assist in the hiring of census workers around the country.
ACORN spokesman Scott Levenson told FOXNews.com, “ACORN as an organization has not been charged with any crime,” adding that concerns that the organization will unfairly influence the census are unfounded.
The U.S. Census Bureau has also gone on the defensive.
“The Census (Bureau) is a nonpartisan, non-political agency and we’re very dedicated to an accurate account,” bureau spokesman Stephen Buckner told FOXNews.com. “We have a lot of quality controls in place to keep any kind of systemic error or fraudulent behavior to affect the counts.”
Buckner said 140,000 census taker jobs must be filled to complete the first phase of the effort. Each applicant, he emphasized, must take a basic skills exam and is also subject to an FBI background check.
But there are many who remain concerned about the organization’s role.
"ACORN has been accused of voter fraud, embezzlement, and more... and yet this is a group that the federal government wants helping with the census?" asks Bobby Eberle of GOPUSA.
“It’s a concern, especially when you look at all the different charges of voter fraud. And it’s not just the lawmakers’ concern. It should be the concern of every citizen in the country,” Rep. Lynn A. Westmoreland, R-Ga., vice ranking member of the subcommittee for the U.S. Census, told FOXNews.com. “We want an enumeration. We don’t want to have any false numbers.”
ACORN came under assault in 2007 when Washington State filed felony charges against several paid ACORN employees and supervisors for more than 1,700 fraudulent voter registrations. In March 2008, an ACORN worker in Pennsylvania was sentenced for making 29 fraudulent voter registration forms.
Meanwhile, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a member of the House census subcommittee, said, “I feel fairly confident that the penalties for an individual manipulating the count are pretty severe,” noting that the penalties would certainly deter any fraud in the counting by workers. The penalty for any fraudulent activity can be up to five years in jail.
The census count is critical to both politicians and states because it not only determines congressional allocation, but it also provides the raw data by which government spending is allocated on everything from roads to schools.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
To allow ACORN to have a hand in the Census would be like allowing - - I guess I can't think of anything that would be worse as we are now in the throes of just about everything that is bad for our country - the Census being controlled by ACORN and the White House is just one more nail in our own coffin. This would be just another part of the Marxist socialist plan to fundamentally change America.
What in the world is going here here? Who are these people? Who voted for these guys?
ACORN to Partner With Government for 2010 Census
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 9:07 AM
By: Dave Eberhart
The Association of Community Organizations for Reform (ACORN) is now a “national partner” with the U.S. Census Bureau, soon to help the White House find 1.4 million workers to canvass for the country’s 2010 census.
If the acronym rings a bell, it’s because the organization has a history of voter fraud charges in the last election cycle, according to a report by FOXNews.com.
ACORN will be joining with more than 250 national partners, including TARGET and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), to assist in the hiring of census workers around the country.
ACORN spokesman Scott Levenson told FOXNews.com, “ACORN as an organization has not been charged with any crime,” adding that concerns that the organization will unfairly influence the census are unfounded.
The U.S. Census Bureau has also gone on the defensive.
“The Census (Bureau) is a nonpartisan, non-political agency and we’re very dedicated to an accurate account,” bureau spokesman Stephen Buckner told FOXNews.com. “We have a lot of quality controls in place to keep any kind of systemic error or fraudulent behavior to affect the counts.”
Buckner said 140,000 census taker jobs must be filled to complete the first phase of the effort. Each applicant, he emphasized, must take a basic skills exam and is also subject to an FBI background check.
But there are many who remain concerned about the organization’s role.
"ACORN has been accused of voter fraud, embezzlement, and more... and yet this is a group that the federal government wants helping with the census?" asks Bobby Eberle of GOPUSA.
“It’s a concern, especially when you look at all the different charges of voter fraud. And it’s not just the lawmakers’ concern. It should be the concern of every citizen in the country,” Rep. Lynn A. Westmoreland, R-Ga., vice ranking member of the subcommittee for the U.S. Census, told FOXNews.com. “We want an enumeration. We don’t want to have any false numbers.”
ACORN came under assault in 2007 when Washington State filed felony charges against several paid ACORN employees and supervisors for more than 1,700 fraudulent voter registrations. In March 2008, an ACORN worker in Pennsylvania was sentenced for making 29 fraudulent voter registration forms.
Meanwhile, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a member of the House census subcommittee, said, “I feel fairly confident that the penalties for an individual manipulating the count are pretty severe,” noting that the penalties would certainly deter any fraud in the counting by workers. The penalty for any fraudulent activity can be up to five years in jail.
The census count is critical to both politicians and states because it not only determines congressional allocation, but it also provides the raw data by which government spending is allocated on everything from roads to schools.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Enviromentlist Chu/Liberal Democrats Demand Less Power Generation : No Nuclear/Coal/Oil/Gas
How cool is this, Energy Secretary says we don't need Nuclear power generation, Obama says we don't need Coal or Oil or Natural Gas - wind and solar is enough for this country, especially after it becomes a third world dump. Hey, they are surviving is Cuba without this, why not here- dah!
Don't you just love the liberal Democrats and their urban terrorist friends the environmentalists, that have decided for all us that we have to live a more spartan life style to save the planet. I hope you noticed that I said 'we', this doesn't include 'them' as they must have the necessities of life to make the decisions that will save the world - 'we' on the other hand must obey their commands to make it all happen. They will live the good life while 'we' must do with less, much less.
If you find this a little strange, you are correct - this is a self fulfilling prophesy in that the enviros must accomplish this change-over as fast as possible to claim, in the near future when nothing has changed in our climate, that they can say," see, we were right - we saved the planet" - even though nothing was actually changed, except now 'we' are all living in poverty and have become powerless.
Is it possible that a majority of the voting public can't see the error of this and the fatal consequences of allowing this insanity to continue? It doesn't look good seeing what this new far left Marxist administration has in mind. Elections DO have consequences - You be the judge
keep the faith and watch these people and vote them out as soon as possible!
NIXING NUKE POWER*
By JOSH GILDER
March 13, 2009 --
WHEN it comes to nuclear energy, settled science appears to count for little with the new Obama administration. This week, ostensibly "pro-nuclear" Secretary of Energy Steven Chu announced the administration's decision to kill the nuclear-waste-storage site at Yucca Mountain in the Nevada desert.
Chu said we need to take a "fresh look" and that "we can do a better job." Good luck. The Yucca site had been studied for more than 20 years, undergoing $9.5 billion of tests by some 2,500 of the nation's leading scientists.They gave the Yucca project a green light, for obvious reasons. Yucca Mountain is in an isolated desert region with ideal meteorological conditions for a nuclear-storage project. If we can't dispose of our nuclear waste there, we can't dispose of it anywhere, and we will never be able to build a new nuclear-power plant in America again.
So much hysteria has been generated on the subject of nuclear waste and radiation in general that it's worth taking a moment to put Yucca's supposed risks into perspective. Those billions of dollars of studies determined that 10,000 years from now the greatest annual radiation dose near Yucca Mountain as a result of deteriorating storage canisters would be 0.24 millirem. In a million years, it might get up to .9 millirem. Yet normal cosmic radiation delivers a dose of 26 millirems a year at sea level.
If you moved from Manhattan to Denver, you'd be about doubling that. In other words, the residents of Denver (who, except when the Broncos win the Super Bowl, have never been known to sport two heads) are all getting more than 52 times the dosage of radiation that inhabitants of the Armagosa desert valley (which lies below Yucca) might get a million years from now.
Transportation isn't a problem, either. As Ted Rockwell (who helped build the first nuclear sub and commercial nuclear power plant) once said to me, you'd have to use a shaped charge to blow a hole in the canisters they ship the waste in, then stand next to it taking no precautions, for there to be any significant danger.Energy Secretary Chu - a Nobel Prize winner and former director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab - must know that Yucca is safe. What he may not understand is that his success or failure as energy secretary will be largely determined by his ability to find adequate energy sources for our economy's future growth - and he just appears to have cut off his one viable option.
There is plenty of carbon-based energy lying around, of course. But these sources are anathema to the global-warming worriers, and the Obama administration intends to impose a massive tax on their production and use. And, though we hear endlessly about "alternative" or "green" energy, its boosters never mention that, despite massive subsidies, solar and wind today provide about one half of 1 percent of our nation's energy consumption. You could cover the nation over with windmills and solar panels (and then listen to the enviros scream about the destruction of habitat that entails) and still barely make a dent in our energy needs.
Meanwhile, we are dismantling our dams and lessening our hydroelectric capacity.Where are we going to get the power, all from biofuels? Every plausible national energy policy includes building many more nuclear plants.Recycling nuclear waste is part of the solution, but we'll still need Yucca to store the waste byproducts. In the meantime, all that nuclear waste is sitting around in shallow pools or in above-ground containers next to nuclear-power plants in some of the most populated locations in the United States. Chu said in congressional testimony that this is perfectly safe for now, and he's probably right. But it does beg the question why a theoretical danger a million years in the future - way out in the desert near where we once tested nuclear bombs - should be allowed to imperil our nation's energy future.
Is ignoring nuclear science what President Obama really meant by his inaugural pledge, "We will restore science to its rightful place"?
Josh Gilder is a senior director of the White House Writers Group, a strategic- communication consulting group in Wash ington, DC.Home
Don't you just love the liberal Democrats and their urban terrorist friends the environmentalists, that have decided for all us that we have to live a more spartan life style to save the planet. I hope you noticed that I said 'we', this doesn't include 'them' as they must have the necessities of life to make the decisions that will save the world - 'we' on the other hand must obey their commands to make it all happen. They will live the good life while 'we' must do with less, much less.
If you find this a little strange, you are correct - this is a self fulfilling prophesy in that the enviros must accomplish this change-over as fast as possible to claim, in the near future when nothing has changed in our climate, that they can say," see, we were right - we saved the planet" - even though nothing was actually changed, except now 'we' are all living in poverty and have become powerless.
Is it possible that a majority of the voting public can't see the error of this and the fatal consequences of allowing this insanity to continue? It doesn't look good seeing what this new far left Marxist administration has in mind. Elections DO have consequences - You be the judge
keep the faith and watch these people and vote them out as soon as possible!
NIXING NUKE POWER*
By JOSH GILDER
March 13, 2009 --
WHEN it comes to nuclear energy, settled science appears to count for little with the new Obama administration. This week, ostensibly "pro-nuclear" Secretary of Energy Steven Chu announced the administration's decision to kill the nuclear-waste-storage site at Yucca Mountain in the Nevada desert.
Chu said we need to take a "fresh look" and that "we can do a better job." Good luck. The Yucca site had been studied for more than 20 years, undergoing $9.5 billion of tests by some 2,500 of the nation's leading scientists.They gave the Yucca project a green light, for obvious reasons. Yucca Mountain is in an isolated desert region with ideal meteorological conditions for a nuclear-storage project. If we can't dispose of our nuclear waste there, we can't dispose of it anywhere, and we will never be able to build a new nuclear-power plant in America again.
So much hysteria has been generated on the subject of nuclear waste and radiation in general that it's worth taking a moment to put Yucca's supposed risks into perspective. Those billions of dollars of studies determined that 10,000 years from now the greatest annual radiation dose near Yucca Mountain as a result of deteriorating storage canisters would be 0.24 millirem. In a million years, it might get up to .9 millirem. Yet normal cosmic radiation delivers a dose of 26 millirems a year at sea level.
If you moved from Manhattan to Denver, you'd be about doubling that. In other words, the residents of Denver (who, except when the Broncos win the Super Bowl, have never been known to sport two heads) are all getting more than 52 times the dosage of radiation that inhabitants of the Armagosa desert valley (which lies below Yucca) might get a million years from now.
Transportation isn't a problem, either. As Ted Rockwell (who helped build the first nuclear sub and commercial nuclear power plant) once said to me, you'd have to use a shaped charge to blow a hole in the canisters they ship the waste in, then stand next to it taking no precautions, for there to be any significant danger.Energy Secretary Chu - a Nobel Prize winner and former director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab - must know that Yucca is safe. What he may not understand is that his success or failure as energy secretary will be largely determined by his ability to find adequate energy sources for our economy's future growth - and he just appears to have cut off his one viable option.
There is plenty of carbon-based energy lying around, of course. But these sources are anathema to the global-warming worriers, and the Obama administration intends to impose a massive tax on their production and use. And, though we hear endlessly about "alternative" or "green" energy, its boosters never mention that, despite massive subsidies, solar and wind today provide about one half of 1 percent of our nation's energy consumption. You could cover the nation over with windmills and solar panels (and then listen to the enviros scream about the destruction of habitat that entails) and still barely make a dent in our energy needs.
Meanwhile, we are dismantling our dams and lessening our hydroelectric capacity.Where are we going to get the power, all from biofuels? Every plausible national energy policy includes building many more nuclear plants.Recycling nuclear waste is part of the solution, but we'll still need Yucca to store the waste byproducts. In the meantime, all that nuclear waste is sitting around in shallow pools or in above-ground containers next to nuclear-power plants in some of the most populated locations in the United States. Chu said in congressional testimony that this is perfectly safe for now, and he's probably right. But it does beg the question why a theoretical danger a million years in the future - way out in the desert near where we once tested nuclear bombs - should be allowed to imperil our nation's energy future.
Is ignoring nuclear science what President Obama really meant by his inaugural pledge, "We will restore science to its rightful place"?
Josh Gilder is a senior director of the White House Writers Group, a strategic- communication consulting group in Wash ington, DC.Home
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Obama Agenda Leaves America Defenseless
I don't know what to say about the president of the United States that has plans to destroy our country - I can't begin to understand what is happening in America - how can this happen here and no one will stand up to stop this insanity - who voted for this guy??
Obama Wants to Disarm U.S. Pilots
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 12:19 PM
By: David A. Patten
The Obama administration is taking steps quietly to shut down the program that qualifies commercial airline pilots to carry firearms in jetliner cockpits in order to ward off another 9/11-type attack.
The administration recently diverted $2 million from a program to train and certify pilots to carry firearms safely while on duty. Instead, it is using the money to hire additional field inspectors to help discipline pilots who step out of line, according to a report in Tuesday’s Washington Times.
A Times editorial condemned the Obama administration's action, calling it “completely unnecessary harassment of the pilots.”
Since Obama took office, the approval process for certifying pilots to carry firearms has ground to a halt, the newspaper reports. Pilots are afraid to speak out about the behind-the-scenes maneuverings, for fear of retaliation, according to the newspaper. No cases have been reported in which pilots have brandished a weapon inappropriately or otherwise abused their eligibility to carry firearms.
About 12,000 pilots have been authorized to carry handguns while flying aircraft as part of the Federal Flight Deck Officers Program. Congress authorized the program in a 310-to-113 vote following the 9/11 attacks to help prevent terrorists from turning jetliners into flying bombs that could be used to attack key sites like the White House, the Pentagon, or Capitol Hill.
Paul Valone, a Second Amendment advocate who directs Grass Roots North Carolina (GRNC.org), is calling for citizens to contract their congressional representatives to protest the administration’s anti-gun priorities.
Pilots are already required to pay for their own room and board during training, and use paid leave for the time they’re off the job. Every six months, the program requires them to be requalified for firearm use.
Valone writes on Examiner.com: “While bureaucrats . . . may have attempted to hamstring the program with burdensome requirements, training instructors and the Federal Air Marshals who now oversee the program routinely thank the FFDOs for their professionalism and dedication in protecting the nation’s air commerce against terrorism.”
Valone says the Obama administration is “dismantling yet another layer of defense against terrorism and defying the will of the American people.”
Since coming to power, the Obama administration has undertaken a series of moves that signal a major de-emphasis of programs enacted to keep America’s homeland safe from terrorist attack:
Obama’s choice for U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, labeled enhanced interrogation techniques as outright “torture” during his Senate confirmation hearings.
Obama banned waterboarding and ordered CIA interrogators to abide by U.S. Army Field Manual regulations.
He selected Clinton-era political operative Leon Panetta to serve as his CIA director. Panetta’s qualifications to run the agency have been questioned widely.
Obama announced that he would shut down the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in Cuba within one year, raising the prospect of hardened terrorists entering the U.S. criminal justice system, or worse, being released to rejoin al-Qaida.
He indicated the U.S. defense budget would be sharply reduced.
He has sent a letter to Russian leaders, apparently offering to back off on the ballistic missile defense system that would protect Europe from Iran and North Korea.
These and other Obama administration moves recently prompted former vice president Dick Cheney to charge that Obama is returning to the Clinton-era view of terrorism as a law enforcement issue.
"Now he's made some choices that in my mind raise the risk to the American people of another attack," Cheney said of Obama on CNN's "State of the Union" program.
The Washington Times points out that about 70 percent of airline pilots have military backgrounds. With airport screening less than 100 percent effective, it states, armed pilots provide a second layer of defense.
“Only anti-gun extremists and terrorist recruits are worried about armed pilots,” the newspaper editorial says.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Obama Wants to Disarm U.S. Pilots
Wednesday, March 18, 2009 12:19 PM
By: David A. Patten
The Obama administration is taking steps quietly to shut down the program that qualifies commercial airline pilots to carry firearms in jetliner cockpits in order to ward off another 9/11-type attack.
The administration recently diverted $2 million from a program to train and certify pilots to carry firearms safely while on duty. Instead, it is using the money to hire additional field inspectors to help discipline pilots who step out of line, according to a report in Tuesday’s Washington Times.
A Times editorial condemned the Obama administration's action, calling it “completely unnecessary harassment of the pilots.”
Since Obama took office, the approval process for certifying pilots to carry firearms has ground to a halt, the newspaper reports. Pilots are afraid to speak out about the behind-the-scenes maneuverings, for fear of retaliation, according to the newspaper. No cases have been reported in which pilots have brandished a weapon inappropriately or otherwise abused their eligibility to carry firearms.
About 12,000 pilots have been authorized to carry handguns while flying aircraft as part of the Federal Flight Deck Officers Program. Congress authorized the program in a 310-to-113 vote following the 9/11 attacks to help prevent terrorists from turning jetliners into flying bombs that could be used to attack key sites like the White House, the Pentagon, or Capitol Hill.
Paul Valone, a Second Amendment advocate who directs Grass Roots North Carolina (GRNC.org), is calling for citizens to contract their congressional representatives to protest the administration’s anti-gun priorities.
Pilots are already required to pay for their own room and board during training, and use paid leave for the time they’re off the job. Every six months, the program requires them to be requalified for firearm use.
Valone writes on Examiner.com: “While bureaucrats . . . may have attempted to hamstring the program with burdensome requirements, training instructors and the Federal Air Marshals who now oversee the program routinely thank the FFDOs for their professionalism and dedication in protecting the nation’s air commerce against terrorism.”
Valone says the Obama administration is “dismantling yet another layer of defense against terrorism and defying the will of the American people.”
Since coming to power, the Obama administration has undertaken a series of moves that signal a major de-emphasis of programs enacted to keep America’s homeland safe from terrorist attack:
Obama’s choice for U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, labeled enhanced interrogation techniques as outright “torture” during his Senate confirmation hearings.
Obama banned waterboarding and ordered CIA interrogators to abide by U.S. Army Field Manual regulations.
He selected Clinton-era political operative Leon Panetta to serve as his CIA director. Panetta’s qualifications to run the agency have been questioned widely.
Obama announced that he would shut down the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in Cuba within one year, raising the prospect of hardened terrorists entering the U.S. criminal justice system, or worse, being released to rejoin al-Qaida.
He indicated the U.S. defense budget would be sharply reduced.
He has sent a letter to Russian leaders, apparently offering to back off on the ballistic missile defense system that would protect Europe from Iran and North Korea.
These and other Obama administration moves recently prompted former vice president Dick Cheney to charge that Obama is returning to the Clinton-era view of terrorism as a law enforcement issue.
"Now he's made some choices that in my mind raise the risk to the American people of another attack," Cheney said of Obama on CNN's "State of the Union" program.
The Washington Times points out that about 70 percent of airline pilots have military backgrounds. With airport screening less than 100 percent effective, it states, armed pilots provide a second layer of defense.
“Only anti-gun extremists and terrorist recruits are worried about armed pilots,” the newspaper editorial says.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Obama Says "I'm Not A Socialist" : Misinformation
Income redistribution is the foundation of a socialist agenda along with class warfare and control of the population though misinformation and the threat of violence for nonconformity.
The Obama administration has all of these qualities and is actively pursuing them as quickly as possible. The faster they can implement them the better as most in the population are not paying attention and those that are can't see the forest for the trees. The slobbering masses that will endure any hardship to please the smartest guy in the room and never, ever, complain they have been lied to.
Luckily there seems to be some cracks appearing in the armor of the "one" as he tries to crush the economy as quickly as possible to accomplish is agenda of Marxist socialism - even some of his supporters are beginning to see his end game as a disaster. hmmm
Not that they disapprove of total power for the liberal Democrats for the next three of four decades but what they see coming will dull the effects of that total power that their predecessors had for over sixty years. They see a population living a third world existence which can't provide the controlling power structure with the necessary means to accumulate real wealth. Unacceptable.
Keep the faith - the battle is engaged.
The Obama Rosetta Stone ·
By DANIEL HENNINGER
Barack Obama has written two famous, widely read books of autobiography -- "Dreams from My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope." Let me introduce his third, a book that will touch everyone's life:
"A New Era of Responsibility: Renewing America's Promise. The President's Budget and Fiscal Preview" (Government Printing Office, 141 pages, $26; free on the Web).
This is the U.S. budget for laymen, and it's a must read. Turn immediately to page 11. There sits a chart called Figure 9. This is the Rosetta Stone to the presidential mind of Barack Obama. Memorize Figure 9, and you will never be confused. Not happy, perhaps, but not confused.[The Obama Rosetta Stone] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123681860305802821.html
One finds many charts in a federal budget, most attributed to such deep mines of data as the Census Bureau or the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The one on page 11 is attributed to "Piketty and Saez."Either you know instantly what "Piketty and Saez" means, or you don't. If you do, you spent the past two years working to get Barack Obama into the White House. If you don't, their posse has a six-week head start on you.
Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, French economists, are rock stars of the intellectual left. Their specialty is "earnings inequality" and "wealth concentration."Messrs. Piketty and Saez have produced the most politically potent squiggle along an axis since Arthur Laffer drew his famous curve on a napkin in the mid-1970s. Laffer's was an economic argument for lowering tax rates for everyone. Piketty-Saez is a /moral/ argument for raising taxes on the rich. PodcastListen to Daniel Henninger's Wonder Land column, now available in audio format. http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/media/031109henningerpodcast.mp3
As described in Mr. Obama's budget, these two economists have shown that by the end of 2004, the top 1% of taxpayers "took home" more than 22% of total national income. This trend, Fig. 9 notes, began during the Reagan presidency, skyrocketed through the Clinton years, dipped after George Bush beat Al Gore, then marched upward. Widening its own definition of money-grubbers, the budget says the top 10% of households "held" 70% of total wealth.
Alan Reynolds of the Cato Institute criticized the Piketty-Saez study on these pages in October 2007. Whatever its merits, their "Top 1%" chart has become a totemic obsession in progressive policy circles.Turn to page five of Mr. Obama's federal budget, and one may read these commentaries on the top 1% datum:"While middle-class families have been playing by the rules, living up to their responsibilities as neighbors and citizens, those at the commanding heights of our economy have not.""Prudent investments in education, clean energy, health care and infrastructure were sacrificed for huge tax cuts for the wealthy and well-connected.""There's nothing wrong with making money, but there is something wrong when we allow the playing field to be tilted so far in the favor of so few. . . . It's a legacy of irresponsibility, and it is our duty to change it."
Wonder Land Columnist Daniel Henninger on the latest autobiographical work from Barack Obama.Mr. Obama made clear in the campaign his intention to raise taxes on this income class by letting the Bush tax cuts expire.
What is becoming clearer as his presidency unfolds is that something deeper is underway here than merely using higher taxes to fund his policy goals in health, education and energy.The "top 1%" isn't just going to pay for these policies. Many of them would assent to that. The rancorous language used to describe these taxpayers makes it clear that as a matter of public policy they will be made to "pay for" the fact of their wealth -- no matter how many of them worked honestly and honorably to produce it.
No Democratic president in 60 years has been this explicit. Complaints have emerged recently, on the right and left, that the $787 billion stimulus bill will produce less growth and jobs than planned because too much of it goes to social programs and transfer payments, or "weak" Keynesian stimulus. The administration's Romer-Bernstein study on the stimulus estimated by the end of next year it would increase jobs by 3.6 million and GDP by 3.7%.
http://www.volkerwieland.com/docs/CCTW%20Mar%202.pdf
One of the first technical examinations of the Romer-Bernstein projections has been released by Hoover Institution economists John Cogan and John Taylor, and German economists Tobias Cwik and Volker Wieland. They conclude that the growth and jobs stimulus will be only /one-sixth/ what the administration predicts. In part, this is because people anticipate that the spending burst will have to be financed by higher taxes and so will spend less than anticipated.
New York's Mike Bloomberg, mayor of an economically damaged city, has noted the pointlessness of raising taxes on the rich when their wealth is plummeting, or of eliminating the charitable deduction for people who have less to give anyway.True but irrelevant. Mayor Bloomberg should read the Obama budget chapter, "Inheriting a Legacy of Misplaced Priorities."
The economy as most people understand it was a second-order concern of the stimulus strategy. The primary goal is a massive re-flowing of "wealth" from the top toward the bottom, to stop the moral failure they see in the budget's "Top One Percent of Earners" chart.The White House says its goal is simple "fairness." That may be, as they understand fairness. But Figure 9 makes it clear that for the top earners, there will be blood.
This presidency is going to be an act of retribution. In the words of the third book from Mr. Obama, "it is our duty to change it."
Write to henninger@wsj.com/Please add your comments to the/ Opinion Journal forum http://forums.wsj.com/viewtopic.php?t=5439.
The Obama administration has all of these qualities and is actively pursuing them as quickly as possible. The faster they can implement them the better as most in the population are not paying attention and those that are can't see the forest for the trees. The slobbering masses that will endure any hardship to please the smartest guy in the room and never, ever, complain they have been lied to.
Luckily there seems to be some cracks appearing in the armor of the "one" as he tries to crush the economy as quickly as possible to accomplish is agenda of Marxist socialism - even some of his supporters are beginning to see his end game as a disaster. hmmm
Not that they disapprove of total power for the liberal Democrats for the next three of four decades but what they see coming will dull the effects of that total power that their predecessors had for over sixty years. They see a population living a third world existence which can't provide the controlling power structure with the necessary means to accumulate real wealth. Unacceptable.
Keep the faith - the battle is engaged.
The Obama Rosetta Stone ·
By DANIEL HENNINGER
Barack Obama has written two famous, widely read books of autobiography -- "Dreams from My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope." Let me introduce his third, a book that will touch everyone's life:
"A New Era of Responsibility: Renewing America's Promise. The President's Budget and Fiscal Preview" (Government Printing Office, 141 pages, $26; free on the Web).
This is the U.S. budget for laymen, and it's a must read. Turn immediately to page 11. There sits a chart called Figure 9. This is the Rosetta Stone to the presidential mind of Barack Obama. Memorize Figure 9, and you will never be confused. Not happy, perhaps, but not confused.[The Obama Rosetta Stone] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123681860305802821.html
One finds many charts in a federal budget, most attributed to such deep mines of data as the Census Bureau or the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The one on page 11 is attributed to "Piketty and Saez."Either you know instantly what "Piketty and Saez" means, or you don't. If you do, you spent the past two years working to get Barack Obama into the White House. If you don't, their posse has a six-week head start on you.
Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, French economists, are rock stars of the intellectual left. Their specialty is "earnings inequality" and "wealth concentration."Messrs. Piketty and Saez have produced the most politically potent squiggle along an axis since Arthur Laffer drew his famous curve on a napkin in the mid-1970s. Laffer's was an economic argument for lowering tax rates for everyone. Piketty-Saez is a /moral/ argument for raising taxes on the rich. PodcastListen to Daniel Henninger's Wonder Land column, now available in audio format. http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/media/031109henningerpodcast.mp3
As described in Mr. Obama's budget, these two economists have shown that by the end of 2004, the top 1% of taxpayers "took home" more than 22% of total national income. This trend, Fig. 9 notes, began during the Reagan presidency, skyrocketed through the Clinton years, dipped after George Bush beat Al Gore, then marched upward. Widening its own definition of money-grubbers, the budget says the top 10% of households "held" 70% of total wealth.
Alan Reynolds of the Cato Institute criticized the Piketty-Saez study on these pages in October 2007. Whatever its merits, their "Top 1%" chart has become a totemic obsession in progressive policy circles.Turn to page five of Mr. Obama's federal budget, and one may read these commentaries on the top 1% datum:"While middle-class families have been playing by the rules, living up to their responsibilities as neighbors and citizens, those at the commanding heights of our economy have not.""Prudent investments in education, clean energy, health care and infrastructure were sacrificed for huge tax cuts for the wealthy and well-connected.""There's nothing wrong with making money, but there is something wrong when we allow the playing field to be tilted so far in the favor of so few. . . . It's a legacy of irresponsibility, and it is our duty to change it."
Wonder Land Columnist Daniel Henninger on the latest autobiographical work from Barack Obama.Mr. Obama made clear in the campaign his intention to raise taxes on this income class by letting the Bush tax cuts expire.
What is becoming clearer as his presidency unfolds is that something deeper is underway here than merely using higher taxes to fund his policy goals in health, education and energy.The "top 1%" isn't just going to pay for these policies. Many of them would assent to that. The rancorous language used to describe these taxpayers makes it clear that as a matter of public policy they will be made to "pay for" the fact of their wealth -- no matter how many of them worked honestly and honorably to produce it.
No Democratic president in 60 years has been this explicit. Complaints have emerged recently, on the right and left, that the $787 billion stimulus bill will produce less growth and jobs than planned because too much of it goes to social programs and transfer payments, or "weak" Keynesian stimulus. The administration's Romer-Bernstein study on the stimulus estimated by the end of next year it would increase jobs by 3.6 million and GDP by 3.7%.
http://www.volkerwieland.com/docs/CCTW%20Mar%202.pdf
One of the first technical examinations of the Romer-Bernstein projections has been released by Hoover Institution economists John Cogan and John Taylor, and German economists Tobias Cwik and Volker Wieland. They conclude that the growth and jobs stimulus will be only /one-sixth/ what the administration predicts. In part, this is because people anticipate that the spending burst will have to be financed by higher taxes and so will spend less than anticipated.
New York's Mike Bloomberg, mayor of an economically damaged city, has noted the pointlessness of raising taxes on the rich when their wealth is plummeting, or of eliminating the charitable deduction for people who have less to give anyway.True but irrelevant. Mayor Bloomberg should read the Obama budget chapter, "Inheriting a Legacy of Misplaced Priorities."
The economy as most people understand it was a second-order concern of the stimulus strategy. The primary goal is a massive re-flowing of "wealth" from the top toward the bottom, to stop the moral failure they see in the budget's "Top One Percent of Earners" chart.The White House says its goal is simple "fairness." That may be, as they understand fairness. But Figure 9 makes it clear that for the top earners, there will be blood.
This presidency is going to be an act of retribution. In the words of the third book from Mr. Obama, "it is our duty to change it."
Write to henninger@wsj.com/Please add your comments to the/ Opinion Journal forum http://forums.wsj.com/viewtopic.php?t=5439.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Liberal Agenda IS An All Consuming Government
The Heritage Foundation is front and center on this subject of big all consuming government - this is just part of the plan to reconstruct America to fit the Marxist socialist agenda of the new liberal Democrats.
Do the Democrats care if they destroy our way of life - No, they don't. We are seeing the results of this plan every day in the actions of the Obama administration.
Keep the faith - the battle goes on!
Putting big labor and big government first
"The misnamed Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) does more than effectively eliminate workers' rights to a secret ballot vote on joining a union," Heritage Foundation labor expert James Sherk reports.
It could also give control of the workplace to government bureaucrats.
If employees and their employer cannot come to an agreement, the government could write the collective bargaining agreements of most newly organized companies. These bureaucrats would have the power to set not just wages and benefits but all business operations that significantly affect workers. This includes promotion procedures, retirement plans, health benefits, subcontracting, mergers, work assignments, even the machines used to run a plant. Employers would lose the ability to pursue their business strategies, and workers would lose all say about their workplace for two years.
The Heritage Foundation is working hard to explain the problems with this approach to Congress, the Obama administration, the media and the public.
Do the Democrats care if they destroy our way of life - No, they don't. We are seeing the results of this plan every day in the actions of the Obama administration.
Keep the faith - the battle goes on!
Putting big labor and big government first
"The misnamed Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) does more than effectively eliminate workers' rights to a secret ballot vote on joining a union," Heritage Foundation labor expert James Sherk reports.
It could also give control of the workplace to government bureaucrats.
If employees and their employer cannot come to an agreement, the government could write the collective bargaining agreements of most newly organized companies. These bureaucrats would have the power to set not just wages and benefits but all business operations that significantly affect workers. This includes promotion procedures, retirement plans, health benefits, subcontracting, mergers, work assignments, even the machines used to run a plant. Employers would lose the ability to pursue their business strategies, and workers would lose all say about their workplace for two years.
The Heritage Foundation is working hard to explain the problems with this approach to Congress, the Obama administration, the media and the public.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Democrats Must Kill Talk Radio : The Vampire Syndrome
This is an easy one - the liberal Democrats must kill talk radio as it "talks truth to power" - something that can not be tolerated - there can be no debate - there can be only one point of view - there is only source for the truth.
If the truth were to be told then the Democrats would disintegrate in a cloud of smoke like a vampire when they are exposed to the light. Isn't it always this way - shine light on a subject and suddenly it becomes clear what must be done.
Keep the faith - live in the light - it easier to see where you are going.
Reid: Fairness Doctrine ‘Ghost That Doesn’t Exist’
Wednesday, March 11, 2009 2:48 PM
By: Rick Pedraza
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., says despite last-minute “special amendment” language to regulate talk radio slipping into a D.C. voting rights bill earlier this week, the return of the so-called Fairness Doctrine is an aberration that neither political party would like to see resurrected.
“The Fairness Doctrine – what a ghost that doesn’t exist,” Reid scoffed from the floor of the Senate yesterday.
“None of us want to go back to the way it was before,” he assured Senate colleagues. “It is an issue they [Republicans] brought up to talk about. No one wants to re-establish the Fairness Doctrine – Democrats or Republicans,” CNS News reports.
The doctrine, implemented by the FCC in 1949, required broadcasters to present equal time on controversial topics in “a fair and balanced way,” and with “divergent political viewpoints.” President Ronald Reagan stopped the FCC from implementing the rule during his second term as president in 1987.
The amendment attached to the D.C. Voting Rights Act, introduced by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., states, “certain affirmative actions” are “required” of the FCC, including “actions to encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest.”
This, many conservative media experts agree, is a veiled means for Reid and other Democratic leadership to regulate talk radio and purge conservative radio programs and their popular hosts from the airwaves, including Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.
Last week, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., told Newsmax that House Democrats had an “end run” planned around the Senate’s version of the bill, which prohibits the FCC from re-instituting the Fairness Doctrine.
In a press release issued by his office, Inhofe said, “encouraging and promoting diversity in communication media ownership,” is “really just a new means of censorship on the airways.”
Inhofe and other conservative lawmakers believe the language in the “Durbin Amendment” was written so “incredibly vague” and so “potentially far-reaching” that they can’t say with any certainty what the end result will be.
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., told Fox News that Durbin’s amendment to the voting rights bill will "impose the Fairness Doctrine through the back door by trying to break up radio ownership. We need to make it a law that the FCC or this Congress cannot implement any aspect of the Fairness Doctrine.”
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
If the truth were to be told then the Democrats would disintegrate in a cloud of smoke like a vampire when they are exposed to the light. Isn't it always this way - shine light on a subject and suddenly it becomes clear what must be done.
Keep the faith - live in the light - it easier to see where you are going.
Reid: Fairness Doctrine ‘Ghost That Doesn’t Exist’
Wednesday, March 11, 2009 2:48 PM
By: Rick Pedraza
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., says despite last-minute “special amendment” language to regulate talk radio slipping into a D.C. voting rights bill earlier this week, the return of the so-called Fairness Doctrine is an aberration that neither political party would like to see resurrected.
“The Fairness Doctrine – what a ghost that doesn’t exist,” Reid scoffed from the floor of the Senate yesterday.
“None of us want to go back to the way it was before,” he assured Senate colleagues. “It is an issue they [Republicans] brought up to talk about. No one wants to re-establish the Fairness Doctrine – Democrats or Republicans,” CNS News reports.
The doctrine, implemented by the FCC in 1949, required broadcasters to present equal time on controversial topics in “a fair and balanced way,” and with “divergent political viewpoints.” President Ronald Reagan stopped the FCC from implementing the rule during his second term as president in 1987.
The amendment attached to the D.C. Voting Rights Act, introduced by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., states, “certain affirmative actions” are “required” of the FCC, including “actions to encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest.”
This, many conservative media experts agree, is a veiled means for Reid and other Democratic leadership to regulate talk radio and purge conservative radio programs and their popular hosts from the airwaves, including Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.
Last week, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., told Newsmax that House Democrats had an “end run” planned around the Senate’s version of the bill, which prohibits the FCC from re-instituting the Fairness Doctrine.
In a press release issued by his office, Inhofe said, “encouraging and promoting diversity in communication media ownership,” is “really just a new means of censorship on the airways.”
Inhofe and other conservative lawmakers believe the language in the “Durbin Amendment” was written so “incredibly vague” and so “potentially far-reaching” that they can’t say with any certainty what the end result will be.
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., told Fox News that Durbin’s amendment to the voting rights bill will "impose the Fairness Doctrine through the back door by trying to break up radio ownership. We need to make it a law that the FCC or this Congress cannot implement any aspect of the Fairness Doctrine.”
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Do Americans Understand Our Financial Problem? : No Way
Is America waking up to Obama and the Marxists in our government? Democrats and 'turn-coat' Republicans? I hope so -
The American public has a responsibility to rise up and stop this nonsense that is coming from the socialists and worse in our government.
Is This America's Dark Knight?*
Mises Daily*
by Paul A. Cleveland
Posted on 3/10/2009
America's Dark Knight:
Welcome to a World without RulesIn last year's hit movie, /The Dark Knight/, there is a classic scene between Alfred and Bruce Wayne. A befuddled Bruce cannot figure out what the Joker is actually trying to gain, and he is sharing his consternation with Alfred. Alfred responds by telling Bruce that some men are just different and, in one of the great lines of the movie, states bluntly, "Some men just want to see the world burn."
While it is quite early on in the new administration's term in office, it appears to be behaving in exactly this way. Obama is playing the part of the Joker to perfection, aided and abetted by the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. The only difference being that, instead of wearing a clown's face, he has chosen to look promising and speak lofty words of nothingness as he and the other Democratic leaders push the nation ever closer to economic collapse.
Ignoring any sound economic principles, these leaders have carved a path of prodigality unmatched in American history. It seems as if they desire the total economic failure of the country.To be sure, the Bush administration has left the nation ravaged by its excess spending and monetary expansion that undergirded the housing bubble. Indeed, during his eight years in office, federal spending ballooned from $1.8 trillion per year to nearly $3 trillion. That is a 67% increase! But while Bush radically expanded the size and scope of government, Obama and the Democrats plan the absolute explosion of it.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this year's federal spending will top $3.5 trillion, with a deficit in excess of $1 trillion. And this number was forecasted /prior/ to the passage of the so-called "stimulus bill."Imagine Bush as a drunken sailor in port for the first time in a year. He goes into a casino in Atlantic City, sits down at a thousand-dollar-a-hand blackjack table, and promptly loses a million dollars. Obama comes in as Bush's replacement, and the casino seats him in Bush's old chair. While bemoaning the situation, Obama tells us we must end this failed policy by moving up to the /ten-thousand/-a-hand table and doubling down.
Of course, this makes no sense whatsoever, and the sane person would quickly back away. But sanity appears not to be present anywhere in Washington these days.For far too long now, we have allowed our leaders to take us in this direction. In earlier days our leaders did so mainly to line their own pockets and those of their favored friends. These days, however, it seems that they are merely driven by their own ideological madness. And we have been too busy to pay enough attention to understand the situation and to resist it. Neither Bush nor Obama could do the things they have done or are doing had there not been a long history of governmental abuses.
To not understand this now will lead to even greater abuse in the future.Unmasking the Sacred Lies coverThis was my motivation for my new book, titled /Unmasking the Sacred Lies/ http://www.mises.org/store/Unmasking-the-Sacred-Lies-P569.aspx.
I wanted to help busy Americans come to grips with the current economic situation and to understand the long political process of change that has led us here.If there is to be any hope for our economic future, we must come to a sound understanding of what got us here. With that in mind, I put together a book that paints the big picture. It traces the economic history of each policy area in order to demonstrate how each law passed by Congress and enforced by our government has pushed us into this hole that we find ourselves in today.
It is my firm belief that providing the average person with the right information in a readily understandable format can make a difference. I only hope that it is not too late, and that we do not have to watch America burn.
The American public has a responsibility to rise up and stop this nonsense that is coming from the socialists and worse in our government.
Is This America's Dark Knight?*
Mises Daily*
by Paul A. Cleveland
Posted on 3/10/2009
America's Dark Knight:
Welcome to a World without RulesIn last year's hit movie, /The Dark Knight/, there is a classic scene between Alfred and Bruce Wayne. A befuddled Bruce cannot figure out what the Joker is actually trying to gain, and he is sharing his consternation with Alfred. Alfred responds by telling Bruce that some men are just different and, in one of the great lines of the movie, states bluntly, "Some men just want to see the world burn."
While it is quite early on in the new administration's term in office, it appears to be behaving in exactly this way. Obama is playing the part of the Joker to perfection, aided and abetted by the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. The only difference being that, instead of wearing a clown's face, he has chosen to look promising and speak lofty words of nothingness as he and the other Democratic leaders push the nation ever closer to economic collapse.
Ignoring any sound economic principles, these leaders have carved a path of prodigality unmatched in American history. It seems as if they desire the total economic failure of the country.To be sure, the Bush administration has left the nation ravaged by its excess spending and monetary expansion that undergirded the housing bubble. Indeed, during his eight years in office, federal spending ballooned from $1.8 trillion per year to nearly $3 trillion. That is a 67% increase! But while Bush radically expanded the size and scope of government, Obama and the Democrats plan the absolute explosion of it.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that this year's federal spending will top $3.5 trillion, with a deficit in excess of $1 trillion. And this number was forecasted /prior/ to the passage of the so-called "stimulus bill."Imagine Bush as a drunken sailor in port for the first time in a year. He goes into a casino in Atlantic City, sits down at a thousand-dollar-a-hand blackjack table, and promptly loses a million dollars. Obama comes in as Bush's replacement, and the casino seats him in Bush's old chair. While bemoaning the situation, Obama tells us we must end this failed policy by moving up to the /ten-thousand/-a-hand table and doubling down.
Of course, this makes no sense whatsoever, and the sane person would quickly back away. But sanity appears not to be present anywhere in Washington these days.For far too long now, we have allowed our leaders to take us in this direction. In earlier days our leaders did so mainly to line their own pockets and those of their favored friends. These days, however, it seems that they are merely driven by their own ideological madness. And we have been too busy to pay enough attention to understand the situation and to resist it. Neither Bush nor Obama could do the things they have done or are doing had there not been a long history of governmental abuses.
To not understand this now will lead to even greater abuse in the future.Unmasking the Sacred Lies cover
I wanted to help busy Americans come to grips with the current economic situation and to understand the long political process of change that has led us here.If there is to be any hope for our economic future, we must come to a sound understanding of what got us here. With that in mind, I put together a book that paints the big picture. It traces the economic history of each policy area in order to demonstrate how each law passed by Congress and enforced by our government has pushed us into this hole that we find ourselves in today.
It is my firm belief that providing the average person with the right information in a readily understandable format can make a difference. I only hope that it is not too late, and that we do not have to watch America burn.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Democrats Open Stimulus To Illegals : Surprise - Surprise
And the hits just keep coming - the Democrats are bent on crushing our country so they can make it over to suit their agenda of making everyone dependent on the government -
I wonder who will pay the bills when everyone stops working
Stimulus Loophole Gives 300,000 Jobs to Illegals
Monday, March 9, 2009 6:09 PM
By: David A. Patten
An estimated 300,000 construction jobs paid for by the stimulus plan will go to illegal workers after leading Democrats removed a provision requiring verification of citizenship, a leading immigration expert tells Newsmax.
The House version of the $787 billion stimulus bill required verification of the legal residency of anyone put to work by its spending. But that provision was removed from the bill before members of Congress met to reconcile the House and Senate versions of the bill.
Steven Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), tells Newsmax the verification provision was deleted by Democratic leaders even before the bill reached the conference committee, where differences between House and Senate legislation are normally ironed out.
“When it got to conference, the top people -- not just the conference members, but the top people: Reid, Pelosi, and Obama -- chose to kill the provision and not include it,” Camarota says.
“This was a purposeful decision.”
The provision would have required that workers’ names to be vetted through the Internet-based E-Verify system. E-Verify, a joint project of the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration, gives employers a quick means of verifying employee eligibility. “E-Verify is our most effective tool for preventing illegal immigrants from getting jobs, and they chose not to use it,” says Camarota.
The estimate of 300,000 construction jobs is based on U.S. Census and other studies showing that approximately 15 percent of U.S. construction workers are illegal immigrants.
Construction projects funded by the stimulus bill are expected to generate 2 million jobs. Assuming 15 percent of those workers are illegal, 300,000 illegal aliens would be employed. The actual number could be higher, however, because many of the projects are in states with high immigrant populations, such as Texas, California, and Florida.
The CIS estimates are accepted by the conservative Heritage Foundation, and even groups that advocate on behalf of illegals don’t quibble with them much. One activist for illegals, however, told USA Today that the CIS report amounts to “fear tactics.”
Some sources suggest Democrats opened up stimulus money to illegals to placate activists who may have to wait for the outright amnesty they covet. Others say it reflects the influence of pro-business interests who want a vast workforce of reasonably priced labor.
Whatever the motivation, Camarota says it’s no accident the verification measure was stripped out. “This was not just a careless oversight that can sometimes happen in the legislative process,” he says.
One economic concern generated by the CIS report: A significant portion of illegal workers’ income is shipped out of the United States to support their families. That money would no longer be available to support economic activity in the United States.
The Council on Foreign Relations, for example, estimates that in 2004 Mexican nationals pumped $22.2 billion back into Mexico’s economy via remittances sent back home. How well U.S. taxpayers tolerate the export of stimulus dollars given the rapidly rising unemployment at home remains to be seen.
“In general construction jobs are reasonably good paying jobs for working class people, and we’re talking about perhaps 300,000 of them going to people who aren’t supposed to be even in the country,” Camarota says. “And this is money coming from taxpayers. The whole point of the stimulus is to put Americans back to work. And by not including E-Verify, it’s a terrible slap in the face to U.S. construction workers, who are currently experiencing a 10 percent, sometimes even 15 percent unemployment rate.”
Before leaving office, former President Bush signed an executive order requiring all federal contractors to submit employees’ names to E-verify. President Obama has delayed implementation of that directive until at least May 21. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a lawsuit to prevent making the use of E-Verify mandatory. The organization says Congress approved it strictly as a voluntary initiative.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
I wonder who will pay the bills when everyone stops working
Stimulus Loophole Gives 300,000 Jobs to Illegals
Monday, March 9, 2009 6:09 PM
By: David A. Patten
An estimated 300,000 construction jobs paid for by the stimulus plan will go to illegal workers after leading Democrats removed a provision requiring verification of citizenship, a leading immigration expert tells Newsmax.
The House version of the $787 billion stimulus bill required verification of the legal residency of anyone put to work by its spending. But that provision was removed from the bill before members of Congress met to reconcile the House and Senate versions of the bill.
Steven Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), tells Newsmax the verification provision was deleted by Democratic leaders even before the bill reached the conference committee, where differences between House and Senate legislation are normally ironed out.
“When it got to conference, the top people -- not just the conference members, but the top people: Reid, Pelosi, and Obama -- chose to kill the provision and not include it,” Camarota says.
“This was a purposeful decision.”
The provision would have required that workers’ names to be vetted through the Internet-based E-Verify system. E-Verify, a joint project of the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration, gives employers a quick means of verifying employee eligibility. “E-Verify is our most effective tool for preventing illegal immigrants from getting jobs, and they chose not to use it,” says Camarota.
The estimate of 300,000 construction jobs is based on U.S. Census and other studies showing that approximately 15 percent of U.S. construction workers are illegal immigrants.
Construction projects funded by the stimulus bill are expected to generate 2 million jobs. Assuming 15 percent of those workers are illegal, 300,000 illegal aliens would be employed. The actual number could be higher, however, because many of the projects are in states with high immigrant populations, such as Texas, California, and Florida.
The CIS estimates are accepted by the conservative Heritage Foundation, and even groups that advocate on behalf of illegals don’t quibble with them much. One activist for illegals, however, told USA Today that the CIS report amounts to “fear tactics.”
Some sources suggest Democrats opened up stimulus money to illegals to placate activists who may have to wait for the outright amnesty they covet. Others say it reflects the influence of pro-business interests who want a vast workforce of reasonably priced labor.
Whatever the motivation, Camarota says it’s no accident the verification measure was stripped out. “This was not just a careless oversight that can sometimes happen in the legislative process,” he says.
One economic concern generated by the CIS report: A significant portion of illegal workers’ income is shipped out of the United States to support their families. That money would no longer be available to support economic activity in the United States.
The Council on Foreign Relations, for example, estimates that in 2004 Mexican nationals pumped $22.2 billion back into Mexico’s economy via remittances sent back home. How well U.S. taxpayers tolerate the export of stimulus dollars given the rapidly rising unemployment at home remains to be seen.
“In general construction jobs are reasonably good paying jobs for working class people, and we’re talking about perhaps 300,000 of them going to people who aren’t supposed to be even in the country,” Camarota says. “And this is money coming from taxpayers. The whole point of the stimulus is to put Americans back to work. And by not including E-Verify, it’s a terrible slap in the face to U.S. construction workers, who are currently experiencing a 10 percent, sometimes even 15 percent unemployment rate.”
Before leaving office, former President Bush signed an executive order requiring all federal contractors to submit employees’ names to E-verify. President Obama has delayed implementation of that directive until at least May 21. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a lawsuit to prevent making the use of E-Verify mandatory. The organization says Congress approved it strictly as a voluntary initiative.
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Just How Much Is A Trillion Tax Dollars?
Take a few minutes and have a look at what a trillion dollars really is - and at the same time, think about our senators and congressmen, and our illustrious president, when they talk about the trillions of dollars that they are spending of our money - money that we will be paying for for the next thirty years or longer. Oh, and by the way, our lives will be changed dramatically as we won't have any money for anything except what the government allows us to have.
Think long and hard about this as it reflects what the majority vote decided. The majority didn't do much thinking when they voted the first time so now what will you do? Nobody read the "Porkbill" either for 1.3 Trillion - WOW - elections do have consequences.
Our government really does want to destroy the American dream and we are allowing it to happen - well, I didn't vote for him but what about all the other folks that did. Do you think they care? hmmm - Maybe, but then again, maybe not. To a lot of these people it's like the guy that has been in prison for most of his life and then is released - he finds that the outside isn't what he remembered it to be so he commits a crime to get back where all things are decided for him. Enslavement isn't as bad as he thought.
Liberals find that most people are of this mind set and they play to this most wantoned human instinct - fear of independent thought.
"The chains are heavy but I really don't mind that much."
Keep the faith - fight on!
http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html
Think long and hard about this as it reflects what the majority vote decided. The majority didn't do much thinking when they voted the first time so now what will you do? Nobody read the "Porkbill" either for 1.3 Trillion - WOW - elections do have consequences.
Our government really does want to destroy the American dream and we are allowing it to happen - well, I didn't vote for him but what about all the other folks that did. Do you think they care? hmmm - Maybe, but then again, maybe not. To a lot of these people it's like the guy that has been in prison for most of his life and then is released - he finds that the outside isn't what he remembered it to be so he commits a crime to get back where all things are decided for him. Enslavement isn't as bad as he thought.
Liberals find that most people are of this mind set and they play to this most wantoned human instinct - fear of independent thought.
"The chains are heavy but I really don't mind that much."
Keep the faith - fight on!
http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html
Friday, March 13, 2009
Liberals Attack Freedom of Speech : Pelosi Backs Bill
What this bill does is stop conservative talk radio and make all radio stations broadcast programming that is covered under the government mandate. That is, 'think the way we do or you are done'.
The liberal mandate is "no Conservative talk radio" - Shall I define this bill - The first amendment has just been thrown under the bus - freedom of speech is gone, not that we really had all that much given that all news media, TV, newspapers and magazines are virtually all far left liberal screeds, even sports and car magazines are left liberal agenda orientated, but that isn't enough, the liberals want to stop all debate, period. Worse, most people don't care that their right to free speech, under the Constitution, is going to be taken away completely.
What is happening here? What in the world do these people think of America? No more freedom of speech? Can this actually happen here - dah - just look at our schools and universities with speech codes. How do you think this will effect future generations?
Keep the faith and vote out the liberals next year.
Pelosi Backs Talk Radio Regulations
Sunday, March 8, 2009 6:27 PM
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is supporting legislation that will force the Federal Communications Commission to “promote diversity” on the airwaves – a move many see as a stealth effort to regulate conservative-dominated talk radio without bringing back the controversial Fairness Doctrine.
Pelosi, D-Calif., has thrown her support to an amendment in a Senate bill that directs the FCC to explicitly “take actions to encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest,” according to CNS News.
The amendment has become known as the Durbin amendment, after its sponsor, Senate Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin, D-Ill.
“Certainly, I support Mr. Durbin in most things,” Pelosi told CNS News. “Diversity in media ownership is very, very, important.” The amendment is clearly an attempt to revive the Fairness Doctrine – an unpopular FCC regulation removed in 1987 that forced broadcasters to grant equal airtime to opposing political viewpoints, Republican Rep. Mike Pence told CNS News.
“Its clear to me that Democrats, having failed in their frontal assault on talk radio in America through the Fairness Doctrine, are now shifting strategy to a form of regulation that is essentially the Fairness Doctrine by stealth,” Pence, R-Ind., a former radio broadcaster, told CNS.
Minutes after the passage of the Durbin amendment last Thursday a separate amendment that would ban the restoration of the Fairness Doctrine, which was proposed by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), was also attached to the same D.C. voting rights bill and passed by a vote of 87-11.
House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said he thinks Republicans may be able to muster the votes to stop it when it gets to his chamber.
“I think as we get into the appropriations process you will see us continue our effort to make sure the Fairness Doctrine is not put back into place,” Boehner told CNS News at his weekly press conference on Thursday. “And I do believe the votes are in the Congress to make sure that happens.”
The primary text of the Durbin amendment reads:
SEC.9 FCC Authorities. (a) Clarification of General Powers. – Title III of the Communications Act of 1934 is amended by inserting after section 303 (47 U.S.C. 303) the following new section:
SEC.303B. Clarification of General Powers. (a) Certain Affirmative Actions Required – The Commission shall take actions to encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest. …
The language is virtually identical to a policy position that has been long developed by Democrats and has been recently taken up by the Obama administration over calls by some to revive the Fairness Doctrine. The White House now aims to “encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nation's spectrum.”
That philosophy is part of a position established earlier at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank headed by former Obama transition leader John Podesta. The center published a report calling for a new “localism” and “ownership diversity” regulations to balance conservative talk radio with so-called “progressive” talk radio. The report, “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio,” concludes with the following recommendations:
“[A]ny effort to encourage more responsive and balanced radio programming will first require steps to increase localism and diversify radio station ownership to better meet local and community needs. We suggest three ways to accomplish this:
Restore local and national caps on the ownership of commercial radio stations.
Ensure greater local accountability over radio licensing.
Require commercial owners who fail to abide by enforceable public interest obligations to pay a fee to support public broadcasting.”
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
The liberal mandate is "no Conservative talk radio" - Shall I define this bill - The first amendment has just been thrown under the bus - freedom of speech is gone, not that we really had all that much given that all news media, TV, newspapers and magazines are virtually all far left liberal screeds, even sports and car magazines are left liberal agenda orientated, but that isn't enough, the liberals want to stop all debate, period. Worse, most people don't care that their right to free speech, under the Constitution, is going to be taken away completely.
What is happening here? What in the world do these people think of America? No more freedom of speech? Can this actually happen here - dah - just look at our schools and universities with speech codes. How do you think this will effect future generations?
Keep the faith and vote out the liberals next year.
Pelosi Backs Talk Radio Regulations
Sunday, March 8, 2009 6:27 PM
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is supporting legislation that will force the Federal Communications Commission to “promote diversity” on the airwaves – a move many see as a stealth effort to regulate conservative-dominated talk radio without bringing back the controversial Fairness Doctrine.
Pelosi, D-Calif., has thrown her support to an amendment in a Senate bill that directs the FCC to explicitly “take actions to encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest,” according to CNS News.
The amendment has become known as the Durbin amendment, after its sponsor, Senate Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin, D-Ill.
“Certainly, I support Mr. Durbin in most things,” Pelosi told CNS News. “Diversity in media ownership is very, very, important.” The amendment is clearly an attempt to revive the Fairness Doctrine – an unpopular FCC regulation removed in 1987 that forced broadcasters to grant equal airtime to opposing political viewpoints, Republican Rep. Mike Pence told CNS News.
“Its clear to me that Democrats, having failed in their frontal assault on talk radio in America through the Fairness Doctrine, are now shifting strategy to a form of regulation that is essentially the Fairness Doctrine by stealth,” Pence, R-Ind., a former radio broadcaster, told CNS.
Minutes after the passage of the Durbin amendment last Thursday a separate amendment that would ban the restoration of the Fairness Doctrine, which was proposed by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), was also attached to the same D.C. voting rights bill and passed by a vote of 87-11.
House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said he thinks Republicans may be able to muster the votes to stop it when it gets to his chamber.
“I think as we get into the appropriations process you will see us continue our effort to make sure the Fairness Doctrine is not put back into place,” Boehner told CNS News at his weekly press conference on Thursday. “And I do believe the votes are in the Congress to make sure that happens.”
The primary text of the Durbin amendment reads:
SEC.9 FCC Authorities. (a) Clarification of General Powers. – Title III of the Communications Act of 1934 is amended by inserting after section 303 (47 U.S.C. 303) the following new section:
SEC.303B. Clarification of General Powers. (a) Certain Affirmative Actions Required – The Commission shall take actions to encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest. …
The language is virtually identical to a policy position that has been long developed by Democrats and has been recently taken up by the Obama administration over calls by some to revive the Fairness Doctrine. The White House now aims to “encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nation's spectrum.”
That philosophy is part of a position established earlier at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank headed by former Obama transition leader John Podesta. The center published a report calling for a new “localism” and “ownership diversity” regulations to balance conservative talk radio with so-called “progressive” talk radio. The report, “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio,” concludes with the following recommendations:
“[A]ny effort to encourage more responsive and balanced radio programming will first require steps to increase localism and diversify radio station ownership to better meet local and community needs. We suggest three ways to accomplish this:
Restore local and national caps on the ownership of commercial radio stations.
Ensure greater local accountability over radio licensing.
Require commercial owners who fail to abide by enforceable public interest obligations to pay a fee to support public broadcasting.”
© 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Heros Are Made, Not Born : Two Stories Tell The Tail
Very interesting stories about two people that had a lot in common, both spiritually and morally. This is something that's right for today as well - sometimes it necessay to do the right thing no matter the outcome.
Indeed, an inspirational story. There are so many others out there that we don't know about or that none has researched and brought into the light. There are heroic lives throughout our Military's 300 plus year history, to be sure, but there are a lot of civilian or Civil Service employees, State and Federal, that work or act heroically.
STORY NUMBER ONE
Many years ago, Al Capone virtually owned Chicago . Capone wasn't famous for anything heroic. He was notorious for enmeshing the windy city in everything from bootlegged booze and prostitution to murder.Capone had a lawyer nicknamed "Easy Eddie." He was Capone's lawyer for a good reason. Eddie was very good! In fact, Eddie's skill at legal maneuvering kept Big Al out of jail for a long time.To show his appreciation, Capone paid him very well. Not only was the money big, but Eddie got special dividends, as well.
For instance, he and his family occupied a fenced-in mansion with live-in help and all of the conveniences of the day. The estate was so large that it filled an entire Chicago City block.Eddie lived the high life of the Chicago mob and gave little consideration to the atrocity that went on around him..Eddie did have one soft spot, however. He had a son that he loved dearly. Eddie saw to it that his young son had clothes, cars, and a good education. Nothing was withheld. Price was no object.And, despite his involvement with organized crime, Eddie even tried to teach him right from wrong. Eddie wanted his son to be a better man than he was.
Yet, with all his wealth and influence, there were two things he couldn't give his son; he couldn't pass on a good name or a good example.One day, Easy Eddie reached a difficult decision. Easy Eddie wanted to rectify wrongs he had done .He decided he would go to the authorities and tell the truth about Al "Scarface" Capone, clean up his tarnished name, and offer his son some semblance of integrity.. To do this, he would have to testify against The Mob, and he knew that the cost would be great. So, he testified.
Within the year, Easy Eddie's life ended in a blaze of gunfire on a lonely Chicago Street . But in his eyes, he had given his son the greatest gift he had to offer, at the greatest price he could ever pay. Police removed from his pockets a rosary, a crucifix, a religious medallion, and a poem clipped from a magazine.The poem read:"The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop, at late or early hour. Now is the only time you own. Live, love, toil with a will. Place no faith in time. For the clock may soon be still."
STORY NUMBER TWO
World War II produced many heroes. One such man was Lieutenant Commander Butch O'Hare..He was a fighter pilot assigned to the aircraft carrier Lexington in the South Pacific.One day his entire squadron was sent on a mission. After he was airborne, he looked at his fuel gauge and realized that someone had forgotten to top off his fuel tank.He would not have enough fuel to complete his mission and get back to his ship.His flight leader told him to return to the carrier. Reluctantly, he dropped out of formation and headed back to the fleet.As he was returning to the mother ship, he saw something that turned his blood cold; a squadron of Japanese aircraft was speeding its way toward the American fleet.
The American fighters were gone on a sortie, and the fleet was all but defenseless. He couldn't reach his squadron and bring them back in time to save the fleet. Nor could he warn the fleet of the approaching danger. There was only one thing to do. He must somehow divert them from the fleet.Laying aside all thoughts of personal safety, he dove into the formation of Japanese planes. Wing-mounted 50 caliber's blazed as he charged in, attacking one surprised enemy plane and then another. Butch wove in and out of the now broken formation and fired at as many planes as possible until all his ammunition was finally spent.
Undaunted, he continued the assault. He dove at the planes, trying to clip a wing or tail in hopes of damaging as many enemy planes as possible, rendering them unfit to fly.Finally, the exasperated Japanese squadron took off in another direction.Deeply relieved, Butch O'Hare and his tattered fighter limped back to the carrier.
Upon arrival, he reported in and related the event surrounding his return. The film from th e gun-camera mounted on his plane told the tale. It showed the extent of Butch's daring attempt to protect his fleet. He had, in fact, destroyed five enemy aircraft This took place on February 20, 1942 , and for that action Butch became the Navy's first Ace of W.W.II, and the first Naval Aviator to win the Congressional Medal of Honor.A year later Butch was killed in aerial combat at the age of 29. His home town would not allow the memory of this WW II hero to fade, and today, O'Hare Airport in Chicago is named in tribute to the courage of this great
So, the next time you find yourself at O'Hare International, give some thought to visiting Butch's memorial displaying his statue and his Medal of Honor. It's located between Terminals 1 and 2.
SO WHAT DO THESE TWO STORIES HAVE TO DO WITH EACH OTHER? Butch O'Hare was "Easy Eddie's" son
Indeed, an inspirational story. There are so many others out there that we don't know about or that none has researched and brought into the light. There are heroic lives throughout our Military's 300 plus year history, to be sure, but there are a lot of civilian or Civil Service employees, State and Federal, that work or act heroically.
STORY NUMBER ONE
Many years ago, Al Capone virtually owned Chicago . Capone wasn't famous for anything heroic. He was notorious for enmeshing the windy city in everything from bootlegged booze and prostitution to murder.Capone had a lawyer nicknamed "Easy Eddie." He was Capone's lawyer for a good reason. Eddie was very good! In fact, Eddie's skill at legal maneuvering kept Big Al out of jail for a long time.To show his appreciation, Capone paid him very well. Not only was the money big, but Eddie got special dividends, as well.
For instance, he and his family occupied a fenced-in mansion with live-in help and all of the conveniences of the day. The estate was so large that it filled an entire Chicago City block.Eddie lived the high life of the Chicago mob and gave little consideration to the atrocity that went on around him..Eddie did have one soft spot, however. He had a son that he loved dearly. Eddie saw to it that his young son had clothes, cars, and a good education. Nothing was withheld. Price was no object.And, despite his involvement with organized crime, Eddie even tried to teach him right from wrong. Eddie wanted his son to be a better man than he was.
Yet, with all his wealth and influence, there were two things he couldn't give his son; he couldn't pass on a good name or a good example.One day, Easy Eddie reached a difficult decision. Easy Eddie wanted to rectify wrongs he had done .He decided he would go to the authorities and tell the truth about Al "Scarface" Capone, clean up his tarnished name, and offer his son some semblance of integrity.. To do this, he would have to testify against The Mob, and he knew that the cost would be great. So, he testified.
Within the year, Easy Eddie's life ended in a blaze of gunfire on a lonely Chicago Street . But in his eyes, he had given his son the greatest gift he had to offer, at the greatest price he could ever pay. Police removed from his pockets a rosary, a crucifix, a religious medallion, and a poem clipped from a magazine.The poem read:"The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop, at late or early hour. Now is the only time you own. Live, love, toil with a will. Place no faith in time. For the clock may soon be still."
STORY NUMBER TWO
World War II produced many heroes. One such man was Lieutenant Commander Butch O'Hare..He was a fighter pilot assigned to the aircraft carrier Lexington in the South Pacific.One day his entire squadron was sent on a mission. After he was airborne, he looked at his fuel gauge and realized that someone had forgotten to top off his fuel tank.He would not have enough fuel to complete his mission and get back to his ship.His flight leader told him to return to the carrier. Reluctantly, he dropped out of formation and headed back to the fleet.As he was returning to the mother ship, he saw something that turned his blood cold; a squadron of Japanese aircraft was speeding its way toward the American fleet.
The American fighters were gone on a sortie, and the fleet was all but defenseless. He couldn't reach his squadron and bring them back in time to save the fleet. Nor could he warn the fleet of the approaching danger. There was only one thing to do. He must somehow divert them from the fleet.Laying aside all thoughts of personal safety, he dove into the formation of Japanese planes. Wing-mounted 50 caliber's blazed as he charged in, attacking one surprised enemy plane and then another. Butch wove in and out of the now broken formation and fired at as many planes as possible until all his ammunition was finally spent.
Undaunted, he continued the assault. He dove at the planes, trying to clip a wing or tail in hopes of damaging as many enemy planes as possible, rendering them unfit to fly.Finally, the exasperated Japanese squadron took off in another direction.Deeply relieved, Butch O'Hare and his tattered fighter limped back to the carrier.
Upon arrival, he reported in and related the event surrounding his return. The film from th e gun-camera mounted on his plane told the tale. It showed the extent of Butch's daring attempt to protect his fleet. He had, in fact, destroyed five enemy aircraft This took place on February 20, 1942 , and for that action Butch became the Navy's first Ace of W.W.II, and the first Naval Aviator to win the Congressional Medal of Honor.A year later Butch was killed in aerial combat at the age of 29. His home town would not allow the memory of this WW II hero to fade, and today, O'Hare Airport in Chicago is named in tribute to the courage of this great
So, the next time you find yourself at O'Hare International, give some thought to visiting Butch's memorial displaying his statue and his Medal of Honor. It's located between Terminals 1 and 2.
SO WHAT DO THESE TWO STORIES HAVE TO DO WITH EACH OTHER? Butch O'Hare was "Easy Eddie's" son
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
