Monday, October 31, 2011
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
From: Dean McClain
"When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe ."
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
"It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world."
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government."
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
"To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property - until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
All the above quotes from Thomas Jefferson.- - -Woodrow Wilson gave the USA to the Private Bankers when he signed the bill creating the Federal Reserve and the IRS 12/23/1913!
Brother DeanPray while you are able to the God who is able to do exceedingly above all that we ask or think!Springfield MissouriHistory is always HIStory!Free Speech - Use It or Lose It!Freedom - Defend it Now or Lose it!Independent Baptist byConviction and PracticeA Wise Man has a Teachable Spirit,
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Monday, October 24, 2011
From: "Larry Trout"
'Biden:'We think the federal government in Washington, D.C., should say to the cities and states, look, we're going to give you some money so that you can hire back all those people. And the way we're going to do it, we're going to ask people who have a lot of money to pay just a little bit more in taxes....
No problem, says the vice president. We're going to "ask" people who have "a lot of money" to "pay just a little bit more" in taxes.
Where are these people? Evidently, not in York, Pa. But they're out there somewhere. Who has "a lot of money"? According to President Obama, if your combined household income is over $250,000 a year you have "a lot of money." Back in March, my National Review colleague Kevin Williamson pointed out that, in order to balance the budget of the United States, you would have to increase the taxes of people earning more than $250,000 a year by $500,000 a year.
Okay, okay, maybe that 250K definition of "bloated plutocrat" is a bit off. After all, the quarter-mil-a-year category includes not only bankers and other mustache-twirling robber barons, but also at least 50 school superintendents in the State of New York and many other mustache-twirling selfless public servants.
So how about people earning a million dollars a year? That's "a lot of money" by anybody's definition. As Kevin Williamson also pointed out, to balance the budget of the United States on the backs of millionaires you would have to increase the taxes of those earning more than 1 million a year by 6 million a year.'
Saturday, October 22, 2011
From: al grotz
The article only considers the short term. Like a drug addict, the economy is bound to go through withdrawal symptoms. If we borrow like crazyand the econonmy goes through a short term recovery, then the elite will put out the propaganda that we don't need budget cuts, that wecan afford the deficit and the debt, all the while getting richer off the interest, while the common people continue to work harder to pay for it. What do you think got us here in the first place? This constantly growing deficit and its interest payments have a lot to do with our problem.An additional contributor to our problem is the shipping of a large portion of our factories overseas. Another short term solution. The wealthy get rich off of the slave labor of countries that don't have labor laws and we get to buy cheap products, but the long term result is that we don't have jobs with which to buy anything any more, whether produced here or overseas. I guess in a global free market economy, like the waters of the ocean, the disadvantaged countries are likely to improve their standard of living, while the countries of people who have nearly everything they need and are living comfortably (e.g. the U.S.) are bound to come down closer to the level of the poor countries. In the end every country that is properly managed will be living at approxiamately the same standard of living. In other words, one day the poor Chinese workers will be earning the same wage as the U.S. citizen, and vice versa. Are you ready for that leveling? The U.S., even in the midst of its economic turmoil, still has a population that is living pretty comfortably. Nearly every one is living in a house, or a pretty nice apartment. Nearly everyone has a T.V. and a cell phone. Nearly everyone has a car, etc. etc., oh, not to mention, everyone is eating! Are you ready to come closer to the Chinese standard of living? When they are done exploiting 4 billion people in China to the point where their wages have come a little closer to ours, they will be off to Africa or some other frontier where they can exploit people for much less than the Chinese.That's not to say that the U.S. citizen has to become more poor. There may be enough wealth in the worldfor everyone to live comfortably, especially with a world full of innovative bright minds that are always figuring out how to improve things.But as long as our elite control America and the Chinese elite control China, the playing field will never be fair for the average worker.We can continue to use a large portion of our labor to give welfare to the elite in the form of large interest payments from our government.Still a third contributor to our economic problems is illegal immigrants. In some ways this is much more deabilitating than the competition above, because the illegal immigrant gains unfair advantages over the U.S. citizen. He doesn't have to pay taxes (unless he has stolen your SSN, that's another whole issue) so companies can afford to pay him much less to begin with. By his very entry he also, some how, mysteriously gains immediate rights to services that even I was not able to obtain after paying taxes into the system and working hard for the same company for 23 years. (I didn't get disability because "it wasn't a permanent injury". I didn't get worker's comp "because you can't prove the injury is work related." I didn't get unemployment "because you are not medically fit to seek work. Therefore you cannot qualify for unemployment because one of the requirements is that you apply for work twice every week. It doesn't matter that you are applying, you will never get one of those jobs because you are medically unqualified to get one." Incidently, I didn't get a severance pay either.) So here a person can sneak into our country, who has no history with the country, who has never paid taxes and thereby has never built up an "account" with us, and yet they have rights to our schools, medical services, etc. Someone has to pay for those services. Guess who? Another form of coperate welfare, as legal workers pay for services for illegal immigrants through their tax burden so that cooperations don't have to pay a wage that is high enough to make the job attractive to a U.S. citizen (that has, you know, all that baggage, like part of his wages will go to taxes.)One more word about illegal immigrants. (And let's be clear about one thing, I hold nothing against any of them as persons, but the fact is we have to talk some common sense here, we have to talk sustainablility. If you want to be charitable to people who come from other countries who are at a disadvantage, you are free to give as much of your own money as you want to. But don't commit all of us, against our will, through an unsustainable govermental policy.) I live and work in Thailand. Despite the fact that I have worked for the same school for years and have both a visa and a work permit, every few months I have to check in with the government and tell them again what my address is. Every year I have to jump through the hoops, fill out the paperwork, and sit in the immigration office a couple of times for hours with an employee of the school who verifies that they are employing me and that they can't do without my services (e.g. a Thai cannot do accurately what I do.) If at some point the Thais decide they don't want me any more I would understand that is all part of the process, and go somewhere where people do want me.Entering the country illegally has never even occurred to me. And even if I did enter the country illegally, I would understand right from the start that I was illegal. I would always know that I didn't belong here, and I would always know that sooner or later I may be caught. I would always understand that if I got caught I would immediately be deported. You would not hear me saying, "But, oh, it's not fair! I have been here 20 years now. I have a wife and kids here now. It's not fair, it's not right to deport me!" I would have known I was illegal all along, and everything I did here I did with that knowledge and with that risk. I would have no grounds to cry "unfair". So, sorry, illegal immigrants knew all along they would someday be deported. Getting away with breaking the law for many years doesn't justify it or change the position.So, the above three things are in my view three very large contributors of our economic woes, 1.)The budget deficit with its slavery of interest payments, which is making some people very wealthy 2.) Factories overseas. 3.) Millions upon millions of illegal immigrants who don't have to pay taxes (except for those who have stolen our identities) and who have immediate access to services that have not been earned.Al
non-criminal illegal aliens
'The Obama administration soon will begin its systematic review of the approximately 300,000 pending deportation cases, separating "high priority" cases involving criminals it wants to deport from "low priority" cases it will drop, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told Congress Wednesday.
The effort marks another point in an evolution of immigration enforcement away from the worksite raids of the Bush administration and towards deportations of illegal immigrants in prisons and jails.
Napolitano said a group of Homeland Security and Justice Department officials will begin a small "pilot" review of immigration cases in "two or three" weeks, and hopes to rapidly expand its efforts.
Under the policy announced last year, federal immigration officials will place the highest priority on deporting illegal immigrants who pose a danger to public safety and national security, while "administratively closing" other cases, taking into consideration a list of factors. Those factors include the person's length of time in the United States, whether the immigrant arrived as a child, served in the military and has a spouse, child or parent who is a U.S. citizen.
DHS officials say the new policy, which gives immigration officials "prosecutorial discretion," is similar to policies of previous administrations, and is a "common sense" approach to immigration enforcement…
Napolitano said the department's focus on criminal illegal immigrants is better than "the ad hoc approach where non-criminal aliens are more likely to be removed than criminals."'
Friday, October 21, 2011
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Monday, October 17, 2011
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Friday, October 14, 2011
Thursday, October 13, 2011
'Research by Edward Pinto, a former chief credit officer of Fannie has shown that 27 million loans—half of all mortgages in the U.S.—were subprime or otherwise weak by 2008. That is, the loans were made to borrowers with blemished credit, or were loans with no or low down payments, no documentation, or required only interest payments.
Of these, over 70% were held or guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie or some other government agency or government-regulated institution. Thus it is clear where the demand for these deficient mortgages came from.'
'Beginning in 1992, the government required Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to direct a substantial portion of their mortgage financing to borrowers who were at or below the median income in their communities. The original legislative quota was 30%. But the Department of Housing and Urban Development was given authority to adjust it, and through the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations HUD raised the quota to 50% by 2000 and 55% by 2007.'
'As housing bubbles grow, rising prices suppress delinquencies and defaults. People who could not meet their mortgage obligations could refinance or sell, because their houses were now worth more.
Accordingly, by the mid-2000s, investors had begun to notice that securities based on subprime mortgages were producing the high yields, but not showing the large number of defaults, that are usually associated with subprime loans. This triggered strong investor demand for these securities, causing the growth of the first significant private market for MBS based on subprime and other risky mortgages….
When the bubble deflated in 2007, an unprecedented number of weak mortgages went into default, driving down housing prices throughout the U.S. and throwing Fannie and Freddie into insolvency. Seeing these sudden losses, investors fled from the market for privately issued MBS, and mark-to-market accounting required banks and others to write down the value of their mortgage-backed assets to the distress levels in a market that now had few buyers. This raised questions about the solvency and liquidity of the largest financial institutions and began a period of great investor anxiety.'
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
'The protests consist mainly of people who believe that economic and social justice requires a form of economic organization other than capitalism. That may not lend itself to a five-point plan, but it's an agenda nonetheless.
It's a decidedly misguided agenda. The protesters are massively wrong about the incompatibility of capitalism and social justice.
Social justice shouldn't be measured on what the rich have, which is the fixation of the protesters. Instead, the focus should be on the lot of the poor. The spread of market capitalism has done more to improve living standards for more of the world's poor than anything else in human history.
There is, however, a serious social justice problem that has developed in American market capitalism. Two of the bridges to the middle class for those without a college education – manufacturing and construction – have been eroded. Manufacturing jobs haven't been lost mainly to free trade, as the brief against capitalism would have it, but to sharply improved productivity. And construction wages have been undermined by illegal immigrant labor.'
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
1 Israeli soldier exchanged for 1000.
'"The deal will happen in two stages -- the first stage the release of 450 Palestinian prisoners, including 315 Palestinian prisoners that have one or many life sentences and the ones who are with high sentences. The second stage will include 550 Palestinian prisoners," he said.
The exchange will also include the release of 27 Palestinian female prisoners, said Meshaal.'
'FBI and DEA agents have disrupted a plot to commit a "significant terrorist act in the United States" tied to Iran, federal officials told ABC News today.
The officials said the plot included the assassination of the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States, Adel Al-Jubeir, with a bomb and subsequent bomb attacks on the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington, D.C. Bombings of the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Buenos Aires, Argentina, were also discussed, according to the U.S. officials.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said in an announcement today that the plan was "conceived, sponsored and was directed from Iran" by a faction of the government and called it a "flagrant" violation of U.S. and international law.
"The U.S. is committed to holding Iran accountable for its actions," Holder said.'
Interesting program this morning on the GB radio.
One thing that didn’t matter all that much to me was the interview with Hank Williams Jr. last week where they were supposed to be talking about his release of his dads new album, a reproduction I presume. And they (anchorman & woman) questioned him on his politics (“what do you think, let’s get your opinion”) & he commented on a golf game the president went on. Then ABC was offended & pulled his song off the Monday night football broadcast.
Any way they were playing his new song this morning. Just one week after the NBC fiasco, Hank Jr. was singing a song called “I’ll keep the USA & you can keep the Change”. Awesome how he is now slamming the media networks & insinuating that they have given into “The United Socialist States of America”
I love it, how do you like him now NBC.
Friday, October 7, 2011
The agent's name was Lauchlin Currie, and, as M. Stanton Evans writes in his indispensable 2007 book "Blacklisted by History," he ranks "among the most influential Soviet agents ever in the U.S. government, if only by virtue of his portfolio in the White House dealing with affairs of China." Currie, an administrative assistant to FDR, was instrumental in the U.S.-government-wide communist plot to turn China red.
But that's not all he did. Currie pops up in nine KGB cables translated by American cryptographers in what is known as the Venona Project, which became public in 1995. From these and other archival sources we have learned that Currie passed secret documents and shared sensitive political intelligence with Soviet spymasters. Equally as damaging, Currie used his stature as a senior Roosevelt aide to shut down investigations into the activities of other American traitors operating inside government.
While I haven't seen mention of Currie's economic activities in KGB documents, how does stimulus spending sound now on discovering that this bona fide Soviet agent was its leading proponent? In "Roosevelt, the Great Depression and the Economics of Recovery" (University of Virginia Press, 2005), Elliot Rosen, professor emeritus of history at Rutgers, writes: "The initial rationale for public expenditure as a stimulus to the economy was provided by Currie, who won a wide and influential audience in the Roosevelt administration." As assistant research director for the Federal Reserve, his position before moving to the White House, "Currie provided an economic rationale" for deficit spending. "Wartime aside," Rosen writes, "no precedent existed for budget unbalance." Not surprisingly, another Currie project was to push for the "abandonment of the concept of annual budget balance."'
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
'Putin has proposed forming a "Eurasian Union" of former Soviet nations'
'Russian police have brutally dispersed an opposition rally in Moscow.
Police spokesman Gennady Bugachyov said 24 people were detained Tuesday.
Riot police broke up the protest outside a subway station minutes after the activists formed a chain and started chanting slogans against Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.
The protesters also tried to unfurl banners criticizing upcoming parliamentary and presidential elections.
The police were seen twisting protesters' arms and forcing them into police vans.
Putin is expected to reclaim the presidency, raising the possibility he could prolong his increasingly authoritarian rule through 2024.'
Monday, October 3, 2011
Sunday, October 2, 2011
But sometimes Obama cronyism is murderous: Eric Holder, a man unfit to be attorney general of the United States, continues to stonewall the "Fast and Furious" investigation into taxpayer-funded government gun-running to Mexican drug cartels.
It is alleged that the administration chose to facilitate the sale of American weapons to crime kingpins south of the border in order to support a case for gun control north of the border. Evidence keeps piling up:
The other day, a letter emerged from ATF supervisor David Voth authorizing Special Agent John Dodson to buy Draco pistols to sell directly to known criminals. Over 200 Mexicans are believed to have been killed by "Fast and Furious" weapons — that is to say, they were killed by a U.S. government program.
Doesn't the New York Times care about dead Mexicans? Doesn't Newsweek or CBS News? Isn't Obamaism with a body-count sufficiently eye-catching even for the U.S. press?