Saturday, May 30, 2009
"First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish."
Gee, where have we heard that.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Socialist Party of America presidential candidate Norman Thomas, from his 1944 Campaign Speech.
Now, we have this brilliant idea of a VAT, which is already popular with the GOVERNMENTS of many European governments. The people don't like it so much, but what do we matter.
So instead of instituting the FairTax solution, we are going to have big taxes on the top earners (which they will pass on to the consumer) and now we will also have a VAT on consumables. OH but wait, that will pay for Health Care! Yeah, just like the lousy health care elsewhere in the world.
Watch for this, it's gonna get interesting: VAT
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Excuse me? Arrogant much?
If you are upholding the Constitution, then it is about education, not life experiences. And white males can come to well reasoned conclusion just as well as Latina women. "Better" is subjective.
hmmm is this a sign of times to come?
Monday, May 25, 2009
This is basically the story (in my words):
When you hear "The British are coming" who do you think of? Paul Revere.
Who else? Very few of us have been taught and I'm sure it's not being taught in schools today, there were a number of people involved in the events on that night so long ago. That night of the birth of the American Revolution. Many say the American Revolution was born during the Boston Tea Party, that was certainly one of it's early birth pangs but remember, that was 1773. It wasn't until two years later, that Paul Revere took his fateful ride.
During this time, the British had a curfew in place, but there was an unnamed man hanging about watching the British activity. He warned Dr. Joseph Warren. Revere, Dawes and Dr. Prescott were sent on this ride by Dr. Joseph Warren to warn Samuel Adams and John Hancock, but first he had to cross the river. Dr. Warren arranged to have him rowed across the river. Now, this was all during the curfew. The river had many ships they had to row between. There was a man on the other shore with a horse for Paul Revere.
The point is, Paul Revere could not have done any of this without the man in town after curfew, Dr. Warren making the arrangements, the other riders, the rowboat captain, the man with the horse....
So yes we are just one, each by ourselves. But together, we can accomplish great things.
Do what you can, talk to people. Educate yourself. But you CAN make a difference, no matter how small the act or how big the sacrifice. None of it can happen without us all.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Geez, as bad as you people think it was with Bush, this is getting worse by the minute.
We have to get back to the constitution, shrink the government back down, and let states and local government have back the power that the American people give them.
They will either think that it is up to them to help all the "less fortunate" (i.e., lazy) and will find ways to "give back" to them instead of using their influence to get the government to lay off all this spend spend spend that is keeping entrepreneurs and companies from expanding and CREATING jobs to help out the unemployed
Since a good many of them are on the Council of Foreign Relations, they were just getting a want list together.....
Which do you think?
Indiana Law Proceedings
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Meanwhile, Germany has become a nation of uniforms, goose-stepping to Hitler's tune, where boys of ten are taught to throw hand grenades, where women are regarded as breeding machines. Most cruel joke of all, however, has been played by Hitler & Co. on those German capitalists and small businessmen who once backed National Socialism as a means of saving Germany's bourgeois economic structure from radicalism. The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright, on others what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for foodstuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism.
Meanwhile an estimated 1,133 streets and squares, notably Rathaus Platz in Vienna, acquired the name of Adolf Hitler. He delivered 96 public speeches, attended eleven opera performances (way below par), vanquished two rivals (Benes and Kurt von Schuschnigg, Austria's last Chancellor), sold 900,000 new copies of Mein Kampf in Germany besides selling it widely in Italy and Insurgent Spain. His only loss was in eyesight: he had to begin wearing spectacles for work. Last week Herr Hitler entertained at a Christmas party 7,000 workmen now building Berlin's new mammoth Chancellery, told them: "The next decade will show those countries with their patent democracy where true culture is to be found."
Rest of the article: Time
Thanks to MS on Boortz reminding me to do this!
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Here's another thought for you: If the federal government bails out California, and then starts bailing out other states, what is to stop them from doing away with states all together?
The Constitution? They've tromped all over that already.
This is why it is so important for the states to all declare their sovereignty and get the Fed out of our business.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Hearing his speeches (hate subtitles) and thinking of events at that time can be downright scary.
I think it was the History Channel, if you get a chance watch it. Very well done.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
"The new President of the United States did not bring about any crucial changes in relation to Georgia, but having a dominant role in NATO he still insists on Georgia's soonest joining of the Alliance. If it happens, the world would face a more serious threat than the crises of the Cold War.
"Under the new realities, Georgia's war against South Ossetia may easily turn into NATO's war against Russia. This would be a third world war."
(Irina Kadzhaev, South Ossetia political scientist, South Ossetia Information Agency, April 2009
Excerpt from Global Research:
On May 12 James Mattis, NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Transformation [ACT] and commander of the U.S. Joint Forces Command, spoke at a three-day symposium called Joint Warfighting 09 in Norfolk, Virginia, where NATO's Allied Command Transformation is based, and stated:
"I come with a sense of urgency. The enemy is meeting like this as well."
A local newspaper summarized his speech:
"Mattis outlined a future in which wars will not have clearly defined beginnings and ends. What is needed, he said, is a grand strategy, a political framework that can guide military planning."
He failed, for what passes for diplomatic reasons no doubt, to identify who "the enemy" is, but a series of recent developments, or rather an intensification of ongoing ones, indicate which nation it is.
Last week the head of the U.S. Strategic Command, Gen. Kevin Chilton, told reporters during a Defense Writers Group breakfast on May 7 "that the White House retains the option to respond with physical force - potentially even using nuclear weapons - if a foreign entity conducts a disabling cyber attack against U.S. computer networks...."
Now, on a normal day these morons would know better than to start talking about WWIII, nuclear, etc. But with what is going on with NWO, who knows.
Bilderberg Group began their meeting today, continuing through the 17th. Timing is questionable.
From Gerard Warner of the Telegraph.co.uk
If al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the rest of the Looney Tunes brigade want to kick America to death, they had better move in quickly and grab a piece of the action before Barack Obama finishes the job himself. Never in the history of the United States has a president worked so actively against the interests of his own people - not even Jimmy Carter.
Obama's problem is that he does not know who the enemy is. To him, the enemy does not squat in caves in Waziristan, clutching automatic weapons and reciting the more militant verses from the Koran: instead, it sits around at tea parties in Kentucky quoting from the US Constitution. Obama is not at war with terrorists, but with his Republican fellow citizens. He has never abandoned the campaign trail.
That is why he opened Pandora's Box by publishing the Justice Department's legal opinions on waterboarding and other hardline interrogation techniques. He cynically subordinated the national interest to his partisan desire to embarrass the Republicans. Then he had to rush to Langley , Virginia to try to reassure a demoralised CIA that had just discovered the President of the United States was an even more formidable foe than al-Qaeda.
"Don't be discouraged by what's happened the last few weeks," he told intelligence officers. Is he kidding? Thanks to him, al-Qaeda knows the private interrogation techniques available to the US intelligence agencies and can train its operatives to withstand them - or would do so, if they had not already been outlawed.
So, next time a senior al-Qaeda hood is captured, all the CIA can do is ask him nicely if he would care to reveal when a major population centre is due to be hit by a terror spectacular, or which American city is about to be irradiated by a dirty bomb. Your view of this situation will be dictated by one simple criterion: whether or not you watched the people jumping from the twin towers...
President Pantywaist's recent world tour, cosying up to all the bad guys, excited the ambitions of America 's enemies. Here, they realised, is a sucker they can really take to the cleaners. His only enemies are fellow Americans. Which prompts the question: why does President Pantywaist hate America so badly?
Back to Joyce: Now, this is from the British press, not American! I think his world tour to make America look good, is backfiring on him.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
They all have reps in Washington every day lobbying for this Universal Health Care bill to be pushed through so they can get their hands on as much of it as they can.
They are also responsible for President Obama pressuring the Governor of California to rescind the pay cuts negotiated with their state health care workers. We all know California is in very serious budget trouble. They negotiated in good faith with the state health care workers who AGREED to the pay cuts to help the state of California.
Along comes SEIU who intercedes and gets Washington involved, threatening to withhold their stimulus money if these pay cuts are not rescinded.
I'm telling you people, it is not worth taking the stimulus money. The Federal Government wants to run every facet of the state and local governments which are supposed to be, according to the 10th Amendment of the Constitution, sovereign and separate from the Federal!
http://citizensconsulting.org/ of course their website is now blocked you just get the main logo
Lawsuits abound against ACORN, with ties to SEIU: National Review report
14 states have filed fraud charges on voter registration. They get paid based on how many people they get to sign up, in funds from taxpayers and money from political parties and corporations.
This is all BIG money in politics and BIG money in health care. ACORN may have started out with the best intentions, but money has corrupted it's direction. They will also have to answer embezzlement charges.
So when you are thinking, gee that universal health care sure sounds like a grand idea, just think of the corrupt lobbyists and pocket padders involved and then think how they are going to affect the cost of this program.
Oh and that is just two of the 270 companies associated with CCI. It could get worse. Much worse.
Be sure to click on the ACORN tag below for more stories and updates.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Sunday, May 10, 2009
So why are we wasting our money and manpower there? Oh it's ok when the Dems do it....
We need to get out of there while the getting is good.
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Except Geithner thinks that is a revolving account for his use! It doesn't go back into the general fund to help reduce future spending, oh no! He just turns around and give it out again to some one else! At least until October 2010, when it SHOULD expire. We'll see.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Let's start with our National Debt:
Scary ain't it? That's as of May 9th and the 2009 Budget our President has written in blood is not included.
In 2008, we (all us taxpayers) paid $412BILLION just in interest on this debt.
To the Federal Reserve! So supposedly we owe The Fed $11.2 Trillion.
Do ya feel like you just kissed your brother? We owe ourselves almost is the way it feels.
The Federal Reserve is a private entity created in 1913. According to the contract, we could opt out for only $450 million!!! Look how much we could save! They "loan" the government money through the various regional Fed Banks, print it out of thin air basically and charge us interest.
I don't understand a lot about this, hopefully I'll be able to talk some friends into helping me write more on this.
Here are some links, inside there are many more links. It's a LOT of studying. The important thing is that there is a piece of legislation right now calling for a full audit of the Federal Reserve. Can you believe they have NEVER been audited!?! It is HR1207, so far has 134 signatures.
If this worries you as much as it does me, make sure your representative signs this bill so we can get it out of committee and on to a vote.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
But the Obama administration has decided that the UAW is to get money first. They get 4.6Billion, another 1.5billion to be paid @ 9% interest (who gets 9% these days), 56% ownership AND a directors spot on the board.
Cerebus, one of the major creditors, out of $500,000 million owed to them get nothing. They give up all shares they had in the company (about 6%). They held title to the headquarter building, that is to be turned over as well.
Unnamed sources have told Glenn Beck that they have never witnessed such strong arming, the ends justify the means tactics as they witnessed in these meetings.
Out of the TARP money Chrysler owed to us the taxpayers, we get nothing. BUT we do get to give them another $2billion. This year. Next year another $4billion.
Someone TELL ME how the HELL any of this is legal?
And his supporters still think he is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
more to follow.......
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
You don't think so? There is an un-ratified treaty from 1997 being reconsidered that could very well result in American citizens being extradited for gun offenses. And I'm not talking about violent crimes against humanity! Manufacture and reloading would be targeted.
Note the reference to the grievances against King George in the Declaration of Independence:
the grievances against King George listed in the Declaration of Independence were:
This is scary stuff. Check it out here: Gun Treaty
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: ....For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
Amazing. But it could get that way here. I wonder if they have banned Rev. Wright?
Monday, May 4, 2009
THOSE DISGUSTING ANTI-AMERICAN SECURED CREDITORS
Neal Boortz @ May 4, 2009 8:29 AM
You've read, no doubt, about the Chrysler bankruptcy. Have you read, though, of how Obama used his power as president to demonize and browbeat some of the people to whom Chrysler owed money? I've been saying for years that despotic politicians depend on the ignorance of the American people to work their schemes and protect their positions of privilege and power. The behind the scenes goings-on are a brilliant case in point.
Now I'm not trying to insult anyone here, but permit me to couch this bit in terms that the victims (though they aren't aware of their victimhood) of our government education system can grasp. Getting down to basics is necessary for as many people as possible to understand how our anti-capitalist president has possibly turned business lending on its ear. If you think I'm stating the case wrongly here you're welcome to chime in with a comment. (You do see the "comments" link, don't you?) (note from Joyce: go to www.boortz.com to comment, I took it out here)
There are two kinds of people in the world: People who divide the people in this world into two types, and those who don't. There are also two types of loans. You have secured loans, and unsecured loans. The terms under which you borrow or lend the money will depend on large part whether the loan is secured or unsecured. The difference: With a secured loan the borrower has put up something of value that he owns as security to ensure his payment. If he doesn't pay, the lender can perfect his security interest on that item of value. The most common examples would be real estate loans and car loans. You put up either the car or your house as security for the loan, and if you don't pay the lender sends out some huge tattooed menace to repossess your car or a pot bellied Sheriff with aviator sunglasses to foreclose on your home.
If you put up nothing but your good reputation and credit history as security for the loan, well that would make your loan unsecured. Good reputations and credit histories tend to be worthless when economic times get rough.
When you're lending other people's money and you owe those people a duty to do everything you can to make sure the loan is paid back, with interest. In many cases the lender is actually a corporation and the corporate officers loaning the corporate money have a responsibility to corporate shareholders to keep their investments safe.
Loans, like talk show hosts, have a pecking order. (I'm one of the smaller peckers out there). When a borrower goes Tango Uniform the lenders line up to get their money out of the carcass ... usually through a bankruptcy procedure. The secured lenders go first. The unsecured creditors go last. This is as it should be. What good is getting security for your loan if you know that when you get to a liquidation of your borrower through bankruptcy you're going to have to wait until some unsecured lenders get made whole. Let's expand this a bit. Let's say a corporation or business comes to you for a loan. It doesn't matter for what: Maybe they want to expand, add jobs, develop a new product. Doesn't matter. They want money; you have money ... and you're trying to make a deal. You, the lender, have a responsibility to your shareholders, so you're going to insist on security for the loan. No security - no loan. You're also going to want to know that in the event of a meltdown you loan is going to be given priority over all of the unsecured loans your borrow may have. Without that assurance you're not likely to make the loan.
OK .. why all of these basics? That would be because they all come into play in this Chrysler bankruptcy. The two warring parties here were bondholders and unions. Chrysler owes money to bondholders. Those loans are secured. Chrysler also owns money to union pension funds. Those obligations are not secured. Enter, politics. Unions are a lot more important to a Democrat president than are bondholders. After all, bondholders are mere investors ... and they are more likely to be wealthy than the retired union members. That, of course, makes them evil.
So ... this appears to be how the Chrysler bankruptcy is going to shake out. The union pension funds are going to get priority over the bondholders. In other words, unsecured creditors will get preference over secured lenders. Cats and dogs sleeping together. Not only will the unsecured union pension plans get priority, Obama and his minions did no small amount of demonizing the secured lenders in the process.
Some of the secured lenders - those not under the thumb of the Obama administration because they took TARP funds - balked at Obama's plan. They were secured Chrysler lenders, and secured lenders they wished to remain. Obama demagogued these secured lenders by saying "I stand with Chrysler's employees and their families and communities" and not "those who held out when everybody else is making sacrifices." So there you go. If you want to enforce your security interest - if you want your money back -- you're against Chrysler's employees and families. Everyone else is making sacrifices and you don't want to. Hey ... wait a minute here. Are we forgetting that these people have obligations to their shareholders?
OppenheimerFunds is one of those secured creditors. They issued a statement saying "Our holdings in secured Chrysler debt are entitled to priority in long-established U.S. Bankruptcy law, and we are obligated to our fund shareholders to support agreements that respect these laws." How do you go to your shareholders and tell them that you've just flushed a bunch of their money down the crapper because you wanted to stand by Chrysler's families and communities? Other liberals also have a name for the secured creditors. They call them "vultures." You'll also hear the word "greedy" Obama called them "speculators," a word that doesn't carry a positive image with the dumb masses. That's Obama for you. Investors are evil. They're "speculators!" They're greedy because they want their loans repaid. Only in the anti-capitalist mind of a liberal moonbat would you hear such asinine language.
Yesterday afternoon we got news that the Obama White House threatened to destroy the reputation of a particular investment bank if they didn't cave in and go along with Obama's bankruptcy plan for Chrysler. How? By calling them traitors and vultures? That's been done already.
OK ... so what's going to happen now? Two things:
First: Some of Chrysler's secured creditors are going to object to the Obama-negotiated bankruptcy plan. They will fulfill their obligation to their shareholders, as they should, and try to get the favored treatment from the bankruptcy court usually reserved for secured creditors; and for standing by the rule-of-law they will be called every but Children of God. The anti-capitalist crowd will use these creditor hold-outs to demonize the financial sector in general and to promote the cause of even more government control.
Second: Lenders are going to be very careful in their lending decisions. What lender, for instance, will want to buy any bonds in any company that might end up a protectorate of the federal government? Who would want to loan that company any money? You want security for your loan, and you don't want political hacks demagoguing you if you actually try to foreclose on your security interest. Under this standard businesses - especially businesses in a wee bit of trouble - are going to have a rougher time getting needed financing.
Here's a scenario from you. A manufacturing concern is in trouble. If they don't get some financial help to make it through a rough spot they're going to tank, and about 2000 workers are going to lose their jobs. The manufacturing company goes to an investment bank and seeks a loan. As security for the loan the manufacturing company offers a lien on its buildings, corporate aircraft and manufacturing equipment. The lender, though, says no. The company is in trouble and there is a possibility that the loan might not be repaid. Under the new Obama scenario the government might step in and prevent the lender from foreclosing on its security interest in land, buildings and equipment. The government might decide that all of the company's assets should be sold in bankruptcy and the funds dedicated to the unsecured pension obligations to the 2000 workers. Result? Since the normal rules about secured and unsecured credit don't really apply any more, the lender declines the loan. We'll be in a situation where the best way for a company to get a loan is to prove to the lender that they don't need the money. This will all work out well for Obama, of course, because if the ailing company can't get the private sector financing ... where is there to go? Why, to the government, of course!
OK ... a bit wordy. But you need to know just how having a dedicated anti-capitalist in office works. Good for those who love government. For those who don't ... not so good.
Back to Joyce: So this is our President, yet again breaking the law. He does not have the power to change bankruptcy law.
Friday, May 1, 2009
All reports in the main stream media (MSM) say they will probably need a little help. HA!
I have heard from more than one source that the results were/are horrendous! As in "Oh My I want my cash NOW!" bad. Run on the banks bad. Possible riots bad.
Ok Joyce why should I believe you?
Don't. Just ask people you may know in the business and keep an eye out. You also might want to keep a little extra cash on hand. It'll take awhile for the FDIC to sort it out and cover your deposits. That is if the reports aren't doctored.....
Conspiracy Theory? Maybe. But I'd rather be safe than sorry. I can always redeposit my cash later if it turns out to be nothing.