Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Al Gore Ranks in the Green Heroes Basement
According to Entertainment Weekly, Al Gore rates in the basement when it comes to green heroes. Here's the box office facts:
$118 million
The Grinch
$260 million
Green Lantern
$219 million
The Hulk
$135 Million
Rango
$118 million
The Green Hornet
$99 Million
Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth
$24 million
Mike Church Explains Why Newt Gingrich is Not a Conservative
Excellent quick analysis of why Newt Gingrich is not a conservative.
If you fancy yourself a politician these days It has become fashionable to call yourself “conservative”. If you are a conservative politician who retires to private life as a lobbyist, you are now a lobbyist and no longer a conservative. Why, Because you are complicit in growing the size and power of the government that “conservatives” are supposed to oppose. This is what former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich has done, he lobbied Congress to vastly expand the welfare state with the passage of the Medicare Prescription Drug Entitlement. Now, as he seeks a return to office Gingrich claims he was NOT a lobbyist and can be trusted to shrink the same government he helped expand, this is nice work if you can find it!
But Gingrich’s big government bonafides do not end there, his consortium was paid millions to “consult” Freddie Mac as a “historian”. Well unless he were instructing them on the history of the recent nationalization of the mortgage market that claim is dubious besides how many historians make $30,000 an hour vending advice to mortgage companies? To make this infringement on liberty even more offensive, the man who will shepherd our return to the land of Constitutional milk and honey told Fox News’ Great van Susterin that he never saw the mortgage bubble burst coming and neither did anyone else. Perhaps the Speaker has not heard of Peter Schiff, Mish Shedlock or Ron Paul. All three of these men saw the bubble bust coming long before it actually happened.
Gingrich goes on to incorrectly blame the Federal Reserve and its 2008 reactions to the market crash for this bubble and he is exactly incorrect here too. The Fed cause the bubble beginning in 2001 by setting interest rates too low and artificially holding them there. Any one who does not candidly admit this and then say it must be brought to an end is either woefully misinformed or a permanent member of the ruling elite. Combine those two together and you should disqualify that person for the Presidency, even if he is a shrewd enough lobbyist to convince conservatives” to hire him as First historian.
If you fancy yourself a politician these days It has become fashionable to call yourself “conservative”. If you are a conservative politician who retires to private life as a lobbyist, you are now a lobbyist and no longer a conservative. Why, Because you are complicit in growing the size and power of the government that “conservatives” are supposed to oppose. This is what former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich has done, he lobbied Congress to vastly expand the welfare state with the passage of the Medicare Prescription Drug Entitlement. Now, as he seeks a return to office Gingrich claims he was NOT a lobbyist and can be trusted to shrink the same government he helped expand, this is nice work if you can find it!
But Gingrich’s big government bonafides do not end there, his consortium was paid millions to “consult” Freddie Mac as a “historian”. Well unless he were instructing them on the history of the recent nationalization of the mortgage market that claim is dubious besides how many historians make $30,000 an hour vending advice to mortgage companies? To make this infringement on liberty even more offensive, the man who will shepherd our return to the land of Constitutional milk and honey told Fox News’ Great van Susterin that he never saw the mortgage bubble burst coming and neither did anyone else. Perhaps the Speaker has not heard of Peter Schiff, Mish Shedlock or Ron Paul. All three of these men saw the bubble bust coming long before it actually happened.
Gingrich goes on to incorrectly blame the Federal Reserve and its 2008 reactions to the market crash for this bubble and he is exactly incorrect here too. The Fed cause the bubble beginning in 2001 by setting interest rates too low and artificially holding them there. Any one who does not candidly admit this and then say it must be brought to an end is either woefully misinformed or a permanent member of the ruling elite. Combine those two together and you should disqualify that person for the Presidency, even if he is a shrewd enough lobbyist to convince conservatives” to hire him as First historian.
Rand Paul Address the Death of Posse Comitatus in America: S 1867 Due Process Dies
Rand Paul pains the scary picture of what could happen if Decepticon Republicans in the Senate like McCain, Graham, and Blunt get their way and pass S 1867. It's the death of due process laws and Posse Comitatus in America
Lindsey Graham on Robbing You of Due Process Rights and Placing You in an Internment Camp
The Fifth Amendment says you have the right to trial. It gives you due process laws--you are innocent until you are proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Apparently, this is an inconvenience for Lindsey Graham. Graham is the sponsor of S 1687.
Obama's Veto of Lindsey Graham's S. 1687 Will Be Meaningless
Whether Senate Bill 1687 passes the House and makes it to Obama's desk is irrelevent. The controversial bill introduced by DeceptiCON Lindsey Graham may be headed towards a veto according to a promise made by Obama, but that's no reason to put this to rest. The bill that gives our military internment power isn't going to give the military anything new that hasn't been done before, and it's not going to stop Obama or any future president from internment.
You see, internment is nothing new in American history. From Abraham Lincoln to Frank Delano Roosevelt, tyrants leading our country have a history of robbing Americans of due process and imprisoning them.
Most historians portray President Abraham Lincoln as the champion of freedom.
But there is a more sinister side of Lincoln and his actions that most history book gloss over or ignore. He jailed thousands of innocent, loyal Americans without evidence or trial.
This is a story of one of those individuals -- Baltimore Mayor George W. Brown.
When the people of Baltimore elected reform candidate George W. Brown mayor by a landslide in 1860, they had no idea he would serve most of his term confined as a federal prisoner. He was arrested in the middle of the night along with more than a dozen other prominent Marylanders, including legislators, a member of Congress and several newspaper editors.
This was an action sanctioned by Lincoln's unprecedented suspension of habeas corpus. There were no formal charges filed against those arrested; there was no evidence presented against them; and none of them ever received a trial.
Many of those who support S 1687 assure this will never happen to Americans. The truth is, it has happened to Americans and there was no S 1687 at the time giving the military this kind of power.
It wasn't just Lincoln. Another president considered a hero, just like Lincoln, sent thousands of Americans to internment camps after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. These Americans crimes wasn't threats to the American federal government. Rather, their Japanese roots was their only crime.
I would rather error on caution that be wrong about this. This bill is sinister. Even if Obama vetoes it, it can and probably will happen again in America.
You see, internment is nothing new in American history. From Abraham Lincoln to Frank Delano Roosevelt, tyrants leading our country have a history of robbing Americans of due process and imprisoning them.
Most historians portray President Abraham Lincoln as the champion of freedom.
But there is a more sinister side of Lincoln and his actions that most history book gloss over or ignore. He jailed thousands of innocent, loyal Americans without evidence or trial.
This is a story of one of those individuals -- Baltimore Mayor George W. Brown.
When the people of Baltimore elected reform candidate George W. Brown mayor by a landslide in 1860, they had no idea he would serve most of his term confined as a federal prisoner. He was arrested in the middle of the night along with more than a dozen other prominent Marylanders, including legislators, a member of Congress and several newspaper editors.
This was an action sanctioned by Lincoln's unprecedented suspension of habeas corpus. There were no formal charges filed against those arrested; there was no evidence presented against them; and none of them ever received a trial.
Many of those who support S 1687 assure this will never happen to Americans. The truth is, it has happened to Americans and there was no S 1687 at the time giving the military this kind of power.
It wasn't just Lincoln. Another president considered a hero, just like Lincoln, sent thousands of Americans to internment camps after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. These Americans crimes wasn't threats to the American federal government. Rather, their Japanese roots was their only crime.
I would rather error on caution that be wrong about this. This bill is sinister. Even if Obama vetoes it, it can and probably will happen again in America.
Mike Church on S 1867: Never Ending Wars and Internment Camps
Mandeville, LA - On today's radio show I spent almost all 3 hours laying out my case for why the current version of the NDAA bill S. 1837 (full version is here) is 1. Unconstitutional and 2. Is dangerous to liberty even if it were Constitutional. To support my case for the UnConstitutional claim I relied heavily on James Madison's "VA Report of 1799 & 1800" which summarized the debate in the VA Assembly of December 21, 1798. In that debate, Federalists argued the constitutionality of the Adams Administration's Alien and Sedition Acts while none other than John Taylor of Caroline, chosen personally for the task by Thomas Jefferson, argued the opposing point of view. The resulting resolution of the VA Assembly and the Kentucky Assembly are what gives the claims of legitimacy to what we fancy today as "Nullification and Interposition".
UPDATE I - I am watching debate LIVE on CSPAN 2 (audio to follow) and John McCain just demanded to know how"we can take out Al Alawkisitting in a foreign jurisdiction with a Predator drone but the same citizen doing the same thing in Charleston SC is entitled to a trial!? It doesn't follow, I've been here 22 years, this doesn't make sense." - So McCain can't wait to drop American ordinance on American citizens on American soil!? My, oh my, this crew is making arguments that I bet could be heard during the debate over the 14th Amendment in 1867UPDATE II - I dug this up from the late George Frisbee Hoar, Senator from MA in regards to invading the Philippines, slaughter her people and imposing American rule on the island - debate in U.S. Senate in 1902. "Gentlemen tell us that the Filipinos are savages, that they have inflicted torture, that they have dishonored our dead and outraged the living. That very likely may be true. Spain said the same thing of the Cubans. We have made the same charges against our own countrymen in the disturbed days after the war. The reports of committees and the evidence in the documents in our library are full of them. But who ever heard before of an American gentleman, or an American, who took as a rule for his own conduct the conduct of his antagonist, or who claimed that the Republic should act as savages because she had savages to deal with? I had supposed, Mr. President, that the question, whether a gentleman shall lie or murder or torture, depended on his sense of his own character, and not on his opinion of his victim. Of all the miserable sophistical shifts which have attended this wretched business from the beginning, there is none more miserable than this. 20Mr. President, this is the eternal law of human nature. You may struggle against it, you may try to escape it, you may persuade yourself that your intentions are benevolent, that your yoke will be easy and your burden will be light, but it will assert itself again. Government without the consent of the government—an authority which heaven never gave—can only be supported by means which heaven never can sanction."
Madison took the proceedings of the debate and condensed them into a summary and added his own sentiments, this is what is known as the Report of 1799-1800. In his Report, Madison leaves no room for modern Federalists to argue that even the AUMF is a legal extension of the Constitution. Nor is the "Patriot Act" and certainly this weeks usurpation delight the National Defense Authorization Act. While my honorable friend Mr. Andy McCarthy does not mention me by name my arguments are similar to Judge Napolitano's that are the subject of Mr. McCarthy's piece on this matter titled "Andrew Napolitano's Mistake".
"I really hope tea-party groups resist taking legal counsel from hysterions such as Fox News’s resident constitutional “expert,” Andrew Napolitano. On Tuesday morning, “the Judge” could be heard on the news railing about the McCain-Levin amendment to the defense-authorization bill (an amendment strongly supported by Senators Lieberman, Graham, Ayotte, and others). Napolitano contended that Congress is proposing to turn the entire globe into a battlefield and give President Obama the authority to have the U.S. armed forces swoop down on American cities and towns, arbitrarily detaining U.S. citizens on the mere say-so that they are enemies of the state. These contentions are absurd. The only real question about the McCain-Levin amendment is whether it is necessary at all. It does not change existing law in any meaningful way. Essentially, it reaffirms the authority Congress conferred on the commander-in-chief in the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that was enacted days after the 9/11 attacks. Most Americans will recall that those attacks killed nearly 3,000 of our fellow citizens in the course of suicide-hijacking strikes on the financial district in New York City and the U.S.-military headquarters in Virginia, as well as an attempted decapitation strike against U.S. political leadership in Washington. Most Americans will recall that, from coast to coast, cities and towns have been targets of numerous attempted enemy attacks in the ensuing decade. We’ll also remember that these plots against our country have occurred against a backdrop of al-Qaeda attacks in Europe, Asia, and Africa. That is to say, no act of Congress turned the United States and the globe into a battlefield. Al-Qaeda did that. The terror network declared war against America, threatening our interests and citizens throughout the world. Its tactic of choice is terrorist atrocities — carried out at any time in any place against any target, civilian or military." |
That the AUMF is a Constitutional exercise in my mind is dubious and can only be claimed and supported by rejecting original intent AND the almost soothsayer like prescience of James Madison himself. That Al Queda exists and has attacked Americans is not at issue or in dispute, what is in dispute is what should be the response and must that response gain sanction by the U.S. Constitution? As Madison says herein "The Constitution is the ORACLE" in these matters (emphasis mine) Turning to The Report we see Madison accepting the Federalists argument that alien enemies (and friends) are in our midst, they mean us harm and therefore because Congress can declare war then Congress can make up any statute it favors to execute said war. Not so says Mr. Madison...
"It is said, that the right of removing aliens is an incident to the power of war, vested in Congress by the Constitution. This is a former argument in a new shape only; and is answered by repeating, that the removal of alien enemies is an incident to the power of war; that the removal of alien friends, is not an incident to the power of war. It is said, that Congress are by the Constitution to protect each state against invasion; and that the means of preventing invasion are included in the power of protection against it. The power of war in general, having been before granted by the Constitution, this clause must either be a mere specification for greater caution and certainty, of which there are other examples in the instrument, or be the injunction of a duty, superadded to a grant of the power. Under either explanation, it cannot enlarge the powers of Congress on the subject. The power and the duty to protect each state against an invading enemy, would be the same under the general power, if this regard to greater caution had been omitted. Invasion is an operation of war. To protect against invasion is an exercise of the power of war. A power, therefore, not incident to war, cannot be incident to a particular modification of war. itnd as the removal of alien friends, has appeared to be no incident to a general state of war, it cannot be incident to a partial .state, or a particular modification of war. Nor can it ever be granted, that a power to act on a case when it actually occurs, includes a power over all the means that may tend to prevent the occurrence of the case. Such a latitude of construction would render unavailing every practicable definition of particular and limitedtpowers. Under the idea of preventing war in general, as well as invasion in particular, not only an indiscriminate removal of all aliens might be enforced, but a thousand other things still more remote from the operations and precautions appurtenant to war, might take place. 'A bigoted or tyrannical nation might threaten us with war, unless certain religious or political regulations were adopted by us; yet it never could be inferred, if the regulations which would prevent war, were such as Congress had otherwise no power to make, that the power to make them would grow out of the purpose they were to answer. Congress have power to suppress insurrections, yet it would not be allowed to follow, that they might employ all the means tending to prevent them; of which a system of moral instruction for the ignorant, and of provident support for the poor, might be regarded as among the most efficacious." |
Mr. McCarthy is basically making at least part of his current argument based on what lawyers call "precedent" but if, as can be demonstrated, the prior statute should never have breathed the life of Constitutional harmony then this act, drawing heavily on and indeed "re-authorizing" most prior transgressions must be void as well. This is to say nothing about what Napolitano and I protested so mightily against*, Sections 1031 and 1032 of the bill which DOES authorize detention of American citizens by military officers acting on military authority, suspects who are then to be tried by military tribunals. Again, Madison insists that no Act of Congress can alter the form of the separation of powers and may not combine those powers either (*nota bene, I am assuming for argument here that the military acts in this law's regard under orders of the CIC and thus as an extension of Executive Power):
"2. It is next affirmed of the alien act, that it unites legislative, judicial, and executive powers in the hands of the President. However difficult it may be to mark, in every case, with clearness and certainty, the line which divides legislative power, from the other departments of power, all will agree, that the powers referred to these departments may be so general and undefined, as to be of a legislative, not of an executive or judicial nature; and may for that reason be unconstitutional. Details to a certain degree, are essential to the nature and character of a law; and on criminal subjects, it is proper, that details should leave as little as possible to the discretion of those who are to apply and to execute the law. If nothing more were required, in exercising a legislative trust, than a general conveyance of authority, without laying down any precise rules, by which the authority conveyed should be carried into effect; it would follow, that the whole power of legislation might be transferred by the legislature from itself, and proclamations might become substitutes for laws. A delegation of power in this latitude, would not be denied to be a union of the different powers. To determine, then, whether the appropriate powers of the distinct departments are united by the act authorizing the executive to remove aliens, it must be inquired whether it contains such details, definitions and rules, as appertain to the true character of a law ; especially, a law by which personal liberty is invaded, property deprived of its value to the owner, and life itself indirectly exposed to danger. The alien-act declares, "that it shall be lawful for the President to order all such aliens as he shall judge dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States, or shall have reasonable ground to suspect, are concerned in any treasonable, or secret machinations, against the government thereof, to depart," &c. Could a power be well given in terms less definite, less particular, and less precise? To be dangerous to the public safety; to be suspected of secret machinations against the government: these can never be mistaken for legal rules or certain definitions. They leave everything to the President. His will is the law." |
Again, my honorable friend, who done his country great service, serving as U.S. Attorney and successfully prosecuting actual terrorists like The Blind Sheik, is proceeding from the viewpoint of settled law as adjudicated by the SCOTUS and other inferior tribunals. My aim here is to simply point out that the entire edifice is flawed from The Patriot Act to today and that in my view, hysterical reactions in the Media by Napolitano, others and myself are lame even tame when compared to the legislative mountains moved by Jefferson, Madison, Taylor et al in opposition to the Alien and Sedition Acts. I have compiled a full section of James' Madison's VA Report of 1799-1800 here. You can read the entire debate in the VA Assembly over the Resolutions of 1798 here.
S. 1867: The National Guard Began Hiring Internment Camp Specialists Over Two Years Ago
As an Internment/Resettlement Specialist for the Army National Guard, you will ensure the smooth running of military confinement/correctional facility or detention/internment facility, similar to those duties conducted by civilian Corrections Officers. This will require you to know proper procedures and military law; and have the ability to think quickly in high-stress situations. Specific duties may include assisting with supervision and management operations; providing facility security; providing custody, control, supervision, and escort; and counseling individual prisoners in rehabilitative programs.
Today, just over two years later we now may know why the Army National Guard is investing money into training Internment Specialists. Let's think of the role of the National Guard. It is all means the military arm for the states. The governor has control of the National Guard and they are allowed on American streets, where as thanks to Possee Commitatus, even the President of the United States can't allow the American military such access to the heartleand. So why is it the National Guard is training soldiers as Internment Specialists?
I ask that question today as the US Senate passed Senate Bill 1867 are the two connected. I have to say I am a very worried American today as I recalled the ad as I discovered the bill passed in the US Senate.
Here's opponent Senator Rand Paul talking about how the bill could eventually rob Americans of due process rights.
I think BBCW should point out just a couple years months prior to this language giving military personel this power, there was HR645, which gave FEMA the authority to set up the camps that our Congress is now pushing for military power in order to make arrest to fill.
Detention Centers Bill HR645
Now Congress is telling us this is to protect us from terrorist. I remind you who they consider terrorist. Let's reread the MIAC Report that was published and given to law enforcement officials in Missouri.
The Modern Militia Movement-Missouri MIAC Strategic Report 20Feb09
There were other reports describing average freedom-loving Americans, like Ron Paul supporters, as terrorists. They even came from the Department of Homeland Security a few weeks later.
As someone putting pieces of the puzzle together, this concerns me. There clearly seems to be a plan in place and S. 1867 starts the transfer of power to the military to rob people of due process in all likelyhood to keep some National Guardsmen busy.
S. 1867: John McCain Supports Robbing Americans of Due Process
Military hero, which I think is a questionable title, John McCain will support S. 1867. The controversial bill will rob Americans of due process rights as Patriot Act level power expands in the government. A bunch of Constitutional killing RINOS and Democrats are behind the bill including McCain.
Now I remind you, our founding fathers believed your innocent until proven guilty and the government has the responsiblity to prove you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This legislation clearly denies that Constitutional right.
For those doubters who say this can't happen to Americans and it's for the terrorist, I recall in history where Abraham Linoln shut down printing presses and put his political enemies in jail who didn't agree with his war of Northern agression, which was not this just fight to end slavery--but started because the broke northern states were taxing the southern states to "redistribute the wealth."
Again in World War II, Japanese Americans were lined up and put in internment camps despite no record of treason or any other crime. They were simply put there because of their skin color as their possessions were destroyed and vandalized while they were locked in internment camps. It has happened in American and this bill is very dangerous.
Levin Bipartisan legislation being considered in the U.S. Senate would expand the military’s power to go after any terrorism suspect, including American citizens, anywhere in the world—including within the United States—and confine them indefinitely without being charged or tried.
S. 1867, referred to as the National Defense Authorization Act bill, was drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Michigan) and John McCain (R-Arizona) and was scheduled for a vote by the full Senate on Tuesday.
Voices on both the right and left have expressed concerns about the bill, including the American Civil Liberties Union and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul.
Senator Mark Udall (D-Colorado) has introduced an amendment to S. 1867 that would “delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power,” according to the ACLU. “The Udall Amendment will make sure that the bill matches up with American values.”
The provision has also drawn the ire of high-ranking officials in the executive branch who see it as a usurpation of power by the military. FBI Director Robert Mueller wrote a letter to members of Congress raising his own concerns and stating that “The legislation ... will inhibit our ability to convince covered arrestees to cooperate immediately, and provide critical intelligence.” President Barack Obama has threatened to veto the bill.
Now I remind you, our founding fathers believed your innocent until proven guilty and the government has the responsiblity to prove you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This legislation clearly denies that Constitutional right.
For those doubters who say this can't happen to Americans and it's for the terrorist, I recall in history where Abraham Linoln shut down printing presses and put his political enemies in jail who didn't agree with his war of Northern agression, which was not this just fight to end slavery--but started because the broke northern states were taxing the southern states to "redistribute the wealth."
Again in World War II, Japanese Americans were lined up and put in internment camps despite no record of treason or any other crime. They were simply put there because of their skin color as their possessions were destroyed and vandalized while they were locked in internment camps. It has happened in American and this bill is very dangerous.
Levin Bipartisan legislation being considered in the U.S. Senate would expand the military’s power to go after any terrorism suspect, including American citizens, anywhere in the world—including within the United States—and confine them indefinitely without being charged or tried.
S. 1867, referred to as the National Defense Authorization Act bill, was drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Michigan) and John McCain (R-Arizona) and was scheduled for a vote by the full Senate on Tuesday.
Voices on both the right and left have expressed concerns about the bill, including the American Civil Liberties Union and Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul.
Senator Mark Udall (D-Colorado) has introduced an amendment to S. 1867 that would “delete the harmful provisions and replace them with a requirement for an orderly Congressional review of detention power,” according to the ACLU. “The Udall Amendment will make sure that the bill matches up with American values.”
The provision has also drawn the ire of high-ranking officials in the executive branch who see it as a usurpation of power by the military. FBI Director Robert Mueller wrote a letter to members of Congress raising his own concerns and stating that “The legislation ... will inhibit our ability to convince covered arrestees to cooperate immediately, and provide critical intelligence.” President Barack Obama has threatened to veto the bill.
Herman Cain Accuser Ginger White is a Stalker: Female Body Builder Accuses White of Stalking
Body builder Kimberly Vay had to get an order of protection against White for stalking. Vay was White's business partner in a fitness program called No Limit Cycling. Somewhere in the middle of that partnership, it appears White may have crossed the line.
Vay says White sent out a defamatory email about her in December. Defamortory--you mean like joining a bunch of other women with questionable pasts that are no trying to destroy a black REPUBLICAN presidential candidate without providing any proof. All the Cain accusers have very questionable pasts. It appears White is no different.
Springfield, Missouri Ron Paul 2012 Meeting: December 1, 2011
Fellow liberty lovers and Ron Paul supporters.
I wanted to remind all of you about the meeting on Thursday, December 1st at the Fountain room at Cox North at 6:30pm.
It is very important that as many of you as possible attend. We are seeing real momentum both nation-wide and here in Springfield and the 7th district. Missouri now has a State-wide campaign coordinator and we have a solid plan moving forward. Furthermore, with your help, we can really put in some solid effort toward the national campaign's efforts in Iowa, New Hampshire and some of the early states.
I really believe we have a good shot at this, so we all have to pull together and move this forward!
If you have not signed up for http://www.meetup.com/Springfield-MO-for-Ron-Paul-2012/ , I recommend you do so. This is the easiest and most certain way to see what's happening with the movement here in Greene County.
I wanted to remind all of you about the meeting on Thursday, December 1st at the Fountain room at Cox North at 6:30pm.
It is very important that as many of you as possible attend. We are seeing real momentum both nation-wide and here in Springfield and the 7th district. Missouri now has a State-wide campaign coordinator and we have a solid plan moving forward. Furthermore, with your help, we can really put in some solid effort toward the national campaign's efforts in Iowa, New Hampshire and some of the early states.
I really believe we have a good shot at this, so we all have to pull together and move this forward!
If you have not signed up for http://www.meetup.com/Springfield-MO-for-Ron-Paul-2012/ , I recommend you do so. This is the easiest and most certain way to see what's happening with the movement here in Greene County.
Congressman Billy Long, It's Time to Get Fed Up With Congressional Pensions
Dear Congressman Billy Long,
I suspect one of the reasons you decided you wanted to go to Washington was the fact Congressman Barney Frank helped destroyed the housing market. Considering your interests were in real estate market. In fact, you made a comment about the auction industry taking a hit in a December 2009 Springfield Business Journal article.
While you have done little to control Washington since you got to Washington, voting for things like the largest debt ceiling in history, there is an opportunity for you here to do the right thing.
It angers me that Barney Frank will soon be receiving a Congressional pension--a reward for his duties fulfilled in Congress which includes helping create the housing bubble. So as American wealth was destroyed thanks to this moron, he never had anything to worry about knowing his gay butt was going to be catered to by the American taxpayer in the form of a Congressional pension. Perhaps, this is one of the reasons you decided to go to Washington too--a pension and healthcare.
All the while, more than likely, just like Newt Gingrich has profited millions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both government institutions I know you Congressman Long have profited from to considering your real estate interests, thanks to Newt's political connections, Barney Frank will also come to play a role in the fraud that is taking place against the American taxpayer as these bailed out organizations take US tax dollars and pay these people of influence like Newt. I am sure we will hear of Congressman Frank's new role some day soon.
So with this said Congressman Long, I challenge you to do the right, fed up thing, and introduce legislation that ends Congressional pensions. This legislation should remove you of any federal assistance in healthcare and force you to pay into both the broken Social Security and Medicare programs.
Our country is broke, and considering the lack of service you and people like Congressman Frank provide for our Republic to get one of these pensions, it's time you realize $15 trillion is a huge number and people like you and Frank sucking off the federal tit is not helping reduce this number. Let's end Congressional pensions once and for all.
I suspect one of the reasons you decided you wanted to go to Washington was the fact Congressman Barney Frank helped destroyed the housing market. Considering your interests were in real estate market. In fact, you made a comment about the auction industry taking a hit in a December 2009 Springfield Business Journal article.
While you have done little to control Washington since you got to Washington, voting for things like the largest debt ceiling in history, there is an opportunity for you here to do the right thing.
It angers me that Barney Frank will soon be receiving a Congressional pension--a reward for his duties fulfilled in Congress which includes helping create the housing bubble. So as American wealth was destroyed thanks to this moron, he never had anything to worry about knowing his gay butt was going to be catered to by the American taxpayer in the form of a Congressional pension. Perhaps, this is one of the reasons you decided to go to Washington too--a pension and healthcare.
All the while, more than likely, just like Newt Gingrich has profited millions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both government institutions I know you Congressman Long have profited from to considering your real estate interests, thanks to Newt's political connections, Barney Frank will also come to play a role in the fraud that is taking place against the American taxpayer as these bailed out organizations take US tax dollars and pay these people of influence like Newt. I am sure we will hear of Congressman Frank's new role some day soon.
So with this said Congressman Long, I challenge you to do the right, fed up thing, and introduce legislation that ends Congressional pensions. This legislation should remove you of any federal assistance in healthcare and force you to pay into both the broken Social Security and Medicare programs.
Our country is broke, and considering the lack of service you and people like Congressman Frank provide for our Republic to get one of these pensions, it's time you realize $15 trillion is a huge number and people like you and Frank sucking off the federal tit is not helping reduce this number. Let's end Congressional pensions once and for all.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
The Fed Audit Reveals: 16 Trillion to the Big Banks, None for You
This coming from Bernie Sanders's desk:
The first top-to-bottom audit of the Federal Reserve uncovered eye-popping new details about how the U.S. provided a whopping $16 trillion in secret loans to bail out American and foreign banks and businesses during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. An amendment by Sen. Bernie Sanders to the Wall Street reform law passed one year ago this week directed the Government Accountability Office to conduct the study. "As a result of this audit, we now know that the Federal Reserve provided more than $16 trillion in total financial assistance to some of the largest financial institutions and corporations in the United States and throughout the world," said Sanders. "This is a clear case of socialism for the rich and rugged, you're-on-your-own individualism for everyone else." Among the investigation's key findings is that the Fed unilaterally provided trillions of dollars in financial assistance to foreign banks and corporations from South Korea to Scotland, according to the GAO report. "No agency of the United States government should be allowed to bailout a foreign bank or corporation without the direct approval of Congress and the president," Sanders said. The non-partisan, investigative arm of Congress also determined that the Fed lacks a comprehensive system to deal with conflicts of interest, despite the serious potential for abuse. In fact, according to the report, the Fed provided conflict of interest waivers to employees and private contractors so they could keep investments in the same financial institutions and corporations that were given emergency loans. For example, the CEO of JP Morgan Chase served on the New York Fed's board of directors at the same time that his bank received more than $390 billion in financial assistance from the Fed. Moreover, JP Morgan Chase served as one of the clearing banks for the Fed's emergency lending programs. In another disturbing finding, the GAO said that on Sept. 19, 2008, William Dudley, who is now the New York Fed president, was granted a waiver to let him keep investments in AIG and General Electric at the same time AIG and GE were given bailout funds. One reason the Fed did not make Dudley sell his holdings, according to the audit, was that it might have created the appearance of a conflict of interest. To Sanders, the conclusion is simple. "No one who works for a firm receiving direct financial assistance from the Fed should be allowed to sit on the Fed's board of directors or be employed by the Fed," he said. The investigation also revealed that the Fed outsourced most of its emergency lending programs to private contractors, many of which also were recipients of extremely low-interest and then-secret loans. The Fed outsourced virtually all of the operations of their emergency lending programs to private contractors like JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, and Wells Fargo. The same firms also received trillions of dollars in Fed loans at near-zero interest rates. Altogether some two-thirds of the contracts that the Fed awarded to manage its emergency lending programs were no-bid contracts. Morgan Stanley was given the largest no-bid contract worth $108.4 million to help manage the Fed bailout of AIG. A more detailed GAO investigation into potential conflicts of interest at the Fed is due on Oct. 18, but Sanders said one thing already is abundantly clear. "The Federal Reserve must be reformed to serve the needs of working families, not just CEOs on Wall Street."
You can read the audit itself here.
10 Reasons the Mafia is Better than the State: Soapbox Idol
This is an amazing speech given at the Porcupine Freedom Festival in New Hampshire, the Live Free or Die state. This speech was the winning speech at the Soapbox Idol competition.
Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich Aren't Reagan Republicans: The Party of Reagan is No Longer the Party of Reagan
by David W. Wise
One of the most negative things to have happened to the increasingly dysfunctional political system in the United States has been the transformation of the Republican Party over the last generation into the party of fiscal deficits. At one time, the bastion of balanced budgets and no free lunches, 70% of gross public debt through the last fiscal year was accumulated under the last three Republican presidents who ran deficits twenty out of twenty years averaging 3.9% of GDP.
Having inherited a budget surplus from Bill Clinton, George W. Bush presided over a doubling in federal debt, simultaneously cutting taxes while running two wars on credit. Railing against domestic spending, the same administration implemented a large new unfunded prescription drug benefit. Yet now, as the opposition party, Republicans pontificate about the dangerous levels of gross public debt (now at 101.1% of GDP) and last summer set about playing chicken with a possible default on our financial obligations. In now trumpeting national debt as a paramount evil, the Republicans approach the debate by taking tax increases and defense spending off the table – which is somewhat like resolving to set about losing weight by eschewing dieting and exercise.
During the Reagan administration the Republicans acquired an almost theological affinity for tax cuts. And the guise under which these initial tax cuts were sold to the public sounded persuasive: reduce the tax rates and increase rewards for those who generate economic activity and the economic pie will grow, thus self-financing the tax cuts while making everyone better off.
The problem is that none of it worked out that way. The beneficiaries of lower US taxes in the Bush administration did not reinvest in the American economy. Between 2000-09 gross domestic business investment declined 10.4%; gross private investment declined 9.8%, even as direct investment by Americans overseas increased 166.5%. Even before the financial crisis of the last year of the Bush administration the domestic economy produced fewer jobs and average real incomes showed the worst performance in fifty years.
Conservatives are right to raise issues about what they see as a tendency to throw money at domestic programs, yet refuse to apply the same logic to spending on the military. In a world with no existential threat such as we faced during the Cold War and in which 85% of global defense spending is by the US and its allies, the US defense budget is higher now on a constant dollar basis than it averaged during the Cold War. There is probably no part of the Federal government that is more poorly and wastefully managed than the US weapons acquisition programs where massive cost overruns are common.
The current situation is dangerous and unsustainable. This year the US government will collect taxes equal to 14.4 of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) – the lowest level since 1950 – yet spend 25.3% of GDP. Serious people know in their hearts what has to be done.
Although a recent poll says the American public does not want Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid changed – that desire is not an option given Baby Boomer demographics. Those programs have to be fundamentally restructured or they will collapse. Federal spending has to be reined in. And taxes have to be raised.
If Federal receipts could be 18.2% of GDP in the last year of the “small government” Reagan administration it is hard to understand why 14.4%, given the alternative of fiscal collapse, is sacrosanct. Even Ronald Reagan raised taxes eleven times when he found it the fiscally necessary thing to do.
One of the signs of maturity is having the discipline to do what needs to be done – not because it is fun or what we want to do, but because it is necessary. Given the current situation in Washington, perhaps the time has come for the administration and Congressional leaders to come together and dust off and adopt either the Bowles/Simpson or Rivlin/Domenici proposals as the basis for a plan to be voted upon by the end of the year and before the paralysis of the 2012 election year.
David W. Wise is an American businessman based in Annapolis, Maryland. He holds an MALD degree in international affairs from The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
One of the most negative things to have happened to the increasingly dysfunctional political system in the United States has been the transformation of the Republican Party over the last generation into the party of fiscal deficits. At one time, the bastion of balanced budgets and no free lunches, 70% of gross public debt through the last fiscal year was accumulated under the last three Republican presidents who ran deficits twenty out of twenty years averaging 3.9% of GDP.
Having inherited a budget surplus from Bill Clinton, George W. Bush presided over a doubling in federal debt, simultaneously cutting taxes while running two wars on credit. Railing against domestic spending, the same administration implemented a large new unfunded prescription drug benefit. Yet now, as the opposition party, Republicans pontificate about the dangerous levels of gross public debt (now at 101.1% of GDP) and last summer set about playing chicken with a possible default on our financial obligations. In now trumpeting national debt as a paramount evil, the Republicans approach the debate by taking tax increases and defense spending off the table – which is somewhat like resolving to set about losing weight by eschewing dieting and exercise.
During the Reagan administration the Republicans acquired an almost theological affinity for tax cuts. And the guise under which these initial tax cuts were sold to the public sounded persuasive: reduce the tax rates and increase rewards for those who generate economic activity and the economic pie will grow, thus self-financing the tax cuts while making everyone better off.
The problem is that none of it worked out that way. The beneficiaries of lower US taxes in the Bush administration did not reinvest in the American economy. Between 2000-09 gross domestic business investment declined 10.4%; gross private investment declined 9.8%, even as direct investment by Americans overseas increased 166.5%. Even before the financial crisis of the last year of the Bush administration the domestic economy produced fewer jobs and average real incomes showed the worst performance in fifty years.
Conservatives are right to raise issues about what they see as a tendency to throw money at domestic programs, yet refuse to apply the same logic to spending on the military. In a world with no existential threat such as we faced during the Cold War and in which 85% of global defense spending is by the US and its allies, the US defense budget is higher now on a constant dollar basis than it averaged during the Cold War. There is probably no part of the Federal government that is more poorly and wastefully managed than the US weapons acquisition programs where massive cost overruns are common.
The current situation is dangerous and unsustainable. This year the US government will collect taxes equal to 14.4 of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) – the lowest level since 1950 – yet spend 25.3% of GDP. Serious people know in their hearts what has to be done.
Although a recent poll says the American public does not want Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid changed – that desire is not an option given Baby Boomer demographics. Those programs have to be fundamentally restructured or they will collapse. Federal spending has to be reined in. And taxes have to be raised.
If Federal receipts could be 18.2% of GDP in the last year of the “small government” Reagan administration it is hard to understand why 14.4%, given the alternative of fiscal collapse, is sacrosanct. Even Ronald Reagan raised taxes eleven times when he found it the fiscally necessary thing to do.
One of the signs of maturity is having the discipline to do what needs to be done – not because it is fun or what we want to do, but because it is necessary. Given the current situation in Washington, perhaps the time has come for the administration and Congressional leaders to come together and dust off and adopt either the Bowles/Simpson or Rivlin/Domenici proposals as the basis for a plan to be voted upon by the end of the year and before the paralysis of the 2012 election year.
David W. Wise is an American businessman based in Annapolis, Maryland. He holds an MALD degree in international affairs from The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
Obama's Christmas Economy Isn't What the Left Wing Press is Making It
Have you heard the news? The Obama Christmas economy is the best Christmas economy in years, or so we are told. In fact it's so good, you have one California woman so eager to spend her money she brought pepper spray to Walmart. You have a Springfield, Missouri, woman so excited to spend her money that she tasered shoppers who got in her way. Yeah, it's that good, but wait a minute.
As we are told the dollars spent were big, much bigger than previous years, let's not forget inflation has kicked in thanks to all the dollars the Federal Reserve printed. More dollars printed means your dollars are worth less. If your dollars are worth less, it's going to cost more to purchase. Do you see the problem? Now I know most of you already realize you are spending more at the grocery store. Why do you think that is?
Here's more proof the Obama Christmas season isn't so merry. Americans are saving less and less. In fact, savings for the third quarter of 2011 are at a ten year low. Why is that? Inflation means your dollar is worth less, thus it takes more to purchase making it harder to save. In fact, third quarter savings rates are lower than Great Depression levels.
In the last quarter, the US consumer literally tapped out, bringing their savings rate from a 2011 high 5.3% in June to 3.6% in September, after the BEA reported that while spending increase was in line with expectations at an unsustainable 0.6%, income was just barely above unchanged at 0.1% on expectations of 0.3% confirming that as far as the economy is concerned, the consumer is just getting worse and worse off.
As we are told the dollars spent were big, much bigger than previous years, let's not forget inflation has kicked in thanks to all the dollars the Federal Reserve printed. More dollars printed means your dollars are worth less. If your dollars are worth less, it's going to cost more to purchase. Do you see the problem? Now I know most of you already realize you are spending more at the grocery store. Why do you think that is?
Here's more proof the Obama Christmas season isn't so merry. Americans are saving less and less. In fact, savings for the third quarter of 2011 are at a ten year low. Why is that? Inflation means your dollar is worth less, thus it takes more to purchase making it harder to save. In fact, third quarter savings rates are lower than Great Depression levels.
In the last quarter, the US consumer literally tapped out, bringing their savings rate from a 2011 high 5.3% in June to 3.6% in September, after the BEA reported that while spending increase was in line with expectations at an unsustainable 0.6%, income was just barely above unchanged at 0.1% on expectations of 0.3% confirming that as far as the economy is concerned, the consumer is just getting worse and worse off.
The USDA Has Now Invaded the Circus
What did the USDA do to the circus?
Today, USDA announced a “settlement” with Feld Entertainment the owner of Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus for $270,000 in “alleged” violations of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) for what seems to be every “Non-Compliance” ($10,000 each) violation the company has had since 2007. “Feld Entertainment made a business decision to resolve its differences with the USDA. The company decided it was more important to focus on the future of its business by continuing to provide the best animal care possible instead of engaging in costly and protracted litigation.”
What is the REAL story?
Paul Harvey always did a good job at telling us “The Rest of the Story” and so I think all the people who raise, care for and have animals should hear how the animal rights activists (People Who Don’t Think We Should Own Any Animals) has hijacked a Federal Agency and our freedoms to own animals as Americans with it. It is easy to jump to the conclusion that the GOVERNMENT has caught some sort of torrid animal abuse going on by “Non-Compliance” but these can be as simple as not filling out paper work correctly: forgot to dot an “i” ($10K), cross a “t” ($10K), your vet disagrees with the Agency ($10K).
Why would an Agency who is supposed to care about the welfare of animals be bringing up non-compliance items?
If they were doing their job in caring for animals, why weren't these things dealt with on the spot and not dating back to the beginning of the Obama Administration? Well… because PETA and theanimal rights activist petitioned and appeared to have found a friend in the USDA General Counsel, Ramona Romero (Mother Jones Nov/Dec 2011) to do their bidding and to try and close The Greatest Show on Earth. Ramona, wasn’t alone in her actions she also had the help of former Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) attorney and animal rights activist turned USDA insider and Chief, Animal Health and Welfare Enforcement Branch, Sarah Conant the same one who fined a Family (Dollarhite Rabbit Case), THREE MILLION DOLLARS for allowing their son to raise rabbits and learn responsibility. By the way in their best year they raised $4,500 worth of rabbits! USDA now says “they can pay “just” $90,000 if they pay within 30 days… credit cards accepted.” You may remember, the recent leaked internal memo from this same agency allowing HSUS to provide oversight on animal welfare policy revealed by Senator Moran in his floor speech.
How will this affect us as pet owners and individual citizens?
If you raise/have animals all of these things could happen to you, as USDA Animal Care fueled by and staffed by the animal rights activist slowly creeps its mission into your backyard! The law needs to be changed to stop harassment of all people who care for/own animals from elephants to mice. If you agree with me, call the Secretary of Agriculture 202-720-3631 Tom Vilsack and tell him to stop harassing animal owners using the AWA! Then call, the House Agriculture Committee 202-225-2171, and the Senate Agriculture Committee 202-224-2035 and tell them the Animal Welfare Act needs to be changed to stop the harassment of animal owners.
Please forward to all animal owners you know… “And now you know the rest of the story.”
Today, USDA announced a “settlement” with Feld Entertainment the owner of Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus for $270,000 in “alleged” violations of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) for what seems to be every “Non-Compliance” ($10,000 each) violation the company has had since 2007. “Feld Entertainment made a business decision to resolve its differences with the USDA. The company decided it was more important to focus on the future of its business by continuing to provide the best animal care possible instead of engaging in costly and protracted litigation.”
What is the REAL story?
Paul Harvey always did a good job at telling us “The Rest of the Story” and so I think all the people who raise, care for and have animals should hear how the animal rights activists (People Who Don’t Think We Should Own Any Animals) has hijacked a Federal Agency and our freedoms to own animals as Americans with it. It is easy to jump to the conclusion that the GOVERNMENT has caught some sort of torrid animal abuse going on by “Non-Compliance” but these can be as simple as not filling out paper work correctly: forgot to dot an “i” ($10K), cross a “t” ($10K), your vet disagrees with the Agency ($10K).
Why would an Agency who is supposed to care about the welfare of animals be bringing up non-compliance items?
If they were doing their job in caring for animals, why weren't these things dealt with on the spot and not dating back to the beginning of the Obama Administration? Well… because PETA and theanimal rights activist petitioned and appeared to have found a friend in the USDA General Counsel, Ramona Romero (Mother Jones Nov/Dec 2011) to do their bidding and to try and close The Greatest Show on Earth. Ramona, wasn’t alone in her actions she also had the help of former Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) attorney and animal rights activist turned USDA insider and Chief, Animal Health and Welfare Enforcement Branch, Sarah Conant the same one who fined a Family (Dollarhite Rabbit Case), THREE MILLION DOLLARS for allowing their son to raise rabbits and learn responsibility. By the way in their best year they raised $4,500 worth of rabbits! USDA now says “they can pay “just” $90,000 if they pay within 30 days… credit cards accepted.” You may remember, the recent leaked internal memo from this same agency allowing HSUS to provide oversight on animal welfare policy revealed by Senator Moran in his floor speech.
How will this affect us as pet owners and individual citizens?
If you raise/have animals all of these things could happen to you, as USDA Animal Care fueled by and staffed by the animal rights activist slowly creeps its mission into your backyard! The law needs to be changed to stop harassment of all people who care for/own animals from elephants to mice. If you agree with me, call the Secretary of Agriculture 202-720-3631 Tom Vilsack and tell him to stop harassing animal owners using the AWA! Then call, the House Agriculture Committee 202-225-2171, and the Senate Agriculture Committee 202-224-2035 and tell them the Animal Welfare Act needs to be changed to stop the harassment of animal owners.
Please forward to all animal owners you know… “And now you know the rest of the story.”
Monday, November 28, 2011
Obama's the Military Industrial Complex's Favorite Child: More Nukes and More War
Obama may have told us he is pulling us out of Iraq, but the budget shows $6.5 billion more in war spending in Iraq next year. It's really the never ending war. Wanna bet we are borrowing money from China to blow up bombs in Iraq?
"Today, I state clearly and with conviction America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons," Obama once said. The reality of that is far different. Obama is overseeing a large increase of nuclear weapons.
Shrinking America's nuclear arsenal has turned out to be far easier said than done. Despite the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) cuts, federal spending on the atomic stockpile is actually beyond Cold War levels, driven by congressional hawks and powerful nuclear labs eager to "modernize" the arsenal and fund projects that could spark a new arms race.
During the Cold War, the United States spent, on average, $35 billion a year on its nuclear weapons complex. Today, it spends an estimated $55 billion.
And yet, hippy liberals will still believe hope and change is coming. They will remain in denial as they cast their vote for Obama next year. It's the equivalent of conservatives claiming to be against Obamacare voting for Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich, who both support the mandate that forces you to purchase healthcare insurance.
We all know the promise Obama made in October 2007 when it came to these wars. He promised the first thing he would do would be to end the wars. He lied.
Obama also made another promise, but it appears the military industrial complex has Obama's attention. Did you know under Obama, the United States is producing more nuclear weapons than it did during the Cold War. Yes Democrats who once made Reagan out to be a crazy cowboy with his finger ready on the button are going to have to face the facts. Obama is the nuclear president despite this promise.
"Today, I state clearly and with conviction America's commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons," Obama once said. The reality of that is far different. Obama is overseeing a large increase of nuclear weapons.
Shrinking America's nuclear arsenal has turned out to be far easier said than done. Despite the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) cuts, federal spending on the atomic stockpile is actually beyond Cold War levels, driven by congressional hawks and powerful nuclear labs eager to "modernize" the arsenal and fund projects that could spark a new arms race.
During the Cold War, the United States spent, on average, $35 billion a year on its nuclear weapons complex. Today, it spends an estimated $55 billion.
And yet, hippy liberals will still believe hope and change is coming. They will remain in denial as they cast their vote for Obama next year. It's the equivalent of conservatives claiming to be against Obamacare voting for Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich, who both support the mandate that forces you to purchase healthcare insurance.
Barney Frank to Return to Pimping Gay Men in His Basement: Frank Considers Joining NAMBLA in Retirement
Gay Congressman Barney Frank announced his retirement. That's right the American taxpayer gets to pay for Congressman Frank to return to his residence in Massachusetts that's infamously known as the best little whore house in Mass for gay men.
Congressman Frank is excited about returning to the gay pimp lifestyle he once enjoyed but pushed blame on his gay lover after news broke of the scandal. Frank said in a news conference he was retiring because “there are other things I would like to do with my life.” And we all know what that means--like join NAMBLA on your dime.
Frank of course is retiring after leading this country to the housing crisis. You may remember this highlight from the Bill O'Reilly show.
Of course, there was this moment too where Frank miraculously farted on national TV.
Obama's Philosophy on Government is "We the Unit" not "We the People": Units Will Be Denied Healthcare
A fascinating study in the use of language by the Obama administration has many people worried. Elizabeth Scalia notes in an excellent written article that "We the People" has become "We the unit" based on verbiage used in the Obamacare health bill. That's right, the three most important words of the Constitution, since our Republic is based on the very premise that all men are created equal thus all having a say in government is quickly transitioning to a statist view through the use of language used by the Obama administration.
Consider the word unit--as something that must be serviced, and of course Obama believes that government's sole responsibility is to service, thus the important idea of people being substituted with the word unit. Removing the word people helps people get past those three words that continue to anger Obama, which of course the Constitution begins with.
It doesn't end with Obamacare. Obama's education agenda calls students "human capital." I am sure that's what every parent sending their kids off to kindergarten wants to consider their child for the next 13 years right?
They are cold words from the statist and his administration who doesn't believe that all men are created equal. And they remove the ideas of freedom and liberty that come with the idea of We the People. It appears, based on the article, that known fact about Obamacare that Obama himself has tried to hide is some units aren't going to get the healthcare they would have received had Obamacare not been passed. No surprise there, especially when the healthcare is promised by a group of central planners $15 trillion in debt.
Here's Scalia's article:
Consider the word unit--as something that must be serviced, and of course Obama believes that government's sole responsibility is to service, thus the important idea of people being substituted with the word unit. Removing the word people helps people get past those three words that continue to anger Obama, which of course the Constitution begins with.
It doesn't end with Obamacare. Obama's education agenda calls students "human capital." I am sure that's what every parent sending their kids off to kindergarten wants to consider their child for the next 13 years right?
They are cold words from the statist and his administration who doesn't believe that all men are created equal. And they remove the ideas of freedom and liberty that come with the idea of We the People. It appears, based on the article, that known fact about Obamacare that Obama himself has tried to hide is some units aren't going to get the healthcare they would have received had Obamacare not been passed. No surprise there, especially when the healthcare is promised by a group of central planners $15 trillion in debt.
Here's Scalia's article:
As regular readers know, I rarely listen to talk radio — the reception is lousy in the house and when I’m driving I like to listen to my cd’s. But I was monitoring traffic on the all-news station and something annoyed me so I started flipping around. I hit the Mark Levin show and was stopped in my tracks by a conversation between Levin and a caller who identified himself as a neurosurgeon. Now I need to confirm if this is real.
The caller said that he had recently gone to Washington to participate in a conference involving both the American Association of Neurosurgeons (AANS) and the Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS). I couldn’t take notes while driving, but the gist of the call was this: these surgeons were told, by a member of the Department of Health and Human Services that under the new health insurance legislation (aka Obamacare) government-insured people over the age of 70 who present with brain issues — stroke, hemorrhages, etc — would see no automatic surgical intervention, as they might now. Before any surgery could be begun, an “ethics” panel — made up not of doctors but of administrators and bureaucrats — would convene assess whether the person would be treated. “As a general course, though,” the caller said, “only ‘comfort care’ would be offered if you’re over 70.”
“So, generally speaking, it will be ‘comfort care only’ for patients over 70? That will be the rule, rather than the exception?” Asked a horrified-sounding Levin.
“Yes, but they’re not referred to as patients, or even subjects,” the caller corrected, “they’re called ‘units’. That’s what they called them.”
The caller made a point — as I think any neurosurgeon or nurse or well-read person would — that when it comes to brain-bleeds and strokes the faster the intervention, be it medical or surgical, the better a patient’s chances of minimizing damage; the faster the intervention, the better chance of overall recovery. “My ancestry is German,” the doctor said, (paraphrasing from memory) “and I am troubled by what I heard; to have administrators instead of doctors make the assessment…right now, if you come in at 2 AM with a stroke, no one is convening a panel — we’re going to aggressively attempt to limit the damage.”
Under Obamacare, an “ethics panel” will convene to determine whether your life is worth saving or not. But you will not be a “you”; you will be a thoroughly de-humanized “unit.” And the reason you will be a “unit” is because if this enlightened sort of “ethics panel” discussed you as a male or a female, they might be tempted to think of you as a human being — someone’s mother or sister or wife — a person who is beloved, and whose life is valued, even if the brain and body aren’t functioning at optimal levels.
So if you are a 70 year-old Nancy Pelosi, or Paul Krugman — with a potent private health insurance plan such as the one enjoyed by Members of Congress and other bureaucrats — you will get every appropriate surgery and treatment applicable.
So if you are a 70 year-old Nancy Pelosi, or Paul Krugman — with a potent private health insurance plan such as the one enjoyed by Members of Congress and other bureaucrats — you will get every appropriate surgery and treatment applicable.
But if you are a 70 year-old former bookkeeper or waitress on Medicare, well — you have swung your last golfclub or danced your last waltz, because the “ethics panel” that assesses your unithood will have no problem inventing a equation that goes something like, “Potential-Tax-revenues-minus-potential-cost-divided-by-social-and-political-value-equals…a negligible unit.
And you’ll be shuffled off to the room with the big screen full of daffodils and excellent speakers blasting Vivaldi, and made “comfortable.”
Assessing human beings as “units” is Evil. Period, full stop. It is a diabolical disorientation. The only people who do not understand that are people who also have difficulty with that inconvenient old “conscience thing“.
The caller to Levin’s show said he was a neurosurgeon, and of German descent. He mentioned his ancestry at the same time he discussed “units” and admitted he was distressed. The source of his distress was very likely his recognition of a the sort of ruthless efficiency someone in his family once knew first hand, either from one side of the ledger, or the other.
Those “ethics panels” by the way? Paul Krugman slipped up and called them something else, not too long ago. See if you can hear what he calls them, at right about 1:15:
Those “ethics panels” by the way? Paul Krugman slipped up and called them something else, not too long ago. See if you can hear what he calls them, at right about 1:15:
“. . .some years down the pike, we’re going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes…”
If there are any neurosurgeons or other medical personnel out there who can confirm what this caller said on Levin’s show, can you let me know?
And let’s bear in mind that this “ruthless efficiency” is going to argue that it can insert itself into your reproductive rights; how many units you can have, whether your unit should see the light of day or will be too big a burden on the system — it will perhaps eventually find a preference for genetically engineered units who will cost less, overall. The ruthless efficiency is what some of us, and dare I say, some churches, oppose. Because ruthless efficiency is evil.
Oh, and here’s the Krugman bit, with transcript for the harddrive.
UPDATE: The Right Scoop has the Levin Audio and a partial transcript. My paraphrases were accurate in the basic info.
Comedy Brought to You By Presidential Candidate Newt Gingrich
Newt Gingirch is taking off the gloves and working to become the front runner of the 2012 GOP presidential field. Newt, who has pushed for the federal mandate contained in Obamacare, made millions from consulting for bailed out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, serves on Healthymagination's board with Tom Daschle, which stands to make billions from Obamacare, and of course posed on a couch with Nancy Pelosi, says he is the only true conservative in this race that is electable. He followed it by saying...
"I wouldn't lie to the American people, I wouldn’t switch my positions for political reasons. It’s perfectly reasonable to change your position if facts change, if you see new things you didn’t see. Everybody's done that; Ronald Reagan did it. It's wrong to go around and adopt radically different positions based on your need of any one election because then people have to ask themselves, ‘What will you tell me next time?'"
Does this look like a conservative to you?
I do want to know what Newt will tell me next time? Perhaps he has decided to move forward with Obamacare once he gets into office considering past views.
"I wouldn't lie to the American people, I wouldn’t switch my positions for political reasons. It’s perfectly reasonable to change your position if facts change, if you see new things you didn’t see. Everybody's done that; Ronald Reagan did it. It's wrong to go around and adopt radically different positions based on your need of any one election because then people have to ask themselves, ‘What will you tell me next time?'"
Does this look like a conservative to you?
I do want to know what Newt will tell me next time? Perhaps he has decided to move forward with Obamacare once he gets into office considering past views.
Ohio Obesity Police Steals Honor Roll Student from Mother: Apparently Your Third Grader Has No Freedom to Eat Lots of Twinkies
 |
| If this kid lives in Ohio, he better head to an obese friendly state-- Wisconsin or Mississippi. |
They tyrannical Ohio Department of Family Services has stolen an honor student from his mother. What is his mother guilty of? Apparently, she feeds the kid too many Twinkies despite she cares enough to push the kid through school to ensure he's on the honor roll.
Here's what we know about the Ohio Obesity Police's actions:
An Ohio third-grader who weighs more than 200 pounds has been taken from his family and placed into foster care after county social workers said his mother wasn't doing enough to control his weight.
The Plain Dealer reports (http://bit.ly/t68M7D ) that the Cleveland 8-year-old is considered severely obese and at risk for such diseases as diabetes and hypertension.
Lawyers for the mother say the county overreached when authorities took the boy last week. They say the medical problems he is at risk for do not yet pose an imminent danger.
A spokeswoman says the county removed the child because caseworkers saw his mother's inability to reduce his weight as medical neglect.
So know some government thug can confiscate your child if they don't agree with your child's legal lifestyle. Last I looked, despite Michelle Obama's efforts, Twinkies are still legal.
This child may have the most loving mother in the world and because the kid has a Ding Dong addition, a government, who claim they represent a free people is now stealing kids from their mothers...
Can you imagine what this is going to be like once the federal government finally fully takes over the healthcare system? This is just the first instance, but you wait and see, it's not the last.
Campaign for Liberty Reminds Voters how Newt Gingrich Sold Out America While Speaker
The Campaign for Liberty writes:
During his stint in the House, Gingrich also supported GATT and the WTO, two big cornerstones of the one-world government agenda. “Gingrich’s Benedict Arnold act helped to hand over the power to regulate foreign commerce, a power reserved in the Constitution to Congress alone, to an internationally controlled body, making America’s economic interests entirely at the mercy of the WTO,” explains Rebecca Terrell, writing for Campaign for Liberty.
Following Newt's crime against the Constitution, he further enforced the idea of world government. The global warming fraud that is taking place around the world is really about the confiscation of natural resources by the world's elite who wish to control it through world governance. Look who Newt sat on the couch with accepting the global warming argument, which has never been proven with plenty of examples of the books being cooked like at Hadley CRU.
Global warming is a tool set forth by the globalist to push for more world government. It's really that simple. It appears Newt is drinking the globalist Kool-Aid.
Shoppers Continue Black Friday Shopping Despite Man Lying on the Floor Dying
Black Friday is a reminder of the declining moral decency that exist in America. Walter Vance of West Virginia was shopping during Black Friday when he collapsed. Hardly anyone noticed he fell to the floor as shoppers raced to get their MADE IN CHINA junk. One nurse eventually gave CPR to this man. Even store workers could have cared less about this man who collapsed dying at a Target.
Now we are getting excuses from people whose true ethos have been exposed. They didn't want to get in the way, and it's Target's policy to leave the person alone to die until the ambulance gets there. That will make me think twice about shopping at Target.
Now we are getting excuses from people whose true ethos have been exposed. They didn't want to get in the way, and it's Target's policy to leave the person alone to die until the ambulance gets there. That will make me think twice about shopping at Target.
Sarah Conant and the Attack on Missouri Agriculture by HSUS Through the USDA
Does the name Sarah Conant ring familiar? If not, you haven't been following the story of the USDA tyranny against a small Nixa family whose crime, according to the federal government, was simply teaching their young son responsibility with a few rabbits.
Conant is a radical animal rights activist that has infiltrated the USDA to terrorize Americans like John Dollarhite with fines that violate the Eighth Amendment all to push a radical left-wing agenda.
Conant has become one of the generals leading an army into Missouri against those engaged in agriculture. This video explains what is taking place in Missouri against people putting in a hard day's work.
Conant is a radical animal rights activist that has infiltrated the USDA to terrorize Americans like John Dollarhite with fines that violate the Eighth Amendment all to push a radical left-wing agenda.
Conant has become one of the generals leading an army into Missouri against those engaged in agriculture. This video explains what is taking place in Missouri against people putting in a hard day's work.
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Is Facebook Leading Us to the Mark of the Beast?
It's funny how Facebook has become a part of normal everyday living. On the surface, it seems like a friendly place to meet friends. Then you read this from Digital Journal about the direction this little social media site is heading and you quickly see how powerful Facebook really is.
As a sign of what’s to come, Facebook has just filed for “Facebook Trademark on business cards and ID cards,” a non-magnetically encoded identity card.
Similar to using Facebook to enter another website, the Facebook ID card will have an array of uses---banking, employment, citizenship, passports, census, taxation, welfare fraud, child-support, social security, and criminal identification--- with an “extremely secure and accurate computer record.”
Think about that, and let me know what you think.
As a sign of what’s to come, Facebook has just filed for “Facebook Trademark on business cards and ID cards,” a non-magnetically encoded identity card.
Similar to using Facebook to enter another website, the Facebook ID card will have an array of uses---banking, employment, citizenship, passports, census, taxation, welfare fraud, child-support, social security, and criminal identification--- with an “extremely secure and accurate computer record.”
Think about that, and let me know what you think.
“National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace”: Obama Administration Wants a Web User Identification Card
Surf the net a lot? Visit Facebook even a little bit? If the Obama administration gets its way a national ID card for Internet users may be more common that a library card. But the Obama administration is careful about calling it an ID card.
"We are not talking about a national ID card. We are not talking about a government-controlled system. What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy, and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities," Commerce Secretary Gary Locke said at an event Friday at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, according to Fox News.
The program called “National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace” is the brain child of another Obama czar. It's about safety of course, but like Benjamin Franklin warned, beware of any government safety measure that robs you of your liberty.
The White House Cyber Security Adviser Howard Schmidt and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke have recently announced a proposal for mandatory virtual ID cards for Internet users, called the “National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace.”
Two additional agencies had been in the running for the proposal, in addition to White House Cyber Security, all willing to prepare a comprehensive strategy meant to improve safety in cyberspace. One was the National Security Agency and the other was Department of Homeland Security.
Not far behind will be the national database collecting information about every Web site you visit, in the name of national security of course.
"We are not talking about a national ID card. We are not talking about a government-controlled system. What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy, and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities," Commerce Secretary Gary Locke said at an event Friday at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, according to Fox News.
The program called “National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace” is the brain child of another Obama czar. It's about safety of course, but like Benjamin Franklin warned, beware of any government safety measure that robs you of your liberty.
The White House Cyber Security Adviser Howard Schmidt and Commerce Secretary Gary Locke have recently announced a proposal for mandatory virtual ID cards for Internet users, called the “National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace.”
Two additional agencies had been in the running for the proposal, in addition to White House Cyber Security, all willing to prepare a comprehensive strategy meant to improve safety in cyberspace. One was the National Security Agency and the other was Department of Homeland Security.
Not far behind will be the national database collecting information about every Web site you visit, in the name of national security of course.
S.1867, The National Defense Authorization Act: US Senate to Decide on Military Power that Undermines Due Process Laws
The war on terrorism is about to strike the United States Constitution even harder. As if the Patriot Act didn't already kill the Fourth Amendment, the Fifth Amendment will soon be dead as well if Congress successfully passes the National Defense Authorization Act.
The bill would give the military the power to arrest anyone they suspect to be a terrorist, and it would rob those people of due process laws that force the government to prove their guilt. As you can see, this is a very dangerous proposition when you consider the broad definition of terrorist documents like Missouri's MIAC created.
“The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself,” writes Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.
Under the ‘worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial’ provision of S.1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which is set to be up for a vote on the Senate floor Monday, the legislation will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who supports the bill.
The bill was drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), before being passed in a closed-door committee meeting without any kind of hearing. The language appears in sections 1031 and 1032 of the NDAA bill.
“I would also point out that these provisions raise serious questions as to who we are as a society and what our Constitution seeks to protect,” Colorado Senator Mark Udall said in a speech last week. One section of these provisions, section 1031, would be interpreted as allowing the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens on U.S. soil. Section 1031 essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by authorizing the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions on American soil. That alone should alarm my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, but there are other problems with these provisions that must be resolved.”
This means Americans could be declared domestic terrorists and thrown in a military brig with no recourse whatsoever. Given that the Department of Homeland Security has characterized behavior such as buying gold, owning guns, using a watch or binoculars, donating to charity, using the telephone or email to find information, using cash, and all manner of mundane behaviors as potential indicators of domestic terrorism, such a provision would be wide open to abuse.
Of course, when you study history, the United States has a horrible record of robbing its citizens of due process laws. Abraham Lincoln jailed his political enemies, those who simply criticized Lincoln, during the Civil War. We know during World War II Japanese Americans were hauled of to internment camps without probable cause, unless you call skin color probable cause.
Obviously, the Senate is looking to make this the law of the land.
The bill would give the military the power to arrest anyone they suspect to be a terrorist, and it would rob those people of due process laws that force the government to prove their guilt. As you can see, this is a very dangerous proposition when you consider the broad definition of terrorist documents like Missouri's MIAC created.
“The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world. The power is so broad that even U.S. citizens could be swept up by the military and the military could be used far from any battlefield, even within the United States itself,” writes Chris Anders of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office.
Under the ‘worldwide indefinite detention without charge or trial’ provision of S.1867, the National Defense Authorization Act bill, which is set to be up for a vote on the Senate floor Monday, the legislation will “basically say in law for the first time that the homeland is part of the battlefield,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who supports the bill.
The bill was drafted in secret by Senators Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), before being passed in a closed-door committee meeting without any kind of hearing. The language appears in sections 1031 and 1032 of the NDAA bill.
“I would also point out that these provisions raise serious questions as to who we are as a society and what our Constitution seeks to protect,” Colorado Senator Mark Udall said in a speech last week. One section of these provisions, section 1031, would be interpreted as allowing the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens on U.S. soil. Section 1031 essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by authorizing the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions on American soil. That alone should alarm my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, but there are other problems with these provisions that must be resolved.”
This means Americans could be declared domestic terrorists and thrown in a military brig with no recourse whatsoever. Given that the Department of Homeland Security has characterized behavior such as buying gold, owning guns, using a watch or binoculars, donating to charity, using the telephone or email to find information, using cash, and all manner of mundane behaviors as potential indicators of domestic terrorism, such a provision would be wide open to abuse.
Of course, when you study history, the United States has a horrible record of robbing its citizens of due process laws. Abraham Lincoln jailed his political enemies, those who simply criticized Lincoln, during the Civil War. We know during World War II Japanese Americans were hauled of to internment camps without probable cause, unless you call skin color probable cause.
Obviously, the Senate is looking to make this the law of the land.
Friday, November 25, 2011
Iowa Hates Romney, Wants a True Conservative Candidate
Mitt Romney isn't winning the hearts of Iowans just weeks before the Iowa Caucus. Insiders in the Iowa GOP are meeting behind closed doors in hopes of a conservative alternative in place of the man who inspired Obamacare.
Fox News has learned there will be another meeting Monday of what could be called Iowa's ‘Coalition of the Anxious'.
After the Thanksgiving weekend is over, some of Iowa's social conservative leaders will gather for a second time.
"There is a lot of concern from different organizations and churches who want to know is there a candidate who can defeat Mitt Romney?", says Bob Vander Plaats.
Vander Plaats, CEO of The Family Leader, was not at the 1st meeting but was briefed on it.
Vander Plaats explains social conservatives have become nervous that Romney, despite sparingly visiting Iowa, could walk away with a victory in the first-in-the-nation nominating contest.
"(Romney) has managed to hold on residual support (from his 2008 Iowa Caucus campaign)", notes Vander Plaats.
Indeed, Romney has been the one candidate this year always in the top tier on every presidential preference poll in Iowa, placing no worse than third in any survey.
Social conservatives in Iowa have had an open distaste for Romney. Bob Vander Plaats, CEO of The Family Leader, another social conservative group says, "(Romney) has been passionate on both sides of every issue."
At the top of list of gripes by social conservatives about Romney are the former Massachusetts governor's evolved positions on abortion and gay marriage. Once pro-choice and supportive of pro-gay marriage candidates, now Romney says he is pro-life and does not support same sex couples marrying.
This is very good news that people involved in the GOP are looking for a conservative to beat Obama. Apparently, Newt isn't the answer either.
Fox News has learned there will be another meeting Monday of what could be called Iowa's ‘Coalition of the Anxious'.
After the Thanksgiving weekend is over, some of Iowa's social conservative leaders will gather for a second time.
"There is a lot of concern from different organizations and churches who want to know is there a candidate who can defeat Mitt Romney?", says Bob Vander Plaats.
Vander Plaats, CEO of The Family Leader, was not at the 1st meeting but was briefed on it.
Vander Plaats explains social conservatives have become nervous that Romney, despite sparingly visiting Iowa, could walk away with a victory in the first-in-the-nation nominating contest.
"(Romney) has managed to hold on residual support (from his 2008 Iowa Caucus campaign)", notes Vander Plaats.
Indeed, Romney has been the one candidate this year always in the top tier on every presidential preference poll in Iowa, placing no worse than third in any survey.
Social conservatives in Iowa have had an open distaste for Romney. Bob Vander Plaats, CEO of The Family Leader, another social conservative group says, "(Romney) has been passionate on both sides of every issue."
At the top of list of gripes by social conservatives about Romney are the former Massachusetts governor's evolved positions on abortion and gay marriage. Once pro-choice and supportive of pro-gay marriage candidates, now Romney says he is pro-life and does not support same sex couples marrying.
This is very good news that people involved in the GOP are looking for a conservative to beat Obama. Apparently, Newt isn't the answer either.
International Baccalaureate Diplomas Are Failing to Impress Colleges
Here in Ozark, Missouri, our school board is investing hundreds of thousands of dollars with the promise of better education through an agenda controlled by the United Nations through UNESCO. Dr. Gordon Pace, superintendent, and Chuck Fugate, school board president, promise the International Baccalaureate will better prepare your kids, while ignoring the conflict the UN's agenda may have with your American and Christian values.
Now we have already seen at Springfield, Missouri's Central High School, test scores and graduation rates have dropped over the last three years since Central became the first school in Missouri to offer IB. This is also the school Dr. Pace became an IB believer. Scary, I know.
Now the Mail Online is further confirming a drop in academic performance after students graduated with an IB diploma.
From the Mail Online:
Scores of private school pupils who ditched the A-level to do a new exam have failed to get into university.
Growing numbers of teens are taking the International Baccalaureate diploma because it is said to be better preparation for university.
But dozens got a worse score than predicted and have not met the minimum requirements. They will have to scrap their university ambitions or reapply next year when tuition fees rise from £3,290 to £9,000.
Institutions have received calls from desperate teens, parents and even politicians, blaming the IB for the failure and saying their grades do not reflect ability.
Universities Minister David Willetts has lobbied three universities on behalf of more than a dozen students in his constituency.
One candidate with a conditional offer from Exeter achieved 26 points in the IB, the equivalent of A-level grades BCC, far short of the required ABB – 32 points in the IB.
Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said a ‘number of institutions’ reported problems. Ucas is reviewing the number of points awarded to the IB.
A top result in the IB is the equivalent to six and a half As at A-level.
Meanwhile the results for more than 450 independent schools, published today, show fee-paying pupils passed 19.07 per cent of A-levels at A* this year – more than double the national average of 8.2 per cent.
Some 2,078 pupils gained at least three A* grades. Boys were slightly more likely than girls to achieve a hat-trick of A*s.
More than 80 schools including Eton refused to allow their results to be used in league tables.
Wycombe Abbey in Buckinghamshire topped the table after gaining an A and AS-level score of 531, equivalent to almost AAA across the board.
Meanwhile, Aberdeen University has become the first in Scotland to announce a fee increase for students coming from the rest of the UK.
The decision intensifies the current bitter row over the ‘tuition fee apartheid’ which discriminates against English students.
From 2012 Aberdeen will charge English, Welsh and Northern Irish students £9,000 a year for three years, with the fourth year free.
Scots and students from the rest of the EU will attend free of charge.
The remaining universities are to declare their fees within the next few weeks, with leading institutions such as Edinburgh and St Andrews expected to charge £9,000 for each year of their four year degrees producing a total of £36,000.
I know what you are thinking. That's in England. Well, make note of this. The IB globalist education agenda is the same around the world. The requirements to graduate IB don't change from country to country. If it's not working in the UK and it's not working at Central High School where Dr. Pace came from, who does Dr. Pace think he's fooling that he came make it work at Ozark. In the end, we will learn our tax dollars have been wasted while Ozark Schools compromised our values. It's coming quickly.
Now we have already seen at Springfield, Missouri's Central High School, test scores and graduation rates have dropped over the last three years since Central became the first school in Missouri to offer IB. This is also the school Dr. Pace became an IB believer. Scary, I know.
Now the Mail Online is further confirming a drop in academic performance after students graduated with an IB diploma.
From the Mail Online:
Scores of private school pupils who ditched the A-level to do a new exam have failed to get into university.
Growing numbers of teens are taking the International Baccalaureate diploma because it is said to be better preparation for university.
But dozens got a worse score than predicted and have not met the minimum requirements. They will have to scrap their university ambitions or reapply next year when tuition fees rise from £3,290 to £9,000.
Institutions have received calls from desperate teens, parents and even politicians, blaming the IB for the failure and saying their grades do not reflect ability.
Universities Minister David Willetts has lobbied three universities on behalf of more than a dozen students in his constituency.
One candidate with a conditional offer from Exeter achieved 26 points in the IB, the equivalent of A-level grades BCC, far short of the required ABB – 32 points in the IB.
Universities UK, which represents vice-chancellors, said a ‘number of institutions’ reported problems. Ucas is reviewing the number of points awarded to the IB.
A top result in the IB is the equivalent to six and a half As at A-level.
Meanwhile the results for more than 450 independent schools, published today, show fee-paying pupils passed 19.07 per cent of A-levels at A* this year – more than double the national average of 8.2 per cent.
Some 2,078 pupils gained at least three A* grades. Boys were slightly more likely than girls to achieve a hat-trick of A*s.
More than 80 schools including Eton refused to allow their results to be used in league tables.
Wycombe Abbey in Buckinghamshire topped the table after gaining an A and AS-level score of 531, equivalent to almost AAA across the board.
Meanwhile, Aberdeen University has become the first in Scotland to announce a fee increase for students coming from the rest of the UK.
The decision intensifies the current bitter row over the ‘tuition fee apartheid’ which discriminates against English students.
From 2012 Aberdeen will charge English, Welsh and Northern Irish students £9,000 a year for three years, with the fourth year free.
Scots and students from the rest of the EU will attend free of charge.
The remaining universities are to declare their fees within the next few weeks, with leading institutions such as Edinburgh and St Andrews expected to charge £9,000 for each year of their four year degrees producing a total of £36,000.
I know what you are thinking. That's in England. Well, make note of this. The IB globalist education agenda is the same around the world. The requirements to graduate IB don't change from country to country. If it's not working in the UK and it's not working at Central High School where Dr. Pace came from, who does Dr. Pace think he's fooling that he came make it work at Ozark. In the end, we will learn our tax dollars have been wasted while Ozark Schools compromised our values. It's coming quickly.
Angered By Hypocritical Republican 2012 Presidential Voters
I keep hearing the words, "we have to get Barack Obama out of office." While I agree with this sentiment I find a large percentage of committed Republican 2012 presidential voters to be hypocritical and dangerous. There is a clear reason why.
Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are the two front runners that will battle it out in the fall. Here's what I can't figure out. Since one of the main issues of this election is Obamacare, why is it these two mandated healthcare RINOs are the lead for the nomination?
Of course Mitt Romney pushed mandated healthcare insurance in Massachusetts and his Romneycare was the pilot program that inspired Barack Obama's healthcare program. Last February, Obama even praised Romney for his role in Obamacare. Yet Republican voters are pushing Romney as their nominee. It gets worse, because it looks like the choice is going to be limited come next fall considering who also has become the second of the two main front runners.
That would be Newt Gingrich. Gingrich has had his hands in the healthcare mix too. You see Gingrich has been busy preparing to profit from Obamacare. Just like Gingrich made millions pushing the unconstitutional Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (socialist homeowner programs) which received multiple federal bailouts, Gingrich has positioned himself on GE's Healthymagination board with Tom Daschle.
GE is run by Obama buddy Jeff Immelt, who also benefited from $140 billion in taxpayer bailouts. About the same time Obamacare was passed, Healthymagiation, positioned itself to be the government's partner in the race to socialize medicine in the United States. They are working on projects that assist in implementing Obamacare. Like Newt had his hands in the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac disaster, he is also meddling with Obamacare through Healthymagination.
Of course, Newt, like Romney, is in the process of telling voters what they want to hear because they want to be elected to the most powerful position in the world. Power corrupts and we now have a situation that shows the real hypocrisy of Republican voters.
You see the same Republican voters that were angered by the lack of reporting of Obama's radical past during the election, as Obama forget his communist, terrorists, and racial American hating mentors like Frank Marshall Davis and Jeremiah Wright for the more pleasant sounding "hope and change," it seems there are many Republican voters who would rather not talk about how both Newt and Romney don't have the Constitution's best interest at hand as both of them have agreed the federal government should have the right to hold a gun in your face and force you to purchase healthcare insurance like Obamacare does.
Here's Newt on supporting the Federal Mandate:
Here's Newt on global warming with buddy Nancy Pelosi:
Newt says now he regrets doing this commercial that fueled the cap and trade argument, but he only regrets it now that he is running for president--because that's what voters want to hear. They don't care about what Newt's past looks like and that his thinking resembles Barack Obama's thinking, because we simply must beat Obama.
Well if the new boss looks like the old boss, then how do you expect to reverse the damage of the Obama administration?
That's why I am angry with Republican 2012 presidential voters who are propping these two clowns up as some alternative to Obamacare while ignoring the obvious. They clearly aren't an alternative. They are more of the same. Sorry GOP, but if Mitt or Romney get the nomination, my vote will be with the Constitutionalist in the third party who sees the danger and not the central power Obamacare creates.
Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are the two front runners that will battle it out in the fall. Here's what I can't figure out. Since one of the main issues of this election is Obamacare, why is it these two mandated healthcare RINOs are the lead for the nomination?
Of course Mitt Romney pushed mandated healthcare insurance in Massachusetts and his Romneycare was the pilot program that inspired Barack Obama's healthcare program. Last February, Obama even praised Romney for his role in Obamacare. Yet Republican voters are pushing Romney as their nominee. It gets worse, because it looks like the choice is going to be limited come next fall considering who also has become the second of the two main front runners.
That would be Newt Gingrich. Gingrich has had his hands in the healthcare mix too. You see Gingrich has been busy preparing to profit from Obamacare. Just like Gingrich made millions pushing the unconstitutional Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (socialist homeowner programs) which received multiple federal bailouts, Gingrich has positioned himself on GE's Healthymagination board with Tom Daschle.
GE is run by Obama buddy Jeff Immelt, who also benefited from $140 billion in taxpayer bailouts. About the same time Obamacare was passed, Healthymagiation, positioned itself to be the government's partner in the race to socialize medicine in the United States. They are working on projects that assist in implementing Obamacare. Like Newt had his hands in the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac disaster, he is also meddling with Obamacare through Healthymagination.
Of course, Newt, like Romney, is in the process of telling voters what they want to hear because they want to be elected to the most powerful position in the world. Power corrupts and we now have a situation that shows the real hypocrisy of Republican voters.
You see the same Republican voters that were angered by the lack of reporting of Obama's radical past during the election, as Obama forget his communist, terrorists, and racial American hating mentors like Frank Marshall Davis and Jeremiah Wright for the more pleasant sounding "hope and change," it seems there are many Republican voters who would rather not talk about how both Newt and Romney don't have the Constitution's best interest at hand as both of them have agreed the federal government should have the right to hold a gun in your face and force you to purchase healthcare insurance like Obamacare does.
Here's Newt on supporting the Federal Mandate:
Here's Newt on global warming with buddy Nancy Pelosi:
Newt says now he regrets doing this commercial that fueled the cap and trade argument, but he only regrets it now that he is running for president--because that's what voters want to hear. They don't care about what Newt's past looks like and that his thinking resembles Barack Obama's thinking, because we simply must beat Obama.
Well if the new boss looks like the old boss, then how do you expect to reverse the damage of the Obama administration?
That's why I am angry with Republican 2012 presidential voters who are propping these two clowns up as some alternative to Obamacare while ignoring the obvious. They clearly aren't an alternative. They are more of the same. Sorry GOP, but if Mitt or Romney get the nomination, my vote will be with the Constitutionalist in the third party who sees the danger and not the central power Obamacare creates.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Ron Paul 2012!
I Took the Founders Red Pill!
My new Congressman with Pelosi
What's Right
-
Obama Wars: The Birthers Revenge52 minutes ago
-
I Bought A Gun in D.C., But...8 hours ago
-
Kate Beckinsale - Rule 515 hours ago
-
Volunteer to run government1 day ago
-
Lunch Links - 1/26/122 days ago
-
Rand Paul Stands Up To TSA5 days ago
-
J. Dudley Butler Throws in the Towel1 week ago
-
HOME - Dierks Bentley1 month ago
-
Set Principles First7 months ago
Blog Archive
- January 2012 (206)
- December 2011 (243)
- November 2011 (223)
- October 2011 (84)
- September 2011 (17)
- August 2011 (187)
- July 2011 (464)
- June 2011 (587)
- May 2011 (888)
- April 2011 (442)
- March 2011 (340)
- February 2011 (392)
- January 2011 (361)
- December 2010 (431)
- November 2010 (706)
- October 2010 (658)
- September 2010 (560)
- August 2010 (300)
- July 2010 (96)
- June 2010 (105)
- May 2010 (304)
- April 2010 (565)
- March 2010 (626)
- February 2010 (564)
- January 2010 (779)
- December 2009 (550)
- November 2009 (433)
- October 2009 (256)
- September 2009 (367)
- August 2009 (430)
- July 2009 (317)
- June 2009 (342)
- May 2009 (349)
- April 2009 (363)
- March 2009 (374)
- February 2009 (296)
- January 2009 (302)
- December 2008 (176)
- November 2008 (111)
- October 2008 (30)