Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

Political Correctness Produces Pusillanimous People

December 30, 2016

Perhaps the more reasonable among us can deal with the exengencies of survival and the often useless emotional expressions while still moving forward.

I hope so!

Pusillanimous means exactly what you think it means. Decades of political correctness has produced people who can’t handle anything that challenges their vision of the world, makes them feel …

Source: Political Correctness Produces Pusillanimous People

The Mysterious Results of Liberal Policies.

October 5, 2015

Source: The Mysterious Results of Liberal Policies.

Los Angeles Gun “Buyback” An Epic Fail

December 27, 2012

Los Angeles Mayor’s Gun “Buyback” An Epic Fail

12/27/12
By: Gary Hardee

Original CBS story: here

Anyone who has been observing the political left since the 1970’s is not surprised in the slightest at the predictable knee-jerk response to the recent high profile tragedies at Sandy Hook Elementary School and the Aurora, Colorado theater.

The well entrenched minority of international collectivist elites will stop at nothing to deprive their targets of the means to resist them. “Useful idiots”, as the communists call them, are abundant. Let any crisis, real or imagined, occur and the pressure from above begins and the cannon fodder masses, feelings close in tow, bow in unison to calls that defy history’s lessons and surge headlong into the lion’s teeth.

In this CBS propaganda piece, such conclusions are easily reached. We see no attempt to balance the sympathetic actions, though rewarded with money for guns, with hard facts about the clear disconnect with crime statistics and the massive number of guns in the hands of the public at large. Instead, we see a most tortured rant against guns and the over glorified and totally ineffective childish turning in of guns for cash.

If 2,500 guns are expected to be “turned in” in this drive and 8,000 guns since 2009 have been turned in, that makes a total of 10,500 guns. Assuming only one gun per person is turned in out of at city with a population of 3,819,702 – the participation rate in this “most successful drive ever” is .002748, or a non-participation rate over 3 years of 99.997251 percent of the city’s population.  Good for you Los Angeles. Your intelligence is not given any credit by CBS or the Mayor of your city.

According to a Gallop Politics article from October 2011, 47% of adult Americans own a firearm. Admittedly, these figures are not exact, but if just 20% of L.A. adults own one gun, that’s 1,963,940 guns in the city.

10,500 guns is only 1/2 of 1 percent of the total. This media piece makes it sound like the 33% reduction in crime from 2009 to date is due to the gun buyback program involving just 8,000 guns. If just turning in 8,000 guns has resulted in a 33% reduction in violent crime then with just another 16,000 turned in it would eliminate the other 67% of violent crime in L.A. It is the gun grabbers that are making the firm connection so one must surmise they are blaming just 8,000 guns for previous higher rate in violent crimes. How does one honestly connect those 8,000 guns, not now in the hands of the citizens, with a reduction in violent crime unless it was those very guns that committed the crimes?

A non-thinking person is lead therefore to conclude that just 24,000 guns are responsible for all violent crime there. If this were true, why call for the disarming of the 99% of guns that are not responsible for crime? It is also mathematically and statistically insane to conclude that zero violent crime will only occur if all guns are banned and confiscated when by their own implied logic only 24,000 guns cover all violent crime.

The more you slice the media hype the more ridiculous their claims become.

What percentage of L.A.’s violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, parolees, early parolees, or the criminally bent gangs or gangbangers? Nothing is said about the number of would-be violent acts that are thwarted by a citizen with a gun or what will likely happen when only the unstable and criminally inclined have them.

The second amendment’s purpose is to preserve a “free state” against all enemies, foreign and domestic, against tyrannical agents and authoritarianism emanating from our own government. History shows that authoritarianism is best achieved with a disarmed citizenry.

The high degree of non-participation in this “buyback” scheme tells me the collectivist propaganda is largely falling on deaf ears as it should. Just watch out for and defeat local, state and federal infringements that are surely forthcoming!

We all share great sympathy with the victims and their loved ones so maliciously deprived their young lives it still does not justify a course that will only leave more people even more defenseless. This is not good government or good policy, it is lunacy!

I too would like to live in a world free of crime and violence. Not all crime is violent and not all violence is criminal. But what we all know, understand and accept is that evil, unethical, and immoral actions will never be stopped, even in the most authoritarian system imaginable. Under such systems, crime does not cease, it becomes enshrined and emanates from those in power.

Considering the wide array of “criminal activity” that has befallen mankind, the real question becomes; When actual threats to your life, liberty or property come calling at your doorstep, what means of defense against the aggression should you be deprived of or denied by your own government through laws? What tools of aggression do you think the criminals will be denied because of those same laws?

It is unethical of me to deny you your preferred means of defense. Forcibly denying you makes me responsible for your full safety – an impossible task!

The best way to contain or eliminate all types of crime is the universal collective threat of a bullet between the eyes.

US Gun Statistics:  http://rense.com/general62/gns.htm

What’s This Talk About Secession?

December 16, 2012

12/16/2012
by: Gary Hardee

Some may wish to be a ward of the state, receiving from it gratefully the crumbs of what are their natural rights, bowing low to accommodate the will of the “collective” and yield to the pervasive “group think” that now haunts the thinking of our citizens… but where does it end?

Perhaps you are married “till death do us part”. Does that rule out a divorce from a totally out of control marriage that is clearly violating its foundational tenants? Why do laws allow for divorce in the face of that voluntary vow of monogamy and other expected normal functioning of a married loving couple?

Isn’t it funny how we apply situation ethics when we find the ends to our liking? Are there times when extreme irreconcilable conditions exist that justify ones public appeals for peace, harmony or justice?

We forbid involuntary servitude and rightfully object to taxation without representation but let one person get serious with their clear defiance to such treatment and threaten to divorce themselves from the oppression, harming the union, and they all of a sudden become the threat? Is there no relief for an injured and abused victim? Elections you say? Become a democracy you say? Let 51% rule the other 49% you say?

We can peacefully decent but not too much, right? How and why does loyalty and patriotism to your nation’s founding principles become widely viewed as insurrection?

“Separate but equal” is the often criticized term, wrongly accused of being rooted in racism when it is more clearly rooted in our own individual rights. Under our union of states we are and were meant to be separate but equal. “Equal” in the eyes of the federal government, is to show no favoritism to one state over another in adjudicating disputes between them. Yet they are sovereign, free to otherwise compete with one another, their people freely moving about in support of that state that most reflects our preferred conditions for happiness.

Is it not proper, that we can enter into a contract and it become null, if breached by the signers, and seek court enforced remunerations against the violating party? By this measure, is it not also proper that upon decades of merciless violations of the Constitution which they alone approved would seek relief as sovereign members from that union? When if not under such circumstances are states superior to that which they created? It defies logic that parties to a contract creating something cannot also de-create that something when it no longer serves the agreed upon best interests of the parties that created it, or as they say, “no longer functions as the founders intended”.  The concept of willful consensual participation in an atmosphere of unilateral and widespread abuse only goes so far. Redress of grievances was one of the reasons we declared independence from Great Britain.

So, while I am not at all in favor of secession or any dissolution of our republic, I am totally in favor of reviving the contract as it is written and amended “from time to time”.

The “republic” that Benjamin Franklin alluded to is too sadly remote from the knowledge and hearts of her people. The 17th amendment struck a horrible blow to that republic and has resulted in the erosion of the states’ voice in checking and balancing the easily fanned emotions of the people. We are suffering from its approval and will re-balance when it is repealed.

Even the great capitalist favoring business magazine (Forbes) would not remain in an oft violated contract with anyone without seeking firm relief and justice under repeated violations.

Injunctive relief is the larger motive behind recent calls for secession. While the citizens’ general knowledge of our union is severely lacking, it may compel the states to act, being one of the guardians and responsible parties to the pact.

As long as our states elected legislatures operate within the confines of their respective state constitutions and seek that injunctive relief through state calls, we may yet curtail and retract the unauthorized actions of the federal government that brought us to this stage. It is not to bring about harm by the secession calls, quite the contrary! Saying that the union will be harmed or damaged is to rule out the attainment of due relief and balance that more properly existed and heal the nation by again putting the horse in front of the cart. The people’s natural rights are the source of authority for the states, and with the states, are the higher authority of the federal government, and in that order.

May we accomplish the objective of re-balancing post-haste! Then and only then will be see a free nation produce to its potential.

Let’s Play the Loop Game Again, Shall We?

September 3, 2012

Join the political “Loop Liberation Movement”!

By: Gary Hardee
July 24, 2012

It is an irrefutable fact that Jimmy Carter filled his administration with members of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission (CFR/TC).  It is they who are responsible for the failings of administrations in which they dominated.  Not understanding this group’s immense influence within administration after administration keeps you right where they want you; ignorant, programmed and obedient.

These organizations and their affiliated front groups are overwhelmingly internationalist in their mindset. They view our US Constitution as the greatest hurdle toward global governance, which they openly tout!

They are decidedly opposed to any of the aims of Presidential candidate Ron Paul. This is the entire reason the Establishment Insiders and their member/surrogates in the media beat him up, black him out and otherwise bash his ideas and proposals even while he, and almost he alone, has been accurate in his future predictions of 9/11 and the bursting of the housing bubble, among others, years ahead of their happening.  Do any Ron Paul detractors, who claim to be “conservatives”, disagree with my assessment of Jimmy Carter and his administration?

However, just as Jimmy complained about the “insiders” while campaigning: “The insiders have had their chance and have not delivered. We need new faces and new ideas.”, so too did Reagan! Wasn’t the outcome of electing Jimmy Carter just more of the same or worse? More CFR/TC members, more domestic regulations, more international sellout, giving away our Panama Canal, communists allowed to ravage central America and I could go on and on. With their members holding the highest positions within Carter’s Cabinet and throughout his administration, should we not hold them accountable or to blame for the outcomes? Did the “insiders” become outsiders or was it all a lie to deceive a gullible public?

Reagan, prior to the New Hampshire primary, condemned the TC by name and took New Hampshire by storm, 50% to Bush’s 23%. George H. W. Bush, was required to resign his CFR Directorship while running against Reagan or while “in public service”.  Bush was the Director of the CFR from 1977-1979 when he resigned.
See:  http://www.cfr.org/about/history/cfr/appendix.html

As just one example of his super-internationalist views; the following is taken from this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_world_order_(politics)
“A pivotal point came with Bush’s September 11, 1990 “Toward a New World Order” speech to a joint session of Congress. This time it was Bush, not Gorbachev, whose idealism was compared to Woodrow Wilson, and to Franklin D. Roosevelt at the creation of the UN.” Please note the date! 9/11/1990! Oddly, 11 years to the day prior to the 9/11/2001 WTC attacks. Now, that could be a coincidence I’ll admit, but it is very strange.

You see, many still yet do not understand or acknowledge who we are fighting against. You are the victim of what in the computing world is called a “repeating loop”, normally requiring “debugging” or correcting.  Every command line inside the loop is performed until it reaches a command to return to the first line and repeats itself over and over.  The interesting thing is that the output of the loop is different each time but only within a range of acceptable values set by the programmers within that loop. Just before the loop repeats, the names of the known “X”s and “Y”s are changed to “A”s and “B”s but the formulas and their outputs are the same.  Many being none-the-wiser are all too content to think that this loop is a wonderful example of our democratic two-party system in action. If so, you have become a captive of the loop!

Activists and supporters of the “liberty movement” are largely familiar with the “loop game” and are attempting to expose and change the command lines of the loop and break the loop all-together in time.  I have dubbed this effort the “Loop Liberation Movement”(LLM).

Education is the only thing that will expose the “loop game” and how the masses are trapped in it. To understand the current command lines and how the loop game is played, you must watch this video. When you have carefully watched it, please return with your comments. But until then, I must hold onto my hope that humans can still muster the character and willingness to learn things that they currently do not know or that they insist on denying at their own peril.

For this presentation in written form, click here: The Insiders!

Keeping it Real and Open – the Internet!

September 1, 2012

Like many of you around the world, I like the animating contest of freedom over the slavery of restrictions imposed on me by others. The lack of knowledge, even by the willful rejection of the truth, empowers enslavement ends. The ignorant and willfully ignorant are far more apt to swallow the deceptions of tricksters, con-artists, crooks, tyrants and collectivists.  “The truth shall set you free” is a well-known and accepted axiom, but for it to be fulfilled, it requires us to want truth and have the willingness to accept the transforming impact that comes along with it.

Restoring liberty will not be done from the top down but from the bottom up! Entrenched powers seldom want limits placed on them, but rather, more of the same.  Truth and knowledge breeds freedom, while deception and ignorance breeds tyranny – a tyranny that is sadly asked for by those who have allowed themselves to become dependent to the corrupting “system”.

Once you accept that evil men conspire to advance their personal agendas, that birds of a feather flock together and that those that want insulation from market competition will compromise most principles to have government do their dirty work, you begin to get a small sense of the long entrenched conspiratorial forces that must be vanquished. It is not an easy task, nor is it for the faint of heart. It will for now, likely cause you to lose more friends than gain them. Those you enlighten will forever express their thanks while others may become uncomfortable around you because they know they should be more active in opposing the evil you made them aware of.

To be a “dignitary” one should comport oneself in a dignified manner.  Desiring to assume and wield unauthorized power over the life and property of another makes man little short of a thief and con-artist, or a would-be tyrant.  Collectivists and would-be tyrants cannot qualify as being worthy of the title “dignitary”.

The people of Earth live in truly exciting, if not hard times.  A time in which, thanks mostly to the growing and widespread use of the internet, mankind is more able to communicate with each other. Therefore they are breaking from the old mediums of biased media, prominent collectivist think tanks and book publishers, entrenched left-wing college professors, and the most destructive of all – our national system of “public schools”.

What does inadequate, insufficient and deliberately withheld knowledge give to the solving of any problem?  Nothing! Ignorance contributes nothing to freedom, however, knowledge does.  Ignorant and free can never be.  If you don’t recognize the previous sentence as a famous saying – you may be ignorant.  Don’t feel bad, we are all ignorant (lack knowledge) in some area.  I am not condemning general ignorance but rather the widespread resistance to certain knowledge and vital truths.

Provided that the internet remains open and uncontrolled; a virtual information anarchy, a place where information is made available and shared openly, we will by osmosis learn to think and reason on our own and to throw off preposterous notions and deliberate propaganda. Frauds will be discovered and so will time-honored principles.  The internet’s openness, while chaotic, will be freedom’s salvation if man steps up to influence its destiny.  While “Net Neutrality” and other such schemes to limit or restrict the free flow of communications serve only tyrants, it is readily apparent that putting the technology “Jeanie” back in the bottle will be highly improbable.

I believe we are beginning to see the gradual rising tide of truth and therefore freedom, not just in the U.S. but in Europe and elsewhere. I believe that freedom will ultimately win, even as it exposes certain false “conservatives” of today. The individual will again be respected and contracts upheld. The occasional “dust storm”, while likely, will not be blinding.

The generally accepted concept that there are only two sides to an argument is beginning to be seriously challenged by this open information exchange.  People and belief systems are not as complex as one might think.  No one likes a thief.  No one likes a thug.  No one likes a murderer. We may disagree about what to do, but we are on the same side of the issue.

We know there are liberal-conservatives as well as conservative-liberals for instance. This is not news. What really is news is that because the internet allows for greater unregulated communication, both sides are starting to form alliances to fight for commonly held issues.  It’s not the answer but it is a start.

We know there are “anti-war” Republicans and Democrats that see no sense continuing to wage the “war on drugs” or other politically driven war.  We are discovering and bridging common ground and beginning to grow a backbone for resistance to certain collectivist and authoritarian policies and laws.  The growth of this much-needed “backbone” may be painfully slow, but does have the potential for rapid manifestation as enlightenment spreads.

Robert Welch said in 1958: “All we must find and use and build to win is a sufficient understanding, while there is still time”.  Many citizens, from the 50’s to the 80’s rang the alarm bells and provided resistance to communism, collectivism, fiat money, debt and deficits, globalism and the U.N.’s military goals.  I thank them and honor their sacrifices. Their efforts may not have fully awakened freedom from her “comatose” state but those dutiful citizens may have kept her alive long enough for the internet “defibrillator” of today to play its role.

Any individual, group, leader, agency or non-governmental agency, bureaucrat or politician that favors controls on the internet is not the friend of freedom.

Real Choice, Real Serious, Real Scary!

July 1, 2012

7/1/2012
by: Gary Hardee

In his June 27, 2012 blog entry entitled “Deep Concerns about the Media Should Romney Win”, Rodney Page, author of the to be released book, “Powers Not Delegated”, he lays out his concerns regarding the tricks and tactics of the dominant liberal media.

See his blog here:
http://blog.powersnotdelegated.com/2012/06/27/deep-concerns-about-the-media-should-romney-win.aspx

His points are well taken and I don’t take issue with the bulk of his points. It’s a worthy read for those who truly value their vote this November!

Perhaps Mr. Page will approve of my comments or maybe he won’t. But since we now have the power of the internet, our voices cannot be silenced if we take time to bypass MSM outlets and take our statements directly to the people.  So, here is my response for your consideration.

The deception that Romney is significantly “better” or “diametrically opposed” to Obama is a scam and a lie. Both are government operatives and “managers”. Both have clear records that prove it. Obama is perhaps a more strident and blatant radical, even the label of Marxist I can accept. But Romney will serve the same globalist interests that Obama does. The wars, undeclared, will continue wherever the eastern liberal establishment (the Insiders) want them to occur.

If you vote for Romney and he wins, don’t expect much better due to the backers that are promoting his candidacy. I’m not talking about the local voter who can’t stand Obama and want him out. Otherwise known as the ABO crowd. I’m talking about the same ones who gave us H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and even Jimmy Carter as well.

No discussion of the cure is helpful unless one first recognizes the real “kingmakers” that are giving us false choices to begin with.

Only a candidate that wants a return to individual freedom and a limited government based on the restrictions imposed by the US Constitution will bring us out of the socialist quagmire we find ourselves in today. Romney will not do it! His false “conservatism” coupled with his highly liberal record in Massachusetts should be proof enough for any brain ruled by common sense.

I do not question the good intentions of the vast majority of Romney supporters but I do have grave concerns over their apparently flawed hope the he will truly side with the Constitution.

There is only one man that has proven his worthiness of the Presidency but he is not the Insider’s choice! Thus we see the media “blackout” and steady promotion of almost any other. Just as in 2008, we again are not allowed to hear equally from Ron Paul. The Insiders have successfully scared the Republican base into avoiding him in favor of another neo-con “repeat” and possible defeat rather than recognize that his honesty and character would surely win over the dishonest collectivism of Obama.

So! Why is the media silencing him by  ignoring and lampooning him? Why isn’t he being interviewed honestly and with respect, on the national news shows? His predictions, well in advance of housing crisis alone, should propel him to “expert” status, and it has if you ask many media types, off the record.

If you want a President who is consistently on the side of the people and their labors, who understands well the dynamics of markets and the downfalls of debt and continual wars, who can move us toward sound money and reduced inflation and reduce our destructive entangling alliances the founders warned so often about, etc., your only choice is to vote for Ron Paul in November no matter what!

The collectivism of Obama will not be stopped by Romney. We must elect more Congressmen to DC that are much like Ron Paul so that no matter who we are forced to accept for President, funding can be denied for all unconstitutional activities of the federal government.

The people must rise with a backbone and throw out those who have proven records of creating more and more laws and job destroying regulations that are clearly not authorized activities of the fed.

“We get the government we deserve”, is generally true. But will we deserve better this time around? Will we be wiser? Or will we make another stupid mistake?

Did You Hear Our Propaganda Today?

June 16, 2012

I thought I would share the latest prearranged installment of campaign double speak.  The email below, written and approved many days in advance, arrived at 6:30 pm, shortly after Obama’s speech in the important swing state of Ohio.

Filled with the usual and customary emotional trigger words and short on specifics, it makes its expected “appeal” to one’s emotions and would not be complete without an appeal to get into your wallet!  It’s a typical fundraising letter, filled with hysteria, fear and empty promises they can’t live up to.

From David Axelrod and the Obama campaign.
“Keep this message at the top of your inbox”
Did you hear the President today?

This is a make-or-break moment for middle-class Americans — and anyone who cares needs to watch the speech President Obama made in Cleveland today.  (the clear implication is that if you don’t or haven’t watched their speech propaganda, then you don’t care about the middle-class! Why single out “the middle-class”? What happened to the “general” welfare?)

In this election, we face a choice between two fundamentally different visions of how to grow the economy. The path Mitt Romney and his Republican allies want to take us down is exactly the one that led us to the 2008 crisis. We have to reject those policies and embrace the President’s vision of growing the economy, not from the top down, but from the middle class out. (one has to believe that both candidates want to actually grow the economy.  Neither candidate’s plans, actions, or historical evidence is proof that they do.  Obama and Romney have proven their clear willingness to grow government ever larger and ever more comprehensive, taxing and spending more and more, not less and less.  Equally poor serfs is always the game of tyrants.)

The choice couldn’t be clearer on the issues most important to ordinary Americans:  (really? ordinary Americans? Or just collectivists and progressives?)
– Better Education: We need to invest in good teachers and help more students go to college and get job training — not pack kids into classrooms and slash scholarships. (central planning has ruined education since the early 60’s but yet the proposed solutions are to intervene, borrow and spend even more? The answer is the exact opposite. )
– More, Cleaner Energy: We need to invest in promising new sources of energy to create a market for innovation and good jobs of the future — not go back to relying on foreign oil. (not go back to foreign oil? Stop shutting off our own oil production and we wouldn’t rely on others)
– Leading Through Innovation: We need to invest in our best scientists, researchers, and entrepreneurs so they innovate here — not cede new ideas to countries like China and India. (ideas and research do start here and plenty of them but onerous federal regulation will drive out the manufacturing to less onerous countries).
– Job-Creating Infrastructure: We need roads, bridges, ports, and broadband technology that attract businesses that will create jobs here — not more pet projects and bridges to nowhere.  (pet projects like Solyndra?)
– Fair, Simple Tax Reform: We need to reward businesses that create jobs here instead of rewarding outsourcing, and must ask the wealthiest to pay their fair share again — not sacrifice investments critical to the middle class. (what about the poor? Don’t you care about them anymore? First they came to help the poor and now we have poverty.  Now they want to help the middle-class?)

This economic crisis didn’t start in 2008.  For more than a decade before, we knew things weren’t working the way they should.  We saw costs for everything from health care to education rising faster than wages.  Good-paying, middle-class jobs were becoming harder to find, as more and more companies moved production overseas. (Oh yes, I remember. The Democrats helped pass CAFTA and NAFTA that wiped out our textile jobs here at home and many were union jobs.  Are we being taken again?)

The other side’s solution was the same then as it is now — massive tax cuts benefiting mainly the wealthy, rolling back regulations on risky behavior for Wall Street and banks, and slashes to services that the middle class depends on, like Medicare, education, and job training.  A decade ago, Bill Clinton left a record surplus.  But the last administration put two wars, two huge tax cuts, and the Medicare prescription program on a credit card, and handed President Obama a trillion dollar deficit and a raging economic crisis. (and Obama thinks more taxing of the rich, more regulating of markets, bailing out banks and business with borrowed money, expanding Medicare, education and job training, more debt, more borrowing and printing, more wars and an all powerful central government will fix all our ills?)

Incredibly, Romney and his allies want to go back to those same, disastrous policies: budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy and free rein for Wall Street to write its own rules.  We tried Mitt Romney’s failed formula for most of the last decade.  It benefited a few, but exploded the deficit, crashed our economy, and devastated the middle class.  It didn’t grow our economy, create good jobs, or pay down our debt — it did the opposite. And it won’t work this time around either: Independent economists confirm that Romney’s plan wouldn’t cut the deficit, or even create a single job now — in fact, it could slow growth and push us back into recession. (you mean the same one’s that didn’t call for an Audit of the Federal Reserve fraud when you guys were in power? Are you calling for an Audit today? NO, you are not! There is so much garbage in this paragraph I’d have to write a book to correct it)

Today the President laid out a very different vision, one where everyone — no matter who you are, where you’re from, or how big your bank account is — pitches in (how’s this “pitching in” thing gonna work?) together to rebuild the foundations of our country and economy.  Instead of another $250,000 tax cut for millionaires, Obama believes we should pay down our debt (he is demanding we do the opposite) and invest in the things we know we need to grow the economy (government is a bad investment) and strengthen the middle class.  That means restoring and upgrading our crumbling infrastructure, investing in education, paying down our debt responsibly, and yes, asking the wealthiest Americans to pay a little more.  This approach requires tough choices and shared sacrifice — exactly how we built the American economy in the first place. (no, it was not built on any such nonsense. It was built on freedom, production and wealth.)

As supporters, it’s on us to get this message out there.

Watch the President’s speech, and share it with your friends, family — heck, share it with everyone you know. There’s even a helpful printout you can download and pass around:

http://my.barackobama.com/The-Presidents-Vision

Thanks,

David

More than 2 million people like you power this campaign. (no, it’s Goldman Sachs and Wall Street that dominates your administration)
If you can, please donate today. (to your own demise)

Sen. Paul – Introduces US Use, Drone Limiting Bill

June 12, 2012

Sen. Paul Introduces Bill to Protect Americans Against Unwarranted Drone Surveillance

Jun 12, 2012

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today,  Sen. Rand Paul introduced legislation into the Senate that protects individual privacy against unwarranted governmental intrusion through the use of the unmanned aerial vehicles commonly known as drones.  The Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act of 2012 will protect Americans’ personal privacy.

“Like other tools used to collect information in law enforcement,  in order to use drones a warrant needs to be issued.  Americans going about their everyday lives should not be treated like criminals or terrorists and have their rights infringed upon by military tactics,” Sen. Paul said.

The Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act of 2012 also:

1.       Prohibits the use of drones by the government except when a warrant is issued for its use in accordance with the requirements of the Fourth Amendment.

2.       Includes the following exceptions:

1)       patrol of national borders;

2)       when law enforcement possesses reasonable suspicion that under particular circumstances,  swift drone action is necessary to prevent “imminent danger to life;”

3)       high risk of a terrorist attack

3.       Allows any person to sue the government for violating this Act.

4.       Specifies that no evidence obtained or collected in violation of this Act can be used/admissible as evidence in a criminal, civil, or regulatory action.

###

Are You Considering Newt Gingrich? Consider This!

April 22, 2012

Some facts you should seriously consider before you decide with whom you will side!

(original credit)
by Bill Evelyn on Thursday, June 16, 2011

Newt Gingrich served in Congress from 1979 to 1999 and served as Speaker of the House from 1995 – 1999. Newt is credited with welfare reform and the Contract with America. Newt led the charge to impeach Bill Clinton. Newt voted for H.Res. 611 Impeach Resolution Amendments for the impeachment of Bill Clinton. Newt also voted against the Brady Hand Gun Bill.

This paper focuses on Newt’s participation in the Housing market collapse and subsequent financial morass our nation finds itself.

Newt Gingrich entered the US Congress in January of 1979 from the 6th District of Georgia. Gold was $200 per ounce; gold in January 1999 leaving office was $287.00 per ounce. Yet, this does not tell the entire story. Today, gold is $1,650 per ounce as a result of massive Federal reserve issuing of dollars causing the value of the dollar to collapse against the value of gold.

For example, with a salary of $18,000 dollars a family could buy 90 oz. of gold in 1979. Today with a salary of $18,000 you can only purchase 10 oz. of gold (1/21/12). This inflation has destroyed our retirement savings and ruined our ability to be independent, because many families are being forced into poverty with the subsequent housing collapse. This short analysis illustrates Newt Gingrich’s complicity in the failed policy of the past 20 years.

Questions that I feel Newt needs to answer:
Do you believe; “Fannie Mae is an excellent example of a government institution fulfilling its mandate while functioning in the market economy?”
Do you believe the Federal Reserve has maintained its charter to stabilize the value of the dollar?
Do you believe Fannie Mae is constitutional?
Would you vote YES now for the Fair Housing Act?
Would you vote YES now for H.R. 3768 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Act (FDICA) Did you know the Christopher Dodd (D-CT) Amendment was included in FDICA?
Would you vote YES now for H.R. 5334 Housing & Community Development Act 1993?
……………………………………………………
1988 – Roll Call #697, June 29, 1988 – H.R. 1158 Fair Housing Act- Newt Gingrich YES for this law.
1. Modifies the definition of a discriminatory housing practice to include acts of interfering, coercing, threatening or intimidating a person in the exercise or enjoyment of his/her rights as protected by Sections 804, 805 and 806 of this act.
2. Provides HUD with the ability to initiate complaints. In essence, HUD can now set up stings to find evidence that mortgage lenders and banks are discriminating against blacks and Hispanics. Prior to this law a complaint must have been filed by that person believing they were being discriminated against.
……………………………………………………
1991 – Roll Call #416, November 21, 1991 6:04 PM – H.R. 3768 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act (FDICIA)- Newt Gingrich voted YES for this law.
The House passed this bill with a little known amendment inserted by Christopher Dodd (D-CT). The amendment expanded the federal safety net increasing the likelihood of taxpayer bailouts. Walker F. Todd an assistant general counsel and research officer at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland uncovered the obscure amendment. Prior to this law only commercial banks, members of the Federal Reserve System, could access emergency funds from the central bank. The amendment to FDICA increased the availability of Fed assistance to included investment banks and insurance companies. Dodd’s constituents include most of the nation’s large insurance companies. “Moral hazard” – Access to emergency capital made bank managers less likely to exercise caution.
Thus in 2008 (TARP) the Fed rescued AIG and banks all over the world at the detriment of United States taxpayers. When Walker F. Todd tried to raise awareness Congress wanted no discussion of the expanding safety net and its costly implication for taxpayers. The Fed is printing money, inflating the dollar, and destroying the savings of American citizens.
……………………………………………………
1992 – Roll Call #366, August 5, 1992 2:53 PM – Housing and Community Develop Act (CRA) – Newt Gingrich voted YES for this law.
In 1992, President George H.W. Bush signed the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992. The Act amended the charter of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to reflect Congress’ view that the GSE’s “have an obligation to facilitate the financing of affordable housing for low-income and moderate-income families.” For the first time, the GSEs were required to meet “affordable housing goals” set annually by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and approved by Congress.
Establishes within the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, managed by a presidentially appointed Director, who shall ensure that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the enterprises) and their affiliates are adequately capitalized and operating safely. Authorizes the Director to require financial reports from the enterprises in addition to quarterly and annual reports required under specified Acts. Grants the Secretary of HUD, except for specified authority of the Director of the Office, general regulatory power over each enterprise. Requires the Secretary to require each enterprise to obtain the Secretary’s approval for any new program before implementing it. Amends the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act to prohibit the Secretary from merging or consolidating the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, or any of its functions or responsibilities, with any function or program the Secretary administers. Authorized Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) to issue Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (CDO’s) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac issue and guarantee pass-through securities; Ginnie Mae only adds its guarantee to privately issued pass-through’s backed by government-insured (FHA and VA) mortgages. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have issued CMOs for some time; the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) began to issue CMOs in 1992; and Ginnie Mae initiated its own CMO program in 1994. The CRA, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the relationship between Wall Street and the Federal government caused the financial meltdown in 2008. Bankers were forced to make loans to low income people that could not repay those mortgages. In order to cover that risk CDO’s were sold to unknowing investors, banks and insurance companies, and eventually this bubble burst causing the meltdown we are living with now.
……………………………………………………
Fannie Mae was created in 1938 by FDR to bail-out banks with bad mortgages. Freddie Mac was created in the 1960’s to compete with Fannie Mae. All during the 1980’s Republican legislators tried to privatize fully Fannie and Freddie. In the late 1980’s Jim Johnson a politically connected Democrat was appointed Chairman of Fannie Mae. Jim Johnson has a very different perspective. He strong armed lawmakers to ensure Fannie was never fully privatized in order to maintain the ability for the federal government to bail-out Fannie. In doing so, interest rates on Fannie’s mortgage offerings could be set lower, because of the implied exception of taxpayer bail-out. No wonder Jim Johnson was a good friend of Angelo Mozzilo of Countrywide Mortgage.
Jim Johnson fought hard to ensure that Fannie remained tethered to the federal taxpayers. He was instrumental in getting FDICA passed into law and the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act 1992 Title 10 of H.R. 5334. It ensured HUD maintained its oversight and thus was tethered to the taxpayers. It also provided Fannie with a new mission – provide affordable housing to low income
Jim Johnson geared up to spend $1.0T to be spent on affordable housing between 1994 and 2000. This money would finance 10 million homes for low-income families. Fannie boasted that they would bring new flexibility to the loan underwriting process. Jim Johnson used Fannie Mae partnership offices nationwide. In doing it cemented its relationships with members of Congress in order to protect Fannie.
In Feb 1995 Johnson traveled to Atlanta to launch the new office focusing on creating new mortgage products for first-time homebuyers and low- and moderate-income consumers. There to celebrate the Fannie Mae commitment was none other than Newt Gingrich a supposed big proponent of reduced government size.
Gingrich said; “Fannie Mae is an excellent example of a former government institution fulfilling its mandate while functioning in the market economy.”
The problem with this statement; Fannie Mae is still being bailed-out by the taxpayers. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have received $317B in bail-outs and it’s not over. Jim Johnson massed a $21M fortune in salary and bonuses as Chairman of Fannie Mae. Your savings and purchasing power has fallen 650%.

http://www.amazon.com/Reckless-Endangerment-Outsized-Corruption-Armageddon/dp/0805091203/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1308231800&sr=8-1


%d bloggers like this: