Tread on This!

Why Would Anyone Want to be President?

2011-10-21T23:27:00.003-04:00

I often wonder why someone would want to be President. Why? It's an awful job and it pretty much ruins the rest of your life.. being hated by most of the world and having to be followed around by security 24/7. What drives a man to do that to himself and his family?

Is it an underlying passion for a certain philosophy? Is it for pure power, greed and ego?

I look at each candidates thoughts on each major talking point and I try to understand WHY they say what they do. What is their opinion based on? What are they trying to preserve or help by having this opinion? What has driven them to have this opinion. Most of all, I try to link this underlying drive to all of their opinions on their talking points. Do they apply this philosophy equally to all of their opinions? if not, why not? Is it because they're trying to match popular opinion? Romney has flip flopped so much it makes John Kerry dizzy. So, what is driving his passion to be in the seat?

I believe every person makes decisions based on a philosophy. This personal philosophy is built throughout ones life based on their understanding of moral and ethical issues and how they would best handle those. These beliefs should be applied to every decision we make. A man that can apply his philosophy equally, is a man that knows himself and understands who he is.

Sounds corny, but it's true.

If it is morally and ethically wrong to steal, then how can a man institute a policy which takes from one person and gives to another without their permission? Either this man does not understand his philosophy, or his intent on theft, greed, and power have over ridden his instincts.

So, which is it? Does Herman Cain know who he is and have a clear path for himself? Does he form his opinions consistently across all talking points? If I cannot conclude that he does, then I know he does not have the best interest in mind for you and I and his objective is being driven by greed and power.

Herman Cain’s problematic position(s) on abortion

Which Mitt.. How Well do you know your Romney?

Ron Paul clearly expresses the objective of Liberty in every single answer and opinion that he gives. Is gay marriage popular in mainstream? Not really. But Paul is willing to stand up for it, because government has no place in the religious aspect of it's peoples lives. His is widely criticized for votes like this, but people do not understand is that his vote is not for gay people, it was for liberty. I find this the PRIMARY flaw in conservatism.
Ron Paul in 1988

Dr. Paul and his current ideas..

His current message, mirrors his 1988 interview.. because he has held to his values.

It's ok for the President to go to war without Congressional approval when the people support the cause, but when they do not, they hit the streets and a media frenzy begins. Had they stuck to their principles to begin with, then the unpopular war would have never been allowed to happen. This is just one example.

Sometimes the truth hurts.. but it is always necessary and it always wins.

Anyone who does not apply liberty principles to each and every political talking point, is only working to take more of your liberties away. Only freedom and prosperity can come from liberty, and any other path is but a mere illusion.

Yours in Liberty,
~Brad

Free Market Economics in 5 minutes

2011-02-01T21:51:00.001-05:00

In response to an article published on "The Atlantic"

It's quite an amusing take on what is wrong with the middle class and how to fix it.You can find the article here.

The Future of the Middle Class

Here is my response, along with a typical progressive answer complete with demeaning, childish, name calling behavior.

Enjoy!

Brad

Economic problems can be solved by allowing the producers (who risk capital) to put products onto the market without regulation (free market). Consumer spending does not stimulate economies, rather the products made available do. Without the products and someone willing to risk their capital, there will be no products, therefore no consumption. GDP is a measure of $ spent, not goods produced. Therefore a complete useless tool in deciding the health of an economy powered by the middle class. Spending does not create an economy, savings (capital) does.

Therefore, when sound monetary policy is reintroduced allowing middle class capital to appreciate, more capital will be available allowing more producing and a higher rate of spending. Consumers only take part in an exchange which is beneficial for them and the same is true for the producer. Seeing that both benefit from the transaction, over time the costs will drop and the production becomes more efficient. This was true for our country 150 years leading up until 1913, the creation of the federal reserve. Prices dropped, consumers saved, and producers were able to reinvest profits into their product making it's production more efficient. Since then, the value of the US dollar has dropped 97%. The only thing that has changed between a $.35 gal of milk in 1970 and a $3.99 gal today is not the amount of product being sold, rather that the dollar buying it has less value, meaning more is used for the purchase. Inflation is a stealth tax that steals from the middle class.

You see, there is no complicated algorithmic equation that is needed to measure the health of our economy and to shock it back into existence. Rather, a simple common sense economics lesson on capital growth and preservation without regulation would do just fine. A free market built the richest nation and invented the technology we have today and if those "radical" ideas can once again be followed, another revolution will ensue.
ComG

Yes, because unregulated markets have worked so well in the past! See Panics of 1873, 1884, 1893, 1896, 1901, 1907, 1910, and the Great Depression starting in 1929, and those are just in the U.S.

If you simply ignore history, it is amazing what utopian dream you can project back on the past with a copy of The Road to Serfdom and of Atlas Shrugged as your guides.

Brad

Business cycles are natural. Over consumption and even over production will eventually cause for correction. Both result in a loss of capital and the only way to regain capital is to under consume for a short period. This loss of capital because of a misinformed consuming/producing decision is referred to as mal-investment. My failures will be mine and your failures will be yours.

Nowhere in trade is government needed. But to address your argument directly, when government does intervene to artificially hide business cycle "bottoms", the same reasoning also serves to hinder business cycle "tops". While limiting how much one can fail, it also limits how much one can succeed. To use the "Panic of 1893" as an example, it was brought about by the overbuilding of the railroad industry. Supply outpaced demand, capital was lost, therefore under consumption was necessary to regain capital. Thanks for the great example.

This is no Utopian dream, it is the model of free trade that allows a consumer and producer to benefit from a transaction driving down prices and stimulating growth based on mutual agreements. While government holds my money and decides in what way to spend it to benefit "the firms" in the form of a bailouts, the economy is losing a tremendous amount of "opportunity cost" seeing as how I can use the money to consume or produce (the lifeblood of the economy).

It is not my ignorance of history that is the problem. It is the ignorance of history that neglects that free trade built the richest nation and made the greatest scientific and technological advances this world has ever seen. I can assure you it wasn't government's heavy handed regulation that allowed for those advancements. Human nature is to only engage in beneficial trade. As stated before, for 150 years leading up to 1913, prices for products fell because the mutual benefit of free trade. Since then, prices have risen.

The "Great Depression" was a direct result of the government and it's loose monetary policy thanks to the newly erected Federal Reserve. Fractional Reserve banking allowed consumers, for the first time ever, to use credit. Since this was consumer credit and not capital growth credit, it's use did not produce and give back into the economy. The roaring 20's were borrowed, and when the consumers were no longer able to make good on their contracted debts, they defaulted causing as contraction in the money supply. This is called deflation.. and the "Great Depression" was 100% deflationary. Thanks for that example as well.

It is obvious that strangling government regulation, mismanaged government spending, and fiat monetary policy have stolen from the middle class. Government is the root of the problem and therefore will not be able to solve the problem. No one manages my money better than me and if you choose to allow the bureaucratic institutions of DC to provide for you, you deserve what you get.

By the way, if you choose to respond, please do not waste the readers time with child like behavior using demeaning rhetoric. A clear, concise, factual, and well structured argument will work just fine. (e.g. If you simply ignore history, it is amazing what utopian dream you can project back on the past with a copy of The Road to Serfdom and of Atlas Shrugged as your guides.)

----------

...and yes, I do own a copy of Atlas Shrugged, and I highly suggest you do too!

The Founders, Their Faith, and America's Lost Ways

2011-01-04T09:59:00.000-05:00

The founders understood one thing.. that governing a people, one that is free, can not be done by the vices of their own emotional tendencies. When a leader governs from emotion, then all of the people who they govern are subject to those emotions. It seems that while they may or may not have been Christian, they had a respect for the values in which the Christian religions are based. It seems today that the mention of God, in the sense of a Christian God, is a very bad thing. Whether you are Christian or not, I believe that the moral standards set forth by the Christian faith or of the highest set of moral standards that have ever been conceived. How could someone trying to live by these high standards be the victim of such criticism? Why would someone of any other faith criticize an individual who may try to hold themselves to such a high standard?

Thus, the reason we are lost now; our country and it's leaders have no foundation.. no principles. If we did, we would know how to govern by those principles and not enact laws that are purely emotional based. This includes financial greed, social programs, economic policies, foreign policies, and on and on. These are all purely based on emotion, lacking any type of foundation and fundamental structure of principle and values.. based on freedom, liberty, and individual sovereignty.

You see, the equation is quite simple. What is good for me is not always good for you.. but what will always be good for both of us is the freedom of choice. The great United States of America has lost that and is no longer "united". While we fight many bloody wars on foreign soil, the true war is being waged in our own backyard.

The bottom line is that in the realm of country and liberty, it is none of my business what your religion is. It is however my business to ensure that you continue to have the freedom of choice.. including keeping your religion.

Can't we work together, regardless of faith, and preserve liberty in this great republic?

S510- Ultimate Control Over What we Eat

2010-12-01T14:10:00.002-05:00

Yesterday, Nov 30th 2010, the Senate passed S510, the Food Safety Modernization Act http://www.govtrack.us/. Wow.. that sounds like a great bill.. make food safer, right? You didn't hear about it on TV did you?

This destructive piece of legislation extends the arm of the federal government by pouring billions of dollars into the FDA for the oversight of the United States food supply. It's not enough that we are pushing 14 Trillion dollars in debt and have nearly 100 Trillion in unfunded liabilities; we must spend more to micro manage the food supply of the American people. Where in the Constitution does it provide the federal government the ability to police or oversee the food supply? Well, it doesn't. But who cares anymore, right? That old raggedy document just needs to stay in it's pretty case down in DC; no need to bring up history!

The bill passed by a vote of 73 to 25. I'll list the voters at the end so you can contact your own representative and tell them what a piece of work they are. The bill was designed to maintain stricter standards in keeping food safe, but also has a few other things in mind. The bill also increases funding for the FDA, increases FDA inspections, enhances surveillance systems, ensures to protect the food supply against terrorism, and grants the U.S. government new authority over the public’s right to grow, trade and transport any foods.

Chris Waldrop, director of the Consumer Federation of America's Food Policy Institute, states "Americans expect our food to be safe. We've been shocked over the past few years by a series of large outbreaks of food borne illness caused by common food products such as spinach, green onions, peppers, peanut butter, cookie dough and eggs. The Senate's action moves the country toward a new food safety law designed to meet the challenges inherent in a modern, global food system.

A global food system? Ah! Now the truth comes out! And you think I am crazy for having fresh eggs in my backyard?! Have large corporations put food on shelves that made people sick? Sure! Should they be held accountable and make right with the people affected? By all means! Should the government stick their long nose into the business of private business and individuals? Hell no! If people stopped buying the food from a company that made a mistake, then I assure you they would correct it very quickly. How many times must I iterate to you that the free market always wins? And by free, I mean, without the help of government and their strangling regulations!

The new bill gives companies such as **Monsanto the power to monopolize US seed, food supplements, food and farming. It puts US food and farms under the Department of Homeland Security. It ends US sovereignty over its own food supply. It would also allow the government to mandate antibiotics, hormones, slaughterhouse waste, pesticides and genetically modified organisms.

Whoa whoa.. backup! Did I just say Homeland Security? Why yes.. yes I did! In the name of security, the government must now ensure that no terrorist can hurt you with your food. Yes.. seriously!

Insert silly, famous, historical, common sense quote here:
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~Benjamin Franklin

Canadian Health whistleblower Dr. Shiv Chopra warns, “If accepted it would preclude the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes. It will become the most offensive authority against the cultivation, trade and consumption of food and agricultural products of one’s choice. It will be unconstitutional and contrary to natural law or, if you like, the will of God.”

The Tester Amendment was added to appease opposition to the bill by exempting small farms who make less than $500k a year. You may think, "Great! We are saved! No more pain for us little people!" You may be correct to a degree, but the over all destructive nature of the bill can not be overlooked.

S510 has been passed while Wiki-leaks steals the headlines. All along I have said for you to watch the sleight of hand. Obamacare was passed in disguise as well. Your freedoms are eroding and the your personal sovereignty and liberties are being stolen as we speak. Do you understand what this means for you? I suggest you read history if you don't. What do you plan on doing about it?

It's time to stand up, folks!

Further info:

**Monsanto Company (MON)
Monsanto is a leading global provider of technology-based solutions and agricultural products for growers and downstream customers, such as grain processors and consumers, in the agricultural markets. Monsanto Company has a market cap of $45.29 billion; its shares were traded at around $83.1 with a P/E ratio of 18.9 and P/S ratio of 3.9. The dividend yield of Monsanto Company stocks is 1.3%. Monsanto Company had an annual average earning growth of 30.7% over the past 5 years.

George Soros owns 1,126,614 shares and Druckenmiller owns 3.3 million shares as of 09/30/2009.

The criminals in action:

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...2&vote =00257

Grouped By Vote Position

YEAs ---73
Akaka (D-HI)
Alexander (R-TN)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Brown (R-MA)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coons (D-DE)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kirk (R-IL)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
LeMieux (R-FL)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (D-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs ---25
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bunning (R-KY)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Graham (R-SC)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Wicker (R-MS)

Not Voting - 2
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)

Liberty and the Legalization of Cannabis

2010-11-19T21:03:00.000-05:00

Where does the federal government get the power to prohibit marijuana? Should it be legalized?

     It is clear that the prohibition by the federal government on drugs is not authorized by the Constitution. The Constitution has been referred to as a “charter of negative liberties” by our now President, Barack Obama. Perhaps he is correct in his academic assumption, however, the literal phrase and its context is derogatory toward the implications of what the purpose of the Constitution is. This means that the Constitution does not spell out what the federal government can’t do, yet it defines what it can do. It was designed this way in order to maximize the ability to limit the powers of a centralized government. The founders gave the federal government certain powers by spelling them out through their enumeration into the Constitution. By doing this, it was made clear what their powers were. The Constitution also explicitly states, in the 10th amendment, that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively or to the people”.

     In 1920, the people understood this and the prohibition of alcohol came about by the means of a Constitutional amendment. This has not been true in the case of Marijuana. There have been no amendment conventions and the overreaching arm of the federal government has stepped outside of its boundary. Thomas Jefferson defined the basic human rights as the rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. The ability to have those rights is eliminated when an individual violates those same rights of another individual. For instance, alcohol is legal, but there are laws helping mitigate some of the risks that are involved such as drinking and driving. The ramifications of drinking and driving could be fatal, not only to one’s self, but to others, therefore, the law for committing such a crime is very debilitating. However, it still remains legal.

     Is the same not true for Marijuana? Should the choice of what goes into one’s body not be the choice of that individual so long as they maintain the integrity of the basic human rights and not violate the rights of another citizen? By allowing this over reaching arm of the federal government to manage the health and well being of an individual citizen concerning marijuana, they have also spilled this concept into other areas of the American citizen’s lives. Some examples would be the laws concerning the sale of raw dairy milk, mandated healthcare and mandated retirement funds known as social security.

   In conclusion, there are no “one hundred percents” in the realm of deciding if the legalization of marijuana is a good idea or not. The effects it would have all the way from small communities to the national and international levels would be felt by all. It would span across all emotions to include moral, ethical, spiritual, financial and bear global economic impact. Some may be positive and others may be negative. However, there is one fact that must be understood. With all scientific experiments, there lies a variable and a constant. The one constant that should always remain intact is personal sovereignty, and the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. When one government creates law based on emotion, then all those who are governed by that law are subject to that same emotion. Strong and long lasting happiness is built from a concrete foundation. The true underlying values should never be lost and once they have, then man can no longer be free. No other right could be more basic or more inherent to human nature than having the ability to choose what substances to put into one’s own body. If government can limit what an individual puts into their body, what limits on government are there?

Why can't Chuck get a job?

2010-10-27T20:53:00.000-04:00

Why can't Chuck get a job?

Free markets always win! Watch this and learn about how our government has strangled our markets into submission and have absolutely killed entrepreneurship..

Follow the link to see the video..

The Dollar, Gold & Silver, and You

2010-09-24T21:03:00.018-04:00

In my opinion, this is the most important document I have ever put together. I have done this to share with you all, but mostly with my close friends and family. I believe that something is near that none of us have experienced in our lifetime and I want to share my knowledge gained through many hours and weeks of research. I have heeded to the warnings I have outlined here and I urge you to consider the same. Remember, technology provides no resistance to poverty.

The notion of thinking in this manner began last winter during the second record blizzard here in Maryland. The roads were impassible for over a week. It happened when I was able to get out of the house for the first time and get to the grocery store. When I arrived and walked through the sliding doors, it was a moment of awakening. The shelves were cleared out. No trucks had been able to deliver goods for consumers like myself. My kitchen cabinets were wiped clean at home and there were 6 children to be taken care of. I began to wonder what I would do to take care of my family if a true disaster were to occur.

At what point do I hold myself responsible for the care of my family if the grocery store does not "provide" for me? If that institution fails, how can I prevent myself from failing my family? Do I trust the livelihood of myself and my family on a system that is not guaranteed? Just because I got groceries there yesterday and today, does that mean the doors will be open for me to go there again tomorrow? Those are questions I asked myself in the coming weeks after my awakening. No matter how seemingly sarcastic and outlandish you may find them, as a man, a Father, and provider, I found them extremely important.

There are two key elements to this discussion. One is to inform on why/how this process is taking place, and the other is what. I spend hours and hours a week researching monetary systems, history of monetary systems, economic theories and policies and I try to understand the affects that each of these can have in the current economic climate. I urge you to take the time to read through my commentary and digest the information to critically think your way to your own solution/opinion. There will also be links to videos that can provide a greater in-depth study to the topics I touch on here. Please utilize those. Everything I present will be documented with a resource for fact checking.

Let's get started..

In 1920 a 1 ounce gold piece had value, roughly $20.68. It's approximate value was that of a top end brand new suit, tie, shoes and a hat. Today, gold still holds it's value. You can still buy a top end suit, tie, hat and shoes. In comparison, gold has recently hit all time highs bounding over $1,300.00 an ounce. While gold maintained it's value, only one thing in the equation didn't.. and that was the US Dollar. The lesson to learn here is that gold is not becoming worth more, but rather that the US Dollar is becoming worth less meaning that it takes more dollars to buy the same items. Since that time period, one dollar has roughly lost 97% of it's buying power.

The markets operate in cycles. As one market goes into a bubble and becomes over valued, another becomes under bought and undervalued. Once the peak for each is realized, buyers bail in the over priced commodity and begin then once again to invest in the under valued commodity. The cycle repeats. In my opinion, this allows for one of the largest transfers of wealth that can ever be created in a lifetime. I say lifetime, because when studying history, you will see that these bubbles and transfers happen about every 30-50 years. The last time this happened was in 1980 after debt, deflation, then inflation had people running scared from a mismanaged government economic policy. I think now we are beginning to start this cycle again. However, I think this cycle will be much more dramatic because the numbers that we are dealing with now have become exponentially more dramatic. We have added more debt in the last two years than the first 200 years of our country. President Obama signed a $40 billion dollar small business bill just yesterday and it didn't even make headlines. The spending continues and the Keynesian economic theory of spending your way out of debt will continue until someone stops it or the system implodes. Herein lies the problem..

In my opinion, while gold and silver may hold an intrinsic value and be an essential commodity for someone, the ultimate commodity that one can own is real estate. With real estate, a home can be built. Food can be raised and grown and that privately owned piece of land is your for the period of your life. It's where you raise your children and protect your family. No other commodity can offer that. Hence, the reason I am having this discussion. The real estate bubble has busted and an under valued precious metals market has begun to rise.

I also want to take a moment to discuss the difference between money, currency, and a Fiat currency. While these terms have become widely used and interchangeable, they both have very distinct and different definitions.

Money- An item that can be deemed to have value by the people who agree to use it as an exchange for goods. Gold coins would be a good example. Sea shells would not because of their mass availability.

Currency- Currency is not real. It is merely a representation of the money. For each piece of currency, there should be 1 piece of money to back it and hold it's value.

Fiat Currency- the same as a currency, except there are no monies that back the currency. It is a faith based system

The US currently operates under the Fiat currency system.

The US Constitution states that our currency should be backed by a gold money. Under President Nixon in 1971, too much currency had been printed and it could no longer be backed. We have since been off of the "gold standard". Please watch here for a very good explanation of the history of US Currency as explained by the Ludwig Von Mises Institute.

http://www.moneyweek.com/%7E/media/MoneyWeek/2009/090914/Import/GM260208-chart-2gif.ashx

Think of this fact as you read more. In 1980, silver hit an all time high price of $48 an ounce. The median cost for a home in the United States during that time was $47,200. You could buy a home during this time with roughly 900 ounces of silver.

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/case-shiller-chart-updated.png

The next thing you need to understand is inflation.

"Inflation is defined as a sustained increase in the general level of prices for goods and services. It is measured as an annual percentage increase. As inflation rises, every dollar you own buys a smaller percentage of a good or service." - Investopedia- Inflation

Inflation is a result of simply having too many dollars. For instance, if the energy supply in a certain grid area is tight, and more money is pumped into the company to expand, the resulting factor is a raise in consumer prices. Keep this definition in the front of your mind because it's also import for you to understand that there is a distinct difference in inflation and hyper-inflation. They are two totally different problems and are of no relation.

Hyper-inflation is a result of a total economic collapse. When all else has failed and complete trust has been lost in a nation's currency, the printing presses roll and hyper-inflation ensues. It is inflation on steroids. It is often measured and declared when inflation rates run as high as 50% a month. One of the worst examples of hyper-inflation occurred in Germany between World War I and II. Germany's inflation peaked in 1923 when it became so severe that a wheelbarrow full of money couldn't buy a newspaper. People spent their money as quickly as they could in order to preserve as much value as possible. Goods were bartered and traded because it became easier than actually using the broken currency. At the worst point, one trillion marks were equivalent to one dollar. This has also been seen more recently in Zimbabwe as pictured below with the Zimbabwe One Hundred Trillion dollar bill.

Contrary to common belief, hyperinflation does not arise from too much bank lending. The sole cause of hyperinflation is always too much government spending. The pattern is as follows.
The government spends more money than it is receiving in taxes, which forces it to borrow. As these deficits grow, they eventually exceed the market’s capacity or willingness to lend money to the government. Invariably, the central bank steps in and provides the government with the money it needs by creating it – as the saying goes – ‘out of thin air’, or what governments today call “quantitative easing”.

An EXCELLENT video on inflation is listed below and titled "The Gold Dinar and Silver Dirham".

Inflation will hit energy and food hard along with other things (including silver) that we need and must have. Real estate and other assets normally purchased with debt (houses and cars) will deflate. If credit cannot be found easily or if most people are scared to take on more debt as they should be, prices will collapse to down-payment levels. The ride down in real estate has only begun.

According to Investorwords.com the definition of Deflation is "a decline in general price levels, often caused by a reduction in the supply of money or credit. Deflation can also be brought about by direct contractions in spending, either in the form of a reduction in government spending, personal spending or investment spending. Deflation has often had the side effect of increasing unemployment in an economy, since the process often leads to a lower level of demand in the economy. The opposite of inflation." - http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation_Articles/Deflation.asp

Here is a chart that shows silvers high in 1980. It also includes an adjusted band to display what that price would be if it were to be adjusted to today's inflation rates. This is necessary because the dollar's value is constantly changing, and inflation is increasing by the day. At the time of this chart being created (May, 2008) the silver adjusted price would have been $128. Today's rate would be much higher.

In addition, the high of gold during this period was $825.50 an ounce. This was realized on Jan. 21, 1980. If that amount were to be adjusted for today's inflation rates, it would translate to an all-time record of $2,184.08 an ounce.

source

A recent study was published stating that the US is hiding it's true amount of debt.

"The Government is lying about the amount of debt. It is engaging in Enron accounting," said Laurence Kotlikoff, an economist at Boston University and co-author of The Coming Generational Storm: What You Need to Know about America's Economic Future.

"The problem is we're seeing an explosion in spending," added Andrew Moylan, director of government affairs for the National Taxpayers Union.
In 1980, the debt - the accumulated red ink incurred by the Federal Government - was $US909 billion.
This represented some 33 per cent of gross domestic product, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
Thirty years later, based on this year's second-quarter numbers, the CBO said the debt was $US13.4 trillion, or 92 per cent of GDP.
The CBO estimates the debt will be at $US16.5 trillion in two years, or 100.6 per cent of GDP.
But these numbers are incomplete."

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/breaking-news/us-government-hiding-true-amount-of-debt/story-e6frfkur-1225926567256#ixzz10TEnX0QA

Those numbers spell disaster and should scare anyone. Just for reference, the GDP or Gross Domestic Product is the total number of goods and services made in the United States for one complete year. It is the measure of the health of our economy. In other words, in two years, for every $1 made from the sale of a product made in the USA, we will spend more than a dollar. Try balancing your personal checkbook that way and then when it doesn't work, you ask your bank for a loan to cover the difference. Good luck..

Perhaps the above chart will bring to life this problem a bit more. This chart compares the total debt in the US to GDP on a percentage basis. Current total credit-market debt stands at more than 340% of total GDP. There is a key date here that is referenced by an arrow. I will not explain this date to you, because we all know what happened during the ten years following. Also, consider that debt has most recently been growing at a rate 6 times faster than the underlying GDP and you will begin to appreciate just how bogus the claims of recent “growth” really has been.

Solution?

It's simple. The choices for reversing this ratio to a manageable level are quite limited. We have 3 choices. Under the current administration, which path do you think will be taken or have we already started down?

Pay the debts down
Default on them
Inflate them away

John Boehner has written a new Proposal to America (from the Republicans). He states that the Republican version of healthcare reform will be a much better alternative. They use terms such as "we will allow". The Democrats claim this letter has trillions of dollars of spending in it. Don't forget Bush's Keynesian TARP bailouts. If you think either party can cure this cancer, you need a wake up. I do not need to state the case against the Democrats current level of spending.

So, the economy is sinking and the dollar is losing it's value. How can I protect and hedge my wealth against this? Buy gold and silver bullion. It was used as money thousands of years ago and is still used as money today. It will continue to be used as money after the coming economic fallout. President Obama just passed the financial regulation bill a few weeks ago that will force you to file a form 1099 for every precious metal investment over $600 starting Jan 1st, 2012. Why you ask? I'll let you speculate for yourself. But one thing is for sure, it's none of the government's business how much silver I own. Do your research online at stores like Apmex.com. Then find a local coin shop who deals in bullion. Remember, do not let them talk you into buying numismatic coins (collectors). People do not collect rare coins when a collapse or depression is taking place. Use only cash and buy straight 1 oz rounds of bullion. Silver or gold, the choice is yours. Do not buy silver stocks, ETFs, certificates, or bank storage. It is not backed by a physical metal and can devalue just like the dollar is. Keep it in your home in a bolted down safe. This is your store of wealth and will bring you through the worst of times.

So now you have been able to swallow a few facts regarding the current state of the economy and it's direction. There is so much more to learn and many more facts that can be added to this commentary. I hope from time to time as I learn more that I can update and expand this bit of knowledge here. In the meantime, I'm going to leave you with some video resources that contain much more information than I could ever write about. There are literally several hours worth of learning here, so bookmark this and come back and watch another. The game is just getting started. In the image below, we now reside in the "light-bulb" phase in the cycle of what we can call a "wealth cycle".

In a truly astonishing admission from a former Fed chairman, Alan Greenspan offered this morsel last week: "Fiat money has no place to go but gold ... Gold is the canary in the coal mine. It signals problems with respect to currency markets. Central bankers should pay attention to it."
source: Death Knell for the Dollar

I'm afraid to say, hard times are ahead. The rest of the world has a US Dollar backed currency. The US Dollar is weakening by the minute. If you can add 2+2 you can see why I truly think you need to be prepared in many ways. Prepare your food, housing, and a way to protect your assets.

For further research:

Mike Maloney:

The Gold Dinar and Silver Dirham

Meltup:

The secret of Oz:

The Crash Course:

This is a 20 part series.. one of the best explanations of our economy I think ever put together

Chris Martenson - Crashcourse

Tread Carefully - The Big GOP Talking Heads

2010-09-15T09:55:00.009-04:00

The fight is not one of color, race, age.. or party. It's the policy, the policy that impedes on our liberty!

Yesterday, 14 Sept, 2010, was a big day for the states. It was primary election day, the day you choose who you want to see on the ballot for your local and state offices. One of the most talked about races was for the Delaware GOP Senate candidates, Mike Castle and Christine O'Donnell. Why you may ask? Because it was a race between a Tea Party backed candidate, and the GOP incumbent Mike Castle. Castle was framed as a GOP weak link for his "yes" votes on issues such as "Cap and Tax" and "Obamacare".

The people of Delaware spoke out last night, and Mike Castle will not be on November's ballot.

It wasn't long before the GOP reared it's big ugly head and unveiled it's true self. This was led by "The Architect" himself, Karl Rove. Here is his interview with Sean Hannity:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Jlh1EsgS7Q&feature=player_embedded

Excuse me? Rove attacked her "character" and "rectitude" and then claimed that she had never answered questions about some of her supposed financial woes. She does so here. (http://christine2010.com/blog/472-christine-counters/) Rove then continues and refers to her stance on security as "nutty".

Instead of awarding a word of encouragement and congratulating a candidate who would seemingly be on the same side of the proverbial "fence", Rove did just the opposite. His harsh words and attacks on her character give us an insight on what Rove and the GOP truly represent. For some reason, Mike Castle was his man. Could it be for the reasons we mentioned earlier concerning some of Castle's controversial "yes" votes?

He makes it clear here that the GOP is in no way interested in supporting a candidate not privy to their plan. What plan you may ask? The Freedomist has published this:

http://freedomist.com/2010/09/14/exclusive-karl-rove-tried-to-cut-deal-for-castle-with-tea-party-teaparty-news/

source:

Sources at the Christine O’Donnell victory party revealed to The Freedomist that in December of last year Karl Rove met with Tea Party leaders in Dover, Delaware trying to get them to cut a “deal” in which they would leave Mike Castle alone and NOT support O’Donnell.
The Freedomist has also learned that Rove was allegedly acting as an operative, although in what capacity it is not known, even as he is playing the role of a political analyst on Fox New in a fair and balanced way.
Breaking Reagan’s 11^th commandment, Rove launched a vicious character attack against Republican nominee Christine O’Donnell in an interview with Sean Hannity on Fox News, who took strong objections to his exaggerations, misstatements and misrepresentations, including attributing remarks made against Castle by a third party to the campaign, this despite the fact that campaign had promptly repudiated it.

Furthermore, it has been published this morning that Castle will not back O'Donnell in November. Will he back the Democrat instead?

Defeated Castle says he won't back O'Donnell for Senate Race
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20100915/NEWS/100915012

The point here is not to endorse Christine O'Donnell or denounce her, but to draw a clear line in the sand. The Karl Roves and Newt Gingriches of the GOP are not an answer. In fact, I see no difference in the voice of the GOP and the liberal left. We need candidates with guts and a spine to represent true constitutional values.

Liberty sees no parties!

My Libertarian Opinion on the Quran Burning

2010-09-10T09:25:00.000-04:00

-My Libertarian Opinion on the Quran Burning-

Drudge Headlines:

‘Meant to Be a Warning’…
Obama: Call it off…
Vatican: ‘Outrageous’…
NYPD: ‘Dangerous’…
Holder: ‘Idiotic’…
Clinton: ‘Disgraceful’…
Palin: ‘Unnecessary provocation’…
FBI: Retaliation ‘Likely’…

See anything in common among these headlines that are draping the front page of the Drudge Report? None of these people have a spine! That's what!

First of all, I want to say loud and clear that I do not agree that burning a Quran is the right thing to do. I do not support it and I would not do it myself. I do not see anything about this action to be holy or uplifting in any way to a god, no matter which god it is you pray to. The burning of anothers religious text has always been frowned upon just like the burning of another nation's flag.

Now, let's get started. This is the United States of America. This is not Cuba, it is not Saudi Arabia, and we are no longer owned by a British Empire. We are a Republic, not a democracy, and this nation is supposed to be all about "We the People". We are a free people, one that has private property rights and freedom of speech rights. Got it?

Now, can someone please explain to me why this Pastor from Florida cannot stand on his own private property, with a Quran that he owns, abiding by local fire codes and city ordinances, and burn whatever it is that he wants to burn? He has that right to! He can stack Qurans into a 100' tall Jenga game as long as he does it on his property, he owns the Qurans, and he is following local fire codes. He can have a marshmallow roast and cook hot-dogs over them if that's what makes his day!

It comes down to one question here. At what point does our government draw the line between the rights of a private citizen and their ability to take that right away from you? Better yet, where are YOU going to draw the line in the sand and tell the government they can't cross it?

This is America. We are free to have our own ideas. We are free to have them whether they are good, bad, or unpopular. That's the beauty of who we are, can't you see that? What kind of people have we become when our Army's top general has publicly spoken out against this pastor? What about Clinton, Obama, the FBI, Palin, and even the Vatican!?! Don't you think that having General Petraeus give such a statement deepens the severity of the event? It'll be plastered all over the front page of every middle eastern newspaper now! This is a non-issue. It's a man doing what he wants to do on his own private property. Why does anyone even have to question this?

I listened to Sean Hannity on XM radio yesterday and I got so mad I turned it off. He was interviewing the pastor and completely lambasted everything the man had to say. For someone who claims to stand for Liberty and Freedom and ride the Tea Party choo-choo train, he sure did fall into the political correctness trap on this one. He briefly mentioned that the man had a Constitutional right to do what he has planned to do, but then continued to drive the point home that he did not think the Pastor should continue based on General.. blah blah, Palin blah blah.. He referenced all of the above people who have spoken out against the Pastor. Mr Hannity, you should take a step back, open your eyes, and you would see how deep of a hole you have fallen in to. You are drowning in big government political correctness! The issue here is not whether a Quran is burned, it is protecting an individuals property rights and personal liberty. GET IT RIGHT!

Should American citizens lose their right to private property and freedom of speech based on a risk of a threat from another nation? Shall we, as private citizens, base our actions on our own personal property, on the reactions of another extremists group? I think NOT! Isn't that the very reason we call ourselves a free people? Shall we have to submit paperwork to the United Nations for approval before we partake in events on our private property to ensure that no other nations will have their feelings hurt? Do I sound outlandish here? Then draw your line the sand!

See folks, we as a people have lost our way. We have strayed from the very foundational values that made us who we are. Our morals and values have been bombarded by a government system of cradle to grave intervention. It has been 100 years in the making, but the vision of the progressives in history, have finally come to past.

You have a choice now. Stand up, or stand down.. but whichever you choose, get the hell out of my way, because I plan to fight the fight!

Economic Warning - Tony Robbins

2010-08-18T10:58:00.000-04:00

Tony Robbins, renowned success coach and motivational speaker shares an insight from some of the influential people he works with and why he believes a breakdown is underway. 3rd August, 2010.

Obama Economy Facts

2010-08-17T22:29:00.001-04:00

An outstanding article with nothing but cold hard facts. You can't argue with the numbers!

Bam's lousy economic record: Let's just look at the facts, shall we?
BY Keith Hennessey
Monday, August 16th 2010, 4:00 AM

On the campaign trail, President Obama is talking about everything except his own economic record. He attacks his predecessor - a man for whom I worked - as his advisers promise a return to Clinton-era economics.

Rather than hearing about the last two Presidents, voters may instead want the President to explain the economic realities of his own 18-month tenure and what he foresees for the next two years. To further that understanding here are some facts.

At 9.5%, the unemployment rate is 1.8 percentage points higher today than when the President took office. There are 3.3 million fewer U.S. jobs than there were in January 2009. The U.S. economy has lost jobs in 12 of the 18 months he has been office, including the last two months.

In early August of last year, the President declared that, thanks in part to his policies, the U.S. economy was "pointed in the right direction." We have lost jobs in six of the 12 months since then, for a net decline of 52,000 jobs. The 9.4% unemployment rate when he made this statement climbed to 10.1% and has since declined to 9.5%, still higher than it was last August.

The President signed into law an $862 billion stimulus law and two health laws that will create $788 billion of new entitlements over the next decade. Combine these with countless other smaller spending bills, several of which were labeled as emergencies and therefore not paid for, and the U.S. government is $2.5 trillion more in debt than on the day this President took office. That's $8,000 more debt for every American man, woman, and child.

Signed free trade agreements with allies Colombia, Panama and Korea have not been ratified by Congress because the President hasn't submitted them for approval. All three have sat in his inbox.

That's the past and present. What, then, does the President have to offer a skeptical voter for the future?

Assuming his economic agenda is enacted into law, the Obama administration projects unemployment would average 9.0% over four years of the President's term. If you assume he is re-elected, they project unemployment over his two terms would average 7.6%.

For comparison, unemployment during former President Bill Clinton's tenure averaged 5.2% and during President George W. Bush's tenure it averaged 5.3%. Former President Jimmy Carter's unemployment rate averaged 6.5%.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner says the President is returning America to "the pro-growth tax and fiscal policies" of the Clinton administration. Yet the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates this administration would have the federal government spend more than 24% of the overall U.S. economy over his term, a government 25% larger than during the Clinton era. Budget deficits would average 8.7% of the U.S. economy, compared with Clinton's average 0.4% surplus.

The President proposes more government spending, higher tax rates and more debt than his Democratic predecessor.

If Americans had devoted all their income from the beginning of 2009 to June 8 of that year, they could have paid off the government debt inherited by this President from all his predecessors. Under the President's policies, if they were to try this in 2013, they'd have to work until Sept. 24.

While attention focused on taxpayer funds invested in big Wall Street banks, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac cost taxpayers $291 billion last year and will cost an additional $98 billion over the next decade. The new financial reform law does not address these two firms, which continue to cost taxpayers about $2 billion each month.

If the President has his way, on Jan. 1, taxes on many successful small business owners will rise. Investors will pay higher taxes on their capital gains and dividends, and some small businesses and family farms will once again be subject to death taxes. This isn't undoing tax cuts for the rich, it's raising taxes on small businesses.

Tanning salons and tobacco are not the only new taxes Americans will face. Drug companies, health plans and medical device manufacturers will charge higher prices as they pass new taxes on to their customers. Health Savings Accounts will no longer be usable for tax-free purchases of over-the-counter medications. Some workers will pay higher Medicare taxes, and some investors will pay a new 2.9% tax.

Individuals and families who cannot afford health insurance will face a new tax, as will employers who cannot afford to provide their employees with health insurance. The President proposes to tax charitable contributions for high-income donors, American firms competing with foreign firms overseas, and, indirectly, your electric bill.

These facts may explain why President Obama wants to talk about somebody else.

Hennessey, who served as the White House senior economic adviser to George W. Bush, is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution.

Backup and Sources

* Unemployment rate = 9.5% in July 2010. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics.
* Unemployment rate = 7.7% in January 2009. 9.5 – 7.7 = 1.8. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics.
* In January 2009, total nonfarm payroll employment = 133.549 M. In July 2010, total nonfarm payroll
   employment = 130.242 M. The delta is 3.307 M. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics. (Select More
   Formatting Options, then choose “Original Data Value” and Retrieve Data.
* Count the months that are negative, starting with the data point for February 2009. June and July 2010 are negative. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics.
* “Today we’re pointed in the right direction.” Presidential Rose Garden statement, August 7, 2009.
* Count the months that are negative, starting with the data point for August 2009, the first one after this
    statement. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics.
* In July 2009 (the data point for the Presidential statement), total nonfarm payroll employment = 130.294
   m. In July 2010, total nonfarm payroll employment = 130.242 M. The delta is –52 K. Source: Bureau of
   Labor Statistics. (Select More Formatting Options, then choose “Original Data Value” and Retrieve Data.)
* Unemployment rate = 9.4% in July 2009, the data point for which the President made his “pointed”
   statement. The rate climbed to 10.1% in October 2009, and was 9.5% in the latest report for July 2010.
   Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics.
* “All told, CBO now anticipates that the law will increase deficits by $862 billion between 2009 and 2019.”
   Source: Congressional Budget Office, The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2010 to 2020,
   Appendix A.
* For the $788 B figure I included only the net deficit impact of the new insurance coverage provisions. I
   could have chosen a larger number to incorporate other deficit-increasing provisions. Source:
   Congressional Budget Office, Score of H.R. 4872 in a letter to Speaker Pelosi, Table 1 on page 5.
* Debt held by the public on January 20, 2009: $6,307 B. Debt held by the public on August 12, 2010:
   $8,787 B. The delta is $2.48 trillion. Source: TreasuryDirect.
* U.S. population = 310 M. $2.48 T / 310 M = $8,000 per person. Source: Census.
* The Colombia Free Trade Agreement was signed on November 22, 2006. “Colombia’s Congress
   approved the agreement and a protocol of amendment in 2007. Colombia’s Constitutional Court
   completed its review in July 2008, and concluded that the Agreement conforms to Colombia’s
   Constitution.” Source: U.S. Trade Representative.
* The Panama Free Trade Agreement was signed on June 28, 2007. Panama approved the TPA on July 11,
   2007. Source: U.S. Trade Representative.
* The Korea Free Trade Agreement was signed on June 30, 2007. “If approved, the Agreement would be
   the United States’ most commercially significant free trade agreement in more than 16 years.” Source: U.S.
   Trade Representative.
* The Administration’s projected annual average unemployment rates are: 2009 = 9.3%, 2010 = 9.7%,
   2011 = 9.0%, 2012 = 8.1%. These average to 9.025%. Source: Office of Management and Budget,
   Mid-Session Review, Fiscal Year 2011, Table 2 on page 9.
* The same table shows projected annual average unemployment rates are: 2013 = 7.1%, 2014 = 6.3%,
   2015 = 5.7%, 2013 = 5.3%. The eight-year average is 7.5625%. Source: Office of Management and
   Budget, Mid-Session Review, Fiscal Year 2011, Table 2 on page 9.
* Clinton average is calculated from February 1993 through January 2001. Bush average is calculated using
   February 2001 through January 2009. Carter average is calculated using February 1997 through January
   1980. Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics.
* “Rather than creating a false prosperity fueled by debt and passing the bills on to the next generation, we
   need to restore America to a pro-growth tax and fiscal policy, …” Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner,
   Remarks as prepared for delivery at the Center for American Progress, August 4, 2010.
* CBO estimates outlays/GDP ratios: 2009 = 24.7%, 2010 = 24.8%, 2011 = 25.4%, 2012 = 23.7%.
   These average to 24.65%. Source: Congressional Budget Office, An Analysis of the President’s Budgetary
   Proposals for Fiscal Year 2011, Table 1-2 on page 5.
* Outlays / GDP averaged 19.6% during the Clinton Administration. Source: My post Comparing Obama
   Economics to Clinton economics. Note this table shows a lower average for President Obama’s average
   spending because it uses the Administration’s more optimistic OMB projections. For an apples-to-apples
   comparison here I’m using CBO numbers.
* CBO estimates deficit/GDP ratios: 2009 = 9.9%, 2010 = 10.3%, 2011 = 8.9%, 2012 = 5.8%. These
   average to 8.725%. Source: Congressional Budget Office, An Analysis of the President’s Budgetary
   Proposals for Fiscal Year 2011, Table 1-2 on page 5.
* Source: My post Comparing Obama Economics to Clinton economics, which uses data from OMB’s
   Historical Table 1.2.
* Source: My post Comparing Obama Economics to Clinton economics. Revenues/GDP are projected to be
   lower during President Obama’s term because of the weak economy, but beginning in 2013 the top income
   tax rate will be higher than during the Clinton Administration.
* Debt held by the public on January 20, 2009 = $6,307 B. 2009 GDP = 14,119 B. Therefore debt / GDP
   = 44.67%. Assuming a linear GDP throughout the year, June 8th is 44.67% through the calendar year.
   Source: TreasuryDirect and Commerce Department, Bureau of Economic Analysis.
* I made an error here – it should be September 9th rather than September 24th. CBO projects debt held
   by the public at the end of CY 2012 = 11.579 T and projects 2013 GDP = 16.676 T. Therefore debt /
   GDP = 69.44%, getting to September 9, 2013.
* Source: Congressional Budget Office, CBO’s Budgetary Treatment of Treatment of Fannie Mae and
   Freddie Mac (January 2010), Table 2 on page 8.
* Source: Treasury’s “Green Book,” General Explanations of the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2011
   Revenue Proposals, pp. 127-128.
* Source: Treasury’s “Green Book,” p. 131.
* Source: Treasury’s “Green Book,” p. i footnote 1.
* Section 5000B as added by Sec. 10907 of Public Law 111-148 (H.R. 3590), “Imposition of tax on
   indoor tanning services.”
* Section 701 of Public Law 111-3 (H.R. 2), “Increase in excise tax rate on tobacco products.”
* Section 9008 of Public Law 111-148 (H.R. 3590), “Imposition of annual fee on branded prescription
   pharmaceutical manufacturers and importers.”
* Section 9010 of Public Law 111-148 (H.R. 3590), “Imposition of annual fee on health insurance
   providers.”
* Section 9009 of Public Law 111-148 (H.R. 3590), “Imposition of annual fee on medical device
   manufacturers and importers.”
* Section 9003 of Public Law 111-148 (H.R. 3590), “Distributions for medicine qualified only if for
   prescribed drug or insulin.”
* Section 9015 of Public Law 111-148 (H.R. 3590), “Additional hospital insurance tax on high-income
   taxpayers.”
* Chapter 2A as added by Section 1402 of Public Law 111-152 (H.R. 4872), “Unearned income Medicare
   contribution.”
* Section 5000A(b) & (c) as added by Sec. 1501(b) of Public Law 111-148 (H.R. 3590), “Shared
   Responsibility Payment” and “Amount of penalty.”
* Sec. 1513 of Public Law 111-148 (H.R. 3590), “Shared responsibility for employers.”
* Source: Treasury’s “Green Book,” p. 129.
* Source: Treasury’s “Green Book,” throughout pp. 39-49.
* Source: The President’s Budget would establish “emissions allowances” from an economy-wide carbon
   cap. A cap-and-trade is economically equivalent to a carbon tax with some of the revenues raised rebated
   to carbon producers. Source: The President’s Budget, FY 2011, Table S-2, footnote 3 on p. 4.

Why Gold and Silver are Important

2010-08-17T14:12:00.000-04:00

In my opinion, this may be the most important 10 minutes you have ever spent on research regarding your finances.

I'm no economist, but somewhere you have to apply a small amount of common sense and realize that the current system is not working and cannot be sustained. The value of the dollar has decreased 97% since 1913.

This November the Republicans will take back a majority of it's seats in house and senate and the moral will improve for the average American. This will drive down the costs of precious metals temporarily.. buy up all you can during that time. Buy physical gold bullion, do not trade in gold/silver stocks.. there's not enough physical to back the paper.

The average US sheeple will think this will turn around all of our problems. More money will be printed to kill the debt, interest rates will rise, and new taxes will be imposed (think obamacare and the push for the gov to own everyones 401k). Inflation will take place over the next several years.

Store it in your home in a safe. All assetts inside a bank will be ceased if it closes, including your 401k, IRAs, your cd's, and anything physical in a lock box. If you do keep a large sum of money in a bank, spread it across 3 or 4 banks.

Jan 1, 2012, the Federal Government will begin tracking precious metal purchases exceeding $600. I'll leave you to think about why. On Apr 3, 1933, Roosevelt signed an executive order requiring all citizens to turn over their gold or face fines and imprisonment. Just because we have technology like fancy cell phones and playstations don't mean it can't happen again.

I'm just an idiot spitting out my opinion, but it just so happens that my opinion goes right along with many top economists right now. Read all you can and DYODD (do your own due diligence).

We used to be able to say "it's as good as gold".. but today a dollar ain't worth shit.

The Liberal Pizza

2010-07-27T14:50:00.001-04:00

Well, apparently.. Domino's is either deaf and dumb, or they have chosen to ride the liberal choo-choo whack train as well. As you can see, in the picture below that I recieved in an email, Domino's displays it's ignorance by making parody to the now famous quote "the ends justify the means". I'm sure you've heard this recently if you watch any tv at all..

It is the rule that Mr Obama himself lives by. It's his golden rule. The quote was made famous by Saul Alinky in his book, "Rules for Radicals". In essence, by saying do the "ends justify the means" you are saying that you will do whatever it takes (whether moral or immoral, ethical or unethical) to achieve your end goal. Screw whoever you like.. just as long as you get what you want!!! Right?!?

Sound familiar in today's "radical" political climate?

This is what happens when the sheep pretend they don't see the wool over their eyes. This is what happens when we feed our children into the state education "system" and this is what happens when we hand the government 30-60% of every dollar we make.. taxes at the highest level in history..

Yes, we get corruption and control!!!

Now it's so bad I can't even eat a pizza without a liberal agenda!

Damn pepperoni! I just want my Liberty!!!

Brad

The Philosophy of Liberty

2010-05-20T10:04:00.000-04:00

The Philosophy of Liberty

The following is a video that I ran across while doing some reading. The context and contents of the video are so outright basic and fundamental in the function of society that I believe that they have been forgotten. They have been manipulated and perverted over many generations. Please watch this openly and share with others and discuss. These fundamental thoughts of self respect, personal liberty and self ownership are KEY to restoring our nation.

"The philosophy of personal liberty has a serious message. Many Americans have accepted the infringements on their liberties because they know of no other existence. There was a time, not that long ago, when Americans were truly free. We accept taxation on our labor, on our property, Roadblocks for our "safety" and many other intrusions into our personal lives. This must STOP."

Healthcare - A Dark Day in American History

2010-03-22T11:21:00.001-04:00

Today is a day that will not soon be forgotten. It is a day when the word "free" has been transformed. It has been fundamentally transformed. You see, I believe that you and I, along with every other person on the planet, are born with certain unalienable rights. I believe we are created equal. I believe just like our founders believed.. the founders who stood up the most powerful and free nation the world has ever seen. They did so on a principal that we would be free and left alone to succeed and fail. Their vision came from oppression and control from a government much like the one our country is turning into now. They were men who were willing to leave everything and travel across little known waters to an uncivilized piece of land to completely start a new. The ambition of these men is one that is unmatched. The bravery and drive of these men is one that is unmatched. Their drive and push for freedom built something great. And today, this great country has fallen.

It has been building for nearly 100 years. In the 1930s, then President FDR passed a series of social programs known as the "New Deal". Programs like Social Security were started. FDR also believed that "New new Deal" must be passed. It was his belief that all Americans deserve healthcare, education, housing and jobs. This is where it all began and since this day in our history, Democrats and "progressive" thinkers have held onto this agenda.

"All men are created equal".

This does not mean that all men end up equal. Some work hard. Some hardly work. Some just have bad luck. Have you ever been hired by a poor man? If you take away the ability to succeed and the ability to fail, then what do we become as a society? What are you entitled to? If you are entitled to this new "right" of healthcare, then who is to fund it? There are over 300 million citizens of our great United States. This is not free nor is it deficit neutral. This is an economic burden that will hamper and harm our children and future generations of youth for decades to come. Today our deficit has reached nearly an astounding 13 Trillion dollars. The average liability per US citizen is $350,000.00. Your newborn child will inherit an immediate debt of $350,000.00 upon birth. How is that for a "birth right"?

Health care is broken and expensive, I agree. But a government intervention will not save us money. It's not a creative solution that will drive economic growth and support small business growth. You know this. I know this, and the law makers who voted yes for this bill know this. The difference is that you and I have a different philosophy of what our nation should be. Our philosophy is one of individual rights and self awareness. It is one that thrives on hard work and perseverance. The opposition believes everyone should be the same. No one should do without. No one should have more than the next. We are raising a new generation of entitled youth. If we don't turn back now, then there is no turning back.

I'm afraid that the complacency of the American people has shown it's ugly face today. Your freedoms were ripped away. Your countries constitution was trampled on. Your rights are now not given to you from your creator, they are given to you by a body of partisan bureaucrats. All of this while you sat in the comfort of your home and watched it happen. I'm just as guilty as the next. but today has become a day that has opened my eyes. It is no longer the time to sit on our hands and watch these events unfold. The government will own your home. They will own your education. They will own your healthcare and they will own the car that you drive. they will also regulate your trash can, your electricity and the food that you eat. Do you really think they will let you eat Cheeseburgers and bon-bons if it raises the cost of your health care? What if you're 65 and have cancer. Will you receive treatment, or will the 35 year old receive treatment who has more to contribute to society? Your livelihood will soon become a ration.

If you don't peel the wool from your sheep eyes today, tomorrow will be too late. You MUST become active. You MUST make phone calls, send emails, send faxes, attend rallies. If not, this is only baby step number one to a country that will soon be completely unrecognizable. Today is not the day for complacency. Tomorrow is not the day for complacency. A new horizon is upon us and it's up to "WE the People" to ensure that it is the dawn or a brighter era for our future generations of American children.

Stand firm today. Stand strong today. Do what you know is right. Guard your faith. Guard your country. America is the last stand on Earth. There is no other country on Earth that was free like America was. Make your own destiny.. don't stand by the wayside and let it be dictated.

Last night President Obama said, "This is what change feels like."

People.. make Obama feel real change. Look at American history. It seems to be forgotten that when "We the people" are pushed.. we have a strong tendency to push back.

Today is the day, America.

The truth shall set you free. The truth always prevails.

" All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." Thomas Jefferson
"Democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man." Ronald Reagan
"Don't be afraid to see what you see." Ronald Reagan
"Government's first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives." Ronald Raegan
" A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take
from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government." Thomas Jefferson

Brad

Health Care and the Left’s Perverted Definition of ‘Rights’

2010-03-08T09:41:00.002-05:00

Health Care and the Left’s Perverted Definition of ‘Rights’ - Big Government

by Kerry J. Byrne

One way that leftists have managed to keep alive their dead, defeated, bankrupting theories on issues like so-called health care is by perverting the definition of very basic terms.

The word “right” is one of the most glaring examples of a definition that’s been distorted by the intellectual house-of-horrors mirror that is leftist theory.

Image: CATO Institute

Every American has the “right” to health care they argue.

They’re right. Every American does have a right to health care. In fact, they have that “right” right now. They have the right to buy insurance. They have the right to not buy insurance. They have the right to pay out of pocket. They have the right get a second opinion. They have the right to rub a little dirt on it and suck it up. They have a right to help out a friend in need.

What they don’t have is the “right” to health care in the perverted leftist sense of the word.

A “right,” in the traditional American lexicon laid out by the likes of Thomas Jefferson, is something that exists by virtue of our humanity. It is “inalienable” and we are endowed with these rights by our creator. No government or institution has the power to take away these rights. You exist, therefore these rights exist.

In the leftist sense of the word, though, a “right” is something very different. In fact, it’s not a “right” at all: it’s a handout provided to you by government, often at exorbitant costs to society.

“I have the ‘right’ to health care!” the leftists demand angrily. “Therefore, the government must provide it for me!”

Rights, in other words, are not innate to your humanity in leftist theory. Instead, rights are bequeathed to you like party favors by political Big Brothers: here’s a do-nothing job for Uncle Henry, here’s a tax exemption for a big donor and … oh, look, here’s some discounted healthcare for members of the big unions that support me.

The “right” to health care in leftist theory, then, is not something that you possess inalienably by virtue of your humanity. Instead, a “right” to them is a dehumanizing tragedy in the making.

The government that gives you your “right” to health care can just as easily deny you that so-called “right” to health care. They can take it away at anytime: if you end up in the wrong column of an actuarial chart, if you vote the wrong way, or, hell, in the very likely event that the system goes bankrupt, the government will be in a position to deny what once was your inalienable “right” to health care. Remember, the Soviet Union declared that its citizens had the right to everything from a home to a job. How’d that work out for them?

“B-b-b-b-b-but!,” scream the leftists. “Insurance companies can already deny you health care.”

No, they can’t. Insurance companies are certainly part of the problem. We’ve grown to depend on them too much and on ourselves too little. The system does need to be fixed.

But insurance companies cannot deny you the inalienable ”right” to health care. They do not have that power. They can only choose not to pay for certain procedures. You can still find another insurance company, seek help in a different state, find a charitable doctor to pay for it, benefit from a fundraiser or, worst-case scenario, benefit from the generosity of a well-funded, for-profit private health care institution.

After all, you still have the “right” to find that care. Even in a worst-case scenario in the current system, you only need the means.

But when government monopolizes the system, when government first decides what kind of care you’ll get, and when government next decides if they’ll even pay for it, your right to health care no longer exists.

At best, your rights will be forced underground into a health care black market: doctors illegally providing care in a cash-only medical economy – but probably one better than the legit “health care” system where patients have no rights but those regally gifted to them by the lords of big government (who, themselves, will never be denied care).

Look at Canada: it already has a vibrant cash-only medical economy. It’s called the U.S. health care system.

Your “right” to health care already exists. Don’t let the leftist and their perverted definition of the word take it away.

JOE LEGAL vs. JOSE ILLEGAL

2010-02-09T10:58:00.002-05:00

JOE LEGAL vs. JOSE ILLEGAL

You have two families: "Joe Legal" and "Jose Illegal".

Both families have two parents, two children, and live in California .

Joe Legal works in construction, has a Social Security Number and makes $25.00 per hour with taxes deducted.

Jose Illegal also works in construction, has NO Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash "under the table".

Ready? Now pay attention...

Joe Legal: $25.00 per hour x 40 hours = $1000.00 per week, or $52,000.00 per year. Now take 30% away for state and federal tax; Joe Legal now has $31,231.00.

Jose Illegal: $15.00 per hour x 40 hours = $600.00 per week, or $31,200.00 per

year. Jose Illegal pays no taxes. Jose Illegal now has $31,200...00.

Joe Legal pays medical and dental insurance with limited coverage for his family at $600.00 per month, or $7,200.00 per year. Joe Legal now has $24,031.00.

Jose Illegal has full medical and dental coverage through the state and local clinics at a cost of $0.00 per year. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal makes too much money and is not eligible for food stamps or welfare. Joe Legal pays $500.00 per month for food, or $6,000.00 per year. Joe Legal now has $18,031.00.

Jose Illegal has no documented income and is eligible for food stamps and welfare. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal pays rent of $1,200.00 per month, or $14,400.00 per year. Joe Legal now has $9,631.00.

Jose Illegal receives a $500.00 per month federal rentsubsidy. Jose Illegal pays out that $500.00 per month, or $6,000.00 per year. Jose Illegal still has $ 31,200.00.

Joe Legal pays $200.00 per month, or $2,400.00 for insurance. Joe Legal now has $7,231.00.

Jose Illegal says, "We don't need no stinkin' insurance!" and still has $31,200.00.

Joe Legal has to make his $7,231.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, etc.

Jose Illegal has to make his $31,200.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, and what he sends out of the country every month.

Joe Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part time job after work.

Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his family.

Joe Legal's and Jose Illegal's children both attend the same school. Joe Legal pays for his children's lunches while Jose Illegal's children get a government sponsored lunch. Jose Illegal's children have an after school ESL program. Joe Legal's children go home.

Joe Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same police and fire services, but Joe paid for them and Jose did not pay.

Do you get it, now?

If you vote for or support any politician that supports illegal aliens...

You are part of the problem!

It's way PAST time to take a stand for America and Americans!

Are You Capable of Decency, Rahm Emanuel? -Sarah Palin

2010-02-01T21:27:00.003-05:00

Are You Capable of Decency, Rahm Emanuel?

The newly-released mind-boggling, record-smashing $3,400,000,000,000 federal budget invites plenty of opportunity to debate the merits of incurring more and more debt that will drown the next generation of Americans. Never has it been possible to spend your way out of debt. So... let the debate begin.

Included in the debate process will be opportunities for our president to deliberate internally the wisdom of this debt explosion, along with other economic, military and social issues facing our country. Our president will discuss these important issues with Democrat leaders and those within his inner circle. I would ask the president to show decency in this process by eliminating one member of that inner circle, Mr. Rahm Emanuel, and not allow Rahm’s continued indecent tactics to cloud efforts. Yes, Rahm is known for his caustic, crude references about those with whom he disagrees, but his recent tirade against participants in a strategy session was such a strong slap in many American faces that our president is doing himself a disservice by seeming to condone Rahm’s recent sick and offensive tactic.

The Obama Administration’s Chief of Staff scolded participants, calling them, “F---ing retarded,” according to several participants, as reported in the Wall Street Journal.

Just as we’d be appalled if any public figure of Rahm’s stature ever used the “N-word” or other such inappropriate language, Rahm’s slur on all God’s children with cognitive and developmental disabilities – and the people who love them – is unacceptable, and it’s heartbreaking.

A patriot in North Andover, Massachusetts, notified me of Rahm’s “retarded” slam. I join this gentleman, who is the father of a beautiful child born with Down Syndrome, in asking why the Special Olympics, National Down Syndrome Society and other groups condemning Rahm’s degrading scolding have been completely ignored by the White House. No comment from his boss, the president?

As my friend in North Andover says, “This isn’t about politics; it’s about decency. I am not speaking as a political figure but as a parent and as an everyday American wanting my child to grow up in a country free from mindless prejudice and discrimination, free from gratuitous insults of people who are ostensibly smart enough to know better... Have you no sense of decency, sir?”

Mr. President, you can do better, and our country deserves better.

- Sarah Palin

For Those of you who use Google

2010-01-10T12:19:00.000-05:00

Do you use Google? I do.. as a matter of fact, I don't know what I would have done without for the last few years. Everything from school projects to looking up random wasteful interests. I think I'm going to stop. "Why?" do you ask? It's simple.. The Google company has is now overstepping its bounds. The Internet is a source of free speech. It's a world where ideas can be shared and information can be broadcasted around the world in seconds. It has changed the way we live.

But what happens when Google filters the information you see? Perhaps Google has an agenda.. and if Google is your primary source of information, do you become a supporter of that agenda.. or atleast unknowingly and unwillingly slowly "led" to the same agenda?

Free speech is under attack in America. You might say I am an Obama hater, a racist, a right wing extremist lunatic.. I don't care. Let me ask you something. How big is Google? You probably have no idea.. and is more than likely beyond your comprehension the amount of data that Google filters to your computer screen. When something so large has an agenda, then you and I have a problem.

You need to see this. Revolutions don't happen overnight. Hitler didn't become Hitler over night. It happened in steps.. one small step at a time. Try this little experiment for yourself and tell me if you think free speech, the freedom of information is under attack. When you decide if it is or not.. ask yourself what you plan on doing to stop it. This is not a joke..

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/01/08/google-censoring-islam/

go to http://www.google.com

type in "christianity is" - google will help you see related conversations that are actively being searched on the internet.

type in "islam is" - and normally google will help you find related searches..

what happens when you do this?

Dear Terrorists.. Please wait a Minute

2009-12-02T10:39:00.000-05:00

I don't know if any of you saw this last night.. Mr Obama managed to commit 30k troops to Afghanistan in an escalation to "win" the war.

Just one problem.. Obama didn't use the word win.

But he did manage to say that he would remove all troops by summer 2011.

I think he could have saved us all the trouble, if he would have just published an audio file like Osama Bin laden. He then could ask the terrorists to just stay in their caves.. we give them permission to reorganize and attack again in 2011.

Atleast then, my favorite Christmas cartoon, Charlie Brown, wouldn't have been moved from it's prime time slot. I missed it to cover this babbling nonsense that has managed to drop the moral of every soldier in all corners of the world fighting for our country.

I said it before, and I'll say it again. Obama doesn't get it. He needs to stand in front of every crying Mother, Father, Wife, and Husband that lost a loved one and wipe their tears.

The only problem with that, atleast for me, is that I could not stomach to give him that privilege.

What a disgusting excuse for a man.

Everything for Everyone! The New American Way..

2009-11-19T14:16:00.003-05:00

"Everything for Everyone, and Nothing for Yourself"

That seems to be the motto of this new administration.. and the disgrace that the American people have chosen to evolve its culture into.

There's a simple principle that Americans have seemed to have forgotten. It's self responsibility.

Everyone wants someone to give them something. Everyone wants something for free.. or at least at a reduced cost, or with assistance. WE the people need to understand that our failure is our failure and our success is our success. No one is responsible for those actions but yourself. How could you believe differently? Why do you think it's fair that someone who has worked their entire life to build a small personal business and be successful should pay for your health care? HOW could you live with yourself and sleep at night knowing you are taking from that person and their quality of life, their employees, and their family? That is what it amounts to. You are stealing.. as mandated by the government. That is not the principles that our great country was founded on. Those are NOT Godly qualities that built our nation.. the greatest and most powerful free nation the world has ever seen. You might say that it is not fair for them to have so much! Well, SHAME ON YOU! THEY took the risk! They put their careers on the line! THEY stuck their neck out and worked countless hours to make it happen! If you want to work a 40 hour week and live a 40 hour a week lifestyle, then so be it. But don't STEAL from the man that works 70 hours a week, to bring YOU a service and provide jobs within the communities.

It's a disgust and I'm ashamed of Americans. I am ashamed of what we have become. The world laughs at us and mocks us. They look at our overweight population and think about the greed.. the big homes, the super expensive cars, stereos, and daily or weekly spa and personal treatments.

What's going to happen if you don't buy the mandated "stolen" health insurance?

Failing to purchase “acceptable health insurance coverage” could result in a fine punishable “up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” Those are direct quotes from a letter of analysis done by the Joint Committee on Taxation, a non-partisan analysis committee in Congress. Do you understand what you just read? WOW! For the first time in History the government has MADE you buy something or face punishment. I understand how the government can mandate car insurance. Car insurance is not necessary for life and it's your choice to drive a car. In contrast, health care is needed by everyone. It is a part of life. We do not choose to live and breath.. and yet we are forced to take part in something, which should be a personal choice, not a mandated one.

I sit in disgust on a daily basis and look out my window the see what my great country is becoming. I see the snub and arrogant administration doing nothing for us and everything to empower himself. I see him apologizing for who we are and what we stand for. I see him bow to foreign nations, when no other nation does that. I see him pushing personal agendas, that benefit no one but his personal ties. I see a community organizer that speaks well and doesn't have an ounce of leadership qualities. Our nation needs a respectable, hard fighting man of his word. We need a Patriot! We need someone who understand liberty and stands up for those values at all costs. We need someone who believes in our Constitution, not someone who says that it's an irrelevant document like Obama has. We need someone who doesn't ignore the needs of our troops and takes the War on Terrorism seriously. I would like for Obama to stand up to the mother of every soldier lost in battle since August (when our ground General requested more troops) and tell them that he is sorry. He needs to tell them that he is sorry for his incompetence and vow to fight this war and clean up the mess like an American warrior, not a coward hiding behind a suit and tie. He needs to face his enemy and face the tears of the broken families. He needs to understand the consequence of his actions.

What will it take for you to understand? What will it take for you to take responsibility and accountability for your actions? Will you have to lose your job? Your home? Will you have to lose a loved one in a war that our President is floundering on? Where does it end? Will you pay into Social Security all of your life and rely on it when you retire.. to only realize that it has been stolen by the government to fund their personal projects? Will you lose a loved one, when you know they could have lived longer, only because they couldn't get the care they needed because Medicare has been cut back? Will they die in pain because Hospice couldn't provide them a comfortable bed to prevent sores and maybe a bed pan? I hope you realize that with the new Healthcare bill, you will pay more out of your check every week in Medicare, but you will receive less coverage. Since when has that been a good decision? Have you ever bought something that was more expensive and gave you less? Hmm.. i think I'll have a Big Mac, but the one without meat and cheese.. and it costs $2 more. Do you understand now?

Story from a real person, a gentleman in Louisiana, who will remain anonymous:

"This is a little heads up with obamacare...As some of yall may know from some of my post, my 84 year old Dad is in a nursing home...He has no legs,(from diabetes)...About 6 mos ago, he was hospitalized with a severe urinary tract infection from the catheter that stays in him..The social worker at the hospital recommended hospice....Hospice provided a brand new hospital bed with a air mattress to prevent him from getting bed sores and had a trapeze mounted on it to help him...Well I just got informed by St Joseph, (hospice provider) that they have been under alot of pressure lately from OBAMA and MEDICARE..Now, if a patient can talk and feed themself, medicare will no longer pay for hospice care...This means my Dad is going to lose his new bed, and go back to the piece of shit bed he had before...Hospice provides a very good service...They help the patient with the dying process as well as their family...To think,, that bastard in the white house changed the guidelines is a disgrace and an insult to our elderly..Now, this means that if you have a loved one who is dying from cancer or whatever, they will not be covered under medicare for this end of life quality care if they can talk or feed themselves....THAT is how they are going to save millions from medicare cuts...Also this recent change for women not needing mamograms anymore under the age of 50 is bullshit!!! EARLY DETECTION SAVES LIVES!!! But this arrogant muslim in the white house is now turning his attention to the insurance industry...Mark my words....You're going to see a rise in breast cancer...The gov. is already predicting that if this healthcare bill gets signed into law we are going to have a shortage of drs. and will need to import drs. from the middle east where they only go to school for 3 years...Plus they work for alot less than ours...Please write to your elected officials...Thank You"

I hope you understand. I hope you can see past the wool being pulled over your eyes. I hope you can see what these people are trying to do to our country. Our very country is at risk right now.. along with personal freedoms. Our speech has been attacked, our health care has been attacked. The government owns the car industry and the banking industry. The own the loans you have on your car, the mortgage on your house and your land. They also want to bail out the newspapers, so that they can own the words that you read. Please educate yourself and talk about these issues with your friends and loved ones. It's the only way that we don't slowly progress into a hole in which we can't recover from. Remind the people in Washington that the money that they are spending is money that you worked hard for. Remind them that they work for WE the people.. and that this is OUR country and they will NOT take it away.

Stand strong on your rock and true to your faith..

A lady asked Dr. Franklin Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy — "A republic," replied the Doctor, "if you can keep it."
Anonymous, from Farrand's Records of the Federal Convention of 1787

An honorable Peace is and always was my first wish! I can take no delight in the effusion of human Blood; but, if this War should continue, I wish to have the most active part in it.
John Paul Jones, letter to Gouverneur Morris, Sept 2, 1782

Stand up and fight this war.. you are not alone!

Support FairTax!

2009-10-02T14:08:00.001-04:00

ABOUT THE FAIRTAX

The FairTax proposal is a comprehensive plan to replace federal income and payroll taxes, including personal, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security/Medicare, self-employment, and corporate taxes. The FairTax proposal integrates such features as a progressive national retail sales tax, dollar-for-dollar revenue replacement, and a rebate to ensure that no American pays such federal taxes up to the poverty level. Included in the FairTax Plan is the repeal of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution. The FairTax allows Americans to keep 100 percent of their paychecks (minus any state income taxes), ends corporate taxes and compliance costs hidden in the retail cost of goods and services, and fully funds the federal government while fulfilling the promise of Social Security and Medicare.

Americans take home their whole paychecks.
Not only do more Americans have jobs, but they also take home 100 percent of their paychecks (except where state income taxes apply). No federal income taxes or payroll taxes are withheld from paychecks, pensions, or Social Security checks.

The prebate makes the FairTax progressive.
To ensure no American pays tax on necessities, the FairTax Plan provides a prepaid, monthly rebate (prebate) for every registered household to cover the consumption tax spent on necessities up to the federal poverty level. This, along with several other features, is how the FairTax completely untaxes the poor, lowers the tax burden on most, while making the overall rate progressive. However, the FairTax is progressive based on lifestyle/spending choices, rather than simply punishing those taxpayers who are successful. Do you see how much freer life is with the FairTax instead of the income tax?

No tax on used goods. The amount you pay to fund the government is totally visible.
With the FairTax you are only taxed once on any good or service. If you choose to buy used goods − used car, used home, used appliances − you do not pay the FairTax. If, as a business owner or farmer, you buy something for strictly business purposes (not for personal consumption), you pay no consumption tax. The FairTax is charged just as state sales taxes are today. When you decide what to buy and how much to spend, you see exactly how much you are contributing to the government with each purchase.

Retail prices no longer hide corporate taxes or compliance costs, which together drive up costs for those who can least afford to pay.
Did you know that income taxes and the cost of complying with them currently make up 20 percent or more of all retail prices? It’s true. According to Dr. Dale Jorgenson of Harvard University, hidden income taxes are passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices for everything you buy. If competition does not allow prices to rise, corporations lower labor costs, again hurting those who can least afford to lose their jobs. Finally, if prices are as high as competition allows and labor costs are as low as practical, profits/dividends to shareholders are driven down, thereby hurting retirement savings for moms-and-pops and pension funds invested in Corporate America. With the FairTax, the sham of corporate taxation ends, competition drives prices down, more people in America have jobs, and retirement/pension funds see improved performance.

The income tax exports our jobs, rather than our products. The FairTax brings jobs home.
Most importantly, the FairTax does not burden U.S. exports the way the current income tax system does. The FairTax removes the cost of corporate taxes and compliance costs from the cost of U.S. exports, putting U.S. exports on a level playing field with foreign competitors. Lower prices sharply increase demand for U.S. exports, thereby increasing job creation in U.S. manufacturing sectors. At home, imports are subject to the same FairTax rate as domestically produced goods. Not only does the FairTax put U.S. products sold here on the same tax footing as foreign imports, but the dramatic lowering of compliance costs in comparison to other countries’ value-added taxes also gives U.S. products a definitive pricing advantage which foreign tax systems cannot match.

The FairTax strategy is revenue neutral: Neither raise nor lower taxes so consumer costs remain stable.
The FairTax pays for all current government operations, including Social Security and Medicare. Government revenues are more stable and predictable than with the federal income tax because consumption is a more constant revenue base than is income.

If you were in a 23-percent income tax bracket, the federal government would take $23 out of your paycheck for every $100 you made. With the FairTax, if the federal government gets $23 out of every $100 spent in America, the same total revenue is delivered to the federal government. This is revenue neutrality. So, instead of paycheck-earning Americans paying 7.65 percent of their paychecks in Social Security/Medicare payroll taxes, plus an average of 18 percent of their paychecks in federal income tax, for a total of about 25.65 percent, consumers in America pay only $23 out of every $100. Or about 30 percent at the cash register when they elect to spend on new goods or services for their own personal consumption. And this tax is collected only on spending above the federal poverty level, providing important progressivity.

Tax criminals don’t make criminals out of honest taxpayers.
Today, the IRS will admit to 16 percent noncompliance with the code. FairTax.org will be generous and simply take the position that this is likely a conservative estimate of the underground economy. However, this does not take into account the criminal/drug/porn economy, which equally conservative estimates put at one trillion dollars of untaxed activity. The FairTax does tax this -- criminals love to flash that cash at retail -- while continuing to provide the federal penalties so effective in bringing such miscreants to justice. The substantial decrease in points of compliance -- from every wage earner, investor, and retiree, down to only retailers -- also allows enforcement to concentrate on following the money to criminal activity, rather than making potential criminals out of every taxpayer struggling to decipher the current code.

What is the FairTax Plan?
The FairTax Plan is a comprehensive proposal that replaces all federal income and payroll based taxes with an integrated approach including a progressive national retail sales tax, a prebate to ensure no American pays federal taxes on spending up to the poverty level, dollar-for-dollar federal revenue replacement, and, through companion legislation, the repeal of the 16th Amendment. This nonpartisan legislation (HR 25/S 1025) abolishes all federal personal and corporate income taxes, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, and self-employment taxes and replaces them with one simple, visible, federal retail sales tax administered primarily by existing state sales tax authorities. The IRS is disbanded and defunded. The FairTax taxes us only on what we choose to spend on new goods or services, not on what we earn. The FairTax is a fair, efficient, transparent, and intelligent solution to the frustration and inequity of our current tax system.

What is Americans For Fair Taxation (FairTax.org)?
FairTax.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, grassroots organization solely dedicated to replacing the current tax system. The organization has hundreds of thousands of members and volunteers nationwide. Its plan supports sound economic research, education of citizens and community leaders, and grassroots mobilization efforts. For more information visit the Web page: www.FairTax.org or call 1-800-FAIRTAX.

Stop Allowing The Left To Set The Rules

2009-09-28T16:36:00.001-04:00

September 28, 2009
Stop Allowing The Left To Set The Rules
By Lloyd Marcus
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/stop_allowing_the_left_to_set.html

I am so sick of the Left being allowed to make the rules. Imagine the absurdity of a competition in which one side is allowed to set the rules against their opponent. The Left tells us what is racist. The Left tells us what we can and cannot say. The Left published a cartoon depicting former black Secretary of State Condolezza Rice as an Aunt Jemima; another depicted Rice as a huge-lipped parrot for her Massa Bush. Neither were considered racist by their creators or publishers, or even widely condemned on the Left.

In opposition to black Republican Michael Steele's campaign to run for U.S. Senate, a liberal blogger published a doctored photo of Steele in black face and big red lips made to look like a minstrel. The caption read, "Simple Sambo wants to move to the big house". Not one Democrat denounced these racist portrayals of black conservatives.

And yet, a sign seen at a tea party depicting Obama as a witch doctor is considered by the Left to be beyond the pale and obviously racist. Why is the Left, given their track record of bias, granted final authority to determine the intent of the sign? Why do we conservatives so quickly and easily allow ourselves to be put on the defensive?

The rules set by the Left are extremely clear. Racist images of black conservatives and negative images of Bush are fair game. Even a play about murdering President Bush was called "harmless art". Meanwhile, all unflattering images of Obama are racist, and constitute dangerous, potentially violent hate speech.

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd called Congressman Joe Wilson a racist for saying, "You lie" to president Obama. Using her psychic powers, Dowd said Wilson was really saying in his mind, "You lie, BOY!" And yet, liberal commentator Julianne Malveaux, saying she hopes black conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' wife "feeds him a lot of fatty foods so he will die early from heart disease like many black men", was not considered racist. I am a black conservative singer, songwriter, entertainer and columnist. Liberals have posted comments all over YouTube and C-SPAN freely using and calling me the "N" word. Because they are libs and I am an uppity, off the liberal plantation, run-away black, all tactics to restore me to my owners are acceptable.

Here is another example of the Left setting the rules. "Take Back America!" is now on their list of racist terms we protesters are not allowed to use. Again using their psychic powers, the Left claims the protesters are really saying, "Because the president is black, lets take America back"! This is totally absurd. "Take Back America" refers to the hijacking of our freedoms, liberty and culture by an out of control administration.

I was asked to perform at a tea party event. The organizer informed me, "I want to get away from calling the rally a "Tea Party" because the liberal media have made the term negative". I said, "Does this mean you do not want me to sing my "American Tea Party Anthem"? Then, why am I here?" Politeness to my host prevented me from saying, "News flash, pal! The media is going to trash us regardless of what we call our rallies. It's what they do. They are not on our side. Should we keep changing what we call the rallies in hope of finding a name which will cause the media to give us fair coverage"? A million people showed up in Washington DC for the September 12th Taxpayers Rally. The media reported 70,000.

I was interviewed on CNN. During the pre-interview by the young black producer over the phone, he asked me, "Is there any part of Obama's health care plan you like"? I replied, "No". He was stunned. With great shock and disbelief in his voice, the producer repeated my reply with a loud "NO?". Then he abruptly said, "I'll call you back".

News1News posted my CNN interview on YouTube with the following caption, "African American Right Wing (Obama Hating) Singing Tea Bagger, Lloyd Marcus". Folks, I am a Christian and hate no one. But, this is what the media does to those who disagree. All who oppose Obama's agenda are either racist, redneck or stupid.

Folks, the stakes are far too high to allow the Left to continue setting the rules of engagement. The far Left and Obama administration have a vision for America different than our Constitution. As patriots, it is our duty to just say, NO!

My black 82 year old dad told me he has seen the reports on TV how a lot of people at the rallies want Obama dead. I said, "I bet you saw that on CNN". Dad said, "Yes". It infuriates me that CNN is selling the lie that the Tea Party Movement is all about racism and hatred for a black president. While my dad never said anything out loud, I thought, "What must he think of me? Why is his first born siding with these evil white folks against a fine fellow black man?" I replied, "Dad, try watching Fox".

Lloyd Marcus, Black Un-hyphenated American!

Eye Opener

2009-09-28T09:47:00.001-04:00

Here's an eye opener..

I'm not going to take the time to explain these. I think they speak enough for themselves.

Watch the first video and then the 2nd.. notice the resemblance?

Video 1

Video 2

Comment!

Don't Tread On Me- Chuck Norris

2009-09-22T10:04:00.000-04:00

Don't Tread on Me!
by Chuck Norris
09/22/2009
Don't Tread On Me- Chuck Norris

Sept. 12 was an amazing day, as thousands marched on Washington seeking to unite Americans and make a stand against tyranny and oppression. At the same time, the Tea Party Express escorted a number of patriots to the U.S. Capitol to culminate its cross-country rallies.

But what's next? I have an idea.

What I loved about the 9/12 idea is that it was a nonpolitical, nonpartisan movement. The 9-12 Project was designed to bring Americans back to the place where we were Sept. 12, 2001 -- the day after America was attacked by terrorists. We were not concerned then with red states, blue states or political parties. We were united as Americans, standing together to protect our nation.

On Sept. 12, 2001, we sought to protect our nation against terrorists from without. Beginning on Sept. 12, 2009, we are seeking to protect our nation against enemies of our republic from within. Many of us are protesting the present political direction of Washington. Outrageous borrowing, excessive bailouts, massive spending, speedball stimulus plans, universal hell care and swings toward socialism are just a few of the things that were protested that day. Of course, economics is far from America's only problem, as large as it appears to loom.

I want to emphasize: This revolutionary movement is not solely an independent, Republican or Democratic fight. It represents patriots who are fed up against modernists who seek to overturn almost every principle and tenet laid down by our country's Founding Fathers at the inception of our republic. From the East Coast to the "Left Coast," America seems to be moving farther and farther from its Founders' vision and government.

For example, George Washington advised, "The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible." Yet despite presidential campaign promises, we slowly are pulling out of Iraq but are escalating missions in Afghanistan. And the Obama administration also pledged $900 million in U.S. taxpayer-funded aid to Hamas-controlled Gaza and Mahmoud Abbas' Palestinian Authority.

On another front, as I've mentioned before, Thomas Jefferson counseled us, "We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt." Yet the feds have caused our national deficit and debt to skyrocket by trillions of dollars, and they plan much more fiscal expansion, with seemingly few expectations of resistance. Despite the fact that George Washington admonished us that "to contract new debts is not the way to pay for old ones," we keep borrowing and bailing.

Regarding political accountability, Patrick Henry taught that our "Constitution is ... an instrument for the people to restrain the government." Yet Washington politicians trample that founding document by their actions, bypassing its mandates, spinning its words to justify their choices, abandoning its balance of power, and instead using it to accommodate their own desires, partisan politics and runaway spending.

John Adams declared, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people." Yet we've bastardized the First Amendment, reinterpreted America's religious history, denied our Christian heritage, and secularized our society, and now we ooze skepticism and circumvent religion on every level of public and private life.

And sadly, much of this has escalated in a single year, since our new president took office.

It is no surprise, therefore, that "tea parties" have transformed into town hall revolts, cross-country town criers, 9/12 movements, the Tea Party Express and a proliferation of protests on the Internet. Washington can decry all of these as organized partisan resistance, but the fact of the matter is that everyday common citizens and patriots across this country are fed up with the Fed, and they're not going to take it anymore.

As 9/12 concluded, we all heard many ways to keep this revolutionary movement going. But I was sitting back thinking there's one way we can take a daily stand and declare that as for me and my house, we will serve God and the republic as the Founders did.

If that describes you, then I suggest you fly some revolutionary flag in lieu of your 50-star flag over the next year. Post the 13-star Betsy Ross flag, Navy Jack or Gadsden flag ("Don't Tread on Me") or any representation that tells the story of Old Glory and makes a stand for our Founders' vision of America.

Of course, patriots know that the 50-star flag truly represents one nation under God and our Founders' republic, but modernists simply don't get it. So what do you say we make a statement by flying a different flag and educate our neighbors when they ask us, "Why are you flying that flag instead of the contemporary Stars and Stripes?" (If you insist on posting a modern USA flag, too, then get one that is tea-stained to show your solidarity with our Founders.)

Know a few other patriots? Then please pass along this vintage-flag-posting encouragement to them, as well, and make our Founders proud. And let's remind the U.S. government, "Don't tread on me!"

A Man with NO Principles- Obama

2009-09-21T12:18:00.002-04:00

I'm amazed with this man. No, I don't mean with his great ability to speak and move people, I mean with the actual words that comes out of his mouth. Actually no, I'm not amazed. I think disgusted would be a better word.

Obama will be on Letterman tonight. Yep, I said it.. he's on TV again. It's like a bad used car commercial that just won't end.

So, what does Letterman have to do with any of this?

Do you remember when radio show commentator Don Imus made the racist and sexist comment about the basketball players? Barack Obama, as a senator and Presidential candidate, announced that he would not go on his show. Even after Imus apologized, Obama insisted that he should be fired.

Okay, okay. I get it. What Imus did was wrong. Maybe he should have lost his job. But wasn't this in sharp contrast with Obama's thoughts on healing relationships and reconciliation to Iran and North Korea at the time?

Ok, aside from his stance on some of his foreign policy, let's fast forward a little bit to David Letterman. Perhaps you recall his nasty and absurd comments about Sarah Palin and her daughter? Her 14 year old daughter! He said that maybe she got pregnant while at the NY Yankees game. Also, maybe you can remember him referring to Palin as "slutty".

Letterman later apologized and said that he intended it to be directed toward Palin's older daughter. Listen closely and you will hear Letterman doing a tap dance to save his career. He never apologized for calling Palin "slutty".

Regarding the Imus incident, Obama said Imus "didn't just cross the line. He fed into some of the worst stereotypes that my two young daughters are having to deal with today in America.. It was a degrading comment. It's one that I'm not interested in supporting".

Do you recall him saying anything about the Palin's?

So, as you see, there's a bit (and by a bit I mean a lot) of contradiction going on here. What if Letterman had something "slutty" to say about Obama's under age daughters? Perhaps that would change his mind. But instead, he will once again, degrade himself and his character by speaking with his actions and his poor choice of words. His poor character is shining through in this spotlight of the presidency.

A man of great character stands by his beliefs and defends them with dignity and honor. Obama has set double standards in more instances than you and I can count. It's a disgusting site to see. I just wish that someone could hold him accountable for the actions and the moral standards that he has set for our country and our upcoming generations of children.

Obama: Legalize illegals to get them health care

2009-09-18T16:04:00.001-04:00

Obama: Legalize illegals to get them health care
By Stephen Dinan
Friday, September 18, 2009
The Washington Times

President Obama said this week that his health care plan won't cover illegal immigrants, but argued that's all the more reason to legalize them and ensure they eventually do get coverage.

Full story can be found here:
Obama: Legalize illegals to get them health care

The Timeline - Obama's connections to ACORN

2009-09-18T13:30:00.002-04:00

JUST PLAIN NUTS
Unearthed! Obama's twisted ACORN roots
Track timeline of president's ties to group immersed in scandals
Posted: September 18, 2009
12:10 am Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=110131

While ACORN remains riddled in scandal, lawmakers have voted to cut off federal funding to the group, the U.S. Census Bureau has severed ties to the organization – and the White House has blasted its behavior as "unacceptable."

But just how extensive are President Obama's personal ties to ACORN?

The following is a timeline outlining some of the purported connections between the president and ACORN through the years:

More can be found here:

Unearthed! Obama's twisted ACORN roots

Does it Matter if Obama lies too?

2009-09-18T10:56:00.002-04:00

Here is an article from FactCheck.org. It speaks for itself. This is quite amazing, but I digress and will let you make your own opinions. I would also like to point out, that this is not an anti-Obama smashing campaign. Fact check, from what I can gather, is not biased on producing results. There are plenty of articles here debunking myths about just as much right extreme material as there are left extreme material. You won't catch me on either side.. I just want the truth. The truth as it was written in the Constitution.

Obama’s Health Care Speech
We fact-check the president's address to Congress and the nation.
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/obamas-health-care-speech/
September 10, 2009
Corrected: Sept. 16, 2009

President Obama’s prime-time address to Congress and the nation on health care prompted a Republican congressman to shout “you lie!” Did he? Here’s what we’ve found:

* Obama was correct when he said his plan wouldn’t insure illegal immigrants; the House bill expressly forbids giving subsidies to those who are in the country illegally. Conservative critics complain that the bill lacks an enforcement mechanism, but that hardly makes the president a liar.
* The president said “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions.” But the House bill would permit a “public option” to cover all abortions, and would also permit federal subsidies to be used to purchase private insurance that covers all abortions, a point that raises objections from anti-abortion groups. That’s true despite a technical ban on use of taxpayer dollars to pay for abortion coverage.
* The president repeated his promise that his plan won’t add “one dime” to the federal deficit. But legislation offered so far would add hundreds of billions of dollars to the deficit over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
* Obama said his plan won’t “require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have.” It’s true that there’s no requirement, but experts say the legislation could induce employers to switch coverage for millions of workers.

Correction, Sept. 16: We originally reported that Obama had "overstated somewhat the degree of concentration in the insurance industry," but we now have retracted that criticism. For a full discussion of why, please see our Sept. 16 FactCheck Wire post: "Retraction: Health Insurance Market Concentration."
Analysis

The president addressed a joint session of Congress Sept. 9, and the event was televised nationally.

Illegal Immigrants

Obama said that his proposal would not cover illegal immigrants, a remark that prompted Republican Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina to shout "You lie!"

Obama: There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.

The president is correct: The House bill contains a section (Sec. 246) titled "NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS," which states: "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."

However, conservative critics object to a lack of specific enforcement measures in the bill. They argue that the lack of a specific verification mechanism constitutes a loophole that would allow illegal immigrants to get benefits despite the legal prohibition. Republican Rep. Dean Heller of Nevada proposed an amendment to the bill that would have required the use of the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements program to check the citizenship of anyone applying for federal coverage or affordability credits. SAVE is the program used by Medicaid and similar entitlement programs. That amendment was voted down along party lines by the House Ways and Means Committee.

Republicans have a point here: More could be done to enforce the ban. But it’s worth remembering that, as a spokesperson for the American Immigration Lawyers Association told us, attempting to get a health care credit would have legal repercussions. "Making a fraudulent claim to an entitlement program when you’re not actually entitled to it would have serious consequences for any person," the spokesperson told us, "but especially if it’s considered a false claim to citizenship, that would have serious immigration consequences that could ultimately lead to deportation." And Rep. Wilson certainly was out of bounds to call the president’s statement a "lie." He later issued a statement apologizing for his "inappropriate and regrettable" comments.

Abortion

The president insisted that no federal money would pay for abortions:

Obama: [U]nder our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions.

The truth of that depends on what is meant by “federal dollars.” Actually, as we’ve written before, under Democratic legislation now before Congress, the “public option” would cover abortions in cases of rape, incest or threat to the life of the mother and could cover all abortions if the administration chooses, and as Obama once promised. Private insurance plans purchased with the help of federal subsidies to low- and moderate-income workers also could cover all abortions, as many, if not most, private plans do today.

Under an amendment adopted by a House committee, abortions would be paid for by the "public option" only with money collected from policyholders in the form of premiums, not with money collected from taxpayers. But is money collected by the government and paid out to abortion providers by the government “federal dollars"? The anti-abortion side says yes. And the same goes for federal subsidies given to low- and moderate-income persons to help them buy insurance. If they use those dollars to buy private policies that cover all abortions, does that mean “federal dollars” go to fund abortions? Again, abortion foes say yes.

The advocates of abortion rights argue otherwise. They say the House bill would be an extension of longstanding policy under the Hyde amendment, which forbids use of federal taxpayer dollars to fund Medicaid abortions except in cases of rape, incest or threat to the mother’s life, but also allows states to use their own Medicaid money to fund other abortions (and 17 of them do). In any case, the matter is not so simple or clear as the president would like it to seem.

Deficit-Neutral

The president repeated his promise to fully pay for the plan.

Obama: I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits – either now or in the future. Period.

Up until now, that’s been a promise in search of fulfillment. As we reported earlier, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has found that Democratic plans in the House and Senate both would add hundreds of billions of dollars to the federal deficit over the coming decade.

In his speech, the president reduced the price tag, saying "the plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years." That’s about $100 billion less than what the CBO said the House bill would cost. And the president embraced a tax on expensive employer-paid health plans, something he’s resisted in the past. He also said there will be a provision in this plan that "requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don’t materialize."

But it remains to be seen whether the CBO’s budget experts will agree that the plan would be fully paid for. For that, they’ll need to see more specific details.

"Public Option"

The president misstated a few details on the proposed "public option":

Obama: It would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance. No one would be forced to choose it, and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance.

In fact, under the House bill, the new federal plan would be open to anybody who buys insurance on his or her own, whether or not the person currently has coverage. It also would be open to employees of small businesses, defined in the House bill as those with no more than 20 employees, whether or not those employees are currently covered by another plan. It’s true that the "public option" is aimed at the uninsured, but they wouldn’t be the "only" ones who could buy it.

It is true, as Obama said, that "no one would be forced to choose it." But experts say that it might well have an "impact" on some of those who currently have insurance. Obama noted that "based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5 percent of Americans would sign up" for the federal plan. The CBO did say that only 11 million to 12 million Americans would join the public plan under the original House bill. But estimates from the Lewin Group, a subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group that says it operates with editorial independence, were higher, at 33.6 million. Lewin’s estimate triples when it looks at what might happen if the federal plan were available to everyone, a possibility the House bill leaves open. The House bill as amended by the Energy and Commerce Committee, however, sets up a "public option" that won’t affect nearly as many people. The CBO estimates that an insignificant number would switch under that plan, and Lewin’s estimate drops to 20.6 million, if the plan were open to all.

Choosing Words Carefully

Some of the president’s factual claims, while accurate, were notable for his careful wording.

Obama: There are now more than 30 million American citizens who cannot get coverage.

“Citizens” is the operative word here. And even so, the 30 million figure is an understatement. The official Census figure for 2007 was actually 45.7 million persons in the U.S., but that figure includes an estimated 10 million who are not U.S. citizens, including 5.6 million who are here illegally, according to the National Institute for Health Care Management Foundation. That still leaves about 35.7 million U.S. citizens without health coverage in 2007, well above the president’s figure. And hours after the president spoke, Census released new figures for 2008, showing the total number of uninsured went up slightly, to 46.3 million.

Obama: [N]othing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have.

It’s true that no Democratic legislation would “require” workers or employers to change coverage, though some existing plans may have to be upgraded to meet new federal minimum standards if, for example, they fail to cover preventative screenings.

Obama has become more cautious in his wording since an Aug. 15 appearance when he said "if you like your health care plan, you keep your health care plan." That won’t always be true. In fact, as we noted at the time, some firms are likely to buy different coverage for their workers than they have now, or simply drop coverage and pay a penalty instead, leaving workers to buy their own private coverage or go on a new federal insurance plan. The CBO estimated that 3 million who now have employer-provided coverage would lose it under the House bill, as their employers find that paying the penalty is cheaper than providing coverage. The CBO also said these employers would likely have lower-wage employees eligible for federal subsidies to help them purchase insurance.

Obama: [Republicans] just this year supported a budget that would essentially have turned Medicare into a privatized voucher program.

We slammed the Democratic National Committee for running an ad that said Republicans voted to "abolish Medicare." The president was talking about the same vote, and characterized it much more accurately. The budget resolution supported by most House Republicans would have preserved the current system for everybody age 55 or over, but when younger workers reached retirement age they would have been given a choice of government-approved private insurance plans and a government subsidy to pay most of the premiums.

However, Obama continued to make one factual claim we have repeatedly found to be wrong:

Obama: [T]hose of us with health insurance are also paying a hidden and growing tax for those without it – about $1,000 per year that pays for somebody else’s emergency room and charitable care.

That figure comes from a study by Families USA estimating the effect on premiums of uncompensated care, which is care that is provided to the uninsured but not paid for. But that group advocates vigorously for wider government health coverage.The figure is not supported by the Kaiser Family Foundation or the Congressional Budget Office. Both have reported that uncompensated care actually leads to lower hospital profits, not higher premiums. KFF’s estimate of the amount of uncompensated care shifted to premium-payers works out to about $200 per family per year, not $1,000.

Overall, Obama got good marks for clarity and accuracy from at least one expert who’s sometimes been critical. John Sheils, senior vice president of the Lewin Group, which has analyzed the House bill and health care proposals, told us that there was “a lot of stuff you could quibble with” in the president’s speech, but overall he was “impressed” with the way Obama explained a “hugely complicated issue.” “I think in the main of it, I think he did pretty well.”

– by Brooks Jackson, Jess Henig, D’Angelo Gore and Lori Robertson
Sources

U.S. House Ways and Means Committee. "Heller Amendment to H.R. 3200." (as introduced 16 Jul 2009).

"Joe Wilson says outburst to Obama speech ’spontaneous.‘" CNN. 10 Sep 2009.

Families USA. "Hidden Health Tax: Americans Pay a Premium." May 2009

Hadley, Jack et al. "Covering the Uninsured in 2008: A Detailed Examination of Current Costs and Sources of Payment, and Incremental Costs of Expanding Coverage." Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured. Aug. 2008.

Elmendorf, Douglas W. "Expanding Health Insurance Coverage and Controlling Costs for Health Care." Testimony before the Committee on the Budget, United States Senate. 10 Feb 2009.

Smith, Lamar. "Healthcare scheme would benefit illegal immigrants." The Hill. 3 Aug. 2009.

"White House Radio Address Continues Pattern of Distortions on Health Care Bill." Press release. Office of Rep. Lamar Smith. 25 Aug. 2009.

Government Accountability Office. "Private Health Insurance: 2008 Survey Results on Number and Market Share of Carriers in the Small Group Health Insurance Market." 27 Feb 2008.

U.S. Census Bureau. "Health Insurance Coverage Status and Type of Coverage by State and Age for All People: 2008." Accessed 10 Sep 2009.

Mackin, KoKo, BlueCross BlueShield of Alabama. Interview with FactCheck.org. 10 Sep 2009.

U.S. House. "H.R. 3200." (as introduced 14 Jul 2009.)

Congressional Budget Office. Letter to Rep. Charles B. Rangel. 17 Jul 2009.

Congressional Budget Office. Letter to Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. 2 Jul 2009.

Congressional Budget Office. Letter to Rep. Dave Camp. 26 Jul 2009.

Sheils, John and Randy Haught. “Cost and Coverage Impacts of the American Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009.” Lewin Group. 27 Jul 2009, amended 31 Jul 2009.

Sheils, John and Randy Haught. “The Cost and Coverage Impacts of a Public Plan: Alternative Design Options.” Lewin Group, 6 Apr 2009.

National Right to Life. "Obama Says ‘Government Funding of Abortion’ is ‘Fabrication,’
But the White House-Backed House Bill Explicitly Authorizes It." press release. 19 Aug 2009.

Capps amendment to H.R. 3200. House Energy and Commerce Committee. 30 Jul 2009.

NARAL Pro-Choice America. "The Truth About Abortion and Health Reform." Blog for Choice. 14 Aug 2009.

White House Begins to Shy away from ACORN

2009-09-17T19:59:00.001-04:00

Wow, what a headline. I am glad to see it. But one question comes to mind. What took so long?

-ACORN CEO, Bertha Lewis, says the videos released at BigGovernment.com were doctored and dubbed over. However, she fires those employees and says their behavior was "indefensible". Yet she will pursue legal action against these individuals, and FOX news.

-She also claims that James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles visited dozens and dozens more ACORN offices and were kicked out. They both deny the claims, and James says he has all receipts from his travels and will post them online.

-James’s receipts total approximately $1300 and the organization and mainstream media outlets have claimed that he has spent millions and even a hundred million dollars on these video sting operations.

-The senate has voted with a whopping 83-7 majority vote to end federal funding to ACORN.

-All ties have been cut with ACORN for next year's 2010 national census.

-Just 3 days ago, Charlie Gibson, ABC reporter, claimed he didn't know about this ongoing investigation and scandal.

The list can go on and on, until I would be tired of writing and you tired of reading it. It's almost more information than be sorted and comprehended.

My Point is this. Just yesterday, the White House decided to comment. Of course, through the voice of Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, of who should have won "America's Got Talent" last night with the professional tap dance routine that he is so well known for.

This has been going on for nearly two weeks, TWO WEEKS! So, I raise one primary question. What took so long?

After all, it is my money they are using, right? Shouldn't I have a right to ask that question? I mean, I am a working taxpayer, that a pays a non-profit organization to give my money to other organizations who push their own propaganda in door to door campaigns. Read a little bit about the New York based "Working Family Party".

Did it just take them that long to figure out what to say? Surely ACORN is not corrupt. Surely, money laundering business founders such as the Rathke brothers wouldn't build an organization to benefit themselves, would they? Will Obama say SEIU again? Oh wait; they are the ones helping draft this new and wonderful health care bill. In case you missed it, the Rathke brothers started the SEIU and ACORN.

Ok, so maybe I am being a bit rash here. I'm sure Obama knew what he wanted Mr. Gibbs to say. He just had to make a few phone calls to some of the "people I surround myself with". Will Obama throw these contacts under the bus and cut ties under the pressure of the raging tax payer population? Don't hold your breath. Or better yet, take a deep breath now, because the smoke and mirrors are rolling onto the stage.

You know, you're right. Maybe that was a bit over the top as well. Maybe the problem was that he just could not bring himself to say that FOX News was right. Was Gibbs admitting that FOX news had gotten something right? Do you think the White house is thankful that all of this corruption could be uncovered? It seems that they would be. But that's not how it works. FOX is not trying to hide anything. When a story breaks, it breaks; unless the main stream media hides it of course. Obama hid behind the ones that guarded him for as long as he could, the mainstream media. Now that the pressure has become too great, and on the same day the story broke in ALL of the media outlets, the White House too, decided it was time to speak. Are you choking on that smoke yet?

I think Obama and the White house owe a big thank you to Mr. O'Keefe and Ms Giles. That would be the morally correct thing to do anyways. But, that is another story.

Do you think this is the only story that FOX has gotten right? Surely not. Surely, somewhere in all of that far right extremist corrupt broadcasting organization, there has been another truth. Well, I say to all of you that think this, the numbers don't lie.

This courtesy of: http://tvbythenumbers.com/category/ratings/cable-news

Live + Same Day Cable News Daily Ratings for September 15, 2009
FOX News 25-54 Primetime demo of 928k nearly equals combined competition’s demo of 933k.

P2+ Total Day
FNC – 1,640,000 viewers
CNN – 610,000 viewers
MSNBC –462,000 viewers
CNBC – 186,000 viewers
HLN – 321,000 viewers

P2+ Prime Time
FNC – 3,426,000viewers
CNN— 1,044,000 viewers
MSNBC –1,164,000 viewers
CNBC – a scratch w/113,000 viewers
HLN – 643,000viewers

Can you see that FOX news has nearly triple the amount of viewers? This trend has been true as far back as I could research. Those are facts. There is nothing smoky going on here. However, I guess you could also say that 85% of the population is wrong in being worried about paying for the 15% who do not have health care. Better yet, maybe 85% are just racist.

Stand up against this madness, America.

Let's Praise Him-- or NOT!

2009-09-15T15:46:00.000-04:00

I would like to point out one something small for you to think about. I'm attaching a video for you to see. It is of Obama's health care speech last week. It's not necessary to watch very long. I just want you to watch starting at the 38 second mark and stop at the 45 second mark.

What did you see? Did you see what I did? Did you see many people clapping? of course you did. But, what stood out? Did you see the man raising his hand?

Where else have you seen this happen? What does it remind you of? Does it remind you of something you would see inside a religious place of worship? have you seen people raise their hand in worship before?

That's what I see and that's what I don't like. That scares me. That threatens me. I don't like it.

He is a man, a mortal man that has a closet probably full of many more skeletons than you can count. You do not know the truth and for this type of worshiping to happen is sickening. It sickens me to the pits of my stomach.

Understanding 'Angry Mobs'

2009-09-15T11:42:00.002-04:00

This is an amazing article that I ran across. The author, Mike Grady, does an excellent job of articulating his points in a way that just come across so clearly. Please take the time to read this. Included with the article, is my response to him thanking him for such fine words. As always, comments are encouraged.

September 15, 2009
Understanding 'Angry Mobs'
By Mike Grady

Liberals are having difficulty understanding the grass roots opposition to President Obama's plans for the government takeover of the health care industry, as well as the President's loss of support since his election. Equally disconcerting to liberals was the massive turnout on September 12th to protest a Federal government that is too big, too intrusive, and far too corrupt. As one who attended the September 12th rally at the Capitol, let me offer liberals the following explanation for what is happening.

Legendary football coach Vince Lombardi said, "Fatigue makes cowards out of all of us." And what are the American people these days if not fatigued? Bombarded with bad news from the 24-hour news cycle, is it any wonder that the American people are exhausted? Consider a few examples.

An estimated fifty trillion dollars or more in investor wealth is lost in a matter of weeks in the stock market collapse. Meanwhile a few speculators, Wall Street executives, and maybe even some of America's own politicians make out like bandits. The result is that the American people rightly wonder why they should bother to work hard, put money in a 529 college fund, a 401(k) retirement plan, or save for a new car if it can all be wiped away in the blink of an eye. And Americans are fatigued.

Americans are told the H1N1 swine flu virus is coming and there is little they can do to protect themselves. And Americans are scared.

A young girl is kidnapped and held captive for 18 years, repeatedly raped, made to live in a tent, and forced to be a mother to two children when she was still a child herself. Americans wonder how they can possibly protect their children from such evil. And Americans are afraid.

The Associated Press publishes a photograph of a heroic young Marine taken while he lay dying on a battlefield far from home, ignoring pleas from the young Marine's parents, the United States Marine Corps, and requests from the Secretary of Defense not to publish the photo. Concurrently, op-ed pieces in any number of news publications detail how the war in Afghanistan is lost, or that no matter the outcome, confronting America's enemies can't possibly be worth the sacrifice anyway. As a consequence, the American people question their commitment to confront Islamic terrorism and their solemn duty to pursue America's enemies far from her shores. And Americans are drained.

Medicare and Medicaid, to say nothing of Social Security, are bankrupt and the American people are told the only hope to sustain them is to accept yet another government-run healthcare program that promises even greater encroachment on their most personal freedoms. And if the American people dare to object, their own elected officials and broadcasters on the evening news label them Nazis, Brown Shirts, racists, and right-wing domestic terrorists. And the American people are shattered.

The list of attacks on the American conscience is endless. There is no doubt that the American people are fatigued and as Vince Lombardi well knew, fatigue makes cowards of us all. More importantly however, it is cowardice that the Left relies on to impose its will.

The American people have endured a decades-long effort to discredit their values and belief system and relentless attempts to make them believe their history is worthy of ridicule. The mugging began years ago with attacks on Judeo-Christian values and accusations of intolerance. It continues today with the President giving speeches overseas decrying American excess, ignorance, and arrogance, and culminates at home with political infighting over outrageous borrowing and spending by the members of Congress. Now with majorities in both the House and the Senate and control of the White House, liberals believe the ultimate goal to fundamentally change the Nation (or destroy it in the process) is finally within reach.

In the nick of time however, the American people have shaken off their shared fatigue. Try as they might, the majority of the American people simply cannot reconcile their own view of America with the views of liberals who want to radically change the Nation. In spite of the Left's efforts to convince them otherwise, the American people know without question that the United States has been the greatest force for good the world has ever known. Americans know that a strong, albeit imperfect, America isn't just good for Americans, but for the rest of the world as well.

More Americans are wiser now too and many now recognize the tactics the Left will employ to advance their agenda. More Americans finally understand that Leftists will refuse to argue the facts and will never accept responsibility for their own policies. For example, they will never acknowledge that crime, abortion, out of wedlock births, welfare claims, drug use, and a countless list of other social ills occur most often in areas where Democrats have had a lock on the political landscape for decades. When challenged, liberals will do their best to change the subject. Anyone who disagrees with liberal objectives will be shouted out of the room or otherwise intimidated. Ultimately, anyone who opposes the liberal agenda will be labeled a racist, a Nazi, or worse.

It is a formidable defense that Americans have been reluctant to engage, but they have had enough. From the financial meltdown to bailouts, from stimulus packages, to TARP, TARP II, and TARP III, from Cap and Trade to health care reform, the American people have had it with corrupt government. And they know too that the endless stream of "news" that inundates their daily lives is a deliberate attempt to beat them down.

After decades of abuse at the hands of the Left, the American people can clearly see the great and gathering political storm on the horizon. Two opposing forces will collide and the outcome will be critical to the future of America. On one side there is a corrupt, elitist political machine, the embodiment of politics in America. On the other side are the troubled, but still free people of the United States of America. The growing opposition to all things government is America's recognition that it requires courage, not cowardice, to preserve freedom. That liberals either cannot, or do not want to see it coming speaks to their willingness to believe that if Americans are fatigued enough, they will lack the courage to fight back against a Leftist agenda.

The electorate is weary from the unceasing attacks on the American sense of right and wrong. But make no mistake; the American people will rest to clear their collective head. While resting, perhaps Americans will further befuddle their liberal tormentors and take comfort in the words from the book of Psalms, Chapter 3, a suggestion that prior to the liberal ambush of American values would have been considered mainstream.

Lord, so many are against me. So many seek to harm me. I have so many enemies. So many say that God will never help me. But Lord, you are my shield, my glory, and my only hope. You alone can lift my head, now bowed in shame.

Then I lay down and slept in peace and woke up safely, for the Lord was watching over me. And now, although ten thousand enemies surround me on every side, I am not afraid.

The Psalms isn't meant to be a gratuitous biblical reference, but rather is meant to serve notice that Americans no longer care what politicians and a complicit media think of them. Americans are among the most benevolent people on earth, but they are tired of being mocked and lampooned for deeply held opinions and beliefs. Instinctively, Americans have always embraced their solemn duty to fight for freedom. Not easily provoked and slow to anger, the American people have always fought for what is right once called into action. It should therefore come as no surprise to anyone, least of all liberals that Americans are protesting in waves.

What politicians in general and liberals in particular don't understand is that no matter how fatigued Americans might be, Coach Lombardi's paradigm simply does not apply. Fatigued? Yes of course, many times and perhaps even still. But never have the American people been cowards. Elitist politicians don't understand what is happening because they don't want to understand it. Whether they figure it out in time to save their own political hides, or not, is immaterial. The political storm is gathering. When it hits, my money will be on the American people.

---------

Mr Grady,

This is one of the finest articles I have read in quite some time. It was truly refreshing and spot on to how I feel in the pits of my stomach. As so many have said, it is not about left or right, Democrats and republicans. I am pointing out the corrupt one on all sides and WE need to come together to end this. I am excited to see such a banning together from every day people just like myself and I believe it is time that us "everyday people" take back our country. Once again, a great thanks to you and the points you were able to dissect within this article.

Brad
http://treadonthis.blogspot.com

9/12: The Revolution Has Begun

2009-09-15T11:08:00.000-04:00

9/12: The Revolution Has Begun
by Chris Burgard
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/cburgard/2009/09/14/912-the-revolution-has-begun/

What began on the border in 2005 has spread to DC and every state in the union. The Revolution isn’t coming, it is here. Call it the Constitution Revolution. The genie is out of the bottle and there will be no putting her back in.

I spent all day yesterday up and down Pennsylvania Avenue with people from all over the Union. One guy I met had 45 autographs on his t-shirt from people from 45 states. He only needed 5 more to make it a day.

The mainstream media has reported the rally as anti-Obama or anti-government, both are partially true, but I believe that pro-Constitution would be much more accurate. Pro-Constitution and polite. This was more than a peaceful demonstration. I never heard so many excuse mes and thankyous in my life, and not a drop of litter to be found.

There was some anger yesterday, there was a lot of frustration, but mostly there was a multitude of Americans determined to have their voices heard. I am talking about people of all colors. I am talking about people with long hair, short hair, Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Libertarians, conservatives, cops, teachers,college students, grandmas, grandpas, great grandmas, moms, dads and kids.

The frustration demonstrated yesterday has been building for longer than nine months. What do the people want? They want the Federal Government to listen to the will of the people. They want the Federal Government to stick to the Constitution. They want the Federal Government to Keep the Czars in Russia.

When I filmed “Border,” I was afraid that the greatest threat to the future of our country was apathy. Those fears were completely swept away by what I experienced yesterday. But the fresh new hope that surged through all of us was tempered by the MSM media reports that we began hearing as soon as we left the Capitol.

I was hit with a nauseating wave of déjà vu. I had a flashback to when I was in Honduras, when a couple hundred Marxist revolutionaries and pro-Zelaya supporters demonstrated and the next day it was on the front page of newspapers around the world. But put one hundred thousand Constitutionalists in the streets of Tegucigalpa and it won’t make U.S. news at eleven.

When we first arrived at yesterday’s demonstration, CNN was reporting that 30,000 people were expected. By the afternoon FOX news was reporting 60,000. The Saturday evening newscasts all said that “thousands” of people had turned out. Later they updated to “tens of thousands.”

At the rally, at noon on Saturday, we began hearing that DC police estimates were 1.2 million. I could not confirm that with any of the DC police officers that I spoke with. However, I did speak with a retired NYPD Sergeant towards the end of the day, he had a significant background in crowd control, including the evacuation of Manhattan on 9/11. This Sergeant put the number between 1.4 and 1.6 million.

The London Daily Mail would later put the number at 2 million. For the better part of two hours we saw Pennsylvania Avenue packed with humanity walking towards the Capitol Building. For the longest time it seemed like an unending river of humanity. Fourteen blocks of streaming individuals!!

I ducked under police tape blocks away from the Capitol Building. Police officers immediately stopped me. I told them that I was press. The officers said that they didn’t care. I was told, “Get back. The venue is full.” They wouldn’t guess at how large the crowds were, but it was clear that they were stunned by the size of the turnout.

Where I stood, thousands of people were being turned back. I had to go around the demonstration to make my way closer to the steps of the Capitol.

I don’t know how many people were there. Maybe satellite photos will later give us an accurate count, but I would estimate that 90 percent of the demonstrators never even saw the event stage. Possibly 50 percent of the crowd never even got close enough to the remote speakers to hear what was being said.

No one cared. They didn’t come to hear the VIP speakers, they came to be with other Americans. They came because this is their house.

I couldn’t help but wonder what President Obama was thinking as he flew over us in Marine One on his way to Minnesota.

As I looked out down from the balcony of a twelfth story Pennsylvania Avenue apartment, our host told me that in all of her decades in DC, she had never seen anything like this.

Either the entire corps of the Mainstream Media are entirely incompetent or they are complicit in propaganda of the greatest proportions. Do not be fooled.

Robert Gibbs said on Friday that the White House was unaware of the rally… he didn’t know who this group was.

Mr. Gibbs, this is not a group. These are the American people, and they came here to remind you that you work for them.

All day long, I saw people pushing strollers. I saw people on crutches and in wheelchairs. But the image that will stick with me the longest was when I saw an elderly woman, possibly near 80 years old, lying in the middle of Pennsylvania Avenue. She was seizing very badly. She had walked almost a mile in the DC heat, but her body just couldn’t take it. Her elderly sister looked on as the paramedics worked on her. I don’t know if she made it, but she was a patriot.

I will put her courage and commitment up against the arrogance of the political elite any day.

There is nothing stronger on this planet than the united will of the American people. Yesterday this nation turned a corner. The American people have awakened, and they want their country back.

Photos taken by Barbara Auchter

Lions, Tigers, and Czars- Oh my?!?

2009-09-14T11:59:00.009-04:00

I'm gonna give a short lesson here on the US Government and how it maintains itself on checks and balances. This lesson goes back to early elementary school, but it's not a common thing for most of us to think about, so I will describe it here. I will then use that foundation to discuss what a Czar is and what having Czars means to you.

Our government was founded on a document knows as The Constitution. Based on the guidelines of this constitution, we have 3 branches of government. Each have their own responsibilities of which include keeping the other two branches in line by a means of checks and balances.

This is it in a nutshell.

The framers wrote the Constitution wanted to provide for a separation of powers, or three separate branches of government. Each has its own responsibilities and at the same time they work together to make the country run smoothly and to assure that the rights of citizens are not ignored or disallowed. This is done through checks and balances. A branch may use its powers to check the powers of the other two in order to maintain a balance of power among the three branches of government.

Legislative- The legislative branch of government is made up of the Congress and government agencies, such as the Government Printing Office and Library of Congress, that provide assistance to and support services for the Congress. Article I of the Constitution established this branch and gave Congress the power to make laws. Congress has two parts, the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Executive- The executive branch of Government makes sure that the laws of the United States are obeyed. The President of the United States is the head of the executive branch of government. This branch is very large so the President gets help from the Vice President, department heads (Cabinet members), and heads of independent agencies.

* President: Leader of the country and commands the military.
* Vice President: President of the Senate and becomes President if the President can
no longer do the job.
* Departments: Department heads advise the President on issues and help carry out
policies.
* Independent Agencies: Help carry out policy or provide special services.

Judicial- The judicial branch of government is made up of the court system. The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land. Article III of the Constitution established this Court and all other Federal courts were created by Congress. Courts decide arguments about the meaning of laws, how they are applied, and whether they break the rules of the Constitution.

Now, why am I talking about Czars and what does a Czar have to do with any of this? A Czar is appointed by the president. He or she is appointed to oversee a certain industry or topic of great importance. For instance, we have science czars, health care czars, etc.

A Czar is not elected by the people. A Czar does not answer to any of these three branches of government. A Czar only answers to the President. Obama has appointed 34 Czars to date.

Might I add, the term Czar comes from old Soviet Russia. These Czars are "Political Officers." In the old Soviet Union, they were called Commissars. Might I also add, we now have more Czars than the Soviet Union ever had.

Some lawmakers and outside experts fear that Obama is setting up a system that is not subject to congressional oversight and creates the potential for conflict among his many advisers.

Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) became concerned enough to send a cautionary letter to Obama last week. At times, he said, past White House staffers have assumed duties that should be the responsibility of officials cleared through the Senate confirmation process. He cited President Bush's naming of homeland security czar Tom Ridge as an example. "They rarely testify before congressional committees and often shield the information and decision-making process behind the assertion of executive privilege," Byrd wrote of past czars and White House staffers in similar positions. At times, he said, one outcome has been to "inhibit openness and transparency, and reduce accountability. The rapid and easy accumulation of power by White House staff can threaten the constitutional system of checks and balances," Byrd said.

The Executive Branch of government is organized into a hierarchy from the top down, by departments (Treasury, Defense, etc). Each department functions under the direction of an executive, referred to as a "Secretary," who is confirmed by the Senate. The appointments of these Czars changes the fundamental structure of the Executive Branch into a matrix structure. The czars have political power across all of the departments within the Executive Branch. They speak for Obama and their function is to ensure compliance with Obama's policies within the Executive Branch.

The American People don't know who most of these Czars are. Do you know who they are? They've had no background checks. There is no Congressional oversight over the Czars, unlike a Cabinet position. They are appointed by Obama and are extraordinarily powerful, simply because they take their direction from and report directly to Obama.

Do you know how much money they make? We don't know how many tax-payer dollars they oversee. We don't know how large their staffs are. We don't know how much power they wield.

Where are the checks and balances America? Where are they?

As I have said so many times before, it's corruption in disguise. It must be unmasked and it MUST be stopped. People, I get fired up about this, I admit. I talk about it to everyone. Some people hate me for it and some people love me for it. But the truth has to be told.. people need to be educated on the facts and have their eyes opened to what is happening. Please talk about this to co-workers and neighbors and spread it. It's not about left and right and Dem vs Rep. It's about truth and fighting for our rights! I'm only pointing fingers at the corrupt ones no matter their color, race or party.

Let's end this corruption and get our country back!

Joe Wilson: The Answer to Your Question Is "Yes"

2009-09-14T10:24:00.004-04:00

Another great explanation and take on why Obamacare is a disaster. This is a great article with very clear thinking. Enjoy..

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/09/14/joe-wilson-the-answer-to-your
Joe Wilson: The Answer to Your Question Is "Yes"
By William Tucker on 9.14.09 @ 6:09AM

It's remarkable that in the whole brouhaha about Joe Wilson shouting "You lie!" at President Obama's assertion that illegal immigrant won't be covered by Obamacare, no one has pursued the question, "Who's right?"

So here's the answer. Yes, illegal immigrants will be covered for Obamacare. Or rather, "Illegal immigrants may be legally ineligible for Obamacare, but they'll get covered anyway."

How do we know this? Because it will be in the interest of all the players -- doctors, hospitals, any other care provider, social workers, immigration lawyers, plus the immigrants themselves -- to get them into the system. The only people opposed will be some bean-counting bureaucrat in Washington or some crazed Republican who worries about the future of the country. These interests will be distant and abstract and will count for little. All the institutional momentum will say, "Give them coverage." It will be like water flowing downhill.

Here's an example of how it will work. Ten years ago my nephew, who grew up in Holland, moved to New York City with his pregnant French wife. He was an American citizen, she was not. Neither had ever lived in this country. They didn't know Medicaid from the medicine cabinet, but the first time they visited the gynecologist, he signed them up for New York's generous Medicaid benefits. My nephew had a good education but didn't yet have a job and was still getting money from his parents. No matter, he was eligible. Medicaid paid the entire costs of the delivery.

Within a few months he had a job and a year later he was making so much money that they decided to move to New Jersey to get away from New York City taxes. It was a perfect exploitation of New York City's welfare system. My nephew is a strong conservative and libertarian and became quite embarrassed about it years later when he understood what had happened, but I told him not to feel bad. The system was designed to be exploited. The doctors and hospitals were eager to have him on Medicaid because they wanted to be paid themselves. They didn't want to have to worry about whether he would find a job or whether his parents would continue to pick up the bills. Medicaid is what economists call a "common pool."

Common pool resources are the dread of all economists but the delight of everyone else, since everyone figures they can take out more than they put in. Back at the dawn of the Environmental Era, Garrett Hardin defined environmental degradation as a common-pool problem. In a famous 1968 essay, "The Tragedy of the Commons," Hardin used the chronically overgrazed Medieval sheep commons as a model for the exploitation of commonly held resources like air and water. "Private property, or something formally like it," Hardin wrote, was the solution to environmental problems. (This was before environmentalists themselves began exploiting the common-pool resources of the American landscape by littering it with ugly windmills and solar collectors.)

The same logic works with health insurance. If coverage is provided by private insurers who have an interest in their own survival, they will maintain control of the system and exploitation will be limited. But if the federal government aggregates everybody into one big common pool, then everybody will think healthcare is "free" and nobody will have any stake in monitoring the system. The government itself will simply borrow or print money in order to win the favor of voters by maintaining the illusion that the system is sustainable. The tragedy of the commons becomes inevitable.

Obamacare and all socialized medicine schemes are an effort to turn health spending into one gigantic common pool. The rule of thumb about common pools is the bigger the pool, the harder it is to monitor and the easier it is for everyone to take all they can get while contributing as little as they can. As Frederic Bastiat put it in the 19th century, "Government is the mythical entity whereby everyone tries to live off the efforts of everyone else."

This is what has happened with Social Security. When it was invented in 1936, Social Security as a way of allowing people to retire at age 65 at a time when the average American lived until 66. Today the average American lives to 79 but people can start collecting at age 59 and may go on collecting for thirty years. Hardly anyone puts in as much as they take out. That is why the system is on course to run out of money in 2037, leaving unfunded liabilities of $10 trillion. Medicare is in even worse shape, projected to go into the red in 2017 with unfunded liabilities of $40 trillion, more than three times today's gross domestic product. Already Social Security and Medicare absorb one-third of federal revenues. By 2040 they may swallow everything.

The bizarre thing is that Obama and the gang think they can solve these problems by creating a bigger pool! Democrats continuously cite the impending Medicare implosion as "the reason we need healthcare reform."

But all Obamacare will assure is that all the individual players -- doctors, patients, hospitals, major corporations eager to dump their health benefits onto the federal government, social workers on a mission to help the poor, immigration lawyers dispensing justice -- will all be working to game the system, including getting illegal immigrants on the rolls. After all, doesn't making the hospitals treat uninsured illegal immigrants just add to their costs? Wouldn't it be cheaper to include them as well? Just to anticipate a bit, "If we can provide full medical to terrorists in Guantanamo, why can't we provide it to hard-working illegal immigrants."

During the New York City financial crises, a woman wrote a letter to the Daily News defending the city. "God bless New York City," she wrote. "I grew up in New York City and the City provided us with everything. It gave us housing, it gave us welfare, it gave us unemployment insurance, it gave me a free education at City College. People say New York is too generous but all I can say is 'God Bless New York City.'" The woman lived in Teaneck, New Jersey.

That's the way common pools work. Take all you can and then get out before it comes time to make your contribution. Only this time the stakes will be even higher. If Medicare has created a chasm the size of Grand Canyon in the federal budget, Obamacare promises to be a meteor crater as wide and as deep as the United States of America.

Watch and Learn

2009-09-13T09:43:00.001-04:00

The 9/12 Project

2009-09-12T18:02:00.006-04:00

First off, I want to send a big thank you to Glenn Beck. I applaud his courage to stand and speak against so much opposition. It was his idea to bring together the people of our great country and take a stand. People listened, people agreed, and the people made it happen. It was a single idea, from a single man with a platform to speak to all of us but MANY not only listened, but felt it important enough to come together for a cause. Many have felt the same and just didn't know where to go to have their voice heard. Hundreds of thousands of voices of everyday Americans spoke loudly today.

What is it that we were speaking out against? Was it Obama? Was it the Republicans or Democrats?

If you believe that, you are sadly mistaken.

I think everyone was there to speak out against CORRUPTION!

We were speaking out against spending, against Czars in having authority over issues that we did not elect; against Robin Hood type tactics that take my hard earned dollar and gives it to the one that works less than I do. You know that I could go on and on.

What I want to say is that I want a future for our country and I want it to be bright. I want it to be bright for my children and grandchildren. I want the American dream to live on and I want my success to be my own and I want to admit when I have failed and try again. I do not need your help. I do not need his help. I do not need my government to help. The only thing the government can do to help us all, is BUTT OUT. I can't stand the thought of my car, my home, my healthcare, and maybe even my paycheck coming from the government, and I have NO choice. How can we prosper when there is no success? How will healthcare companies continue to compete when they can't beat the government? How will car companies continue on when they can't compete with the government? How will hospitals and private health institutions continue on when they can't compete with the government?

Did you know that it took just over 400 days for the Empire State building to be built in New York? Did you know that this was accomplished in 1931? The Hoover Dam was built in just over 5 years. Did you know that it has been over 8 years since our World Trade Center towers have fallen.. and we have not answered the call to rebuild them? Is this the America that you know? Is this the America that leads the way in science, education, technology, and ingenuity? Why can't we build the most affordable and most fuel efficient car in the world? Why can't we build a tower in New York that would shadow the old World Trade Centers? Why can't we run self sufficiently inside our own borders? Why is everything made in China, Mexico, Taiwan, Japan, etc?

Because of corruption. Because YOUR voice is not being heard. When an honest politician goes to DC, he spends money. He spends money from special interest groups. Once he is elected, he is obligated certain things to those groups. He is indebted to them. This is corruption and we need to stop it. We need to end the special interest groups running our country and stop the special interest money from getting into the wrong hands.

There is a plan and al it needs is your support. You can finds more information here.
http://goooh.com/

Cash for Clunkers

2009-09-12T17:59:00.001-04:00

Just a few facts that I would like you to chew on..

A vehicle at 15 mpg and 12,000 miles per year uses 800 gallons a year of gasoline.
A vehicle at 25 mpg and 12,000 miles per year uses 480 gallons a year.
So, the average clunker transaction will reduce US gasoline consumption by 320 gallons per year.
They claim 700,000 vehicles – so that's 224 million gallons / year.
That equates to a bit over 5 million barrels of oil.
5 million barrels of oil is about ¼ of one day's US consumption.
And, 5 million barrels of oil costs about $350 million dollars at $75/bbl.
So, we all contributed to spending $3 billion to save $350 million.

How good a deal was that ???

Obama in the Schools

2009-09-11T14:27:00.005-04:00

Below is a letter I wrote to a local radio broadcaster. Her show airs from 5am to 10am and reaches millions of people every morning on their way to work.

In their morning news cast, the story of Obama speaking in the schools came up. They began to rant and belittle the people with children who think that Obama should not have done this.

"XXXXX,

You made a great point on the radio this morning. We send our kids to government schools. But the reason that we are in this situation is that you forget that the government works for us (you and I). It is a government run school system, that is supposed to work for the people, we are the voices of this country and we should have the say so on whether our president addresses our children. Since when it is ok to let the government force things down our throat without our permission first?

The republicans in Florida are saying that they can not believe that tax dollars are being used for Obama to spend his time coming into schools to spread his socialist agenda. Of course the democrats across the country, and the followers of the great American messiah, say that discussing education has nothing to do with politics. They also say that nothing in his speeches have been written about any topics such as national health care, etc.

But you and I both know.. that young kids idolize, and dream to follow in the footsteps of a man with such power. It's just human nature. Whether or not he states those facts or not, that is who he is. And if it is ingrained in our children at an early age that this is the type of man that they should emulate with their life, then they too will follow along the same moral standards and political ideals that this "great American icon" stands for.

My kids would not take part in this either. This is a far fetched example, but it's just like young girls that grow up in an abusive home. They tend to follow that trend all of their life living in abusive relationships. That's a scientific and psychological fact that has been proven over and over again. The same principle stands here.. and such the trend will continue among us as long as this type of leadership is in place.

"Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave."

What does the president want us do to? Didn't the United States elect him? Shouldn't this be what can the president do for us?

Exactly the point that every left thinking liberal has forgotten! The government is supposed to work for the people!

How many senators have you seen on tv that changed their mind on healthcare after being blasted at their OWN town hall meeting.. anyone?

Probably not, because they have been lifted onto a throne as someone more important than you and I. They are smarter, hold a higher place in this world, and therefore get to decide what's right for the rest of us peons, right?

Not if everyone keeps speaking out..

I honestly can't wait for things to get worse so that they can finally get better. I keep saying it, it's like an old drunk thats had a problem for 40 years. he won't stop drinking until he almost takes his life or that of someone else. Sometimes you have to hit rock bottom to realize how low you have gone.

Good day
Brad

And her response is..

Hi Brad

Thanks so much for the eloquent email. I don't have children so frankly this argument is not as interesting to me. I remember Nancy Reagan's Just say No campaign when I was in school. In some respects it was a good thing, but in other ways it was an empty slogan that didn't get to the root of drug abuse or why kids were getting on drugs. I will read the transcript that the administration is putting out the day befpre Obama's speech. I will reserve judgement until then. If I were a teacher I would use every aspect of this speech to teach children to critically think for themselves. Not to swallow everything our government tells us and to question politics. The controversy of the first televised speech to students only, the parental protests and the speech itself should be a boon to teachers nationwide so they can teach young people to be civic minded while watching out for the huge potholes in our two party system today. These discussions may even convince a student or two to stay in school.

What? I hear a very good tap dance going on..

Let's break it down just a little bit.

President George H W Bush gave a speech to our schools in 1991. The House Majority leader at that time, Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.) said, "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students. And the President should be doing more about education than saying, 'Lights, camera, action.' " Washington Post on October 3, 1991 (h/t KY3 Political Notebook via Chuck Todd)

The Democrats accused Bush of using Government money to inoculate himself and for his own personal use and gain. It carried a message of studying hard, saying in school and avoiding drugs and trouble makers. Two House committees demanded that the department explain the use of its funds for the speech, an explanation that Deputy Secretary David T. Kearns provided late in the day in a letter to Rep. William D. Ford (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee.

Rep. Martin Frost (D-Tex.) said that if Bush feels obliged to use government funds to hire outside consultants “to make him look good,” then he should fire some of the public relations experts on the White House payroll. “Then the president might be more sympathetic to unemployment benefits,” Frost said, referring to Bush’s threat to veto legislation to extend benefits.

Obama asks the children to "help him" in the speech. What? I think once again, that he forgot that he works for us. Shouldn't he be on tv asking us how he can help us? Instead you see him running as fast as possible to pass legislation that hasn't even been read yet. Why? Does that make sense to you? Is there any logic in this equation?

Ironically, the most controversial part of the speech may be its closing, when Obama invokes the Creator in asking God to bless America. Will the atheist activists let that slide?

Look at the words of the speech! There are 56 self-references and three to the nation.

56 iterations of “I”
19 iterations of “school”
10 iterations of “education”
8 iterations of “responsibility”
7 iterations of “country”
5 iterations each of “parents”, “teachers”
3 iterations of “nation”

Reagan's speech referenced "I" only 19 times. It's a shame that people would actually accuse Obama of self promotion!

Let us Remember

2009-09-11T13:49:00.005-04:00

Where were you when you heard about the tragedy on 11 Sept 2001?

I was on top of a "Checkers" drive through in Alabama working on their Heating/Cooling when I heard this on the radio. I ran down to the parts store to get a few things and saw it on tv. It's the kind of thing you see and your jaw drops and you get that weird uneasy feeling in your chest. It hits hard and it's almost surreal as you see it happening.

God bless all of these families, wives, husbands and children that will grow up without a parent because of this. My hats off to the men and women in uniform whether it here at home or in a far away place. I don't think words can express the tragedy and feelings surrounded with this event.

As time passes we forget about how it felt and about how we still have men and women fighting over this. I'm attaching a picture I just got a few mins ago in an email. I'm not going to say much about it, but I want you to take a second and look at it. Think about what this soldier is doing and how it's the small things that we can easily over look. He asked his wife to send him US soil, grass seeds and fertilizer to grow this outside his tent. Before every mission, the men take turns walking on "American Soil" to remind them what it's all about.

RIP- We Shall Never Forget

It's Time for the Truth to be Heard!

2009-09-11T13:14:00.005-04:00

Some days I hear the news and it seems that all has been lost. It seems that everything I learned growing up has become a thing of the past. When I was a boy, I was taught that the United States of America was the only free country. I was taught that we had the strongest military, that our doctors and scientists were the smartest, and that I had hope in achieving something called the "American Dream". Now that I have been married, had three children and started a career, I have come to the realization that a "change" has happened.

I see corruption happening. I see it from the lowest of levels to the highest political and corporate positions in America. It ranges from our neighborhoods to the President himself. "How?", might you ask! Well, that is what I want to explain with my existence here. However, our first step is to recognize that there is a problem. We have all succeeded with this step. But, the next becomes more challenging. It's how we convey our points in such a manner that can be heard.. and heard loud enough that a change can happen.

It's time to take back control of our country. I'm calling on you to help do that. Start in your homes. Educate your children and spouses and family members of what is going on. Teach them values, morals and the principles which were used by the founders of our great nation.

Reach out to your communities. Knock on a neighbors door and talk to them about it! Try to attend or even host a community event that can get everyone involved. Most important of all, speak the TRUTH! Let it be heard!

Glen Beck and the 9/12 Project have written 9 principles that we should follow as US Citizens. This list was derived from the original 28 that our founding fathers used to write the Constitution.

The 9/12 Project

1. America Is Good.

2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.
God “The propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that
disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has
ordained.” from George Washington’s first Inaugural address.

3. I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday.
Honesty “I hope that I shall always possess firmness and virtue enough to
maintain what I consider to be the most enviable of all titles, the character
of an honest man.” George Washington

4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the
government.
Marriage/Family “It is in the love of one’s family only that heartfelt
happiness is known. By a law of our nature, we cannot be happy without the
endearing connections of a family.” Thomas Jefferson

5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is
above it.
Justice “I deem one of the essential principles of our government… equal and
exact justice to all men of whatever state or persuasion, religious or
political.” Thomas Jefferson

6. I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is no
guarantee of equal results.
Life, Liberty, & The Pursuit of Happiness “Everyone has a natural right to
choose that vocation in life which he thinks most likely to give him
comfortable subsistence.” Thomas Jefferson

7. I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to.
Government cannot force me to be charitable.
Charity “It is not everyone who asketh that deserveth charity; all however,
are worth of the inquiry or the deserving may suffer.” George Washington

8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my
personal opinion.
On your right to disagree “In a free and republican government, you cannot
restrain the voice of the multitude; every man will speak as he thinks, or
more properly without thinking.” George Washington

9. The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me.
Who works for whom? “I consider the people who constitute a society or a
nation as the source of all authority in that nation.” Thomas Jefferson

The 12 Values
* Honesty
* Reverence
* Hope
* Thrift
* Humility
* Charity
* Sincerity
* Moderation
* Hard Work
* Courage
* Personal Responsibility
* Gratitude

Speak the Truth and speak it LOUD!

Number One

2009-09-11T10:02:00.004-04:00

Yes, this is blog post number one. I want to set the tone before diving deep into my opinions of the state of our nation and it's "health". I am a conservative. I am not Democratic or Republican. I'm not interested in supporting one party or another. My interest lies in supporting what our founding fathers built for us and conserving it to the best of our abilities. No one will take away my freedoms of speech, my right to bear arms, and the freedom of choice. Abortion is murder and global warming is over hyped into something more than it is. Government run healthcare will become a disaster and nothing scares me more than knowing the government owns the car I drive, the house I live in, and now wants to control the well being of myself and my family. That just don't cut it. Some of the issues that I want to discuss are:

Abortion
Affirmative Action
Death Penalty
Economy
Education
Environment
Gun Control
Health care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Religion
Same sex Marriage
Social Security
Taxes
The UN
War
Welfare/Medicare/Medicaid

Sit down, shut up, hold on and get heated. There is a grassroots movement of everyday Americans that have had enough. Stand up, and shout with your voice! Write your congressmen and women and tell someone. Let it be heard!