Obama to Lift Ban on Funding for Groups Providing Abortions Overseas

Copy HTML:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed or Email Feed.

Obama Administration: Day 1 – Free Gitmo Terrorists & Murder Unborn Babies

Posted January 21, 2009

Comments(1)

This is what we have to look forward too for the next four years. The liberal agenda in full force. If anyone really thought that he would govern from a center-right perspective, they are sorely mistaken. All I can say is he better know where he’s putting the detainee’s before he closes Gitmo and they better not end up here.

I don’t even know where to begin with the abortion issue. We’re going to fund abortions outside the country? I’ve never heard of anything so asinine in my life. Here, we can’t afford to fund nor should we fund the homeowner mortgage bailout but we’re going to fund abortions! I’m sick to my stomach already. Four years of abdominal pain that’s what we’re in for if we don’t get him out NOW!

Sad reading…

Obama to Lift Ban on Funding for Groups Providing Abortions Overseas

President Obama will continue the back-and-forth of presidents before him by using the Roe v. Wade anniversary to allow non-governmental organizations working abroad to use U.S. funding to give counseling on or provide abortions.

By Major Garrett
FOXNews.com

President Obama will issue an executive order on Thursday reversing the Bush administration policy that bans the use of federal dollars by non-govermental organizations that discuss or provide abortions outside of the United States.

Obama will sign the executive order on the 36th anniversary of the landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion in all 50 states.

The policy, known in governmental circles as the “Mexico City policy,” requires any non-governmental organization to agree before receiving U.S. funds that they will “neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations.”

The language was announced at the United Nations International Conference on Population in 1984, and was approved by President Reagan and originally drafted by his assistant secretary of state, Alan Keyes.

Keyes ran unsuccessfully as the GOP nominee against Obama for the U.S. Senate in 2004.

President George Herbert Walker Bush continued Reagan’s Mexico City policy.

President Bill Clinton issued an executive order lifting the ban on Jan. 22, 1993. President George W. Bush issued an executive order re-instating the ban on federal dollars for NGOs that discuss or provide abortions on Jan. 22, 2001.

Obama’s Draft Order Calls for Closing Gitmo in One Year, Suspending Military Tribunals

President Obama wants to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay within the year and could put an end to the military tribunals after a four-month review, according to a draft executive order.

FOXNews.com

President Obama issued a draft document Wednesday calling for a 120-day suspension of military tribunals while the Defense Department reviews whether the Pentagon should continue to prosecute enemy combatants.

The draft also calls for the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to be closed within the year.

Closing the facility “would further the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and the interests of justice,” reads the draft prepared for the new president’s signature.

It calls for a systematic review of each detainee’s case to determine which cases can be released, and which cannot.

“It is in the interests of the United States to review whether and how such individuals can and should be prosecuted,” the document says.

A judge has already granted Obama’s request to suspend the war crimes trial of a young Canadian for 120 days. Army Col. Stephen Henley issued the ruling Wednesday after a brief hearing at the Guantanamo base.

Other defendants say they oppose the delay because they want to plead guilty to charges that carry a potential death sentence. Execution would enable them to become martyrs.

Under a scenario foreshadowed in the draft document, some detainees being held at Guantanamo would be released, while others would be transferred elsewhere and later put on trial under terms to be determined. Closing Guantanamo could potentially mean moving the remaining detainees to
federal prisons in the U.S., such as the Leavenworth prison in Kansas.

Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, vehemently opposes that idea. He introduced legislation almost immediately after the draft regulation was announced
requiring Obama to provide Congress 90 days’ notice as well as a study that answers specific questions relating to security, logistics and alternatives before taking any action to close the Guantanamo prison or move the detainees.

“We cannot afford to make snap decisions about detainee policy, and the American people should be able to judge any policy changes for themselves,” Brownback said. “This legislation would require an open and comprehensive review of the factors related to moving the Guantanamo detainees.”

Wednesday’s draft may be as much an indictment of the Supreme Court’s direction on how to prosecute detainees than on anything else.

The Supreme Court’s decisions over the past few years — most recently its June ruling on Lakhdar Boumediene, a naturalized U.S. citizen held at the prison who successfully claimed habeus corpus rights — have produced legal contradictions in allowing detainees access to U.S. courts.

The facility at Guantanamo Bay has long been the target of Bush administration critics at home and some governments overseas. The Bush administration established the prison early in battling terrorism, contending that the people held there were not entitled to the customary rights of prisoners in the United States, or to the protections of the Geneva Conventions that cover war prisoners.

The draft order notes that some of the detainees at the site have there for more than six years, and most for at least four years.

At the Pentagon, military leaders were preparing for the order that spokesman Bryan Whitman said would begin a “comprehensive review of policies and procedures related to detainee activities.”

“The president has clearly made his intentions well known,” Whitman said. “And he has taken the first steps with respect to his direction to order a pause to military commission proceedings.”

David Rivkin, a constitutional attorney, said he hoped the 120-day review to be undertaken by the Pentagon would lead to “responsible” results.

“You can, but that does not resolve the situation. You either have to detain them under the military justice/laws of war paradigm, you need to decide how you’re going to prosecute the rest,” he said.

Rivkin said that such a decision isn’t just about moving the 245 detainees remaining at Guantanamo, which initially housed more than 800.

“This is about hundreds and thousands of people the United States is likely to capture in future wars .. ongoing wars frankly against Al Qaeda and Taliban. You cannot fight a war without retaining this vital legal architecture,” Rivkin said.

He said he’s less concerned about whether it’s military commissions or tribunals or giving more due process to the detainees.

“They have to keep this architecture, they can not just keep or resort to a criminal justice model,” he said.

FOX News’ Lee Ross and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Copy HTML:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed or Email Feed.

Conservatism At Its Best

Posted January 7, 2009

Comments(0)

Happy New Year! I’ve been away from the daily grind of liberal bashing and, quite honestly, enjoyed the holidays lazily with my family. We spent Christmas at Lake Tahoe, skiing and snowboarding. It was wonderful and relaxing and gave me great cause for reflection. A respite from the coming turmoil that will be 2009. I wish I could see the future but would be afraid to look at it. Sometimes, though reflection on the past is more telling of the future and following is a remarkable piece of history that should and will live on as a classic.

Despite the graininess of the video and the numbers that are quoted, if you heard the following speech by Ronald Reagan today, you would swear he was speaking of current times and current issues. However, this speech was given in 1964 in support of Barry Goldwater’s campaign.

Now I was but a child in 1964 and knew nothing of nor cared in the least about politics. I knew that JFK had been assassinated in 1963 and had watched the funeral procession on our very first TV but I didn’t understand it nor did I understand the socialist movement that was well underway and known to true patriots like Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagen.

I have learned more about the differences between Democrats and Republicans, Liberals and Conservatives and left and right as they relate to politics in the last six months than I learned in 40 years previous. I never cared. Yet, when Ronald Reagen ran for president following the debacle of Jimmy Carter, he made sense. I knew he was honorable and patriotic and cared for our freedom and the Constitution. I just didn’t know how much he loved this country and for how long. After listening to this speech, though I, once again, have renewed my deep love for this man, for the eloquence with which he can deliver the message.

We are in for some very tough times in 2009 and beyond. The issues we face cannot be resolved by a government or even more government. Less government, much less government, is what will be required to turn this country around. Less government spending and more income retained by the people. That is the stimulus package that Americans need. However, I don’t think we can get there without a revolution. It has finally come to the battle line of those individuals that have high self esteem and strong moral character. Those that love their Liberty and the Freedom afforded us by the framers of Our Constitution against those that prefer Mother government and the Nanny state. Since the liberals have gained control of Congress and now the White House, we cannot stand idle and watch our country and the freedom it represents be disassembled by the “liberal agenda”

Human action is healthy when it is effective in the pursuit of happiness, legitimate in its respect for the rule of law, free because coercion is prohibited, cooperative when consent is voluntary, and mutual in honoring the universality of rights and justly acquired property. The economic, social and political arrangements inherent in all collectivist societies invariably render individual action less effective because it is disempowered by the state, illegitimate because it is condemned by the state, unfree because it is oppressed by the state, less cooperative because it is coerced by the state, and less mutual because it is dehumanized by the state.
Dr. Lyle Rossiter, Jr. M.D., “The Liberal Mind”

The full transcript of President Reagan’s speech follows the video…

“A Time for Choosing”

Ronald Reagan, October 27, 1964

I have spent most of my life as a Democrat. I recently have seen fit to follow another course. I believe that the issues confronting us cross party lines. Now, one side in this campaign has been telling us that the issues of this election are the maintenance of peace and prosperity. The line has been used, “We’ve never had it so good.”

ronald-reagan-with-barry-goldwater But I have an uncomfortable feeling that this prosperity isn’t something on which we can base our hopes for the future. No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income. Today, 37 cents out of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector’s share, and yet our government continues to spend 17 million dollars a day more than the government takes in. We haven’t balanced our budget 28 out of the last 34 years. We’ve raised our debt limit three times in the last twelve months, and now our national debt is one and a half times bigger than all the combined debts of all the nations of the world. We have 15 billion dollars in gold in our treasury; we don’t own an ounce. Foreign dollar claims are 27.3 billion dollars. And we’ve just had announced that the dollar of 1939 will now purchase 45 cents in its total value.

As for the peace that we would preserve, I wonder who among us would like to approach the wife or mother whose husband or son has died in South Vietnam and ask them if they think this is a peace that should be maintained indefinitely. Do they mean peace, or do they mean we just want to be left in peace? There can be no real peace while one American is dying some place in the world for the rest of us. We’re at war with the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars, and it’s been said if we lose that war, and in so doing lose this way of freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening. Well I think it’s time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers.

Not too long ago, two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, “We don’t know how lucky we are.” And the Cuban stopped and said, “How lucky you are? I had someplace to escape to.” And in that sentence he told us the entire story. If we lose freedom here, there’s no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth.

And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except the sovereign people, is still the newest and the most unique idea in all the long history of man’s relation to man.

This is the issue of this election: whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I’d like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There’s only an up or down: [up] man’s old — old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.

In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the “Great Society,” or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a greater government activity in the affairs of the people. But they’ve been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves; and all of the things I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations. For example, they have voices that say, “The cold war will end through our acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism.” Another voice says, “The profit motive has become outmoded. It must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state.” Or, “Our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century.” Senator Fulbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the President as “our moral teacher and our leader,” and he says he is “hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document.” He must “be freed,” so that he “can do for us” what he knows “is best.” And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as “meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government.”

Well, I, for one, resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me, the free men and women of this country, as “the masses.” This is a term we haven’t applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, “the full power of centralized government” — this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don’t control things. A government can’t control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.

Now, we have no better example of this than government’s involvement in the farm economy over the last 30 years. Since 1955, the cost of this program has nearly doubled. One-fourth of farming in America is responsible for 85% of the farm surplus. Three-fourths of farming is out on the free market and has known a 21% increase in the per capita consumption of all its produce. You see, that one-fourth of farming — that’s regulated and controlled by the federal government. In the last three years we’ve spent 43 dollars in the feed grain program for every dollar bushel of corn we don’t grow.

Senator Humphrey last week charged that Barry Goldwater, as President, would seek to eliminate farmers. He should do his homework a little better, because he’ll find out that we’ve had a decline of 5 million in the farm population under these government programs. He’ll also find that the Democratic administration has sought to get from Congress [an] extension of the farm program to include that three-fourths that is now free. He’ll find that they’ve also asked for the right to imprison farmers who wouldn’t keep books as prescribed by the federal government. The Secretary of Agriculture asked for the right to seize farms through condemnation and resell them to other individuals. And contained in that same program was a provision that would have allowed the federal government to remove 2 million farmers from the soil.

At the same time, there’s been an increase in the Department of Agriculture employees. There’s now one for every 30 farms in the United States, and still they can’t tell us how 66 shiploads of grain headed for Austria disappeared without a trace and Billie Sol Estes never left shore.

Every responsible farmer and farm organization has repeatedly asked the government to free the farm economy, but how — who are farmers to know what’s best for them? The wheat farmers voted against a wheat program. The government passed it anyway. Now the price of bread goes up; the price of wheat to the farmer goes down.

Meanwhile, back in the city, under urban renewal the assault on freedom carries on. Private property rights [are] so diluted that public interest is almost anything a few government planners decide it should be. In a program that takes from the needy and gives to the greedy, we see such spectacles as in Cleveland, Ohio, a million-and-a-half-dollar building completed only three years ago must be destroyed to make way for what government officials call a “more compatible use of the land.” The President tells us he’s now going to start building public housing units in the thousands, where heretofore we’ve only built them in the hundreds. But FHA [Federal Housing Authority] and the Veterans Administration tell us they have 120,000 housing units they’ve taken back through mortgage foreclosure. For three decades, we’ve sought to solve the problems of unemployment through government planning, and the more the plans fail, the more the planners plan. The latest is the Area Redevelopment Agency.

They’ve just declared Rice County, Kansas, a depressed area. Rice County, Kansas, has two hundred oil wells, and the 14,000 people there have over 30 million dollars on deposit in personal savings in their banks. And when the government tells you you’re depressed, lie down and be depressed.

We have so many people who can’t see a fat man standing beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one. So they’re going to solve all the problems of human misery through government and government planning. Well, now, if government planning and welfare had the answer — and they’ve had almost 30 years of it — shouldn’t we expect government to read the score to us once in a while? Shouldn’t they be telling us about the decline each year in the number of people needing help? The reduction in the need for public housing?

But the reverse is true. Each year the need grows greater; the program grows greater. We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry each night. Well that was probably true. They were all on a diet. But now we’re told that 9.3 million families in this country are poverty-stricken on the basis of earning less than 3,000 dollars a year. Welfare spending [is] 10 times greater than in the dark depths of the Depression. We’re spending 45 billion dollars on welfare. Now do a little arithmetic, and you’ll find that if we divided the 45 billion dollars up equally among those 9 million poor families, we’d be able to give each family 4,600 dollars a year. And this added to their present income should eliminate poverty. Direct aid to the poor, however, is only running only about 600 dollars per family. It would seem that someplace there must be some overhead.

Now — so now we declare “war on poverty,” or “You, too, can be a Bobby Baker.” Now do they honestly expect us to believe that if we add 1 billion dollars to the 45 billion we’re spending, one more program to the 30-odd we have — and remember, this new program doesn’t replace any, it just duplicates existing programs — do they believe that poverty is suddenly going to disappear by magic? Well, in all fairness I should explain there is one part of the new program that isn’t duplicated. This is the youth feature. We’re now going to solve the dropout problem, juvenile delinquency, by reinstituting something like the old CCC camps [Civilian Conservation Corps], and we’re going to put our young people in these camps. But again we do some arithmetic, and we find that we’re going to spend each year just on room and board for each young person we help 4,700 dollars a year. We can send them to Harvard for 2,700! Course, don’t get me wrong. I’m not suggesting Harvard is the answer to juvenile delinquency.

But seriously, what are we doing to those we seek to help? Not too long ago, a judge called me here in Los Angeles. He told me of a young woman who’d come before him for a divorce. She had six children, was pregnant with her seventh. Under his questioning, she revealed her husband was a laborer earning 250 dollars a month. She wanted a divorce to get an 80 dollar raise. She’s eligible for 330 dollars a month in the Aid to Dependent Children Program. She got the idea from two women in her neighborhood who’d already done that very thing.

Yet anytime you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we’re denounced as being against their humanitarian goals. They say we’re always “against” things — we’re never “for” anything.

Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.

Now — we’re for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we’ve accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem.

But we’re against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments to those people who depend on them for a livelihood. They’ve called it “insurance” to us in a hundred million pieces of literature. But then they appeared before the Supreme Court and they testified it was a welfare program. They only use the term “insurance” to sell it to the people. And they said Social Security dues are a tax for the general use of the government, and the government has used that tax. There is no fund, because Robert Byers, the actuarial head, appeared before a congressional committee and admitted that Social Security as of this moment is 298 billion dollars in the hole. But he said there should be no cause for worry because as long as they have the power to tax, they could always take away from the people whatever they needed to bail them out of trouble. And they’re doing just that.

A young man, 21 years of age, working at an average salary — his Social Security contribution would, in the open market, buy him an insurance policy that would guarantee 220 dollars a month at age 65. The government promises 127. He could live it up until he’s 31 and then take out a policy that would pay more than Social Security. Now are we so lacking in business sense that we can’t put this program on a sound basis, so that people who do require those payments will find they can get them when they’re due — that the cupboard isn’t bare?

Barry Goldwater thinks we can.

At the same time, can’t we introduce voluntary features that would permit a citizen who can do better on his own to be excused upon presentation of evidence that he had made provision for the non-earning years? Should we not allow a widow with children to work, and not lose the benefits supposedly paid for by her deceased husband? Shouldn’t you and I be allowed to declare who our beneficiaries will be under this program, which we cannot do? I think we’re for telling our senior citizens that no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds. But I think we’re against forcing all citizens, regardless of need, into a compulsory government program, especially when we have such examples, as was announced last week, when France admitted that their Medicare program is now bankrupt. They’ve come to the end of the road.

In addition, was Barry Goldwater so irresponsible when he suggested that our government give up its program of deliberate, planned inflation, so that when you do get your Social Security pension, a dollar will buy a dollar’s worth, and not 45 cents worth?

I think we’re for an international organization, where the nations of the world can seek peace. But I think we’re against subordinating American interests to an organization that has become so structurally unsound that today you can muster a two-thirds vote on the floor of the General Assembly among nations that represent less than 10 percent of the world’s population. I think we’re against the hypocrisy of assailing our allies because here and there they cling to a colony, while we engage in a conspiracy of silence and never open our mouths about the millions of people enslaved in the Soviet colonies in the satellite nations.

I think we’re for aiding our allies by sharing of our material blessings with those nations which share in our fundamental beliefs, but we’re against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world. We set out to help 19 countries. We’re helping 107. We’ve spent 146 billion dollars. With that money, we bought a 2 million dollar yacht for Haile Selassie. We bought dress suits for Greek undertakers, extra wives for Kenya[n] government officials. We bought a thousand TV sets for a place where they have no electricity. In the last six years, 52 nations have bought 7 billion dollars worth of our gold, and all 52 are receiving foreign aid from this country.

No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So, governments’ programs, once launched, never disappear.

Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.

Federal employees — federal employees number two and a half million; and federal, state, and local, one out of six of the nation’s work force employed by government. These proliferating bureaus with their thousands of regulations have cost us many of our constitutional safeguards. How many of us realize that today federal agents can invade a man’s property without a warrant? They can impose a fine without a formal hearing, let alone a trial by jury? And they can seize and sell his property at auction to enforce the payment of that fine. In Chico County, Arkansas, James Wier over-planted his rice allotment. The government obtained a 17,000 dollar judgment. And a U.S. marshal sold his 960-acre farm at auction. The government said it was necessary as a warning to others to make the system work.

Last February 19th at the University of Minnesota, Norman Thomas, six-times candidate for President on the Socialist Party ticket, said, “If Barry Goldwater became President, he would stop the advance of socialism in the United States.” I think that’s exactly what he will do.

But as a former Democrat, I can tell you Norman Thomas isn’t the only man who has drawn this parallel to socialism with the present administration, because back in 1936, Mr. Democrat himself, Al Smith, the great American, came before the American people and charged that the leadership of his Party was taking the Party of Jefferson, Jackson, and Cleveland down the road under the banners of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin. And he walked away from his Party, and he never returned til the day he died — because to this day, the leadership of that Party has been taking that Party, that honorable Party, down the road in the image of the labor Socialist Party of England.

Now it doesn’t require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed to the — or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? And such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment.

Our Democratic opponents seem unwilling to debate these issues. They want to make you and I believe that this is a contest between two men — that we’re to choose just between two personalities.

Well what of this man that they would destroy — and in destroying, they would destroy that which he represents, the ideas that you and I hold dear? Is he the brash and shallow and trigger-happy man they say he is? Well I’ve been privileged to know him “when.” I knew him long before he ever dreamed of trying for high office, and I can tell you personally I’ve never known a man in my life I believed so incapable of doing a dishonest or dishonorable thing.

This is a man who, in his own business before he entered politics, instituted a profit-sharing plan before unions had ever thought of it. He put in health and medical insurance for all his employees. He took 50 percent of the profits before taxes and set up a retirement program, a pension plan for all his employees. He sent monthly checks for life to an employee who was ill and couldn’t work. He provides nursing care for the children of mothers who work in the stores. When Mexico was ravaged by the floods in the Rio Grande, he climbed in his airplane and flew medicine and supplies down there.

An ex-GI told me how he met him. It was the week before Christmas during the Korean War, and he was at the Los Angeles airport trying to get a ride home to Arizona for Christmas. And he said that [there were] a lot of servicemen there and no seats available on the planes. And then a voice came over the loudspeaker and said, “Any men in uniform wanting a ride to Arizona, go to runway such-and-such,” and they went down there, and there was a fellow named Barry Goldwater sitting in his plane. Every day in those weeks before Christmas, all day long, he’d load up the plane, fly it to Arizona, fly them to their homes, fly back over to get another load.

During the hectic split-second timing of a campaign, this is a man who took time out to sit beside an old friend who was dying of cancer. His campaign managers were understandably impatient, but he said, “There aren’t many left who care what happens to her. I’d like her to know I care.” This is a man who said to his 19-year-old son, “There is no foundation like the rock of honesty and fairness, and when you begin to build your life on that rock, with the cement of the faith in God that you have, then you have a real start.” This is not a man who could carelessly send other people’s sons to war. And that is the issue of this campaign that makes all the other problems I’ve discussed academic, unless we realize we’re in a war that must be won.

Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy “accommodation.” And they say if we’ll only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he’ll forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answer — not an easy answer — but simple: If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based on what we know in our hearts is morally right.

We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the Iron Curtain, “Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we’re willing to make a deal with your slave masters.” Alexander Hamilton said, “A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one.” Now let’s set the record straight. There’s no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there’s only one guaranteed way you can have peace — and you can have it in the next second — surrender.

Admittedly, there’s a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face — that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight or surrender. If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand — the ultimatum. And what then — when Nikita Khrushchev has told his people he knows what our answer will be? He has told them that we’re retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes to deliver the final ultimatum, our surrender will be voluntary, because by that time we will have been weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically. He believes this because from our side he’s heard voices pleading for “peace at any price” or “better Red than dead,” or as one commentator put it, he’d rather “live on his knees than die on his feet.” And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don’t speak for the rest of us.

You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin — just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard ’round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn’t die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well it’s a simple answer after all.

You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, “There is a price we will not pay.” “There is a point beyond which they must not advance.” And this — this is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater’s “peace through strength.” Winston Churchill said, “The destiny of man is not measured by material computations. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we’re spirits — not animals.” And he said, “There’s something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.”

You and I have a rendezvous with destiny.

We’ll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we’ll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.

We will keep in mind and remember that Barry Goldwater has faith in us. He has faith that you and I have the ability and the dignity and the right to make our own decisions and determine our own destiny.

Thank you very much.

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Copy HTML:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed or Email Feed.

SCOTUS Denys Stay In Cort Wrotknowski’s Case

Posted December 15, 2008

Comments(1)

08A469 WROTNOWSKI, CORT V. BYSIEWICZ, CT SEC. OF STATE The application for stay and/or injunction addressed to Justice Scalia and referred to the Court is denied.

It seems that the Supreme Court has abandoned the Constitution of the United States along with Congress and the White House. It looks as though they would prefer to swear in a usurper and create an illegitimate regime. There really is no justice left in America. We are being lied to from all sides and there is no one left to trust. This is a sad day for the people.

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Copy HTML:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed or Email Feed.

The Perfect Politically Correct Gift For Your Child

Posted December 12, 2008

Comments(0)

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Copy HTML:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed or Email Feed.

IL Gov Arrested! Allegedly Conspired To Sell Obama’s Senate Seat

Posted December 9, 2008

Comments(0)

It doesn’t get any better than this. If you don’t think that everything and everyone is for sale with the Democrats, you are sadly mistaken. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree so the Obama, Rezko, Blagojevich connection is probably pretty tight. I wonder if Rezko sang a tune to get the FBI wiretaps? I wonder, even more, if Blagojevich is going to sing a tune on Obama.

Press Release on Blagojevich Arrest

The news release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office following the arrest of Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

TUESDAY DECEMBER 9, 2008

ILLINOIS GOV. ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH AND HIS CHIEF OF STAFF

JOHN HARRIS ARRESTED ON FEDERAL CORRUPTION CHARGES

Blagojevich and aide allegedly conspired to sell U.S. Senate appointment, engaged in pay-to-play schemes and threatened to withhold state assistance to Tribune Company for Wrigley Field to induce purge of newspaper editorial writers

CHICAGO – Illinois Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich and his Chief of Staff, John Harris, were arrested today by FBI agents on federal corruption charges alleging that they and others are engaging in ongoing criminal activity: conspiring to obtain personal financial benefits for Blagojevich by leveraging his sole authority to appoint a United States Senator; threatening to withhold substantial state assistance to the Tribune Company in connection with the sale of Wrigley Field to induce the firing of Chicago Tribune editorial board members sharply critical of Blagojevich; and to obtain campaign contributions in exchange for official actions – both historically and now in a push before a new state ethics law takes effect January 1, 2009.

Blagojevich, 51, and Harris, 46, both of Chicago, were each charged with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud and solicitation of bribery. They were charged in a two-count criminal complaint that was sworn out on Sunday and unsealed today following their arrests, which occurred without incident, announced Patrick J. Fitzgerald, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, and Robert D. Grant, Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Both men were expected to appear later today before U.S. Magistrate Judge Nan Nolan in U.S. District Court in Chicago.

A 76-page FBI affidavit alleges that Blagojevich was intercepted on court-authorized wiretaps during the last month conspiring to sell or trade Illinois U.S. Senate seat vacated by President-elect Barack Obama for financial and other personal benefits for himself and his wife. At various times, in exchange for the Senate appointment, Blagojevich discussed obtaining:

a substantial salary for himself at a either a non-profit foundation or an organization affiliated with labor unions;

placing his wife on paid corporate boards where he speculated she might garner as much as $150,000 a year;

promises of campaign funds – including cash up front; and

a cabinet post or ambassadorship for himself.

Just last week, on December 4, Blagojevich allegedly told an advisor that he might get some (money) up front, maybe from Senate Candidate 5, if he named Senate Candidate 5 to the Senate seat, to insure that Senate Candidate 5 kept a promise about raising money for Blagojevich if he ran for re-election. In a recorded conversation on October 31, Blagojevich claimed he was approached by an associate of Senate Candidate 5 as follows: We were approached pay to play. That, you know, he’d raise 500 grand. An emissary came. Then the other guy would raise a million, if I made him (Senate Candidate 5) a Senator.

On November 7, while talking on the phone about the Senate seat with Harris and an advisor, Blagojevich said he needed to consider his family and that he is financially hurting, the affidavit states. Harris allegedly said that they were considering what would help the financial security of the Blagojevich family and what will keep Blagojevich politically viable. Blagojevich stated, I want to make money, adding later that he is interested in making $250,000 to $300,000 a year, the complaint alleges.

On November 10, in a lengthy telephone call with numerous advisors that included discussion about Blagojevich obtaining a lucrative job with a union-affiliated organization in exchange for appointing a particular Senate Candidate whom he believed was favored by the President-elect and which is described in more detail below, Blagojevich and others discussed various ways Blagojevich could monetize the relationships he has made as governor to make money after leaving that office. The breadth of corruption laid out in these charges is staggering, Mr. Fitzgerald said. They allege that Blagojevich put a for sale sign on the naming of a United States Senator; involved himself personally in pay-to-play schemes with the urgency of a salesman meeting his annual sales target; and corruptly used his office in an effort to trample editorial voices of criticism. The citizens of Illinois deserve public officials who act solely in the publics interest, without putting a price tag on government appointments, contracts and decisions, he added.

Mr. Grant said: Many, including myself, thought that the recent conviction of a former governor would usher in a new era of honesty and reform in Illinois politics. Clearly, the charges announced today reveal that the office of the Governor has become nothing more than a vehicle for self-enrichment, unrestricted by party affiliation and taking Illinois politics to a new low.

Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. Grant thanked the Chicago offices of the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Division, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the U.S. Department of Labor Office of Inspector General for assisting in the ongoing investigation. The probe is part of Operation Board Games, a five-year-old public corruption investigation of pay-to-play schemes, including insider-dealing, influence-peddling and kickbacks involving private interests and public duties.

Federal agents today also executed search warrants at the offices of Friends of Blagojevich located at 4147 North Ravenswood, Suite 300, and at the Thompson Center office of Deputy Governor A.

Pay-to-Play Schemes

The charges include historical allegations that Blagojevich and Harris schemed with others – including previously convicted defendants Antoin Rezko, Stuart Levine, Ali Ata and others – since becoming governor in 2002 to obtain and attempt to obtain financial benefits for himself, his family and third parties, including his campaign committee, Friends of Blagojevich, in exchange for appointments to state boards and commissions, state employment, state contracts and access to state funds. A portion of the affidavit recounts the testimony of various witnesses at Rezkos trial earlier this year.

The charges focus, however, on events since October when the Government obtained information that Blagojevich and Fundraiser A, who is chairman of Friends of Blagojevich, were accelerating Blagojevichs allegedly corrupt fund-raising activities to accumulate as much money as possible this year before a new state ethics law would severely curtail Blagojevichs ability to raise money from individuals and entities that have existing contracts worth more than $50,000 with the State of Illinois. Agents learned that Blagojevich was seeking approximately $2.5 million in campaign contributions by the end of the year, principally from or through individuals or entities – many of which have received state contacts or appointments – identified on a list maintained by Friends of Blagojevich, which the FBI has obtained.

The affidavit details multiple incidents involving efforts by Blagojevich to obtain campaign contributions in connection with his official actions as governor, including these three in early October:

After an October 6 meeting with Harris and Individuals A and B, during which Individual B sought state help with a business venture, Blagojevich told Individual A to approach Individual B about raising $100,000 for Friends of Blagojevich this year. Individual A said he later learned that Blagojevich reached out directly to Individual B to ask about holding a fund-raiser;

Also on October 6, Blagojevich told Individual A that he expected Highway Contractor 1 to raise $500,000 in contributions and that he was willing to commit additional state money to a Tollway project – beyond $1.8 billion that Blagojevich announced on October15 – but was waiting to see how much money the contractor raised for Friends of Blagojevich; and

On October 8, Blagojevich told Individual A that he wanted to obtain a $50,000 contribution from Hospital Executive 1, the chief executive officer of Childrens Memorial Hospital in Chicago, which had recently received a commitment of $8 million in state funds. When the contribution was not forthcoming, Blagojevich discussed with Deputy Governor A the feasibility of rescinding the funding.

On October 21, the Government obtained a court order authorizing the interception of conversations in both a personal office and a conference room used by Blagojevich at the offices of Friends of Blagojevich. The FBI began intercepting conversations in those rooms on the morning of October 22. A second court order was obtained last month allowing those interceptions to continue. On October 29, a court order was signed authorizing the interception of conversations on a hardline telephone used by Blagojevich at his home. That wiretap was extended for 30 days on November 26, according to the affidavit.

Another alleged example of a pay-to-play scheme was captured in separate telephone conversations that Blagojevich had with Fundraiser A on November 13 and Lobbyist 1 on December 3. Lobbyist 1 was reporting to Blagojevich about his efforts to collect a contribution from Contributor 1 and related that he got in his face to make it clear to Contributor 1 that a commitment to make a campaign contribution had to be done now, before there could be some skittishness over the timing of the contribution and Blagojevich signing a bill that would benefit Contributor 1. Blagojevich commented to Lobbyist 1 good and good job. The bill in question, which is awaiting Blagojevich s signature, is believed to be legislation that directs a percentage of casino revenue to the horse racing industry.

Sale of U.S. Senate Appointment

Regarding the Senate seat, the charges allege that Blagojevich, Harris and others have engaged and are engaging in efforts to obtain personal gain, including financial gain, to benefit Blagojevich and his family through corruptly using Blagojevichs sole authority to appoint a successor to the unexpired term of the President-elects former Senate seat, which he resigned effective November 16. The affidavit details numerous conversations about the Senate seat between November 3 and December 5. In these conversations, Blagojevich repeatedly discussed the attributes of potential candidates, including their abilities to benefit the people of Illinois, and the financial and political benefits he and his wife could receive if he appointed various of the possible candidates.

Throughout the intercepted conversations, Blagojevich also allegedly spent significant time weighing the option of appointing himself to the open Senate seat and expressed a variety of reasons for doing so, including: frustration at being stuck as governor; a belief that he will be able to obtain greater resources if he is indicted as a sitting Senator as opposed to a sitting governor; a desire to remake his image in consideration of a possible run for President in 2016; avoiding impeachment by the Illinois legislature; making corporate contacts that would be of value to him after leaving public office; facilitating his wifes employment as a lobbyist; and generating speaking fees should he decide to leave public office.

In the earliest intercepted conversation about the Senate seat described in the affidavit, Blagojevich told Deputy Governor A on November 3 that if he is not going to get anything of value for the open seat, then he will take it for himself: if . . . theyre not going to offer anything of any value, then I might just take it. Later that day, speaking to Advisor A, Blagojevich said: Im going to keep this Senate option for me a real possibility, you know, and therefore I can drive a hard bargain. He added later that the seat is a [expletive] valuable thing, you just dont give it away for nothing.

Over the next couple of days – Election Day and the day after – Blagojevich was captured discussing with Deputy Governor A whether he could obtain a cabinet position, such as Secretary of Health and Human Services or the Department of Energy or various ambassadorships. In a conversation with Harris on November 4, Blagojevich analogized his situation to that of a sports agent shopping a potential free agent to the highest bidder. The day after the election, Harris allegedly suggested to Blagojevich that the President-elect could make him the head of a private foundation.

Later on November 5, Blagojevich said to Advisor A, Ive got this thing and its [expletive] golden, and, uh, uh, Im just not giving it up for [expletive] nothing. Im not gonna do it. And, and I can always use it. I can parachute me there, the affidavit states.

Two days later, in a three-way call with Harris and Advisor B, a consultant in Washington, Blagojevich and the others allegedly discussed the prospect of a three-way deal for the Senate appointment involving an organization called Change to Win, which is affiliated with various unions including the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

On November 10, Blagojevich, his wife, Harris, Governor General Counsel, Advisor B and other Washington-based advisors participated at different times in a two-hour phone call in which they allegedly discussed, among other things, a deal involving the SEIU. Harris said they could work out a deal with the union and the President-elect where SEIU could help the President-elect with Blagojevichs appointment of Senate Candidate 1, while Blagojevich would obtain a position as the National Director of the Change to Win campaign and SEIU would get something favorable from the President-elect in the future. Also during that call, Blagojevich agreed it was unlikely that the President-elect would name him Secretary of Health and Human Services or give him an ambassadorship because of all of the negative publicity surrounding him.

In a conversation with Harris on November 11, the charges state, Blagojevich said he knew that the President-elect wanted Senate Candidate 1 for the open seat but theyre not willing to give me anything except appreciation. [Expletive] them. Earlier in that conversation, Blagojevich suggested starting a 501(c)(4) non-profit organization, which he could head and engage in political activity and lobbying. In that conversation with Harris and other discussions with him and others over the next couple of days, Blagojevich suggested by name several well-known, wealthy individuals who could be prevailed upon to seed such an organization with $10-$15 million, and suggesting that he could take the organizations reins when he is no longer governor, according to the affidavit.

On November 12, Blagojevich spoke with SEIU Official who was in Washington. This conversation occurred about a week after Blagojevich had met with SEIU Official to discuss the Senate seat, with the understanding that the union official was an emissary to discuss Senate Candidate 1’s interest in the Senate seat. During the November 12 conversation, Blagojevich allegedly explained the non-profit organization idea to SEIU Official and said that it could help Senate Candidate 1. The union official agreed to put that flag up and see where it goes, although the official also had said he wasn’t certain if Senate Candidate 1 wanted the official to keep pushing her candidacy. Senate Candidate 1 eventually removed herself from consideration for the open seat.

Also on November 12, in a conversation with Harris, the complaint affidavit states that Blagojevich said his decision about the open Senate seat will be based on three criteria in the following order of importance: our legal situation, our personal situation, my political situation. This decision, like every other one, needs to be based upon that. Legal. Personal. Political. Harris said: legal is the hardest one to satisfy. Blagojevich said that his legal problems could be solved by naming himself to the Senate seat.

As recently as December 4, in separate conversations with Advisor B and Fundraiser A, Blagojevich said that he was elevating Senate Candidate 5 on the list of candidates because, among other reasons, if Blagojevich ran for re-election, Senate Candidate 5 would raise[] money for him. Blagojevich said that he might be able to cut a deal with Senate Candidate 5 that provided Blagojevich with something tangible up front. Noting that he was going to meet with Senate Candidate 5 in the next few days, Blagojevich told Fundraiser A to reach out to an intermediary (Individual D), from whom Blagojevich is attempting to obtain campaign contributions and who Blagojevich believes is close to Senate Candidate 5. Blagojevich told Fundraiser A to tell Individual D that Senate Candidate 5 was a very realistic candidate but Blagojevich was getting a lot of pressure not to appoint Senate Candidate 5, according to the affidavit.

Blagojevich allegedly told Fundraiser A to tell Individual D that if Senate Candidate 5 is going to be chosen, some of this stuffs gotta start happening now . . . right now . . . and we gotta see it. Blagojevich continued, You gotta be careful how you express that and assume everybodys listening, the whole world is listening. You hear me? Blagojevich further directed Fundraiser A to talk to Individual D in person, not by phone, and to communicate the urgency of the situation.

Blagojevich spoke to Fundraiser A again the next day, December 5, and discussed that days Chicago Tribune front page article stating that Blagojevich had recently been surreptitiously recorded as part of the ongoing criminal investigation. Blagojevich instructed Fundraiser A to undo your [Individual D] thing, and Fundraiser A confirmed it would be undone, the complaint alleges.

Also on December 5, Blagojevich and three others allegedly discussed whether to move money out of the Friends of Blagojevich campaign fund to avoid having the money frozen by federal authorities and also considered the possibility of prepaying the money to Blagojevichs criminal defense attorney with an understanding that the attorney would donate the money back at a later time if it was not needed. They also discussed opening a new fund raising account named Citizens for Blagojevich with new contributions.

Misuse of State Funding To Induce Firing of Chicago Tribune Editorial Writers

According to the affidavit, intercepted phone calls revealed that the Tribune Company, which owns the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Cubs, has explored the possibility of obtaining assistance from the Illinois Finance Authority (IFA) relating to the Tribune Companys efforts to sell the Cubs and the financing or sale of Wrigley Field. In a November 6 phone call, Harris explained to Blagojevich that the deal the Tribune Company was trying to get through the IFA was basically a tax mitigation scheme in which the IFA would own title to Wrigley Field and the Tribune would not have to pay capital gains tax, which Harris estimated would save the company approximately $100 million.

Intercepted calls allegedly show that Blagojevich directed Harris to inform Tribune Owner and an associate, identified as Tribune Financial Advisor, that state financial assistance would be withheld unless members of the Chicago Tribunes editorial board were fired, primarily because Blagojevich viewed them as driving discussion of his possible impeachment. In a November 4 phone call, Blagojevich allegedly told Harris that he should say to Tribune Financial Advisor, Cubs Chairman and Tribune Owner, our recommendation is fire all those [expletive] people, get em the [expletive] out of there and get us some editorial support.

On November 6, the day of a Tribune editorial critical of Blagojevich , Harris told Blagojevich that he told Tribune Financial Advisor the previous day that things look like they could move ahead fine but, you know, there is a risk that all of this is going to get derailed by your own editorial page. Harris also told Blagojevich that he was meeting with Tribune Financial Advisor on November 10.

In a November 11 intercepted call, Harris allegedly told Blagojevich that Tribune Financial Advisor talked to Tribune Owner and Tribune Owner got the message and is very sensitive to the issue. Harris told Blagojevich that according to Tribune Financial Advisor, there would be certain corporate reorganizations and budget cuts coming and, reading between the lines, he’s going after that section. Blagojevich allegedly responded. Oh. Thats fantastic. After further discussion, Blagojevich said, Wow. Okay, keep our fingers crossed. Youre the man. Good job, John.

In a further conversation on November 21, Harris told Blagojevich that he had singled out to Tribune Financial Advisor the Tribunes deputy editorial page editor, John McCormick, as somebody who was the most biased and unfair. After hearing that Tribune Financial Advisor had assured Harris that the Tribune would be making changes affecting the editorial board, Blagojevich allegedly had a series of conversations with Chicago Cubs representatives regarding efforts to provide state financing for Wrigley Field. On November 30, Blagojevich spoke with the president of a Chicago-area sports consulting firm, who indicated that he was working with the Cubs on matters involving Wrigley Field. Blagojevich and Sports Consultant discussed the importance of getting the IFA transaction approved at the agencys December or January meeting because Blagojevich was contemplating leaving office in early January and his IFA appointees would still be in place to approve the deal, the charges allege.

The Government is being represented by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Reid Schar, Carrie Hamilton and Christopher Niewoehner.

If convicted, conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison, while solicitation of bribery carries a maximum of 10 years in prison, and each count carries a maximum fine of $250,000. The Court, however, would determine the appropriate sentence to be imposed under the advisory United States Sentencing Guidelines.

The public is reminded that a complaint contain only charges and is not evidence of guilt. The defendants are presumed innocent and are entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Source: U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Copy HTML:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed or Email Feed.

So Whats Next? Taxpayer Revolt? Depression? Or Both?

Posted December 9, 2008

Comments(0)

Everybody sing… ITS STARTING TO FEEL A LOT LIKE DEPRESSION (to the tune “Its Starting to feel a Lot Like Christmas”). I don’t have much more to add to Devvy’s article below except that I live in Silicon Valley (Santa Clara County, CA) and people here are not immune to this recession. It is really getting bad. I wish everybody the Happiest of Holidays this holiday season. I know for some, it will be difficult. Best wishes for the new year and remember, we’re all in this together. We cannot rely on the government to save us so plan for your own survival.

COLUMNISTS CALL FOR TAXPAYER REVOLT – WANT MORE SOCIALISM

By: Devvy

December 4, 2008
© 2008 – NewsWithViews.com

Back in September, I happened upon a column titled ‘Time for a Taxpayer Revolt.’ As I began to read the column, I thought, “This is good.” The two authors were outlining the disaster of the so-called “bail outs” underway. As I worked my way through the column, I realized it was just more blame Republicans. At the bottom of this drivel, out popped the ignorance of the authors as they spewed their socialism: the government should help people build houses, create jobs for the greenie movement and universal health care.

I don’t know where Medea Benjamin & Arun Gupta went to school, but it’s obvious they know nothing about our legal form of government or the U.S. Constitution. Yet, these socialists who hide behind the “liberals” label have a large forum where they pump out their propaganda. Because Americans are so under educated from attending the dumbing down institutions they call public schools and blind loyalty to their political party, they believe it. Benjamin and Gupta call for a Twenty-First Century New Deal, similar to the dangerous and toxic message put out by Richard C. Cook yo.

Isn’t it odd how people like Benjamin and Gupta rail about the bailouts, but how much you want to bet both of them voted for Comrade Obama who voted for this grand larceny? Allegedly Americans voted back the entire Congress (with 17 seats changing in the House out of 435) who approved this looting of the American people. So, why on earth would there be a taxpayer revolt? Americans were so happy with the performance of Congress (who had an approval rating of about 17% before the pretend elections) – they rehired 99% of the same people who are destroying this country! We’re right back to where we were before the pretend election with the same Congress and people think there’s going to be change?

I was out of the state from November 16 – December 2nd. When I travel I always try to engage Americans on current issues just to see what they know. The bail out issue has people hopping mad, yet we’re to believe Americans supposedly voted all the same crooks back into office? The one thing that did surprise me was how many folks from restaurant personnel, gas station employees, grocery store, you name it – have heard about the citizenship controversy surrounding Comrade Obama.

While on the road, I caught a segment with Bill O’Reilly who said quit listening to the gloom and doom people out there and spend! It’s important for the economy said O’Reilly, and people like yours truly and Dr. Edwin Vieira don’t know what we’re talking about. According to the big O, we’re just fear mongers. A few days later I caught a morning segment on FAUX. The subject: people are now saving their money and how bad that is for the economy. Listen. It’s real easy for a gas bag like O’Reilly to tell you to spend yourself further into debt when he likely spends cash; easy to do with an income of about $20 million bux a year. Yes, our economy depends on the exchange of goods and services for compensation. However, with pink slips dropping like leaves in fall and Americans living on the edge of financial ruin, the economy will suffer. People can’t spend what they don’t have and those who do have are weighing their options on spending. Need vs want.

Over the past few decades, Americans haven’t saved, but spent themselves into massive debt. Banking institutions, lenders and private companies have been lying and cheating about the solvency of their corporations and now the day of reckoning has come with the worst still on the horizon. As millions of Americans have no credit or bad credit, they are unable to spend, even for necessities. Millions more are finally coming to the realization that because they have no savings to speak of, they are standing on a cliff and the view isn’t pretty. The wipeout of 401(k)s has been devastating, but well paid hucksters who make their living peddling bull, knocked yours truly and others for warning about the 401(k) issue. Guess what? Tragically, it has come to pass.

Back in 2005, I told my husband we have to sell our home in Sacramento and get out because the housing market was going to crash. While I was planning to get packed up and put the house on the market, John was diagnosed with cancer so we had to push back our plans a bit. We purchased this house in West Texas in April, 2006 and sold our house in Natomas Park, Sacramento, California, several months later. We were one of the lucky ones who got out. While we had no debt on our home except the original mortgage, I knew the hurricane was building steam and sure as the sun shines, it has hit Natomas Park hard. The house across the street from ours, same floor plan except flipped, sold for $405,000 in June 2005. Today that house is appraised at $274,000. The house we sold is worth $150,000 less today than the day we signed the final escrow papers. Those buyers are saddled with huge mortgages that far exceed the value of the homes in that foreclosure capital and it will never turn around for them. The property will continue to age and eventually new houses in the area will be built commanding higher selling prices than the used ones.

I warned in a column back on September 25, 2008, the bail out disaster would be a never ending hemorrhage and we the people will be the ones bankrupted while CON-gress makes sure their banking buddies are bailed out. Congress critters continue to appear on cable networks talking about how the auto industry CEOs need to give them a plan so they can unlawfully dole out loans. Not one of them except Ron Paul has firmly stated that the U.S. Constitution forbids Congress from acting as a bank giving lines of credit, owning banks, bailing out private industry (auto and insurance) and dictating employment terms to private corporations. Now the states of the Union are lining up like beggars because they, along with their state legislatures, have mismanaged their budgets and want you and I to pay the interest on any money unlawfully loaned to these states by a corrupt Congress.

The level of lawlessness out in Washington, DC, is breath taking and will bring the entire economy to complete and total ruin because there’s no one to stop it. Congress is running amok as if the U.S. Constitution doesn’t exist. There’s no president to stop this massive looting using veto power. No checks and balances any longer. The picture is grim and sugar coating it won’t change the reality of what should begin to hit in the first quarter of next year. Back in January, I wrote about a tent city in Ontario, California. “Shantytowns” are now springing up in major cities:

November 14, 2008: “Rising unemployment and widespread foreclosures have left many homeless and living in tents and makeshift huts in cities around the nation. It’s a scene not seen since the “Hoovervilles” of the Great Depression.”

No new “stimulus” packages being thrown around by Pelosi and Obama will make a damn bit of difference. Using borrowed money to try and bail out a dead economy is simply more lunacy. Congress destroyed our major job sectors (ag, manufacturing, industrial) with all these “free” trade treaties – BOTH parties. Neither have done a thing to stop the destruction by getting America out of NAFTA, CAFTA and GATT. Their only solution is to borrow more money from the privately owned FED, slap all Americans with the interest and dole out more borrowed, worthless currency in an effort to plug the dam that is about to burst.

Who is going to pay the tab for this $8 TRILLION dollar give away called bail outs and rescues? You, me, our children and grand children will be paying the interest on all this borrowed money if the current system stays intact. With the people’s purse overdrawn $10.6 TRILLION dollars, how does Congress expect the debt load to be paid? Don’t ask Nancy Pelosi. That vile female is the quintessential example of an immoral crone who has absolutely no regard for the supreme law of the land. Come April 15, 2009, we shall see if all the money stolen from your paycheck this year via the withholding rip off taxing scheme was enough to support this massive theft from the sweat off your back. Remember the figures from 2004 and multiply them to what Congress has done over the past three months and intends to continue doing. No, this isn’t great news at “Christmas time.” Yes, it’s important for Americans to put money into the economy, but when enough of them see the big picture, they are not going to continue spending. It’s called survival.

But, I guess this is all okay with the American people because they allegedly rehired the same crooks, not just CON-gress, but the state legislatures as well. The destruction of California is voter approved. Not only do the people of California approve of the looting of their wallets by their state legislature and that nitwit governor, Arnie the Terminator, they allegedly voted in even more communists to Sacramento last month. The people of California threw out Davis and replaced him with a “movie star” who is no more qualified to be the governor of any state than I am to teach physics at MIT.

Republican heavies and “leadership” in the state said no to Tom McClintock and convinced gullible conservatives that a pig like Arnold Schwarzenegger had “more name recognition.” Oh, did I call Da Governor a pig? I certainly did. How quickly people forget. Arnie’s photo appeared on Drudge during his run for the governor’s mansion. It was a picture of a female, buck naked except for a wisp of material covering her pubic area, sitting on Arnie’s shoulders, bare legs wrapped around his neck with big udders hanging in his face. Oh, yes, and was I shocked to see it up on Drudge’s web site. I’m sure Maria, California’s first lady, enjoyed that display of her husband for the whole world to see. Schwarzenegger is an empty bag of skin (sagging now since he no longer pumps his pecs with steroids) who has done nothing but rubber stamp the financial destruction of California.

My home state is over run with illegal aliens bankrupting the taxpayers. THAT is why I left California. BILLIONS of dollars fleeced from the hard working people of California every year to support somewhere around 8 MILLION illegal aliens who have no right to anything except being deported, but are given free medical treatment in hospitals, bankrupting them from one end of the state to the other. Crowding California’s class rooms with kids who have NO right to be in the state, much less sucking off the system. From medical treatment to food stamps, education and stealing jobs that belong to natural born and naturalized citizens, to filling the state prisons, illegals are stealing the resources of that state with the blessing of the taxpayers who voted back in the same crooks, cowards and criminals into the state house last month. I said hasta la vista to Arnie and that corrupt legislature.

The mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villagarosa, who is of Mexican ancestry, protects illegals. How he whines about water shortages and not enough money, but he turns a blind eye for “his people” instead of working with Arnie to deport millions of criminals running loose in the state. How much water do you think 8 MILLION illegals use in California every day taking showers, flushing toilets, cooking and doing laundry? Quit complaining, Villagarosa. You and the terminator are nothing but hypocrites who care nothing for the law.

I was just in LA two weeks ago. There are huge areas of that basin that resemble the slums of Tijuana. A third world dump that continues to grow in size. Militant illegals who demand the productive citizens of California work their fingers to the bone to keep them in free services. The people of California asked for this chaos and plunder and now they’re getting a good dose of it up front and in their faces. The citizens in the golden state are so happy about it, they voted the same vermin back to the state house who continue to fund and protect these criminals who sneak across our borders. The same incompetent professional politicians who have destroyed California both morally and economically. That’s why I left California. We could have purchased another home anywhere in the state, but I refuse to have my pocketbook drained to fund criminals.

I continue to encourage people to diversify as much of their holdings as possible into gold. This always brings email telling me the government is going to seize all the gold “just like they did before.” Dr. Edwin Vieira recently made an excellent statement on this very issue:

“Gold confiscation will be far more difficult than confiscation was in the 1930s, when much of the gold was held in the banks, which FDR simply closed. Now very little of it is. So how will it be seized, if people do not voluntarily turn it in? By house-to-house searches? The 401k loot, however, is all in various financial institutions. It can be confiscated electronically and immediately. So, in that respect, the 401k loot is in a worse position than the 1930s gold, because much of that gold was not in the banks, and was never turned in. Of course, people might start liquidating their 401k accounts (leaving aside the tax consequences) if they feared confiscation. But if that started to occur on a massive scale, the PTB would invoke a kind of “bank holiday,” simply freezing the assets in place.”

People are free to do what they feel necessary to protect their assets and if they’re afraid to buy gold because they fear confiscation, so be it. I do not because we are a different people than back in 1933. Know what? Let them try. Some of the most powerful people in this country – including banking barons – own gold and lots of it. We’ll see if Pelosi and the gutless coward, Harry Reid, want to take them on and millions of Americans who will just say, stuff it.

I need to make a correction. In a recent column I wrote the Illinois State Lottery winning Pick 3 numbers on November 5, 2008, was 666. That is a fact. I erred when I said this drawing was on election night. For some reason, I had it stuck in my head the election was November 5th when in fact it was the 4th. An honest mistake.

The Obama citizenship controversy is reaching a full head of steam. Please click here for my last press release two days ago titled ‘Treachery Inside the U.S. Supreme Court.’ There is a second case that has the same teeth as Leo Donofrio’s and that press release covers Cort’s case and what everyone needs to do asap. Regular readers know I filed several FOIAs and the aforementioned press release contains a scan of the letter I received while on the road from the University of Hawaii under their state records act. Now that I’m home, I need to follow up on the others. The U.S. State Department has not responded; I predict those two will have to be lawsuits. I won my last lawsuit against the FAA, so do not give up hope before I even begin my battle.

Also, remember my persistent requests to James Burrus, head of election fraud at the FBI in Washington, DC, to open an investigation into Obama for violation of wire fraud laws. While the FBI will not comment on any on-going investigation, I am hopeful there is one underway. Burrus simply cannot ignore the overwhelming evidence against Obama and not expect at some point for all hell to break loose when the truth comes out and that for political reasons, the FBI knowingly and willfully ignored it. There is a rage blowing across this country and a demand for justice. We shall see if our voices are heard.

As for Phil Berg’s case, Obama and the DNC thumbed their noses at the Supreme Court. This column covers it well. The only thing I disagree with in Mr. Latino’s column is that if Phil’s case gets kicked to the curb, it’s over. Leo and Cort’s cases are clearly the cannon that will stop an impostor from being sworn in as president of these united States of America IF the U.S. Supreme Court has the guts to bring their cases to a full oral argument.

Obama has hired three law firms. Not three lawyers, but three law firms to defend him against this growing legal quagmire. I predict it won’t be long before even Obama’s staunchest supporters begin asking hard questions: Why not produce a real COLB? Why can’t you refute beyond any doubt the valid and solid allegations in Leo’s lawsuit that you, Mr. Obama, were not a natural born citizen at birth? All this can come to a halt by just proving these Americans wrong, Mr. Obama. Why do you refuse to release your records from Columbia? Is it because you obtained funding as a foreign student as has been alleged? The list goes on about this man who has managed to keep all records of his life sealed up nice and tight. There’s a reason and anyone not drowning in denial knows why.

Obama is now a private citizen. Thankfully for this country he has resigned his unlawful seat in the U.S. Senate. He is also creating a constitutional stand off and an on going legal crisis. It can all go away tomorrow, but it won’t. Obama is still gambling he can bluff his way into the Oval Office. Oops, there’s one other legal obstacle: the electoral college. They vote December 15, 2008. But, wait! It now is confirmed that one of the electoral college delegates scheduled to vote on that date from the late, great State of California is deceased! No, you can’t make this stuff up:

“A lawyer playing a major part in a California lawsuit urging officials to prevent the state’s 55 Electoral College votes from being recorded for Barack Obama until questions about his citizenship are resolved has written to county clerks around the state, seeking an investigation into a process that has allowed a dead woman to be listed as an official elector.” (Full column here.)

Not only have we the people been cheated by vote fraud for the past 30+ years, but now due to the diligence of dedicated Americans, we find the electoral college delegates may also be a con job.

The next big event is tomorrow when all nine Supreme Court justices meet in private to consider the merits of Leo’s case. As it is a Friday, likely we won’t hear anything until next week, but you never know because the clock is ticking. You can’t tell me all nine justices are not aware of the importance of Leo’s case and the huge controversy that has been boiling for months. They know the consequences of not granting Leo oral arguments and the consequences if they do. If they don’t and Obama is sworn into office, the lawsuits will be non stop. If Obama is ruled ineligible, the potential for mass riots across this country is sadly very real. However, we cannot and must not allow what “might” happen due to Obama’s deliberate conning of the American people keep us from pursuing the truth. Any negative consequences will be because of Obama’s actions and his actions alone, not Americans who care about what’s right.

Links:

1 – World Net Daily letter campaign mis-states core issue in Donofrio SCOTUS case
2 – Leo’s web site
3 – Berg v. Obama: The Day of Reckoning
4 – New Video: Dr. Ron Polarik on the authenticity of Obama’s COLB
5 – Web site tracking all the lawsuits
6 – Why Hollywood celebs and liberals support a Marxist like Barack Obama

1 – The Great American Housing Market Nightmare Next Phase
2 – 110 US banks have asked for $170B from bailout
3 – Brilliant analysis: Gold and silver market manipulation update
4 – Blue Mountain freezes withdrawals
5 – Governors May Seek $100 Billion in U.S. Social Aid
6 – FEDS to expand rescue
7 – Silicon Valley: Santa Clara County Housing Underwater
8 – Map of housing disaster above
9 – Citigroup Job Cuts Could Reach 35,000
10 – States consider billions in cuts as deficits widen
11 – Homeless illegally breaking into and squatting in foreclosed homes

Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country, ran for Congress and is a highly sought after public speaker. Devvy belongs to no organization.

She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn’t left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party. Her web site (www.devvy.com) contains a tremendous amount of information, solutions and a vast Reading Room.

Devvy’s website: www.devvy.com

Before you send Devvy e-mail, please take the time to check the FAQ section on her web site. It is filled with answers to frequently asked questions and links to reliable research sources.

E-mail is: devvyk@earthlink.net

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Copy HTML:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed or Email Feed.

Corporate Fascism And The Auto Company Bailout

Posted December 8, 2008

Comments(0)

How topical and appropriate is this. The first video below is an old cartoon that points out why capitalism is better than socialism or fascism and uses a an auto company theme. The next two videos have Peter Schiff arguing why the taxpayers should not bailout the auto companies but rather, let them reorganize via bankruptcy law. On the other side of the argument, we have Lansing Michigan Mayor, Virg Bernero, who, as a typical politician, is only concerned about his re-election and not doing what is right for the companies, their workers or the country. No one wants to swallow the hard pill. The companies, unions and local governments think they can continue business as usual without paying the consequences. There is pain and suffering on the horizon and its not going to get better until we all suffer through the recession.

Capitalism explained…

Part 1: Peter Schiff and Virg Bernero…

Part 2: Peter Schiff and Virg Bernero…

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Copy HTML:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed or Email Feed.

In Keeping With The Demise Of America As We Know It Theme

Posted December 5, 2008

Comments(0)

And I thought my conservative perspective was harsh. I posted two additional articles today regarding the same theme, the demise of our social values and the impending subversion to communism in our formerly free United States of America.

THE COMING DICTATORSHIP

by Alan Stang
December 5, 2008
NewsWithViews.com

Many commentators who are aware that Illegal-Alien Elect Hussein intends to impose an intensely repressive system on the nation – if he is not deported and actually becomes President – are trying with minimal success to figure out what it would be like. The reason for the difficulty is that, unlike almost all other peoples on the planet, Americans have been so free for so long they cannot conceive of life under dictatorship. Their only experience of such life is leftover World War II Nazi movies.

Along these lines, I constantly run into people who have fled other dictatorships and come here. At first, they are ecstatic, celebrating their escape while it was still possible, lamenting others who did not heed the warnings and now are trapped. As they settle in to their new lives in the land of the free and home of the brave, they begin to notice disquieting echoes.

In the final phase of this process, they desperately implore anyone who will stand still long enough to listen, trying to convince them that the same things they saw in their native countries – the things that led to Communist dictatorship – are now happening here. I have heard them many times. “It’s happening here! Don’t you see it?” But of course we do not. We are Americans. As the television commercials say, we deserve the best, the best house, the best car, the best doctor, the best education, etc. Besides, it can’t happen here, right?

The naturalized Paul Revere soon slinks off, frustrated, marveling at American naiveté, perhaps forgetting that when the same symptoms erupted in his native country, he did not recognize them either. Most of these new American Paul Reveres used to come from central Europe, during the “Cold War.” I remember one, a Ukrainian, who had started out as an inmate of a Nazi concentration camp and then was graduated to a Communist concentration camp. He became quite a success in the United States. The last time I saw him he was still pleading with people. “It’s happening here! Don’t you see it?”

Most of these people, at least in my experience, now come from South Africa, one of the many countries on which the United States government imposed Communism. (In fact, every Communist country on earth was created by Washington. I cannot think of an exception. Can you?) Recently, I heard of a lady from South Africa who now lives in the American Northwest and has suddenly discovered to her horror that it is happening here.

The father-in-law of one of my sons was born in Macao, a Portuguese colony on the China coast. Hollywood made a movie there. When the Communists took over, he fled. No problem; he wound up in one of Earth’s lushest garden spots, North Vietnam, where he prospered. When the Communists took over he fled. No problem; he wound up in another tropical paradise: South Vietnam, where he prospered. When the Communists took over, he fled. But, hey, Obamatrons, no problem, right? He wound up here. He is ready to tell anyone who will listen about Communism. He hasn’t said where he will flee next. I’m waiting to hear.

I believe I have found a way to impart what Hussein’s Communism will be like. It is a German movie, entitled, “Das Leben Der Anderen,” which translates to “The Lives of Others.” So much of what we know today comes from movies. This one won the Academy Award for best foreign film in 2006. Don’t worry. It has English subtitles. It is quite a movie. I don’t know how I missed it.

It is set in Communist East Germany in 1984, when the country was still divided and the Berlin Wall was still intact. It shows what life under Communism was like. One of the reasons it is so effective is not what it shows, but what it does not show. It does not show torture victims up to their necks in excrement under the jail, raw flesh hanging in strips. Yes, such outrages are the mother’s milk of Communism, but they are so outrageous, so bestial, that to the American mind they would be less believable science fiction, the more outrageous the more unreal. It would be just another movie.

Also, the victims of the system in the film are not primitive Russian peasants, not backward Chinese farm workers, not superstitious African victims of Jomo Kenyatta and his Mau Mau, not even immigrant Turks. They are white Germans, very advanced, typically efficient Germans, who look like many typical Americans, which makes the life they are leading believable. The believability of the film is enhanced by its consummate ordinariness. Again, no one is tortured.

So how does 1984 Communism in East Germany express itself? How does it rule? It rules through total surveillance. The Party knows everything about you. It rules with threats to take everything from you. The story involves a playwright, his actress mistress and their creative associates. The playwright is immensely successful and wants to get along with the system, but a minister forces himself on the lady and then has every inch of their apartment bugged. The minister hopes to catch the playwright saying something “subversive” which he can use to lock the playwright up.

A neighbor sees the eavesdropping squad entering the apartment. The head of the detachment warns her that if she tells the playwright his apartment now is bugged, her daughter will be kicked out of the university. The playwright writes an article about the suicide epidemic in East Germany. It appears anonymously in the big West German magazine Der Spiegel (The Mirror).

The Party in the East goes berserk. It must find the author. All typewriters are registered. That’s right! Should I repeat it? All typewriters are registered. They are dangerous, like your Glock. But the conspirators know this and use a typewriter smuggled in from the West. The Party calls in a typewriter expert to investigate. He discovers which make and model the author used, but none of the suspects owns one.

The greatest theatrical director in East Germany is no longer allowed to work. Somebody uses the word “censorship.” A top Party official corrects him. There is “no censorship” in the “German Democratic Republic.” There is complete freedom of expression. The director is just not allowed to work. Word arrives that the director has added to the epidemic by committing suicide. Everything is photographed gray and grim and forbidding, the way you remember it.

The Party turns people against each other. The actress is arrested and told that she will never again appear on stage unless she incriminates the playwright. Instead, says, the interrogator, we can keep you forever. Terrified, intimidated, she gives up the playwright and tells where he has hidden the contraband typewriter. The Party raids the apartment. Overcome with horror, the actress runs into the street, is hit by a van and killed.

Communist Flag Waved At Obama's Acceptance Speech

Only material approved by the Party can be published, as in our country today. Whoa, isn’t unapproved material published here? Yes, but remember that even at the height of his power in Communist Russia, Stalin allowed the publication of some opposition material, so he could pose as a champion of freedom of the press. We have the same situation here. The “main stream media” effectively deny coverage to anyone who contradicts what they say. That is why most Americans are ignorant of the main issues that confront us. That is why most Americans don’t know that Illegal Alien-Elect Hussein is a foreigner.

So now what do you think? Could any of this happen here? You know it could because it is already happening. The approaching monster is very near. You can already smell its corpselike breath. It is called Communism or Fascism or Nazism or Socialism, whichever you prefer. Think for instance of Hussein’s “civilian national security force,” as big as, as powerful as and as well-funded as the U.S. military. Do you hear tens of thousands of tramping men singing the Horst Wessel? I do.

This issue is especially close to me. By now, I have written six novels. I am thinking about the next. The publishing history of the first one – The Highest Virtue – is a nightmare of its own. You can read it on my web site, alanstang.com, along with the first chapter. Eventually, a “kiss of death” publisher took it, despite which it won five stars – top rating – from the then West Coast Review of Books, which gave five stars to only 1% of its reviews. It also won blockbuster reviews from the Los Angeles Times and the Herald Examiner. Of course it never went anywhere.

Every one of these novels would make a blockbuster movie. The least of them is to most of the garbage that is published as Everest is to a bump on the head. A literary agent tells me the publishers don’t want most books that are worth anything. He also says that the first person who reads your manuscript at the publisher is typically a literary sage in a training bra who labors in the editor’s harem. And the editor does not even need to convert to Islam.

Get Das Leben Der Anderen. I found it in the public library. Watch it and feel the hair on the back of your neck stand up. The next time a refugee from Johannesburg or somewhere else tries to tell you what is happening here, listen. And remember how to prevent the same thing from happening here:

Repatriate – Don’t Inaugurate

[Announcement: Alan Stang's new radio show, The Sting of Stang, will debut on Monday, July 14th, 7 to 8 a.m., Central, M-F, via Republic Broadcasting Network. To listen, go to republicbroadcasting.org and click on Listen Live. Call in is 800 313-9443. If you can't listen at that time, do so via the archives, which are free. I'll be talking about the various manifestations of the conspiracy for world government, its tactics, such as the illegal alien invasion, its purposes and its players, from Jorge W. Boosh on down.]

Alan Stang was one of Mike Wallace’s original writers at Channel 13 in New York, where he wrote some of the scripts that sent Mike to CBS. Stang has been a radio talk show host himself. In Los Angeles, he went head to head nightly with Larry King, and, according to Arbitron, had almost twice as many listeners. He has been a foreign correspondent. He has written hundreds of feature magazine articles in national magazines and some fifteen books, for which he has won many awards, including a citation from the Pennsylvania House of Representatives for journalistic excellence. One of Stang’s exposés stopped a criminal attempt to seize control of New Mexico, where a gang seized a court house, held a judge hostage and killed a deputy. The scheme was close to success before Stang intervened. Another Stang exposé inspired major reforms in federal labor legislation.

His first book, It’s Very Simple: The True Story of Civil Rights, was an instant best-seller. His first novel, The Highest Virtue, set in the Russian Revolution, won smashing reviews and five stars, top rating, from the West Coast Review of Books, which gave five stars in only one per cent of its reviews.

Stang has lectured in every American state and around the world and has guested on many top shows, including CNN’s Cross Fire. Because he and his wife had the most kids in Santo Domingo, the Dominican Republic, where they lived at the time, the entire family was chosen to be actors in “Havana,” directed by Sydney Pollack and starring Robert Redford, the most expensive movie ever made (at the time). Alan Stang is the man in the ridiculous Harry Truman shirt with the pasted-down hair. He says they made him do it.

Website: AlanStang.com

E-Mail: stangfeedback@gmail.com

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Copy HTML:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed or Email Feed.

Who Will Care If The Great Ship “America” Crashes On The Rocks

Posted December 5, 2008

Comments(0)

I came across this article on News With Views after posting this video. I found it interesting and timely because the issues we’re facing as a country are deep-rooted in our parenting and public education system.

Indeed, this undermining of our social values has been deliberate by the liberal left and their socialist communist agenda.

We have now elected, by popular election, the most left-leaning socialist community organizer that has probably ever entered politics to the Presidency. This shows just how big the payoff is for demoralizing the American family and American values. We must wake up to the fact that our Constitution is not a Living Constitution. It cannot be changed at every whim of societal pressure that wants to have a different set of rules to benefit their point of view. There is hell to pay for this kind of thinking and we are paying for it now.

However, it’s not too late to wake up to that fact and take our Country back from the grasp of socialism and restore our Republic to the glory it was founded upon.

DO PEOPLE CARE IF AMERICA ENDS?

By Nancy Levant
November 27, 2008
NewsWithViews.com

It’s an interesting question and one pondered for years. I have come to the conclusion that those born after the 1960’s are not patriotic citizens by the same definition as those born prior to the 60’s. In fact, I’ve heard many 20, 30, and even 40-somethings claim that they hold no particular allegiance to this country, as they consider it to be imperialistic, dishonest, exploitative, and devious.

But we older citizens must realize that the younger generations have not had the benefit of time, wisdom, and many have not had the experience of warfare and soldiering, nor have they had the benefit of an educational system that taught “Republic” vs. “Democracy.” They believe their country to be a democracy, and at the same time, know very well that it is not. They have also been raised on a steady dose of unscrupulous and lying governance, and this they know, as well.

Younger generations are not enamored with Capitalism, politics, democracy, or faith. Today’s younger generations are largely atheistic by educational design and disgusted with leadership, religion, and their historical lies. Sometimes we tend to think they are simply disinterested and apathetic, but the fact is they are all too savvy when it comes to the sick joke of all forms of aristocratic governance.

The older generations, the ones who spearheaded the globalist movement, albeit by manipulation, and also the resulting protest movement, are also disappointed people. We were betrayed by the ones we elected – betrayed. It’s a bitter pill to swallow, because much like our younger countrymen, we did not act responsibly with our freedoms. We took them for granted, and then became enamored of televised entities, who turned out to be liars, thieves, cheaters, and conquerors. We also fully supported the fully corrupt 2-Party system.

We, the older generations, and the largest voting body in America, elected and re-elected the men and women who, year by year, Executive Order after Executive Order, Signing Statement by Signing Statement, Directive by Directive, and Act by Act, disassembled the united States of America and the American Constitution. And now, the younger generations think of us as ignorant, manipulated, and corrupted fools. Truth hurts, doesn’t it?

The Greatest Generation and the Baby Boomers have a heavy burden to bear, because it was under our watch that the deceivers smiled and grinned their ways into full-blown destruction mode. We elected the Socialist globalists into our nation’s most powerful positions, or to put it more honestly and plainly, we elected the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations over and over and over again (and continuing to do so), to our economic and historic demise.

Equally, and in many ways, the Greatest Gen and Boomers sold their souls for appearances, credit, luxury retirement, and in imitation of the elite. It’s a sad state of affairs, a bitter story, and a guilt that is undeniably ours to bear. But, forward we must go, and we need our youth to help us, though they have every substantial reason not to trust our naivety, our politics, or our decisions. After all, we dumped this terrible mess on their shoulders and told them they were living the good life. Now they are paying the price for our ignorance with their lives in foreign nations and strapped to insurmountable and lifelong debt. America did not start corroding 5 years ago. It’s been corroding for a century, and that places the blame and the burden on us. We were supposed to prize, cherish, and protect our freedom. We were supposed to take care of our nation. Instead, we stood 100% behind her destroyers. Many of us still do.

Many younger Americans believe America needs to change – completely and permanently. Hence, the Socialists, who were always around our corners, simply walked in and set up charismatic shop – as in the entire American public school system, the “environmental,” land-stealing, land trust movement, and the “greater good” morality to manipulate the masses straight out of their rights to FREEDOM. And many of the middle to upper-middle class Americans, particularly those who instantly fell for the “eco-friendly” and policed communities, are now so financially polluted that they can think of nothing but their dire straits, their detracting screen addictions, and their pretend country clubs and day-spas. In my book, these people are out to lunch, vacant, and unreachable. Equally, they live in America’s forthcoming wasteland (and I do mean forthcoming).

Again, I say to the Greatest Generation and the Boomers, we have an impossible task before us – the United Nations, the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, Agenda 21 and sustainability, the global land trust scams, corporate and financial dictatorship, all-enCOMPASSing privacy infringements, a transformed and gullible American population, and so very many global enemies – of which, now, we know why. What are the chances to regain our Republic and our Constitution, while we face “internationalized” policing forces, super viruses, and breaking news pandemics? Slim chances…but try, we must. America was slaughtered under our watch. She was.

So, the original question – do American people care if America ends? Today, I’d say the answer is 50/50 at best, but that may be another stupid assumption on this gray-haired lady’s part. God knows I’ve made more foolish political assumptions than this, but to my countrymen of all ages, let us disappoint them, for they have always counted on our ignorance, our apathy, our cultural addictions, and their masterful propaganda. We must disappoint them. We have no choice. And to our younger American generations, please accept our sincerest apologies. We were wrong – albeit manipulated – and incredibly stupid. Please, don’t follow suit.

Nancy Levant is a renowned writer for Constitutional governance and American culture. She is the author of The Cultural Devastation of American Women: The Strange and Frightening Decline of the American Female (and her dreadful timing).

She is an opponent of deceptive governance and politicians, global governance by deception, political feminism, the public school system, political economics based upon manufactured wars and their corporate benefactors, and the Federal Reserve System. She is also a nationwide and lively radio personality. To book an engagement with Nancy Levant, send an email request to:

Not available

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Copy HTML:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed or Email Feed.