Tuesday, March 31, 2009

The Turner Diaries Audiobook

I am proud to offer the complete audiobook version of the Turner Diaries read by the author Dr. William Pierce. It is available by both the links below.

The Turner Diaries Torrent
The Turner Diaries rar file from my Filedropper account

Friday, March 27, 2009

UK Mom Gets Ticket While Reviving Her Son

!!Please visit the Reckless Cop tag at the end of this entry for many more stories like this!!

LONDON, March 22 (UPI) -- Disability activists say they're backing a British mother given a $145 parking ticket when she stopped to revive her severely disabled son.

Penny Batkin, 40, was taking her son, Freddie, 4, to a hospice in Hampton when he began gasping for breath and turning blue, said Richmond Aid, a charity for people with disabilities.

Batkin incurred the ticket by illegally stopping her car on the pavement to resuscitate him. To make matters worse, Batkin said, the Richmond Council's parking office later refused to rescind the ticket even after she explained what had happened, The Daily Telegraph reported Sunday.

Richmond Aid officials say they hope local authorities can find it "in their hearts to rescind a parking fine incurred by a desperate mother who had no choice if she was to save the life of her child."

"We are so appalled we struggle to find words," said one aid official.

Woman Dies While Cop Writes Ticket

A 83 year old woman dies while deputy writes a ticket. A son was taking his mom to the hospital when a sheriffs deputy stopped him and refused to let him drive to the hospital that was less than one mile away.

When will everyone wake up that cops are NOT ON OUR SIDE. They do not "serve and protect" they harass and oppress.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Alex Jones Is A Zionist

There have been many allegations against Alex Jones regarding his rabid defense of Israel and International Jewry. Some claim that he is a Zionist disinfo agent. At first my opinion of Jones was that he was a sensationalist and came off like a used car salesman, however he was very well read and did put out many movies on important subjects. Over the past 6 months my opinion of Alex Jones has changed. I do believe he is in some form a disinfo agent, for International Jewry AKA Zionism AKA the NWO. The article at the bottom is a must read!

The following is a video a compilation of the Alex Jones show revealing his true nature.

This is the article from Real Jew News which puts a nail in Alex Jones's coffin and seals the deal about his Zionist ties.

Is Alex Jones a Zionist?

Monday, March 23, 2009

Jay Rockefeller Hates The Internet

What he means to say is, we the people pushing for a New World Order find that the internet severely hampers our efforts to dumb people down and control them. We also don't like it because unlike every other media outlet we don't have control over it.

Obama: Yes We Can = Thank You Satan

Some of these are reaching, but it is interesting none the less.

For the skeptics

The Debt Star

Audit The Fed!

Ron Paul's "Federal Reserve Transparency Act" to audit the Federal Reserve is now up to 39 co-sponsors the House, and an identical companion bill, S604, has been introduced in the Senate. Here are the House co-sponsors:

Young (R-AK), McClintock (R-CA), Woolsey (D-CA), Rohrabacher (R-CA), Castle (R-DE), Stearns (R-FL), Grayson (D-FL), Buchanan (R-FL), Posey (R-FL), Kingston (R-GA), Price (R-GA), Broun (R-GA), Abercrombie (D-HI), Burton (R-IN), Fleming (R-LA), Alexander (R-LA), Bartlett (R-MD), McCotter (R-MI), Bachmann (R-MN), Peterson (D-MN), Akin (R-MO), Taylor (D-MS), Rehberg (R-MT), Jones (R-NC), Foxx (R-NC), Garrett (R-NJ), Heller (R-NV), DeFazio (D-OR), Platts (R-PA), Duncan (R-TN), Wamp (R-TN), Blackburn (R-TN), Poe (R-TX), Paul (R-TX), Marchant (R-TX), Burgess (R-TX), Chaffetz (R-UT), Petri (R-WI), Kagen (D-WI), Lummis (R-WY)

32 Republicans and 7 Democrats so far. [Urge your Representative to co-sponsor]

Friday, March 20, 2009

Corrine Brown is a Dumbass

Gauging Interest in a Podcast

Due to the lack of good Nationalist, Truth based podcasts I have considered the idea of doing a Truth In Our Time podcast. The following is a poll to see if you would listen on a regular basis or you would rather me stick to blogging.

Would you listen to the Truth In Our Time podcast on a regular basis?
Other, Please explain.

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Bishop Williams on the Holocaust

This is a follow up from this story.

AIG Donations to Obama

Barack Hussein Obama received over $100,000 in 2008 the highest of anyone in the country except for Chris Dodd. It's pretty clear how it works, donate like crazy to powerful politicians, pass out ludicrous and unwarranted bonuses, go bankrupt and the politicians bail you out.

We do not have a representative government, they do the will of the international bankers. I don't know how this could be any clearer.

Monday, March 16, 2009

Mises Admits The South Had it Right

Volume 10, Number 6; June 1992

The Confederate Constitution

By Randall G. Holcombe

Special interests have long used the democratic political process to produce legislation for their own private benefit, and the U.S. Constitution contains flaws that make this easier. One attempt to remedy these flaws was the Confederate Constitution.

The Confederate Constitutional Convention opened in February 1861. Robert Barnwell Rhett of South Carolina, called the "Father of Secession" for initiating his state's breakoff from the union, thought that the U.S. model was the best. The other 50 delegates agreed. He nominated Howell Cobb, a Georgia attorney and former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, to preside over the meeting, which was completed by March I 1, 1861. By the end of that year, 13 states had ratified the new Constitution.

In broad outline, the Confederate Constitution is an amended U.S. Constitution. Even on slavery, there is little difference. Whereas the U.S. Constitution ended the importation of slaves after 1808, the Confederate Constitution simply forbade it. Both constitutions allowed slave ownership, of course.

In fact, slavery only became a constitutional issue after the war had begun. In his 1861 inaugural address, Abraham Lincoln said, "Apprehension seems to exist among the people of the Southern States that by the accession of a Republican administration their property [is] to be endangered.... I have no purpose, directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the United States where it exists.... I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclina6on to do so."

But the differences in the documents, small as they are, are extremely important. The people who wrote the Southern Constitution had lived under the federal one. They knew its strengths, which they tried to copy, and its weaknesses, which they tried to eliminate.

One grave weakness in the U.S. Constitution is the "general welfare" clause, which the Confederate Constitution eliminated.

The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to "lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States."

The Confederate Constitution gave Congress the power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, for revenue necessary to pay the debts, provide for the common defense, and carry on the Government of the Confederate States..."

The Southern drafters thought the general welfare clause was an open door for any type of government intervention. They were, of course, right.

Immediately following that clause in the Confederate Constitution is a clause that has no parallel in the U.S. Constitution. It affirms strong support for free trade and opposition to protectionism: "but no bounties shall be granted from the Treasury; nor shall any duties or taxes on importation from foreign nations be laid to promote or foster any branch of industry."

The use of tariffs to shelter domestic industries from foreign competition had been an important issue since tariffs were first adopted in 1816. Southern states had borne heavy costs since tariffs protected northern manufacturing at the expense of Southern imports. The South exported agricultural commodities and imported almost all the goods it consumed, either from abroad or from Northern states. Tariffs drastically raised the cost of goods in the Southern states, while most of the tariff revenue was spent in the North.

The Confederate Constitution prevents Congress from appropriating money "for any internal improvement intended to facilitate commerce" except for improvement to facilitate waterway navigation. But "in all such cases, such duties shall be laid on the navigation facilitated thereby, as may be necessary to pay for the costs and expenses thereof..."

"Internal improvements" were pork-barrel public works projects. Thus the Southern Founders sought to prohibit general revenues from being used for the benefit of special interests. Tax revenues were to be spent for programs that benefited everyone, not a specific segment of the population.

In another attack on pork-barrel spending, the Confederate Constitution gave the President a line-item veto. "The President may approve any appropriation and disapprove any other appropriation in the same bill." Anticipating the U.S. Constitutional amendment that would become necessary after Franklin Roosevelt's four terms, the President himself would serve only one, six-year term.

In many circumstances, Confederate appropriations required a two-thirds majority rather than a simple majority. Without the President's request, for example, a two-thirds majority of both Houses would have been necessary for Congress to spend any money. This one provision, if adopted in the U.S. Constitution, would eliminate much of the spending that goes on today.

The Confederate Founders also tried to make sure that there would be no open-ended commitments or entitlement programs in the Confederate States. "All bills appropriating money shall specify...the exact amount of each appropriation, and the purposes for which it is made," said the document. "And Congress shall grant no extra compensation to any public contractor, officer, agent, or servant, after such contract shall have been made or such service rendered." Such a provision would have eliminated the cost-overrun," a favorite boondoggle of today's government contractors.

The Confederate Constitution also eliminated omnibus spending bills by requiring all legislation to "relate to but one subject," which had to be "expressed in the title." There would be no "Christmas-tree" appropriations bills or hidden expenditures.

These changes would have had a profound effect in keeping government small and unintrusive. Their inclusion demonstrates much wisdom on the part of Confederate statesmen in improving on the Founding Fathers. Unfortunately, the federal government was not willing to let them give their system a try.

Sunday, March 15, 2009

Israeli Soldier Shoots American Citizen

An American activist who participated in a Palestinian 'solidarity' demonstration is in serious condition Saturday after an Israeli soldier shot him in the face with a high-velocity tear gas canister. He underwent surgery early Saturday.

Even as the rescue operation commenced, more tear gas rained down on the demonstrators as soldiers allegedly delayed ambulance access.

"Tristan Anderson, 38, of Oakland, Calif., was wounded Friday in the West Bank village of Naalin, during a protest against Israel's separation barrier," reported the Associated Press. "In the past year, four Palestinians have been killed and scores injured by Israeli troops putting down weekly stone-throwing protests against the barrier, which cuts off Naalin from 300 acres of olive groves."

"The Israeli soldiers were standing on the hill looking over us firing tear-gas canisters" Ulrike Anderson, who was with Tristan when he was hit, told the International Herald-Tribune. "Tristan was hit and fell to the ground. He had a large hole in the front of his head. I tried to stop the bleeding. He was bleeding heavily from the nose."

"Tristan was shot by the new tear-gas canisters that can be shot up to 500 meters," said Teah Lunqvist with the International Solidarity Movement, according to California's IndyBay. "I ran over as I saw someone had been shot, while the Israeli forces continued to fire tear-gas at us. When an ambulance came, the Israeli soldiers refused to allow the ambulance through the checkpoint just outside the village. After 5 minutes of arguing with the soldiers, the ambulance passed."

"Other ISM activists killed or injured by Israeli forces: Rachel Corrie, killed by a bulldozer in 2003; Brian Avery, shot in the face in 2003; and Tom Hurndall, shot to death in 2004," the site notes.

At the Berkeley Daily Planet, Tristan first became known as an environmentalist by sitting in trees to prevent their removal.

“He has worked extensively with Food Not Bombs,” Marcus Kryshka, one of Tristan's long-time friends, told the paper. “He was also heavily involved with the tree-sit.”

"Kryshka said one of the reasons for his trip to Israel 'was to engage in solidarity with the Palestinian protesters.'"

The Israeli army claimed protesters were throwing rocks at the troops.

"Anderson could very well die from his injuries," reported ABC. "And even if he does recover, his friends doubt he'll ever be the same, physically and mentally."

This video is from PalSolidarity.org, broadcast Mar. 13, 2009. It contains graphic images.

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Wikileaks releases "Strictly Confidential" UN Reports

Wikileaks has released 70 United Nations investigative reports classified "Strictly Confidential". The reports expose matters from allegations of hundreds of European peace-keepers sexually abusing refugee girls [1] to generals in Peru using Swiss bank accounts to engage in multi-million dollar frauds against the UN.

United Nations Confidential Reports

Derivatives Simplified

By: David Haas

George Soros, one of the world's foremost investor-speculators, has said many times that he stays away from financial derivatives because “no one understands them”. In the world of finance, derivatives might be comparable to the theoretical study of linear particle acceleration in nuclear physics. Such theories appear to be “understood” mainly based on current assumptions accepted in academic circles, often with little provable working knowledge of how such currently-held theories might ultimately manifest themselves over the long run in the real world. The problem with assumptions is that they generally change…often sooner than we think.

Some might consider financial derivatives to be a form of “Russian Roulette” that's played for fun and extreme levels of short-run profit by a very small number of financial elites and academics. As you'll see, these high-stakes games are played at the potential risk of total destruction of all the functioning financial systems on Earth. Perhaps this is why Warren Buffett repeatedly calls them “financial weapons of mass destruction” or something similar.

I have a great deal of respect for the opinions of both Mr. Soros and Mr. Buffett and it is my intention to show you; 1. Why they feel as they do about derivatives and 2. the potential scale of the threat posed by derivatives and other similar forms of “financial innovation”.

To help gain a “big picture” understanding of derivatives markets, one must start with a diagram. Here's one I created to help lay the groundwork to convey my understanding:

The “Stable Model” shown above shows that there is room for derivatives on the macroeconomic scene as long as they are kept on a very short leash and used for their intended purpose which is, solely, to help producers manage the risks of dramatic changes in markets they depend upon for raw materials used in production. A prominent example of this is the commodities futures markets.

Traditionally, commodities futures were used by companies like Kellogg's Cereal as a form of “insurance” to help them manage the risk of major price fluctuations in the grains they use to make breakfast cereal. By purchasing a futures contract to guarantee the future delivery price of the grains they needed to make cereal for the consumer marketplace, they could be certain that they could maintain relative price stability at the retail level (benefiting consumers) and still operate with the profit they would need to stay in business and serve the market.

In the early 1980's, derivatives began to appear that were of a strictly financial nature. The reasoning behind their regulatory approval was that producers of financial “products” and services also needed to have similar types of “insurance” to protect them against future risks and uncertainties - just like the non-financial operators had. The main selling point was, of course, that these financial futures contracts would help financial companies to stabilize their operations and provide powerful tools to manage their risks from fluctuating markets and future uncertainties, as well. Unfortunately, these sophisticated tools that were originally intended to help firms manage risk grew into potent vehicles for leveraged speculation… and this is where the systemic problems we're facing today originated.

During the 1990's, more and more firms (financial and non-financial alike) began realizing they could make tremendous profits trading in financial vehicles. Many firms made more money trading than they did in their core manufacturing businesses. Word spread and firms of all kinds across all industries began bringing in experienced traders and setting them up with computerized trading operations or they employed the services of outside money managers and hedge funds to do the job for them. Either way, with the seemingly endless expansion of financial opportunity brought about by the rapidly globalizing markets, companies feared they would look foolish to shareholders if they weren't participating in this leveraged gamesmanship. And why not? Everyone else seemed to be doing it, so they should too.

The first major threat to the global “casino” came in 1998 with the collapse of Long Term Capital Management (LTCM). LTCM was a highly-leveraged, computer-based trading firm whose ingenious program authors had not fully considered the possibility that a “statistically unlikely” series of events could occur in a short span of time and wipe them out. A series of such events (East Asian collapse, Russian financial crisis, etc.) did occur, bringing down LTCM and the failure of LTCM was, singlehandedly, large enough to destabilize the entire global financial system. At that time, governments banded together to stabilize the financial system and in doing so created the world's first example of a firm being “too big to fail”.

Once the “too big to fail” precedent had been firmly established, the structured finance and derivatives industry was off and running, emboldened by the fact that they'd proven governments could be relied upon for bailouts of massive, yet risky ventures pursued by financial firms in the future. The bigger the venture, the bigger the risk, the more likely it would be insulated from ultimate failure by government bailout or intervention with taxpayer money. This is what's commonly known as MORAL HAZARD in industry parlance.

This new philosophy was a speculator's dream and it rocketed around the globe at the speed of light gathering eager new participants and “hot” capital wherever it went. According to my understanding, here's what it did to the global financial structure - mainly between 1996 and 2007 - leading us to the “edge of the abyss” that we are peering into today:

Now, I promised to help put the size of the problem we're facing into perspective for you and I'm going to switch gears and attempt to do that. To begin, let's consider the total productive capacity of the all the world's economies combined - the Gross World Product. To provide a credible figure, I'm going to use the one from the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) which monitors this type of thing as an ordinary part of their operations. We'll assume they know what they're talking about and report genuine figures we can trust. The CIA says the estimated 2007 Gross World Product totaled $65.61 trillion dollars . The figure I'm citing is found on this CIA page:


In the business world, we would view the “total value of all goods and services produced and sold” as being the “gross sales” of a business. Gross sales generally has little bearing on “net profit” and perhaps even less relationship with the “total capital” of a business. Gross sales cannot be spent by the business. Only net profit can be spent or added to the capital base. Where businesses incur costs in producing goods for sale, countries consume or deplete resources and also incur costs.

Another measure of the world's wealth is the CIA's reported total of “Direct Foreign Investment” - where nations (and their citizens) have invested abroad in other nations' shares and industries. These worldwide investments totaled $14 trillion at the end of 2006 .

Finally, we can look at the CIA's “Total Market Value of All Publicly Traded Shares” or TMV. TMV is the total value of all shares of stock issued and (presumably) outstanding that is available to trade on all of the world's stock exchanges. This total would probably be a pretty close approximation of the world's capital base which the CIA reported at $53.51 trillion as of the end of 2006 . With world markets having price collapsed during much of 2008, it's likely that recent TMV figures, if available, would be smaller than $53 trillion.

With what I've laid out so far, if I were a stock analyst reviewing the entire world economy as if it were a company, I would be able to tell you that the world's capital base was priced at about .816 times sales. I arrived at this by simply dividing TMV by Gross World Product as described above.

The next stop on our world financial tour takes us to the Bank For International Settlements (BIS). This is where the mind begins to be boggled. The BIS is the organization that tracks (or attempts to track) the total value of the financial derivatives that have been created and infused into the world financial markets. Bear in mind while reading that there are still other “private contracts” between parties (known as “off balance sheet” items) that do not show up in the BIS reported figures.

On the front page of the BIS website is a “STATISTICS” tab that links to their quarterly and annual reports on derivatives with the most current figures they've published. There are two separate formal markets - over-the-counter and exchange-traded - that the BIS tracks. As mentioned above, there are other private markets for derivatives that are not tracked by the BIS and those contracts are “off the radar” and won't show up in the BIS reports. (Readers should also note that the BIS derivative figures grew at a reported rate of 15% between 2006 and 2007, despite widespread economic turmoil so it's entirely possible that they're even larger now.)

Here are some recent BIS figures*…

(*Note: I used the 2007 year-end reported totals for the OTC numbers and the 2nd quarter 2008 reported totals for the exchange-traded derivatives, since both were the most recent data I could find on the BIS site. I've done my best to try to be accurate but, given the complexity of the BIS reporting, I'd welcome input from readers who can point out any inaccuracies in my interpretation or math. I'll make corrections as necessary. All values shown are the Notional (Face) Value of the contracts outstanding.)

Now that we have an idea of the reported “face values” of derivative contracts outstanding we can begin to relate it to the world's capital base and annual gross productivity via the CIA figures I've gathered and presented above. The first calculation below shows that the current world derivatives markets have leverage that is 12.713 times larger than the entire estimated world capital base. Put another way, a loss of only 7.87% of the total derivatives exposure would, apparently, be enough of a loss to wipe out ALL of the world's capital.

The next calculation shows that the current world derivatives exposure is approximately 10.37 times the CIA estimated Gross World Product for the year 2007, a year with a strong world economy.

That's the world exposure. But what about the “mother lode” of concentrated derivatives exposure right here in the USA? Take a quick run over to the following link and review the table provided there to see the figures for some major US banks back in the Spring quarter of 2008. While you're there, notice the column “OBS Derivatives”, which - as noted above - means “off balance sheet” holdings of derivatives by an institution:

U.S. Bank Derivative Exposure

As you can see on the table at the “Big Picture Blog” (many thanks to them for their post), U.S. bankers should have their very own “reality TV” show entitled BANKERS GONE WILD! for how they're rolling the dice with our money and our financial system. All the banks on this list (remember, things have deteriorated since Spring 2008) have exposure amounting to many, many times their total capital. As capital is eroded due to ongoing “realized” losses and further impairment of capital assets, the situation only gets worse. These banks must be propped up or merged together to avoid a meltdown, as we've already seen happening. Their exposure alone is apparently enough to consume all of the world's capital as calculated above. This is the epitome of “hubris” and a textbook case of MORAL HAZARD that conquered an entire industry. The problem this time may not be “too big to fail” but, more accurately, “too big to save”. Only time will tell. But, seriously, do you REALLY THINK that Paulson's $700 billion (yeah, it's really larger than that…) bailout plan will do anything considering the size of the problem?

In conclusion, I think you can see that we've been living in a world that is standing on its head; a topsy turvy world turned upside down. The forces of gravity pull equally hard on all Earthly structures and economic structures are no different. In the domain of today's digitized wealth, it's become all too easy to forget that the basis for all monetary and financial systems is TRUST , not financial ingenuity and computer programming skill. As in any relationship, trust - once lost - is not easily regained .

For many decades, we have unwittingly entrusted our wealth to a financial system that, beneath the surface, was becoming increasingly unsound, untrustworthy, and recklessly managed. In many ways, our government and government “regulators” even sanctioned (or, at least turned a blind eye to) the deterioration and have been instrumental in covering up what was really happening behind the scenes. In other words, they were not “regulating” anything.

We are now witnessing precisely what happens when the greater masses determine in unison that “the system” can no longer be trusted and they all head for the exits at once. As history has shown, it may ultimately take generations to regain the confidence of the people or it may never happen. That can only be determined by future leaders and, as I see it from where I stand, it may be a while.

As I'll show in my next post, stocks may not even return to their nominal 2007 highs within the next 20 years and, if that were to be the case, those depending on stock portfolios, 401k's, and IRA's to provide for their retirement needs may be sorely disappointed.

Please check back often and be sure to tell a friend about my blog if you can. Help spread the word.

Who in DC Supports the Constitution?

This is an article from The New American Magazine put about by the JBS it grades to members of the 110th Congress on how closely they adhere to the US Constitution. The results, as should be no surprise are abysmal.

The Freedom Index

Senator Gregg and the Neo-Con Ass Kissing Brigade

by Laurence M. Vance

Senator Judd Gregg, a three-term Republican from New Hampshire, and the senior Republican on the Budget Committee, was interviewed recently by the incredibly biased NPR reporter Melissa Block about President Obama’s new $3.5 trillion budget. He did an excellent job of exposing the budget for what it really is: profligate congressional spending run amok, sustained by tax increases:

Here is Senator Gregg:

But the budget itself has some real serious problems, in my opinion, because it is a massive expansion in spending and a massive expansion in taxes. And the real problem is that in the out years, not only does it increase spending in taxes, but it passes on to our children a government that can’t be afforded, and that’s a big problem.

I don’t think he was elected to bankrupt the country. Basically if you run up deficits at this level – where you’re doubling the national debt in five years and tripling it in 10 years and then doing virtually nothing to bring it down in the out years – and you don’t address the fundamental underlying problems that’s driving the cost of spending, which are the cost of the major entitlement programs as a result of the retirement of the baby boom generation, you’re going to pass on to our children a government that simply can’t be afforded.

The burden of taxation will be so extraordinarily high to maintain the cost of the retired generation that they simply won’t be able to have a high quality of life.

Seventy percent of the jobs in America today are created by small-business people. So basically what you’re putting in place is a tax burden which is going to make it very difficult for those folks who are the entrepreneurs and job creators in our society to be successful.

Oh, where have you been for the past eight years, Senator Gregg, Senator Gregg, oh, where have you been?

Where was Senator Gregg when Bush sought an increase in the federal budget every year? Where was Senator Gregg when Bush ran a deficit every year? Where was Senator Gregg when Bush ran the first trillion-dollar deficit? Where was Senator Gregg when Bush doubled the national debt?

Gregg and his fellow Republicans were supporting Bush every step of the way.

The New American magazine’s Freedom Index for the 110th Congress scores Senator Gregg a pathetic 53 on 40 key votes in the Senate. The higher the number on this index, the stronger a congressman’s "adherence to constitutional principles of limited government, fiscal responsibility, national sovereignty, and a traditional foreign policy of avoiding foreign entanglements." Congressman Ron Paul consistently scores a perfect 100 on the House version of the index.

Senator Gregg voted last year for the $186.5 billion Supplemental Appropriations bill (H.R. 2642), $161.8 billion of which went toward additional funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Senator Gregg voted last year for the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (H.R. 3221) to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Senator Gregg voted last year for the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (H.R. 1424), otherwise known as the $700 billion bailout bill.

But now, in 2009, Senator Gregg is suddenly concerned about Obama’s proposed "massive expansion in spending."

Like the vast majority of his Republican colleagues, Judd Gregg is a partisan hypocrite without an ounce of allegiance to the Constitution or the principles of liberty and limited government.

And this is why the Republicans are worse than the Democrats. The Democrats openly talk of increasing the size and scope of government – no matter which party is in power; the Republicans talk about fiscal conservatism when the Democrats are in power (while sometimes supporting their fiscal liberalism anyway), and then increase the size and scope of government when they are in power. They are political charlatans and con artists, almost to a man.

How quickly conservatives forget that it was Republicans in 2003 who gave us the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act (PL 108-173). Initially projected to cost about $400 billion (which is still $400 billion too much), it is now projected to cost over a trillion dollars. Well, I have not forgotten it, and don’t intend to either. I intend to hold the Republicans accountable for their endless lies and sellouts.

But didn’t all the Republicans in the House and all but three (Specter, Collins, & Snowe) Republicans in the Senate vote against Obama’s stimulus plan? Yes, but there are really only two problems the Republicans had with Obama’s stimulus plan: it wasn’t a Republican plan, and it was more than they wanted to spend. Opposing the plan on principle because it is a government-spending plan and a wealth-redistribution scheme is the furthest thing from the minds of most House and Senate Republicans. Is there any doubt that if McCain had won the election that he would have his own stimulus bill right now and that many Republicans would be supporting it while many Democrats would be against it?

Some Republicans, like Joe Scarborough, are now speaking out about "our own Republican sins for spending an unconscionable amount of money over the past decade." He opines in a recent column:

It was, after all, a Republican administration that nationalized the banking and mortgage industry with October’s $700 billion Wall Street bailout.

George W. Bush’s White House also bailed out the U.S. auto industry.

Defense spending also grew at explosive rates, as the military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned of benefited greatly from two wars and a White House that refused to make tough choices at home or abroad.

Under Bush, a $150 billion surplus in 2001 turned into a $1 trillion deficit in 2008. The national debt doubled. Conservatives were pushed aside in the name of Republicanism.

So where has Morning Joe been for the past eight years? He has been backing an aggressive U.S. foreign policy, Bush’s wars, mercantilism, and government bailouts – that’s where he’s been.

Because I have written many harsh things about Republicans and conservatives, I get e-mails all the time that rail against me for being a Democrat or a liberal. I am neither. Can the Democratic Party be trusted to increase liberty and decrease government? No, certainly not. I therefore have the same contempt for both major parties. Do I have any sympathy for liberalism? Absolutely none. I am opposed to any form of liberalism, socialism, egalitarianism, environmentalism, racial preference, social engineering, interventionism, and wealth redistribution. But I am also opposed to trillion-dollar military budgets, infringements of civil liberties, violations of the Constitution, the war on drugs, crony capitalism, an imperial presidency, open-ended wars, and an overseas empire of troops and bases.

The solution to the current economic crisis is not putting the right political party in charge of the government. The solution is not enacting a particular ideological agenda. The solution to the problem is more liberty and less government. Isn’t it always?

Monday, March 9, 2009

Amazon Store

Shop on our Amazon Store and we earn a commission at no extra cost to you! If you would like to see a book in our store just leave a comment at the end of this post.

Saturday, March 7, 2009

Peter Schiff Crucial Economic Lessons

I know it is sometimes tedious to watch 8 consecutive youtube videos, however these are some of the best Peter Schiff videos I have seen. It is from a speech he gave in November of 2006 to the Mortgage Bankers Association. As you can see for yourself his predictions have been spot on. Put your trust in those who have told the truth for the last 10+ years like Schiff (and his father) not those who have lied their asses off for political and monetary gain.

Thursday, March 5, 2009

Jesse Jackson Jr. - Communist Like His Father and MLK

Source: www.roguegovernment.com

By - Lee Rogers

Jesse Jackson Jr. has proposed several Constitutional amendments which state that we have the right to full employment, a clean environment, high quality health care, high quality education and safe housing. These amendments are just meant to make all the brainwashed sheep out there feel good because the government cannot guarantee full employment, a clean environment, high quality health care, high quality education and safe housing for all. These proposed amendments sound like something that would be written by Karl Marx or a politician in the old Soviet Union. These are some of the dumbest proposed Constitutional amendments ever in the history of this country, and Jackson should be removed from office just based on the stupidity of these proposals. Government doesn’t grant rights, and certainly nobody has a right to any of these things that Jackson is proposing. People are given inalienable rights to be free when they are born and they cannot be granted or given by any politician or government institution.

Check out the text of these proposed Amendments. They are beyond insane. When we have Congressional figures proposing garbage like this, it is clear that we are living in a nation in which real freedom is no more. What we have now is the illusion of freedom.

Right to a clean, safe and sustainable environment.

‘Section 1. All persons shall have a right to a clean, safe, and sustainable environment, which right shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State.

‘Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation.’.

This is a stupid proposal because the U.S. government is one of the biggest polluters anywhere. The best way to guarantee a clean environment is to strengthen private property rights, but instead they want us to think that government will guarantee a clean environment. The word sustainable is also a buzz word used by global warming/climate change alarmists trying to push for the global carbon tax agenda based off of these phony environmental problems.

Right to health care of equal quality.

‘Section 1. All persons shall enjoy the right to health care of equal high quality.

‘Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation.’.

Any government guarantee of health care for all might be of equal quality, but it will not be high quality. This is nothing short of big government socialism that has failed miserably in other nations. A decentralized free market health care system would make health care affordable again, but they won’t do that because their buddies in the pharmaceutical industrial complex would lose out and they would not be able to grab more control over people’s lives. This proposal is entirely ridiculous. Nobody has the right to health care, but they have the inalienable right to obtain health care if they so choose to do so.

Right to full employment.

‘Section 1. Every person has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work, and to protection against unemployment.

‘Section 2. Every person, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

‘Section 3. Every person who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for themselves and their family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

‘Section 4. Every person who works has the right to form and join trade unions for the protection of their interests.

‘Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation.’.

The Communists in the Soviet Union guaranteed a job for everyone. When this happened, people decided it was not in their best interest to work hard, because regardless of their work performance they would still have a job. This is a stupid proposal that Karl Marx and other card carrying big government socialists, communists and fascists would approve of. Nobody has an inalienable right to a job. This is something that must be earned based upon merit and what they can offer in terms of skills and talent.

Right to safe, sanitary and affordable housing.

‘Section 1. All persons shall have a right to decent, safe, sanitary, and affordable housing, which right shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State.

‘Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation.’.

How on earth will the government provide safe, sanitary and affordable housing as well as all of these other so called rights for all considering the current economic situation? This is another proposed right designed to make people feel good despite the fact that the government will never and should not be responsible for delivering affordable and safe housing for all. Also, who would define what affordable housing is? Again, people have the right to earn a good home for themselves, it is not an inalienable right.

Right to quality education.

‘Section 1. All persons shall enjoy the right to a public education of equal high quality.

‘Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation.’.

This was covered in a previous article. The government wants to make education a right so that they can grab even more federal control over the educational system under the guise that they are doing it to guarantee quality education for all. The more money that has been poured into the educational system the worse education has become in this country. This proposed amendment is a total fraud.

Jackson is clearly a card carrying socialist, communist, fascist or collectivist considering these ridiculous proposed amendments. It is amazing that he seeks to put this type of language in the Constitution which is supposed to limit government from taking away inalienable rights by pretending to grant us rights which are not inalienable. These so called proposed rights are just meant to make everybody feel happy. Again, rights are not granted by government, people are born with them and it is clear Jackson thinks that government grants rights to people and this means that Jackson is either really stupid or a bought and paid for stooge.

Jesse Jackson Jr. - A Moron Like His Father

Source: www.roguegovernment.com

By - Lee Rogers

A new House Resolution seeks to amend the U.S. Constitution to guarantee all citizens of the United States the right to a public education of equal high quality. This is perhaps one of the dumbest Amendments to the U.S. Constitution ever proposed. The government is incapable of providing high quality education and it is not the intention of the Department of Education to create individual thinkers. The goal of the Department of Education is to ensure that the control of what children learn is centralized at the federal level. With that being the case, it is obvious that this proposed amendment will guarantee that everyone will all get a horrible education and be indoctrinated into their brainwashing system equally. It is no coincidence that after the Department of Education was formed, that we have seen a continued degradation in quality of education despite the fact that billions of Federal Reserve Notes are continually funneled into this institution.

Here is the full text of the proposed amendment HJ Resolution 29 introduced by Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL) the son of racism profiteer stooge Jesse Jackson.

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States regarding the right of all citizens of the United States to a public education of equal high quality.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:


‘Section 1. All persons shall enjoy the right to a public education of equal high quality.

‘Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation.’.

This proposed amendment to the Constitution will guarantee total centralization and control over the educational system under the guise of providing high quality education for all. Of course, high quality education for all is not the goal. Instead, the goal is to ensure perpetual control over the educational system to ensure that all children are taught material that is approved by the criminals in Washington DC. A government guarantee of education is not a natural right and sounds like something that would come out of the United Nations, Nazi Germany or any other socialist or fascist dictatorship and not in a supposedly free country. Not only that, but the powers that be want to make everyone think that they are granting people rights, when rights are not derived from government. Man has inalienable rights and education is not one of them. To hell with Jesse Jackson Jr. who thinks that we all have a right to an education when it isn’t even an inalienable right to begin with. This is a stupid proposal and is meant to grant more government control over the educational system using a Constitutional amendment as the excuse to do so. Most people won’t care though, because they don’t have a fundamental understanding of how we are all born as free human beings and need not to be granted rights by a bunch of criminal politicians.

Jesse Jackson Jr. has also proposed other stupid Constitutional amendments which we will cover in more detail at a later date. Check out these links below.

Amendment Centralizing Power Of Congress Over Elections

Amendment On Reproductive Rights

Amendment Guaranteeing The Right To Health Care

Amendment Guaranteeing The Right To A Clean Environment

Amendment On Progressive Taxes

Amendment Guaranteeing The Right To Safe Housing

Amendment Guaranteeing The Right To Full Employment

Amendment Abolishing The Electoral College

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

HyperInflation Here We Come!!

March 3 (Bloomberg) -- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said policy makers may need to expand aid to the banking system beyond the $700 billion already approved and take other aggressive measures even at the cost of soaring fiscal deficits.

“Without a reasonable degree of financial stability, a sustainable recovery will not occur,” the Fed chairman said today in testimony prepared for the Senate Budget Committee. “Although progress has been made on the financial front since last fall, more needs to be done.”

Bernanke’s comments suggest he sees a role for bigger federal outlays as the Obama administration seeks congressional approval for a budget of $3.55 trillion for the fiscal year beginning in October. President Barack Obama has already signed into a law a $787 billion economic stimulus package of tax cuts and government spending.

Obama’s first budget seeks standby authority for as much as $750 billion in new aid to the financial industry. Whether those funds will be needed “depends on the results of the current supervisory assessment of banks” and the evolution of the economy, Bernanke said.

Bernanke said policy makers would have “preferred to avoid” what is likely to be the largest ratio of federal debt compared with gross domestic product since the end of World War II, and he urged lawmakers not to lose sight of fiscal discipline.

Cost to Budget

“But our economy and financial markets face extraordinary challenges,” and doing less now would eventually prove to be more costly, he said. “We are better off moving aggressively today to solve our economic problems; the alternative could be a prolonged episode of stagnation” that would cause budget deficits to swell further, increase unemployment and undermine incomes “for an extended period.”

The Fed has more than doubled its assets to $1.9 trillion during the past year by expanding loans to banks, launching programs to revive commercial paper and other markets and backing the merger of Bear Stearns Cos. with JPMorgan Chase & Co.

The 55-year-old Fed chairman told the Senate Banking Committee last week there’s a “reasonable prospect” the recession will end in 2009 “if the actions taken by the administration, the Congress and the Federal Reserve are successful in restoring some measures of financial stability.”

Stock Slump

Fed policy makers face headwinds from equity markets, with the Standard and Poor’s 500 Index falling this year by 22.5 percent and the S&P Financials Index tumbling 44.2 percent.

The government is still trying to stabilize large financial institutions such as Citigroup Inc. and insurer American International Group Inc. Shares of Citigroup traded at $1.33 this morning at 9:33 a.m., and the government expanded its aid to AIG yesterday after the company reported a fourth-quarter loss of $61.7 billion, the worst loss by any U.S. corporation.

The spending blueprint delivered to Congress last month forecasts government spending this year of $3.94 trillion, up 32 percent from a year ago. That would yield a record deficit of $1.75 trillion in the year ending Sept. 30, equal to about 12 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product, the highest since World War II. Government spending of $3.55 trillion next year will include about $350 billion approved as part of the stimulus package.

Stimulus Impact

“By supporting public and private spending, the fiscal package should provide a boost to demand and production over the next two years as well as mitigate the overall loss of employment and income that would otherwise occur,” Bernanke said.

Still, the size of the impact on the economy from government spending is “subject to considerable uncertainty,” Bernanke said. Consumers may decide to pay down debt or save their cash rather than spend it, he noted.

January forecasts by Fed officials suggest “a full recovery of the economy from the current recession is likely to take more than two or three years,” Bernanke told lawmakers last week.

The U.S. unemployment rate rose to 7.6 percent in January, the highest level since 1992. Job losses spanned almost all industries from trucking and construction to retailing and finance.

Fed officials expect unemployment in the fourth quarter to average 8.5 percent to 8.8 percent, which would be the highest since 1983, according to their January forecasts. Gross domestic product will contract 1.3 percent to 0.5 percent, and inflation will run at just 0.3 percent to 1 percent this year, their projections indicate.

Fed Forecasts

Fed officials don’t see labor markets improving until 2011, when growth forecast at 3.8 percent to 5 percent reduces the unemployment rate to a range of 6.7 percent to 7.5 percent.

Economic models used by Macroeconomic Advisers LLC show the Obama stimulus package could keep the jobless rate at about 8.8 percent instead of the 9.5 percent rate that would result without the package.

The Fed is stepping up efforts to stem the worst credit crisis in seven decades by expanding a program aimed at supporting consumer and business loans to $1 trillion from $200 billion and adding commercial real estate. It is also buying $600 billion of debt sold by government-backed housing finance companies and mortgage-backed securities they guarantee.

Monday, March 2, 2009

The Murder of Shannon Christian and Christopher Newsome

Courtroom Transcripts Here

Knoxville, TN -- In January, 2007, two young White people, Shannon Christian and her boyfriend, Christopher Newsome were found murdered in Knoxville, TN

Police investigators determined that Shannon and Christopher had been carjacked. Police say the carjackers took Shannon and Christopher to a local house, repeatedly gang raped BOTH the girl and her boyfriend; raping the guy in front of the girl and vice-versa!

After hours of gang raping him, the perpetrators took the young man out to nearby railroad tracks where he was shot and his body set on fire. His dead body was found on the railroad tracks.

The perpetrators then went back to the house and continued to gang rape the girl. When they were done, they poured cleaning fluid into her orifices - to destroy DNA - then stuffed her into five garbage bags and left her body in the garbage can.

So brutal was the repeated gang raping and oral sodomizing that the Medical Examiner found the rapists had torn the membrane that connected the girl's bottom lip to her lower gums of her mouth!

Black-on-White, but NOT a "Hate Crime?"

Four Black males and one Black female were arrested in connection with the case. Despite the clearest implications of this being a Black-on-White hate crime, the perps were NOT charged with a hate crime.

This fact spawned protest rallies in Knoxville, one of which I attended. Coverage of the story on this blog made national news when I appeared on "Paula Zahn Now" on CNN. (Video Below)

Lawyers for at least one defendant filed a motion in federal district court for a Change of Venue and cited THIS BLOG as one of the reasons they were seeking to move the case. The Federal District Court for the eastern District of Tennessee DENIED that request. The court papers mentioning me by name are available Here

Lawyers want the Internet Silenced too!

Having failed to get the case moved, the perps were forced to go to trial in Knoxville. But the lawyers didn't stop with their nonsense.

In a motion filed with the courts this week, the lawyers are demanding that Internet web sites be FORBIDDEN from allowing anonymous comments about the case to appear online!

They claim that anonymous comments - especially those which comment about the racial aspects of the case - are interfering with the Defendant's Sixth Amendment rights to a fair trial. The lawyers claim they cannot find a Juror anywhere in Tennessee who hasn't read or heard about the case!

Maybe if their clients weren't brutal murderer's they wouldn't have this problem!

The courts have yet to rule on whether or not YOUR free speech might be curtailed so the murderer can get a fair trial, but rest assured whatever the court ruling, THIS BLOG will allow anonymous comments.

If need-be, I will re-install my own server at a data center, beyond the reach of Tennessee Courts and Google "Blogger" Terms of Service, so the public will continue to have a place to speak.

Update Here 5/20/09
Live Feed From The Trial

Glenn Beck on The Housing Crisis

This is a must see video, that lays the truth out very very simply.