Thursday, October 30, 2008

Book Burning Is So Yesterday

In the past we had government book burning - today's world offers us Mandatory Internet filtering by the government.

And of course it is all to protect citizens from pornography and other "undesirable sites"...
oh Really.....

Australia has apparently fallen to Chinese tactics and policies... is the United States far behind?

Well consider the US government report that Social networking groups like Twitter are "havens for terrorists"...

Internet News reported:
The military intelligence paper is "not a serious intelligence analysis. It's more like a student exercise discussing a topic of hypothetical concern," Steven Aftergood, who directs the FAS's project on government secrecy, told
"Anything can be used by terrorists -- credit cards, laptops, hammers and nails, so to say that something could be used by terrorists doesn't really say anything at all," Aftergood added. "The other point is that communications technologies of any sort can be used to communicate and, if Twitter is not available, cell phones can be used, or instant messaging, or walkie talkies. So again the threat under discussion doesn't amount to a great deal."

Remember that the government just has your best interests at heart when they start censoring stuff.

3rd Party Debate To Focus On Economy

A debate is scheduled for Thursday, October 30th at 4:30 PM at the City Club of Cleveland, 850- Euclid Ave, Cleveland. C-Span will tape Thursday’s debate for broadcast later that night.

The forum, organized by the City Club will effectively break the media blackout on viable third party candidates running in the presidential race. Third party candidates in the debate include Independent Ralph Nader, the Green Party’s Cynthia McKinney and the Libertarian Party’s Bob Barr as well as Chuck Baldwin, Constitution party candidate.

The City Club of Cleveland debate, moderated by Dan Moulthrop of Cleveland’s PBS radio and television stations, will be streamed live by ideastream. The debate’s main focus will be on the economy.

“As long as Americans are denied the opportunity to hear from all the candidates we cannot pretend we have unbiased election coverage or fair elections,” said Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin.

Chuck Baldwin has spoken out against the federal government’s recent so-called “bailouts” in contrast to Senators Obama and McCain who support what Baldwin calls “a disastrous scheme against the American taxpayer.”

Baldwin, standard-bearer for the fast-growing Constitution Party has received the endorsement of former GOP presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul.

Last month Paul urged all Americans to end the duopoly of the Republican and Democratic parties and vote for a third party candidate in November.

Obama Not Spreading His Wealth Around

His aunt lives in a Boston slum (Update: and she is living here illegally!)

So what's with this guy who won't even help his own family?
Oh right... he wants me and you to help 'Auntie Zeituni' and Uncle Omar.

and how come she "can't speak to anyone until after the election"
She declined to answer most other questions about her relationship with the presidential contender until after the November 4 election. “I can’t talk about it, I just pray for him, that’s all,” she said, adding: “After the 4th, I can talk to anyone.”

His family is a mystery - some family live in poverty and Obama hasn't done anything to lift them up from their impoverished means. What's up with that? Even Obama's brother lives in a shack in Kenya.
Obama is a disgrace to allow family to live like this while he is jet-setting around.

As for his half hour "infomercial"... anyone can read a script.
The whole thing was absurd.
If anything, people should have come away from listening to all his promises and ask themselves, "How on Earth will we pay for all of this?" Especially with all the tax cuts he is promising? Yeah, it was absurd. Read some more here.
I figured I had to at least catch a little bit of what "The Leader" had to say... I wasn't impressed.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

CT : Write-In Candidates And Some Election Thoughts

Just as a public service announcement - if you don't like either McCain or Obama for President (POTUS) - you do have a choice of Independent Ralph Nader on the ballot in CT (other states are different), and of course you also have an opportunity to mark a write-in candidate. In CT, you can't just write-in anybody's name and have it count though. Write-in candidates in CT have to be "registered" with the Secretary of the State (SOTS)- Hmm.. doesn't that seem to counter the purpose of a write-in candidate?

Here are the registered write-in candidates for POTUS in CT

1. Chuck Baldwin and Darrell Castle - Constitution Party

2. Moore and Alexander - Socialist Party Ticket

3. McKinney and Clemente - Green Party

4. Calero and Kennedy - Socialist Workers Party

Of course there are those out there who will say any vote other than for Democrat or Republican "is a wasted vote".

Presidential candidate of the Constitution Party , Chuck Baldwin said this:
In the first place, a wasted vote is a vote for someone you know does not represent your own beliefs and principles. A wasted vote is a vote for someone you know will not lead the country in the way it should go. A wasted vote is a vote for the "lesser of two evils." Or, in the case of John McCain and Barack Obama, what we have is a choice between the "evil of two lessers."

Albert Einstein is credited with saying that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result. For years now, Republicans and Democrats have been leading the country in the same basic direction: toward bigger and bigger government; more and more socialism, globalism, corporatism, and foreign interventionism; and the dismantling of constitutional liberties. Yet, voters continue to think that they are voting for "change" when they vote for a Republican or Democrat. This is truly insane!

Take a look at the recent $700 billion Wall Street bailout: both John McCain and Barack Obama endorsed and lobbied for it. Both McCain and Obama will continue to bail out these international banksters on the backs of the American taxpayers. Both McCain and Obama support giving illegal aliens amnesty and a path to citizenship. In the debate this past Tuesday night, both McCain and Obama expressed support for sending U.S. forces around the world for "peacekeeping" purposes. They also expressed support for sending combat forces against foreign countries even if those countries do not pose a threat to the United States. Neither Obama nor McCain will do anything to stem the tide of a burgeoning police state or a mushrooming New World Order. Both Obama and McCain support NAFTA and similar "free trade" deals. Neither candidate will do anything to rid America of the Federal Reserve, or work to eliminate the personal income tax, or disband the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Both Obama and McCain support the United Nations. So, pray tell, how is a vote for either McCain or Obama not a wasted vote?

So where is "the change"? I mean real change.

The media has ultimately controlled this election even as far back as the onset of primary season. You have had precious little opportunity to hear all voices in this race, and all points of view. You have heard little from those who wish to protect and defend the Constitution and our rights, or who have spoken of crucial issues of border control, real national security and who have offered up true economic solutions to the financial mess that we find ourselves subjected to. Instead we have been bombarded with nonsense and vicious personal attacks.

The media chooses the subject - chooses the sound bytes - makes a big deal out of clothing allowances and idiotic gaffes. They will turn the discussion away from the crime coming across our borders and the enormous power recently given to our Treasury Secretary (by both Republican and Democrat candidates), as well as other important issues. They will not even discuss Barack Obama's true birth circumstances. His birth certificate is being held back from the American people and is a sealed record which he will not share. Video tapes are being kept secret.

The media has just about crowned a winner in this race. Your vote is just window dressing and a formality. Some posit that it won't even count with the way our registration and voting system has been operating. We have voter registration fraud (a felony) and machines that do not work properly.

The result: We the people are pitted against one another and the media feeds us poison to hate each other for what we each think is right. It's time to shut off the cable TV news channels, read up on all candidates ourselves, and come to our own conclusions. Don't let the media tell you what to believe or how to vote. The pundits - talking heads and spin masters are hard at work. Don't listen to the slogans and sound bytes. I would even say don't take what the candidates themselves say in their speeches - look to their voting records and their past speeches when they weren't running for office, as well as off the cuff non-scripted answers. Follow the money....who is funding the candidate. By all means follow what your gut is telling you because you know how to size up the issues and the candidates. The media wants to make you think that you are not as smart as they are and are unable to do any kind of meaningful analysis.

One thing I do know - it isn't a good idea to have all three branches of government to be controlled by any one party. It is not healthy. So think good and hard on those choices in the voting booth. Don't let your votes for national election sway your votes for local elections. Your state race candidates and local officials are not George Bush or Nancy Pelosi.

Another thing I know - even though your vote may be different than someone else's, it is still important, and it should be respected.

John Quincy Adams said, "Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost."

Saturday, October 25, 2008

Saturday Parody - Bailout

That was a parody off Bon Jovi - Living on a Prayer

Here's something else

Thanks to Rhett and Link...hope you got a chuckle.

But wait... there's more...

Friday, October 24, 2008

Harlem Voters Interviewed On Howard Stern

Now I am not a fan of Howard Stern.. but this video/audio came to my attention and I just had to share it.

Sigh .... This is just so terribly sad.

"Convinced that the people are the only safe depositories of their own liberty, and that they are not safe unless enlightened to a certain degree, I have looked on our present state of liberty as a short-lived possession unless the mass of the people could be informed to a certain degree."-- Thomas Jefferson

CT Should Vote John Larson Out !

I went to the debate last night in West Hartford to hear John Larson and Joe Visconti debate (CT 1st Congressional district).

First off - shame on the League of Women Voters for excluding Green Party Candidate Stephen Fournier. I am not a Green party supporter, but every voice should be heard in the election process. The LWV has really become a farce when it comes to promoting Democracy. Their founders must be spinning in their graves.

Second - I got to "talk" to Congressman Larson after the debate, and all he had to say about this bailout situation was that it was everyone else's mistake. He was quick to blame the mess on the Republicans and the Bush administration. Meanwhile, he takes no part of the blame of this financial crisis upon himself and his buddies Chris "sweetheart mortgage deal" Dodd, and Barney Frank, who should have been keeping an eye on things. He said that since the Democrats have only been in power the past 18-20 months that they couldn't do much; that the problems had already been in place. (And where was he in the meantime before that?) He claims that he couldn't look at himself in the mirror if he hadn't bailed out Wall Street because it would have meant mass unemployment and frozen credit markets. Well, I have news for Congressman Larson, I don't know how he can look himself in the mirror by giving such sweeping authority and power to the Treasury Secretary who is now unaccountable for the way he will be handling this bailout money - furthermore this bailout bill was unconstitutional and Congressman Larson doesn't even know which part of the Constitution was violated!!... He asked me what part of the Constitution was violated... How about this for starters John:
There is no provision of the Constitution that permits or grants the Government of the United States of America the power to participate in commerce by giving or lending public funds and credit to a private party - even if such transaction results in an exchange for warrants, financial interest, and/or control of the private party, especially if such transaction is for a decidedly , definitively, private purpose.

Use of public taxpayer funds to prevent a corporate failure or to promote “Financial market stability” and /or “Stabilizing the credit markets” is a usurpation of the power of We the People; neither is an enumerated power.

Under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States of America, the People have given Congress the power, “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes,”

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of the United States of America gives Congress the power to regulate commerce, not to participate in commerce, or to create markets or set market prices, as a giver or lender of public money and credit to private, for-profit entities.
Imagine that - a Congressman who doesn't understand the document that he took an oath to uphold. He probably didn't even read the bill he passed, except for the pork parts.

I told him I would not vote for anyone who voted for this bailout - including him, and that Dodd and Frank ought to be in jail. I hope all these guys get booted out of office. They are a disgrace to their office, and by their legislation even as far back as Clinton's time have perpetrated this financial mess. But what is worse is that they finger point and blame it on everyone else, leaving themselves conveniently out of the equation. Now they are calling for more regulation and more bailout money. Where was Larson and company when Freddie and Fannie needed to be regulated? Oh yeah, off in Iowa stumping for Dodd's bid for the presidency. Shame on them all!

Meanwhile, Larson has plans to spend even more taxpayer money: More bailouts and more social programs. Sorry John, we are broke.

Here is something for all to consider:

Greenspan Testifies - Paul And Cavuto Report

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Why Is Obama Really Going To Hawaii?

Barack Obama claims he has to go visit his ailing grandmother...
CBS EARLY SHOW co-anchor Harry Smith conducted an exclusive interview with Sen. Barack Obama earlier today in Richmond, Va. Among other topics, the senator told Smith why it's so important for him to take a break from his campaign to see his grandmother. "My grandmother's the last one left," Obama told Smith. The senator added, "She has really been the rock of the family, the foundation of the family." Obama didn't get to his mother before she died. "Yeah, got there too late," he says. "You know, I mean, it was sort of like this, in the sense that she had a terminal illness. We knew she wasn't doing well, but you know, the diagnosis was such that we thought we had a little more time and we didn't. And so I want to make sure that I don't make the same mistake twice."

But what is the real story? Is it for him and his campaign people to go to Hawaii to "fix" a certified Hawaiian birth certificate? There have been serious questions about the validity of the Certificate of Live Birth which has been put out as "official" and claims Obama was born in Hawaii.

Check out this video (if you already haven't) Mr. Berg has filed a lawsuit regarding Barack Obama's birth records.

This is what the record shows:

1. Occidental College records -- Not released
2. Columbia College records -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- 'not available'
4. Harvard College records -- Not released
5. Selective Service Registration -- Not released
6. Medical records -- Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule -- 'not available'
8. Law practice client list -- Not released
9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate - - Not released
10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth -- Not released
11. Harvard Law Review articles published -- None
12. University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
13. Your Record of baptism-- Not released or 'not available'
14. Your Illinois State Senate records--'not available'

This from Berg's website
Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States, announced today that Obama and tbe DNC “ADMITTED”, by way of failure to timely respond to Requests for Admissions, all of the numerous specific requests in the Federal lawsuit. Obama is “NOT QUALIFIED” to be President and therefore Obama must immediately withdraw his candidacy for President and the DNC shall substitute a qualified candidate. The case is Berg v. Obama, No. 08-cv-04083.

Gee, and this is coming from a Democrat!
and Berg is not alone, as a second lawsuit has been filed..
UPDATE: lawsuits filed in 8 states

Do you wonder why nothing is being made of the missing documents by the media? or why documents haven't been produced? Well, it should raise an eyebrow or two don't you think?
All the DNC and Obama have to do is produce the original document.

Oh yeah... it's just "conspiracy theory"...

What's This Crisis Joe Biden Is Talking About?

Joe Biden at a Seattle fund raiser said that Obama will be tested. We will be hit with a crisis and we'll have to stick by Obama. Oh really? I could have told you that! But what is really interesting is what Biden said and how he said it. Read it for yourself.

The SunTimes reported a full transcript of what Biden actually said:
Seattle, WA fundraiser (#2 of 2) Sunday, October 19, 2008

"The next four years are going to determine what it looks like 25 years from now because we either get this right internationally or we're in trouble," he said, citing the Korean peninsula and Pakistan as potential hot-spots.

He then talked about the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

"It's where al Qaeda lives. It's there. It's real. We focus so much on the bad policy on Iraq, we sometimes seem to think that somehow there isn't a real problem. Our CIA has pointed out that bin Laden is alive and well, Iraq, excuse me, in the mountains between Pakistan and Afghanistan. He's getting (inaudible) and support from those tribal areas. You have, folks, the Taliban is coming back. We're on the verge of finding ourselves in a position to see the regression occurring in Pakistan.

Biden emphasized the importance of injecting economic assistance to build hospitals, roads, and schools.

The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations committee warned that unless people there have "a reason to look to Islamabad instead of looking to the tribally-controlled areas, then in fact we got no hope, folks."

"Bin Laden is alive and well," he cautioned. "Our own agencies have pointed out that we have created more terrorists than we have dissuaded and destroyed as a consequence of shredding the constitution, keeping Guantanamo open."

"We talk about Iran getting a nuclear weapon and threatening Israel and us. Let me tell ya something, Pakistan already is bristling with nuclear weapons, all of which can hit Israel right now, all of which can strike the Mediterranean and well into the Indian Ocean."

Biden recalled when his helicopter came down in a snowstorm at 10,500 feet in the middle of the mountains along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

"You literally can see what these kids are up against, our kids in that region. The place is crawling with al Qaeda. And it's real."


So why was Biden saying this to the crowd of supporters? He'll tell ya why...

"We're gonna find ourselves in real trouble when we get elected. This is gonna be really hard. This is gonna be really, really, really hard. We're gonna have the largest systemic deficit in modern - not modern - in the history of the world. Literally. Literally. We're gonna find ourselves inheriting a debt, yearly debt this year, that may approach three-quarters of a trillion dollars. You hear me? We left this guy with a $232 billion surplus. At a minimum when we take office - God willing - we're gonna have a $450 billion deficit. And the way the economy is tanking the way it is now it may be as high as $750 billion."

"28 states are in serious trouble and they're about to contribute to the economic downward spiral because what are they doing? Cutting services, laying people off as they lose their tax base. So there are going to be a lot of tough decisions Barack's gonna have to make, a lot of tough decisions, including on foreign policy."

"And here's the point I want to make. Mark my words. Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy. And he's gonna have to make some really tough - I don't know what the decision's gonna be, but I promise you it will occur. As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it's gonna happen. I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate. And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you, not financially to help him, we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right. Because all these decisions, all these decisions, once they're made if they work, then they weren't viewed as a crisis. If they don't work, it's viewed as you didn't make the right decision, a little bit like how we hesitated so long dealing with Bosnia and dealing with Kosovo, and consequently 200,000 people lost their lives that maybe didn't have to lose lives. It's how we made a mistake in Iraq. We made a mistake in Somalia. So there's gonna be some tough decisions. They may emanate from the Middle East. They may emanate from the sub-continent. They may emanate from Russia's newly-emboldened position because they're floating in a sea of oil."

After again touting Cantwell's judgment, Biden told the crowd to "gird your loins."

"Only thing I'm asking you is, you know, gird your loins. We're gonna win with your help, God willing, we're gonna win, but this is not gonna be an easy ride. This president, the next president, is gonna be left with the most significant task. It's like cleaning the Aegean stables, man. This is more than just, this is more than - think about it, literally, think about it - this is more than just a capital crisis, this is more than just markets, this is a systemic problem we have with this economy."

As he did last week in Missouri, Biden then touted Obama's team of economic advisers.

"I have great respect and have had great respect for a long time for Barack Obama, but I've never, I never thought that I'd have the kind of respect I have after watching him assemble probably the finest economic team that's been put together in the history of this country, Democrats and Republicans. You should see him orchestrate these meetings we have with 18 of the best minds in the world, from both parties. There's no doubt about who's charge, Gov. There's no doubt. There's no doubt about how incisive his questions are. What he asks of this group is stunning in terms of there responses. They kind of go, 'whoa, whoa!' This guy has an ability to move to the quick of things like anybody I've ever served with, at least this up close. So I think we're gonna put our hands, take this ship (inaudible) in the right hands. I think we got this ticket right. I think we got it in the right balance here."

After a round of applause, Biden continued.

"I've forgotten more about foreign policy than most of my colleagues know, so I'm not being falsely humble with you. I think I can be value added, but this guy has it. This guy has it. But he's gonna need your help. Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going 'oh my God, why are they there in the polls, why is the polling so down, why is this thing so tough? We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now, I'm asking you now, be prepared to stick with us. Remember the faith you had at this point because you're going to have to reinforce us."

Noting that he's a practicing Irish-Catholic, the Delaware lawmaker said, "Let's not be, for those of a different faith remember St. Peter denied Christ thrice, you know? We don't need anybody denying us, this is gonna be tough. There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go 'whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don't know about that decision.' Because if you think the decision is sound when they're made, which I believe you will when they're made, they're not likely to be as popular as they are sound. Because if they're popular, they're probably not sound."

While the crowd laughed, Biden noticed your pooler in the back of the room pounding away at his keyboard.

"I probably shouldn't have said all this because it dawned on me that the press is here," the senator said.

"All kidding aside, these guys have left us in a God-awful place. We have the ability to straighten it out. It's gonna take a little bit of time, so I ask you to stay with us. Stay with us."

Crisis huh? Like maybe giving up our sovereignty to join in on the plan for a global currency? Like maybe we are looking at the total destruction of the US dollar?
Like maybe we are going to have to cut some sort of deal with brutal dictators?
What crisis do you foresee?

Biden knows what's to come and so does Obama - and so does McCain.

Folks it won't really matter who is president - because he and his administration will not be running the show.

Lawsuit Filed

From Bob Schulz:
As I begin to write this article, I am on the train from D.C. to the BWI airport, heading home, having filed yet another set of papers in the Supreme Court of the United States in defense of the Constitution. Once again, the Government is in the process of attempting to seize power from the People.

This time, regarding the A.I.G. and $700 Billion Wall Street bailout plans, I filed an emergency motion asking the U.S. Supreme Court to restrain the Government from giving or lending taxpayer funds or credit in exchange for private assets in aid of private corporations, unless and until the government defendants could show the Court where in the Constitution it provides that the People have agreed to share with the Government their power to purchase private assets such as "toxic" mortgage-related assets and non-toxic shares of bank stocks.

My argument is the People never gave that power to the Government and the Government has taken another step outside the boundaries We the People have drawn around its limited, enumerated powers.

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

CT Governor M. Jodi Rell Gets An "F" In Fiscal Policy

Sorry Governor Rell ... but the Fiscal Policy Report Card on America’s Governors: 2008 from the CATO Institute has just come out, and it isn't looking good for CT.

This fiscal report card examines the tax and spending decisions made by governors since 2003. It uses statistical data to grade the governors on their taxing and spending records. Governors who have cut taxes and spending the most receive the highest grades, while those who have increased taxes and spending the most receive the lowest grades.
Three governors were awarded an "A" in this report card – Charlie Crist of Florida, Mark Sanford of South Carolina, and Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Eight governors were awarded an "F" – Martin O'Malley of Maryland, Ted Kulongoski of Oregon, Rod Blagojevich of Illinois, Chet Culver of Iowa, Jon Corzine of New Jersey, Bob Riley of Alabama, Jodi Rell of Connecticut, and C. L. "Butch" Otter of Idaho.
The report said this of CT's Governor:
Jodi Rell of Connecticut has pushed numerous large tax increases. Her first budget in 2005 proposed increases to cigarette taxes, gasoline taxes, and business taxes. In 2007 she proposed raising cigarette taxes and increasing the top individual income tax rate. Governor Rell’s performance on spending is also worse than average

Governor Rell’s fiscal record features numerous large tax increases. Rell’s first budget proposed increases in cigarette taxes, gasoline taxes, and various business taxes. In 2007 she proposed raising the cigarette tax from $1.51 to $2.00 per pack and increasing the top personal income tax rate from 5.0 percent to 5.5 percent. Luckily for taxpayers, the income tax part of her plan did not pass the legislature. On spending, Governor Rell has usually proposed substantial increases, and in 2007 she proposed skirting a state budget cap to spend more than was allowed under normal rules.
Unfortunately, they don't mention anything about the legislature she's had to deal with. But anyway, at least on the bright side it seems there is no where to go but up on this score. Closing the budget gap could be a start.

And here are two other interesting findings:
• Republican governors did slightly better in the report card than Democrats, with an average score of 55 compared to an average for the Democrats of 46.
• Republican governors scored better, on average, than Democratic governors on spending (54 to 48), revenue changes (58 to 44), and tax rates (51 to 48). But those
are just averages with many exceptions— Democrat Joe Manchin, for example, has
enacted probably the most pro-growth tax reforms of any governor.

Here is the full report

Time Out For Some Political Humor - Onion Style

Obama on jobs (language warning):

McCain has a mishap:

and for third party lovers:

Cressbeckler in 08!

Hope you had a few chuckles today.

Monday, October 20, 2008

CT - DCF Investigative Hearing - Or How To Waste More Taxpayer Money In Four Hours

Yes, I attended this "hearing" today (from 10:00 am till 2:00 pm) and quite frankly as a CT taxpayer I was appalled at the softball questions fielded in the three hours after the hour long testimony given by the panel of four: Attorney General Blumenthal, Secretary of Office of Policy and Management Robert Genuario, DCF Commissioner Susan Hamilton and Child Advocate Jeanne Milstein. They were all there in front of members of the Select Committee on Children and the Human Services Committee to answer the question: Are children and families better off because of their involvement with DCF?

Heck, they didn't even scratch the surface of that question, and the questions put out to the panel of four after their testimony was just incredibly anemic. In fact, after the meeting broke up after 4 hours of "discussion", I overheard Hamilton and her folks say, "Gee, this could have been much worse".

Well, it should have been much worse. A baby is dead at the hands of a DCF employee, countless other children are being routinely drugged and restrained, and it costs taxpayers $864,685 per child per year to be housed in Riverview Hospital! But wait there's more....In the last 12 years there have been 549 reports of abuse and neglect perpetrated by DCF employees. We still have no answers about what happened to those employees or if they are still employed at DCF. We still have no answers as to what happens to these kids in custody, or what the outcomes of their treatment are, or if they have been served properly and effectively. There are so many, many, questions left unasked and unanswered.

A few legislators took to mild chastisement of the way all four of these agency heads have done business. Rep. Toni Harp and Rep. Toni Walker asked some very good questions, but the answers to their questions were less than impressive. Chairman of the Committee, Sen. Harris asked some pointed questions about linking the agency's directives to their "results". All I heard in response from the panel of 4 were platitudes and lots of talk about plans, and what they intend to do, and what they should consider, and what they should study.

Sen. Harris even tread into the territory of talking about educational neglect and homeschooling, which was met with denials by the DCF Commissioner about how homeschoolers are not considered to be neglecting their children educationally just because they aren't sending their children to a public school. That is a whole other subject, and most likely will be an issue to raise it's ugly little head again.

With regard to DCF, they keep wanting to rearrange the deck chairs on this sinking ship instead of making some fundamental common sense decisions. How about we do something that serves the children instead of serves directives or reporting requirements? How about we treat these kids as human beings instead of statistics and quarterly report contents? And give me a break, but hardly ever during the four hour meeting was the word parent or parental involvement even uttered!!

The Attorney General said DCF is too big and needs to be dismantled and that existing management should be overhauled - but failed to mention how he didn't do his job to investigate when incidents of abuse and drugging were given to him by members of Ablechild. In fact, all he did with their information was go after drug companies for fraud, making some national headlines in the process. Unfortunately, none of the Committee members took the Attorney General to task as to why he hadn't done his job to prosecute those who are abusing and drugging kids in CT facilities. It is after all his assistant attorneys general who advise and represent DCF in every juvenile court in CT every day! If he advised and directed his asst. attorneys general on how to properly advise DCF in these cases, many of these problems might not exist or at least have been alleviated in some fashion.

Robert Genuario had the audacity to sit there and defend the growth of expenditures of DCF which has blossomed from $607.5 million in FY 2004 to $884.5 million in FY 2009. The operating costs of Riverview Hospital alone is a staggering $48,986,343 dollars with $42 million of that going to personnel salaries and fringe benefits. This is with a decline in their patient census which is currently reported as 69.6, and heaven knows how much the kids treated at home or in community residential facilities costs the taxpayer. What did Genuario say in the end? Just that DCF is a "work in progress" - as if it is some grand experiment that we will never get to the bottom of. He wants more funding to consider and explore and study in order to make improvements. He even got into a tiff towards the end of the meeting, with Rep. Hamm of Middletown, about the expansion of the number of children in the CT Juvenile Training School, which her constituents are against. The Governor was going to shut the facility down, but the legislature hasn't done anything about it at all. Genuario said he and the Governor are frustrated with the inaction of the Legislature on these issues.

Jeanne Milstein got to sit there and complain about how there have been pockets of progress, but overall the progress has been made only because of the result of pressure or reaction to some horrible event like a baby's death. She decried the need for change and that there is a lack of management and leadership at DCF. She cited that she has gone as far as she could go with the resources that she has, to address the lack of meaningful and sustainable change in DCF, despite a 1 billion dollar budget and the apparent inability for DCF to do it's job. She asked for someone or something to take a look and determine whether DCF has the right people with the right skills in the right positions, to affect fundamental change in that agency. But she doesn't think DCF should be carved up, and she wants to see more strategic planning and more funding. Egads, more money and more about some "DOING"? Plans don't mean anything if they aren't implemented.

We also heard from DCF Commissioner Susan Hamilton. I think if I were to hear one more - "Yes, I agree, ... we intend to... we plan to... we want to....", I think I would just keel over. She said she wants to find what the best structure is and then have a plan to get them to what they want to achieve. One would think that this agency would know this by now!! We also heard about how complex the agency is and how they also do many things right, but the bottom line here and the reality is that kids are dying and there are hundreds of complaints about very bad practices and policies of this agency. No doubt the case workers have a tough job; no one disputes that, but the agency seems to have wrapped itself up in plans and reports and complying with mandates that they have forgotten the kids and what they need. Moreover, they have forgotten parents and their rights. They will talk of re-uniting families as they are working to take custody away from parents. They have treatment plans that are reviewed by administrators who hardly even meet with a child personally. It's that and so much more.

They didn't even touch on how much it costs to send kids out of state to other facilities, or what it costs to send DCF employees around the country to attend whatever meetings with staff at those facilities. The dirty secret that people don't know is that DCF uses out of state facilities as a bargaining chip; parents are told that if they don't comply with the wishes of what DCF is proposing as treatment for a child, that the child will be sent out of state. But I digress.

Clearly the system is broken. Unfortunately, this Investigative Hearing today was meant more for the cameras and to give the public an impression that something was being done in response to a murder, than it was to actually find solutions to fix what is wrong with DCF. Four hours of testimony and little results to show for it. But fear not, there will be other such meetings in November and one will even include public comment (that should be interesting).

For what the public spends on this agency it is clear that our money is not being well spent and that children are not thriving in DCF care. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that, and while the panel of four can talk about the things that are good about what DCF does do well, it is the many things that DCF does badly that we ought to be completely focused upon.

Funny - this is all AP had to say about this hearing.

Saturday, October 18, 2008

Parody Music For Saturday - I Am Changing My Name To Fannie Mae

That as by sung by Arlo Guthrie and is an updated twist to Tom Paxton's song: "I'm Changing My Name To Chrysler"

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Joe The Plumber

Redistribution of Wealth is Socialism. Period.

Yaron Brook, says this:
The Treasury Department, as part of its ongoing assumption of control over the financial industry, is preparing to inject cash into U.S. banks in exchange for preferred shares of bank stock.

“Are we all socialists now?” said Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights. “Have we learned nothing from the devastation that socialist policies wrought worldwide in the twentieth century? Government intervention distorts markets and causes economic dislocations, no matter whether Uncle Sam controls private companies by regulation or assumes public ownership outright.

“A crisis doesn’t transform poison into medicine. Over decades, government manipulation of money, credit, and mortgages poisoned this economy and left it dangerously weak. Now Hank Paulson and his comrades are hooking up IV tubes filled with more of the same poison--bailouts, loan guarantees, cheap money, and more burdensome regulations--and hoping we will lie still and trust in their cure.

“But the real cure is capitalism, not more doses of socialism. We should act quickly to put government in its place, by rolling back the interventionist measures that caused the present emergency. Government’s proper role is to punish fraud and enforce contracts, not to own and manage the economy. We cannot achieve financial health unless we are willing to free the markets.”
Unfortunately, the Bush administration, which has long ago totally abandoned true Conservative ideals, has most definitely set this country up for what is about to come. A McCain administration promises "Socialist-lite". An Obama administration would be Socialist. Either way, we will be seeing tons more government spending and tons more government expansion. They will be bankrupting every American into government dependence. The interesting thing is that once one is dependent, there is no incentive to break out of that dependence, and the programs which "help you" are also meant to keep you dependent. We need to stop thinking about how government should "give us stuff" and instead about how we can help ourselves.

Since we have been "so successful " in fighting "wars" from the "war on drugs", to the "war on poverty" to the "war on terror" - Look to see, very soon, the shift to a "war on greed" or a "war on corporatism" or a "war on capitalism" as we wend our way through this financial crisis.

This financial crisis was manufactured by the "universal housing" programs designed to put people in houses they could not afford. Yes, corporations and their CEO's were greedy, and they ended up ruining their well established companies and reputations, but the price to pay was their ruination. Government is now not allowing them to fail and/or ultimately be gobbled up by others in the private sector who might do a much better job. Instead, we are seeing the government move in to take over. It is interesting to see the timing of this all before our national elections and after China announced on September 25, that they would be freezing credit to the United States. It all sounds so very oddly "convenient".

With every move the US government makes to "fix things" they are met with more unease on Wall Street. There appears to me now to be a shift in the investment strategies of many to move from living and doing business in a capitalist financial market to one of a highly regulated and nationalized financial market. Sure we had regulation in our "free market" but now the regulation will be on steroids, even to the point of dictating how much money CEO's can be paid by their own companies or boards of directors. The stock market is trying to assess where we are all going. This is no accident that this comes before November 4th elections.

Barack Obama is a Socialist along with his pals Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. If this triumvirate hold the reins of power in the next 4 years there will be Change alright, but it will be Change that robs the wealth from those who have worked and took risks and gives it to those who have not worked or taken risks. We already have seen historically that Socialism doesn't work. It stifles the incentive to grow rich. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke, say this bailout move is distasteful but that they have to do it... hogwash. They don't have to do anything that they don't want to do... the fact is that they have made out very well in this deal as it has given them more power then they had before.

As for Joe the Plumber, he and millions of Americans will be the ones ultimately holding the bag - as we are forced to give up the fruits of our labor to pay for everyone else, and "spread the wealth". The question remains, what happens when there are no more rich people, and no one to take the risks or to grow a company? What happens when we are all on the receiving end of government bailouts? After all, as taxpayers aren't we all really "the government"?

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson

Extreme taxation, excessive controls, oppressive government competition with business... frustrated minorities and forgotten Americans are not the products of free enterprise. They are the residue of centralized bureaucracy, of government by a self-anointed elite.” - Ronald Reagan

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

A Temporary Measure?

President Bush and company claim that this program of buying equity in banks (in return for controlling how they compensate employees and heaven knows what else) is "Temporary".
President Bush on Tuesday announced a $250 billion plan by the government to directly buy shares in the nation's leading banks, saying the drastic steps were "not intended to take over the free market but to preserve it....

"We regret having to take these actions," Paulson said. "Today's actions are not what we ever wanted to do -- but today's actions are what we must do to restore confidence to our financial system."...

"Government owning a stake in any private U.S. company is objectionable to most Americans -- me included," he added. "Yet the alternative of leaving businesses and consumers without access to financing is totally unacceptable."

Said Bernanke: "We will not stand down until we have achieved our goals of repairing and reforming our financial system and thereby restoring prosperity to our economy."

The move, in effect a partial nationalization of the banking system, does put the United States in the awkward position of owning shares in institutions it also regulates. The shares purchased by the government are expected to be nonvoting ones.

"The government's role will be limited and temporary," Bush pledged. "These measures are not intended to take over the free market but to preserve it. He said these steps and other related actions echoed similar bold moves made overseas in an effort to prevent a global recession. Bush said that by restoring confidence in the system, the hope is to "return our economy back to the road of growth and prosperity."

Well, we all know what a temporary government program is. And how much trust can we really put in this government and Congress who have allowed us to get into this financial mess to begin with? The market on Tuesday didn't seem too impressed.

The truth is that the nationalization of banks and private companies has begun. They say it's temporary - but there is no guarantee or time limit placed on this move. They even tell us we could, as taxpayers, make money on this deal in the end. (wink, wink)

This was part of the plan (from CNN Money)
$700 billion: The Treasury Department, unveiling details of the $700 billion bailout plan approved earlier this month, said Tuesday it will pour $250 billion directly into the nation's banks in a dramatic move meant to stabilize the flailing financial system.

Nine of the largest banks have already agreed to participate. The program calls for the government to buy preferred shares in the banks, hold those shares until the market stabilizes and then sell them back to the banks. The program also limits executive pay.
They are pumping lots of liquidity into the markets, but we are still racking up debt. That is the heart of the problem. Until we stop accruing debt in order to consume we will remain in a very bad place. But they want us to continue borrowing money like mad and buying stuff.

Government spending, and the emptying of the treasury on this bailout on the scale that we are seeing is not a good thing. How can it be? We cannot borrow and spend our way out of this mess.
We are out of money folks.

The fact of the matter is that if the US government isn't tapped out now, it surely will be very very soon. Oh yeah, I forgot, they can just print up more money to cover it. (Wouldn't you like to have a printing press in your basement too?)

With change like this .... who needs Obama? Or maybe the Washington good 'ole boys are just setting the stage for the Socialist wonder. (You'll be lucky if you have any change at all!)

Expect hyperinflation to hit all of us, sometime next year.

I leave you with some worthwhile quotes from Dr. Milton Friedman:

"Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it."

"Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program."

"The government solution to a problem is usually as bad as the problem."

Here is what the Doctor had to say:

Would somebody in Washington please listen already?

Monday, October 13, 2008

Happy 50th Birthday Paddington Bear!

Today is Paddington Bear's 50th birthday!
It is 50 years since the first story featuring Paddingon, the iconic bear found at his namesake West London station and beloved of many an English schoolchild, was published by former BBC radio engineer and cameraman Michael Bond.

The first Paddington story, entitled A Bear Called Paddington was released on 13 October 1958. The book described the bear's first year in Britain, from his discovery at Paddington station by his owners Mr and Mrs Brown, through the trauma of his first experience of bathing, and concluded with the anniversary of his fortuitous discovery.

Here is the official Paddington Bear website.
Read more at Wiki.

Friday, October 10, 2008

Is The Market Reacting to Creeping Socialism In America?

"Every step we take towards making the State our Caretaker of our lives, by that much we move toward making the State our Master." - Dwight Eisenhower

For those of you wondering why the market continues to crash (yes, I am using the "C" word) despite US government's feverish interventions with bailouts and loans and regulations, perhaps we should consider that it is government's intervention that caused the problem in the first place and very well may be causing the current sell off.

With talk of the government now "buying shares" of banks - and thereby owning them, and more taxpayer money being poured into private companies - and thereby owning them... it seems as if US and foreign investors may be pulling out of the US markets because we are losing ground to Socialism and fueling the fires of uncertainty. Now, Senator McCain is talking about government buying up and restructuring mortgages (something private companies should have been doing). The free market is being manipulated and assaulted. Investors sense this.

Barack Hussein Obama talks about universal healthcare while our government has already embarked upon universal housing through legislation like the Community Reinvestment Act and it's move to put low income people into home ownership. It backfired, even as it also made Wall Street Investment Houses and Bankers and Insurers very very wealthy; wealthy enough to enjoy lavish spending on it's agents and employees, and wealthy enough to make obscene corporate compensation. They have in fact become like the ruling aristocracy before events like the French Revolution. Unfortunately, folks like the heads of AIG and Lehman Brothers etc., also made very bad business decisions, squandered their companies' wealth, and put us all into jeopardy. Now the common man is outraged, and very justifiably so, because we are being required to fund this mess, and many of us have lost a substantial amount of our savings to boot.

We the people are also expecting government to "Save us". We the people must have also forgotten that investing in the stock market is, and always has been, a risky proposition. The market never had assurances for any of us, yet we were lured to place our retirements in the marketplace, just as people were welcomed to buy homes they could not afford with sub-prime loans. Many of us have been put into a place where we may now have no choice BUT to be dependent on government. We have to ask ourselves...was this by design? How did we fall for it?

Meanwhile, back in Washington, the Federal government has just given sweeping powers and authority to our Treasury Secretary with this bailout package. This was not a good move for us as a nation. Too much control in one place never is. Our Founders knew that.

More government intervention is not what is needed. It is what has caused this mess.
But as we speak the global powers that be are deciding the next move.
What will they be deciding?
What deals will be made outside of Congressional oversight?
Will it be a global currency that they will seek?
Will they embark upon a new framework which brings us closer to some sort of a "New World Order" whereby all countries join some sort of financial pact?
or is that just conspiracy theory hokum?
So far the conspiracy theorist "nutjobs" haven't been too terribly wrong, because they predicted this financial meltdown even down to it being just prior to American elections. Go figure.

What we must face here is that this financial crisis has been long in the making. We are also following very similar paths which led up to the 1929 crash. The Roaring Twenties were not that different from the over-extended credit consumerism of the Roaring Nineties (and "Aughts").

There are those that believe a crash is just what the Socialists in this country wanted in order to bring about more dependence on government. We expect that the government should bail us out of everything and give us everything. We are the generation of "Entitlement". That begets Socialism, and candidates like Barack Hussein Obama who preach Universal Healthcare, and government entitlements. He IS a Socialist, and if you support him YOU are supporting the expansion of Socialism in this country. The problem is that Senator McCain is no better at this point. Third party ideas are essentially being silenced in this election.

So where does this put us? It puts us in a position where investors are very concerned; and rightfully so. Americans are scared and angry; and rightfully so. We must also ask ourselves why is it that so-called "Conservative" Congressmen and others who proclaim to "protect our Constiutution", abandoned their principles to pass this bail-out legislation? How did they succumb to enticements, and coercion above representing their constituents? Now it is up to us to vote them out.

Meanwhile, President Bush makes another speech about how we all have to have confidence that the government is doing all it can to fix things ("Everything's Under Control Gromit") when really what we need is for the government to stop taking more and more control of everything.

The best thing we can do is wait for the market to bottom, let the market work as investors scoop up the bargains, and then it can continue along to build and put back the pieces. We should also require that companies make their CEO's pay for the companies' destruction, and that those frauds go to jail, along with certain Congressmen who initiated the legislation that brought the sub-prime mortgage mess to us in the first place.

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Pretty Soon The Fed Will Pay You To Borrow Money

They cut the interest rates again:
Ben Bernake and The Federal Reserve cut its key federal funds lending rate by half a percentage point to 1.5 per cent and lowered its discount rate by the same amount to 1.75 per cent.

The interest rate cuts by the fed are usually a short term solution and it doesn't do anything to really solve the economic problems. There is folly to this type of strategy. Ron Paul pointed this out in 2004:
In a truly free economy, interest rates are determined by market forces rather than central economic planners. The availability of investment capital, and the interest rate at which it is available, depends on savings, not fiat money and credit. The Fed's easy credit policies simply have made the cost of borrowing money artificially low. With lots of cheap money available, businesses and individuals spend with less discipline and incur more debt. Cheap credit created a wildly overvalued stock market, with many companies trading at outrageous prices. Eventually the bubble had to burst, resulting in record numbers of both personal and business bankruptcies.

The laws of supply and demand work better than any central bank bureaucrat in determining the correct cost of money, without the political favoritism and secrecy that characterize central banks. Americans should not tolerate the manipulation of our economy and the inflation of our currency by an unaccountable institution. The turbulent period we have entered may serve to remind Americans that the Fed cannot suspend the laws of economics. The key to lasting prosperity is a return to true private banking, where interest rates are set by the free market and dollars are backed by gold.
The monetary policies of the Federal Reserve have been a failure. Additionally, the money which should be restored to the financial systems should be the money that people like CEO Richard Fuld, of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., have pillaged from their respective companies.

I do find it laughable that Congressional members of these hearing committees have the audacity to scold and look down their noses at the CEO's who have trashed their companies, when these very same elected leaders have thrust upon the American people law and regulations and policies that have also contributed to putting this country on the path to destruction.

Monetizing large portions of debt is equivalent to printing more money.
In the 1920's German deficits had to be financed internally -- a difficulty which greatly accelerated the printing of fiat currency.
Looks like we are on the road to hyperinflation - anyone remember the lessons from 1920's Germany?

Monday, October 6, 2008

The Dow Plunges

... and it is starting to resemble the Mariana Trench.

It looks like the market didn't seem too impressed with the Congressional $700 Billion Bailout also known as the "ginormous power grab by the US Treasury Secretary to buy lots and lots of worthless paper assets for an enormously obscene sum of taxpayer money in order to save a bunch of rich financial weasels who made some very bad business decisions because they were initially encouraged to do so by extremely reckless public policy changes included in the "Community Reinvestment Act" passed by Congress in the 1990's.

You might be interested to see the political contributions which may have influenced the Senate votes by "Mr. Change" and "Mr. Maverick" (aka - The best presidential candidates special interest money can buy).

From OpenSecrets and Campaign For Liberty
Top 10 Corporate PAC Contributors:

Goldman Sachs $739,521
UBS AG $419,550
Lehman Brothers $391,774
Citigroup Inc $492,548
Morgan Stanley $341,380
Latham & Watkins $328,879
Google Inc $487,355
JPMorgan Chase & Co $475,112
Sidley Austin LLP $370,916
Skadden, Arps et al $360,409

Merrill Lynch $349,170
Citigroup Inc $287,801
Morgan Stanley $249,377
Wachovia Corp $147,456
Goldman Sachs $220,045
Lehman Brothers $115,707
Bear Stearns $108,000
JPMorgan Chase & Co $206,392
Bank of America $133,975
Credit Suisse Group $175,503

If you aren't completely incensed by now - then you haven't been paying attention.
Vote these, and other, Congressional leeches out of office on November 4 if they voted "YES".
Let's send a message to these folks.

No taxation without representation!!
They ignored us when we called upon them to vote "NO" - now it's time for us to act.

As for the presidential candidates - look for other names on the ballot and pick one, because at this point neither the "Change guy" or the "Mavricky guy" look much different. They both helped to tank my 401-K, and they both helped load up this bailout bill with more pork than you can find in a Hawaiian luau.

Vote the "Yes People" out of office
(a few of them even deserve to be in jail)

Another Reason To Homeschool - Youth Political Indoctrination

The recent videos coming out with "Obama Youth" are getting pretty scary - including this one with kids wearing paramilitary uniforms and behaving like robots and claiming they would be pretty much nothing without Obama:

For these kids to say.."because of Obama, I ...........", is disturbing, as if these kids can't become anything or achieve anything without "Obama". How about their parents? Haven't their parents inspired them to become anything or to achieve anything? How about their community's religious leaders? Haven't they inspired these kids to become anything or to achieve anything?

One commenter of this video said:
"When you combine this video, with the one with Children chanting, "Yes we can, can, can. Yes we can, can, can" with a backdrop of a messianic Obama symbol, the ideology is strikingly similar to that found in communist/socialist nations. This is just plain wrong. Pure indoctrination. If I were running for president, I would be abhorred by this kind of idolatry on my behalf - Obama just soaks it up, like a holy sponge."
Here is the other "Obama Youth" video that surfaced early last week:

The video above illustrates the best case for Private and home schools ever seen in this country. Here we have innocent children (complete with hand gestures), who I will wager don't even know much about Barack Obama or his Socialist policies, singing his praises and parroting sound bytes of "Change and Hope". They are being used as a political tool, and placing themselves in the spotlight, clearly at the delight of their parents and teachers. (yes, I know this was done "out of school")

How are these kids any different from these:

or these:

or this, or this?

Isn't brainwashing also a form of child abuse?
These kids are exemplifying the "sheeple" mentality that we see being proliferated in our education system. Nevermind if the kids coming out of public education cannot do math or read... we ought to be very concerned about their willingness to follow.

Saturday, October 4, 2008

Friday, October 3, 2008

Reid-McConnell Bailout Bribe Passes 263-171

Read the list of bribe takers here.

Vote them out of office in November.

Congress is a disappointment.
The majority of Americans did not want this.
This was legislation rammed down our throats.

It won't be long before the next money crisis unfolds.

Will The US House Of Representatives Succumb To Bribery?

A "YES" Vote In Exchange for Tax Breaks, Pet Projects and More Pork

The "Christmas Treed Bailout Bill", also known as the Reid-McConnell Bailout Bribe, is heading back to the House with all sorts of bribes and pork in it to sway House members who voted "NO" (earlier this week) to change their vote to a "YES" vote this time around. I would take that as an insult to my integrity if I were any one of them. Unfortunately the bribes they are being offered by the Senate to pass this bailout bill are very tempting. We will get to see who in the House of Representatives has any integrity, and any courage. (Text of the bill is here)

The pressure for legislators to grant the Treasury Secretary more power is enormous. Legislators are being threatened and coerced and sweet-talked to vote for this bailout bill, which now costs $150 billion dollars more!

I hope that each one of those House members would take a serious look at themselves in a mirror before they accept any part of this disgusting piece of legislation in return for favors. 228 elected Congressmen and women who last voted "NO" are now challenged to place good government before politics and partisanship. They will be challenged to maintain their integrity as well as remember their oaths of office, because it is the will of the people, whom they represent, that must be done. The American people so far, have rejected this bailout bill and are bombarding Congressional offices with calls, faxes and emails. Meanwhile, the American people are being fed scare tactics by the administration to get them to back off. If in fact these legislators vote against the will of the people and succumb instead to bribery and political gain, then we do indeed once more have taxation without representation.

Bribes are still that - bribes.

The American people are sick of it. We should all resolve to vote out of office (on Nov. 4) any Representative who votes in favor of this Senate bailout bill when it gets to a vote in the House, especially if their vote was in exchange for pork or pet projects.

Parts of this bill are targeted to specific Representatives.
For example (and these are just a few):
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), said she was switching her "NO" vote to a "YES" after the Senate added some $110 million in tax breaks and other sweeteners.

Rep. Jim Ramstad (R-Minn) may switch to "Yes" because the Senate attached the bailout to legislation he spearheaded to give people with mental illnesses better health insurance coverage.

Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), is lured by the $223 million package of tax benefits for fishermen and others whose livelihoods suffered as a result of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill.

Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) is being bribed by tax breaks for Arizona solar companies.

Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) is being tempted by a tax deduction for bike commuters, since he is a bike advocate.

Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Brad Sherman (D-CA), both California Congressmen, are being wooed by tax breaks for movie producers.
Isn't this just disgusting? And it is so incredibly obvious!

Still other Congressmen are being blackmailed into voting for this bailout bill - because if they vote against the goodies in this bill, then they know that will be used against them in their campaigns back home. (i.e. Joe Congressman voted against insert pet project or tax break here )

As far as the alternative remedy for Wall Street and the financial markets, there have been other proposals offered up by leading economists and businessmen and women. (This article has excellent suggestions )

Make no mistake, the goal of this bill is not to "Rescue Wall Street", it is to give the Treasury Secretary more power without oversight and without consequence, and it will reward people who have trashed our financial markets as a result of very bad public lending practices initiated over a decade ago!

Joel Stein of the LA Times wrote this
On Sept. 18, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that if a bill wasn't passed that week, "we may not have an economy on Monday." Not only did we have one, but in the coming days some smart, conservative investors (JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Warren Buffett) scooped up some troubled banks (Washington Mutual, Wachovia, Goldman Sachs) and the crappy mortgages they held, and the government hardly did anything. The only thing we have to fear is the government making us scared.
Oh, and in case anyone forgot - appropriation bills like this have to originate in the House, not the Senate - but at this point procedure has been tossed to the wind. You might as well just burn any remaining copies of the US Constitution.

Isn't anyone out there angry about this? If you are, then you should be calling Congress today.
In his Communist Manifesto, published in 1848, Karl Marx proposed 10 measures to be implemented after the proletariat takes power, with the aim of centralizing all instruments of production in the hands of the state. Proposal Number Five was to bring about the ‘...centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.’ If he were to rise from the dead today, Marx might be delighted to discover that most economists and financial commentators, including many who claim to favor the free market, agree with him.” - Martin Masse, National Post
Many of Marx's goals have already been accomplished - and we are almost there folks.

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Dear Senate - What Part Of "NO" Don't You Understand?

Phones rang off the hook with angry constituents - one California Senator said she'd received 91,000 phone calls and 85,000 were people who wanted her to vote "NO" but she was going to vote "YES" anyway.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is not representation.

Here is the roll call vote tally.

Here are the Senators who listened to their constituents and voted "NO" against this Socialist bill, and they deserve to be thanked:
Allard (R)
Barasso (R)
Brownback (R)
Bunning (R)
Cantwell (D)
Cochran (R)
Crapo (R)
DeMint (R)
Dole (R)
Dorgan (D)
Enzi (R)
Feingold (D)
Inhofe (R)
Johnson (D)
Landrieu (D)
Nelson (FL) (D)
Roberts (R)
Sanders (I)
Sessions (R)
Shelby (R)
Stabenow (D)
Tester (D)
Vitter (R)
Wicker (R)
Wyden (D)
Bi-partisan "non-support" with 15 "R's" and 9 "D's" and 1 "I".

Here is the text of the 451 page "Christmas Tree" bill
that was loaded up with all kinds of "ornaments" like:
- An Excise Tax Exemption for Wooden Practice Arrows Used by Children
- Tax breaks benefiting litigants in the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill
- A measure to require large companies' health plans to give equal treatment to mental health or addiction if they cover such illnesses.(Mental Health parity legislation)
- $100 billion of tax breaks, including relief for businesses
- Raising FDIC insurance limit to $250,000 (yes, don't we all have $250,000 sitting in the bank that needs to be insured immediately?)
- Renewable energy tax credits
- A fix that would prevent middle-class taxpayers from paying the alternative minimum tax.
- Financial Help for Rural Schools
- Disaster Aid (including mileage allowance changes)
- Tax subsidies for producers of rum in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
- and other mayhem

Looks like they put a Hershey Kiss in the middle of a really rotten piece of fruit and they want you to eat it all.

I am so glad that these ornaments really address the liquidity issue on Wall Street. (eye roll). It's an abomination, because even with the list of goodies attached, it still means that the Treasury Secretary gets use our taxes to buy up lots of bad paper at his discretion (the very same paper that Wall Street investment companies couldn't make a profit with) with the notion that the federal government will be able to sell them and make a profit (yes, and if you believe that I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn). On top of that, foreign banks get bailed out, and the Treasury Secretary can dictate to corporations what they can pay their CEO's. It's essentially the same bad ill conceived bill that the House rejected.

One interesting note regarding foreign banks - the Royal Bank of Scotland gave nearly a quarter of a million dollars to Senator Dodd, who is led the bailout negotiations in the Senate, and RBS is going to be a big gainer with this bailout package. Senator "Countrywide Sweetheart deal recipient" Dodd is an abomination, and should be removed from his position in the Senate immediately. What a disgrace to the people of Connecticut and to the American people.

Let's hope that the House has much more sense and courage to reject this mess. (I'll be calling them again)- it should be noted that both Rep. DeFazio and Rep. Kaptur have an alternative that won't cost the taxpayer a penny and requires no bailout legislation at all! Many top notch economists have also put forth some alternative ideas. Understand the problem at it's root: A credit crunch and housing foreclosure crisis that can be solved with some policy changes. Watch: Let's Play Wall Street Bailout

As far as McCain and Obama's vote - McBama both voted "YES" - now that just goes to show that there really is no difference between the two - and neither of them understand or support free market economics - and neither of them mind corporate bailouts - and neither of them listened to the thousands of citizens of this country who called them to tell them to vote "NO". Obama's phone number yielded me a "full voice mailbox" and McCain's office was unreachable. I am definitely not voting for either of them.

As far as I am concerned McCain just lost the election. He made no "Maverick" move, and instead marched in lockstep with the lobbyists who filled the Senate pushing for this bailout. He did nothing to distinguish himself or stand up for Conservative principles. Now, when Gov. Palin is questioned in the debate about the bailout, what is this "good conservative" supposed to say? That she agrees with corporate welfare and bailing out companies who have screwed the American public and our economy? Yeah, that'll go over like a lead balloon with her base. She can't come out disagreeing with the top of the ticket, now can she? As for Obama and "Change" - yeah right.... same fraud and politics, different day.

One last comment - not only is this bill unacceptable, but they have by-passed all procedures to bring it properly to the floor - there was no hearing - no debate - no time to evaluate it - and should not have originated in the Senate. They are rushing and ramrodding this dressed up pig through Congress with scare tactics and with little regard to the thousands (if not millions) - of citizens who have called Washington to protest. For Shame. This is truly not America anymore, but something very foreign and very unfortunate. The troops fighting abroad should just come home - they are fighting for principles that our government doesn't even abide by anymore.