Monday, March 30, 2009

A world currency moves nearer after Tim Geithner's slip

US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner confessed on Wednesday that he had not read the plans by China's central bank governor for a "super-sovereign reserve currency" run by the International Monetary Fund, but nevertheless let slip that Washington was "open" to the idea. Whoops.

By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
Last Updated: 8:58AM GMT 27 Mar 2009

This is how matters quickly escalate in geo-finance. China's suggestion – backed by Russia, Brazil, and India, and clearly aimed at breaking US dollar hegemony – is making its way onto the agenda of the G20 Summit next week. 'Dollar-dämmerung' no longer looks so far-fetched.

China's paper, by Governor Zhou Xiaochuan, is couched in understated language – more a 'thought experiment' than a declaration of monetary war. His ideas could be mistaken for the musings of an academic theorist. Nobody should be fooled by decorum.

It comes days after premier Wen Jiabow demanded US action to safeguard the value of China's holdings of US bonds - $740bn of US Treasuries and a further $600bn or so of other debt. "We have lent huge amounts of money to the US. Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets," he said.

China's Communist Party seems to fear that the Federal Reserve is orchestrating a beggar-thy-neighbour devaluation - and a disguised default on America's foreign debt - by resorting to the nuclear option of printing money to buy US Treasury bonds.

China's proposal is to activate the IMF's power to issue Special Drawing Rights (SDRs). The IMF would be groomed as de facto central bank for the planet. The SDRs would gradually become an "accepted means of payment". Call it the 'globo'.

It would be an error dismiss this idea as a pipe-dream. Cynics once ridiculed Maastricht plans to launch the euro. John Major famously said chatter about a European currency had "all the quaintness of a rain-dance and about the same potency". Yet once officialdom began assembling the machinery for monetary union, EMU acquired a life of its own.

The pitfalls of a world central bank are obvious. It is hard enough for the European Central Bank to run policy for 16 states in a region with a shared history, and shared EU institutions (Commission, Court of Justice, competition police, etc). The politics of global monetary management would be poisonous.

Sunday, March 29, 2009

10 Reasons why we haven't seen the bottom---Yet!

Before I give my reasons, let me make clear that I have no idea what the market is going to do in the short term. Dow 8,000 would not surprise me in the least (well maybe a little). The biggest rallies happen in bear markets. Also, don’t read this if you prefer to remain in denial – you won’t like it. Caveats thus dispensed, here we go:

1) The bottom can’t be here because too many folks are still looking for it. When all hope of catching the bottom has been given up and the thought of buying a stock makes people want to puke, then maybe the bottom will be in. We’re a long way from the paradigm shift in sentiment right now.

2) There is a massive oversupply of companies built on free money. 1 out of every 3 companies needs to disappear, in my guesstimation. Good luck picking stocks now before the massive bankruptcy wave that is coming.

3) Discretionary income falls by a multiple of wealth destruction. In other words, if you lose 25% of your household income, discretionary spending can fall 80%. Think about it.

4) Behavior is changing this time. This isn’t like the tech bubble of the late 90s. That was a speculation bubble based on the greater fool theory. This time, the recession is pervasive and it is changing people’s lives for the worse by the day. The shock to the economy is just beginning.

5) Investors are going to understand more and more that the stock game is rigged. Who wants to go to a casino where the government is the house and keeps loading the dice and changing the rules? The economic stats published by the government are garbage and who knows which company’s CEO has been cooking the books?

6) Valuations are high. P/E ratios are only meaningful if you have some confidence of future E. I personally believe that earnings of the overall market are going to be negative for a couple years, which makes the P/E ratio N.M. or not meaningful. What will investors be willing to pay for negative earnings? Even if you believe the optimists who think S&P500 earnings will be around $50 this year, that puts the current P/E at 14x. Previous big bears have ended with P/Es closer to 6x or 7x.

7) Technicals. You can take your McClellan Oscillators, MACD, and Fibonacci Cycles and stick them where the sun don’t shine, as far as I’m concerned. Look at a 20-year chart of any major index and tell me that you’re jump in front of that freight train.

8) There will be other shoes to drop. In fact, it may start raining shoes. Some possibilities: currency crisis, war, treasury bond default, massive selloff by Russia, Japan and China of dollar reserves, bank runs, food shortages, civil unrest, snowballing bankruptcies, systemic financial meltdown; skyrocketing interest rates and inflation when foreign central banks stop buying those little pieces of paper that promise them 3% interest paid out of our children’s future earnings. If you really think that none of these or other shoes will drop, then you’re living in la la land. “This is America. We’re special. Blessed by God. It can’t happen here.” That’s exactly the type of arrogance that marked the end of other empires throughout history.

9) Political anger – people are getting mad, and they should be. Congress and the Fed are spending trillions of our money down a sinkhole – but at least it has been creating all those jobs and helping the little guy! Our children will be spending a huge part of their labor to pay interest on debt created by the profligacy of our generation. Good thing our congressional leaders all have PhDs in economics and finance. Not! Central planning worked so well in the USSR that we’re going to try it in our country.

10) The economy is in a death spiral. Lower spending begets layoffs which begets lower spending still which begets more layoffs. If we had been saving during the sunny times for the rainy days, this would just be a recession. But everybody is broke.

I really, really hope I’m wrong about all this. But I honestly don’t see how I could be.

Statgeek's blog, March 11, 2009

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

You and I Can't Buy the Guns Mexican Cartels Own

The Administration is Not Dealing Straight With Us on Mexico's Gun Problem

Ralph Weller
March 1 2009

Let's set things straight right up front. Yes, some guns are being smuggled into Mexico from the U.S. Most are handguns. But, handguns are being illegally trafficked from state to state and from the U.S. to Canada. It should come as no surprise that guns are smuggled into Mexico. But, the problem being portrayed by the U.S. media and our government is not as it seems. You see, Mexico doesn't allow ownership of most firearms, so ordinary Mexican people seeking self-protection will find a way to get them into Mexico. As for the drug cartels operating in the border towns along the U.S., they have other sources for their weapons and have become the prime supplier within Mexico.

I worked in Mexico in a border town for about five years. It was far enough from San Diego County in the Sonora Desert of Mexico that commuting several hundred miles daily was impossible. So, for a few years I lived in the city and commuted home periodically on some weekends. As crime grew out of control, I eventually moved into a place on the U.S. side and commuted daily in and out of Mexico for my own safety.

I stayed in Mexico for a Mexican holiday my first year. I don't recall the holiday. Normally, I would leave Mexico for a holiday, but it was in the middle of the week and one day was not long enough to come home. All I know is that on that particular Mexican holiday, Mexicans love to fire guns into the air. That evening as I sat on the balcony of my hotel, the gun fire that erupted in celebration was quite unbelievable. It was so intense I backed off the balcony and watched the festivities from a couple three feet in the room. We're talking war-like firing of weapons, it was that intense.

As I listened that night to the gun fire, I was somewhat shocked at the amount of fully automatic gun fire. It wasn't sporadic. It was continuous throughout the city. For a country that bans guns I thought, how in the world did they get their hands on all these full-auto weapons? Clearly what sounded like M16 fire was prolific along with 7.62 x 39 AK autos with a smattering of smaller caliber full-autos, most likely 9mm. Gun fire can be heard in most American cities on New Years, but I've never heard full-auto weapons being fired, at least not in the San Diego area.

The next day I went into work and sat down with a trusted senior Mexican manager. I looked at him and said, "I thought guns were illegal in Mexico." He chuckled and said, "So you stayed in town last night?" As the conversation progressed, it became clear that guns are as common in Mexico as tamales at Christmas. Everyone he knows, including himself, own at least one gun. And, it matters not whether it's a semi-auto or fully automatic, they're all illegal, so why stop with semi-autos? Though clearly illegal in the states in most instances, a lot of Mexicans have more firepower in terms of military weapons than we can only dream of owning here.

As time went on, parties in the city at middle class Mexican homes become a way of life. Most Mexican managers in the plant knew I was a gun wonk. As it turns out, they couldn't wait to invite me over to their place on a Friday night to show me their collection. Semi-autos, some very high-end Sigs and other European handguns were not uncommon along with piles of old revolvers. I thought I had seen everything in the states, but in Mexico it's not uncommon for people to own full-auto military rifles. Everything from an M16, UZI machine pistols and the most popular, select-fire AK47 military rifles. These are not the so-called "assault weapons" you can buy at the local gun shop in the U.S., but full select-fire military-issue rifles. Now, I know you want to know and are dying to ask; Did I see any U.S. military-issue weapons stolen from the U.S. military? Not a single one was marked with U.S. military markings. Everything was marked with additional foreign markings on the receiver, including M16 rifles, or they had nothing at all. I saw firearms manufactured in Europe, China, Russia and South America along with U.S. manufactured weapons. I saw rifles that looked familiar with no place of manufacture, no serial number or manufacturer's logo. The information was not removed, it was never there to begin with. I can only assume they came from illegal arms manufacturers in India or Pakistan that produce copies of weapons. It was obvious that none of these firearms came from a U.S. gun shop in Tucson or San Diego. You couldn't buy them from a gun shop in the states if you tried.


Speak Out Against REAL ID

Submit comments to the Dept. of Homeland Security by May 8th!

A broad coalition of organizations across the United States is urging the public to submit comments rejecting the illegal national identification system created under the Department of Homeland Security's REAL ID program.
Five states and several members of Congress have rejected the scheme, which creates a massive national ID system without adequate security or privacy safeguards, which makes it more difficult and costly for people to get licenses, and which makes it easier for identity thieves to access the personal data of 245 million license and cardholders nationwide.
To take action and submit comments against this fundamentally flawed national ID system, click here! Comments are due by 5pm EST on May 8, 2007.
Take Action!
To take action and make your voice heard, submit comments against the fundamentally flawed national identification scheme. The draft regulations to implement the REAL ID Act are open for comment until 5:00 PM EST on May 8, 2007.

Your comments can be submitted in one of three ways:

1. Online through the Federal Rulemaking Portal: (search for "DHS-2006-0030-0001" and follow the instructions for submitting comments);
2. Fax to 1-866-466-5370. Your fax must state that you are submitting comments in response to Notice of Proposed Rulemaking DHS-2006-0030.
3. Postal Mail sent to Department of Homeland Security; Attn: NAC 1-12037; Washington, D.C. 20538. Your letter must state that you are submitting comments in response to Notice of Proposed Rulemaking DHS-2006-0030.


By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, theFederal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash.

The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? Nancy Pelosi. She is the leader of the majority party.

She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red

If the Army & Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation," or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.

Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.

What you do with this article now that you have read it.......... Is up to you!

Charley Reese has been a journalist for 49 years.

Monday, March 23, 2009

Obama Just Created the Depression of 2009!

Mar 21, 2009

Now I’m really Scared For America.

Obama just put the nail in the economic coffin of the United States. He did it with sleight of hand once again using the big news of the day (AIG bonus ‘crisis) to hide his real move which was to absolutely 100% destroy the economy of the United States. This is that serious.

Your life literally depends on this as now it is mere months not years before Obama must outlaw guns and the Bill of Rights. In so doing he will plunge America into a real Revolution. You can read about the news on page 20 in your newspaper, or hidden where the sun doesn’t shine.

This is the fall of America. The media is helping by hiding the fact that Obama just turned America into Weimar Republic in Germany in 1932.

We are about to see massive inflation and I am so scared that this is not funny. Even Obama supporters can’t be so blind as to not see what he is doing? Surely even they can see that this path to Marxism will not be a pretty one. Watch this and prepare.

We have been betrayed by the media. They put life altering and nation altering news on page 20, hiding the truth of what was just done to our nation.
Depression Here We Come!

I guarantee you we will now be descending more and more into the abyss of socialism and marxism. On March 19, 2009 Obama had the Treasury invest 1 trillion dollars that we do not have. The fed created this out of thin air in an imitation of Germany in the 1920s and 30s.

ALERT : Price of Gold up $80 almost immediately, everyone is abandoning he dollar and we are about to be slammed like a third world nation. This is so damned serious that I am ashamed that the media is not saying anything! They have it buried for the most part.

We are in trouble, Obama is doing it on purpose.

My God America, in just 3 months, Obama has managed to increase deficits by many trillions.

He also has managed to now be the cause of unthinkable inflation over the coming weeks. That’s right, weeks, not months and years. Weeks! Your money is about to become worthless, even in a bank and visions of wheel-barrels of money the Germans had to bring to buy a loaf of bread, echo in 2009.

TARP funds=political donations to Congress

Banks Recycling TARP Funds as Political Contributions
Published on 03-22-2009

Source: Newsweek

There was plenty of outrage on Capitol Hill last week over the executive bonuses paid out by AIG after getting federal bailout money. But another money trail could make voters just as angry: the campaign dollars to members of Congress from banks and firms that have received billions via the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

While a few big firms, such as Wells Fargo and JP Morgan Chase, have curtailed their campaign giving, others are quietly doling out cash to select members of Congress, particularly those who serve on committees that oversee TARP. In recent filings with the Federal Election Commission, the political action committee for Bank of America (which got $15 billion in bailout money) sent out $24,500 in the first two months of 2009, including $1,500 to House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and another $15,000 to members of the House and Senate banking panels. Citigroup ($25 billion) dished out $29,620, including $2,500 to House GOPWhip Eric Cantor, who also got $10,000 from UBS which, while not a TARP recipient, got $5 billion in bailout funds as an AIG "counterparty." "This certainly appears to be a case of TARP funds being recycled into campaign contributions," says Brett Kappell, a D.C. lawyer who tracks donations. (A spokesman for Cantor did not respond to requests for comment. A spokeswoman for Hoyer said it's his "policy to accept legal contributions.")

The cash flow is already causing angst inside the Beltway. "The last thing I want to do is wake up one morning and see our PAC check being burned on C-Span," said one bank lobbyist, who asked not to be identified because of the issue's sensitivity. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Financial Services chair Rep. Barney Frank both said recently they won't take donations from TARP recipients. But House Democratic fundraisers have quietly passed the word that the party's campaign committee will resume accepting them—but down the road, not right now. Said one fundraiser, who also requested anonymity, "These are treacherous waters."

Saturday, March 21, 2009

House adopts plan for 'volunteer' corps

Also requires new evaluation of 'mandatory' service for all
Posted: March 19, 2009
4:58 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

The U.S. House of Representatives has approved a plan to set up a new "volunteer corps" and consider whether "a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people" should be developed.

The legislation also refers to "uniforms" that would be worn by the "volunteers" and the "need" for a "public service academy, a 4-year institution" to "focus on training" future "public sector leaders." The training, apparently, would occur at "campuses."

The vote yesterday came on H.R. 1388, which reauthorizes through 2014 the National and Community Service Act of 1990 and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973, acts that originally, among other programs, funded the AmeriCorps and the National Senior Service Corps.

It not only reauthorizes the programs, but also includes "new programs and studies" and is expected to be funded with an allocation of $6 billion over the next five years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Many, however, are raising concerns that the program, which is intended to include 250,000 "volunteers," is the beginning of what President Obama called his "National Civilian Security Force" in a a speech last year in which he urged creating an organization as big and well-funded as the U.S. military. He has declined since then to elaborate.

WND reported when a copy of the speech provided online apparently was edited to exclude Obama's specific references to the new force.

The new bill specifically references the possibilities "if all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service."

Such new requirements perhaps, the legislation notes, "would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds."

No one, apparently with the exception of infants, would be excluded.

"The means to develop awareness of national service and volunteer opportunities at a young age by creating, expanding, and promoting service options for elementary and secondary school students, through service learning or other means, and by raising awareness of existing incentives."

According to a report by Canada Free Press, "'volunteerism' that kept America running since the days of its founding" would be "wiped out with the stroke of a pen."

"It becomes forced labor and like the practice of another era, presses American citizens of all ages and creeds, unknowingly into military service," the commentary said.

"On paper, H.R. 1388 is the 'Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act'; the more innocuous sounding 'The Give Act,' for short.

"The Give Act puts the finishing touches to Public Allies New Leadership
for New Times, modeled after Saul Alinsky's 'Peoples Organizations' and operating under Michelle Obama," the commentary said.

"Michelle was also a pioneer in the social entrepreneur movement – leaders who create new approaches and organize to provide new solutions to social problems. Like most things Saul Alinsky, H.R. 1388 sounds noble in stating why wide-sweeping change is necessary," the commentary said.

"H.R. 1388 goes straight to the heart of volunteerism in America, impacting everything from the lemonade stands of neighborhood children, to the residents of senior citizens homes. … The Give Act puts tow-headed school children and silver-haired seniors in the official uniform of the new State, and encompasses every walk of life in main-street America," the commentary said. "Whether you are young or old, or firmly believe that volunteering means you are offering your time to the good of community work, you will be pressed into Obama's National Civilian Community Corps."

Groups of such "volunteers," would, under the legislation, be "grouped together as appropriate in campuses for operational, support, and boarding purposes. The Corps campus for a unit shall be in a facility or central location established as the operational headquarters and boarding place for the unit. … There shall be a superintendent for each camp."

The plan generated this concern from "This is the equivalent of brown shirts."

Another portion of the bill talks about a "service learning" plan that will be "a mandatory part of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools served by the local educational agency."

A forum participant noted, "I wonder what's going to happen to those who refused to 'volunteer.' Maybe they will be put into a different 'campus.' I guess we will soon find out."

Formal announcements about the plan suggested something far different, picking a provision far down in the 200 pages of legislation to highlight.

According to a Business Wire statement released by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the bill "would formally authorize federal support for establishing the anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks on America as a National Day of Service and Remembrance."

That provision is tucked into the far reaches of the legislation, but Schumer discussed it as if it were the primary point.

"I could not be more proud to work to pass this important provision," said Schumer. "September 11 should not only be a day for mourning – it should be a day to think about our neighbors, our community, and our country. We can take a tragic day in our nation's history and turn it into a force for good."

On the Albany Insanity blog, this concern was raised: "What gives the government the right to require individuals to give three years service under the guise of 'volunteer' service? It is not explicit exactly who is required but I think they get the bill passed and then iron out the details. It talks about uniforms and 'camps.' They revise the word 'camps' and call it 'campus.' There is language about Seniors and Community organizations."

The blog noted, such work forces would be used for "pressing national and local challenges" that apparently could range from weather disasters to economic uncertainty.

At a Republican website, officials noted it authorizes funding for an Education Corps, Healthy Futures Corps, Clean Energy Corps, Veterans' Corps and Opportunity Corps.

The bill was sponsored by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, a Democrat from New York. It was approved in the House 321-105, with mostly GOP opposition. It now goes to the Senate.

WND reported earlier on Obama's Colorado Springs campaign speech when he sought a civilian security force as big and well-funded as the military – with a budget of hundreds of billions of dollars.

WND later reported when the official website for Obama,, announced he would "require" all middle school through college students to participate in community service programs.

However, after a flurry of blogs protested children being drafted into Obama's proposed youth corps, officials softened the website's wording.

Originally, under the tab "America Serves," read, "President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in under served schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps.

"Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year," the site announced.

WND previously reported on a video of a marching squad of Obama youth.

Joseph Farah, founder and editor of WND, used his daily column first to raise the issue and then to elevate it with a call to all reporters to start asking questions.

"If we're going to create some kind of national police force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, isn't this rather a big deal?" Farah wrote. "I thought Democrats generally believed the U.S. spent too much on the military. How is it possible their candidate is seeking to create some kind of massive but secret national police force that will be even bigger than the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force put together?

"Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that? If not, why did he say it? What did he mean?" Farah wrote.

'305 million Americans need to know if foreign national is usurping presidency'

Taitz to FBI: Investigate 'tampering' at Supremes

Posted: March 21, 2009
12:15 am Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A California attorney battling on a number of fronts to obtain documentation
of Barack Obama's eligibility to be president is asking the FBI and U.S. Secret Service to investigate suspected "tampering" at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Orly Taitz, who is pursuing nearly half a dozen causes through her Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, says the issue of Obama's eligibility to meet the Constitution's demand for a "natural born" president has been before the Supreme Court at least four times.

But she wonders whether the justices actually were given the pleadings to review.

"I believe … that there was tampering with documents and records by employees of the Supreme Court and the justices never saw those briefs," she alleges in a letter to the FBI's Robert Mueller, the Secret Service's Mark Sullivan and Attorney General Eric Holder.

"Three hundred five million American citizens … need to know whether a foreign national is usurping the position of the president and the commander in chief," she wrote.

Taitz raises questions about "forgery of court records, tampering with court records, cyber crime, erasing of court records from the docket, fraud, mail fraud, wire fraud and other related crimes."

Specifically, she points to the handling of her own case, Lightfoot v. Bowen, which was submitted to the Supreme Court on an emergency basis. Although it was scheduled for a conference, no hearing ever was held.

Join one third of a million people who are seeking the truth on whether Obama meets the Constitution's "natural born" citizenship clause.

Taitz notes that references to the case were erased from the docket of the Supreme Court on Jan. 21, shortly after Obama, the defendant, met with eight of the nine justices behind closed doors.

It happened just two days before her case was scheduled to be reviewed in conference.

Secondly, Taitz notes that in her conversation with Justice Antonin Scalia at a book-signing in Los Angeles several weeks ago, he appeared to have no knowledge of the cases that had been submitted.

She said she mentioned her case and those brought by Cort Wrotnowski, Philip Berg and Leo Donofrio.

"In the presence of several attorneys, law students and Secret Service agents Justice Scalia kept saying that he didn't know anything … even though all of the plaintiffs have received notification that all of those cases were reviewed by all nine justices," she said.

Taitz said she's also concerned that the Supreme Court docket was somehow modified.

"Did somebody from outside break and enter into the computer system of the Supreme Court or was it done by one of the overzealous employees who wanted to keep Obama in the White House?" she asked.

"I demand to see the printout of entries of both internal docket seen by justices and the external docket seen by the public to verify if those were identical at all times, particularly between January 20th and January 23rd," she said.

She also raised the possibility that justices' signatures may have been "stamped" on documentation.

Her allegations, she said, were part of what she submitted to Chief Justice John Roberts when she met him at the University of Idaho a week ago.

"Due to the … great urgency of the matter in relation to the national security of the United States … I demand immediate investigation of this matter," Taitz wrote.

Taitz also is developing a Quo Warranto case that has been submitted to Holder.

Essentially, the case demands to know what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto "affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents."

As WND reported, Taitz already has submitted a motion to the Supreme Court for re-hearing of Lightfoot v. Bowen, a case she is working on through Defend Our Freedoms alleging some of her documentation may have been withheld from the justices by a court clerk.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, some suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Although Obama officials have told WND all such allegations are "garbage," here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama's eligibility:

* New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.

* Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, (now dismissed) brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.

* Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.

* Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.

* Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case was dismissed by Judge Michael P. Kenny.

* Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.

* Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.

* In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.

* Also in Ohio, there was the Greenberg v. Brunner case which ended when the judge threatened to assess all case costs against the plaintiff.

* In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.

* In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.

* California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.

In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama's eligibility include:

* In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.

* In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.

* In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.

* In Washington, L. Charles Cohen vs. Obama.

* In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.

Friday, March 20, 2009

U.S. law-making is riddled with slapdash, incompetence and gamesmanship

Is this the end of America?
Posted: March 19, 2009, 7:38 PM by NP Editor

By Terence Corcoran

Helicopter Ben Bernanke’s Federal Reserve is dropping trillions of fresh paper dollars on the world economy, the President of the United States is cracking jokes on late night comedy shows, his energy minister is threatening a trade war over carbon emissions, his treasury secretary is dithering over a banking reform program amid rising concerns over his competence and a monumentally dysfunctional U.S. Congress is launching another public jihad against corporations and bankers.

As an aghast world — from China to Chicago and Chihuahua — watches, the circus-like U.S. political system seems to be declining into near chaos. Through it all, stock and financial markets are paralyzed. The more the policy regime does, the worse the outlook gets. The multi-ringed spectacle raises a disturbing question in many minds: Is this the end of America?

Probably not, if only because there are good reasons for optimism. The U.S. economy has pulled out of self-destructive political spirals in the past, spurred on by its business class and corporate leaders, the profit-making and market-creating people who rose above the political turmoil to once again lift the world out of financial crisis. It’s happened many times before, except for once, when it took 20 years to rise out of the Great Depression.

Past success, however, is no guarantee of future recovery, especially now when there are daily disasters and new indicators of political breakdown. All developments are not disasters in themselves. The AIG bonus firestorm is a diversion from real issues , but it puts the ghastly political classes who make U.S. law on display for what they are: ageing self-serving demagogues who have spent decades warping the U.S. political system for their own ends. We see the system up close, law-making that is riddled with slapdash, incompetence and gamesmanship.

One test of whether we are witnessing the end of America is how many more times Americans put up with congressional show trials of individual business people and their employees, slandering and vilifying them for their actions and motives. And for how long will they tolerate a President who berates business and corporations as dens of crime and malfeasance? If the majority of Americans come to accept the caricatures of business as true, then America is closer to the end of its life as a global leader, as a champion of markets and individualism.

But America is at risk in other ways, especially in the technical business of setting and executing policy. The presidency of Barack Obama has set out on a course that has no precedent in U.S. history. Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose New Deal transformed the U.S. economy during the Great Depression, pushed America off on a sharply different political and ideological course. The Obama administration is different in many ways, not least in its supreme self-confidence in its methods and objectives.

Reform of health care, environmental policy, education, energy, banking, regulation — every nook and cranny of the U.S. economy has been put on alert for major change. Expansion of government spending, plunging the U.S. into unprecedented deficits, is without parallel. In economic policy, through regulation and control of energy output, financial services and monetary expansion, the U.S. government has embarked on a fundamental reshaping of America. It is designed, in short, to bring on the end of America.

The spillover effect of all this on the rest of the world promises to be dramatically disruptive. The greatest global risk is in monetary and currency policy. Below is a chart that graphically demonstrates the sharp deviation in monetary policy from past norms. Under the chairmanship of Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve is in the midst of a giant economic experiment, flooding the world with U.S. dollars, hoping that flood will stimulate economic activity.

The total monetary base, already at astronomical levels, is now expected to take another big hit with the new Fed policy of buying up U.S. longer-term treasury bills in a bid to drive down long-term interest rates.

Mr. Bernanke is sometimes known as “Helicopter Ben” because he once in an academic paper referred to the use of “helicopters” full of money to rescue an economy from deflation. In comments Wednesday to explain the Fed’s new policy of buying $300-billion in U.S. treasury bills, Mr. Bernanke noted that the Fed is now more worried about inflation being too low than about it getting too high in the future.

For the rest of the world, however, the worry is that America is at risk of becoming the fountainhead of a new inflationary outburst. The U.S. dollar is now in decline, gold is moving sharply higher, and new global currency turmoil is on the horizon.

It may not happen. A paper just published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis says that the Fed will have to be prepared to absorb all the excess money it has poured into the U.S. economy. It will be a technical and political challenge unlike any central bank has ever undertaken. The future of America is at stake.

Thursday, March 19, 2009

"Enemy of the State"

Obama’s use of controlled chaos
Posted by Hans Gruen on Mar 18th, 2009 •

In the 1998 movie “Enemy of the State,” Robert Clayton Dean (Will Smith) and “Brill” (Gene Hackman) have their lives turned upside down by excessive surveillance activity from a sinister top NSA official, Thomas Reynolds (Jon Voight). Reynolds and a rogue group of NSA agents killed a congressman in a political-related murder, which was caught on tape, and for the rest of the movie they try to cover up the murder through deceit, misdirection and chaos theory – destroying evidence and intimidating witnesses, including Dean and Brill.

In a climactic scene between Dean and Brill, the tables are turned when Brill, a former career NSA agent himself who became “rogue” when his best friend was killed 18 years ago (the result of a covert mission overseas gone bad), decides to team up with Dean, a labor lawyer who stumbled upon the congressman’s murder by accident. He teaches his young protégé the rudiments of war strategy reminiscent of the military and political classics – Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War,” Machiavelli’s “The Prince,” Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” and chaos theory.

Here is an excerpt from the movie:

Brill: In guerrilla warfare, you try to use your weaknesses as strengths. (Here Brill shows Dean several listening devises NSA agents had planted on him, which up to that point allowed them to make his life a living hell.)Dean: Such as?

Brill: Well, if they’re big and you’re small, then you’re mobile and they’re slow. You’re hidden and they’re exposed. Only fight battles you know you can win. That’s the way the Vietcong did it. You capture their weapons and you use them against them the next time.

That scene from a popular movie 11 years ago reminds me of the Machiavellian tactics President Obama and his advisers are using today. These people, most of them Ivy-League graduates and diehard socialists, are very intelligent people. They realize that their policy remedies to fix the economy have no historical or rational basis and are only causing more economic uncertainty and chaos on Wall Street and on economic indicators throughout the world.

Therefore, the salient question becomes: Why is the Obama administration causing such chaos against his own nation, his own people who just elected him as the first black man to serve as president of United States?

It’s chaos theory.

In 1890, Henri Poincare, a French mathematician, physicist and philosopher of science, was the first discoverer of chaos theory. He applied it to mathematics and described this new phenomenon in this manner:

Chaos theory – the behavior of certain dynamical systems – that is, systems whose states evolve with time – that may exhibit dynamics that are highly sensitive to initial conditions (popularly referred to as the butterfly effect). As a result of this sensitivity, which manifests itself as an exponential growth of perturbations in the initial conditions, the behavior of chaotic systems appears to be random. This happens even though these systems are deterministic, meaning that their future dynamics are fully defined by their initial conditions, with no random elements involved. This behavior is known as deterministic chaos, or simply chaos.

Applied to politics, chaos theory is reminiscent of several derivative military, political and philosophy treatises of the past, including “The Art of War” (circa 500 B.C.) – All war is deception; victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win; “The Prince” (1513) – Politics have no relation to morals; the end justifies the means; and “Rules for Radicals” (1971) – Rule No. 13, Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.

Obama is a master at using his enemies’ strengths (Christianity, free-market capitalism, Reagan conservatism) as a weakness (moral and economic collapse, multi-billion dollar bailouts, George W. Bush). Obama, along with his socialists and fascist minions, believes the best way to dominate a society is by always having a certain degree of controlled (”determined”) chaos to supply the means to achieve their long-term ends of womb-to-tomb socialist controls over the people.

The president has masterfully manipulated chaos theory to exacerbate existing societal problems by acting like he is somehow above it all or disassociated from the plethora of existing problems. (”I inherited this economy” and “not on my watch” are favorite Obama mantras.) Furthermore, Obama has purposely refrained from seriously focusing on fixing these pressing problems facing America, whether it’s the economy, Wall Street, the home mortgage industry, the auto industry, the multi-trillion dollar debt we have with China, or the numerous geopolitical catastrophes across the world.

In “Enemy of the State,” Brill’s dialogue with Dean concluded, “You grow stronger as they grow weaker. Learn to use your enemy’s own weapons against him.” Obama and his minions have been taught by radical professors at the Ivy-League schools they attended to utterly hate America and all of her wonderful attributes like Natural Law, Christianity, liberty, integration of law and morality, free markets, the Bible, the Constitution, separation of powers, federalism – qualities that made America the greatest nation in this history of the world in less than 200 years. Instead, we are literally watching the Obama administration wage a coup d’état against his own country and wage a full frontal assault against her most sacred and vested interests.

I truly believe that Obama and the radicals in his administration will stop at nothing to achieve their nefarious ends, because they have the one characteristic conservatives and Republicans with all their God talk and reliance on the Constitution’s framers could never champion … self-righteousness.

Using pride, arrogance and self-righteousness combined with the political and legal application of chaos theory, the Obama administration should collapse upon the vanity of its own failed ideas, but for the media and our own self-delusion as products of the Stalinist public schools. The result? In the manner that Obama’s mentor, FDR, used the Great Depression as a pretext for the New Deal, Obama will likewise exploit societal instability, the collapse of Wall Street and the brink of a worldwide great depression, which under chaos theory is determinism and chaos, as a means to achieve his diabolical ends of transforming America from the USA to the USSA (the United Socialist States of America).

Obama’s tactics are not new. As I delineated above, they have precedence in Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Alinsky and chaos theory. President Obama, the prep school/Ivy-League/ community organizer, is banking on the fact that as a public school educated citizen you have never read any of those authors and theories. If that is so, please rent the movie, “Enemy of the State” to understand that your precious natural rights are virtually extinct, and let’s turn chaos theory against the Obama administration instead of being unwitting victims of his vast, Machiavellian conspiracy where in the name of affirmative action, bipartisanship and civility We the People have become willing accomplices to our own demise.

May God forbid.

Author: Dr. Ellis Washington

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

The Fed Did Indeed Cause the Housing Bubble

In 1995, a senior Clinton Administration official shared with me the Administration's targets for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgage volumes in low- and moderate-income communities. We had recently reviewed the Administration’s plans to increase government mortgage guarantees — most of these mortgages would also be pooled and sold as securities to investors. Even in 1995, I could see that these plans would create unserviceable debt loads in communities struggling with the falling incomes expected from globalization. Homeowners would default on mortgages while losses on mortgage-backed securities would drain retirement savings from 401(k)s and pension plans. Taxpayers would ultimately be hit with a large bill . . . but insiders would make a bundle.

I looked at the official and said that the Administration was planning on issuing more mortgages than there were houses or residents. “Shut up, this is none of your business,” the official snapped back.

Recently, we have seen numerous press accounts of bank and hedge fund losses from sub-prime mortgages. Remarkably, these reports imply that the losses are the result of a market downturn or contracting credit cycle. But there has been no mention of the extraordinary profits that were generated or who reaped them. There is no mention of who is poised to make a fortune on the bubble collapse. Even the most sophisticated commentators of our day are describing this financial coup d'etat as the unintentional consequence of "market forces."

I have written and spoken about the intentional engineering of the U.S. housing bubble and its ramifications for Americans and global investors. "Do not attempt to cure what you do not understand" is our motto for navigating the gathering storm. As we work to mitigate investment losses in the mortgage market and the harm done to communities through the fraudulent inducement of debt, we are well served to understand what has happened, who is benefiting, and why. One of the dirty little secrets behind the housing bubble is the long standing partnership of narcotics trafficking and mortgage fraud and the use of the two in combination to target and destroy minority and poor communities with highly profitable economic warfare. This model is global. It is operating in counties throughout the world as well as in US communities.

— Catherine Austin Fitts
Assistant Secretary of Housing - Federal Housing Commissioner, Bush I

Fannie plans bonuses of up to $611K for 4 execs

Fannie Mae plans bonuses of up to $611,000 for 4 executives; Freddie Mac has similar plans

* Alan Zibel, AP Real Estate Writer
* Wednesday March 18, 2009, 4:18 pm EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Fannie Mae plans to pay retention bonuses of as much as $611,000 each to key executives this year as part of a plan to keep hundreds of employees from leaving the government-controlled company.

Rival mortgage finance company Freddie Mac is planning similar awards, but has not yet reported on which executives will benefit.

The two companies, which together own or back more than half of the home mortgages in the country, have been hobbled by skyrocketing loan defaults. Fannie recently requested $15 billion in federal aid, while Freddie has sought a total of almost $45 billion.

Fannie Mae disclosed its "broad-based" retention program in a recent regulatory filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The company was only required to disclose the amounts for the top-paid executives, who will pocket at least $470,000 on top of their base salaries. The bonuses are more than double last year's, which ranged from $200,000 to $260,000

Lose your property for a home garden?

Big Brother legislation could mean prosecution, fines up to $1 million
Posted: March 16, 2009
8:56 pm Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Some small farms and organic food growers could be placed under direct supervision of the federal government under new legislation making its way through Congress.

Food Safety Modernization Act

House Resolution 875, or the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009, was introduced by Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., in February. DeLauro's husband, Stanley Greenburg, works for Monsanto – the world's leading producer of herbicides and genetically engineered seed.

DeLauro's act has 39 co-sponsors and was referred to the House Agriculture Committee on Feb. 4. It calls for the creation of a Food Safety Administration
to allow the government to regulate food production at all levels – and even mandates property seizure, fines of up to $1 million per offense and criminal prosecution for producers, manufacturers and distributors who fail to comply with regulations.

Michael Olson, host of the Food Chain radio show and author of "Metro Farm," told WND the government should focus on regulating food production in countries such as China and Mexico rather than burdening small and organic farmers in the U.S. with overreaching regulations.

"We need somebody to watch over us when we're eating food that comes from thousands and thousands of miles away. We need some help there," he said. "But when food comes from our neighbors or from farmers who we know, we don't need all of those rules. If your neighbor sells you something that is bad and you get sick, you are going to get your hands on that farmer, and that will be the end of it. It regulates itself."

Want your vegetables to grow like crazy? Get the amazing natural fertilizer designed to maximize taste and nutrient density!

The legislation would establish the Food Safety Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services "to protect the public health by preventing food-borne illness, ensuring the safety of food, improving research on contaminants leading to food-borne illness, and improving security of food from intentional contamination, and for other purposes."

Federal regulators will be tasked with ensuring that food producers, processors and distributors – both large and small – prevent and minimize food safety hazards such as food-borne illnesses and contaminants such as bacteria, chemicals, natural toxins or manufactured toxicants, viruses, parasites, prions, physical hazards or other human pathogens.

Under the legislation's broad wording, slaughterhouses, seafood processing plants, establishments that process, store, hold or transport all categories of food products prior to delivery for retail sale, farms, ranches, orchards, vineyards, aquaculture facilities and confined animal-feeding operations would be subject to strict government regulation.

Government inspectors would be required to visit and examine food production facilities, including small farms, to ensure compliance. They would review food safety records and conduct surveillance of animals, plants, products or the environment.

"What the government will do is bring in industry experts to tell them how to manage all this stuff," Olson said. "It's industry that's telling government how to set these things up. What it always boils down to is who can afford to have the most influence over the government. It would be those companies that have sufficient economies of scale to be able to afford the influence – which is, of course, industrial agriculture."

Farms and food producers would be forced to submit copies of all records to federal inspectors upon request to determine whether food is contaminated, to ensure they are in compliance with food safety laws and to maintain government tracking records. Refusal to register, permit inspector access or testing of food or equipment would be prohibited.

"What is going to happen is that local agriculture will end up suffering through some onerous protocols designed for international agriculture that they simply don't need," Olson said. "Thus, it will be a way for industrial agriculture to manage local agriculture."

Under the act, every food producer must have a written food safety plan describing likely hazards and preventative controls they have implemented and must abide by "minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water."

More Washington Theater - Bad actors all

Last updated: 6:18 am
March 18, 2009
Posted: 2:11 am
March 18, 2009

ALL the world's a stage, wrote Shakespeare, and in the world of Washington, the curtains have opened on the most elaborate farce of the year.

Welcome, taxpayers, to the Kabuki Theater of AIG Outrage - where DC's histrionic enablers of taxpayer-funded corporate bailouts compete for Best Performance of Hypocritical Indignation.

Over the weekend, cloaked in their finest populist costumes, the Beltway's hair-sprayed and powdered politicians and White House aides took to the airwaves to inveigh against $165 million in employee-retention payments made by the government-backed insurance giant.

The checks were mailed Friday, but the March 15 bonus deadline had been on the Capitol Hill radar screen since December.

But it wasn't until last week that the hapless court jester of the Obama administration, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, scrambled to rein in the payments.

AIG Chief Executive Edward Liddy basically told him to buzz off.

Michelle Malkin is author of "Unhinged: Exposing Liberals Gone Wild."

Obama got over $100,000 from AIG, but he's tearful

Obama's A.I.G. crocodile tears
March 17, 1:40 PM ·

"Excuse me, I'm choked up with anger here." -- Barack Obama

Yesterday, President Obama got all choked up over the A.I.G bonuses that, according to the New York Times, the Obama administration went along with (read: screwed the American taxpayer).

Why won't Obama do as I suggested and make those [expletive deleted] executives sue for their so-called bonuses and force them to defend their actions to a judge or jury?

Could it have something to do with the fact that Obama received more in bonuses campaign contributions from A.I.G than any other candidate except Senator Dodd? What other explanation actually makes any sense?

Monday, March 16, 2009

When Is It Going To Be Enough, America?

Lorie Kramer
March 15, 2009

Believe it or not, this started being about HR875 & S425, but in the writing of it, it's just so much more.
This is about the amazing things happening in this nation,
and the inconcievable tolerance the American public has of it all.

Dear, dear, America,

When is it going to be enough? Haven't you been disrespected, marginalized, misdirected, demeaned, disregarded, ignored, insulted, bullshitted, deliberately misinformed, uninformed, manipulated, controlled, cheated, lied to, poisoned, killed…and generally just plane old screwed for long enough? I'm really starting to wonder about you. Why isn't all that enough for you America? Yoo Hoo! Are you in there?

How does it make sense that you can be thrown into jail for an unpaid traffic ticket, perhaps for days if it's on a weekend yet; Bernard Madoff who ruined the lives of thousands gets to hang out in luxury, being available to do whatever one does when they are trying to cover their assets before going to jail? Isn't that enough for you, America?

You are a number. You are photographed hundreds of times everyday. They intend to track you everywhere, they pretty much already do. They already have your grocery cards, and your cars, and your phones, and your computers. They want to "chip" you, and your animals. You have no privacy. Why isn't that enough for you, America?

You work, most of you, when you can. Those that don't work and live off the system just don't "get it". Then you pay for their dead weight and their children's. Hell, you allow yourselves to work a third of the year just to pay taxes! Do you think that's what our founding fathers had in mind? Is that not enough for you YET, America?

You have worked hard for years, tried to save, invested for the future; only to see your future become a far less comfortable one, if it will be there for you at all. All this because of the legalized gambling known as "the stock market". All this so that bankers and corporations and politicians can profit, from your losses. And you allow them to throw more and more of your money down the toilet. Your dollar is dying. The domino effect of the situation resulted in a global financial meltdown. Why isn't THAT enough for you, America?

As the late great Bill Hicks said, "Entertainment is a weapon." Your "news" is controlled and manufactured. Your comedians are the journalists. You and your children are stupefied and zombified by television. Movies, cars, sports and fashion, and Hallmark holidays; they take your attention and your resources. You are in debt up to your ears. Isn't that enough for you, America?

Your jobs have already gone overseas or are disappearing daily. Welfare, which used to be an embarrassing thing to partake of, is a way of life for millions. Is that enough for you, America?

Your Constitution might as well not even exist. You allow the marginalizing and silencing of those who would honor it. You call them "possible terrorists". You watch as they try to deny you your rights. You allow them to ignore our borders and the consequences.

You don't care enough anymore whether or not the person who "leads" your nation can provide the necessary qualifications to even be considered to run for the office, let alone occupy it. That's why "they" can slip such schmucks in on you, you make it so easy. Don't YOU and your children have to throw down your birth certificates for all kinds of things? I thought so. It's the law. Try and not do it and see what happens. Your current liar in chief didn't have to do it. Why isn't THAT enough for you, America?

Then, you are told that you have "no standing" in YOUR own courts to question whether or not these Constitutional requirements have been fulfilled. One or two of you make it part of the way only to be told you WILL NOT BE HEARD, and that's OK with you! Why isn't THAT enough for you America? Any of you, and I mean ANY of you has standing to ask this question because it is YOUR Constitution that is OUR LAW.

Should you decide to voice your opinion in disagreement with those in power, you are "allowed" to do so but are penned in cages, or trodden by horses, or beaten or sprayed or tazed. Why isn't THAT enough for you America?

Your rights have been marginalized; you allow voter fraud to go unchecked. You scream for change but at the next election, you re-elect all but 8 of the 257 about which you complain. Your cities and towns are in disrepair, your infrastructure is crumbling. You devalue your teachers, and reward thieves. You let your schools flounder; therefore many of your children are ignorant (not stupid, there's a difference). Too many of you are fat, way too many of you are on way too many drugs, legal or not. Your sweeteners cause cancer. You are diseased with mystery illnesses, cancer and HIV/AIDS; and your vaccines are dangerous. Why isn't all of THAT enough for you, America?

Your families are in shambles. Your children are parents. Divorce is expected. Lying is expected and accepted. Sex is perverted. Morals are old-fashioned. Love is hardly a thing of real value. All this supported by your "media" and "entertainment" industry. Is that still not enough for you, America?

Your fellow Americans have raised valid questions about what actually happened on 9-11. Instead of investigating and insisting on the truth, you demonize them and act as if there could be no possibility of any foul play. There is plenty of evidence that the "official" story is not complete or accurate. You saw with your own eyes how that went down. They continue to lie to you and use the tragedy to further restrict your liberties. Why isn't THAT enough for you, America?

You are no longer considered one of the good guys in the geopolitical scheme of things. You are hated and reviled for your foreign policy. War profiteering is more important than human life; more important than you and your children's lives; and those of "the enemy". Your military and government tortures. Your sons and daughters have died for greed and nation building; and now they want Iran. Why isn't THAT enough for you, America?

Your drinking water is laced with mind numbing poison. Your cell phones are rotting your brains. You live in an electromagnetic cess pool. Is that enough for you, America?

Your atmosphere, the air you need to breathe, and the waters that you and all other living things on the planet need to live, have been poisoned, often beyond repair; to facilitate military/industrial desires. Why isn't THAT enough for you, America?

And now, they are after your food, AGAIN. That's what this started to be about, HR875 & S425. The HR875 bill is in committee in the House with 40, count them, 40 sponsors that will let the government control what you can and cannot do on your own land, with your own crops or livestock, or organic garden. Ixquick it. This bill was introduced by Rosa DeLauro whose husband, Stanley Greenberg, works for Monsanto. This bears repeating. This bill was introduced by Rosa DeLauro whose husband, Stanley Greenberg, works for Monsanto. Do you honestly think this is going to be GOOD for you? Don't we already have the FDA and the USDA and the FSIS? Why do we need this new agency of control?

Growing one's own food, local farms, co-ops and ranches are things that do indeed need to be protected. If this global crisis continues, and all indications are that it will; what are you going to do for food if your local growers go away because of government regulation and/or fines and penalties? Remember victory gardens, they used to be a good idea, now they are a threat? It looks to me like what we need to protect our food from is our government. If they finally go after your food, and you'd better know they are, what are you going to do about it? I'll write more on that and watch it. But, they'll still try and do it. When they do, which is NOW, will THAT be enough for you, America?

It's all more than enough for me. Where the hell are you, America?

When is enough going to be enough?

Lorie Kramer
Houston, TX

UW-Milwaukee Study Could Realign Climate Change Theory

Scientists Claim Earth Is Undergoing Natural Climate Shift

POSTED: 3:18 pm CDT March 15, 2009

MILWAUKEE -- The bitter cold and record snowfalls from two wicked winters are causing people to ask if the global climate is truly changing.

The climate is known to be variable and, in recent years, more scientific thought and research has been focused on the global temperature and how humanity might be influencing it.

However, a new study by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee could turn the climate change world upside down.

Scientists at the university used a math application known as synchronized chaos and applied it to climate data taken over the past 100 years.

"Imagine that you have four synchronized swimmers and they are not holding hands and they do their program and everything is fine; now, if they begin to hold hands and hold hands tightly, most likely a slight error will destroy the synchronization. Well, we applied the same analogy to climate," researcher Dr. Anastasios Tsonis said.

Scientists said that the air and ocean systems of the earth are now showing signs of synchronizing with each other.

Eventually, the systems begin to couple and the synchronous state is destroyed, leading to a climate shift.

"In climate, when this happens, the climate state changes. You go from a cooling regime to a warming regime or a warming regime to a cooling regime. This way we were able to explain all the fluctuations in the global temperature trend in the past century," Tsonis said. "The research team has found the warming trend of the past 30 years has stopped and in fact global temperatures have leveled off since 2001."

8 Dems oppose quick debate on global warming bill

By ANDREW TAYLOR - Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON -- Eight Senate Democrats are opposing speedy action on President Barack Obama's bill to combat global warming, complicating prospects for the legislation and creating problems for their party's leaders.

The eight Democrats disapprove of using the annual budget debate to pass Obama's "cap and trade" bill to fight greenhouse gas emissions, a measure that divides lawmakers, environmentalists and businesses. The lawmakers' opposition makes it more difficult for Democratic leaders to move the bill without a threat of a Republican filibuster.

The budget debate is the only way to circumvent Senate rules that allow a unified GOP to stop a bill through filibusters.

"Enactment of a cap-and-trade regime is likely to influence nearly every feature of the U.S. economy," wrote the Democratic senators, mostly moderates. They were joined by 25 Republicans. "Legislation so far-reaching should be fully vetted and given appropriate time for debate."

It takes 60 votes to overcome a filibuster in the Senate, but Democrats and allied independents currently control 58 seats.

Under a cap and trade system, the government would auction off permits to emit greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide. The auctions would raise almost $650 billion over the next decade, with the cost passed on to consumers as higher energy prices.

Friday, March 13, 2009

Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist.

Dr. Sam Vaknin is a Psychologist. He has written extensively about narcissism. He has an interesting view on our new president, Barack Obama.

Dr. Vaknin states "I must confess I was impressed by Sen. Barack Obama from the first time I saw him. At first, I was excited to see a black candidate. He looked youthful, spoke well, appeared to be confident - a wholesome presidential package. I was put off soon, not just because of his shallowness but also because there was an air of haughtiness in his demeanor that was unsettling. His posture and his body language were louder than his empty words. Obama's speeches are unlike any political speech we have heard in American history. Never a politician in this land had such quasi "religious" impact on so many people. The fact that Obama is a total incognito with zero accomplishments, makes this inexplicable infatuation alarming. Obama is not an ordinary man. He is not a genius. In fact, he is quite ignorant on most important subjects."

Barack Obama is a narcissist.

Dr. Sam Vaknin, the author of the book Malignant Self Love says, "Barack Obama appears to be a narcissist." Vaknin is a world authority on narcissism. He understands narcissism and describes the inner mind of a narcissist as no other person. Dr. Vaknin says that Obama's language, posture, and demeanor, with the testimonies of his closest, dearest and nearest suggest that the Senator is either a narcissist or he may have narcissistic personality disorder (NPD). Narcissists project a grandiose, but false image of themselves. Jim Jones, the charismatic leader of People's Temple, the man who led over 900 of his followers to cheerfully commit mass suicide and even murder their own children was also a narcissist. David Koresh, Charles Manson, Joseph Koni, Shoko Asahara, Stalin, Saddam, Mao, Kim Jong Ill, Mussolini, Castro, and Adolph Hitler are a few examples of narcissists of our time. All these men had a tremendous influence over their fanciers. They created a personality cult around themselves and with their blazing speeches elevated their admirers, filled their hearts with enthusiasm and instilled in their minds a new zest for life. They gave them hope! They promised them the moon, but alas, invariably they brought them to their doom. When you are a victim of a cult of personality, typically you don't know it until it is too late. One determining factor in the development of NPD is childhood abuse.

"Obama's early life was decidedly chaotic and replete with traumatic and mentally bruising dislocations," says Vaknin. "Mixed-race marriages were even less common then. His parents went through a divorce when he was an infant (two years old). Obama saw his father only once again, before he died in a car accident. Then his mother re-married and Obama had to relocate to Indonesia, a foreign land with a radically foreign culture, to be raised by a step-father. At the age of ten, he was whisked off to live with his maternal (white) grandparents. He saw his mother only intermittently in the following few years and then she vanished from his life in 1979. She died of cancer in 1995".

One must never underestimate the manipulative genius of pathological narcissists. They project such an imposing personality that it overwhelms those around them. Charmed by the charisma of the narcissist, people become like clay in his hands. They cheerfully do his bidding and delight to be at his service. The narcissist shapes the world around himself and reduces others in his own inverted image. He creates a cult of personality. His admirers become his co-dependents. Narcissists have no interest in things that do not help them to reach their personal objective. They are focused on one thing alone and that is personal power. All other issues are meaningless to them and they do not want to waste their precious time on trivialities. Anything that does not help them is beneath them and therefore,does not deserve their attention.

If an issue raised in the Senate does not help Obama in one way or another, he has no interest in it. The "present" vote is a safe vote. No one can criticize him if things go wrong. Those issues are unworthy by their very nature because they are not about him. Obama's election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review led to a contract and advance to write a book about race relations.

The University of Chicago Law School provided him a lot longer than expected and at the end it evolved into, guess what? His own autobiography! Instead of writing a scholarly paper focusing on race relations, for which he had been paid, Obama could not resist writing about his most sublime self. He entitled the book Dreams from My Father.

Not surprisingly, Adolph Hitler also wrote his own autobiography when he was still nobody. So did Stalin. For a narcissist, no subject is as important as his own self. Why would he waste his precious time and genius writing about insignificant things when he can write about such an august being as himself? Narcissists are often callous and even ruthless. As the norm, they lack conscience. This is evident from Obama's lack of interest in his own brother who lives on only one dollar per month.

A man who lives in luxury, who takes a private jet to vacation in Hawaii, and who has raised nearly half a billion dollars for his campaign (something unprecedented in history) has no interest in the plight of his own brother. Why? Because, his brother cannot be used for his ascent to power.

A narcissist cares for no one but himself. This election is like no other in the history of America. The issues are insignificant compared to what is at stake. What can be more dangerous than having a man bereft of conscience, a serial liar, and one who cannot distinguish his fantasies from reality as the leader of the free world? I hate to sound alarmist, but one is a fool if one is not alarmed. Many politicians are narcissists. They pose no threat to others...They are simply self serving and selfish.

Barack Obama evidences symptoms of pathological narcissism, which is different from the run-of-the-mill narcissism of a Richard Nixon or a Bill Clinton, for example. To him reality and fantasy are intertwined. This is a mental health issue, not just a character flaw. Pathological narcissists are dangerous because they look normal and even intelligent. It is this disguise that makes them so treacherous.

Today, the Democrats have placed all their hopes in Obama. But this is the man who could put an end to their party. The great majority of blacks have also decided to vote for Obama. Only a fool does not know that their support for him is racially driven. This is racism, pure and simple. The downside of this is that if Obama turns out to be the disaster I predict, he will cause widespread resentment among the whites.

The blacks are unlikely to give up their support of their man. Cultic mentality is pernicious and unrelenting. They will dig their heads deeper in the sand and blame Obama's detractors of racism. This will cause a backlash among the whites.

The white supremacists will take advantage of the discontent and they will receive widespread support. I predict that in less than four years, racial tensions will increase to levels never seen since the turbulent 1960's.
Obama will set the clock back decades.

America is the bastion of freedom. The peace of the world depends on the strength of America, and its weakness translates into the triumph of terrorism and a victory for rogue nations.

It is no wonder that Ahmadinejad, Hugo Chavez, the Castrists, the Hezbollah, the Hamas, the lawyers of the Guantanamo terrorists and virtually all sworn enemies of America are so thrilled by the prospect of "their" man in the White House. America is on the verge of destruction. There is no insanity greater than electing a pathological narcissist as president.

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

"Inside The Revolution"

Joel Rosenberg, March 9, 2009


On April 1, 1979, Iran became the first Islamic republic in history. Three decades later, the shock waves from the Iranian Revolution are still being felt around the globe. Iran today is the most dangerous terrorist state on the face of the planet. What’s more, we are rapidly approaching the most dangerous moment in the history of the Iranian Revolution.

Iran’s senior leaders have taught in recent years that the Revolution is now reaching its climax. They have stated publicly that the end of the world is “imminent.” They have taught that the way to hasten the arrival or appearance on earth of the Islamic messiah known as the “Twelfth Imam,” or the “Mahdi,” is to destroy Israel, which they call the “Little Satan,” and the United States, which they call the “Great Satan.” They have vowed to annihilate the United States and Israel and have urged Muslims to envision a world without America and Zionism. They have come to believe that Allah has chosen them to create chaos and carnage on the planet.

The key leaders in Iran seem hell-bent on accomplishing their apocalyptic, genocidal mission. They are feverishly trying to build, buy, or steal nuclear weapons. Iran is actively testing advanced ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads. Tehran is building alliances with Russia, China, and North Korea-all nuclear-armed powers-and has cooperated on the development of offensive and defensive weapons systems with those countries.

Iran’s leaders are building a network of thousands of suicide bombers ready to strike American targets. They are sending suicide bombers and other insurgents, money, and weapons into Iraq to kill Iraqis as well as American and Coalition forces. They are harboring scores of al Qaeda terrorists and leaders inside Iranian cities and allowing terrorists to crisscross their territory. They are making a concerted effort to enlarge the reach of terrorist operations by building strategic alliances with other jihadist organizations, regardless of their theological differences.

The Iranian leaders are digging hundreds of thousands of new graves in Iran itself to bury the enemies of Islam. They are calling for the unification of the Islamic world politically and economically, including the creation of a single currency. They are aggressively exporting their Islamic Revolution to countries throughout the Middle East and around the world.

Put simply, the leaders of Iran believe that Allah is on their side, the wind is at their back, and the end of Judeo-Christian civilization as we know it is near.

I believe just the opposite. As an evangelical Christian with a Jewish father (and Gentile mother), I worship the God of the Bible-the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, who is also the God of the New Testament. I do not believe that God is on the side of the zealots that run Iran. Rather, I believe that the end of their reign of terror is increasingly close at hand. Every day I pray for the peace of Jerusalem. Every day I pray for peace throughout the Middle East. What’s more, I pray for the salvation of the leaders of Iran and the salvation of their terrorist allies, and I encourage others to do the same. And because I serve a prayer-hearing and prayer-answering God, a wonder-working God of miracles, I firmly believe that God in His grace can change the leadership in Iran.

That said, the God of the Bible may have other plans. If, in His sovereignty, He chooses not to remove the Radicals in Iran, then I believe a major, cataclysmic war or series of wars is coming soon as a direct result of the Iranian Revolution that was set into motion by the Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979. The United States, NATO, Israel, or some combination thereof could initiate a preemptive strike to neutralize the Iranian nuclear threat. If they do not, Iran will soon be poised to launch the apocalyptic war required by its theology to destroy the West and usher in the End of Days. The question we all must be asking is not if there will be war with Iran but when it will begin and who will strike first….

What the extremists need most-what they pray for most of all-are Western ignorance, apathy, and lack of moral clarity. If the West can be lulled to sleep, if free people the world over can somehow be prevented from understanding the true goals and objectives of the Radicals and mobilizing to take all necessary actions to prevent their success, then the Radicals will soon be able to pull off a series of attacks that make 9/11 pale by comparison and could leave millions dead, not thousands.

Thirty years after the rise of the Ayatollah Khomeini to power in Iran, however, it has become clear to me that there is not simply one Revolution under way; there are three. Each is pursued with equal passion and vigor by groups I define as the “Radicals,” the “Reformers,” and the “Revivalists.” And with the stakes so high-and time so short-there are important questions to be answered, and fast…

Sunday, March 8, 2009


Saturday, March 7, 2009

I am compelled by the Holy Spirit to send out an urgent message to all on our mailing list, and to friends and to bishops we have met all over the world.


For ten years I have been warning about a thousand fires coming to New York City. It will engulf the whole megaplex, including areas of New Jersey and Connecticut. Major cities all across America will experience riots and blazing fires—such as we saw in Watts, Los Angeles, years ago.

There will be riots and fires in cities worldwide. There will be looting—including Times Square, New York City. What we are experiencing now is not a recession, not even a depression. We are under God’s wrath. In Psalm 11 it is written,

“If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?” (v. 3).

God is judging the raging sins of America and the nations. He is destroying the secular foundations.

The prophet Jeremiah pleaded with wicked Israel, “God is fashioning a calamity against you and devising a plan against you. Oh, turn back each of you from your evil way, and reform your ways and deeds. But they will say, It’s hopeless! For we are going to follow our own plans, and each of us will act according to the stubbornness of his evil heart” (Jeremiah 18:11-12).

In Psalm 11:6, David warns, “Upon the wicked he will rain snares (coals of fire)…fire…burning wind…will be the portion of their cup.” Why? David answered, “Because the Lord is righteous” (v. 7). This is a righteous judgment—just as in the judgments of Sodom and in Noah’s generation.


First, I give you a practical word I received for my own direction. If possible lay in store a thirty-day supply of non-perishable food, toiletries and other essentials. In major cities, grocery stores are emptied in an hour at the sign of an impending disaster.

As for our spiritual reaction, we have but two options. This is outlined in Psalm 11. We “flee like a bird to a mountain.” Or, as David says, “He fixed his eyes on the Lord on his throne in heaven—his eyes beholding, his eyelids testing the sons of men” (v. 4). “In the Lord I take refuge” (v. 1).

I will say to my soul: No need to need to hide. This is God’s righteous work. I will behold our Lord on his throne, with his eye of tender, loving kindness watching over every step I take—trusting that he will deliver his people even through floods, fires, calamities, tests, trials of all kinds.

Note: I do not know when these things will come to pass, but I know it is not far off. I have unburdened my soul to you. Do with the message as you choose.

God bless and keep you,

In Christ,


Tuesday, March 3, 2009

"The Greatest Depression Under Way" by Gerald Celente

Gerald Celente`

KINGSTON, NY, 2, March 2009 - "The Greatest Depression" that The Trends Research Institute forecast, well before Wall Street or Washington would acknowledge recession, is upon us.

The global financial markets are collapsing.

All the pundit's cautious predictions and business media's hopeful expectations at the New Year for an economic turn around and imminent market bottom were dead wrong. There will be no turn around in the second quarter of 2009 or 2010 or 2011 America and much of the world has entered "The Greatest Depression."

The global financial system, built on endless supplies of cheap money, rampant speculation, fraud, greed, and delusion is terminally ill and will not be coaxed into remission by stimulus packages nor restored to health by government buyouts and bailouts.

Today, the MSCI World Index of stocks in 23 developed nations fell 4.9 percent to 713.75, the lowest closing level since March 2003, and its Emerging Markets Index slid 5 percent. The Dow followed, plunging 300 points, closing below 7,000 for the first time since 1997.

There is no stock market bottom in sight. The only figure that can be forecast with confidence is that the Dow won't reach zero!

As the crisis worsens, governments will take draconian measures to prevent total economic collapse and public panic. We have cautioned the likelihood of such measures before. But the rapidity and severity of the economic unraveling now demands immediate attention.

Expect massive bank failures, runs on banks, and bank holidays. Even if deposits are FDIC insured, quick access to money is by no means assured. At minimum, have reserves on hand for emergencies.

Trendpost: When the ship is sinking there are very few options: Life boats, life rafts, life preservers and for the late to act, possibly a few pieces of floating debris to cling to.

We are trend forecasters, not certified financial advisors legally empowered to provide such advice. Although gold prices declined today some $15 to $925 per ounce, we forecast that gold will be one of the few life saving investments that will continue to increase in value, reaching $2,000 per ounce and beyond.

More military officers demand eligibility proof

Plaintiff: 'In the worst case … it's going to be revolution in the streets'
Posted: March 02, 2009
8:18 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Military officers from the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines are working with California attorney Orly Taitz and her Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, citing a legal right established in British common law nearly 800 years ago and recognized by the U.S. Founding Fathers to demand documentation that may prove – or disprove – Barack Obama's eligibility to be president.

Taitz told WND today she has mailed to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder a request that he "relate Quo Warranto on Barack Hussein Obama II to test his title to president before the Supreme Court."

The lengthy legal phrase essentially means an explanation is being demanded for what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto "affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents."

Requesting the action are Maj. Gen. Carroll Childers; Lt. Col. Dr. David Earl-Graef; police officer Clinton Grimes, formerly of the U.S. Navy; Lt. Scott Easterling, now serving on active duty in Iraq; New Hampshire
state Rep. Timothy Comerford; Tennessee state Rep. Frank Nicely and others.

"As president-elect, Respondent Obama failed to submit prima facie evidence of his qualifications before January 20, 2009. Election officers failed to challenge, validate or evaluate his qualifications. Relators submit that as president elect, Respondent Obama failed [tO] qualify per U.S. CONST. Amend. XX [paragraph] 3," the document said.

John Eidsmoe, an expert on the U.S. Constitution now working with the Foundation on Moral Law, an organization founded by former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore after he was removed from office for formally recognizing the Ten Commandments' influence in the U.S., said the demand is a legitimate course of action.

"She basically is asking, 'By what authority' is Obama president," he told WND. "In other words, 'I want you to tell me by what authority. I don't really think you should hold the office.'

"She probably has some very good arguments to make," Eidsmoe said.

The letter, dispatched to Holder today, is the latest development in the quest by a multitude of lawyers and plaintiffs nationwide for documentation that Obama qualifies to be president under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Counselor suspended six weeks for letting kids overhear Christian music

— Ben Rast @ 9:29 pm

This is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve seen in quite some time. A group home counselor in Orange County, CA has been suspended for six weeks for - oh, the horror - allowing kids in her charge to overhear Christian music. This is just insane! The Pacific Justice Institute is representing the counselor and has the details:

A lawsuit has been filed against Orange County by a veteran group home counselor who was suspended six weeks for exposing four teenagers to Christian music. The counselor is represented by affiliate and staff attorneys of Pacific Justice Institute.

The lawsuit states that, in the summer of 2006, the counselor took four teenage girls from the Orangewood Children’s Home on an approved field trip to a 5K run and then to the beach. At the beach, the group encountered a “Surf Jam” taking place at the Huntington Beach pier. The group also overheard Christian music for about ten minutes while they were eating.

Following the beach outing, the counselor, an eighteen-year employee, was summoned to a disciplinary meeting focusing on the Christian music. Several months later, the same incident was brought up again and the counselor was slapped with a six-week suspension for “exposing children to unapproved religious activities.”

After many months of exhausting state administrative remedies, the counselor filed suit late last week in Orange County Superior Court to recover the financial losses she suffered from the suspension and to vindicate her constitutional rights. The counselor is represented by John and Laurie Messerly Stewart, attorneys in Orange, California, and the Pacific Justice Institute.

Dems want to ratify "Treaty Says Children’s Rights Outweigh Parental Rights".

By J.D. Longstreet
March 2nd, 2009 •
This treaty would ban spanking, home schooling, and even church attendance …if the kids reject them!

What we are writing about here is… the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child. This horrific UN treaty has been around for a good 20 years now and 193 countries have signed on to it. Only two countries have not signed it. The US and Somalia! (Go figure!)

The Clinton Administration signed it but it was never sent to the Senate for ratification. It was understood, at the time, that it had a snowball’s chance of being ratified by a Senate with a teaspoon full of common sense. But common sense is something in extremely short supply in the Senate, and the House, for that matter, these day. It is almost certain to be ratified if brought up before the socialist Senate we have today. And… guess what? California democrat (What else), Barbara Boxer, is pushing to have it brought up in the Senate for consideration. More than likely she will have her way.

The bottom line is… the treaty would, first and foremost, strip mothers and fathers of their parental rights! And it would strip the US of its sovereignty and reclassify this country as a vassal state of the United Nations which, of course, means our constitution would be totally useless as we would be ruled by the UN… not by our own laws.

Experts who have studied the document say: “…the treaty, which creates “the right of the child to freedom of thought, conscience and religion” and outlaws the “arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy,” intrudes on the family and strips parents of the power to raise their children without government interference.

Why is this treaty so dangerous to the sovereignty of the United States? A few days ago I wrote of the “Supremacy Clause” in our Constitution. I inferred that it was a dangerous few words. Well here is WHY it is dangerous: Because of the Supremacy Clause, in Article VI of the Constitution, all treaties are rendered “the supreme law of the land,” superseding preexisting state and federal statutes. Any rights or laws established by the U.N. convention could then be argued to hold sway in the United States.

So who will say how you can rear and how you can teach your kids? A committee appointed by the UN and sitting in Switzerland, will make the parental decisions for you, for the parents of children in all countries signatory to the treaty. That’s who!

Some even go so far as to suggest that the government will decide how you punish your kids for, oh, say, smoking dope, or… even if you CAN punish your child. The government will decide, if you can make you kids go to church, or not allow them to go to the prom, etc. Parents will no longer be able, legally, to make those decisions. The government will do it.

Ask Steven Groves, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, what he thinks. He will tell you: “To the extent that an outside body, a group of unaccountable so-called experts in Switzerland have a say over how children in America should be raised, educated and disciplined — that is an erosion of American sovereignty.” He is absolutely correct.

None of this matters as Senator Boxer has made it clear she intends to push, energetically, to get the treaty ratified by the US Senate. There is reason to believe the Obama administration will side with Boxer on this and push it through the Senate to ratification.

We are convinced this is all a part of the push for that “One World Government” we continually warn about in this space.