Louis Blasiotti's Posts (220)

Sort by

PRAYER

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on March 23, 2013 at 6:03pm

The following is taken from "Preparation for Death" by Saint Alphonsus De Liguroi, Chapter XXX entitled 'Efficacy of Prayer.'

"Not only in this, but in a thousand places in the Old and the New Testament, God promises to hear all who pray to Him.  Cry to me, and I will hear thee. 'Call upon me, and I will deliver you from all dangers.'  'If you ask anything in My name, that I will do.'  ''Whatsoever you shall ask through my merits, I will grant.'  'You shall ask whatever you will, and it shall be done unto you.'  ''Ask as much as you wish: all that you ask will be given to you.'  There are many other similar passages.  Hence Theodoret has said that prayer is one, but can obtain all things.  St. Bernard says that when we pray, the Lord will give either the grace we ask, or one that is more useful to us.  The prophet animates us to pray by assuring us that God is all mercy to those who invoke His aid.  'Thou, O Lord, are sweet and mild, and plenteous in mercy to all that call upon Thee.'   The words of St. James are still more encouraging.  'If any of you want wisdom, let him ask of God, who giveth abundantly to all men, and upbraideth not.'  This apostle tell us that when we pray to the Lord, He opens His hands, and gives us more than we ask.  'He giveth to all men abundantly, and upbraideth not.' He does not reproach us with the offences that we have offered to Him; but when we pray to Him, He appears to forget all the injuries that we have done Him.St. John Climacus used to say that prayer in a certain manner forces God to grant us whatsoever we ask of Him.  "Prayer piously offers violence to God."  But it is, as St. Tertullian says, a violence which is dear to him,and which he desires from us.  Yes; for, as St. Augustine says, God has a greater desire to give us His graces, than we have to receive them.  The reason is, because God is of His own nature infinite goodness.  Hence he feels an infinite desire to impart his goods to us.  Hence St. Mary Magdalene de Pazzi used to say, that God feels as it were under an obligation to the soul that prays to Him;  because by prayer it opens to Him the way by which He can satisfy His desire of dispensing His graces to us.  David says that the goodness of God, in instantly hearing all who pray to Him, showed him that he was He was his true God.  'In what day soever I shall call upon Thee, behold, I know Thou art my God."   Some, observes St. Bernard, complain that God is wanting to them; but the Lord far more justly complains that many are wanting to Him by neglecting to ask His graces.  Of this precisely the Redeemer appears to have complained one day to His disciples.  'Hitherto you have not asked anything in My name: ask, and you shall receive, that your joy may be full.'  As if He said: Do not complain of Me if you do not enjoy complete happiness; complain of yourselves for not having asked My graces: ask Me for them henceforth, and you shall be satisfied.

Hence, in their conferences, the ancient monks came to the conclusion, that there is no exercise more conducive to salvation than to pray always, and say: "Lord, assist me, incline unto my aid, O God."  The Venerable Paul Segneri used to say of himself, that in his meditations he was at first accustomed to spend his time in pious affecftions; but, having afterward learned the great efficacy of prayer, he endeavored generally to employ himself in petitions to God.  Let us always do the same.  We have a God who loves us to excess, and who is solicitous for our salvation, and therefore He is always ready to hear all who ask His graces.  The princes of the earth, says St. Chrysostom, give audience only to a few; but God gives audience to all who wish for it."

Read more…

DHS will not answer congressional questions about why they bought so many bullets.

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on March 22, 2013 at 6:08pm

New Jersey Congressman Leonard Lance has asked the question about why DHS bought so many bullets and other military hardware.  No answer from Secretary Neapolitano.  Why?  To my mind when Congress does not get an answer from DHS they need to cut off the funding immediately.  This administration told us that they were going to be transparent but in fact they are the most non-transparent administration in the nations history.  What are they hiding?  Congress has the right to know!  Support Congressman Lance because he asked the tough questions and support the Constitution of the U.S.

Read more…

HABEMAS PAPAM - POPE FRANCIS - Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio of Argentina

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on March 13, 2013 at 1:56pm

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSbvEPDKI-nqL7nkOWJtXVRGkQXEDy3bp-Lt_uQvdH_bUmhF-i0

Give thanks to the Holy Trinity for a humble Pope Francis!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jorge_Bergoglio

http://www.ewtnnews.com/catholic-news/Vatican.php?id=7232

http://www.google.com/search?q=ewtn+pope+francis&hl=en&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=VuRAUcrbFKfi0gHHy4DADA&ved=0CDkQsAQ&biw=1152&bih=538

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/weird-wide-web/sistine-seagull-becomes-twitter-superstar

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/habemus-papam-pope-francis-i

Read more…

God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit and patriotism will bring victory to the people

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on March 9, 2013 at 6:30pm

It is obvious that the liberals and the shadow government would not allow an honest God fearing person to get near to a point where he/she could run for office.  Americans do not realize what a strangle hold these misguided people have on the process that would allow a good, honest, God-fearing and patriotic American to run for office with the idea of putting God and patriotism back into our country.  Conservatives and other groups that do not like what the liberals have sowed in America do not realize what tremendous power these people have over the low-information voters (a term Rush Limbaugh uses).  They have their people in every administration whether Republican or Democrat.  They own or control every candidate.  Just about every person in high office is controlled by these people some how or other (my guess is about 80%).  It is up to the American public to get off of their duffs and to put forth, to support and to elect a person who is not controlled by the shadow government.  Americans are asleep at the steering wheel of freedom.  Wake up before the Freedom Van goes over the cliff.  Even the well meaning conservative media, of which there are not many, are afraid to talk about the organizations which make up the shadow government.  Write to any of them and ask them why they do not talk about the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Trilateral Commission (TLC), the Bilderberg organization, the Masons, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, the Federal Reserve (Congress cannot get the Fed to do a public audit;  or is Congress afraid to demand it?), the Club of Rome, the Illuminati, the One World Government, the Globalists who have sold out America for a handful of coins, and all the organizations and corporations which they control to include the (controled) media.  Oh, it is not secret, that is, you can read about them or watch videos on you-tube about what they are up to.  You cannot even classify it as a conspiracy since they are so vocal and in your face about what they are doing.  It has gotten to the point of high arrogance that they do not try to hide what they are doing except for their private conspiratoral meetings.  They have got a lot of people fooled.  And then there are the Communists and the Socialists who also want to control the population, that is, to destroy the U.S. internally, and remake it into a socialist/communist UTOPIA, since they  know that they cannot defeat us militarily.  They foolishly believe that this time they can absolutely make communism/socialism succeed even though 80 years of it in Russia resulted in a profound failure.  They believe that the Russians were stupid and did not know how to make it succeed.  Can you believe this kind of thinking.  It would help them if the government played into their hands and took away all the weapons that the citizenry owned.  They would love that.  These people are more secretive and conspiratorial.  Then you have the radical Muslims who want every American to be converted to ISLAM and to submit to Shariah Law or off with your heads.  We are surrounded by jackasses in every direction.  They all have one thing in common and that is exactly what Wild Bill stated in a previous blog:  Get rid of God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit and, of course, Patriotism because it gets in the way of their hidden agendae.  Especially belief in Almighty God is a severe problem to them.  If the population believes in a high level of morality as displayed in the 10 Commandments given to Moses, by God, they won't be able to control the SHEEPLE (sheep people) and won't be able to lead them around by the nose, that is, tell them what is right and what is wrong...what to believe and what not to believe...what to think or not to think...what to love and what to dislike....what to accept and what to reject...what to read and what not to read...what to allow to be shown on the news and what to keep off of the news...what TV programs to be funded and made so as to brainwash the public and what TV programs to defund (even if it makes a profit) because it will not brainwash the public in the direction of their hidden agendae.  God is the secret to a victory over these unbelieveably misguided groups.  A profound belief in God is their enemy and they know that this deep Faith will destroy all of their efforts.  That is why they were so agressive in eliminating God and prayer from the school systems.  People who believe in Jesus and the Holy Spirit cannot be led by the nose and they know that so very well.  That is why the Russian communists worked so very hard to shut down the Churches especially the Catholic Churches.  They knew that if the Churches remained open and the people practiced their devotion to God in public they would eventually be driven out of office.  They understood that their demise lay in Freedom of Religious practice.  Let's not forget about Patriotism and how it unifies the people....of course they do not want that .... if the people are united what chance do they have in implementing their evil designs and their misguided utopia....not a chance. They are profoundly aware that their opportunities lie in dividing the people... the old Roman strategy of "divide and conquer."

Americans need to wake up to what is happening to them.  As the saying goes: "You snooze...you lose!"

Read more…

"Vigilance is the price of liberty" : Is another terrorist attack on the horizon?

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on March 8, 2013 at 9:30pm
This information should be required reading for every American... 
 FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Read all the way down, good info to think about. It will make you think..
Do you know who Juval Aviv is? He was Golda Meir's bodyguard and the Israeli Agent upon whom the movie ' Munich ' was based. Golda Meir appointed him to track down and bring to justice the Palestinian terrorists who took the Israeli athletes hostage and killed them during the Munich Olympic Games. In a lecture in New York City a few weeks ago, Aviv shared information that EVERY American needs to know, but that our government has not yet shared with us.
A little background: Aviv predicted the London subway bombing on the Bill O'Reilly show on Fox News, stating publicly that it would happen within a week. At the time, O'Reilly laughed and mocked him, saying that in a week he wanted Aviv back on the show. Unfortunately, within a week the terrorist attack had occurred. Juval Aviv also gave intelligence to the Bush Administration about 9/11 a month before it occurred. His report specifically said that they would use planes as bombs and target high profile buildings and monuments... I think we all know what happened, right? Congress has since hired him as a security consultant.
Aviv predicts that the next terrorist attack on the U.S. will occur within the next few months. Forget hijacking airplanes, because he says terrorists will NEVER try hijacking a plane again as they know the people on board will never go down quietly again. Aviv says that our airport security is a joke – that we have been reactionary rather than proactive in developing strategies that are truly effective.
For example, because an idiot tried to light his shoe on fire, now everyone has to take off their shoes. Example 2: a group of idiots tried to bring aboard liquid explosives, and now we can't bring liquids on board. He says he's waiting for some suicidal maniac to pour liquid explosive on his underwear; government security will then have us all traveling naked! Last but not least, our airport security looks for metal, but the new explosives are made of plastic!
Currently, our government only focuses on security when people are heading to the gates. Aviv says that if a terrorist attack targets airports in the future, they will target busy times on the front end of the airport when/where people are checking in. For example, it would be easy for someone to take two suitcases of explosives, walk up to a busy check-in line, ask a person next to them to watch their bags for a minute while they run to the restroom, and then detonate the bags BEFORE security even gets involved. In Israel , security checks bags BEFORE people can even ENTER the airport.
Aviv says the next terrorist attack here in America is imminent and will involve suicide bombers and non-suicide bombers in places where large groups of people congregate, such as Disneyland, Las Vegas casinos, shopping malls, subways in rush hour, train stations, etc., as well as in rural America this time (Wyoming, Montana, etc.). The attack will be characterized by simultaneous detonations around the country involving at least 5-8 cities, including rural areas. Aviv says terrorists won't need to use suicide bombers in many of the larger cities, because at places like the MGM Grand in Las Vegas , they can simply valet park a car loaded with explosives and walk away.
Aviv says all of the above is well known in intelligence circles, but that our U.S. Government does not want to 'alarm American citizens' with the facts. The world, however, is soon going to become 'a different place', Aviv says, where issues like 'global warming' and political correctness will have become totally irrelevant.
On an encouraging note, Aviv says that Americans don't have to be concerned about being nuked. He says the terrorists who want to destroy America will not use sophisticated weapons. Instead, they like to use suicide, as it's cheap, it's easy, and it's effective – and they have an infinite abundance of young, ignorant, fanatic militants more than willing to 'go see Allah'.
Aviv also says the next level of terrorists over which America should be most concerned will not be coming from abroad. They will instead be 'home grown' – meaning they will have attended and been educated in our own schools and universities right here in the U.S. These young terrorists will be most dangerous because they will know our language and will fully understand the habits of Americans; but that we Americans won't know/understand a thing about them.
So, what can America do to protect itself? From an intelligence perspective, Aviv says the U.S. needs to stop relying on satellites and technology for its intelligence. Instead, we need to follow Israel 's, Ireland 's and England 's hands-on examples of human intelligence, both from an infiltration perspective as well as to trust 'aware' citizens to help. We need to engage and educate ourselves as citizens; however, our U.S. Government continues to treat us, its citizens, 'like babies'. Our government thinks we can't handle the truth' and are concerned that we'll panic if we understand the realities of terrorism. Aviv says this is a deadly mistake.
Aviv recently created/executed a security test for Congress by placing an empty briefcase in five well-traveled spots in five major cities. The results? Not one person called 911 or sought a policeman to check it out. In fact, in Chicago , someone tried to steal the briefcase!
In comparison, Aviv says that citizens of Israel are so well 'trained' that an unattended bag or package would be reported in seconds by citizen(s) who know to publicly shout, 'Unattended Bag!' The area would be quickly & calmly cleared by the citizens themselves. But, unfortunately, America hasn't been 'hurt enough' yet by terrorism for their government to fully understand the need to educate its citizens or for the government to understand that it's the citizens who are, inevitably, the best first-line of defense against terrorism.
Aviv also was concerned about the high number of children who were in preschool and kindergarten after 9/11, children who were basically 'lost' without parents being able to pick them up, and schools that had no plan in place to best care for the students until their parents could get there . (In New York City , in some cases this was days!) He stresses the importance of having a plan that's agreed upon within your family, to respond to in the event of a terrorist emergency. He urges parents to contact their children's schools and demand that the schools, too, develop plans of actions, as they do in Israel . He says we should all have a plan that is easy enough for even our youngest children to remember and follow.
Does your family know what to do if you can't contact one another by phone? Where would you gather in an emergency? Aviv says that the U.S. Government has in force a plan that, in the event of another terrorist attack, will immediately cut-off EVERYONE's ability to use cell phones, as this is the preferred communication source used by terrorists and is often the way that their bombs are detonated. How will you communicate with your loved ones in the event you cannot use phones, internet? Bottom line, you need to have a plan!
If you believe what you have just read, then you must feel compelled to send it to every concerned parent or guardian, grandparents, uncles, aunts, whatever and whomever. Nothing will happen if you choose not to do so, but in the event it does happen, I promise this particular email will haunt you. "I should have sent this to...", but I didn't believe it and just deleted it as so much trash. 
 NOTE:  This information was taken from an email which has been circulating the Internet....I cannot verify the validity of this information but it does lend itself to common sense which, in my humble opinion, we should diliberate about the advice given.
Read more…

Senator Rand Paul's "talking filibuster" by Jeffrey Tucker of the Laissez Faire Club

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on March 7, 2013 at 11:58am

March 7, 2013
"Can I Get a Candy Bar?"
                                        Dear Laissez Faire Today Reader,              

3
Jeffrey Tucker

Twitter began by calling it "libertarian p**n" -- the longest and most sustained attack on leviathan from the Senate floor in modern history. But then it became more. And more. It went on for 13 hours. It was about halfway through when the junior senator leaned over to an aide and whispered: "Can I get a candy bar?"
  He deserved it. Before the end of the night, the significance of what he was doing was being  described as "epic." What began as a surprise political move became a bipartisan cry against all the evils of our times, which somehow all come down to the egregious power of the executive state and its omnipotent power over our lives and property. It became political theater unlike any we've seen in many years. The target: all terrible things.
  In short, it was a beautiful day on Capitol Hill.
  It all came courtesy of Sen. Rand Paul, the man who has brought truth, excitement, fun, and the appearance of real-life morality back to the Senate.

 

We aren't used to this. What normal person pays attention to politics, much less to the Senate? Here was something that actually happened -- for once. Something important. Something even... epic.
  This is a story about one man who decided to say, "Enough." It's a so-called "talking filibuster," a last-ditch effort that stops legislative action completely. Something undertaken only in an epic case, a time when there is a hinge of history. Is this that hinge?

LFT_video030713.jpg Alice in Wonderland? Nicely played, Senator.   "Stand with Rand" and send a clear message to your senator by clicking here.

  Sen. Rand's action began just before noon. He started by standing alone against the nomination of John Brennan for the head of the CIA. This Brennan guy is the top advocate of the drone program and the White House's super-creepy claim of the right to kill American citizens on American soil using unmanned aircraft.
  The White House that wants him appointed refuses to rule out killing you and me if dear leader thinks it is necessary. The policy as fact has been in place for a long time, but this administration wants it formalized.
  Are civil liberties at stake? It's a no-brainer. Well, why is there any controversy about this at all? How much despotism can the American people stand? How did we come to this point? How long will the politicians in Washington pretend like this isn't happening?
  There is an elephant in the living room. That elephant has been nominated to head an agency that has been up to no good since its inception after World War II. An agency that operates in secrecy and embodies everything that is wrong with the whole institution of government. And now some guy who favors the right to kill you and me on a whim has been tagged to head the agency.
  Something's gotta give.
  Sen. Paul seemed to break the taboo. He finally said it: This winner of the Nobel Peace Prize is asserting the right to kill citizens right here, without any recourse to courts or law or anything related to the dead letter called the Constitution. His appointee is ready to do the deed.
  In his first hours, Sen. Paul said: 

"When I asked the president, can you kill an American on American soil, it should have been an easy answer. It's an easy question. It should have been a resounding and unequivocal, 'No.' The president's response? He hasn't killed anyone yet. We're supposed to be comforted by that."

Again, his one question: Why won't the president say that he won't kill noncombatants with drones on American soil? The White House pretended none of this was happening.
    Just before noon yesterday, Rand Paul stood alone. Then others joined him. Still others. Rand talked and talked. He went on and on. The online crowd began to grow. And grow. The tweets grew and grew. Facebook went nuts. It went on all day. The Senate chamber filled up by the evening. The fracas became frenzy and then became a mania. Hashtag #StandWithRand became the Internet meme of the night.
[Ed Note:.  It was nice to have a prominent figure in Washington in the spotlight talking about the issues we brought up in our petition.  If you haven't already checked it out, here's what could be your last chance to "StandwithRand."]
    Here is how the global Twitter map looked a few hours before the filibuster ended, with #StandWithRand as the top hashtag used around the world (the larger the hashtag, reflects a larger number of tweets emanating from that area.)

5min_tweets.jpg

Everyone else is talking about what this means for the senator's political career. I have high respect for him, but truly, this is not the point. It is not about who is up and who is down. It is about the power of the government over the individual. It's been growing egregiously for a century. It's become absurd to the point that the "peace president" claims the right to kill us. When do we say no?
    Sen. Paul spoke for the multitudes. And he continued. And continued. It was brilliant. It stopped only once biological needs called.
    It's pathetic that it had to come to this to see some meaningful protest. Still. It's thrilling that this protest has finally come. That The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times heaped disdain on the Senator confirms that he was on the right track.
    I have my own theory about the meaning of all of this. I think it is about the digital revolution finally reaching the most impenetrable apparatus on the planet. Sen. Paul was the instrument, but the tune is made of technology.
I must invoke the memory of the prophet of our age Aaron Swartz. He is dead due to horrible hounding by the government. But before he died, he was working on a new software package that was extremely powerful. It offers a way to apply digital media to the cause of politics. He showed the power of his model with the 2012 attack on SOPA. Pretty much working alone, he defeated this cursed legislation that would have disabled the Internet.
    Like most people, I long ago lost faith in the political process. It is a waste of time. It is a game for suckers and fools. The government owns the system, and it will always be so, no matter who is ostensibly in charge.
    Yet... I respect Swartz. He might have been on to something. He posited that there is power when the people can swarm the state apparatus with digital communications: emails, petitions, tweets, memes, digital protests. This is different from regular politics. It is turning the machine upside-down and inside out, bypassing the lobbying, rallies, voting, and electing entirely in favor of direct confrontation between the ruled and the rulers.
    Remember that government is the most paranoid institution on the planet. It is extremely jumpy for that reason. You know how the petty thief is always watching his back, worried that he is going to get caught? Government is like that. It is always and everywhere engaged in criminal activity. It mainly worries about being found out. It fears discovery. Digital media permit every American to say, "You have been found out!"
    Is that what's going on? It has made a difference in this case. The drone issue, which has been a big one for Laissez Faire -- our petition against Brennan and his drone policies gathered 10,000 signatures -- has been one that has sent a powerful signal to the power elite.
    Sen. Paul is a great political entrepreneur. He stepped out in front -- alone at first, but with the whole body behind him eventually, and today a large whole of the people too.
    Government should fear the people. Today, at least some sectors of the government are a bit more afraid than they used to be. My friends, that's victory. It is not about who will gain power next. It is about dismantling power completely, one step at a time.
    "Can I get a candy bar?"
    Someday, that candy will be freedom itself. It's coming. It's going to happen -- with or without our political leaders.
    Sincerely,
    Jeffrey Tucker     Laissez Faire Club

Read more…

The Club of Rome

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on February 28, 2013 at 10:58pm

Club of Rome/EU: The Ideology of Globalisation: Worldwide Revolution – and We shall Demand World Governance!

http://euro-med.dk/?p=1043

Membership of the Club of Rome

http://www.clubofrome.org/?p=2419

Club of Rome (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Club_of_Rome

Unraveling the Club of Rome (part 1)

http://recyclewashington.wordpress.com/2010/04/29/unraveling-the-club-of-rome-part-1/

Read more…

Bilderberg Membership List

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on February 28, 2013 at 10:27pm

Bilderberg Membership List  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants

The following U.S. citizens were/are members of the Bilderberg group:

United States

 Presidents

 Senators

 Governors

Read more…

News from WND on latest power grab

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on February 28, 2013 at 3:11pm
Dear Fellow American,
Barack Obama has revealed his latest power grab.
WND has reported that the Obama administration is determined to ram through Congress a grandiose plan that transcends the vision for a “North American Union,” encompassing both Europe and Pacific Rim nations.  It’s called the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). But to implement this so-called “free-trade” agreement, the President plans to strip Congress of its Constitutional power to regulate foreign trade.
The President wants to sneak this through before anyone hears about it.  It’s not too late to stop him…if we stand united.  Help us sound the alarm now.
Obama will ask Congress for “fast-track authority” which will give him – not Congress, as the Constitution requires – the power to regulate trade with foreign nations. He will then force Congress to review TPP under limited debate, in an accelerated time frame, and subject to a yes-or-no vote with no amendments…just because Obama wants to assure foreign partners like Vietnam that the TPP will not be changed during our legislative process.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership will kill American jobs, American sovereignty and our way of life.  It will also give Barack Obama even more power.  We cannot allow Congress to cave to the President’s demands…not this time.
Help us sound the alarm so millions of Americans rise up and Tell Congress to say “NO” to fast-track and TPP right away.
If ratified, the Trans-Pacific Partnership will:
• Surrender U.S. sovereignty to an international tribunal with authority higher than the U.S. Supreme Court;
• Put American companies at a competitive disadvantage to foreign firms;
• Give up 544 million acres of public land, one-quarter of the entire U.S. land area, to UN and World Bank judges who will decide how our lands are  used; and
• Ban “Buy American” policies.
It’s not too late to stop Obama’s global government power grab. Fight TPP by donating $25, $50, $100 or whatever you can afford today and make sure Congress rejects Obama’s plan for world government.
America can’t afford a Trans-Pacific Partnership or for President Obama to acquire even more power.  So please stand up for America today.
Thank you,
Joseph Farah Chief Executive Officer, WND and WND Books                                                                                                        
Read more…

Sequester: And now, the rest of the story

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on February 25, 2013 at 11:17am
Subject: Some interesting info on how the sequester came about. Note the author!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Obama’s sequester deal-changerBy Bob Woodward, Published: February 22Bob Woodward (woodwardb@washpost.com) is an associate editor of The Post. His latest book is “The Price of Politics.” Evelyn M. Duffy contributed to this column.Misunderstanding, misstatements and all the classic contortions of partisan message management surround the sequester, the term for the $85 billion in ugly and largely irrational federal spending cuts set by law to begin Friday.What is the non-budget wonk to make of this? Who is responsible? What really happened?The finger-pointing began during the third presidential debate last fall, on Oct. 22, when President Obama blamed Congress. “The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed,” Obama said. “It is something that Congress has proposed.”The White House chief of staff at the time, Jack Lew, who had been budget director during the negotiations that set up the sequester in 2011, backed up the president two days later.“There was an insistence on the part of Republicans in Congress for there to be some automatic trigger,” Lew said while campaigning in Florida. It “was very much rooted in the Republican congressional insistence that there be an automatic measure.”The president and Lew had this wrong. My extensive reporting for my book “The Price of Politics” shows that the automatic spending cuts were initiated by the White House and were the brainchild of Lew and White House congressional relations chief Rob Nabors — probably the foremost experts on budget issues in the senior ranks of the federal government.Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). They did so at 2:30 p.m. July 27, 2011, according to interviews with two senior White House aides who were directly involved.Nabors has told others that they checked with the president before going to see Reid. A mandatory sequester was the only action-forcing mechanism they could devise. Nabors has said, “We didn’t actually think it would be that hard to convince them” — Reid and the Republicans — to adopt the sequester. “It really was the only thing we had. There was not a lot of other options left on the table.”A majority of Republicans did vote for the Budget Control Act that summer, which included the sequester. Key Republican staffers said they didn’t even initially know what a sequester was — because the concept stemmed from the budget wars of the 1980s, when they were not in government.At the Feb. 13 Senate Finance Committee hearing on Lew’s nomination to become Treasury secretary, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) asked Lew about the account in my book: “Woodward credits you with originating the plan for sequestration. Was he right or wrong?”“It’s a little more complicated than that,” Lew responded, “and even in his account, it was a little more complicated than that. We were in a negotiation where the failure would have meant the default of the government of the United States.”“Did you make the suggestion?” Burr asked.“Well, what I did was said that with all other options closed, we needed to look for an option where we could agree on how to resolve our differences. And we went back to the 1984 plan that Senator [Phil] Gramm and Senator [Warren] Rudman worked on and said that that would be a basis for having a consequence that would be so unacceptable to everyone that we would be able to get action.”In other words, yes.But then Burr asked about the president’s statement during the presidential debate, that the Republicans originated it.Lew, being a good lawyer and a loyal presidential adviser, then shifted to denial mode: “Senator, the demand for an enforcement mechanism was not something that the administration was pushing at that moment.”That statement was not accurate.On Tuesday, Obama appeared at the White House with a group of police officers and firefighters to denounce the sequester as a “meat-cleaver approach” that would jeopardize military readiness and investments in education, energy and readiness. He also said it would cost jobs. But, the president said, the substitute would have to include new revenue through tax reform.At noon that same day, White House press secretary Jay Carney shifted position and accepted sequester paternity.“The sequester was something that was discussed,” Carney said. Walking back the earlier statements, he added carefully, “and as has been reported, it was an idea that the White House put forward.”This was an acknowledgment that the president and Lew had been wrong.Why does this matter?First, months of White House dissembling further eroded any semblance of trust between Obama and congressional Republicans. (The Republicans are by no means blameless and have had their own episodes of denial and bald-faced message management.)Second, Lew testified during his confirmation hearing that the Republicans would not go along with new revenue in the portion of the deficit-reduction plan that became the sequester. Reinforcing Lew’s point, a senior White House official said Friday, “The sequester was an option we were forced to take because the Republicans would not do tax increases.”In fact, the final deal reached between Vice President Biden and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) in 2011 included an agreement that there would be no tax increases in the sequester in exchange for what the president was insisting on: an agreement that the nation’s debt ceiling would be increased for 18 months, so Obama would not have to go through another such negotiation in 2012, when he was running for reelection.So when the president asks that a substitute for the sequester include not just spending cuts but also new revenue, he is moving the goal posts. His call for a balanced approach is reasonable, and he makes a strong case that those in the top income brackets could and should pay more. But that was not the deal he made.Read more from PostOpinions: Bob Woodward: Time for our leaders to delegate on the budget Robert J. Samuelson: The lowdown on Lew Jennifer Rubin: Jack Lew’s truth problem Eugene Robinson: The sequester madness© The Washington Post Company
Read more…

Obama: Trilateral Commission Endgame (Dated 2009)

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on February 23, 2013 at 4:41pm

http://www.augustforecast.com/2009/01/27/obama_trilateral_commission_endgame/

The above web site contains the following:

As pre­vi­ously noted in Pawns of the Global Elite, Barack Obama was groomed for the pres­i­dency by key mem­bers of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion. Most notably, it was Zbig­niew Brzezinski, co-founder of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion with David Rock­e­feller in 1973, who was Obama’s prin­cipal for­eign policy advisor.

The pre-election atten­tion is rem­i­nis­cent of Brzezinski’s tutoring of Jimmy Carter prior to Carter‘s land­slide elec­tion in 1976.

For anyone who doubts the Commission’s con­tin­uing influ­ence on Obama, con­sider that he has already appointed no less than eleven mem­bers of the Com­mis­sion to top-level and key posi­tions in his Administration.

According to offi­cial Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion mem­ber­ship lists, there are only 87 mem­bers from the United States (the other 337 mem­bers are from other regions). Thus, in less than two weeks since his inau­gu­ra­tion, Obama’s appoint­ments encom­pass more than 12% of Commission’s entire U.S. membership.

Is this a mere coin­ci­dence or is it a con­tin­u­a­tion of dom­i­nance over the Exec­u­tive Branch since 1976? (For impor­tant back­ground, read The Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion: Usurping Sov­er­eignty.)

  • Sec­re­tary of Trea­sury, Tim Gei­thner
  • Ambas­sador to the United Nations, Susan Rice
  • National Secu­rity Advisor, Gen. James L. Jones
  • Deputy National Secu­rity Advisor, Thomas Donilon
  • Chairman, Eco­nomic Recovery Com­mittee, Paul Volker
  • Director of National Intel­li­gence, Admiral Dennis C. Blair
  • Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of State, Asia & Pacific,  Kurt M. Campbell
  • Deputy Sec­re­tary of State, James Stein­berg
  • State Depart­ment, Spe­cial Envoy, Richard Haass
  • State Depart­ment, Spe­cial Envoy, Dennis Ross
  • State Depart­ment, Spe­cial Envoy, Richard Hol­brooke

There are many other inci­dental links to the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion, for instance,

Sec­re­tary of State Hillary Clinton is mar­ried to Com­mis­sion member William Jef­ferson Clinton.

Gei­thner‘s informal group of advi­sors include E. Gerald Cor­rigan, Paul Volker, Alan Greenspan and Peter G. Peterson, among others. His first job after col­lege was with Henry Kissinger at Kissinger Associates.

Brent Scow­croft has been an unof­fi­cial advisor to Obama and was mentor to Defense Sec­re­tary Robert Gates.

Robert Zoelick is cur­rently pres­i­dent of the World Bank

Lau­rence Sum­mers, White House Eco­nomic Advisor, was men­tored by former Trea­sury Sec­re­tary Robert Rubin during the Clinton administration.

There are many other such links, but these are enough for you to get the idea of what’s going on here.

Ana­lyze the positions

Notice that five of the Tri­lat­eral appointees involve the State Depart­ment, where for­eign policy is cre­ated and imple­mented. Hillary Clinton is cer­tainly in line with these poli­cies because her hus­band, Bill Clinton, is also a member.

What is more impor­tant than eco­nomic recovery? Paul Volker is the answer.

What is more impor­tant than national intel­li­gence? Gen. James Jones, Thomas Donilon and Adm. Dennis Blair hold the top three positions.

What is more impor­tant than the Trea­sury and the saving of our finan­cial system? Tim­othy Gei­thner says he has the answers.

The State Depart­ment is vir­tu­ally dom­i­nated by Tri­lat­erals: Kurt Camp­bell, James Stein­berg, Richard Haass, Dennis Ross and Richard Hol­brooke.

This leaves Susan Rice, Ambas­sador to the United Nations. The U.N. is the chosen instru­ment for ulti­mate global gov­er­nance. Rice will help to sub­vert the U.S. into the U.N. umbrella of vassal states.

Con­flict of interest

Since 1973, the Com­mis­sion has met reg­u­larly in ple­nary ses­sions to dis­cuss policy posi­tion papers devel­oped by its mem­bers. Poli­cies are debated in order to achieve con­sen­suses. Respec­tive mem­bers return to their own coun­tries to imple­ment poli­cies con­sis­tent with those consensuses.

The orig­inal stated pur­pose of the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion was to create a “New Inter­na­tional Eco­nomic Order.” Its cur­rent state­ment has mor­phed into fos­tering a “closer coop­er­a­tion among these core demo­c­ratic indus­tri­al­ized areas of the world with shared lead­er­ship respon­si­bil­i­ties in the wider inter­na­tional system.” (See The Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion web site)

U.S. Tri­lat­eral mem­bers imple­ment poli­cies deter­mined by a majority of non-Americans that most often work against the best inter­ests of the country.

“How,” you say?

Since the admin­is­tra­tion of Jimmy Carter, Tri­lat­erals held these mas­sively influ­en­tial positions:

  • Six out of eight World Bank pres­i­dents, including the cur­rent appointee, Robert Zoelick
  • Eight out of ten U.S. Trade Representatives
  • Pres­i­dent and/or Vice-President of every elected admin­is­tra­tion (except for Obama/Biden)
  • Seven out of twelve Sec­re­taries of State
  • Nine out of twelve Sec­re­taries of Defense

Is this sinking in? Are you grasping the enor­mity of it?

Endgame is at hand

For the Tri­lat­eral crowd, the game is about over. The recent reemer­gence of orig­inal mem­bers Henry Kissinger, Zbig­niew Brzezinski, Brent Scow­croft and Paul Volker serves to rein­force the con­clu­sion that the New Inter­na­tional Eco­nomic Order is near.

The Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion and its mem­bers have engi­neered the global eco­nomic, trade and finan­cial system that is cur­rently in a state of total chaos.

Does that mean that they have lost? Hardly.

As I recently wrote in Chorus call for New World Order, they are using the crisis to destroy what remains of national sov­er­eignty, so that a New World Order can finally and per­ma­nently be put into place.

Con­clu­sion

The Obama pres­i­dency is a disin­gen­uous fraud. He was elected by promising to bring change, yet from the start change was never envi­sioned. He was care­fully groomed and financed by the Tri­lat­eral Com­mis­sion and their friends.

In short, Obama is merely the con­tin­u­a­tion of dis­as­trous, non-American poli­cies that have brought eco­nomic ruin upon us and the rest of the world. The Obama expe­ri­ence rivals that of Jimmy Carter, whose cam­paign slogan was “I will never lie to you.”

When the Demo­crat base finally real­izes that it has been conned again (Bill Clinton and Al Gore were mem­bers), per­haps it will unleash a real polit­ical rev­o­lu­tion that will oust Tri­lat­eral politi­cians, oper­a­tives and poli­cies from the shores of our country.

If the reader is a Demo­crat, be aware that many Repub­li­cans and con­ser­v­a­tives are still licking their wounds after finally real­izing that George Bush and Dick Cheney worked the same con on them for a dis­as­trous eight years of the same policies!

Read more…

ABORTION IS MURDER!

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on February 23, 2013 at 3:59pm

Americans have lost track of the sacredness of the U.S. Constitution and their religious teachings.  Too many do not believe in sin and do not understand the nature of sin.  Too many do not fear God.  Too many are pushing the envelope regarding God's willingness to forgive their sins.  One day He will say:  "Enough is enough" and drop the veil of His Divine protection.  WAKE UP AMERICA...DO NOT OFFEND GOD!

Read more…

WHAT ABOUT THOSE CITIZENS THAT DIED BEFORE THEY EVER COLLECTED SOCIAL SECURITY?

Posted by Louis Blasiotti on February 23, 2013 at 2:09pm

 WHAT OF THOSE THAT DIED BEFORE THEY EVER COLLECTED SOCIAL SECURITY .

The following is an email floating around on the Internet regarding Social
Security Fraud as seen from the eyes of a woman who lost two husbands before 
they were able to retire.

Read this slowly so it sinks in!!!
 
KEEP PASSING THIS AROUND UNTIL EVERY ONE HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ
IT... THIS IS SURE SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT!!!!
 
THE ONLY THING WRONG WITH THE GOVERNMENT'S CALCULATION OF AVAILABLE SOCIAL
SECURITY IS THEY FORGOT TO FIGURE IN THE PEOPLE WHO DIED BEFORE THEY EVER
COLLECTED A SOCIAL SECURITY CHECK!!!
 
WHERE DID THAT MONEY GO?
 
Remember, not only did you and I contribute to Social Security but your
employer did, too. It totaled 15% of your income before taxes. If you
averaged only $30K over your working life, that's close to $220,500. Read
that again. Did you see where the Government paid in one single penny? We
are talking about the money you and your employer put in a Government bank
to insure you and I that we would have a retirement check from the money we
put in, not the Government. Now they are calling the money we put in an
entitlement when we reach the age to take it back. If you calculate the
future invested value of $4,500 per year (yours & your employer's
contribution) at a simple 5% interest (less than what the govt. pays on the
money that it borrows), after 49 years of working you'd have $892,919.98.
 
If you took out only 3% per year, you'd receive $26,787.60 per year and it
would last better than 30 years (until you're 95 if you retire at age 65)
and that's with no interest paid on that final amount on deposit! If you
bought an annuity and it paid 4% per year, you'd have a lifetime income of
$2,976.40 per month.
 
Another thing with me.... I have two deceased husbands who died in their
50's, (one was 51 and the other one was 59 before one percent of their
social security could be drawn. I worked all my life and am drawing 100% on
my own social security). Their S.S. money will never have one cent drawn
from what they paid into S.S. all their lives.
 
THE FOLKS IN WASHINGTON HAVE PULLED OFF A BIGGER PONZI SCHEME THAN BERNIE
MADOFF EVER DID.
 
Entitlement my foot, I paid cash for my social security insurance! Just
because they borrowed the money for other government spending, doesn't make
my benefits some kind of charity or handout!!
 
Remember Congressional benefits? --- free healthcare, outrageous retirement
packages, 67 paid holidays, three weeks paid vacation, unlimited paid sick
days. Now that's welfare, and they have the nerve to call my social security
retirement payments entitlements?
 
We're "broke" and we can't help our own Seniors, Veterans, Orphans, or
 
Homeless. Yet in the last few months we have provided aid to Haiti, Chile
and Turkey. And now Pakistan......home of bin Laden. Literally, BILLIONS of
DOLLARS!!!
 
Our retired seniors living on a 'fixed S.S. income' receive no additional
federal aid nor do they get any financial breaks, while our government 
pour hundreds of billions of $$$ and tons of food to foreign countries!
 
They call Social Security and Medicare an entitlement even though most of us
have been paying for it all our working lives, and now, when it's time for
us to collect, the government is running out of money. Why did the
government borrow from it in the first place? It was supposed to be in a
locked box, not part of the general fund.
 
Sad isn't it?  99% of people won't have the guts to forward this. I'm in the 1% -- I just
did.
Read more…