August 26, 2019, may go down as a day in infamy when the courts allowed a frivolous lawsuit to squeeze through the bench on its way to attack the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. This has been a long-standing battle for the right to “keep and bear arms” as written and so vehemently defended by our Founding Fathers. The Honorable Judge Thad Balkman of the Cleveland County District Court just sent a volley of serious attacks against our freedoms that will forever change history.

Background

The Cleveland County District Court was destined to hear the case on Oklahoma’s opioid crisis, between the Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter (R) and the Conglomerate Johnson’s & Johnson’s subsidiary Jenssen. This has been a long-running trial now for over two years. Evidence was heard on both sides, documents, and witnesses from parents and partners of deceased opioid users.

After some intense deliberation, the Honorable Judge Thad Balkman handed down a verdict citing that the Defendants’ “actions caused harm” (1) “because those actions annoyed, injured or endangered the comfort, repose, health or safety of Oklahomans” (1). He ruled that the “drugmaker Johnson & Johnson helped ignite the state’s opioid crisis” (2). The judge then ordered $572 million to be paid by the Defendants, stating from the bench, “The opioid crisis has ravaged the state of Oklahoma and must be abated immediately” (1).

From the Trial

Before the trial was even set, the Oklahoma Attorney General asked the manufacturer to pay huge sums of money to settle the case outside of court. This is customary for many cases, as 97% of all civil cases settle before trial. The Oklahoma Attorney General asked for a sum of $17.5 billion in his lawsuit, far greater than a reasonable settlement. In mediation, this tactic is called the extortion offer.

I, for one, was watching most of the trial unfold, and am alarmed at how this verdict was reached. Witnesses were crying and sobbing as they remembered their loved ones slipping away or recounting how their loved one “didn’t want to die.” Playing on every channel during the trial were commercials touting these same losses and heartbreaks. This is sad and extremely painful to watch, but even more so for those that live through this catastrophe.  

But is it Johnson & Johnson’s fault?

One individual recounted how their adult child started using pain killers (opioids) and continued even after they recovered. Another described how their loved one couldn’t get the opioids from the prescribing physician, so they resorted to stealing prescriptions and buying prescription medications illegally.

Every day, the trial showcased people who have suffered from the opioid epidemic, while also railing against the carelessness of Johnson & Johnson to allow people to become addicted to opioids.

One such commercial told a story of how their son started taking opioids after an injury and then continued to take the opioids afterward to get “high.” They go on further to say their son “didn’t want to die.”

Reality Check

How did the Honorable Judge Thad Balkman conclude that Johnson & Johnson was at fault for people unlawfully obtaining prescription medications and subsequently overdosing on them? Where was the prescribing physician? Was the physician still prescribing the opioid to the patients?

Where is the connection that led the Honorable Judge Thad Balkman to realize that Johnson & Johnson or its subsidiary Jenssen were in some manner giving out or prescribing a class 2 pharmaceutical?

When did a person “knowingly” allow their son to continue taking a high potent prescription medication to get “high” become the standard to penalize the manufacturer? This comes down to personal responsibility. If you eat MacDonald’s every day while not exercising, is it MacDonald’s fault for your potential health problems?

I have grave concerns that a Republican Attorney General and a Republican District Judge were moved by emotions rather than facts. Even if the manufacturer did not admit to the total addictiveness of the pharmaceutical, the facts do not link the manufacturer to the distribution, nor does they link the manufacturer to the prescription.

Opioids must be prescribed by an attending physician who is licensed and trained for years on the addictive nature of opioids. The medications can only be obtained by a prescription taken to a pharmacy to be dispensed. There have been more restrictive laws and double-checks in place for years to prevent unethical physicians from prescribing opioids. Removal of licensure, lawsuits and prison sentences have been handed down for medical physicians improperly prescribing high-level narcotics. Have we forgotten the Michael Jackson case?

Neither the unlawful purchase of someone else’s medication, the theft of another person’s prescription, nor the theft of personal property to sell or barter to obtain a class 2 pharmaceutical narcotic constitute a manufacturer’s liability to warn about addictiveness. It also doesn’t point to the manufacturer helping “ignite the state’s opioid crisis” (2).

The standard as stated by the Honorable Judge Thad Balkman, “actions annoyed, injured or endangered the comfort, repose, health or safety of Oklahoman’s” (1) is quite a slippery slope.

You can claim: the cashier was rude and this “annoyed” me — sue the produce manufacturer, the tire blowing out from a passing car “endangered my comfort” — sue the automotive manufacturer, or the steel manufacturer uses to produce the automotive, the smoke blown outside the door harmed my “health and safety” — smoke was from a jet flying above — sue the jet fuel manufacturer, and the alarm clock disturbed my “repose” — sue the plastics manufacturer who supplied the alarm clock housing.

The standard is too vague and broad, creating an umbrella law to attack anyone for anything, regardless of their connection to the “action.”

Our Court System

Our courts are made up of laws passed by the legislature for the betterment of society. They are made to uphold our Constitutions, both state and federal. The most noted of all laws are not cited; they are bench laws or precedent. Precedent is when a judge makes a ruling on a case.

These are our most dangerous and harmful laws we have in the country and why we are in such grave danger now. When a judge sets a precedent, every case coming afterward seeks to hold by that ruling. Once lawyers find a favorable precedent, they can appeal to the former judge’s findings and how they ruled. Now, that judge can choose to ignore the previous litigation, which will end up in an appeal for not following precedent; affirm the precedent and award in line with the former judge, which most commonly happens; or overrule the former judge’s ruling, creating the opportunity for further appeals to the superior court.

This is not easy as most litigants, present case excluded, do not have the tens for thousands of dollars to fight a case to the superior courts or all the way to the United States Supreme Court. People accept the ruling by precedent and are forced into servitude or bankruptcy.

A History of Fruitless Attacks on the American Constitution

Everyone remembers the MacDonald’s case where the person was burned with a scorching cup of coffee. What people do not understand is the case was not about hot coffee but under-insulated cups and improper lids when handing out 120-degree beverages. All we remember is a person was burned by coffee, and they were awarded a huge sum of money. This case has been cited as precedent in many later cases to justify penalizing companies for actions that may or may not truly be the Defendant’s fault.

This same burger giant was targeted again years later for “making people fat.” This spawned videos and antics where healthy people who worked out daily, ran marathons, and ate a moderate green diet went on an eating binge to consume thousands of calories more than usual. This led to ignorant findings that were touted to prove that the fast-food chain was knowingly harming the citizens.

We have all heard of the attacks on the auto manufactures for a half-century. When the vehicle is made improperly or defectively, the manufacturer absolutely bears responsibility. When the manufacturer knows of a defect and chooses to ignore the danger, the manufacturer is certainly liable. But it has been ruled many times that the automobile manufacturer does not bear guilt for driver error and weather conditions that exceed the manufacturer’s intended purpose. This case now opens the door for lawsuits against automobile manufacturers when someone drives 200 miles on the doughnut spare, and it blows out.

Everyone remembers the lawsuit to sue the ammunition manufactures for causing death because someone was shot and killed by a bullet built for “one purpose, to kill.” Well folks, all bullets are made to kill, not just some.

Now, certain groups are looking to sue the gun manufactures for someone deciding to commit a deadly act with a firearm. It wasn’t until later we found out the weapon was, in fact, illegally obtained by a person and then was used in an illegal act. I do believe this case was dropped due to lack of, you guessed it, precedent.

How this Affects Our Freedom and Second Amendment

There has been an attempt to hold gun manufacturers liable for mass murders and open the door for Red Flag gun laws for decades. Until now, they have not had a precedent for the extermination of our Second Amendment rights. This precedent has far surpassed the previously discussed attempts from the left to seize and prosecute law-abiding American manufacturers for acts outside of their control.

This dangerous precedent places an independent fifth-party manufacturer as liable for the actions, whether legal or illegal, of people whom the manufacturer has zero control over. Further, the manufacturer has no oversight, supervisory control, prescribing directive, or ability to consult before a prescription for the manufacture’s product is dispensed. Not only this, but there are a second-party intermediary (physician) and a third-party intermediary (pharmacist) who prescribe and procure the product for the user under the direction of established fourth-party healthcare regulatory bodies which lie outside the direction, control, supervision or oversight of the manufacturer.

With this awful tragedy of justice, anyone injured or killed from a firearm, whether that be an accident, suicide, or murder, now has precedent for claiming the manufacturer, not the actor nor seller nor distributor, was at fault for the injury or death, whether or not the firearm was obtained lawfully or illegally nor was the obtainer of the gun legally allowed under law to be in possession of a deadly weapon. This puts in place the direct link to attack the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America and our God-given right to keep and bear arms by extortion or trial.

Once someone is killed or injured, the prosecutor or litigating plaintiff will try to settle for millions or even billions of dollars from the manufacturer. This will be touted; “you see what happened to Johnson & Johnson.” This extortion is used in mediation cases every day as a bargaining chip.

 It’s a “do as I say or else” threat that has teeth when there is precedent. Once the Honorable Judge Thad Balkman’s gavel cracked, people started lining up to extort funds from all types of manufacturers. It is said there are 30 other states’ attorneys general waiting for the ruling on the Oklahoma opioid case. They now have precedent for extortion of millions of dollars or retry Oklahoma’s Attorney General Mike Hunter’s extortion of $17.5 billion. 

If extortion does not work, the legal team goes to work to set in place the precedent that “because those actions annoyed, injured or endangered the comfort, repose, health or safety” (1). This is a slippery slope that has devastating implications. You can now, theoretically, sue or extort money from an electric company because they manufactured the electricity that burned your hand off while you were stealing copper from a city transformer during a rainstorm.

We will see a surge in attacks to extort money from anyone and everyone in mediation and settlement conferences dealing with manufacturers from this date forward. Once they can attach a claim to the manufacturer for the production of a product, then they will have legal right to further restrict the purchase, use, access and carry of all weapons as a dangerous and harmful manufacturer is at fault for manufacturing (drugs, guns, ammo, cars, gasoline, etc.).

There have already been attacks on our gun manufacturers, especially Armalite, the manufacturer of the AR-style rifle. These attacks have waned even to get started because there was no precedent of a removed party manufacturer liability for the use or misuse of a product by an actor who obtained a firearm, whether legally or illegally, and acted with this firearm outside the manufacturer’s guidelines, but that has changed to society product. Once someone is injured or killed in a shooting, it will be open season. If you can claim the manufacturer was a fault for building the product, you can theoretically claim the school was at fault for being the place of the attack, the police were at fault for not stopping it, the parents were at fault for sending their children to school and the bus driver was liable because he transported the student with a weapon. These are all removed party unrelated uninvolved actors.

Conclusion

The first attack on our society, if this ruling is not quickly eviscerated, is the gun and ammunition manufacturers. They will extort billions for suicides to mass shootings touting this precedent. These cases are “bad law” and should not be upheld by the superior courts. This precedent has such a range of implications that we will see frivolous lawsuits and extorted mediation settlements for decades ranging into the billions on removed party product manufacturers whom will have no choice but to shut down due to liability or charge astronomical prices.

Our rights as citizens of the United States, especially here in Oklahoma, just took a back seat as we can no longer pursue happiness as entrepreneurs. We will forever be looking over our shoulder to see if the candle we made and sold to a distributor, who sold the candle to Walmart, bought by a person in another state, was left burning in a window with drapes when everyone left for ice cream and the wind blew the drapes over the flame and the stray cat under the porch died. This is the dangerous precedent that was set today in infamy.

(1)https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/johnson-and-johnson-is-responsible-for-fueling-oklahomas-opioid-crisis-judge-rules-in-landmark-case/2019/08/26/ed7bc6dc-c7fe-11e9-a4f3-c081a126de70_story.html?noredirect=on

(2) https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/08/26/754481268/judge-in-opioid-trial-rules-johnson-johnson-must-pay-oklahoma-572-million

(3)https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/26/health/oklahoma-opioid-judge-thad-balkman-profile/index.html 

(4)https://apple.news/AJ2adPgN0TRy6tOOlVEk8QQ

It was impossible to post this article here. Please go to the website using this url

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14178/venezuela-monroe-doctrine.

We discuss not only the fascinating history of the Monroe Doctrine (Abe Lincoln was the first to invoke it) but why it is applicable to Venezuela. This article was listed as one of the top Google stories.

Clinton Legacy NOT a “Tangled web,” but a Gordian Knot

            As we hear President Elect Trump saying, “I don’t want to hurt the Clinton’s” – implying that his administration will have little or no interest in prosecuting the former Secretary of State for her mass perjuries before the House Oversight Committee and lies before the American Public; her part in the play-for-pay Clinton slush fund/Foundation; and 23 violations of the nation’s Secrets Act . . . with up to 2,100 counts involved – it’s hard not to marvel at the level of corruption this one semi-dynastic family exhibited on the stage of the American body politic.

            Let us, however, like Alexander the Great when facing the challenge of the Gordian Knot (legend said that the person who could undo the taut and complex knot tied by Gordius would rule Asia), let’s us stick to basics.  Alexander quickly slipped his sword from its scabbard and slashed the infamous philosopher’s challenge into thirty limp pieces of 140-year old rope. 

Here is the one great crime that President Bill Clinton committed that no one recognizes.  From the bottom of p.517 and top of p. 518 this short paragraph in WJC’s autobiography My Life, tells America everything we citizens need to know about progressivism (confidence in big ever-expanding government funded by ever-growing taxes to be the be-all and end-all of all potential problems forever, AMEN!  However, since we the citizens are coming to realize that government is the agency with the stick, whip and gun and not the carrot, most of us worship at the church of “Government is NOT the solution, government is the problem” (Ronald Reagan).  Here’s what Slick-Willy Clinton had to say in his book published in 2004:

“One of the most effective things we did was to reform the regulations governing financial institutions under the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA’77).  The law required federally insured lenders to make an extra effort to give loans to low- and modest-income borrowers, but before 1993 it had never had much impact.  After the changes we made, between 1993 and 2000 (sic:  January 2001 = 8 years in office), banks would offer more than $800 billion in home mortgage, small-business, and community development loans to borrowers covered by the law, a staggering figure that amounted to well over 90 percent of all the loans made in the 23- (sic: 24-) year history of the Community Reinvestment Act.”

                It’s truly a shocking thing that virtually no one in America understands what you just read.  Bill Clinton is not just confessing about creating the Great Fiscal Meltdown of 2007 – present; oh no, he is actually bragging about it.  He assumes that the reader of his autobiography will be too stupid to check out the full impact of the facts he’s given and will instead merely assume that Bill Clinton’s intentions were good and that’s all that matters.  There’s probably a 100-page expose on progressivism that could help explain it all, but let’s keep things simple, let’s slash our way through the Gordian Knot.

                These are the facts:

1)      The American mortgage-loan industry was not broken in January, 1977, when progressive President Jimmy Carter assumed office with a great majority of progressive Democrats and a few progressive Republicans joining him.  America had the highest private home ownership rate in the world by far (62-65%) depending upon the economy; and most telling of all the Suspect Loan Rate was a miniscule 0.24%.  The progressives who had just seen a great success in using the Cloward-Piven strategy to more than double the nation’s welfare rolls between 1969 and 1973 and send the economy and the stock market into a monster tailspin using something they called the NWRO (National Welfare Rights Organization) to create a crisis that bankrupted New York City and almost bankrupted New York State and every big city and big-city state in the country.

2)      They quickly realized that CRA’77 was a bit more challenging and set up Arkansas, Bill Clinton’s state as a test case with the Arkansas Community Organization for Reform Now (A.C.O.R.N.) under NWRO veteran Wade Rathke at the helm.  Arkansas was chosen because Hillary Clinton was a well-known Saul Alinsky disciple who’d written her college thesis praising the self-described “neo-Marxist” and his radical work in the inner cities.  Alinsky, author of 1946’s Reveille for Radicals and 1971’s Rules for Radicals had tried to turn his Chicago organization over to her before he died in 1971.  Hillary was also the wife of an up-and-coming young attractive Arkansas Lieutenant Governor William Jefferson Clinton.  With A.C.O.R.N.’s help he would become governor of Arkansas and stay in that role for 12 of the 14 years following the elections of 1978.

3)      By 1987 with A.C.O.R.N. only active in one state, Arkansas, the American Suspect Loan Rate had more than doubled to 0.51%.  CRA’77 loans could be had for as little as 3% down!  A.C.O.R.N. now changed its name to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now and went active in all 50 states.  The push to get totally unqualified loan applicants into expensive new homes was fully underway . . . .

4)      Bill Clinton made three expansions of CRA’77 in the first four year term:  by presidential executive order in 1993; and twice by passing legislation both times in 1995.  By 1997, A.C.O.R.N.’s hard work (Community Organizer Barack Obama, by the way, was an A.C.O.R.N. attorney shaking down banks in Chicago) was starting to pay off . . . the nation’s Suspect Loan Rate now stood at 14.1%  (almost one in every seven home loans was so unsound it was virtually guaranteed to go into foreclosure).  CRA’77 loans were available to virtually any unqualified applicant who wanted one, who was able to fork over 2% as a down payment.

5)      During the height of the Monica Lewinsky scandal in 1998, Bill Clinton took time off to pass his fourth expansion of CRA’77.  This steroid-version expansion of CRA’77 forced loan companies to grant home loans to people without jobs; people with the most horrific credit ratings; people whose only “income” was food stamps; felons; tourists; and even illegal immigrants to receive loans for $225,000 – $480,000 homes. And it seemed that everyone buying a home was seeing its appraised value jumping skyward.  The Construction Industry Bubble and Sub-Prime Lending Bubble were dominating the news.  All these loans were being offered at 3% and lower down payments and many were executed with 0% down payment.

6)      Meanwhile in Texas, new Governor George W. Bush was passing a state law requiring a minimum down payment of 20%.  Later when he became president he struggled for over five years to pass a law repealing all of CRA’77.  Texas and Utah were the only states during the following dozen years that kept producing jobs and balanced budgets.  Everyone else was in the red.

7)      In mid-July 2005, G.W. Bush passed a too-little, too-late watered-down version of his effort to repeal CRA’77.  Much of the law is still on the books today . . . but that’s all he could get done.

8)      In 2007, the nation and the world (mortgage entities with perhaps 22,000 loans “bundled” together had been popular investments for some 29+ years now . . . after all, who doesn’t pay their mortgage?) this time, however, the investors were buying dog-crap paper wrapped in cat-crap paper.  There was no value in any of them.  Why?  Because the nation’s Suspect Loan Rates had reached 34.2%.  More than 1 in every three home loans was logically-doomed to end in foreclosure making virtually all the bonds worthless.  Iceland went bankrupt; Italy, Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Hungary were teetering on the brink.  In America, $5 million was lost during the stock market drop; 39.6% of all home value was lost putting even most long-term owners “upside-down” on their mortgages.  In a 2010 speech Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner who served under both President G.W. Bush and President Obama credited Bush’s passage of an anti-CRA’77 Act back in 2005 as “saving the nation” from even worse consequences.  Nevertheless 8.4 million jobs were lost and immense misery was endured around the globe.

So logically, for his part in Arkansas’s A.C.O.R.N. corruption; and in the nation’s A.C.O.R.N. collapse; and especially for his 1998 Steroid-Version Expansion of CRA’77:  Bill Clinton deserves even more “credit” than the 90% he claims in his autobiography, a full 99.5% of the credit/blame for creating the 2007 Great Fiscal Meltdown of the world’s economies.

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

By: Juan Reynoso, activist  -  voteforamerica@gmail.com

http://anticorruptionact.org/.     STAND FOR AMERICA        http://www.teaparty.org/

"Americas must realize that self-scrutiny is not treason. Self-examination is not disloyalty."

2015 global economic crisis.

Fellow Americans, the World Economic Forum's Global Risks 2014 report, finds that income disparity is most likely to cause serious global economic damage in the coming decade. The world moves to a multipolar distribution of power and influence. The neocon globalist elite, the world’s predators are in control of the world’s economic. As a result of the 8 years of free money to fix the financial crisis and globalization, the 24 trillion Dollars use to fix the global economic crisis; made the richer the ones that benefit the most and fail to create the jobs need it to fix the crisis, while the middleclass and the poor paid for this ill policy. Today the American youth is the most affected by this economic crisis, they are the ones that are paying for the ill financial policies and the Wall Street and the neocon globalist greed. This huge concentration of wealth has cut the purchasing power of over 289 millions of Americans, the result was the decrease of retail business in our country and the closing of thousands of retail stores; we use to manufacture 85% of what we consume today we manufacture less than 60%. And most Americans depend on service jobs that pay less money than manufacturing jobs, most Americans have lost more than 40% of their income due to globalization. In 2015 is going to be another financial crisis, this will impact the whole world, but neither the news media nor the US government is telling the people the truth. The people needs to know the truth but the US media have become the propaganda machinery of the elite that control this system of government; today the only sources of the truth are the independent alternative news media found only in the internet and the whistleblowers the heroes of the world that expose corruption and government crimes against humanity. Please support these organizations they need our support to enable them to continue reporting the truth.  

www.represent.us

To share this please clicks here       Share

Sources for this article include:

Worsening Wealth Gap Seen as Biggest Risk Facing the World in 2014 ...

www.weforum.org/.../worsening-wealth-gap-see...

24 trillion expended and the economic crisis is not fixed.

http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/Documents/20120413_FinancialCrisisResponse.pdf

Hundreds of US retail stores will close in 2015.

http://retailindustry.about.com/od/USRetailStoreClosingInfoFAQs/fl/All-2015-Store-Closings-Stores-Closed-by-US-Retail-Industry-Chains.htm

180 Solar panel manufactures will close in 2015.

 http://www.forbes.com/sites/uciliawang/2012/10/16/report-180-solar-panel-makers-will-disappear-by-2015/

New 2015 global financial crisis

http://www.biznews.com/global-investing/2014/07/finance-expert-eight-ways-new-global-crisis-will-hit-2015/

The root cause of the border crisis is directly attributable to President Barack Obama’s executive amnesty created under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) plan. DACA created the incentive for illegal aliens to break our laws as Obama deliberately undermined our nation’s sovereignty by simply creating his own. American’s must realize that this administration is solely responsible for the breakdown of our southern border. The factual evidence cannot be refuted.

This map is provided by NumbersUSA and it outlines how systematically widespread the relocation of unaccompanied minors has become throughout our country. Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, California, Oregon, Washington, Illinois, Michigan, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Florida, and Oklahoma have literally been invaded. As of today, 16 states have confirmed “relocation centers” that are currently responsible for housing illegal immigrants.

The map below outlines the states who have implemented these centers (red triangles), proposed centers (yellow), and rejected centers (blue pins).

These states were not chosen at random either. The evidence proves this in the form of grants awarded by the Department of Health and Human Services to Non-Profit Private Non-Government Organizations. The grants were specifically awarded to organizations under the Office of Refugee Resettlement. While there are hundred’s of organizations who were awarded grants, they pale in comparison to the amount awarded to the Baptist Child and Family Services organization and the Southwest Key Programs.

The Baptist Child and Family Services (BCFS) is labeled as “a global system of non-profit health and human service organization’s operating programs throughout the U.S., Europe, Latin America, Asia, and Africa”. In the United States their principle offices are located in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, New York, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, and Washington, D.C.

To say that this organization is massive would be an understatement given that HHS has awarded them $280 million this year alone. When you combine that with the $61 million in 2013, $64 million in 2012, $18.9 million in 2011, and $11.7 million in 2010, the total equals $457 million. In short, BCFS has been awarded more money this year then all of the previous years combined, but why?

The answer comes in the form of an official BCFS announcement given after they had been awarded $190 million on July 7, 2014. According to the announcement, “BCFS will be expanding with 6 new regional hubs for BCFS’ new family support and evaluation programs“. The new hubs will be located in, “New York, N.Y., Miami, FL., Houston, TX., Dallas, TX., Sacramento-area, CA., Los Angeles area, CA.”

The President and CEO of the company is Kevin C. Dinnin. According to the San Antonio Business Journal, “Dinnin concluded FY 2012 with more than $100 million in revenue”. Meaning, his nonprofit organization made $36 million that year.

BCFS actually has its own Emergency Management Department (BCFS-EMD) which, according to the official BCFS-EMD website “is a nonprofit partner of federal, state, and local government and private industry”. These are the so called “Brown Shirts” who have been tasked to convert military bases throughout the country into shelters.

They have been tasked to Joint Base Lackland, SA., Fort Still, OK., Joint Base Lewis – McChord in Dupont, Wash., and Naval Base Ventura County, in Port Hueneme, Calif.

The second organization, Southwest Key Programs, is just as concerning as BCFS. According to their official website, Southwest Key is “the largest provider of services to unaccompanied alien children in the United States”. Similar to BCFS, they are connected to the Office of Refugee Resettlement of Health and Human Services.

Southwest Key currently has over 65 operating programs throughout the country. They have 4 in California, 3 in Arizona, 18 in Texas, 15 in Georgia, 1 in Wisconsin, 1 in Delaware, and 2 in New York.

Health and Human Services awarded Southwest Key its largest grant with $122 million this year, following a pattern similar to BCFS. When you combine that with $86 million in 2013, $50 million in 2012, $35 million in 2011, and $30 million in 2010, the total equals $324 million.

The $122 million awarded to Southwest Key this year suggests that they will continue to expand and their ideology is driven by something much more sinister than the “pursuit of happiness”.

The President and founder of Southwest Key is Dr. Juan Sanchez. Mr. Sanchez founded the program in 1987 and today it has become the 4th largest hispanic-led nonprofit organization in the country. Juan Sanchez also serves on the board of the National Council of La Raza.

Read the Rest by Clicking Here http://politicallyshort.com/2014/07/25/executive-amnesty-by-exploitation/

As recently as his State of the Union address this past January, President Obama wasreaffirming the support he announced last August for bipartisan plans making their way through both chambers of Congress to drastically reduce and/or eliminate the two lending giants’ outsized footprint in the housing market, pressuring lawmakers to “send me legislation that protects taxpayers from footing the bill for a housing crisis ever again, and keeps the dream of homeownership alive” by shifting the market more toward private lending. Opposition to the plan’s practical implications from some highly interested parties in the housing sector, as well as the upcoming midterm elections, have put Congress’s legislative role in the Fannie/Freddie drawdown in fuzzy and protracted territory — so in what will doubtless be the long interim before we see any major Congressional action on that front, the Obama administration is now planning to use their regulatory authority to… ramp up their role in the mortgage market and basically promote more risky lending? What? Via the NYT:

The federal overseer of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on Tuesdayannounced a shift in policies intended to maintain the mortgage finance giants’ role in parts of the housing market, spur more home lending and aid distressed homeowners.

“Our overriding objective is to ensure that there is broad liquidity in the housing finance market and to do so in a way that is safe and sound,” Melvin L. Watt, the new head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, said in a speech at the Brookings Institution in Washington. …

Mr. Watt’s changes would perpetuate the presence of the two government-sponsored enterprises in mortgage finance, rather than shrinking it. …

Mr. Watt laid out several specific measures. For example, rather than reducing current limits on the size of the loans they guarantee, as previously proposed by the former overseer, Fannie and Freddie would keep the current, relatively loose, limits in place. The two enterprises back about two-thirds of all new mortgages.

The White House, via Jay Carney, applauded “the Federal Housing Finance Agency for issuing certainty and clarity on the rules of the road for loans backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac” on Tuesday, and as Bloomberg notes:

Watt’s policy decisions will play an increasingly pivotal role in the nation’s housing finance system as bipartisan efforts to wind down Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac appear to be stalling in the Senate.

The Senate Banking Committee is expected to vote Thursday on a measure that would replace the two companies with a reinsurer of mortgage bonds that would suffer losses only after private capital was wiped out. The bill doesn’t have enough Democratic support to advance beyond the committee and legislative efforts to remake Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are unlikely to continue before next year.

Well. So much for that, and in the meantime, it looks like the Obama administration just couldn’t resist the urge to keep getting the federal government increasingly involved in the economy.

Read more at:  http://hotair.com/archives/2014/05/15/obama-admin-officials-oddly-not-downsizing-fannie-maefreddie-mac-like-they-proposed-to-do/

Every year 50,000 plus people are killed and a great number of those are teenagers. Some people claim they are drinking when it happens, sometimes it is just an accident, suicide or sadly some are premeditated murder. Of course, they are used in crimes and are very dangerous in the wrong hands, especially young people. Regardless, people die and this must stop, RIGHT? If only the trained police or certain professionals were able to use them the streets would be safer, thousands of citizens would not be killed and we could set an example for the world. There is no doubt that they are very dangerous and with daily deaths mounting we should do something!

I am talking about vehicles, cars and trucks! Yes, the same argument holds for vehicles as does for guns. The primary difference is that many more people are killed with or in vehicles. They do save lives and prevent crimes, as do guns in the hands of citizens, but no one ever wants to talk about those details.

The environmental people should support this ban, but I do NOT! It makes no more sense than banning guns. It s the person, not the instrument that kills people. Knifes, hammers, screw drivers, ice picks, box cutters, etc. are all dangerous in the wrong and evil hands.

I regret any loss of life, but I value my freedom and will not give it up for alleged increased security. Our Founding Fathers warned us to never give up freedom for promised security.

When I went to public school every boy had a  pocket knife and there were no gun free zones and in fact some kids had them in the cars. We have a people and a morals problem today and need to address it. Israel schools have armed teachers, surrounded by terrorists and people who would attack their children if they were in a gun free zone. The incident yesterday might have been stopped, if Bill Clinton had not banned guns from military bases in 1993. Ever on duty soldier should wear a side arm, as they did in past wars and that evil sick man would have been stopped VS. a shooting gallery. Just as my example of banning vehicles does not make sense, neither does gun free military bases or schools.

The Navy shooter was using a shotgun and even crazy uncle Joe said he has one of them. Obama and others will use this crisis to push gun bans and they are chasing the wrong issue. We have a people problem.  

Obama, Progressivism, Disaster – 2

The prior post… part 1 is available at

Part 1

Now to continue to Part 2

Cloward told The New York Times on September 27, 1970. Rather than placating the poor with government hand-outs, wrote Cloward and Piven, activists should work to sabotage and destroy the welfare system;

[[MGI...]]] … which is what BHO is doing today, even as he adds millions to the welfare roles

 the collapse of the welfare state would ignite a political and financial crisis that would rock the nation; poor people would rise in revolt; only then would "the rest of society" accept their demands.

[[MGI...]]] Aha…. Preaching SABOTAGE, CRISIS, REVOLT….. sounds like a hate speech to me… send them to jail…. But BHO has an opening…… Having fomented political/financial crisis, BHO becomes DICTATOR via declaration of Martial Law…. PLANNED/Aggravated Crises… THE Obama strategy.

HIS Chief……..”Rahm Emanuel: You never want a serious crisis to go to waste

….and Obama’s Corollary…… Lacking a serious crisis…. Generate one!

The key to sparking this rebellion would be to expose the inadequacy of the welfare state.

[[MGI...]]] Republicans have been fighting the inadequacy of welfare ever since FDR (Social Security) and LBJ ( War on Poverty)….both demonrats

Cloward-Piven's early promoters cited radical organizer Saul Alinsky as their inspiration. "Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules," Alinsky wrote in his 1971 book Rules for Radicals.

[[MGI...]]] I think that will work just fine on nobama; MAKE HIM LIVE up to his rules!

When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and  

[[MGI...]]]……..oooops… who slipped THAT in…..” every implicit promise of the liberal social contract,”

 human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether,

[[MGI...]]] Oh…such as existing law on Immigration, Border Protection, Guns, but with a twist………NOT to replace the Capitalist Rule book, but to replace the Socialist regime

 and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one.

Enough for Part 2…. It should be clear that Nobama has a Plan – DISASTER.

……………more later

This is from our friends at Personal Liberty;

Who Shot The Dollar?

PHOTOS.COM

President Barack Obama delivered the deathblow to the dollar.

Who killed the U.S. dollar? This question will be debated by future historians. Already, more people are asking that question than tuned in to find out who shot J.R. on Dallas. The lineup of suspects is long, but it ends with Barack Obama, the triggerman who killed the buck.

The first wound came from Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who expanded the Federal government’s influence far beyond what the writers of the Constitution ever imagined. He devalued the price of gold and made it impossible for ordinary Americans to convert currency to bullion. But FDR was also crucial during America’s World War II victory, a pivotal event that set the stage for America to become the world’s largest creditor and greatest superpower.

LBJ Chooses Guns And Butter

Another suspect is Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson. When I was in college studying economics, our professor made us read history. This seemed counterintuitive until we read about the guns-and-butter policies of the Johnson Administration.

And while Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama make Johnson look like a penny-pincher, Johnson was the first to take a shot at the dollar.

Johnson pressed forward his vision with major spending programs for education, medical care, crime and transportation. He wanted to transform America the way FDR had. And he had a war to fight in Vietnam.

Gold demand rose, creating a drawdown on America’s gold reserves. The root of it all was a growing trade deficit that the United States owed to the rest of the world.

The Administration of John F. Kennedy knew America’s gold standard was in trouble. In January 1961, Kennedy’s Undersecretary of the Treasury, Robert Roosa, suggested the U.S. and Europe pool their gold to prevent a private marketplace for gold in which the price would exceed the mandated price of $35 per ounce. French President Charles de Gaulle reneged on the deal and began to redeem dollars for gold instead of U.S. Treasuries. The drain on U.S. gold became severe.

The 1960s marked a gigantic increase in Federal spending. Johnson’s two-front war was being fought at a prohibitive cost. In 1968, for the first time since 1893, the United States ran a deficit in its balance of trade. Federal debt began to soar. By the end of the 1960s, the U.S. faced the stark choice of eliminating trade deficits or devaluing the dollar.

Gold On Nixon’s Enemies List

On Aug. 15, 1971, President Richard Nixon cut the final link between gold and the dollar. Other nations could no longer redeem rapidly depreciating greenbacks for bullion.

In February 1973, the world’s currencies “floated.” By the end of 1974, the price of gold had soared from $35 to $195 an ounce. The U.S. could suddenly pump dollars without constraint. It was a period during which red flags were being raised for paper investors, few of whom paid any notice.

The majority of investors would pay a steep price for their ignorance. Over the next decade, they suffered through the worst bear market in stocks since the Great Depression and the worst bond market of the 20th century.

A Democrat Gives The Dollar A Reprieve

It is ironic that another Democrat would breathe life into the buck, but that is what President Bill Clinton did.

During the Clinton Administration — with the help of innovative accounting — the dollar stormed back. The disgrace Clinton brought to the Oval Office over the Monica Lewinsky affair seems almost forgivable since his Administration presided over a growing economy and what underpinned it, a strong dollar. More than a decade ago, the world had confidence in the U.S. dollar.

If you do not believe me, check the chart below.

As you can see, the greenback has been experiencing an unprecedented decline since 2001. No doubt much of the weakness in the dollar was caused by another guns-and-butter President: George W. Bush.

Just 2½ years into office, Obama is pushing the value of the dollar even lower. It’s so low that the value of the U.S. dollar now threatens to undermine our future and our children’s future.

To read the rest of the article go here:

http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/government/who-shot-the-dollar/?eiid=&rmid=2011_06_15_PLA_[P11408439]&rrid=394822321

“Figures don’t lie, but liars sure do figure . . .”

Great video, share with your contacts. Remember in November!

Oil Spill Timeline Update Day 84 from RightChange on Vimeo.

The oil spill has taken all the press as of late. It's a crime that with all our technology and trillion-dollar navy,

this country can deal with an oil leak a mile below the water. That part of the world is a place of historical

importance and true American beauty. How can it be worse to drill for oil above ground in an isolated area in Alaska?

All of these issues are important, but what's going to really hurt the economy isn't an oil leak. 100% debt vs GDP in 2015 may sound like an up important issue. Imagine for a moment you made $50,000 each year. Each year you borrowed $50,000 dollars. Your justification is that you need the money to increase you salary in the coming years.

In the past couple of weeks, I've been finding articles, mostly from Europe, on America looming debt/deficit crisis. Our oversees friends seem more involved in our financial well being than we do. Our media really is just a reflection of what America is interesting in watching and reading at a particular part of time.

Thus, the fiscal crisis doesn't have a live camera showing plumes of oil leaking into the gulf or dead birds washing up in thick crude oil. If you following the debt crisis as i have for the past year, the money begin spent and borrowed would amount to 50 oil leaks in every ocean and sea around the world.

Imagine for a moment a Satellite photo of earth. In one small area of the Gulf of Mexico, there's a black area of oil about the size of Connecticut - a horrible image for a beautiful part of the world. Then imagine that a country's debt could be visualized with red ink flowing across the land based on that country's debt. A country with 100% debt vs GDP would result in red ink flowing across 100% of that country's land.

The satellite image would show that almost all the land in the entire world would be covered in 100% red. Not only would most countries be red, they'd be dark red because their debt is beyond 100% GDP vs. Debt. The photo would show a world with blue water, except in one tiny blackened area of Gulf, with red inked land almost everywhere.

Does it matter?