“Besides the ignorant things he said, however, Gingrich suggested that the G.O.P. symbol might be an elephant riding on a magic carpet which (if you look closer) proves to be a paycheck; while the Democrat’s symbol would be a Donkey living in a food stamp book teepee.  Gingrich also said that it was wrong for Republicans to talk about cutting Medicare since it left them open to being demagogued for the next decade and Medicare had only increased 14% under Obama while the federal side of Medicaid had risen 54% and food stamp costs had risen 60% under Obama, then he cited a food stamp increase from 33 million to 47 million Americans now on food stamp rolls an amazing 39.4% jump” in just two years.

Trump, Huckabee Drop-outs and Ex-Speaker’s

Implosion Puts Romney in Catbird Seat

For 2012 G.O.P. Presidential Nomination

               In a dramatic turn of events, the last three days marked climactic upheaval in the ranks of the Republican presidential candidates to replace Barack Obama in the Oval Office starting January, 2013.

               ITEM:  Mike Huckabee cited “spiritual reasons” for deciding NOT to contest the 2012 primary waters in an announcement made at the end of his Huckabee show on FOXNews channel Saturday.  With no effort at all, Huckabee was #2 in the polls among all candidates.  This is a huge game-changer among Republican and many other conservative voters.

               ITEM:  Pressured by his television network, NBC, Donald Trump announced today that he would NOT be running for president either.  Trump said “Business is my greatest passion and I’m not ready to leave the private sector.”  He also cited all the money that his hit show “Celebrity Apprentice” had been making for charity as a reason NOT to run.  Most pundits do NOT believe the Trump announcement changes much in the battle for 2012.  Most conservatives believed “The Donald” was moderate or even liberal; and had very little to offer conservative voters.  Especially after his recent foul-mouthed tirade, he’d lost a lot of his standing as a potential “statesman.”

               ITEM:  Only short days after announcing his decision to be a candidate for 2012 -- saying the election was the most important in America since Abraham Lincoln’s election in 1860 -- Newt Gingrich seemingly committed political suicide and greatly muddied the waters of the debate on Capitol Hill over raising the national debt ceiling and the Ryan Budget.  Gingrich (imitating Joe Biden??) offered not one but two terrific gaffes:

1)      He appeared to say that Obamacare was not so bad and that he personally supported something like it.

2)    He criticized Paul Ryan’s budget.  The Ryan budget which passed in the House with 238 Republican votes, Gingrich said was “radical.”  He continued, “I don’t support social-engineering from the right anymore than I support social-engineering from the left. 

               Unless Gingrich’s ploy will be to run as a Democrat and contest Obama in the primaries, his candidacy can no longer be regarded as valid.

               At this early stage these three key recent developments seem to put Mitt Romney in the driver’s seat.  He’ll presumably emerge with somewhere between 30-35% of the G.O.P. vote in upcoming polls.  He could have a lead of 2 ½ to 1 over his next closest rival presumably Gingrich (who had 15-16% in recent polls but hurt himself recently.  Rajjpuut believes that Mitch Daniels, Indiana Governor; Michelle Bachmann, Minnesota Representative; and businessman Herman Cain would benefit even more than Romney will from the three news items mentioned above.  The big winner, however, might just be the TEA Party.  Let’s look a bit closer at Romney and Gingrich and the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party . . . .

               Discussing Romney, DickMorris.com put it this way, “Romney was having a terrible week.  His speech on health care was terrible.  With Massachusetts up in arms over Romney-care and Republicans dead set against the individual and employer mandate, his failure to repudiate his program would have cost him dearly.  But now he is sitting on top of the world.”  Much truth there but perhaps a bit too rosy a picture painted for Romney . . . .

               Morris later made a personal appearance on the Hannity show on FOXNews and opined that Gingrich had not actually hurt himself, but rather that people just got the out of context version from the mainstream media.  NOT HARDLY, Richard!  However, in Gingrich’s favor these things must be said.

               Besides the ignorant things he mentioned, Gingrich suggested that the G.O.P. symbol might be an elephant riding on a magic carpet which (if you look closer) proves to be a paycheck; while the Democrat’s symbol would be a Donkey living in a food stamp book teepee.  Gingrich also said that it was wrong for Republicans to talk about cutting Medicare since it left them open to being demagogued for the next decade and Medicare had only increased 14% under Obama while the federal side of Medicaid had risen 54% and food stamp costs had risen 60% under Obama.  Then he cited a food stamp increase from 33 million to 47 million Americans now on food stamp rolls an amazing 39.4% jump in 28 months.

               Michelle Bachmann, Morris told Hannity, would benefit because she might get a lot of the social-conservatives favoring Huckabee.  Since Bachmann is a TEA Party favorite and the emphasis of the TEAs is on fiscal- and Constitutional-conservativism, that does not compute . . . . Rick Santorum and possibly Sarah Palin would be more likely to gain in Rajjpuut’s not-so-humble opinion, with Bachmann and Herman Cain getting some lift as well.

               Morris said that “for Daniels, the withdrawal of Trump opens the way for him to become the main establishment business community rival to Romney.  And Huckabee's withdrawal opens the door for conservatives to support him as well.”  Morris thought that both Daniels and Bachmann needed to enter the race very soon.  Pawlenty, already in the tussle, was another one who Morris said would benefit greatly . . . but he left no doubt that in his view Romney might right now be the presumptive nominee.  Rajjpuut believes there’s a huge long way to New Hampshire not to mention the Oval Office and he doubts that Romney will get 30% of the Republican vote in Iowa or 25% in South Carolina.  Besides, who knows . . .  Chris Christy might just wind up running.

               Mitt Romney is the unquestioned early leader, that’s obvious.  But, the millstone of the Romneycare program in Massachusetts hangs heavy upon him.  His biggest worry has to be the TEA Party.  Romney has already pleaded with some TEA Party leaders for the TEAs NOT to run a third party candidate in 2012; some TEA Party folk recently took the opportunity after Romney’s weak Romneycare speech to call him “a walking hypocrite.” Surely  1) Michelle Bachmann, 2) Herman Cain, 3) Mitch Daniels and 4) Tim Pawlenty (after the three shake-ups this weekend) have to be considered far more compatible with the TEAs than Mitt Romney who is at best a moderate Republican and may because of his failure to repudiate Romneycare be looked upon by some as progressive (like Obama).  We’ve a long hot summer ahead of us . . . if one of these four separates himself or herself from the pack, Romney may be in jeopardy . . . then there’s the specter of a locked convention choosing Chris Christy as everyone’s favorite dark horse . . . we do live in exciting times.

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut

Fellow WebItes:

     How many times in the last 90-120 days this year have you been scammed out of your own prowess of web usage upon Facebook? Or, anywhere else for that matter?

I personally have 4 accts with this web server, and not a very happy camper neither.

Recently, I mean within the last 48 hours, they (FB) used a friends name to scam me into doing something in a prideful manor assuming I'd be so gullible to fall for their scamage. I did a quick chek of the information they were seeking and in the crux of their Hyperlink I saw HACKER written all over it.So I refrained from utilizing its contents and backed right out.

But, my friend didn't fare so well. I sent him a msg asking him if he'd purposefully sent the msg to me in good faith. To which he replied NO!

Then, He proceeded telling me what they did to him.

Friends, Facebook, and all of these other so called ISP ENTITIES are within the boundaries of the Federal Communications Commission Guidelines of the Policies and Procedures of The Public Trust.

What they are doing and have done have blatantly violated our Public Trust and are to be held accountable by the FCC to these charges brought about by you and I as Traitors and Treasonists.

They have NO RIGHTS as far as I am concerned to violate our trust nor our space (Which they so sullenly supply) and rights to access, privacy, and usage.

I may not know it at all about the legalistical logistics about all of this, but one thing I do know is that when I'd applied for and received a FCC Radio Operators license back in 1985, it was clearly stated and understood that this and these type of misappropriations of the Public Trust were held and deemed solely Sacred and Sanctem to the Public Trust, i.e. you and me.

If these Corporations insist that they have a seductive need to cop a quick feel of the American Right, then, Let Them Taste American Freedom  WRATH by its own people.

Instead of sitting upon our weary little hands waiting for our congress to do anything about nothing and same ol' / same ol'. We need to start our own Internal Warfare against this anti-citizenry politbureau of political pawns and do the WWF Slapdown to SmackDown Anti-Politicianry Republic of America: REDEEMED RIGHTS FOR ALL.

And please don't be so crass as to put these things into an acronym just for the mere sake of doing so. That Cliche-ism is for the flickin' birds.

Always American, Always True to Myself, Always in Christ.

Max Simon Uhrig

San Tan Valley,  AZ

Posted on The American Spectator-By Peter J. Wallison-May 2011 issue:

“As many readers of The American Spectator will know, I was a member of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, a 10-member body appointed by Congress to investigate the causes of the financial crisis of 2008. The Commission issued its report in late January 2011, with a majority concluding that the crisis could have been avoided if the private sector had not taken so many risks and government regulators had not been asleep at the switch. I dissented from the majority’s view, arguing in my dissent that the financial crisis would not have occurred if government housing policies had not fostered the creation of an unprecedented number of subprime and otherwise risky loans immediately before the financial crisis began.

After the majority’s report was published, many people lamented that it was not possible to achieve a bipartisan agreement even on the facts. But the way the Commission was organized and run made this impossible. One glaring example will illustrate the problem. In March 2010, Edward Pinto, a resident fellow (and my colleague) at the American Enterprise Institute who had served as chief credit officer at Fannie Mae, sent the Commission a 70-page, fully sourced memorandum on the number of subprime and other high-risk mortgages in the financial system in 2008. Pinto’s research showed that he had found more than 25 million such mortgages (his later work showed that there were approximately 27 million). Since there are about 55 million mortgages in the U.S., Pinto’s research indicated that, as the financial crisis began, half of all U.S. mortgages were of inferior quality and liable to default when housing prices were no longer rising. In August, Pinto supplemented his initial research with a paper documenting the efforts of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), over two decades and through two administrations, to increase home ownership by reducing mortgage-underwriting standards.

This information, which highlighted the role of government policy in fostering the creation of these low-quality mortgages, raised important questions about whether the mortgage meltdown would have been so destructive if those government policies had not existed. Any objective investigation of the causes of the financial crisis would have looked carefully at Pinto’s research, exposed it to the members of the Commission, taken Pinto’s testimony, and tested the accuracy of his research. But the Commission took none of these steps. Pinto’s memos were never made available to the other members of the FCIC, or even to the commissioners who were members of the subcommittee charged with considering the role of housing policy in the financial crisis.

Ultimately, I dissented from the Commission majority’s report. There was no alternative. The Commission’s management—particularly its chairman, Philip Angelides, a former Democratic treasurer of California and unsuccessful gubernatorial candidate—would not allow the staff to pursue any theories about the causes of the financial crisis other than those embodied in the standard left-wing narrative. And in the end a majority of the commissioners—never having been presented with any contrary evidence—signed on to a report that said the financial crisis could have been avoided if there had been better regulation of the private sector.

The question I have been most frequently asked about the Commission is why Congress bothered to authorize it at all. Without waiting for the Commission’s report, Congress passed and the president signed the Dodd-Frank Act (DFA), far-reaching and highly consequential regulatory legislation that I believe will have a strong adverse effect on U.S. economic growth in the future. In enacting the DFA, Congress and the president acted without seeking to understand the true causes of the wrenching events of 2008, perhaps following the precept of the President’s chief of staff—“Never let a good crisis go to waste.”

But to avoid the next financial crisis, we must understand what caused the one from which we are now slowly emerging, and take action to avoid the same mistakes in the future. If there is doubt that these lessons are important, consider the ongoing efforts to amend the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (CRA), which currently requires all insured banks and S&Ls to make loans to borrowers at or below 80 percent of the median income in the areas the banks service. If these loans were profitable, of course, there would be no reason to require by regulation that they be made. In the last session of the 111^th Congress, a bill was introduced to extend the CRA to all “U.S. nonbank financial companies,” and was lauded by House Financial Services Committee chairman Barney Frank as his “top priority.” If enacted, the proposal would have applied to the whole financial community the same government social policy mandates that were ultimately responsible for the mortgage meltdown and the financial crisis.

Because of the 2010 election, it is unlikely that supporters of this idea will have the power to adopt similar legislation in the current Congress, but in the future other lawmakers with views similar to Barney Frank’s may seek to mandate the same requirements. At that time, the only real bulwark against the government’s use of private entities for social policy purposes will be a full understanding of how these policies were connected to the events of 2008.

What Caused the Financial Crisis?

GEORGE SANTAYANA is often quoted for the aphorism that “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Looking back on the financial crisis, we can see why the study of history is often so contentious and why revisionist histories are so easy to construct. There are always many factors that could have caused a historical event; the difficult task is to discern which, among a welter of possible causes, were the significant ones—the ones without which history would have been different.

Using this standard, I believe that the sine qua non of the financial crisis was U.S. government housing policy, which led to the creation of 27 million subprime and other risky loans—half of all mortgages in the United States—which were ready to default as soon as the massive 1997-2007 housing bubble began to deflate. If the U.S. government had not chosen this policy path—fostering the growth of a bubble of unprecedented size and an equally unprecedented number of weak and high-risk residential mortgages—the great financial crisis of 2008 would never have occurred.

In this article, I will outline the logical process that I followed in coming to the conclusion that it was the U.S. government’s housing policies—and nothing else—that were responsible for the 2008 financial crisis.

The inquiry has to begin with what everyone agrees was the trigger for the crisis—the so-called mortgage meltdown that occurred in 2007. That was the relatively sudden outbreak of delinquencies and defaults among mortgages, primarily in a few states—California, Arizona, Nevada, and Florida—but to a lesser degree everywhere in the country. No one disputes that the losses on these mortgages and the decline in housing values that resulted from the ensuing foreclosures weakened financial institutions in the U.S. and around the world and were the precipitating cause of the crisis.

This raised a significant question. The U.S. had experienced housing bubbles in the past. Since the Second World War, there had been two—beginning in 1979 and 1989 -- but when these bubbles deflated they had triggered only local losses. Why was the deflation of the housing bubble in 2007 so destructive?

The Commission’s answer was that there were weaknesses in the financial system—failures of regulation and risk management, excessive leverage and risk-taking—that were responsible for the ensuing devastation. To establish this idea, the Commission had to show that these weaknesses were something new. It didn’t attempt to do this, although that was an essential logical step in establishing its point. And the Commission ignored a more obvious answer: the quality of the mortgages in the bubble. As I noted earlier—and as the Commission never acknowledged or disputed—by 2008, half all mortgages in the U.S. -- 27 million—were subprime or otherwise risky loans. If the Commission had really been looking for the reasons that the collapsing bubble was so destructive, the poor quality of the mortgages in the bubble was a far more likely hypothesis than that there had been a previously undetected weakening in the way the U.S. financial system operated.

This in turn raised two other major questions. Why were there so many weak and risky loans in this bubble? What had happened to mortgage underwriting standards in the preceding years that caused such a serious deterioration in mortgage quality?

“Affordable Housing Goals” and the Deterioration in Underwriting Standards:

RESEARCH SHOWED that the turning point came in 1992, with the enactment by Congress of what were called “affordable housing goals” for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These two firms, which were shareholder-owned, had been chartered by Congress more than 20 years earlier to operate a secondary market in mortgages. The original idea was that they would buy mortgages from banks and other originators (Fannie and Freddie were not permitted to originate mortgages), standardize the mortgage document, resell those mortgages to institutional and other investors, and in that way create a national market for U.S. mortgages.

From the beginning, Fannie and Freddie’s congressional charters required them to buy only mortgages that would be acceptable to institutional investors—in other words, prime mortgages. At the time, a prime mortgage was a loan with a 10-20 percent down payment, made to a borrower with a good credit record who had sufficient income to meet his or her debt obligations after the loan was made. Fannie and Freddie operated under these standards until 1992.

The 1992 affordable housing goals required that, of all mortgages Fannie and Freddie bought in any year, at least 30 percent had to be loans made to borrowers who were at or below the median income in the places where they lived. Over succeeding years, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) increased this requirement, first to 42 percent in 1995, to 50 percent in 2000, and finally to 55 percent in 2007. It is important to note, accordingly, that this occurred during both Democratic and Republican administrations.

At the 50 percent level, Fannie and Freddie had to acquire at least one goal-eligible loan for every prime loan that they acquired, and since not all subprime loans were goals-eligible Fannie and Freddie were in effect required to buy many more subprime loans than prime loans to meet the goals. As a result of this process, by 2008, Fannie and Freddie held the credit risk of 12 million subprime or otherwise risky loans—almost 40 percent of their single-family book of business.

But this was not by any means the full extent of the problem. HUD took Congress’s enactment of the affordable housing goals as an expression of a congressional policy to reduce underwriting standards so that low-income borrowers would have greater access to mortgage credit. As outlined in my dissent, by tightening the affordable housing goals, HUD put Fannie and Freddie into competition with the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), a government agency with an explicit mission to provide credit to low-income borrowers, and with subprime lenders such as Countrywide, that had pledged to reduce underwriting standards in order to make more mortgage credit available to low-income borrowers. Moreover, all these organizations were joined by insured banks and S&Ls, which as noted above were required under the CRA to make mortgage credit available to borrowers who are at or below 80 percent of the median income in the areas where they live.

Of course, it is possible to find borrowers who meet prime loan standards among low-income families, but it is far more difficult to find such loans among these borrowers than among middle-income groups. And when Fannie, Freddie, FHA, subprime lenders like Countrywide, and insured banks and S&Ls are all competing to find loans to borrowers in the low-income category, the inevitable result was a significant deterioration in underwriting standards.

So, for example, while one in 200 mortgages involved a down payment of 3 percent or less in 1990, by 2007 it was one in less than three. Other credit standards had also declined. As a result of this government-induced competition, by 2008 19.2 million out of the total of 27 million subprime and other weak loans in the U.S. financial system could be traced directly or indirectly to U.S. government housing policies.

Private Sector Securitization of Subprime Loans:

IF THE GOVERNMENT was responsible for 19.2 million of the 27 million subprime and other risky loans, that leaves 7.8 million similar loans that came from other sources. These were mortgages securitized by the private sector (often called Wall Street in the Commission’s report) and held by financial institutions around the world. How were these mortgages the result of U.S. government housing policy?

This is an important question. Even though these privately securitized mortgages were less than one-third of the total number of subprime and other risky loans outstanding, they are the reason that banks and other loan originators generally have been blamed—in the media, in most books and films about the financial crisis, and of course by the Commission—for the financial crisis.

The securitization of subprime and other risky loans was also a new phenomenon in the housing bubble that ended in 2007, and it was a direct result of the extraordinary growth of the bubble itself. Most bubbles in the past lasted three or four years. In that time, delinquencies begin to appear and the inflow of speculative funds begins to dry up. The bubble that deflated in 2007, however, had an unprecedentedly long 10-year life. The reason was that the money flow into that bubble was not from private speculators looking for profit, but primarily from the government pursuing a social policy by directing the investments of companies or agencies it regulated or otherwise controlled.

Housing bubbles tend to suppress defaults. As housing prices rise, people who can’t meet their obligations can sell the house for more than they paid, or can refinance, so delinquencies are limited. By 2002, five years into the bubble that began in 1997, investors were beginning to notice that subprime and other risky loans—which usually carried higher than normal interest rates because of their risk—were not showing delinquencies or defaults commensurate with their risks. In other words, the data suggested that mortgage-backed securities (MBS) made of these loans were offering unusually high risk-adjusted yields. This stimulated the development of a private market in securitized subprime loans—something that had never existed before.

This market was about 4 percent of all mortgages made in 2002, but by 2004 had grown to 15 percent. It kept growing through 2005 and 2006, but completely collapsed in 2007, when the 10-year bubble finally topped out and began to deflate.

Thus, the 7.8 million subprime and other risky loans that were securitized during the 2000s and still outstanding in 2008 were also the indirect result of U.S. government housing policies, which had built an unprecedented bubble in the late 1990s. The bubble created the necessary conditions—a long run of subprime loans without the expected losses—for the growth of a huge securitization market in subprime and other risky loans in the mid-2000s.

Before leaving this subject, it is important to address one statement that has appeared again and again in the mainstream media, in statements by members of the Obama administration, and was repeated in the Commission report. This is the claim that Fannie and Freddie became insolvent because, seeking profits or market share, they “followed Wall Street” into subprime lending. This idea neatly avoids the question of why Fannie and Freddie became insolvent in the first place, and focuses the blame again on the private sector. The statement, however, as the following quote from Fannie’s 2006 10-K report makes clear, is untrue:

[W]e have made, and continue to make, significant adjustments to our mortgage loan sourcing and purchase strategies in an effort to meet HUD’s increased housing goals and new subgoals. These strategies include entering into some purchase and securitization transactions with lower expected economic returns than our typical transactions. We have also relaxed some of our underwriting criteria to obtain goals-qualifying mortgage loans and increased our investments in higher-risk mortgage loan products that are more likely to serve the borrowers targeted by HUD’s goals and subgoals, which could increase our credit losses.

Subprime and Other Risky Loans Cause the Financial Crisis:

WITH HALF OF ALL mortgages weak and of low quality by late 2007, an eventual financial crisis was a foregone conclusion. No financial system could withstand the huge losses that occurred when the delinquencies and defaults associated with 27 million subprime and other risky loans began to appear. Alarmed by these unexpected and unprecedented numbers of these delinquencies and defaults, investors fled the multi-trillion dollar market for MBS, dropping MBS values—and especially those MBS backed by subprime and other risky loans—to fractions of their former prices.

Mark-to-market accounting then required financial institutions to write down the value of their assets—reducing their capital positions and causing great investor and creditor unease. In this environment, the government’s rescue of Bear Stearns in March of 2008 temporarily calmed investor fears but created significant moral hazard; investors and other market participants reasonably believed after the rescue of Bear that all large financial institutions would also be rescued if they encountered financial difficulties.

However, when Lehman Brothers—an investment bank even larger than Bear—was allowed to fail, market participants were shocked; suddenly, they were forced to consider the financial health of their counterparties, many of which appeared weakened by losses and the capital writedowns required by mark-to-market accounting.

This caused a halt to lending and a hoarding of cash—a virtually unprecedented period of market paralysis and panic that we know as the financial crisis of 2008.

The Policy Stakes:

THE FAILURE OF THE Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission to do its job is one more obstacle to persuading the American people that the Dodd-Frank Act is illegitimate and should be repealed.

The act is far and away the most restrictive piece of legislation ever imposed on the U.S. economy, and it will have a long-term effect in slowing economic growth, just as the uncertainties it has created have already slowed the recovery from the recession.

The DFA was sold to the American people by the media and the Obama administration as necessary to prevent another financial crisis, but as outlined in this article and made very clear in my dissent, the financial crisis was not caused by weak or ineffective regulation.

On the contrary, the financial crisis of 2008 was caused by government housing policies—sponsored and promoted by many of the same people who framed and ultimately enacted the DFA. If we don’t learn that important lesson, we will make the same mistake again, and then we really will have another financial crisis.”

Source:

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/05/13/the-true-story-of-the-financia

Note:  We, as God, family and country loving Americans, must remain vigilant and keep our eyes on the ball and not be distracted by the relentless propaganda being fed to us on a daily basis as part of this President and his minion’s transformation strategy.

My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

Who or what caused the economic crisis that propelled President Obama into office?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/10/06/who-or-what-caused-the-economic-crisis-that-propelled-president-obama-into-office/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note: If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts, please copy web site and paste it on your browser.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may be considered controversial is being censored-what happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

“God Bless & Keep Our USA Safe”

Semper Fi!

Jake

WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

The following exercepts have been taken from "This Apocalyptic Age" by Robert Bergin.

When General Douglas MacArthur died a thought-provoking speech made by him aboard the U.S. battleship Missouri at the time of the Japanese surrender was not reported in most of the biographies.  Part of it is given hereunder:

"Men," the General said, "since the beginning of time have sought peace.  Various methods through the ages have been attempted to devise an international process to prevent or settle disputes between nations.  From the very start, workable methods were found insofar as individual citizens were concerned, but the mechanics of an instrumentality of larger international scope have never been successful.  Military alliances, balances of power, leagues of nations, all in turn failed, leaving the only path to be by way of the crucible of war.  The utter destructiveness of war now blots out this alternative.  We have had our last chance.  If we will not devise some greater and more equitable system, Armageddon will be at our door.  The problem basically is theological and involves a spiritual recrudenscence and improvement of human character that will synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science, art, literature, and all material and cultural developments of the past 2000 years.  It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh."

And on another occasion this is the manner in which he described our present crisis and prayed for our preservation: 

"There are those who seek to convert us to a form of socialistic endeavor leading directly to the path of Communist slavery.  As a counterbalance to those forces is the deep spiritual urge in the hearts of our people--a spiritual urge capable of arousing and directing a decisive and impelling public opinion.  This, indeed, is the great safeguard and resource of America.  So long as it exists we are secure, for it holds us to the path of reason.  It is an infallible reminder that our greatest hope and faith rests upon two mighty symbols---the cross and the flag;  the one based upon those immutable teachings which provide the spiritual strength to persevere along the course which is just and right---the other based upon the invincible will that human freedom shall not perish from the earth.  These are the mighty bulwarks against the advance of those atheistic predatory forces which seek to destroy the spirituality of the human mind and to enslave the human body.  Let us pray for the spiritual strength and innate wisdom to keep the Nation to the course of freedom charted by our fathers;  to preserve it as the mighty instrument on earth to bring universal order out of existing chaos; to restore liberty where liberty has perished; and to reestablish human dignity where dignity has been suppressed."

The strength of General MacArthur's moral fiber was especially indicated when in 1942, while accepting an award as outstanding father of the year, he said:  "My hope is that my son, when I am gone, will remember me not from the battle but from the home repeating with him our simple daily prayer,  'Our Father who art in heaven......' "

The author, Robert Bergin, followed these words with the following:

"By their fruits you shall know them."  Our Lord said: "Do men gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles?  Every good tree bringeth forth good fruit and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit", (Matt. 7.16)

The fruits of the doctrine of Christian love are peace.

The fruits of the doctrine of atheistic hatred are wars, and yet more wars.

The bottom line folks is that without the help of Our Lord and Savior we are going nowhere fast.  St. Paul wrote "Now the Lord is a spirit; and where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty."  (2 Cor. 3.17).

In the Old Testament Isaias cried out:  "Woe to the sinful nation, they have blasphemed the Holy One of Israel.  If you be willing and hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land.  But if you will not.....the sword shall devour you.  Because the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it."  (Isaias 1.4.;19.20).

WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

               "It’s all GASP been put off!   Damnation, are our beloved Revolutionaries just procrastinators at heart?  Hope this blog puts you in the pink!"    

What follows is an article and/or blog post that seems to provide us with the answer to this question-You Decide:

Establishment Blues-Posted on The American Interest-By WALTER RUSSELL MEAD-On May 12, 2011:

“I don’t want to make this a habit, and I suspect he doesn’t either, but Paul Krugman and I are once again in (very) partial agreement.  We both think the American elite has intellectually and morally lost its way, and we agree that the problems our country faces today have more to do with elite breakdown than popular stupidity.  We locate the blame somewhat differently within that elite; Krugman splits the blame between George W. Bush and the economic policy makers of the Clinton/Obama administrations.  I think the rot goes deeper and has spread out more widely.  But the United States today — in both parties, in the corporate and business worlds, in academia and among the intelligentsia, in religion and in many other fields — does not have the strong and thoughtful leadership that we need.

That is not what the elite thinks, by and large.  To listen to many bien pensant American intellectuals and above-the-salt journalists, America faces a shocking problem today: the cluelessness, greed, arrogance and bigotry of the American public.  American elites are genuinely and sincerely convinced that the American masses don’t understand the world, don’t realize that American exceptionalism is a mental disease, want infinite government benefits while paying zero tax, and cling to their Bibles and their guns despite all the peer reviewed social science literature that demonstrates the danger and the worthlessness of both.

As the thoughtful and discerning Dan Drezner noted on his blog, the complaint isn’t all wrong.  Americans historically want generous government support for themselves and their families, and we do have a tendency to think that government exists to give us something for nothing.  Most of us think God has some kind of plan for the United States — that the wealth and the power this country has accumulated over the centuries is intended to benefit humanity as a whole in some way.  Nobody is going to argue that the American people are walking encyclopedias of knowledge about foreign leaders, new developments in European philosophy and WTO regulations.  If world power was determined by fifth grade math scores, the US would rank somewhere between Burkino Faso and Chad.

But by historical standards, the average American is actually ahead of his or her ancestors.  Today’s average Americans are smarter, more sophisticated, better educated, less racist and more tolerant than ever before.  Immigrants face less prejudice in the United States than ever before in our history.  Religious, ethnic and sexual minorities are more free to live their own lives more openly with less fear than ever before.  There is more respect for science and learning, more openness to the arts and more interest in the viewpoints of other countries and cultures among Americans at large than in any past generation.

The American people aren’t perfect yet and never will be — but by the standards that matter to the Establishment, this is the best prepared, most open minded and most socially liberal generation in history.  Unsatisfactory as the American people may be from the standpoints of Georgetown and Manhattan, this is as good as it gets.  Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and Harry Truman could only dream of the kind of sophisticated and cosmopolitan understanding that folks in Peoria have now compared to the old days.

The American people are less prejudiced, more globally aware and more willing to meet other cultures and societies halfway than ever before.  Minorities today are better protected in law and more fairly treated by the public than ever in our history.  No previous generation has been as determined to give women a fair chance in life, or to attack the foul legacy of racism.  The American people have never been as religiously tolerant as they are today, as concerned about the environment, or more willing to make sacrifices around the world to promote the peace and well being of humanity as a whole.

By contrast, we have never had an Establishment that was so ill-equipped to lead.  It is the Establishment, not the people, that is falling down on the job.

Here in the early years of the twenty-first century, the American elite is a walking disaster and is in every way less capable than its predecessors.  It is less in touch with American history and culture, less personally honest, less productive, less forward looking, less effective at and less committed to child rearing, less freedom loving, less sacrificially patriotic and less entrepreneurial than predecessor generations.  Its sense of entitlement and snobbery is greater than at any time since the American Revolution; its addiction to privilege is greater than during the Gilded Age and its ability to raise its young to be productive and courageous leaders of society has largely collapsed.   (There are, of course, many honorable exceptions to generalizations this sweeping; anyone wise enough to be reading this blog can safely assume that none of these terrible things apply to you.)

Take Wall Street.  (Please!)  Our corrupt financial and corporate establishment has by and large lost its concern for the well being of the American state and the American people.  Raj Rajaratnam’s conviction on 14 counts of insider tradingis only the latest of a string of scandals, blunders and crimes that demonstrate the moral vacuity of the best and the brightest in the United States.  Matt Taibbi’s article in Rolling Stone may be a little over the top for some tastes, but even if the Goldman Sachs executives he describes did nothing illegal, it is painfully clear that a great American financial institution has lost its moral compass. There is a dangerous moral vacuum at the heart of the American Financial Establishment. 

We have had financial scandals before and we have had waves of corporate crime.  We have had pirates and robber barons.  But we have never seen a collapse of ordinary morality in the corporate suites on the scale of the last twenty years.  We have never seen naked money grubbing among our politicians akin to the way some recent figures in both parties have cashed in.  Human nature hasn’t changed, but a kind of moral grade inflation has set in and key segments of the American Establishment are increasingly accepting the unacceptable as OK.  Investment banks betray their clients; robo-signers essentially forge mortgage documents day after day and month after month; insider traders are lionized.   Free markets actually require a certain basic level of honesty to work; if we can’t be more honest than this neither our markets nor we ourselves will remain free for very long.  

Many problems troubling America today are rooted in the poor performance of our elite educational institutions, the moral and social collapse of our ‘best’ families and the culture of narcissism and entitlement that has transformed the American elite into a flabby minded, strategically inept and morally confused parody of itself.  Probably the best depiction of our elite in popular culture is the petulantly narcissistic Prince Charming in Shrek 2; our educational institutions are like the Fairy Godmother, weaving shoddy, cheap, feel-good illusions into a gossamer tissue of flattering lies.

Because the idea of an elite makes Americans nervous, and because American culture likes to blur class and power realities rather than highlight them, we don’t have much of a national conversation about the state of our elite and about how to improve it.  That’s a mistake — and it is one of the reasons our elites are performing so poorly.  The United States actually needs a healthy and far-sighted elite, and that means we need to look at the subject head on.  I’ll be posting on this subject from time to time over the next few months; here are some initial, and not particularly Paul Krugman-like thoughts on what I think has gone wrong.

Guild Mindset:

I’ve posted in the past about the power of the learned guilds in our society: lawyers, doctors, university professors, journalists (marginally) and other professionals.  These are the institutions in which much of the American elite makes its living.  That’s a problem, because the most important problems America faces today involve the need to break up these guilds and drastically reshape the professions.  This isn’t something our elite wants to think about — and it doesn’t want the rest of us thinking about it, either.  The system works fine for them, so what’s to reform?  Rather than leading the country into the Promised Land, the elites want to keep us in Egypt.

Progressive Myopia:

Some of the problem is intellectual.  For almost a century now, American intellectual culture has been dominated by the values and legacy of the progressive movement.  Science and technology would guide impartial experts and civil servants to create a better and better society.  For most of the American elite today, progress means ‘progressive’; the way to make the world better is through more nanny state government programs administered by more, and more highly qualified, lifetime civil servants. Anybody who doubts this is a reactionary and an ignoramus.  This isn’t just a rational conviction with much of our elite; it is a bone deep instinct.  Unfortunately, the progressive tradition no longer has the answers we need, but our leadership class by and large cannot think in any other terms.

The old ideas don’t work anymore, but the elite hates the thought of change.

Blind Faith in Meritocracy:

Past generations of the American elite were always a little bit nervous about their situation; it is morally difficult for an elite based on birth, ethnicity or wealth to justify itself in a country with the universalist, democratic values of the United States.  The tendency of American life is always to erode the power and prestige of elites; populism is the direction in which America likes to travel.  Past generations of elites were conflicted about their status and struggled against a sense that it was somehow un-American to set yourself up as better than other people.

The increasingly meritocratic elite of today has no such qualms.  The average Harvard Business School and Yale Law School graduate today feels that privilege has been earned.  Didn’t he or she score higher on the LSATs than anyone else?  Didn’t he or she previously pass the rigorous scrutiny of the undergraduate admissions process in a free and fair process to get into a top college?  Haven’t they been certified as the best of the best by impartial experts?

A guilty elite may be healthier for society than a self-righteous one.  Teddy Roosevelt and his cousins Eleanor and Franklin worked as hard as they did in part because they felt their privilege was unearned.  They were also a little bit afraid; nobody wants to end up in the tumbrils on the way to the guillotine like the French aristocracy.  Best look after the people before things get out of hand.

I don’t make this point because I want to go back to the days when a tightly knit WASP Establishment ran the country; I merely observe that some important things have been lost in what, on the whole, is a very beneficial transition.  We need to think about recovering what was lost even as we hold onto the gains we have made.

The Great Revaluation:

There is an intellectual and a moral problem that undermines the ability of the American elite to perform one of the necessary functions of a leadership class: to draw on the country’s traditional values for the vision and the confidence to move into the future.  During the 1960s and 1970s, many of the most hallowed assumptions of American life were challenged.  Especially when it came to race and to gender relations, two of the deepest and most complex elements in the makeup of traditional American society, the 1960s and 1970s witnessed wholesale and radical change.

I am not, repeat not, saying this was a bad thing.  Having grown up under Jim Crow, and having seen the University of North Carolina deny my mother a chance for an advanced degree because it refused to admit married women into certain professional programs, I have no nostalgia for Tara.  Count me in with the carpetbaggers, scalawags and civil rights activists; I’m marching with Martin, not sulking with Scarlett.

But it has given the United States a complicated and kinky relationship to our national past.  The racist, Indian-killing, woman-oppressing America of the past was not a perfect society, but it was the source of the values that enabled us to grow.  Disentangling the good from the bad and finding a way for society to connect ever more deeply with the good in our roots without resuscitating old evils is one of the essential skills national leaders need.  A country like ours, needing both to reject and to embrace the past in complex and subtle ways, is a hard country to lead.  Unfortunately, our leadership class — impatient with the “bitter clingers” — sometimes doesn’t even seem to be trying.

The leadership class of a country like ours needs to exemplify and to teach smart patriotism: a deep love of country that expresses itself in a concern for the well being of our fellow Americans, a sense of personal dignity and economic restraint, a willingness to set the example of sacrifice for the common good.  Progressive taxation is a poor substitute for the kind of progressive patriotism that we need.

Too many American intellectuals today spend their time mocking popular expressions of American exceptionalism and other forms of patriotic thought without working to create and promote a richer vision of the country, a deeper and wiser patriotism that connects with the sentiments of ordinary Americans and raises them to a wider and more magnanimous plane.  It is worth going back to read some of Daniel Webster’s great patriotic orations like the Second Reply to Haynesor the speech of March 7, 1850 to ask how in today’s circumstances we can articulate a vision of our union that can equally inspire its defense and its reform.

A leadership class is responsible for, among other things, giving a voice to the feelings of the nation and doing so in a way that enables the nation to advance and to change.  Most of the American establishment today is too ignorant of and too squeamish about the history and language of American patriotism to do that job.  In the worst case, significant chunks of the elite have convinced themselves that patriotism is in itself a bad and a dangerous thing, and have set about to smother it under blankets of politically correct disdain.

This will not end well.

The Evaporation of Religion:

The religion gap between the elite and the rest of the country is a big part of the problem — and in more ways than one.  I can’t help but notice that the abandonment of serious religion by most of the American elite has coincided with a massive collapse in both the public and private morality of the American establishment.  Kids who weren’t raised in church or synagogue or mosque, who were taught that ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ were simplistic categories in a complex moral world of shades of gray, who were told that their highest moral duty was to be true to their inner passions, who were the first generation in American history to be raised in a Scripture-free educational medium, turn into self-indulgent, corner-cutting, self-centered adults.

What a surprise!  We raised a generation of bright kids without a foundation in religion, and they’ve grown up and gone to Wall Street.  We never told them that the virtuous life was both necessary and hard, that character was something that had to be built step by step from youth, that moral weakness was both contemptible and natural: and we are shocked,shocked! when, placed in proximity to large sums of loose cash, they grab all they can.

Religion is no guarantee of righteousness; Elmer Gantry is not the only sticky-fingered preacher in the history of the world.  But at least in western history when the culture and habits of mind of an entire social milieu have lost touch with their cultural foundations in ethical monotheism, trouble is usually on the way.  The estrangement from religion is also an estrangement from the ideas and cultural values that bind society into a workable whole.

The French aristocrats laughed at the manners and the morals of the common people and ridiculed the faith that lit the darkness and softened the harsh conditions of ordinary lives.  Enlightened and cosmopolitan, the establishment mocked the attachment of the ignorant peasants to the king.  The well educated, well connected elites accepted no limits on their ability to convert their social privilege into personal wealth; they accepted no limits on the gratification of their physical desires — flaunting their romantic affairs in the same spirit in which they feasted at Versailles while the gaunt peasants starved.  They used and abused to the fullest all the privileges that came with their status while mocking and rejecting any sense of duty and obligation.

It was fun while it lasted.”

Source: 

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2011/05/12/establishment-blues/

Note:  We, as God, family and country loving Americans, must remain vigilant and keep our eyes on the ball and not be distracted by the relentless propaganda being fed to us on a daily basis as part of this President and his minion’s transformation strategy.

My following blog posts contain numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

Have the “power elite” and pseudo-experts covertly sold us corruption disguised as freedom?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/have-the-“power-elite”-and-pseudo-experts-covertly-sold-us-corruption-disguised-as-freedom/

Faith of Our Forefathers!

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/faith-of-our-forefathers/

Is it important to understand the Marxist assault on the foundations of our system?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/01/27/is-it-important-to-understand-the-marxist-assault-on-the-foundations-of-our-system/

Note: If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts, please copy web site and paste it on your browser.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may be considered controversial is being censored-what happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

“God Bless & Keep Our USA Safe”

Semper Fi!

Jake

This is a blatant disregard for America and its citizens to be so lackidasical as those workers were posed to be. In not assisting to thwart the assault on that woman is an outrage against McDonalds Corporation and its fundamental stand in America as to serving anyone, anytime and reaping their profits as they do.

Policies and Procedures were thrown out the door right behind their counter, as the employees just stood around and watched.

Cause and Effect?

Video Violence allowed to thrive in America is partly to blame here upon both sides of this issue.

1) On the part of the attackers, I'm not sure what purposed the incident I've just watched, I wasn't there, and neither were any of us watching or at least hearing the reports. Yet, video gaming in this country should have its course nearly completed by now and HALTED once and for all.

2) On the part of the Employees, as so called Innocent By standers, and impartial witnesses to this attack, to cowardice as part and parcel of company policy, video gaming in the effect that they're so full of the Blood, guts, and gore, that their (even subtle) Human compassion was hacked up and spit upon the floor of that restaraunt.

To put it nicely, yet not to the affect of Political Correctness:

"Don't Step There, Until It Dries!" mentality in America should be a WAKE UP call to the societal dysfunction here in this country.

How can we call this country GREAT when this kind of garbage is taking place, video taped, and broadcast within the realms of any media is a sham and shame upon the American Right.

Stop it NOW!

In response to my blog at www.mymiraclemessage.com  “In God We Trust,” on May 16, “how to make money fast” said, “My spouse and i were really more than happy that Peter could round up his web research with the precious recommendations he acquired through the blog (my blog). It’s not at all simplistic to simply always be giving away guidelines which some others have been trying to sell. So we recognize we need you to give thanks to for this. The most important explanations you’ve made, the easy site navigation, the relationships you will give support to instill – it is mostly fantastic, and it is facilitating our son in addition to the family recognize that the topic is interesting, which is rather fundamental. Thanks for all! btw this is my website about Low Self Esteem Symptoms.”

I’m receiving a lot of comments like this one, young people reading my blogs and understanding what I’m telling them.  All this fear politicians instill in the gullible of old people being left to eat dog food is not impressing the young who know they are being taken by political hacks.

Talk about getting taken, President Obama asks the American people if we are not asking too much of him to ask that he protect our southern border. Perhaps, said he, we want him to dig a mote along the border and put alligators in it.  Be very suspicious of Obama’s remarks.  He is extremely treacherous.  Not only has Obama not secured our southern border, he has not helped the sick economy; unemployment is higher than when he took office; he has run up the national debt to an unsustainable level;  America is weak and getting weaker.  Division is great in America.  When you see Republicans talking out of both sides of their mouths—no answers to very pressing questions, you have every reason to believe you are getting taken.   

With our southern border upon, it has been reported that the State Department is making it impossible for some people to get a passport. I’m a disabled World War II veteran. The VA asked me these questions:  Did I feel stressed?  Did I feel threatened?   Did I feel like doing harm to someone? If I had answered yes to any of the questions, I would have lost my right to carry a concealed weapon. The VA would have reported it to Homeland Security.  Veterans, be forewarned. Be aware that Obama is watching you. You know Obama not looking out for you.  The Obama administration has gone on record as considering veterans potential terrorists.  While he’s giving guns to Mexican criminals, who have shot and killed border patrol agents, he is going strong on the elimination of guns to American citizens, says the National Rifle Association.

President Obama, a Roosevelt Democrat, has for his agenda “collective salvation,” ortransformation to Marxism.  Franklin D. Roosevelt, according to some of America’s most prominent historians, was one of America’s greatest presidents. They are completely oblivious of undeniable facts.  I’ve been here to watch it all take place, from Roosevelt’s beginning. I’m a World War II veteran who saw combat in Germany, and one of the few World War II veterans, who served in the ETO 15 months and then sent to fight the Japs.  The war ended with me on the high seas. I was in the Army of Occupation in Japan.  

In all but four of my working years, I was an entrepreneur fighting both government and competition to survive.  What a shame that after fighting for freedom I would have to fight the IRS. Obama, furthering Roosevelt’s great cause, redistribution of the nation’s wealth, according to his conception of fairness, a distinction is to be made. Government, no different than private industry, concerned with growth,  government growth  solely concerned with spending what private industry produces, until private industry cannot exist without government help, socialism is the result.  More than half of America, thanks to Roosevelt’s Fabian Socialism, today depends on government. The power lies in Big Labor, Big Money, Big Government, the people pawns, the name of the game, might makes right,  I don’t think that is so great for the people. I don’t think you could call that progressive, and where are the Republicans? You don’t know because they are beating about the bush.  It doesn’t hurt me in my present circumstances.  I’m being rewarded for my former effort to defeat the income tax.

We humans were created with reason and logic; we’re not of insect mentality.  We are not here to do Fabian Socialism’s philosophy, for the good of all.  It goes against human nature.  There is no better example than my own case. In 1973, a year in which I made zero income, and owed capital gains tax, I wrote Attorney General William B. Saxbe a letter, stating therein that the United States was unconstitutional in its implementation of federal income tax. Double digit inflation made the land I sold worth double what I paid and the dollars I received worth half as much. I had no capital gain and yet the government was treating dollars worth half as much as 100 percent taxable.  I paid an income tax when I had no income.  The government took my existence and gave it to somebody else.

Saxbe forwarded my letter to the IRS. The IRS doesn’t make federal income tax law, the IRS informed me. Congress makes the law.  The IRS wrote that Congress has authorized the IRS to take, in the name of tax, up to 100 percent of the taxpayer’s income, notwithstanding capital gains.  Black’s Law Dictionary defines it as “legal fraud,  or fraud implied or inferred  by law or made out by construction.”  In that more than half of the American people  benefit from this out-and-out fraud, or at least think they benefit, and the majority rules, or better said, when might makes right, the taxpayer can be taxed out of existence. This government of the people, for the people prefers after me you come first government.  It will not be long until government will be killing people who don’t agree.  

It remains in the law that when one has a personal stake in the outcome, he or she is permitted to take his or her cause to court, in the case of income tax, to the tax court.  No matter what, the taxpayer is not going to get anywhere by claiming the income tax is unconstitutional.  It can’t be helped, not anymore  than runaway spending can be helped.  They go together.

In any event, nobody but a fool would try to challenge this fraud.  I did.  The outraged IRS called me “a Fifth Amendment Freak.  The IRS wasn’t prepared for what I did, nor were the courts. What I did just doesn’t happen.  On my own, I went through the whole legal process.  Had I have hired a lawyer it would have cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.  Even if I won, no court would have awarded my lawyer the legal cost. The government thinks it has taxpayers right where it wants them. The Department of Justice and courts accommodated me to the extent that I took my case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Remember my letter to the Attorney General, which he forwarded to the IRS?  He was forced to appear against me, with a pack of lies,  in the Supreme Court. To be sure, the Supreme Court dismissed me. I went public.  A front page story appeared in The Palm Beach Post.  The IRS hung itself with its own rope—and ate crow on the front page.  “A Fifth Amendment Freak?” The cat was out of the bag. Much to government’s chagrin, I proved my personal power.   

I now have my own blog. Since last February, I’ve received 6,000 favorable comments.  On the other hand, in spite of your complaints on this blog; in spite of the fact that the statistics indicate the people are against the excesses in taxing and spending,  on our side,  none of it has caused government to change directions.  Since more than half of the American people depend on government, what you get from the politicians is doubletalk. Complaining will get you nowhere.  Unfortunately, you end with zip. Say I to the Tea Party, “Come to the party.”  

More comments today on:

www.mymiraclemessage.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=121&action=edit

Hello Website owner. I really enjoy this posting in addition as the web site all in all! That piece of writing is particularly plainly written and also really very easily understandable. Your existing Blog site theme is impressive likewise! Would certainly be excellent to understand exactly where My partner and i can get that. Please maintain up the terrific career. We demand even more this type of internet masters for example you on the web and in addition significantly less spammers. Amazing man!

http://www.mymiraclemessage.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=154&action=edit

Your weblog appears incredible – complete with top quality content.. and so on. I feel you might get even far better good results with including some extra video clips and photographs. What do you believe. Despite the fact that I’ve bookmarked it. Thank you.

http://www.mymiraclemessage.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=286&action=edit

Great write-up, I’m regular visitor of one’s site, maintain up the excellent operate, and It is going to be a regular visitor for a lengthy time.

http://www.mymiraclemessage.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=52&action=edit

Outstanding document and that i favor your attitude towards enhancing standards. Many thanks for putting this materials up. That is Exactly what I have been looking for.

Pamela Geller on Fox Business: Obama's Birth Certifcate 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AArF2jLEIOs  

Pam Geller is from ATLASSHRUGS 

They left out a whole lot of stuff. [But at least they are talking about it]

....Dan, NY

On the "Certificate of Live Birth"  Obama's father has his age listed as

being 25 years old. Several documents state that Obama Sr. was born

on June 18, 1934 which would have made him 27 years old in 1961.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf

See FOIA request show 1934 & 1936 [Univ. of Hawaii list him as born June 18, 1934]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/54015762/Barack-Hussein-Obama-Sr-Immigration-File  

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=293113   

Then there is the "Rubber" Certified Stamp at the bottom which spells

the word  "THE"  as "TXE".  The first short form "Certification of Live Birth"  has it spelled correctly. Its quite obvious that it was done on purpose.

Whitehouse  copy

March 2011

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=298101 

There are several other anomolies on the alleged BC . These are just a few.  Let's see if they ever get "specific" on Fox News and invite certified Experts on the show to prove the errors.

Posted on San Diego Reader-By Walter Mencken-On May 11, 2011:

“TAKING A LONG WALK OFF A SHORT PIER, POINT LOMA — It wasn’t supposed to go down like this. When San Diego’s High Tech High International was named as one of six candidates nationwide to receive a commencement address from president Barack Obama this year, it was supposed to be a validation of how far the fledgling school had come in its first decade of existence. Chief administrative officer Ben Daley boasted that the selection proved the value of his school’s emphasis on “producing meaningful work for a real audience — making things that have lasting value and presenting them to professionals in the field.”

Now, he may be wishing that his students had kept their latest class project to themselves. In a good-natured effort to sweeten the pot for the president prior to his final decision, High Tech High seniors Ramesh Bhangoo and Christina Rivera decided to subject Obama’s recently-released “long-form” birth certificate to the sort of typographic scrutiny given to the so-called “Killian documents” that ultimately led to the resignation/retirement of CBS reporter Dan Rather.

“Remember how the right-wing wackos went nuts in 2004 over those documents that showed how Bush was basically AWOL from the Texas National Guard in the ’70s?” asks Bhangoo. “That guy at Little Green Footballs posted that gif file showing how a memo supposedly typed 30 years ago matched up to a Microsoft Word doc with proportionally spaced font. Of course, they didn’t actually prove that the documents were forgeries, but the fallout was enough to take down Rather, and the whole mess probably helped Bush win in ’04.”

“All this ‘birther’ bullshit sounded like more of the same to us,” adds Rivera. “We knew that the people who believed that Obama was born in Kenya — and that his Hawaiian birth certificate was a fake, and that he therefore had no constitutional right to be president — wouldn’t be convinced by this long-form release. When you’re crazy, you’re crazy, and you can always find a way to justify your craziness. But we figured it couldn’t hurt to at least head them off on this whole typography question. Here at High Tech High, we knew we had the equipment, the training, and the critical thinking skills required to do just that.”

“Yeah, we did,” concluded Bhangoo. “Damn it.”

The title of the students’ report on their work says it all: “Say It Ain’t So: An Inquiry into the Validity of ‘President’ Obama’s Long-Form Birth Certificate.” “We tried to think like the nutjobs,” recalls Rivera.

“We started by asking why they inserted the green-pattern background underneath the original text. Then we started looking for other obvious oddities. Long story short — yeah, this is kind of a fake.”

“You don’t really have to look further than the child’s name,” says Bhangoo. “The way the ‘r’ in ‘Barack’ differs in all sorts of ways from the rest of the letters, the way the green background fades away around certain parts of ‘Hussein’ and‘Obama.’ It’s a Photoshop job, and not even a particularly careful one.

We did a little followup work and found a death certificate for a Herbert Harrison O’Brien from the same hospital, dated August 5, 1961. The date of birth on that death certificate is given as August 4, same as little Barack Hussein Obama. But the funny thing is, there’s no corresponding birth certificate for baby Herbert. Where did it go? And why doesn’t Obama’s mother sign his birth certificate until August 7, three days after her son is born? By then, we were too depressed to dig any deeper.”

“Our commitment to ethics really sets us apart at High Tech High,” says fellow senior and commencement ceremony chair Rishika Daryanani. “This case is no exception. Thanks to these two jerkfaces, now we have to disinvite America’s first black president and maybe get him kicked out of office, too. Thanks a lot, guys. Maybe we can get Donald Trump to fill in.”

Source:

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2011/may/11/sdqt-schooled/

That birth certificate is phony-Posted on WND.com-By Joseph Farah-On May 11, 2011:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=297245

Note:  We, as God, family and country loving Americans, must remain vigilant and keep our eyes on the ball and not be distracted by the relentless propaganda being fed to us on a daily basis as part of this President and his minion’s transformation strategy.

My following blog post contains numerous articles and/or blog posts and videos that relate to this disturbing issue-You Decide:

Could the President’s newly released COLB be a forgery?

http://weroinnm.wordpress.com/2011/04/29/could-the-president’s-newly-released-colb-be-a-forgery/

Note: If you have a problem viewing any of the listed blog posts, please copy web site and paste it on your browser.  Sure seems like any subject matter that may be considered controversial is being censored-what happened to free speech?-You Decide.

“Food For Thought”

“God Bless & Keep Our USA Safe”

Semper Fi!

Jake

WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

Socialism is a code word for Communist-lite.  Socialism would provide the elite and the powerful the opportunity to get rid of the middle class and to create a bottom class so that there are only two classes of people, the controllers and those they control.  They want to get rid of any chances for prosperity.  Why?  Prosperity gives people some hope for the future.  You can't control people when they are hopeful and feed them a line of bull about true equality.  I had the distinct privilege of walking the streets of East Berlin several years before the WALL between East and West Berlin was taken down.  I can tell you that in this supposed showcase of Communism (note that East Berlin was their best work) there was true equality....yes indeed.....everyone was EQUALLY POOR.  But make no mistake there were those who were in charge, roughly 3 percent of the population, who ran the show and lived well while the remainder of the population lived in utter POVERTY.  The buildings were in terrible condition, people were not happy i.e. no smiling and no cheerfulness, people lived in look alike apartments, the lines were long for those waiting to buy food and we were instructed not to buy food as we would be denying food to those who really need it.  That translates into shortages of food.  Why shortages?  Because there were no incentives to produce as there is in those 'so called' greedy capitalistic countries like the U.S.  Why produce when you can't keep the fruits of your labor!  But there certainly were no shortages for the Communist party members who were well fed, well educated and dressed.  The younger population of the U.S. who voted for Socialism in the last election do not have a reality based understanding of history and have been brainwashed by their brain dead teachers who in turn have been brainwashed to believe that socialism is an answer to the worlds problems.  Well I am here to tell you socialism equates to starvation and material and spiritual deprivation on steriods.  There is not much difference between socialism and communism.  Who are funding and encouraging the socialists?  They are the equivalent of the Communist elite.  Only today these characters are not Communist party members but the super rich and super powerful who want to rule the entire world, i.e., one world government.   Look at what they have done in Europe with their European Union.  It would appear now that it is beneficial to the people but lets see how beneficial it will be in the future once they have the European Union all nailed down and under their complete control!

WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

The following comments were made by New York City Mayor John Haylan in 1927:

"These international bankers and .... interests control the majority of the newspapers and magazines in this country. They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government....

The warning of Theodore Roosevelt has much timeliness today, for the real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over City, State, and nation... It seizes in its long and powerful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection...

To depart from mere generalisations, let me say that at the head of this octopus are the ..... interest and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes.

They practically control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use the leading men of private organizations, and resort to every device to place in nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the dictates of corrupt big business...

These international bankers and ....interests control the majority of newspapers and magazines in this country."
John Hylan, Mayor of New York 1927, ¹

These warnings fell on deaf ears, drowned out by the music and excitement of the roaring 20's. People don't tend to complain much in times of prosperity, so the money changers used this boom time they had created to defuse any complaints about their growing control.

1. (Former New York City Mayor John Haylan speaking in Chicago and quoted in the March 27, 1927, New York Times)

WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

Tea Party.org Founder and President Dale Robertson will be undergoing back surgery this week, after suffering for 20 years from an injury incurred while in service to this nation in the U.S. Navy.  His service has never faltered or wavered, as exemplified by this fine organization, TeaParty.org.  Let's offer up the prayers for a successful surgery, a quick and effective recovery, and the return of his presence among us all the more invigorated.  Keep Dale and his family in your frequent and daily prayers.  And continue to join us on Tea Party Radio, because the show will CONTINUE to GO ON!!! 

Contact information for Tea Party Radio is on the Command Page, as I'm sure you are aware.  We'll be live Mondays and Wednesdays at 9 p.m. EST with a range of topics essential to restoring this Republic.  Call-in number is 646-200-4032.  I will be in hosting for Dale Monday, with co-host Leah Lax.  Our other host/co-host David Toy will also be out due to a medical procedure, but hopefully will be able to call in.  He needs your prayers too!!!  ( "Lord, we pray that you knew what you were doing when you blessed David with his sarcasm/wit affliction...Amen.")  Hahaha!!!  Love ya, man!!!  God Bless you all!

 Reading through all these comments and posts, I come away with a feeling of great sorrow and frustration that the basic single most important issue before us is being tossed away like so much chaff because it's...wellll...inconvenient.

I'm not a "Birther."  I just want to see the damn proof, and we get a falsified document AGAIN.  As if we needed proof that the man in the Oval Office is completely anti-American as demonstrated repeatedly by his actions and usurpations.  DAILY.

These are CRIMES that make Richard Nixon look like a saint.  This is the intentional destruction of Western civilization on an international scale, by destroying the one and only true beacon of liberty and freedom the world has EVER KNOWN.  By intentionally debasing and destroying the only monetary base that has generated more wealth and prosperity WORLDWIDE the earth has ever seen. 

And now Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the Constitution of the United States just needs to be IGNORED???

HAVE YOU LOST YOUR FREAKING EVER-LOVING MINDS????????????