Reuters spins fake news on Supreme Court nominee Garland

Lawrence Hurley writes this article on Reuters about the refusal of the Supreme Court of a lawsuit that sought to force the Senate to vote on the confirmation of Merrick Garland to SCOTUS.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-garland-idUSKBN14824O?il=0

In Hurleys’ first nod to fake news spin, he calls Garland a “a moderate appeals court judge“. When a Mockingbird Media organ says somebody is “moderate” or a position is “moderate”, they are speaking a foreign language, they are not speaking English as in standard English. “Moderate” is a subjective word, besides, and so it says nothing about whether a court appointee is truly moderate.

Moderate, according to the most relevant Merriam-Webster definition:

“professing or characterized by political or social beliefs that are not extreme”

Garland’s past decisions show how Mockingbird Media and the Mockingbird Education Complex has abused the language to try to promote Orwellian Newspeak.

Senator Pat Toomey-PA points out that in cases involving the EPA that came before his court, Garland ruled in favor of the usual EPA unconstitutional over-reach in 90 percent of those cases. In the few times he ruled against the EPA, he said it was not enough abuse [my word] of regulatory powers.

In one such case, the court ruled that a rational cost-benefit comparison was “irrelevant”. So if, for example, saving the cross-eyed black-and-white purple polka-dot people eater would bankrupt the national treasury, this is irrelevant? Garland’s opinion was over-ruled at the Supreme Court, where Scalia joined the majority.

But Reuters says this is a “moderate”.

At the time of Ruth Bader Ginzburg’s nomination by Bill Clinton, she was at the time “regarded as a moderate”. If you dig down into why she was so regarded, it was because that was the usual Mockingbird Press talking point, not because of any objective “moderation” measuring stick.

After all, this was an ACLU attorney. Come on, “moderate”?

Her reason for saying she thought Roe v Wade was a mistake? Because it galvanized pro-life opposition to prenatal infanticide (the euphemism is “abortion”).

Now Merrick Garland has ruled against the Second Amendment in a case named by the NRA, where his opinion was that the right to bear arms was not an individual right.

No matter how much Mockingbird Press and Media mocks us by tireless repetition otherwise, the right to bear arms is an individual right and to say otherwise, that is an extremist position.

To say that any one of the rights listed in the Bill of Rights is a collectivist right and not an individual right, is an extremist position. To say that any group, as such, has a “right” based on their differences from other groups, that is an extremist collectivist deviation from the way most Americans have thought since independence.

Reuters also says that the refusal by the Senate has “little precedent in U.S. history”. This is not just spin, it is a lie.
For example,the Senate Democrats did a six-month “filibuster” against the nomination of Miguel Estrada to federal court. Estrada withdrew his name from consideration 28 months after he was nominated. The Democrats objected for ideological reasons while claiming other excuses.

“Little precedent”, Reuters? There is the matter of both Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama trying to block a vote on the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.

Well, at least they avoided the more obvious lie of “unprecedented” that some lying political mouths used.

All you power players trying to get in on a piece of Satan’s award of political power documented in Matthew 4 of the Bible, remember that “God is not mocked”, and “whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap”.

But in Isaiah 1:18 God also promised that if you “reason together” with him, “though your sins be as scarlet they will be white as snow”.  And Jesus promised that “he that cometh to me”, he will in “no wise cast out”.

 

Advertisement

Can things get any more crazy?

CALIFORNIA  ATTY-GENERAL MORE WORRIED ABOUT PERMITS THAN BABY ORGAN TRAFFICKING

Most people who follow the news chatter know by now that a Planned Parenthood executive was caught on video talking about how the price of a specific baby organ depends on the disparate difficulty it causes the abortionist during the “extraction”, a euphemism for prenatal infanticide. The word “crunch” came up several times.

So what does the Attorney General of California promise to do? Root out this evil incentive for baby parts trafficking? No, she’s going to investigate whether there is any permit or license that the messenger forgot to get in this filming, and if the messenger violated any of the minuscule regulations on such matters.

Of course with the massive Hollywood press industry in the middle and paparazzi protections in place, maybe they’ll have some difficulty.

After all, nobody protested, or requested such an investigation, of Michael Moore, who pulled the same kind of stunt on Clint Eastwood for his anti-gun film.

Some in Congress are indignantly talking about investigating. These are politicians mostly of the party that has had several chances to shut down the massive federal funding this infanticide industry gets, and in the several states, and have not done so. Maybe somebody has the inside scoop on these reluctant pro-life politicians.

And `let’s give a nod to those Democrat Party Congressmen who could have blocked the infanticide-friendly Obamacare law, but were pushed, cajoled and even lobbied personally by President Barack Obama himself to obey. Bart Stupak was the “last hope”, he sacrificed his political career to what he had to know was a lying promise from the president’s mouth, and dragged the few fellow pro-life Democrats to defeat in the next election.

Whatever did Obama *really* say to Stupak in that secret meeting? What incentives, arguments, threats?

JUDGE ORDERS CHICAGO TAXPAYERS TO PAY FOR UNIONS AND POLITICIANS’ LYING PROMISES

How can anybody say that there is government “by the people” if the elected politicians can conspire with union bosses to sign contracts that steal other people’s money to fund public employee pensions?

Every legislature that burdens future legislatures and future generations with a growing debt and theft by inflation is committing a robbery that no non-governmental criminal organization can match in its brazen immorality, its arrogance, committed under a cover story of playing fair and favoring the poor.
But then again, the voters go ho-hum and too many of them think they’re voting for “fairness”, when demagogues promise to “help the poor” and soak the rich. They ARE the rich people!

WHO SHOULD VOTE?

“Immigrants aren’t the only ones who shouldn’t be voting”:
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/07/ryan-mcmaken/immigrants-shouldnt-vote/

Ryan makes a good point here. People think it’s really bad when a mayor gives the garbage utility contract to his own company. That’s obviously a conflict of interest. Nepotism is a dirty word.

And yet  seniors have a vote on who can use other people’s extorted moneys to give to them.  Welfare recipients vote on who takes other people’s money to give to them. The long list does not just include not only food stamp recipients, Medicaid, healthcare subsidies for the poor, Section Eight housing. There are nationally protected industries and unions who benefit materially from government policies. Students get federal aid and think it’s a great program.

We have a zillion laws against conflicts of interest in working for government and in working for companies. In many cases it is a crime for a company employee to receive gifts in exchange for favoring one vendor over another.

The same idea applied to political elections would make elections much more fair.

If you get any benefits at all from government, you give up your “right to vote” on who pays you those benefits, whether it’s a job, or direct subsidies, or any program moneys at all. Subsidies would include of course all corporate subsidies and the effect would apply to all employees of any said company. That means all of them. It means all organizations that work on electing anybody.

 

Corporations would have less political clout that way. Welfare recipients too, but nobody wants to get a label of Scrooge. Private companies even now budget lots of money for “charities”.

A person seeking employment would consider this. No more political promises to “bring home the bacon”. No more representatives pushing to allocate bases to their home towns and messing with the voter base that got them their job, even though they cannot vote.

Even some of these staged shows the industry calls “reality shows” do not allow contestants to vote for themselves.

(The industry likes to call them “reality” shows, but who in the real world normally goes naked in a bug-infested jungle full of briers, bristles and thorns to see if they can last 21 days? They are game shows, innovative as they may be)

 

Obamacare: Nightmare of 68,000 new diagnosis codes for ICD-10 including the bizarre

I now work for a healthcare company, and before that a hospital software company, and be it knownst that the Obamacare legal abomination carries a LOT more than just the lying insurance cover.

INTERNATIONAL STATISTICAL CLASSIFICATION OF DISEASES AND RELATED HEALTH PROBLEMS.

They are requiring more conversion by more healthcare companies, and smaller ones, to electronic claims and payments processing and other non-insurance requirements. They are requiring conversion of the electronic diagnosis codes from the ICD-9 list to a new ICD-10 list, with at least ten times more codes.

Look at this number thoughtfully: The ICD-10 requirements include some 68,000 codes for the presumably 68,000 different diagnoses that a doctor might make for a patient. Presumably each healthcare company will have to decide how much to charge for each diagnosis, and possibly negotiate rates with each insurance company separately.

The codes include such idiotic details such “struck by a turtle”, “struck by a sea lion”, “accidental striking against or bumped into by another person, initial encounter”, “headache associated with sexual activity”, ”Pedestrian on foot injured in collision with roller-skater, subsequent encounter.”

Those were found at:

“ICD-10 involves an ‘enormous amount of complexity’”:

http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/10-most-outlandish-kinds-icd-10-codes

I’ve seen some of the more outlandish ones myself. With all the web pages a search brings up for “ICD-10 ridiculous”, it’s truly hard to tell which ones are made-up and which ones are spoofs. One listed “cat-scratch fever”, a la Ted Nugent song.

This may well create more too-big-to-fail companies. There is a mad rush in the healthcare industry to consolidate. Smaller hospitals are begging for bigger chains to buy them out. I haven’t seen specific reference to it, but I’ll bet this includes a LOT of “non-profit” medical companies selling to “profit-based” chains, or other “non-profit” organizations.

The company I work for is snapping up smaller ones everywhere in the country.

Many in the software industry are calling this “bigger than Y2K”, and I think it is. I worked for a small air conditioning equipment distribution company at that time, and changed something like over 600 tables, 1200 “views”, and 1,800 programs. This may affect more. It most certainly has involved LOTS and LOTS of typing and editing and changing going on. Every affected company, corporation and partnership affected, has to finish its own preparation enough to set up test environments so they can jointly test with EVERY other organization they do related business with.

One writer says it will cost trillions of dollars in costs to the medical industry. At my small-ish employer, it is reasonable to say it likely costs millions of dollars in developer pay, and pay for medical diagnosis coders time, and their training, plus all the accounting that goes into the use of the equipment and executives’ time. And all the extra personnel needed to both make the transition, and now the ongoing increase in costs associated with this crazy mess of codes and the multiplication of both human and programming mistakes.

See, this is the problem when people believe that a government can do better than God in sorting things out and taking care of people.

It will never be known how many people will suffer because of so many resources and so much time wasted on obeying government commands to comply with rules that bureaucrats make to justify their salaries, thinking they are helping people.

It’s not just skyrocketing medical costs that will result from this abominable law. It is the resources that are wasted in making life easier for government officials and politicians and giving them yet more socialized control over the lives of individuals. It’s easy to cry foul when a cop shoots a man in cold blood caught on video. It’s not so easy to consider the unemployed teens and unskilled poor who are locked out of the labor market by minimum wage laws. It’s not so easy to consider the invisible harm done to the sick, elderly, and disabled by laws that pretend to expand healthcare but shrink it. It’s not so easy to see the lost jobs and lost wages for the poor and under-employed that lose out to the increased tax burden imposed on their employers. It’s an easy mark to criticize giant corporate profits, but not so easy to see the way the regulations themselves benefit the biggest corporations and keep smaller competitors down. It’s easy to hear the demagogues complain about greedy corporations, but with a government-compliant big-corporation media, it’s not so easy to see how those same “greedy corporations” benefit the demagogues themselves.

Socialism is a lie. Like a friend once told me who had lived in Russia during the days of the Soviet Union, socialism does not exist, there is no such thing. It’s just a trade of one set of rulers for another one with less pretension. “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss”.

But let’s be clear. Obamacare is a bipartisan program. It is an implementation of a “conservative” Heritage Foundation plan published in the 1990s, it is Romney-care writ large, it is Hillary-care recharged. Charged to us, making us foot the bill. Let the refrain sound throughout the land: Obamacare is Hillary’s 1993 plan, Phase One.

“But be not deceived. God is not mocked, for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.”

 

JFK, the Cold War, Krushchev, Allende, and Zelaya

In general, as a convinced anarcho-capitalist, I agree with most of what Mr. Hornberger said in his video linked here about the JFK assassination:

http://www.voicesofliberty.com/video/the-facts-of-the-jfk-assassination-and-what-we-should-learn-from-them/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_campaign=VOL&utm_medium=post

Except mainly for one brief glancing comment about Salvador Allende. Not his fault, necessarily, though, considering the totality of the news blackout on certain aspects of the way things were then.

That said, once you learn some facts that are publicly available, and some that aren’t so much, there is no way one can say that Salvador Allende wanted a peaceful coexistence. There are other aspects of those events that say different, most of which were suppressed by the international press cartel for its own reasons, or for the reasons of those who run it. If the same sequence of events were to happen today, there would be a LOT of facts coming to light on all sides of the issues.

If I had doubt about that before, they were all blown away during 2009, when the entire force of the international news cartel Establishment threw its entire propaganda machine into supporting the same story line about events in Honduras, contrary to the truth. Every single official representative of every single member of the United Nations supported the s
ame story color-coordinated story line as the Media Cartel.

In Honduras there were even large demonstrations outside the offices of CNNE (CNN Espanol) demanding they remove their reporter and stop telling lies about events there.

That’s why I did some research about Allende. Most of what’s in the public libraries is tilted in one direction but even between the lines in the leftist shill press there is some truth to be had.

ALLENDE WAS NOT INTERESTED IN PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE.

One connection I discovered between the Honduras and the Chile stories was Jose Miguel Insulza, the Secretary General of the OAS. He was the chief political adviser to Salvador Allende in that regime, which had declared itself loudly as a Marxist government. Not just socialist, but Marxist. They saw the existing economic system of Chile something to overturn.

Allende brought not only Fidel Castro to visit, but he invited Castro-sympathizer revolutionaries from all the countries around Latin America. This was the 1970s when it was clear, without even believing government press, that Cuba was sending material support to violent leftist insurgencies across the country, and that was also with Soviet support.*

Okay, as socialism is ruinous on any economy, and catastrophic if administered as a shock treatment, Allende’s policies and its effects did just that. I can believe they had help from the CIA, but this process needed no CIA help. Socialism did the same thing that government interference has always done throughout thousands of human history, including the Soviet Union, only faster in the industrial age (which would have collapsed within months from 1917 without help from  Western banking capital).

As libertarians SHOULD know but always forget to point out, when the CIA brings down a socialist regime it is only accelerating a political process that occurs naturally, the same as to the USA regime. From what I understand, that’s just simple Austrian economics.

Anyway, Allende and his administrators (including Insulza) was already into his plan to build his own alternative military structure, just like Obama promised he was going to do in 2008. (Remember that?)

Allende’s regime was stockpiling weapons in government warehouses maintained by political appointees. He was importing experienced (violent) revolutionaries from all around outside his borders. Cubans were invited in (like they were to Venezuela even BEFORE Chavez).

THEN THE SAME CHILE CONGRESS that put the winner of the plurality into power of the general election (well below majority) , finally DEMANDED that the military take action to stop the runaway regime. So they did.

What follows was not pretty. But Chile is in a better condition now that it would have been had the military left Allende to execute the remainder of his totalitarian plans.

JFK somewhat before and toward the end sought peace. Apparently Krushchev did too, in my opinion, his removal being one piece of evidence.

But I doubt that of Allende. I also KNOW that Manuel Zelaya of Honduras in 2009 received the same (better even) coverage that Allende got in 1973. I also know that Roberto Michelletti got the same vitriol (worse really) spun at him that Pinochet got for so many years.

And in the usual leftist shill web sites supported by the usual socialist billionaire-foundation suspects, they still use the same lying rhetoric as back then.

(NOTE: Were there atrocities back then? No doubt. There were also full-blast shootouts between revolutionaries and military troops at those clandestine arms depots. The violent revolutionaries wanting to support the planned totalitarian regime change were called “resistance” against the coup, and the military “golpistas”.

Portugal had a peaceful coup. Libya had a peaceful coup and the West blasted away the ONLY middle-eastern nation and its leader that had denounced its own previous policies, and was a blue ribbon success for peaceful change among Arab countries. The ONLY one where Christians felt safe, women were lifted up in public view, prominently.

Honduras restored constitutionality, which you could call a “coup” but only if you count the stopping of a counter-coup that was already in progress, or restoration of constitutional continuity in power rather than presidential continuity in power.

I am an anarchist, but there things that are worse sometimes that the regime that rules in your land. Ask the Cold-war era refugees from Eastern Europe.

<<————————————>>

*–Remember it didn’t take long for the Soviets to remove Khrushchev after that rapprochement either. (And speaking of facts kept out of general public view, the current Rockefeller patriarch of the day had visited Moscow between both events.

It seems both sides of the Cold War (or their manipulators) wanted to keep the threat levels and military production up, but without actually letting any missiles fly.

Patent law does more harm than good now

Tim Berners-Lee at a Podcast Interview (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Now comes Paul Jacobs, major beneficiary (with reason) of “the patent system” as chairman and CEO, Qualcomm:

http://www.politico.com/sponsor-content/2013/10/congress-dont-destroy-the-patent-system-in-order-to-save-it/?ml=tb&ml=tb

He makes the usual case for protecting the patent system, and says a bill proposed in Congress “aimed at curbing patent infringement lawsuits” would “put at risk” those “patent protections”.

He says his firm “works with companies on both sides of some headline-making patent lawsuits”. And as usual, instead of talking about the cost to his own company, he invokes the image of the little guy. What he doesn’t say is that little guys are the ones most hurt by patent litigation in general:

If the laws are changed to weaken patent protections, many small inventors, like university researchers and start-up innovators burning the midnight oil in their garage, could find themselves unable to protect the fruits of their hard work and investments. In addition, the value of standard essential patents should not be diminished by those who haven’t had a hand in contributing to the standard. They are leveraging the R&D investment of others to build standards compliant products which is healthy for the industry. However, arbitrarily devaluing patents to favor their own commercial interests unfairly tips the scale against the inventor. Who will make the future investments if companies like Qualcomm can’t get a fair return and stop investing and inventing?

What’s missing from the debate is the point-of-view of the inventor.

Really? It would be very interesting to see how much credit is really given to the actual inventors in labs and technology firms –in the form of the revenue differential that comes due to this monopoly grant system.

Did he complain about the bill that kept inventors out in the cold if a really big firm like Paul Jacobs’ can beat him to the Patent Office?

It’s called the “Leahy-Smit American Invents Act”, that changed the patent system from a “first to invent” to a “first to file” system. Under this law, it matters not that YOU invented it, it matters not that somebody stole the idea from YOU, if Qualcomm files first, YOU are screwed. YOU can PROVE that you invented it and they stole it, but they still get the monopoly rights.

Did he complain about that law? Maybe the bill he’s complaining about repeals it?

Here’s what that one did:

(1) It doesn’t matter if you invented it first, if some company that specializes in technology, especially patents, can file the claim first, the guy who got there first is nixed, and the guy who got there first cannot even profit from his own invention.

(2) Some companies might take some technique already in use, some kind of constructed device, in a niche market, for example, and if that company files a patent on it, everybody else has to pay tribute. Including the people who used it first.

(3) The guy who invented the Web, Tim Berners-Lee, communication protocol is not patented. No company would destroy its own PR by doing this, but legally anybody –that means anybody could file the patent and get it. I’m sure they wouldn’t grant it, because it would invite a loud roar from across the land, the techs would give them an earful, and most of all, almost every tech company would have to pay up. Ain’t gonna happen.

Read more on the subject from Stephen Kinsella, a guy on the right side of this issue.

Related articles

• Could Twitter’s patent approach turn off investors? (smartbrief.com)
• Finally, a win against patent trolls (techi.com)
• Massive setback for Android: Apple’s ‘Steve Jobs patent’ reconfirmed for original iPhone (idownloadblog.com)
• Inventors: First Inventor to File is here! (newproductconsulting.me)
• ParkerVision Halted: Jury Finds Qualcomm Infringed Wireless Patents (blogs.barrons.com)

Government “shut down” scary words for good thing: Shut down Obamacare!

Ben Swann (Photo credit: Gage Skidmore)

 

OH yes, I didn’t finish that one thought. When our cousin’s business “shuts down”, it’s not there anymore. The federal government, unfortunately, won’t “shut down”. It will still get taxes coming in. If that’s not enough to pay the bills and service the criminal federal debt, it’s because Congress in times past took stuff on credit that some future Congress would have to pay, not themselves. First, that’s “taxation without [even] representation”.

Second, we the members of the people in the hinterland pay every time that debt ceiling goes up, through the devaluation of the dollar that comes with more dollars in the money supply, whether they be paper dollars or electronic dollars.

Third, since we all pay with the stuff we can no longer buy because of the devalued dollars, therefore all debt, all debt ceiling increases, in the fiat currency dollar, are “stealth” taxation on both the poor and the middle class.

Ron Paul used to expose the Fed Chairman on this fact every time. The “Ron Paul Channel” is up and running, by the way, and so is Ben Swann‘s channel. Recommended.

 

Related articles

• Ted Cruz’s Threat To Shut Down The Government Is Brave And Principled – And That’s Why Republicans Are Upset With Him (businessinsider.com)
• A Government Shutdown Would Actually Be Bullish (businessinsider.com)
• Analyst: Obama Will Raise The Debt Ceiling On His Own And Worry About The Legal Consequences Later (businessinsider.com)
• Obama phones Boehner, says WH won’t negotiate with GOP on debt ceiling (hotair.com)

 

Amazon.com: The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America (9781586489120): David A. Stockman: Books

Reagan Cabinet, 1984 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

http://www.amazon.com/Great-Deformation-Capitalism-Corrupted-Democracy/dp/1586489127

Lots of positive reaction to this book. Add it to your reading list.

A fellow missionary friend of mine who went to college with this guy, David Stockman, pointed out his amazing ability to get the grasp of loads of detail, including specific numbers, in his appearances before Congress in the Reagan years, and his impressions from their college days.

A previous book analyzes why, in his words, the Reagan administration “failed”, and in conversations at the following link from CSpan‘s booktv.com, he points out that many Republicans have some wrong ideas about the Reagan years, myths. Democrat Party cheerleaders and partisans my like those quotes, but even before I read the book, which I plan to do, I suspect those partisans will not like his reasons for saying it.

http://www.booktv.org/Watch/14456/Book+Party+for+David+Stockman+Author+of+The+Great+Deformation+The+Corruption+of+Capitalism+in+America.aspx

Related articles

• The Great Deformation | David Stockman (silveristhenew.com)
• American Fascism (txwclp.org)
• Myths of a New Deal Recovery (txwclp.org)
• Myths of a New Deal Recovery (jewishterrorism.com)
• David Stockman on Paul Krugman (economicpolicyjournal.com)
• Must-See David Stockman Interview (lewrockwell.com)
• A Review of the Great Deformation (financialsurvivalnetwork.com)

Fiscal Cliff: The Reality

Ron Paul at the 2007 National Right to Life Convention, held at Crown Center Hyatt Regency in Kansas City, MO; June 15, 2007, (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The analysis of articles like this one is basic Keynesianism, which means it’s an ignorant piece of crap that it takes a bunch of years in college to learn how to make it sound sophisticated:
http://www.news.com.au/business/markets/fiscal-cliff-whats-a-fiscal-cliff-and-whys-it-called-a-fiscal-cliff-fiscal-cliff/story-e6frfm30-1226531233642

The article made it sound like a “compromise” between taxes and spending would solve the problem coming up on January 1 of 2013.

When has such a “compromise” ever solved “the problem” in the 100 years since the Fed got hold of the currency and banking systems? This is the same problem that has come back again and again every 10 or 20 years, it is the same circular route they’ve gone over, again and again, all these “compromises” only kicked the can down the road some more.

Here’s a real breakdown with details in the clear about what’s really wrong and what’s going to happen on January 1:

http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/transcript-the-great-fiscal-cliff-of-2012-13-part-i-4-50405

(Another perspective comes from not just Patrick Buchanan but others who agree with telling the House to just call the White House bluff. The President is pointing the new media gun at them to extort his will, that’s why all the campaigning after the campaign, but he has a LOT more to lose in the long run, if the Republicans had any guts, or any genuine honesty about all this).

The real “fiscal cliff” is the (for now) slow plummeting in the value of the US dollar, a process that’s been going on from the time the U.S. Congress gave a private bankers’ cartel monopoly control over the United States currency.

THE REAL PROBLEM:

The real problem is too much government spending. Letting the rich invest their resources is NOT the problem. The real problem is too much government doing what government should never do.

Government spending robs the economy of whatever it would otherwise produce with those resources. Instead of the people making their individual decisions to mutual benefit, this government wealth confiscation to get resources to non-sustainable demand, private economy and jobs lose out.

Republicans are addicted to this too, which is why they rush to “surrender” to the Democrats so much to avoid the crises. They pontificate and posture until there is a very public and publicized crisis so they can get cover for caving.

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY ESTABLISHMENT BLEW OFF TWO GREAT OPPORTUNITIES

The Republicans had two opportunities to prove they were honest.

One was in the debt ceiling “crisis” of 2011. The Republicans in the House could have said “Just say no”. In fact they did until the Powers That Be (Boehner) got four of the holdouts to cave in, including the “controversial” Allen West. Maybe they told them if they didn’t they’d cave in their head for them.

Surrender did not suit the (retired) Colonel Allen West very well in the debt ceiling fight, and it did him no good in his re-election campaign. It could be he won in his district in the real numbers, how do 4,000 votes suddenly appear on one side of an election to flip the results?

In fact, the presidential vote looks suspicious. Note that the voters did NOT give any win to the President like the yappers on televised yap shows say, it gave Washington the same stalemated situation they have had.

Boehner is pushing to cave and they will pretty much.

And we will continue our fall off the real fiscal cliff, the fall of the dollar combined with the attack on the economic prosperity engine undertaken by Imperial Washington, now occupied by political enemies of the free market and political liberties…

The other chance they had was the candidacy of Ron Paul and his realistic, pragmatic program for addressing the root problems in Washington. The Party adopted a couple of the most important economic platform points as a nod to reality, the audit of the Fed, and a nod to the gold standard.

In other words, as a Party, if the platform means anything, they admitted they were NOT doing the right thing.

But they also showed they were not serious about being honest with the way the chair broke their own rules to ride roughshod over the Ron Paul delegates and changing rules to keep them down and keep real conservatives out.

Related articles

• Ron Paul: We Already Went Over the Fiscal Cliff (teapartyeconomist.com)
• Fiscal Cliff: Ron Paul Decries Bipartisan Efforts; Predicts Compromise (thenewamerican.com)
• Government Spending is Sending us off the Cliff (tenthamendmentcenter.com)
• Ron Paul: Government Spending Will Push Us Over The Fiscal Cliff – OpEd (eurasiareview.com)
• Ron Paul: Government Spending Will Send Us Over The Fiscal Cliff (silverdoctors.com)
• Headed Toward the 11th Hour Compromise (hawaiireporter.com)
• How far over the ‘fiscal cliff’ could they go? (news.yahoo.com)
• Ron Paul Op-Ed: Liberty Always Loses in the 11th Hour (wealthwire.com)

$16 Trillion Giveaway

After nearly 30 years of fighting the out-of-control Federal Reserve in Washington, my time in Congress is rapidly coming to an end. But what a way to go out!

I am so pleased to tell you about what could be the crowning achievement of my legislative efforts – passing Audit the Fed and exposing its corruption of our money supply and economy.

Earlier this year, my “Audit the Fed” bill passed the House 327 to 98 and had a record number of cosponsors in the Senate.

And because of its overwhelming popularity, Audit the Fed has been added as an official plank of the Republican Party platform.

Our chances of passing Audit the Fed are the best they’ve ever been.

You and I can make history – and help change the course of the country – by passing Audit the Fed through Congress.

Please take a look at the email below from Campaign for Liberty President John Tate for more details.

Campaign for Liberty is on the frontlines of this battle, so I am personally asking you to help them finish this fight with an incredible victory.

Afterwards, please forward this email to your friends and family.

For Liberty,

Ron Paul

Related articles

• $16 Trillion Giveaway (trutherator.wordpress.com)
• Maine GOP: Collins signs on as ‘Audit the Fed’ cosponsor (libertycrier.com)
• 34 Senators Cosponsor Audit the Fed Bill. Is Your Senator MIA? (libertycrier.com)
• Maine GOP: Collins signs on as ‘Audit the Fed’ cosponsor (bangordailynews.com)
• AUDIT THE FED – Bernanke Discusses H.R. 459 (amresolution.com)
• Ben Bernanke’s Love Letters to Congress (silverunderground.com)
• Warns His Creator… (nysun.com)
• The Next Subprime Crisis Is Here: Over $120 Billion In Federal Student Loans In Default (zerohedge.com)
• Federal Reserve had never been public about this or even informed the United States Congress about the $16 trillion dollar bailout (jcjetusa2.wordpress.com)
• 34 Senators Cosponsor Audit the Fed Bill (ronpaulnews.net)

 

Abramoff: Lobbyists for Roberts in 2016 (ie, George WIll is wrong)

John Roberts – Caricature (Photo credit: DonkeyHotey)

Lobbyists for Roberts in 2016:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/lobbyists-for-roberts-in-2016/

Good story. George Will is wrong, the Supreme Court decision with Chief Justice John Roberts unmasking himself as an enemy to the Constitution, this is not a victory for conservatives over the Commerce Clause.

Justice Roberts basically told the Congress, Look, if you want to force anybody to do anything, subject to punishment by fine, just don’t call it a “penalty”. Call the enforcement hit a “tax”.

This is amazing. The people that liked the decision, who want oligarchy-appointed bureacrats to decide what you and your doctor can decide, and who want the insurance-industry complex to get 40,000,000 new customers almost overnight, and for Big Pharma to get a guaranteed coverage market at the expense of all the victims of this dictator’s-dream legislation, of course they’re praising it because they like the result.

Judge Roberts has shown he loves the praises of men rather than the praises of God, or the praises of any honest historical legacy.

With the convoluted and tortured language he used, though, he did more than give Louis Gomert a way to make him look absolutely ridiculous in the majority opinion he wrote. He destroyed his legacy. This decision will go down in history as a big milestone on the road to full-blast tyranny, accelerating the precipitous fall toward the coming economic and social catastrophes that will soon beset the last stronghold of freedom on Earth.

This reach into our medical freedom, health freedom, freedom of medical choice, is just another step in the forced march to the worldwide Beast government dictatorship.

A lot of people will pay for this march with their lives, with their martyrdom, with the physical freedom and political freedom that some nations still respect, but many of those in prison will have free minds, free hearts, free spirits, and souls that will be free for eternity, and that, ladies and gentlemen, is where freedom counts most of all.

He that the Son makes free is free indeed.