Obamacare

I don't know if I can muster any more breath to discuss it.  My head is still spinning.  If you want to get something off your chest, here you go!

Kurt Bills

The results are in.

Gallop asked Americans to name the Presidents religion. Here are the results. http://www.gallup.com/poll/155315/Many-Americans-Cant-Name-Obamas-Religion.aspx

She is an idiot.

Maxine Waters to Tea Party: Let’s get it on California Congressman Maxine Waters told Denver Democrats tonight that Republicans are waging a war on women on issues ranging from health care to wage disparity. During her speech at the 5th annual House District 7 Unity Dinner, she accused Republicans of attacking President Obama any chance they get. “We cannot allow the opportunities that America stands for to be eroded by those who simply want to bring this president down,” she said. She was cheered when she said, “After a good night sleep, I wake up the next day, and I say, ‘Come on, Tea Party, let’s get it on.’” Among those present at the dinner: Congresswoman Diana DeGette; Denver City Councilwomen Robin Kniech and Mary Beth Susman; state Rep. Angela Williams and Sen. Mike Johnston, who represent House District 7; and Sen. Pat Steadman and House Minority Leader Mark Ferrandino. Republicans criticized Democrats for inviting a congresswoman facing ethics charges. Waters said she was there at the invitation of Williams and “that’s that.” denverpost.com

The good old days.

Big Week in Washington.

It is expected that the U.S. Supreme Court will give rulings on two separate issues. First, they will give the ruling on the Healthcare act (Obamacare) Secondly, they will decide on the legality of the Arizona immigration law (otherwise known as the law that the US government already has but, doe not enforce) How do you think they will rule?

Something to think about.

June 16, 2012 If We Took the Constitution Seriously, Obama Would Be Impeached Michael Filozof If the citizens of this Republic still took the Constitution seriously, Obama would be impeached for his decision to unilaterally grant amnesty to certain illegal aliens. Article 1, Sec. 8 of the Constitution, which enumerates the power of Congress, states that "Congress shall have the Power To... establish an [sic] uniform Rule of Naturalization." Congress has passed numerous laws pertaining to immigration and naturalization, including laws requiring the deportation of illegals. The role of the President, according to Article II, Sec. 3, is to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." Obama's refusal to execute Congress's immigration laws (or, for that matter, Congress's Defense of Marriage Act) is an impeachable offense. Article II, Sec. 4 states that the President "shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for... Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors." The deliberate failure to enforce valid immigration law and allow hordes of foreigners to live and work in the U.S. is, arguably, "treason," and doing so in an election year to appease Hispanic voters could certainly be considered "bribery." In theory, Obama could exercise his power in Article II, Sec 2. to "grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States" and offer a blanket pardon for all violators of immigration law. He's not doing that, because he'd certainly lose in November if he did. (However we should be concerned that if he does lose in November, he'll do it anyway on his last day in office). The upshot of Obama's policy not only to allow hundreds of thousands of illegals to live and work in the U.S. during a time of 8 to 10% unemployment, but even worse, since the vast number of illegals we're talking about are Hispanics eligible for affirmative-action preferences, to actually get preferential treatment over native-born Americans. Remember Obama's speech in Berlin in 2008? Well, now you know what "citizen of the world" means: instituting an illegal and unconstitutional policy that favors Third Worlders, and disadvantages people actually born as U.S. citizens. Of course, he'll get away with it... if you think the gutless Republicans in the House actually represent the interests of their native born constituents and will introduce articles of impeachment, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.... Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/06/if_we_took_the_constitution_seriously_obama_would_be_impeached.html#ixzz1yF5t0B7A

Sewall-Belmont House draws fire for honoring Laura Bush

Not everyone is happy to see the Sewall-Belmont House, a museum dedicated to advancing women, give its highest honor to former first lady Laura Bush. Twenty-two women, including former members of the museum’s board, have penned a letter to the museum in protest of Bush’s selection for the Alice Award, as first reported by the Washington Post. Sonia Pressman Fuentes, co-founder of the National Organization for Women, led the charge. “When I read that the award was going to be given to Laura Bush, I felt as if I’d had a sudden onset of Alzheimer’s,” she told Yeas & Nays. “I couldn’t believe my eyes.” It’s not Bush’s political affiliation that she objects to, Fuentes insists. “It’s not partisan,” she said. “I’m not complaining that she’s a Republican. I’m complaining that she’s never done anything for women to get this award.” Fuentes adds that she wouldn’t give President Obama or the first lady an award either. “Both he and his wife have disappointed me in terms of women’s rights,” she said. “Here you have a woman who was a brilliant attorney,” Fuentes said of Michelle Obama. “She’s just published a book about how to garden.” Fuentes and the 21 others who signed the letter had a few other women in mind who could replace Bush or be added as recipients alongside her. (Sen. Barbara Mikulski and Eleanor Smeal were two suggestions.) The Sewall-Belmont House confirmed it’s non-partisan stance to Yeas & Nays and defended Bush’s bona fides. “As with any high-profile public figure, some people agree and some people disagree, and any choice of honoree will never please everyone all the time,” museum executive director Page Harrington wrote to Yeas & Nays. She reiterated that Bush “transcends cultural, political, and geographic boundaries in her work for women’s progress.” Bush has been involved with several campaigns for breast cancer and heart disease, some of which have sent her around the world. Harrington did not provide specifics about disagreements over past Alice recipients. Fuentes, who was on the museum’s board for two decades, could not recall any major controversy about past award winners, which include Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Katie Couric, and Olympia Snowe. “She’s a big name,” Fuentes said of Bush. “And it will bring people into the event.” She added, “Let’s call a spade a spade.” Jenny Rogers Staff Reporter - Yeas & Nays The Washington Examiner

Obama Plans Attack On First Amendment if Re-elected

Kurt Nimmo Infowars.com June 15, 2012 Obama’s chief political strategist, David Axerlrod, announced earlier this week that the administration will push for a constitutional amendment to rollback free speech if his boss is re-elected in November. “When we win, we will use whatever tools out there, including a constitutional amendment, to turn this back,” Axlerod said on Wednesday. “I understand the free speech argument, but when the Koch brothers can spend $400 million, more than the McCain campaign and the Republican Party spent last time, that’s very concerning.” “This has never been done before — in 235 years — to make it possible for the government to control political speech in this country — a truly radical, astonishing thing to say out loud even if you believed it,” remarked Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Thursday. “America was built on free speech — the most important part of the Bill of Rights — and so we need to defend speech we don’t like. And we certainly want to fight against those who are trying to shut us up,” he said. McConnell accused the Obama administration of using the the Federal Election Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Internal Revenue Service to muzzle its critics. He added that the tactic is reminiscent of Nixon’s enemies list in the 1970s. White House Counsel John Dean said Nixon wanted to “use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies.” In April, Rory Cooper wrote about Obama’s “Truth Team“ campaign website. He noted “subtle differences between Obama’s and Nixon’s enemy lists. President Nixon kept his secret, and allegedly used the force of the government to punish adversaries. President Obama’s list is open and designed to elicit public scorn, shame and rebuke. There is no current evidence the President has manipulated the federal machinery punitively. But the message remains clear, if you support a philosophical adversary, you will face some retribution.” Cooper penned his commentary following remarks made by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi and House Democrats have proposed a three tiered plan to ram through Congress what is known as the DISCLOSE Act. It would restrict the political speech of “covered organizations,” including most television and radio networks, newspapers, publishing houses, and think tanks. Axlerod’s remarks about the First Amendment reveal that the so-called Team Obama approach to silencing the political opposition is not particularly effective. It also reveals a brazen contempt for the Bill of Rights. In Citizens United v. FEC, the court said the First Amendment applies to all entities, including corporations: The Court has recognized that First Amendment protection extends to corporations. … This protection has been extended by explicit holdings to the context of political speech. … Under the rationale of these precedents, political speech does not lose First Amendment protection “simply because its source is a corporation.” The Court has thus rejected the argument that political speech of corporations or other associations should be treated differently under the First Amendment simply because such associations are not “natural persons.” Obama and Axlerod may disagree with the concept of “corporate personhood” (except, of course, when it comes to the banks and corporations that support Obama), but the issue has far larger implications than simply preventing the dreaded Koch brothers from spending a small portion of their billions for the purpose of political speech. If Obama manages to amend the Constitution – a remote possibility at best (but then considering the way the Supreme Court is currently construed, maybe not) – restrictions on free speech will undoubtedly be used against opponents outside the political establishment. Axlerod’s comments underscore a deep-seated hostility toward the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, as McConnell noted (not that Republicans are exactly champions of liberty). Obama and the Democrats apparently hate that the First Amendment prohibits the government from infringing upon the freedom of speech, the freedom of association and the freedom to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The Declaration of Independence recognizes all three freedoms as inherent in our humanity. Axlerod’s comments reveal Obama – who we are told is a constitutional scholar – does not agree.

Something smells!

If you do any looking through the internet, you can find some really intresting facts about our president. Have you ever checked this site out? http://www.obamasrealfather.com/

Holder, Issa set for critical meeting on Fast and Furious documents, contempt vote

The congressional investigation that began 16 months ago into the botched anti-gunrunning operation Fast and Furious may be heading toward a resolution, as Attorney General Eric Holder attempts to make a deal with Republican Rep. Darrell Issa by offering some key documents in exchange for Issa calling off a contempt vote scheduled for Wednesday. The latest developments set up a meeting at 5 p.m. Tuesday between Holder, Issa and other lawmakers on the documents and the contempt vote. Holder, in a letter to Issa delivered Monday, said the Justice Department "has offered a serious, good faith proposal to bring this matter to an amicable resolution in the form of a briefing based on documents that the committee could retain." Until now, Issa, the chairman of House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has demanded to see a trove of documents on the controversial Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives operation -- and to know who prepared a now-retracted letter from Feb. 4, 2011, in which the Justice Department claimed the U.S. did not knowingly help smuggle guns to Mexico, including those later found at the murder scene of border agent Brian Terry Congressional Republicans familiar with the investigation say Issa is under pressure from House Speaker John Boehner to drop the Fast and Furious investigation because Boehner sees it as an election-year distraction that could hurt Republicans at the polls. Rep. Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the Oversight Committee, said he welcomed a resolution that would avoid a contempt vote. "Last week, the chairman asked for a 'serious proposal' on these documents, and the attorney general gave us one the next day," Cummings said. "I look forward to our meeting ... to finalize the terms of this proposed agreement, and I see no reason to proceed with contempt given these positive developments." However, late Monday, Issa wrote Holder back with a strategy of his own. Not only must Holder deliver the roughly 1,300 documents pertaining to the Feb. 4 letter, but he must also produce a description of all the documents he will not produce. Issa says that document log is "essential for the committee to determine whether the department has substantially met its obligations." Issa rescheduled Tuesday's meeting from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. to give his staff and the committee time to review the documents. Either way, it is a high stakes gambit on Holder's part to forestall a contempt vote Republicans are sure to pass in the Oversight Committee, which is composed of 22 Republicans and 16 Democrats. But getting a contempt measure to the House floor could be a problem. Sources close to the investigation told Fox News that both Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor generally are not supportive of the vote against Holder. And unless the contempt citation is passed by the House as a whole, the subpoena remains a paper tiger with no force of law. Some House Republicans fear if Boehner does not fully support Issa, Issa may be forced to accept Holder's offer so he doesn't walk away empty-handed. It's also possible the committee could vote to hold Holder in contempt only to see the citation die a quiet death over the summer if Boehner does not schedule a full House vote. Publicly, Boehner and Cantor say they support efforts to hold the attorney general accountable. One key to Tuesday's outcome may be the National Rifle Association. The NRA would not confirm, but sources say the gun rights organization is pushing hard to allow the contempt vote. The group's involvement increases pressure on Boehner and Democrats up for re-election in swing districts. More hard-line Republicans, while supportive of Issa, say they will not go quietly if he accepts Holder's 11th hour offer after complaints that he has stonewalled for months. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/18/holder-issa-set-for-critical-meeting-on-fast-and-furious-documents-contempt/#ixzz1yF40vJAV

Exposed! Another top Dem was member of socialist party

President Obama is not the only major U.S. politician previously involved with the now defunct socialist-leaning New Party in the 1990s. WND has found that Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie was listed as a builder and early leading activist of the controversial third party that is now coming under increased scrutiny after new information indicates Obama was a member. Ritchie was the recipient of national news media attention when he oversaw the recount of the 2008 U.S. Senate race that put onetime comedian Al Franken into office. WND previously reported how Ritchie’s campaign donor list includes a “who’s who” of the radical left, including New Party founders. The Fall 1994 edition of the New Party News, the party’s own newsletter, listed over 100 New Party activists working on “building the party.” The members included “some of the community leaders, organizers, retirees, scholars, artists, parents, students, doctors, writers and other activists who are building the NP.” Among the activist cited is Ritchie of the Minneapolis-based Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. From 1986 until 2006, Ritchie served as the president of the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, which worked to foster so-called long-term sustainability for Minnesota’s rural communities. WND also found a July 20, 1992, article published in The Nation magazine by New Party founder Joel Rogers laying out the case for the establishment of the party. In that article, titled “Out with the Old Politics, in with the New Party,” Rogers cites Ritchie as an early activist in the formation of the New Party, which he describes as a “social democratic” party. Socialist goals The New Party, established in 1992, took advantage of what was known as electoral “fusion,” which enabled candidates to run on two tickets simultaneously, attracting voters from both parties. But the New Party disbanded in 1998, one year after fusion was halted by the Supreme Court. The socialist-oriented goals of the New Party were enumerated on its old website. Among the New Party’s stated objectives were “full employment, a shorter work week and a guaranteed minimum income for all adults; a universal ‘social wage’ to include such basic benefits as health care, child care, vacation time and lifelong access to education and training; a systematic phase-in of comparable worth; and similar programs to ensure gender equity.” The New Party stated it also sought “the democratization of our banking and financial system – including popular election of those charged with public stewardship of our banking system, worker-owner control over their pension assets [and] community-controlled alternative financial institutions.” Many of the New Party’s founding members were Democratic Socialists of America leaders and members of Committees of Correspondence, a breakaway of the Communist Party USA. Last month, WND reported on a 1996 print advertisement in a local Chicago newspaper that shows Obama was the speaker at an event sponsored and presented by the Democratic Socialists of America, the DSA. WND first reported on the event in 2010. Obama listed as New Party member In 2009, WND reported on newspaper evidence from the New Party’s own literature listing several new members of the New Party, including Obama. Last week, researcher and author Stanley Kurtz, writing at National Review Online, reported on documentation from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society that “definitively establishes” that Obama was a member of the New Party. Kurtz reported Obama also signed a “contract” promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office. In 2008, Obama’s Fight the Smears campaign website quoted Carol Harwell, who managed Obama’s 1996 campaign for the Illinois Senate, as stating: “Barack did not solicit or seek the New Party endorsement for state senator in 1995.” Fight the Smears conceded the New Party did support Obama in 1996 but denied that Obama had ever joined. Ritchie backed by who’s who of radical left A previous review by WND and the New Zeal blog of donors to Ritchie’s 2006 and 2010 campaigns found a shocking list of radicals that reads like a “Who’s Who” of the far-left world. Ritchie counts among his campaign donors members of the Democratic Socialists of America, founders of the New Party, members of the Communist Party USA and even a former associate of the Weather Underground domestic terrorist group founded by Bill Ayers. Personalities from several George Soros-funded think tanks and the terrorist-supporting Code Pink also show up on Ritchie’s donor list. Ritchie won a second term in November 2010. He was a beneficiary of the Soros-funded Secretary of State project. “We helped re-elect Mark Ritchie in Minnesota,” declares the project about Ritchie’s 2010 race. His 2006 donor list, reviewed by both WND and New Zeal, includes: Barbara Baran, a member of Democratic Socialists of America. Harriet Barlow, a founder of the socialist New Party. Jeff Blum, a former supporter of the Weathermen domestic terrorist group. Heather Booth, a founder of the Midwest Academy, which has trained thousands of “community activists” in the tactics of radical organizer Saul Alinsky. WND previously reported the executive director of Booth’s group was part of the team that developed and delivered a group of volunteers for President Obama’s 2008 campaign. Paul Booth, a member of Democratic Socialists of America. Cynthia Brown, a vice president for education policy at the Soros-funded Center for American Progress. Dan Cantor, a co-founder of the socialist New Party, now leader of New York’s ACORN and the socialist and communist-dominated Working Families Party. Dan Carol, a member of the Soros-funded Tides Center board, also a founder of the Apollo Alliance, which is led by a slew of radicals, including former Weather Underground terrorist Jeff Jones and Obama’s former “green jobs” adviser and avowed communist Van Jones. Doris Marquit, a veteran leader of the Minnesota Communist Party USA. Erwin Marquit, a veteran leader of the Minnesota Communist Party USA, whose wife is Doris Marquit. And Max Palevsky, a former trustee of the Marxist-oriented, Soros-funded Institute for Policy Studies. Radicals who supported Ritchie’s 2010 campaign included: Jodie Evans, leader of the radical Code Pink, which has sided with the Taliban and Saddam Hussein and has led marches in support of Hamas in Gaza. She is also a member of board of trustees of the Marxist-oriented, Soros-funded Institute for Policy Studies. Margery Tabankin, an Alinsky-trained former member of the radical Students for a Democratic Society from which the Weather Underground terrorist group splintered. Patricia Bauman, a member of the Soros-funded, pro-Palestinian J Street Advisory Council. Martin Bunzl, a member of the J Street Advisory Council. by Aaron Klein as read at http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/exposed-another-top-dem-was-member-of-socialist-party/

Senator Tells Attorney General to Resign • By DANIEL HALPER

Texas senator John Cornyn told Attorney General Eric Holder to resign earlier today at a hearing on Capitol Hill: "You’ve violated the public trust in my view by failing to perform the duties of your office. So, Mr. Attorney General it is with more sorrow than with regret and anger that I would say you leave me with no alternative but to join those who call on you to resign your office," Cornyn told Holder directly. The Weekly Standard. 2012

Justice Department sues Florida over effort to purge voter rolls of non-citizens

The Justice Department on Tuesday sued Florida to block its effort to purge its voter rolls of non-U.S. citizens and to stop further attempts before the November elections. The suit against the state and Secretary of State Ken Detzner alleges Florida violated its obligations under the federal National Voter Registration Act by conducting a “systematic program to purge voters from its rolls within the 90-day quiet period before an election for federal office.” The suit also alleges Florida violated the law by using “inaccurate and unreliable” voter verification procedures, according to a statement by Thomas E. Perez, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. “It appears that Florida has undertaken a new program for voter removal … that has critical imperfections, which lead to errors that harm and confuse eligible voters,” Perez wrote. The suit came one day after GOP Gov. Rick Scott announced his administration is filing suit against the federal government in connection with the same issue. “This is not a partisan issue,” Scott said Tuesday on Fox News. “This is protecting the rights of U.S. citizens and not diluting their vote by non-U.S. citizens.” Florida's suit is being filed against the Department of Homeland Security, claiming the federal government is denying the state access to a database that would allow it to verify the citizenship of registered voters. Scott's administration has said the federal government is skirting the law by denying Florida access to the database. Scott also defended the initiative and denied the purge could unfairly target Latino residents. Florida last year began looking for non-U.S. citizens on the voter rolls. A comparison of driver's license records with voter registration records turned up as many as 182,000 registered voters who may not be U.S. citizens. The state has since submitted a smaller list of more than 2,600 names to local election supervisors. But that list has come under fire for errors. Supervisors have loudly questioned the accuracy of the list, with one GOP supervisor going on Twitter to show the picture of a U.S. passport of one voter found on the list. Two Democratic members of Congress also recently held a news conference with a World War II veteran whose citizenship had been questioned. The Associated Press contributed to this report. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/12/justice-department-sues-florida-over-purging-voter-rolls-as-expected/#ixzz1xgAmQ6CC

Beware the spy in the sky: After those Street View snoopers, Google and Apple use planes that can film you sunbathing in your back garden

Software giants will use military-grade cameras to take powerful satellite images Spy planes able to photograph sunbathers in their back gardens are being deployed by Google and Apple. The U.S. technology giants are racing to produce aerial maps so detailed they can show up objects just four inches wide. But campaigners say the technology is a sinister development that brings the surveillance society a step closer. Google admits it has already sent planes over cities while Apple has acquired a firm using spy-in-the-sky technology that has been tested on at least 20 locations, including London. Apple’s military-grade cameras are understood to be so powerful they could potentially see into homes through skylights and windows. The technology is similar to that used by intelligence agencies in identifying terrorist targets in Afghanistan. Google will use its spy planes to help create 3D maps with much more detail than its satellite-derived Google Earth images. Nick Pickles, director of Big Brother Watch, warned that privacy risked being sacrificed in a commercial ‘race to the bottom’. ‘The next generation of maps is taking us over the garden fence,’ he warned. ‘You won’t be able to sunbathe in your garden without worrying about an Apple or Google plane buzzing overhead taking pictures.’ He said householders should be asked for their consent before images of their homes go online. Apple is expected to unveil its new mapping applications for its iPhone and other devices today – along with privacy safeguards. Its 3D maps will reportedly show for the first time the sides of tall buildings, such as the Big Ben clock tower. Google expects by the end of the year to have 3D coverage of towns and cities with a combined population of 300million. It has not revealed any locations so far. Current 3D mapping technology relies on aerial images taken at a much lower resolution than the technology Apple is thought to be using. This means that when users ‘zoom in’, details tend to be lost because of the poor image quality. Google ran into trouble when it emerged that its Street View cars, which gathered ground-level panoramic photographs for Google Maps, had also harvested personal data from household wifi networks. Emails, text messages, photographs and documents were taken from unsecured wifi networks all around Britain. MILITARY TECHNOLOGY Google claimed it was a mistake even though a senior manager was warned as early as 2007 that the extra information was being captured. Around one in four home networks is thought to be unsecured because they lack password protection. Little has been revealed about the technology involved in the spy planes used to capture the aerial images. But they are thought to be able to photograph around 40 square miles every hour, suggesting they would be flying too quickly and at too great a height to access domestic wifi networks. Like Google Maps, the resulting images would not be streamed live to computers but would provide a snapshot image of the moment the camera passed by. Google pixellates faces and car number plates but faced criticism after its service showed one recognisable man leaving a sex shop and another being sick in the street. Amie Stepanovich, of the Electronic Privacy Information Centre in America, said she believed Apple and Google would be forced to blur out homes in the same way Street View pixellates faces. She said: ‘With satellite images, privacy is built in because you can’t zoom down into a garden. Homeowners need to be asked to opt in to show their property in high definition – otherwise it should be blurred out.’ Apple has previously used Google for its mapping services but last year it emerged it had bought C3 Technologies, a 3D mapping company that uses technology developed by Saab AB, the aerospace and defence company. At the time C3 had already mapped 20 cities and it is believed to have added more with Apple’s backing. Its photographs have been shot from 1,600ft and one C3 executive described it as ‘Google on steroids’. There are already 3D maps available online for most big city centres, but the images are often low resolution, meaning they are of little use for navigation and users cannot zoom in on detail. Critics have argued that Apple and Google will face a backlash if they offer detailed 3D mapping of residential areas in suburbs and rural locations. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2157150/Google-Apple-use-planes-film-sunbathing-garden.html#ixzz1xUAVc1Fh

Top Customer: Under Obama, Fed’s Holdings of U.S. Debt Have Jumped 452% By Terence P. Jeffrey

(CNSNews.com) - Since President Barack Obama was inaugurated in January 2009, the Federal Reserve’s holdings of U.S. government debt have quintupled, according to the Fed’s official monthly balance sheet. On Jan. 28, 2009, a week after Obama’s nomination, the Fed owned $302 billion in U.S. Treasury securities. On April 25, 2012, the latest date reported, the Fed owned five and a half time that much in U.S. Treasury securities--$1.668 trillion. That is an increase from January 2009 of $1.366 trillion—or 452 percent. Under Obama, the Federal Reserve has become the single largest owner of U.S. government debt. When Obama entered office, entities in the People’s Republic of China were the largest holders, followed by entities in Japan. At the end of January 2009, China owned $739.6 billion in U.S. government debt and Japan owned $634.8 billion. By the end of March 2012, China’s holdings of U.S. debt had grown to $1.1699 trillion and Japan’s holdings had grown to $1.083 trillion. Together, the Federal Reserve, China and Japan had increased their holdings of U.S. debt by $2.2445 trillion since Obama took office. The total U.S. government debt grew from $10.6179 trillion to $15.6233 between Jan. 28, 2009 and April 25, 2012. Leaving out the intragovernmental debt—which the federal government owes itself—the publicly owned part of the U.S. government debt has climbed from $6.2955 trillion to $10.8607 trillion, an increase of $4.5652 trillion. The $2.2445 trillion of that new publicly owned U.S. government debt that was purchased by the Fed, China and Japan equals 49 percent of all the new debt the U.S. government has sold to the public since Obama took office.

After Walker victory, Indiana governor suggests public unions should go

On the heels of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's history-making recall victory, the governor of nearby Indiana with his own record of curtailing union benefits suggested public-sector unions are past their prime and should be abolished. "I think, really, government works better without them," Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels told "Fox News Sunday," when asked whether public-worker unions should even exist. Daniels had cracked down on collective bargaining for state workers as soon as he took office in 2005, six years before Walker and his GOP allies in the state legislature started down the same path -- triggering a backlash that forced him to stand for election this past Tuesday. Walker made history as the first governor to survive the recall test, beating Democrat Tom Barrett. Daniels said that vote should send a message about the problems with public-sector unions. "I think the message is that, first of all, voters are seeing the fundamental unfairness of government becoming its own special interest group, sitting on both sides of the table," he said. The pushback on union benefits extends far beyond Wisconsin. In California, voters in San Diego and San Jose just backed ballot measures to curtail retirement benefits for city workers. Speaking on CBS' "Face the Nation," Walker said he thinks his victory is a sign that Americans want "people willing to take on the tough issues" in his state and "across the country." Daniels said private-sector unions, while in decline in America, remain "necessary." But he suggested the public-sector unions have hobbled governments by gobbling up taxpayer resources with generous benefits and salaries and "bulletproof" job protections. Daniels said he hopes Tuesday's election marks "some kind of turning point" in addressing the public union system. Top representatives of that system, though, pushed back on the idea that the Wisconsin election opens the door to a dismantling of public-union benefits. Dennis Van Roekel, president of the National Education Association, said Walker's victory was in part a product of "unlimited corporate funding in elections." He said Walker's side simply was able to push out its message better than the governor's opponents. AFL-CIO Deputy Chief of Staff Thea Lee said the public does support pensions for public- and private-sector workers. "That's something that people do support at the end of the day. We have to figure out how to fund it, we have to figure out how to make it viable, but I don't think that voters in this country want to go to a place where our elderly people are living in poverty," she said. "When times are tough, people are trying to figure out who's to blame, but we need to be able to fund our public sector." Public-sector workers continue to enjoy better benefits than in the private sector. About 64 percent of private-sector workers have access to pensions, compared with 90 percent of state and local government workers. Private-sector workers earn an average of $8.53 in benefits per hour, while government workers earn $14.31 in benefits per hour. Lee, though, said government workers are not overpaid when salaries are taken into consideration, noting that highly skilled professionals like doctors make less in the public than private sectors. She said the debate should focus on how the private sector can offer better retirement benefits, not on how the public sector can offer fewer benefits. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/10/after-walker-victory-indiana-governor-suggests-public-unions-should-go/?test=latestnews#ixzz1xU8OpmlC

Why do we not learn from our history?

By HON. HOWARD BUFFETT U. S. Congressman from Nebraska Reprinted from The Commercial and Financial Chronicle 5/6/48 Congressman Buffett stresses relation between money and freedom and contends without a redeemable currency, individual's freedom to sustain himself or move his property is dependent on goodwill of politicians. Says paper money systems generally collapse and result in economic chaos. Points out gold standard would restrict government spending and give people greater power over public purse. Holds present is propitious time to restore gold standard. Is there a connection between Human Freedom and A Gold Redeemable Money? At first glance it would seem that money belongs to the world of economics and human freedom to the political sphere. But when you recall that one of the first moves by Lenin, Mussolini and Hitler was to outlaw individual ownership of gold, you begin to sense that there may be some connection between money, redeemable in gold, and the rare prize known as human liberty. Also, when you find that Lenin declared and demonstrated that a sure way to overturn the existing social order and bring about communism was by printing press paper money, then again you are impressed with the possibility of a relationship between a gold-backed money and human freedom.

Kurt Bills

I know you probably are well aware of how I feel about Kurt Bills, check out how he stands on the issues. This was taken from his site kurtbills.com Federal Budget - The United States Senate should pass a budget; they haven’t since April 29, 2009, which is over 1,000 days. Our national debt now exceeds $15 trillion and is the direct result of unsustainable spending. If we want our children and our grandchildren to live with the same liberty and prosperity that we have, we must reverse this trend. Federal spending per household has grown more than 150% since 1965. The answers are straightforward. As your next U.S. Senator, I will work with fellow members to pass a budget, along with focusing on lowering spending. Unsustainable spending can be curbed by the federal government focusing on what it was designed to do as defined by the constitution. Federal Reserve Bank - Prices are signals. The price of money is known as the interest rate. It is the most important price in a free enterprise system. The policy of printing more money decreases interest rates and the value of our dollar. This affects the ratio of dollars in circulation compared to the amount of goods and services available. It is the root cause of inflation and the business cycle. Monetary policy and devaluation of our dollar is a GIANT that we face. We all work for, spend, invest, or borrow money. Printing money causes the most regressive form of taxation…the inflation tax. Stealing the purchasing power of working class people by printing money keeps interest rates low and encourages people to go further into debt rather than save. This is one of the most morally corrupt policies I have witnessed in my study and teaching of economics. The solution is to audit the Fed and, at minimum, change its dual mandate from promoting full employment AND providing price stability to simply promoting price stability. I will work for a stronger approach to allow working class people to be paid in wages that maintain or grow their purchasing power. Healthcare - Obamacare, Medicare, and Medicaid are not self-sustaining programs. Obamacare is becoming an even greater infringement on our rights and economy than we ever imagined. Medicare and Medicaid often only reimburse hospitals and other medical facilities for half of the actual medical expenses for treating patients. To compensate for the lack of payment of these medical claims and to stay in business, these health care providers raise their fees for everyone, which negatively affects the efficient and affordable cost of care for all of us. I will work to slow down and eliminate mandates that expand control over the private healthcare system. Doing so will drive costs down, improve services and provide the patient with control. Social Security - Given the current state of this government program, Social Security benefits will not be available to the young adults that are paying into it. Taxing generations of Americans under the illusion that this money is being invested and will offer a return someday is morally wrong. We can make Social Security sustainable. The studies have been done and still congress refuses to act because of the political virtues of the reelection cycle. I am ready to go to Washington to work with those who are ready to make difficult decisions and reform the system. Taxes - The tax code needs to be greatly simplified. I currently sit on the Tax Committee in the Minnesota State Legislature. I have heard the testimony from the Minnesota Department of Revenue that says reforming the state tax code is a daunting task due to the size and complexity of federal tax code and the compliance issues that exist. Having experience on our state tax committee, reforming and restructuring the federal tax code would be a natural fit for me. Simplifying the tax code and ensuring the best return on the taxpayers’ investment needs to be one of Congress’s top priorities. The benefits will be multiplied because the states will follow suit. Trade Deficits - America needs to start focusing on exporting more real goods and services that our smart, productive American workers build. We need to stop exporting inflation through the purchase of foreign goods with printed dollars. Through free trade, America’s great qualities of freedom and liberty will be exported along with those goods and services. We should be confident in knowing that our principles will win in the battle of ideas. Furthermore, we should also be careful that trade agreements are not used as political leverage in supporting monopolies. I will work to audit our “free trade agreements” to allow for competitive processes and market discipline. The less the federal government is involved in this process, the fewer lobbyists and interest groups there will be in Washington. Foreign Policy - With American and European debt crisis concerns, we must be vigilant not to allow international organizations such as the IMF to propel or catapult these monetary and fiscal issues to a magnitude that is irreparable. Reversing the course of debt and dependency should be our top priority as a nation. We should also not be a part of exacerbating debt and dependency around the globe. America should work with allies who value economic freedom and liberty through trade and business relationships. I will work to build these relationships. However, I will not support the promotion of crony capitalism and the funding of dictators through foreign aid. National Defense - According to the constitution, the most important role of the federal government is our national defense. I agree with “peace through strength.” I do not agree with spreading our military so thin around the world that it compromises our men and women and their effectiveness. Furthermore, Congress must declare war according to our constitution. I will work for keeping the US military out of nation building and ill-defined missions. I will work to make sure the US military is equipped and prepared to perform its mission to defend and protect the lives of American citizens. Subsidies - Government subsidies not only cost money and pick winners and losers, they generate bureaucracies that further ramp up the cost of government through very expensive federal employees. Politicians like subsidies because it means more lobby money comes to Washington DC and finds its way to their campaign coffers. The federal government has created more than 2000 subsidies since 1980. I will work to eliminate as many as I can. I believe we will experience more growth when main street Minnesotans are making the economic investment decisions not Washington bureaucrats. Jobs & The Economy - The expenditures of the federal government are approaching 25% of total GDP under President Obama’s budgets. In 1930, federal spending was 3.4% of GDP and the average of government expenditures since World War II has been 18%. In order to grow private sector jobs, we must cut spending by the federal government. Don’t fall for the utopian plans of Democrats or Republicans who claim that they can “create jobs.” As a public school teacher, I know that the only way my classroom is funded is through a vibrant private sector economy. There is a role for government, however it is out of equilibrium with the private sector and has grown too large, crowding out private sector job growth. As a U.S. senator, I will work to get the government out of the way of the people. Bureaucratic Growth - As with any firm or business organization, salaries and benefits are the bulk of expenditures. In 2006, the number of employees in the federal executive workforce numbered 1.88 million. Today that total is over 2.1 million. Combine this fact with a USA Today report in 2009 that found the average civil servant makes $123,000 in wages and benefits. There is a quick and direct way to savings. I will work to cut the federal workforce. My focus will be job growth in Minnesota not in Washington DC. Political Virtue - The greatest obstacle we face as a country is political virtue. Let me explain. Political virtue takes place when politicians make decisions based on self-interest rather than in service to the Constitution and people they represent. When elected representatives are making choices based on the next election cycle – and not based on the solvency and posterity of our great country – political virtue has won. I will not fall victim to political virtue. I have looked into the eyes of too many young people in my role as a public school economics teacher. I will remember their questions and their concerns about our deficits and debt. I will vote with the future of our country in mind and not the future of my political career. Housing - The housing market crash was just another great folly of the politicians and bureaucrats who think they can plan an economy better than the market can naturally guide it. In planning and tinkering with the economy, all politicians and bureaucrats do is plant the seeds for the next bust…the one they claim to save us from once it hits. I will fight to get the government out of housing and other markets once and for all. Even President Obama has called for the restructuring of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Behemoth government sponsored enterprises need to be privatized and the trillions of dollars for which taxpayers are liable need to be taken off the public books. I will not vote for any further government tinkering in the housing market. The Family - I believe the definition of marriage is a relation between a man and woman. The federal government should not involve itself in a state’s determination of how they handle the issue of civil unions and contract law between individuals in these regards. Life - I am pro-life. I will always work to protect the unborn.

Real hope with out the change.

I have to give a big "thank you" to our neighbors to the east. Wisconsin spoke and made many Americans proud. Yesterday was a crucial day for the landscape of our country. With the victory of Scott Walker two messages have been sent. Your everyday average Joe is tired of paying for the bloated unions in the public sector. It should be illegal for the union to be across the table negotiating with the very people they help to elect. But I digress, that is for another discussion. Secondly, the bell has begun to ring loud and clear. Recalling a governor just because you think he has picked a fight is not a viable use of public funds. With two years to go, continue your fight through your legislators. When the 4 year term is done, than out hustle you opposition to get the your guy. Tens of millions of dollars waited to do what? Prove a point? To mend you hurt feelings? Hopefully, other states take notice that you cannot cry over spilled milk. Unless your elected leader has broken a crime ....... wait maybe they are on to something.

Bill Clinton: US in ‘Recession,’ Needs Tax-Cut Extension Read more on Newsmax.com: Bill Clinton: US in ‘Recession,’ Needs Tax-Cut Extension Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Former President Bill Clinton said on Tuesday that the U.S. is already in a recession and urged Congress to extend all the tax cuts set to expire at the end of the year. The nation’s 42nd president told CNBC’s “Closing Bell” that current economic conditions in the U.S. constituted a "recession" and said plans to cut the deficit threaten to sink the country further into debt. "What I think we need to do is find some way to avoid the fiscal cliff, to avoid doing anything that would contract the economy now, and then deal with what's necessary in the long term debt-reduction plans as soon as they can, which presumably would be after the election," Clinton said in a taped interview. "They will probably have to put everything off until early next year," he added. "That's probably the best thing to do right now. But the Republicans don't want to do that unless [President Barack Obama] agrees to extend the tax cuts permanently, including for upper-income people — and I don't think the president should do that." But the Arkansas Democrat did say that Congress would be best off agreeing, at least for the immediate term, to extend all the tax cuts that are set to expire at the end of the year, including the so-called Bush tax cuts named after Clinton's successor, Republican George W. Bush. Democrats have attacked the broad-based cuts, saying they were skewed toward upper-income earners. But Obama countered with the proposed “Buffett Rule,” which would have imposed a surtax on millionaires. The rule was ultimately defeated. On the nation’s current tax structure in general, Clinton defended it, saying the system wouldn't look so bad if the economy was performing better. He also told CNBC that it was reasonable to expect top earners to pay more taxes. Clinton, like the president, blamed much of the nation’s economic woes on the foreign-debt crisis and politics. “This European thing that's having a bigger impact than people know," he said, and then added, "The thing that cost jobs here has been the Congress's policies." Clinton has found himself in a difficult spot lately, as reports have re-emerged about his occasional ambivalence toward President Obama. He recently praised GOP challenger Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital, which further underscored their differences. Obama is "on stronger ground" when he challenges Romney's record as governor of Massachusetts, not as a businessman at Bain, Clinton told CNBC. "There's a company not doing well, that's failing, and you buy it and have to impose some economies there and cutbacks because you're trying to turn it around so it can thrive in the economy,” he said. “Whether you succeed or fail, that's a good thing to do.” "If you go in and buy a company and intentionally load it up with debt, loot its assets and the people lose their jobs and retirements . . . that's a bad thing." "So to make a judgment on that, you have to know a lot of facts about every case," Clinton said. "I just think we'd all be a lot better off if we talk about we have two people running for the president. What would they do?" Clinton remains very popular with the American public. As president, he had an average approval rating of 55 percent during his two terms, according to Gallup. Clinton made no election predictions, but said it would be important for Obama to draw clear lines among voters. "The most important thing in this election is what will President Obama do and what will Gov. Romney do with the economy and how will they deal with people who disagree with them," Clinton said. "Will they be divide and conquer, or would they be, 'let's bring everyone together'?" © 2012 Newsmax. All rights reserved. Read more on Newsmax.com: Bill Clinton: US in ‘Recession,’ Needs Tax-Cut Extension Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Join us later this week.

The group will be joining the Chisago County GOP. Social mixer planned for this Thursday June 7th in Almelund. Want more information? www.chisagoGOP.org

Recall 2.0: Unions Launch Effort to Recall LA Gov. Jindal

by Kevin Mooney with Breitbart.com While media attention is understandably focused on the recall effort aimed against Gov. Scott Walker in Wisconsin, free market advocates should not lose sight of the pressure tactics applied against Gov. Bobby Jindal in Louisiana. This coming weekend “RecallBobbyJindal” will be holding petition signature drives throughout the state, which are not likely to get very far. But they are indicative of what reform-minded governors can expect when they secure policy changes that elevate taxpayer interests above union perks. As an alternative to the “draconian Jindal approach” to education reform, the Louisiana teachers unions have offered up legislation that would revoke value-added teacher assessments, reinstate tenure and allow for school boards to have the final say over personnel matters. In other words, the Louisiana Association of Educators (LAE) and the Louisiana Federation of Teachers (LFT) are looking to restore the status quo and unravel meaningful policy changes, according to business representatives who supported Gov. Bobby Jindal’s agenda. Both union-backed bills were blocked in committee earlier this month, but they remain the focus of an intense debate that will figure into future legislative sessions. The value-added teacher evaluations, which call for student test scores to be included as part of the teacher performance assessments, remain a major sticking point. The new evaluation method was instituted under Act 54 last year in an effort to “end blanket job protection in the form of tenure to teachers who are ineffective after one year,” a “fact sheet” from the governor’s office explains. Beginning in the 2012-2013 school year, 50 percent of evaluations for teachers in academic classes will be based on the LEAP and iLEAP test scores, while the other 50 percent will be based more on subjective criteria built around classroom observations to determine how effective instructors are in motivating students. But Dr. Michael Walker-Jones, executive director of the LAE, is adamantly opposed to using standardized tests as part of teacher evaluations. The LEAP and iLEAP tests were never designed to measure the effectiveness of individual instructors, he said. Instead of accepting input and advice from education professionals, Gov. Jindal and his legislative allies locked out and resisted outside criticism, Walker-Jones, said. However, the revisions to Act 54 included with Senate Bill 650, and the proposed tenure changes within House Bill 879 demonstrate that union officials are not serious about reforming the state education system, Rayne Martin, executive director of Stand of Children, said in response. “What the unions are trying to do is to eliminate the idea that student performance should figure into teacher evaluation,” she said. “By putting up this legislation they have proven that they are not really serious. How a student performs should translate over to how a teacher is ranked, and whether or not a teacher should be given tenure.” The new evaluation system, which is the subject of a pilot program in nine school districts, and the International School of Louisiana, a charter school based in New Orleans, bases half of a teacher’s evaluation on the value-added component, and the other half on observations and input from school principals. In an effort to counter Gov. Jindal’s “extreme agenda,” Sen. Ben Nevers (D-Bogalusa) called for “multiple measures of student growth and “multiple data sources” that would better reflect teacher performance, LAE has argued. “We have been hit with this argument that says we don’t want to include student achievement as part of the teacher evaluation, and this is nonsense,” Walker-Jones said. “There are a variety of ways to make sure students understand the material that is presented in class, it can be a pencil and paper test. But student growth can also be measured by questioning them, having them participate in projects and by classroom observation.” Walker-Jones also said Jindal’s legislation effectively eliminates tenure and guts due process. Under the new system, a teacher would have to be ranked as “highly-effective” for five out of their first six years to receive tenure. After being rated as ineffective after one year, a teacher would lose tenure and become an “at will” employee. The “ineffective” designation established by The Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) applies to the bottom 10 percent of teachers statewide. Districts could start dismissal proceedings for teachers who are assessed as being ineffective over a two-year period. After three-years of ineffective ratings, a teacher could lose their certification. The bill advanced by Rep. Sam Jones (HB 879) would reverse the school governance changes included as part of the tenure reform bill (HB 974). These reforms empower school superintendents with greater latitude over personnel decisions and set limits on school board authority. Jones’s bill would shift authority back over to the school boards and allow for binding arbitration if a teacher wanted to dispute a board’s findings. “If there is any way to muck up and bureaucratize the system anymore than it already has been, this is the way to do it,” Brigitte Nieland, Vice President of Communications and Director of Education and Workforce Development for the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry (LABI). “Putting in binding arbitration would be even worse than the status quo.” Nieland also made it clear that her organization does in fact oppose tenure, but she also said it was incorrect for union officials to claim that it has been eliminated. “Tenured teachers that do not receive an ‘ineffective’ rating can keep their tenure,” she said. “Although it is very difficult for new teachers to obtain tenure, as it should be.” The policy changes Gov. Jindal has set in motion will ultimately work to disadvantage of students and teachers, Walker-Jones suggested. The key organizations responsible for promoting tenure reform and the new teacher evaluation system lack the necessary expertise needed to implement education reform, he said. “I don’t see anyone with LABI or CABL [Council for a Better Louisiana] with the experience to accurately gauge the work teachers do in the classroom,” Walker-Jones said. “I would never put myself up as someone who understands the complexities of business. Number one, schools are not a business, number two, classrooms are not a business and number three, we are trained professionals in what we do. They can sit down with us anytime they are interested in learning how a classroom works. I will debate anyone from LABI or CABL anytime, anyplace, anywhere in Louisiana.” Stephanie Desselle, the vice-president of the Council for a Better Louisiana (CABL), noted that the education community is responsible for implementing the new evaluation system. “Take a look at the pilot program and you will see that the new evaluation system is being designed and field tested by the educators,” she said. “The people who are the experts in teacher evaluation are the ones who are doing this, so the education experts are involved. The feedback is coming from the teachers, the superintendents and the principals.” Nieland, the LABI VP, takes issue with the idea that the schools are not a business. “They receive millions of taxpayer dollars to provide a quality service, and they get millions of dollars in contracts,” she said. “In many districts, they are the largest employer. They spend over $9 million a year. That’s a business and a big one.” LABI would be glad to meet up with the teachers unions anytime, she added. “I may not be trained classroom professional,” she acknowledged. “But since Louisiana is ranked 47th in the nation [out of 50 states] in educational attainment, it’s clear to me that I’m not the only one who lacks educational expertise.”