Previous month:
September 2011
Next month:
November 2011


We are facing an unprecedented danger in our cities, states and federal government. The hyper-politicization of legislation relating to law enforcement. Corrupt legislators seeking to put forth legislation designed to attract campaign funding, media face-time and voter support.

A demonstration of this clear and present danger can be found in the currently proposed New York legislation known as “Int 0656-2011” and legislatively described as “A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to persons not to be detained.”

Misreading and Misinterpreting the law?

Section 1. Legislative findings and intent.

The Council finds that although there is no agreement obligating them to do so, the New York City Department of Correction (“DOC”) cooperates with the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (“ICE”) Criminal Alien Program (“CAP”) by:

(i) allowing ICE agents to maintain a presence at DOC’s facilities,

(ii) allowing ICE agents to interview DOC inmates at DOC’s facilities,

(iii) sharing DOC inmate database information with ICE, including place of birth, and

(iv) honoring immigration detainers issued by ICE for up to 48 hours.

There are two major flaws with this section.

One, there is an absolute requirement for the City of New York and all of its entities to obey the Constitution of the United States in as much as it requires the government to provide for the safety and security of American citizens and to protect the sovereignty of the United States.

Two, there is no mechanism by which federal laws can be selectively bypassed by local or state legislative fiat.

Are the jails half-full of “innocent people?”

Additionally, the Council finds that in calendar year 2009, of the inmates in DOC custody with immigration detainers, 22.4% had a felony and 20.2% had a misdemeanor as their highest prior conviction. This means more than 50% of the inmates in DOC custody with immigration detainers had no prior convictions at all.

Of the inmates discharged to ICE from City jails in 2009, 20.7% had been previously convicted of a felony, 20.9% had a misdemeanor conviction as their highest prior conviction, and 49.3% had no prior convictions.

The Council further finds that the percentages were just as troubling in calendar year 2010. From January through November 2010, of the inmates in DOC custody with immigration detainers, 20.8% had a felony and 20.6% had a misdemeanor as their highest prior conviction. Of the inmates discharged to ICE from City jails during that time period, 18% had been previously convicted of a felony, 22.3% had had a misdemeanor conviction as their
highest prior conviction
, and 49.5% had no prior convictions.

In both 2009 and 2010, roughly half of the people at
Rikers on whom ICE issued detainers had no criminal convictions. The Council finds this is at odds with ICE’s stated goal for the CAP program, which is to”screen inmates and place detainers on criminal aliens to process them for removal before they are released to the general public.”

Due to budgetary constraints and generally lax jail identification procedures, one must question how many of these people “with no prior convictions” really have criminal backgrounds which are hidden behind false identification papers or the inability to obtain fingerprint and name matches. Common sense would tell you that foreign-born citizens are unlikely to have their fingerprints in the American database and because of the complexity of foreign names and forged or stolen credentials, the assurances to the citizens of New York and the United States that these people are not terrorists or repeat criminal offenders rings hollow.

Protecting criminals from lawful law enforcement?

In light of the fact that a significant percentage of the individuals at Rikers in 2009 and 2010 on whom ICE issued detainers through CAP appear not, in fact, to have any criminal record, the Council finds it is appropriate to take action to protect certain individuals from discharge to ICE from City jails.

The Council finds that the current level of cooperation between law enforcement and ICE facilitates the deportation of as many immigrants as possible, without regard to their criminal records or whether or not they actually pose a threat to society.

This is bureaucratic nonsense from politicians pandering to illegal aliens and criminals – in spite of their sworn oath to uphold the law and to protect the population. The thought that a municipality would protect criminals – yes, criminals who have violated federal and international law by breaching a nation’s sovereignty and who have most likely engaged in falsifying government documents or engaged in identity theft – over their citizens is and should be intolerable to law-abiding citizens who rely on their government for protection.

As for posing a threat to society – how many of the actual terrorist/hijackers appeared to “pose a threat to society” before that fateful day on 9/11? A day which should be burned into the hearts of New Yorkers.

The bullshitake justification …

The Council further finds that because cooperation between DOC and ICE is smoothing and expediting
the deportation process, such cooperation is eroding trust between immigrants and local law enforcement.

Such mistrust may make immigrant crime victims less willing to come forward and make the communities of New York City less safe. In particular, immigrant victims of domestic violence and trafficking must feel safe in reporting acts of domestic violence and trafficking to government authorities.

The Council notes that such victims often do not feel
safe contacting authorities because of their fears of retaliation
by abusers and traffickers who may attempt to use criminal justice systems to have them detained and deported, subjecting these victims to harm upon return to their home countries and leaving these victims’ children in the hands of abusers and traffickers.

Those who break the law should fear both law enforcement and the judiciary. It serves as a societal reminder that violating the law is unacceptable and is an affront to society.

Immigrant crime victims can come forward to report crime without the fear of prosecution. They are not incarcerated in local jails and subject to ICE scrutiny. This is a bogus argument which is intellectually dishonest.

How their abusers and attackers, being criminals themselves, can abuse the process and subject victims to deportation is unexplained. Unless these people have perjured themselves or reveal themselves to have committed a serious crime, there is absolutely no linkage between incarceration and ICE scrutiny.

And it is a simple fact of life that children follow their parents. If the parents are deported, their custodial children should also be deported along with them. As for relatives of deportees, that is an individual matter whether or not they are willing to self-deport to maintain familial ties.

Since when do politicians care about taxpayer dollars or anything other than themselves?

For all of these reasons, the Council finds that cooperation between DOC and ICE cannot be supported by the Council and should not be supported by tax-payer dollars. New York City -- home to millions of immigrants -- should not be a willing participant in a program that separates thousands of immigrant families each year without a concomitant benefit to public safety.

It is therefore the intent of the Council to limit the
cooperation between DOC and ICE by creating a category of persons who shall not be detained.

Tax dollars are extracted from tax payers on the premise that such funding will allow the governmental entity to protect and serve them – not circumvent the law to confer some special privilege on a criminal class of illegal aliens.

Law enforcement is a two-edged sword …

In promoting legislation of the Council to create a category of super-criminals, immune from the scrutiny and possible punishment of those who have violated federal law, I respectfully suggest that:

Melissa Mark-Viverito, Christine C. Quinn, Daniel Dromm, Helen D. Foster, Gale A. Brewer, Margaret S. Chin, Robert Jackson, Karen Koslowitz, Jessica S. Lappin, Rosie Mendez, Annabel Palma, Ydanis A. Rodriguez, Deborah L. Rose, Charles Barron, Sara M. Gonzalez, Julissa Ferreras, Stephen T. Levin, Leroy G. Comrie, Jr., Albert Vann, Fernando Cabrera, Inez E. Dickens, Maria Del Carmen
Arroyo, Letitia James, James G. Van Bramer, Mathieu Eugene, Diana Reyna, Larry B. Seabrook, James Sanders, Jr., Joel Rivera, Elizabeth S. Crowley, G. Oliver Koppell, Jumaane D. Williams, Brad S. Lander, Daniel R. Garodnick, Ruben Wills, Darlene Mealy, James Vacca, Mark S. Weprin, Peter A. Koo

as sponsors of this legislation be charged with the crime of aiding and abetting criminal activity and violating federal law upon the bill’s passage.

Bottom line …

We are a nation of laws. Any breakdown in the general application of the law for political purposes that disadvantages citizens or places them at further risk should be strongly resisted and those who legislatively aid and abet others in knowingly evading law enforcement should be themselves punished.

How many people remember that one of the reasons that 9/11 was not detected and prevented is because another democrat political hack, Jaime Gorelick, erected a wall between law enforcement agencies which so hampered the investigation of potential terrorism, that 9/11 because a scar on New York’s body politic.

Most terrorists are extremely careful to blend in and not break the law. In fact, the laws that they break – identity theft, forged documents, speeding – are the very laws that the Council wants local law enforcement to ignore when such behavior – especially if it is noted in multiple states – could raise red flags to prevent the next 9/11.

Therefore, fellow citizens and patriots, I suggest to you that there is a clear and present danger to ourselves and our nation from corrupt politicians who are pandering to illegal aliens and other criminals. A situation which demands that we vote these people out of office in 2012 and replace them with honest brokers who serve “We the People.”

-- steve

Reference Links:

Int 0656-2011

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


We are now faced with a number of firms offering to store our personal and professional information in the cloud – a fancy term for remote computer-based storage.

Some vendors offer free services, possibly with limits, in exchange for your acceptance of advertising. Some vendors make introductory offers with graduated rates in the future.

No matter what the offer, you must consider the following issues:

One, who is it that you are really doing business with? Are you doing business with a major firm or a startup? Are they financially stable now or are they in a growth mode? Are they funded by venture capitalists looking to cash out in an IPO (initial public offering) or run by executives with their own personal exist strategy.

Two, are they accepting responsibility for your data with the financial liability for lost, corrupted or unavailable data or are you being asked to sign a unilateral one-sided agreement that absolves them of all responsibility or limits their damages to the amount you have paid for services for the year? Are you susceptible to multiple unilateral contractual obligations for each of the vendor’s products that you use? Are you required to monitor the vendor’s website for unilateral changes in agreements, terms of service, or end user licensing agreements?

Three, is your data transmission to and from the cloud from any and all devices encrypted with industrial strength security? Some vendors rely on the device’s hardware features or software which can be less secure than security normally found in desktop-level software and hardware.

Four, does your data reside in secure data centers? Are these data centers within the continental United States under the legal jurisdiction of U.S. regulatory and law enforcement agencies? Or is your data stored in an off-shore foreign data center whose legal system is beyond the reach of the U.S. legal authorities>

Five, is your data encrypted while stored on remote machines – including, but not limited to, in-memory transfers?

Six, who holds the encryption keys? Is the data from one or more customers encrypted with a single encryption key held by the vendor?

Seven, is your data securely backed-up or replicated to insure that it is reasonably safe from hardware and software mishaps?

Eight, does the vendor allow you to encrypt your own data with your own encryption keys or do they specify that the information must reside in an unencrypted format or an encrypted format that is accessible to them for data mining – ostensibly to provide you with more targeted advertisement? Will the vendor, acting on their own behalf or on behalf of a third party, scan your data for potential copyright infringement or legally prohibited files?

Nine, will your vendor provide you with sufficient notice of a law enforcement subpoena, administrative summons or a court-ordered examination of your data in sufficient time to argue against the release of the information? What controls will be placed on the data that is provided – considering that portions of your data are beyond the scope of inquiry or may contain legally protected information such as communications with your lawyer?

Ten, will you be violating any local, state or federal statutes by storing information which contains third-party non-public personal information on computers over which you have no absolute control?

Eleven, will your data be retrievable in an acceptable form when you quit the service?

Twelve, will your deleted data be securely expunged on request or will it live in perpetuity. Will the vendor’s rights to access the data be terminated along with your agreement?

And while we could continue listing questions, these are the basic ones which should give you pause before you blindly accept that agreement to store your data in somebody’s cloud. While some offers are mighty attractive – they are also potential sources of unlimited grief should things go wonky.

Bottom line …

You have time, money and effort invested in your data. I would suggest that you adhere to the Better Business Bureau’s code which advises: Investigate Before You Invest?

Remember: “Do No Evil” or similar slogans are corporate mantras, not legal guarantees of ethical behavior, financial responsibility for the loss or misuse of your data or even a guarantee that you will be able to securely access the data when you want and with the device at hand.

Let the buyer beware.


“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Recent reports suggest that the disgraced radical Marxist group involved with ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) is playing a major role in the Occupy Wall Street movement.

According to Fox News …

“EXCLUSIVE: ACORN Playing Behind Scenes Role in 'Occupy' Movement”

“The former New York office for ACORN, the disbanded community activist group, is playing a key role in the self-proclaimed ‘leaderless’ Occupy Wall Street movement, organizing ‘guerrilla’ protest events and hiring door-to-door canvassers to collect money under the banner of various causes while spending it on protest-related activities, sources tell”

“The former director of New York ACORN, Jon Kest, and his top aides are now busy working at protest events for New York Communities for Change (NYCC). That organization was created in late 2009 when some ACORN offices disbanded and reorganized under new names after undercover video exposes prompted Congress to cut off federal funds.”

A disguised skunk still stinks …

“NYCC’s connection to ACORN isn’t a tenuous one: It works from the former ACORN offices in Brooklyn, uses old ACORN office stationery, employs much of the old ACORN staff and, according to several sources, engages in some of the old organization’s controversial techniques to raise money, interest and awareness for the protests.”

“Sources said NYCC has hired about 100 former ACORN-affiliated staff members from other cities – paying some of them $100 a day - to attend and support Occupy Wall Street. Dozens of New York homeless people recruited from shelters are also being paid to support the protests, at the rate of $10 an hour, the sources said.”

As spontaneous as a communist demonstration …

In furtherance of their Marxist ideology, Acorn and the SEIU – Service Employees International Union (founded by the same people) will do or say anything to promote their pro-Marxist agenda. And Barack Obama openly and publicly proclaims he stands with these people.


Bottom Line …

Most of these people have no clue to who is behind “their” movement or how they are being manipulated. All they know is that the message is “populist” and “sounds good to me.”

Others are there for the same reason they go to street fairs – exciting and something to do.

I say that there should be a formal investigation and the agitators held accountable for clean-up costs or any non-permitted activities.

As for Barack Obama and his fellow community organizers, throw the bums out of office and positions of power. Return America to the American ideal – not a slippery slope to the “enlightened workers” of North Korea.

-- steve

Reference Links …

EXCLUSIVE: ACORN Playing Behind Scenes Role In 'Occupy' Movement | Fox News

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

Global Warming: Ignoring the truth ...

Our position has always been that global climate change is a natural phenomena and is the sum expression of a complex chaotic system. The question is, and has always been, can man’s influence in long-term climate affairs even be measurable against the background noise of natural climate variability.

To all but the terminally unaware, the issue of global warming has been a political one – pushed to the forefront by International Marxism as a methodology for internationalizing control over the economies and populations of sovereign nations as a means to further the goals of Marxist ideology.

One of the central tenets of Marxism notes that power is derived from the management of scarcity, whether real or manmade. They posit that the Earth’s natural resources are somewhat finite or that the sustainability limits are linked to population density. Therefore, it is in the best interest of planetary preservation to control the population and allowing an enlightened ruling elite to manage relatively unexceptional units of populations (the people) using “scientific” methods. In other words, an excuse for a centrally-controlled totalitarian government whose central planning benefits everyone. Or “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

Lying through their teeth …

Because the great majority of the United Nation’s IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is comprised mostly of politicians and administrators, it should surprise no one that the science portion of their report is conformed to the political summary and that only 5 out of the alleged 2,500 scientists read all eleven chapters of the 2007 report.

The science is perverted …

The governmental money washing through institutions, projects and scientists has biased the researchers. No other discipline like “climate sciences” has so thoroughly corrupted the science and the peer review process to make a mockery of many of the global conclusions derived from extremely sparse data and extrapolated to unwarranted grand vistas. The inherent bias is that most institutions, projects and scientists are biased towards projects which will be funded and which will allow them to build facilities, support personnel and do some form of research. Therefore the projects they select somewhat conform to the wishes of their governmental patrons.

The real truth …

Examined closely, with the exception of a few obviously biased scientists who have crossed the barrier from scientists to activists, most scientific results are valid for local observations and cannot be extrapolated to larger event horizons.

All of the horrific predictions have been created using silicon silliness … inartfully programmed computer models which feature unwarranted assumptions, grossly simplified and incomplete processes and highly manipulated data inputs. And one of the most ludicrous assertions is that we can predict global climate over hundreds of years to a tenth of a degree accuracy – the decimal position being nothing more than an artificial artifact of the computational process.

What the scientists are really saying …


“ENSO (El Niño/La Niña-Southern Oscillation) is a quasiperiodic climate pattern that occurs across the tropical Pacific Ocean roughly every five years. It is characterized by variations in the temperature of the surface of the tropical eastern Pacific Ocean—warming or cooling known as El Niño and La Niña respectively—and air surface pressure in the tropical western Pacific—the Southern Oscillation. The two variations are coupled: the warm oceanic phase, El Niño, accompanies high air surface pressure in the western Pacific, while the cold phase, La Niña, accompanies low air surface pressure in the western Pacific.”

ENSO causes extreme weather (such as floods and droughts) in many regions of the world. Developing countries dependent upon agriculture and fishing, particularly those bordering the Pacific Ocean, are the most affected.”

As a demonstration of why more climate research is necessary before implementing costly and draconian public policies, I give you the results of a peer-reviewed paper from three well-known climate researchers.

The basis of the study …

“Influence of the Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature”

“The El Nino–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a
tropical Pacific atmosphere-ocean phenomenon but its influence on climate can be seen globally.”

“The detailed mechanisms driving these changes are unclear but large-scale changes in global circulation are involved.”

The extent to which ENSO forcing explains variance in the mean global temperature record has been the subject of several studies, but the additional record in the satellite tropospheric temperature observations provides the opportunity to investigate this further. In our study we quantify the effect of possible ENSO forcing on mean global temperature, both short-term and long-term, and then examine the implications.

Here is the good part: strong correlations with observed climate behaviors …

Change in SOI [Southern Oscillation Index] accounts for 72% of the variance in GTTA [Global Tropospheric Temperature Anomalies] for the 29-year-long MSU[satellite Microwave Sensing Units] record and 68% of the variance in GTTA for the longer 50-year RATPAC [Radiosonde Atmospheric Temperature Products for Assessing Climate] record. Because El Nino Southern Oscillation is known to exercise a particularly strong influence in the tropics, we also compared the SOI with tropical temperature anomalies between 20S and 20N. The results showed that SOI accounted for 81% of the variance in tropospheric temperature anomalies in the tropics.”

Overall the results suggest that the Southern Oscillation exercises a consistently dominant influence on mean global temperature, with a maximum effect in the tropics, except
for periods when equatorial volcanism causes ad hoc cooling. That mean global
tropospheric temperature has for the last 50 years fallen and risen in close accord with
the SOI of 5–7 months earlier shows the potential of natural forcing mechanisms to
account for most of the temperature variation.”

But here is the kicker …

We have shown that the Southern Oscillation is a dominant and consistent influence on mean global temperature.”

“Shifts in temperature are consistent with shifts in the SOI that occur about 7 months earlier. The relationship weakens or breaks down at times of volcanic eruption in the tropics, and meridional heat dispersal likely accounts for this.”

“The slight fall in temperatures prior to the Great Pacific Climate Shift can be attributed to the increasing dominance of positive SOI values (i.e., toward La Nina) leading up to that event and the rise in temperatures following the shift can be attributed to the dominance of negative SOI values since (i.e., a period of extended El Nino tendencies).”

“Since the mid-1990s, little volcanic activity has been observed in the tropics and global average temperatures have risen and fallen in close accord with the SOI of 7 months earlier.”

Finally, this study has shown that natural
climate forcing associated with ENSO
is a major contributor to variability and perhaps recent trends in global temperature, a relationship that is not included in current global climate models.

Riddle me this: One of the major drivers of global temperature changes and a source of the storms that are attributed to global warming is not included in global climate models. How can that be?

And might this encourage politicians and others to reconsider the accuracy and validity of the present models which are the basis for such draconian public policies?

And before the global warming alarmists spout their nonsense …

“The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) predicted that La Nina and the Arctic Oscillation would bring a colder and wetter winter season to the Northwest and central regions of the country--and potentially another ‘Snowmaggedon’ to the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic.”

“’The winter outlook this year is shaped by the redevelopment of La Nina,’ Mike Halpert, deputy director of NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center said on a conference call with reporters.”

“NOAA defines La Nina as ‘unusually cold ocean temperatures in the Equatorial Pacific.’”

“’In very general terms,’ NOAA’s Halpert said, “the outlook favors colder, and wetter than average conditions along the northern part of the nation from the Pacific Northwest to the Great Lakes and drier and warmer than average conditions across much of the South, particularly in the southern Plains.”

“’More specifically,’ he said, ‘a colder than average winter is most likely right along the West Coast and across the northern Plains and Great Lakes states, while a milder than average winter is favored across the south central part of the nation, from the Southwest eastward across the southern Plains to the central Gulf Coast.’”

“NOAA said that precipitation would be heavier than usual in the northern parts of the country and down the valleys of the Ohio and Tennessee rivers.”

Again, “natural climate forcing associated with ENSO is a major contributor to variability and perhaps recent trends in global temperature, a relationship that is not included in current global climate models.

The alarmists tell us that all of this is a result of global warming and yet their vaunted models exclude a potential source of this weather phenomenon. How can this be?

Bottom line …

This is but a single paper, but it puts us, “We the People,” on notice that the major climate models which purport to “prove” that global climate change is greatly influenced by man – and actions must be immediately taken to avoid a planetary emergency -- is based on deeply flawed and incomplete computer models and input data.

And to my way of thinking, it is criminal that the politicians are using this flawed science to push an agenda which features larger government, higher taxes, higher costs, less productivity and above all, the loss of significant portions of our personal freedom.

We must remember:

  • science is not performed by consensus;
  • computer models are but a pale imitation of the physical phenomena they purport to mathematically replicate;
  • computer models are not accepted proof in the scientific community which still relies on experimentation and observation for confirmations;
  • science is a process of perpetual skepticism – hypothesis, challenge, counter challenge – and that skeptics should not be demonized for contributing to the process; and
  • most politicians are corrupt and self-serving.

More research – without political interference -- is needed to determine whether or not man’s influence on the planet can be measured against the noise of natural climate variability and it man’s present abilities can even affect global weather patterns to a measurable extent.

And we need a new crop of politicians to serve as honest brokers for “We the People.” Starting with a clean-up of the Presidency, the Senate, the House and state and local governments in 2012.

Enough is Enough!

-- steve

Reference Links …

McLean, J.D., de Freitas, C.R. and Carter, R.M. 2009. Influence of the Southern Oscillation on tropospheric temperature. Journal of Geophysical Research 114: 10.1029/2008JD011637.

La Nina Strikes Again! NOAA: Colder, Wetter North; Drier South; 'Snowmaggeddon' Threat in East |

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Ron Paul, the man, may be a wonderful small town doctor and an able representative of his mostly small-town bible-belt constituency. But since he has portrayed himself as a man of ideas and is willing to take center stage to declare his candidacy for the 2012 GOP Presidential, let us take a moment to look at Ron Paul the candidate.

To be fair, I have asked a Facebook friend, to comment on Ron Paul. Over the past year, Clint has mounted a vigorous defense of his chosen candidate and is well-qualified to put forth an opinion I respect. I am writing my part of this post without having seen what Clint has said and he knows nothing of what I am writing.

Here is what Clint had to say …

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

In this Republican Primary season, we must decide which one of our candidates will be faithful to that oath. It is true that almost any of the candidates can win a general election against Obama. He’s been a total failure, and he has a list of lies and broken promises a mile long. So often in the news and in political commentary we hear the phrase, “Who has the best chance of beating Obama next November?” We can put up a liberal Republican against Obama and win the election, but where will it get us? We will still be dealing with an administration that doesn’t uphold the Constitution.

The question we need to ask is, “Who will actually uphold the Constitution?” The answer to that question, even for those who hate him, is Ron Paul. No one has so strictly followed the Constitution in their legislative career than he has. But why is that the fundamental question we need to ask? Because the Constitution is there to prevent our federal government from growing out of control. When you get down to it though, you have to have men and women of honor and integrity in office that will strictly abide by the Constitution in their public life, or else you get what we do indeed have today: out of control government.

Some critics of Ron Paul say he has no leadership skills. They say this because he hasn’t gotten the rest of Congress to jump on board with his agenda. This is a rather silly way to measure leadership, however. If you’re serving in Congress with a bunch of people who neither know what the Constitution says nor give a crap about abiding by it, how is that a strike against YOUR leadership skills? I know of many congressmen who get bills passed by getting votes from both sides of the aisle, but what good is that if the bills they pass are unconstitutional and/or grow the size of government? Is that leadership, or is that the blind leading the blind? Ron Paul has stood alone many times as the sole “No” vote. That doesn’t make him ineffective; that makes him a man of principle.

So why should you vote for Ron Paul? For any conservative out there, the simple fact that he will veto any piece of legislation that is unconstitutional should be enough reason for you. And boy, is that a lot of vetoes. Another thing that should make conservatives wet their pants is that the threat of the veto pen will force the Republican Congress to be even more conservative than the Tea Party has been forcing them to be for the past few years. Then there’s the budget plan he rolled out recently. He cuts $1 trillion in the first year, and balances the budget in the third year (all dependent upon Congress, of course). Five departments are eliminated, the federal workforce is trimmed by 10%, and congressional pay as well as his own paycheck will see huge cuts.
Ron Paul has been warning about the national debt for many years. A man of principle speaks out on an issue when it presents itself. A man whose doctrine changes with the wind joins in when it is either too late or almost too late. There are many latecomers on the issues of the national debt, the Federal Reserve, and foreign policy. There’s only one candidate who has been right for decades, and that man is Ron Paul.
Typically on financial issues you hardly find a conservative who disagrees with Ron Paul, or they at least mostly agree. The most disagreement you see is on foreign policy. This is usually because they simply don’t understand foreign policy enough to make a sound judgment, and instead defer to talking points or the party line. When I first looked into Ron Paul back in 2008, I was wary of him on foreign policy. I’d grown up listening to Rush Limbaugh, watching Fox News, etc. and just couldn’t bring myself to accept his views on that. Then I read Ron Paul’s book called “A Foreign Policy of Freedom” and my concerns were gone. The book is basically a collection of Ron Paul’s speeches on foreign policy from 1976 to 2007. I can’t tell you how many times my jaw hit the floor while reading this book. So much of the time, he’d give a speech and say, “We need to stop doing this or we’ll suffer some dire consequences”. A little while passes and something bad does happen because of that particular policy, and he gives another speech saying, “See, I told you so! Can we stop this now?”

Ron Paul has been especially perceptive on Mideast policy. Consider his words in 1983 concerning Israel and Lebanon:

“Israel has not and will not benefit from our persistent involvement in the Mideast. Since our dollars flow to both Arabs and Israelis, we will not be inclined to allow either side to decide for itself what is in its own best interest. Israel, under today’s circumstances, cannot retain its sovereignty, for we will always feel compelled to criticize their actions if, in our opinion, these actions destabilize the area.”

Shock of all shocks, Ron Paul still feels the same way today. He still calls for our government to stay out of Israel’s business and let them decide what’s best for them. He still calls for an end to all foreign aid because it arms Israel’s enemies and guarantees Israel remains a welfare state, not to mention that foreign aid is unconstitutional and we’re broke. When Israel bombed Iraq’s nuclear reactor at Osirak in 1981, he was one of very few who supported Israel while the Reagan administration and the UN condemned them for it.

But what about terrorism? Ron Paul was the only one of our elected officials to warn America that Islamic terrorism would be coming to our shores if our foreign policy wasn’t significantly changed. He warned us in three separate speeches: One in 1998, one in February of 2001, and again in July 2001. Some people like to say he blames America for 9/11. Ron Paul has never blamed America for 9/11. He has consistently blamed government policy. To say he blames America for 9/11 would be like saying the Tea Party blames America for the national debt. Sounds stupid when you say it out loud, doesn’t it?

Americans typically understand that the government is to blame for our problems in domestic policy, yet those same people seem to think that SAME government is a great decision maker when it comes to foreign policy. That may have more to do with nationalism than anything else. As George Orwell noted, “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” I believe that pretty well sums up how most Americans view 9/11 and foreign policy when taken together. For many Americans, history began on 9/11 and the attacks came out of nowhere. Heck, I used to be one of those people until I studied history, and the history reveals that our government has pulled off some seriously sorry crap in the Middle East over the years, and those policies continue to this day.

Others believe 9/11 and terrorism in general are part of muslim conquest. If this were true, it would be the first time in history muslims sought empire by not conquering nearby lands, but rather by trying to conquer a land thousands of miles away, and by only using a ragtag band of terrorists and no army. That’s another one of those things that sounds stupid when you say it out loud. The fact of the matter is that revenge is engineered into Islam. If you know this to be a fact, why would you do anything to bring wrath upon your own country? Ron Paul knows these things, and this is why he was able to foresee that Islamic terrorism would come to our own shores if we didn’t make some serious changes in foreign policy.

Is Ron Paul alone in this view of terrorism? In 2004, Donald Rumsfeld directed the Pentagon’s Defense Science Board Task Force to review the impact the Bush administration’s policies — specifically the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — were having on terrorism and Islamic radicalism. They issued a report in September, 2004 and it condemned the Bush/Cheney approach as entirely counterproductive, and that it was worsening the terrorist threat those policies purportedly sought to reduce. It also revealed that the terrorists don’t care about our freedom, they hate our policies. They see our one sided support of Israel against Palestine, our support of tyrannies in various muslim countries, and the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan as an affront to muslim self determination. The 9/11 Commission Report and the CIA also reached about the same conclusion. Remember KSM, the mastermind behind 9/11? He’s the one we waterboarded multiple times and supposedly got some great information out of him. He said the reason he planned the attacks was because of US policy. Now, at this point some folks will say muslims can lie to advance their faith. Yes, and so can Christians. Remember Rahab? However, it’s a little quirky to say the guy who was waterboarded for information lied about this one thing, and that one thing just happened to be the reasoning behind his involvement in the plot. These folks who throw out the taqiyya card seem to think that these terrorist muslims who are supposedly trying to conquer America are all together on this huge lie about WHY they’re doing it. It’s a first in muslim history, but this is what they want us to believe. Yeah, that’s another one of those things that sounds stupid when you say it out loud. Furthermore, they fail to realize that taqiyya refers not to lying in general but to concealing your faith from an oppressor in order to protect your life and/or property from damage.
So why, in a write up about Ron Paul, would I include such a huge section on foreign policy and Islam? Because in my experience, it is those two subjects which keep people from voting for Ron Paul, and instead leads them to call him a nutter or a dangerous man. In reality, when you fully utilize what’s in your brain housing unit you will see he’s the only choice for president. So now for the summation:

1. Ron Paul will veto A LOT of bills passed by Congress, since most of them are unconstitutional

2. The veto threat will force the Republicans to be even more conservative

3. He’s the only candidate who has proposed serious cuts that address our debt/budget problems and will pull us back from the brink.

4. He’s led by example by strictly upholding the Constitution, even when it was unpopular.

5. He’s the only elected leader in the US who warned Islamic terror was going to come to our shores if our foreign policy didn’t significantly change.

6. He’s the only candidate who understands that the status quo foreign policy is not only counterproductive in fighting terror, but we simply can’t afford it anymore.

7. In a presidential debate with Obama, he can paint the president as a hypocrite on just about every foreign policy issue, and he can dominate him in any discussion of the economy.

8. There’s no other candidate with Ron Paul’s knowledge of the Constitution, foreign policy, and economic and monetary policy.

9. Lastly, the guy who predicted the economic crisis is the guy we need to get us out of it. That’s Ron Paul.

My viewpoint …

Ron Paul’s lack of legislative achievements during his long political career …

Ron Paul has served as a member of the House of Representatives from Texas multiple times (1976-1977, 1979-1985, and 1996 – present). At 76, he has announced that he will not seek another term as a Representative.

Ron Paul is a self-described libertarian running for office as a Republican. If one could sum up Paul’s position, it would be as a Constitutionalist concentrating on adhering to the Constitution as written. His positions/policies include non-interventionism in foreign affairs, terminating federal agencies not authorized in the Constitution, massive tax reductions, eliminating participation in organizations such as the United Nations and World Trade Organization; and returning much of the power held at the federal level to the states and local communities via deregulation.

Many of his ideas cannot be implemented without damage to the country and its allies.

While Ron Paul has co-sponsored the legislation of others, he does not appear to have any significant signature legislative initiatives that were passed over his long career as a Representative. He is known by some of his colleagues as Dr. No for his opposition to much of what the House proposes, discusses and passed.

Ron Paul’s alleged bigotry …

Paul’s past includes a newsletter publishing venture which featured the work of anonymous contributors but presented in the first person under Paul’s name and ostensibly with Paul’s knowledge and permission.

These newsletters often took a racist and bigoted viewpoint. While Ron Paul denies writing those particular entries, he is damned if he did and damned if he didn’t – as they were published under his name.

“Take, for instance, a special issue of the Ron Paul Political Report, published in June 1992, dedicated to explaining the Los Angeles riots of that year. ‘Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks three days after rioting began,’ read one typical passage. According to the newsletter, the looting was a natural byproduct of government indulging the black community with ‘civil rights,' quotas, mandated hiring preferences, set-asides for government contracts, gerrymandered voting districts, black bureaucracies, black mayors, black curricula in schools, black tv shows, black tv anchors, hate crime laws, and public humiliation for anyone who dares question the black agenda.’ It also denounced ‘the media’ for believing that ‘America's number one need is an unlimited white checking account for underclass blacks.’"

“As early as December 1989, a section of Paul's Investment Letter, titled ‘What To Expect for the 1990s,’ predicted that ‘Racial Violence Will Fill Our Cities’ because ‘mostly black welfare recipients will feel justified in stealing from mostly white 'haves.’"

“In the early 1990s, a newsletter attacked the ‘X-Rated Martin Luther King’ as a ‘world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours,’ ‘seduced underage girls and boys,’ and ‘made a pass at’ fellow civil rights leader Ralph Abernathy....”

“A 1987 issue of Paul's Investment Letter called Israel ‘an aggressive, national socialist state,’ and a 1990 newsletter discussed the ‘tens of thousands of well-placed friends of Israel in all countries who are willing to wok [sic] for the Mossad in their area of expertise.’ Of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, a newsletter said, ‘Whether it was a setup by the Israeli Mossad, as a Jewish friend of mine suspects, or was truly a retaliation by the Islamic fundamentalists, matters little.’" <Source>

If any of this is true, Ron Paul is no more fit to be the President of the United States than Barack Obama.

It also appears that Ron Paul will take money from white supremacist groups while at the same time proclaiming that those are not his views. Why he doesn’t return the money may be more indicative of a case of watching the action, not the rhetoric.

“Jesse Benton, communications director for Ron Paul for President 2008, said he was unaware of the existence of Stormfront until just a few days ago, though Stormfront radio endorsed Paul in mid-October.”

“As for what the campaign will do with the supremacist donations, Benton said white supremacists are wasting their money on Paul, a physician and long-time congressman from Texas. ‘We are not in the business of trying to track who is giving us money,’ Benton said. ‘If they want to waste their money on us we will take it and use it to promote freedom and individual rights, not their agenda.’”

“There is no indication that Paul has courted right-wing support. But a wide array of white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups have backed him nonetheless, and there have been rumors about right-wing support in the blogosphere for months.” <Source>

Ron Paul’s skewed version of foreign affairs …

2007 – “Presidential candidate Ron Paul says the U.S. is in ‘great danger’ of a staged Gulf of Tonkin style provocation while also warning that a major collapse of the American economy is on the horizon and could be precipitated by the bombing of Iran and the closure of the Persian Gulf.”

"’I think we're in great danger of it,’ responded the Congressman, ‘We're in danger in many ways, the attack on our civil liberties here at home, the foreign policy that's in shambles and our obligations overseas and commitment which endangers our troops and our national defense.’"

"’Every day we're in worse shape and right now there's an orchestrated effort to blame the Iranians for everything that's gone wrong in Iraq and we're quite concerned that the attack will be on Iran and that will jeopardize so many more of our troops, so I would say that we're in much greater danger than we even were four or five years ago,’ asserted Paul.” <Source>

Here is the Presidential candidate who believes that Iran has a right to nuclear weapons for self-defense and other reasons and that we should terminate all foreign aid in the region. Let Israel stand alone among her enemies.

“I’m not an isolationist, I’m a free-trader. The isolationist are the ones who won’t even trade with Cuba, and they’re the ones who want to put on sanctions, they want to isolate these countries and they always use sanctions. So I think that’s wrong, our founders advised us that we trade with people and be friends with as many as are willing to accept our friendship. And we’re doing the opposite, we get involved in these entangling alliances, we go to war under NATO and the United Nations. And, like I said, there are nuclear weapons all over place over there. If you’re an Iranian, I’m sure you would say, ‘Oh, it’s in our best interest, we ought to gain some respect because if we have a weapon, maybe they might not attack us.’ But they’re surrounded by nuclear weapons; Israel, India, Pakistan, China, United States, Russia; they all have these nuclear weapons and they barely think about it. When they try to enrich for peaceful purposes, they get condemned for it. So yes, there’s a lot of bad people over there, there’s a lot of violent people around the world, but believe me, the Iranians don’t have a tradition of sending troops and invading countries 6000 miles from their shores and occupying another country. Matter of fact, they’re pretty respectful of their borders and the wars they got into in the 1980s was because we instigated the Iraqis to go in to Iran. So I would say a good assessment of that would give you a better appreciation of their position.’” <Source>

Ron Paul’s view of history …

“However, Congressman Paul uttered some shocking, if not downright bizarre, comments yesterday during his interview. He claimed that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 had everything to do with government taking over property rights and nothing to do with race relations. He claimed that Ronald Reagan was a ‘failure’ because he didn't bring down the federal government to ‘constitutional levels,’ whatever that means.”

“Even more surprising and dismaying to me is Congressman Paul's complete lack of understanding about Abraham Lincoln and the reasons for the Civil War. Paul stated in the interview ‘Six hundred thousand Americans died in a senseless civil war…. [President Abraham Lincoln] did this just to enhance and get rid of the original intent of the republic,’ Paul said. ‘Every other major country in the world got rid of slavery without a civil war. I mean, that doesn't sound too radical to me. That sounds like a pretty reasonable approach.’" <Source>

Paul has a strange idea that he can reverse most governmental actions by “executive orders.” In fact, in some conversations, he put forth the notion that Lincoln could have used federal money to simply purchase all of the slaves and set them free. A rather naive or nut-ball idea.

Conspiracy theories …

“The CFR is one of the most feared and vilified groups in the world among the sort of conspiracy theorist wackos whose support Congressman Paul has been shamelessly soliciting for the past year. The CFR, along with the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission, and those owl-worshipping heretics at Bohemian Grove, is one of the main organizations comprising the Illuminati, the New World Order, the Republican National Committee - whatever you want to call it, the cabal of shadowy aristocrats who control all the banks and are plotting to enslave us all beneath the yoke of a world government.” <Source>

Where I do agree …

Not everything that Paul says can be dismissed out-of-hand. I do believe that the Federal Reserve is a proximate cause of the type of asset bubbles that lead to over-corrections and result in recessions and depressions.

I do believe that the federal government has usurped power from the states with its extra-constitutional interpretations and that a number of federal agencies should be eliminated.

I do believe that the federal government should remove some of our foreign-based troops and defend our own borders.

I do believe that much of our foreign aid and/or participation in global institutions is unjustified and, in many cases, downright stupid.

But because I agree – and because some of the other 2012 presidential candidates do not speak of these issues – does not mean I think Ron Paul has the ability, support or character to fundamentally reform America. An incremental process rather than a radical one. In fact, as I have stated before, Paul could cause great damage to our country and our allies should he implement some of his ideas.

Bottom line …

Ron Paul may have some traction with his supporters and a small segment of the public who believes that some of his ideas are sound. Even given that some of his ideas on cutting government spending and eliminating a number of agencies are attractive, I suggest that Paul is not the man to lead the charge nor the man with the actual power to get it accomplished. In many ways, he blew his opportunity to exert real leadership in the House – but he appears to have been virtually ignored by his colleagues as a back-bencher.

Paul even had trouble securing a much broader base of support when he ran for the Senate in 1984, a prophetic year which saw Phil Graham disembowel much of the legislation which would be the precursor to today’s financial crisis.

It appears that Paul is a modern-day Lyndon LaRouche, complete with a cult following and some strange ideas of how the world is supposed to work.

While I may disagree with many and have my own share of detractors, I suggest that you consider this blog post when you think about Ron Paul and his presidential aspiration.

Personally, I think he is a small time grifter and a nutter who has managed to make a career out of speaking “conservative.” Clint disagrees and makes his points. Between us, your should have something to think about as 2012 approaches. But the one thing that both of us agree on is …

Capture11-3-2010-3.06.37 PM

-- steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Like government gun control which penalizes law-abiding citizens and rewards law-breaking criminals, Obama is giving even more money to those who may have acted irresponsibly in voluntarily assuming more debt that they could handle. Like spending more money on the worst students and leaving the bright, productive students to fend for themselves.

Nobody has allowed me to fund a vacation or purchase a boat with a home loan – and then offered me a degree of forgiveness at the taxpayer’s expense.

What’s next, forgiveness of credit card debt so the cycle can repeat itself?

Here is an example of a dishonest domestic policy designed to purchase votes with your money.

Talking back to Obama (in blue italics) …

Capture9-13-2011-4.52.24 PM

Friend --

Now that each and every Senate Republican has vowed to block measures that would create jobs, President Obama is not going to wait for them to rebuild the economy and bring financial security back to the middle class.

There is no proof that Obama’s jobs program does anything different from the last failed stimulus program which funneled money to federal and union-related employees while ignoring the great private sector which actually provides goods and services.

Obama’s use of our taxpayer money to support failed green programs which went bankrupt or supported foreign workers.

Today, he announced new rules on federal mortgages to prevent more families from losing their homes to foreclosure. And that's just the beginning -- the President said he would continue to make the changes he can by executive action, while continuing to urge Congress to act on legislation to strengthen the economy and create jobs.

What does cutting loan rates for people who couldn’t afford their homes in the first place do for the creation of jobs?

If Congress doesn't act, he will -- because millions of Americans can't just wait for Congress to do their jobs. That's why thousands of you have been calling and tweeting your representatives over the past month, joining the President in sending a message to lawmakers in Washington that they need to act now.

Congress now realizes that the people will hold them responsible for their actions and are scared to act. The democrat/socialists want bigger government and more spending to be channeled to the government, government-related, union-controlled jobs.

So Obama is left with little choice other than to put forward more regulation – administrative rules and regulation to subvert and circumvent the function of Congress.

We're not just going to continue to wait -- and we'll be keeping up the pressure by making sure they're hearing from folks across the country every day about why they need to act.

Will you share your story -- and join President Obama in telling Congress that we can't and won't wait?

No! We can wait – preferably until we get honest brokers acting on behalf of “We the People.”

Republicans in Congress have repeatedly filibustered the President's ideas to create jobs now -- ideas that until recently were supported by Republicans.

Republicans supported the “idea” of various jobs initiative – not the heavy-handed government/union-focused charades that buy political support for democrats using your tax dollars.

The President's action today also stands in stark contrast to the positions of the Republicans running for president.

Mitt Romney even told a newspaper last week that we actually shouldn't act; we should let the housing crisis "run its course" and "hit the bottom" so that "investors" can come in and buy up these homes at cheap prices. He's saying to homeowners that they are on their own, forcing thousands of families to explain to their kids why they have to give up their homes.

Government interference in the housing and financial markets was the proximate cause of this financial crisis, exacerbated by the financial institutions themselves.

But unless the real estate market finds its true bottom or continues to be propped up by Obama’s continual interference – there will never be a truthful valuation of real estate and the current crisis will be prolonged.

Doing nothing while families struggle: that's the opposite of what this president and this campaign stand for. President Obama isn't going to let Congress' inaction stop him from doing what he can right now.

Perhaps, the most important thing Obama can do is NOTHING! Let the free market work its magic and keep the socialist central planners from picking winners and losers.

So here's what the President's announcement means:

-- More families whose homes are under water will get help and save money on their monthly mortgage payment through the Home Affordable Refinance Programs.

This is a voluntary program that is actually controlled by the individual lenders and servicers who participate in the program.

The program is run by the two insolvent government sponsored entities, Fannie Mae ad Freddie Mac which must go hat-in-hand to the Treasury department every quarter for their multi-billion dollar bailout lest they be ruled insolvent by the court.

-- If the value of your mortgage is $100,000 and your house is valued at $75,000, you previously weren't able to refinance to save your home -- forcing many families to pay higher interest rates. As a result of today's announcement, many more responsible homeowners will be able to lower their rates and pay their debts.

What rational person or institution is going to loan more than your house is worth? But that is what Obama is really proposing.

Notice Obama doesn’t have the cojones to demand that the lenders and servicers actually reduce the principal loan balance to its appraised value and re-establish an affordable loan?

Of course, lenders would have to be crazy to do that because the housing market is artificially subsidized by the government and has not yet reached a true bottom. Hello Mitt Romney!

-- And this is just one of the incremental changes to come. Next, the President will announce new steps to help young people manage their federal student loan debt while they look for a job and get on their feet. He'll also take action to help small businesses and entrepreneurs, spur the engines of job growth, create new jobs, and assist veterans in finding them.

Obama is simply being dishonest. How many people realize that the government controls the student loan program in the United States. Giving out money to any breathing person with little or no underwriting standards?

How many people realize that student debt totals $1 TRILLION which surpasses the total of credit card debt?

How many people realize that some student loans are unfairly forgiven if you go to work for the government or a government-approved agency?

What do students do when they can’t get a job? They take more loans and stay in school. Like that degree in gender studies has value in the real world.

These measures alone are not a comprehensive solution to the economic challenges we face. That needs to come out of Congress -- and if they're going to finally put party aside, they're going to need to keep hearing from us. President Obama is stepping up the pressure, and he's counting on us to keep going, too.

Neither of these initiatives create jobs, so what the hell is Obama talking about?

Get the President's back and keep the heat on Congress -- tell your story of why we can't wait any longer: <link removed>



James Kvaal
Policy Director
Obama for America

Bottom line …

Barack Obama is still blowing smoke up our backside while he is busy campaigning, golfing, talking with Letterman and Leno, shooting hoops – doing everything but learning how to do his job and governing.

His new “We can’t wait!” slogan is more false urgency – quick pass this legislation before you can read it or understand what it does.

This is nothing more than a power grab by Obama and his socialist/communist fellow travelers who want to usurp the power of Congress to pursue their own twisted ideology.

Time for a change.

Capture9-9-2011-12.45.46 PM

-- steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

Gilad Shalit and the Israel Prisoner Repatriation: WHY?

How many times have you heard it said, “our government does not negotiate with terrorists?” If you negotiate with terrorists and participate in exchanging men, money or materials, you simply encourage such behavior and reinforce its effectiveness as another tool of conflict.

So we wonder why Israel would trade 1,000+ prisoners for a single kidnapped low-ranking soldier?

And I am not the only one wondering …

The Deal For Gilad Schalit

In October of 1938, Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain triumphantly returned from Munich carrying an agreement with Adolph Hitler​ that achieved “peace with honor.” Although the English people were overjoyed, Winston Churchill​ was less sanguine. In a speech to the House of Commons, Churchill stated that England had “sustained a total and unmitigated defeat.” He then prophetically warned:

And do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigor, we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.

Churchill’s chilling words should haunt the decision of the Israeli government to release more than 1000 Palestinian terrorists in exchange for Gilad Schalit​. Notwithstanding the approval of the media and much of the Israeli public, the decision is a tragedy, both morally perverse and strategically shortsighted.

One must sympathize with the Schalit family and the agony it endured. It is normal for a parent to implore the government to pay any price to save the life of his child. The Prime Minister and his Cabinet, however, have a more profound responsibility. They were obligated to resist emotional appeals and instead safeguard the people of Israel as a whole. They have failed abysmally. Their capitulation to Hamas is disastrous on several levels.

First, the deal with Hamas is a betrayal of the families of the victims of the terrorists who will be released. Imagine the searing pain of knowing that the person who murdered your son or daughter will be released.

Second, the decision has validated kidnapping as a valuable “get out of jail free” card. Israel can expect more soldiers and citizens to be seized and held hostage, and to face ransom demands that will continue to escalate.

Third, it sends a message to the members of the Israeli security forces whose jobs are to hunt down and capture terrorists that their efforts are wasted. It makes no sense to confront danger and risk one’s own life to arrest terrorists who are likely to be released.

Fourth, statistics show that a substantial percentage of released prisoners return to terrorism. It is a virtual certainty that many Jews will pay for this deal with their lives; we simply do not yet know their names. What will Israel’s leaders say to the families of the future victims of terrorist attacks? One thing is for sure: they will not be able to claim they did not know what would happen.

There was another way for the government to demonstrate its determination to free Schalit. The Prime Minister could have appeared on television and announced that all food, water, electricity and other goods that had been flowing into Gaza would be stopped until Schalit was released. He could have announced that, should anything happen to Schalit, the consequences to Gaza would be even more devastating. The international community would have screamed about collective punishment, but it’s a sure bet that an urgent effort would have been made to free Schalit to avoid these consequences. It is very possible that such a strong approach would have succeeded in freeing Schalit, especially if the threat were credible. Even if this approach did not convince Hamas to release Schalit unharmed, as long as Israel kept its promise of a crushing retaliation, at least future kidnappings would have been convincingly deterred.

Instead, Hamas is jubilant about its victory over Israel, and justifiably so. Khaled Mashaal has every reason to crow about Hamas’ “great achievement.” In contrast, the Jewish people have been “weighed on the scales and found wanting.” Sukkot, which is supposed to be a joyous holiday, has been stained and scarred. It will now mark our craven surrender to evil, to the shame of Israel and the entire Jewish nation.

Nancy Bonus, Ph.D.

Chapter Leader - San Fernando Valley ACT

Founder - Protecting American Values Everywhere

The case for not releasing prisoners appears to be overwhelming, so we ask why did this occur?

Israel is neither stupid or hyper-politicized when it comes to their national leaders and issues of existential threats. So, WHY?

In my opinion, it may have to do with the so-called Arab Spring and the democratization of anti-dictator protests which threatened to topple existing leaders and nations.

Perhaps this was a method for allowing the newly-formed government in Egypt to demonstrate its newfound power with Israel and shore up its transitional government?

Perhaps, it was a method for simultaneously showing Israel’s displeasure with Turkey?

Perhaps this is a way to split Hezbollah (Shia) and Hamas (Sunni) when it comes to their common goal of destroying Israel?

Perhaps this was a method for bringing Hamas to the bargaining table as a direct party by allowing Hamas to claim what appears to be a major negotiation victory?

Perhaps this may have countered Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' move to attempt to obtain back-door recognition of the Palestinian Authority and Fatah at the United Nations; a move which appeared to weaken Hamas in the Palestinian’s eyes? Especially since partially lifting the blockade of Hamas territory in Gaza may provide a better quality of life – similar to that enjoyed by the Fatah-controlled West Bank.

But more importantly, perhaps this removed Hamas as an agent of Iran, setting the stage for some form of direct Israeli action in the near future; with the expectation that Egypt and Hamas would not engage Israel in defense of Iran?

Bottom line …

It does not appear that Israel is getting an credit from the international community for this humanitarian act because it is being seen as just another indication of realpolitik stagecraft.

Israel appears to have made a bloody deal with the devil, how it will turn out is anyone’s guess.

But whatever the reason, Israel will come out on top. It always has – and God willing, it always will.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


The mainstream media is doing their best to characterize the Occupy Wall Street crowd as ordinary Americans who are disaffected and dissatisfied with the current state of our economy and bringing attention to Wall Street as the proximate cause. Something akin to a younger, hipper version of the Tea Party Movement.

Nothing could be further from the truth …

This is a well-orchestrated propaganda ploy on behalf of radical Marxists and their fellow travelers, the communists and anarchists, who are attempting to build another grass-roots political movement to promote a far left ideology.

Look beyond the students, many of whom consider this to be a recreation of the fabled 60s protest movements which featured hippies, free love, drugs, sex and rock-and-roll and you will see the same old socialists, Marxists, communists and anarchists who inhabit the no-nukes, social justice and environmental justice movements. The people who believe capitalism must be defeated and destroyed to bring justice to the people. These are the people screaming “Power to the People” while ceding their personal power and individuality to a clique that is defined by Marxism to be the enlightened, ruling elite. Where the individual is destroyed in favor of the collective and everything is about justice: “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Pure Marxism which has bred some of the most violent and vicious mass-murdering regimes in history.

All welcomed by President Obama and his fellow travelers in Congress – including the democrats, many of whom are thoroughly corrupt and acting in their self-interest; using their leftist agenda to plunder the U.S. Treasury and achieve perpetual political power.

They need this rag-tag group to divert attention from the tremendous damage the democrats and Barack Obama have done to America.

They need to occupy the mainstream media with their drivel lest they report on the real government corruption happening in front of their faces.

They need to insure Obama and the democrats are not held accountable for their corruption.

View the movie as see the tax cheat who controlled much of the tax legislation, Charlie Rangel, explain “I cannot possibly see anything more American than this.” Since when is the Communist Party part of America?

How stupid are these protesters?

The truth is hiding in plain sight – obscured by the hoopla and mainstream media. Government policies and the failure of the hyper-politicized regulatory agencies were the enablers of this financial fiasco. It is the government who was pushing billions to foreign countries as part of its wealth redistribution program. It was the government that was pushing billions to left wing educational institutions to study global warming science – to convince citizens that the draconian public policies which created higher taxes, higher prices and reduced personal freedoms were necessary to save the planet.

But if you want to see these students go crazy, wait until they find out that the government took over the handling of student loans – giving loans to anyone that was breathing – mainly to subsidize the educational institutions which were biased to the left and controlled by unions.

Wait until these useful idiots find out that student loans are the new subprime bubble – over $1 trillion outstanding in 2011; more than the nation’s credit card debt. And unlike credit card debt, student loans are difficult to discharge in bankruptcy.

Wait until they find that their $100,000 degree in “gender studies” or “social justice” is worthless in today’s technological society. And that nobody gives a rat’s ass for their interpretation of the social customs of illegal aliens.

And, unlike the Tea Party Movement, a politer, cleaner group that wants smaller government, lower taxes and less government interference in the free market, this crowd want increased taxes, more government and a Marxist redistribution of wealth. Un-American to its core.

From my friends at The Campaign to Defeat Barack Obama …

Scary huh?

And the progressives are not only on the left …

We have progressives on the right – one need only look at Mitt Romney to see that he is a RINO; Republican In Name Only. A flip-flopper whose positions change with the last poll numbers. A man whose RomneyCare became the plan for ObamaCare. A man whose 59-point plan smacks of Obama’s rhetoric – taxing those above $200,000.

“As president, Romney will seek to eliminate taxation on capital gains, dividends, and interest for any taxpayer with an adjusted gross income of under $200,000, helping
Americans to prepare for retirement and enjoy the freedom that accompanies
financial security. This would encourage more Americans to save and to invest for
the long-term, which would in turn free up capital for investment flowing back
into the economy and helping to facilitate economic growth.” <Source>

Draw your own conclusion about those who have an adjusted gross income of $200,000. – Hello Mr. Obamney!

Bottom line …

While I acknowledge that our financial institutions were complicit in the catastrophe before us, I know four things.

One, our present system of corrupt government officials pandering to the special interests is unsustainable.

Two, our nation is beset with individuals who do not wish America well – and may be following the dictates of foreign powers.

Three, we need to elect constitutional conservatives to office; honest brokers to serve “We the People.”

And I do not mean nutters like Ron Paul who whines endlessly about a libertarian world that exists nowhere in nature. Or useful aisle-hopping idiots like John McCain, Lindsey Graham and the other so-called “moderates.”


Capture8-29-2011-7.21.20 PM

Wishing you and yours safety, security and the America we all deserve.

-- steve

Check out Herman Cain – he may not be polished, may misspeak from time-to-time, but he is certainly as qualified as any of the other “political candidates” and probably a whole lot “truthier.”  The mere fact that the mainstream media is supporting Mitt Romney as the “front runner” should give you pause.

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS


Basically, I think Mitt Romney is every bit a manufactured image as Barack Obama – the progressive’s dream candidate who is himself a progressive RINO (Republican In Name Only).

Let us, for a moment, concentrate on one issue of great importance to me: global warming. The progressive wet dream which subverts science in order to convince the public that it is prudent to install a permanent political class in America and provide them with unfettered access to the taxpayer’s money and control over individual citizens. In short, the Marxist dream of an “enlightened ruling class” controlling an unexceptional populace using scientific means. Central planning writ so large as to look like totalitarianism.

Mitt Romney’s position on global warming …

As reported in the Boston Globe …

“Romney reaffirms stance that global warming is real.” (June 4, 2011)

“In the first town hall of his freshly announced presidential campaign, Mitt Romney yesterday reaffirmed his view that global warming is occurring and that humans are contributing to it, a position that has been rejected in recent years by many Republicans as the issue has taken on a greater partisan tinge.”

“I don’t speak for the scientific community, of course,’’ Romney said. “But I believe the world’s getting warmer. I can’t prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that … so I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and the global warming that you’re seeing.’’ <Source>

But as we can all plainly see, Romney has a terrible history of saying or doing anything that will allow him to gain or maintain power. A flip-flopper of the first order.

As reported in Politico Pro …

“Mitt Romney tweaks climate stance.” (August 24, 2011)

“Hours after being called ‘mushy on environmental issues’ by a Republican senator, Mitt Romney has tweaked his position on global warming.”

“Asked Wednesday at a Lebanon, N.H., town hall meeting whether he believed in global warming and if humans contribute to rising temperatures, Romney said he doesn't know.”

“’"Do I think the world's getting hotter? Yeah, I don't know that but I think that it is,’ Romney said, as reported by Reuters. ‘I don't know if it's mostly caused by humans.’" <Source>

But even worse than his position on global warming was his scientific advisor for global warming issues …

For what I can tell, Mitt Romney has a clear association with the Marxist devil himself, John Holdren.

“[Obama’s] Science Czar John Holdren, a participant in ClimateGate who has advocated de-developing America and putting sterilants in the public water supply.”

“Holdren has also spoken in favor of forced abortions, confiscation of babies, targeted as well as mass involuntary sterilization, bureaucratic regulation of family size, and global authoritarian government. If there is a line between ultra-left ideologue and evil maniac, Holdren clearly crosses it.” <Source>

And it might be a long-term relationship?


“New clean air rules balance environmental and economic goals”

“Governor Mitt Romney today announced that Massachusetts will take another major step in meeting its commitment to protecting air quality when strict state limitations on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants take effect on January 1, 2006.”

“’Massachusetts continues to be committed to improving air quality for all our citizens. These carbon emission limits will provide real and immediate progress in the battle to improve our environment,’ Romney said. ‘They help us accomplish our environmental goals while protecting jobs and the economy.’”

Massachusetts is the first and only state to set CO2 emissions limits on power plants. The limits, which target the six largest and oldest power plants in the state, are the toughest in the nation and are designed to lower emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and mercury from power plant smokestacks.”

“The combination of these market-based mechanisms with stringent CO2 caps will lead to cost-effective environmental gains.”

“In the development of greenhouse gas policy, Romney Administration officials have elicited input from environmental and economic policy experts. These include John Holden, professor of environmental policy at Harvard University and chair of the National Commission on Energy Policy and Billy Pizer, an economist at Resources for the Future, an environmental policy think-tank based in Washington D.C.” <Source>

John Holdren is currently in the news …

“Obama Science Czar Led UN Effort to Hide Proceedings, Subvert FOIA, Records Indicate”

“Washington, D.C., October 17, 2011 - The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request today with the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), run by controversial White House Science Adviser (and former Mitt Romney climate adviser) John Holdren. The FOIA request seeks records involving an apparently co-ordinated effort between OSTP and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to subvert and circumvent U.S. law.

“Specifically, CEI's FOIA request seeks details of the Obama Administration's involvement in a UN IPCC plan to hide official online correspondence in non-governmental accounts. The express purpose of creating a non-government web-site "cloud" communications system was to avoid national transparency laws, such as the U. S. FOIA. However, with OSTP having taken over the lead U.S. role in the IPCC in 2009, this also implicates the Presidential Records Act of 1978 (PRA).”

“The new IPCC system sought to shield U. S. government employees working on the Fifth Assessment Report from FOIA requests by hiding their correspondence, even though they are being tasked and paid by the federal government to work on the report. The scandal-plagued IPCC is funded with millions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. CEI demonstrates in its FOIA request that the IPCC's motivation to avoid future FOIA requests was past embarrassment over releases of earlier communications between IPCC officials and participating bureaucrats, appointees and scientists working on the assessment reports.” <Source>

From what I can tell, Holdren is a committed Marxist ideologue willing to subvert science and country to pursue his chosen twisted philosophy.

Bottom line …

There was RomneyCare in liberal Massachusetts which President Obama credits as being the model for ObamaCare. A legislative initiative which is based on Marxist-like Central Planning and can implement rules and regulations which could easily cost you your life. No matter what you may think of Sarah Palin, she had the issue pegged correctly: Death Panels overseen by government bureaucrats, responsible to no one except their political appointers.

Then there was global warming and the demonization of carbon dioxide –- with regulations over our energy creation, distribution and usages. All based on the science as promoted by a committed Marxist ideologue, John Holdren.

Now being a member of the James Bond method of threat assessment, I am saying:

Once is happenstance;

Twice is coincidence;

Three times it is enemy action!

Not being able to rely on Mitt Romney, whose words and deeds are subject to change at the drop of a poll, I believe that we cannot take a chance that – no matter what Romney’s business background might have been – the man is a Massachusetts' liberal in the mold of fellow Massachusetts’ progressive democrats: Teddy Kennedy, John Kerry and Barney Frank.

His past actions say he is a progressive!

I would rather vote for a Herman Cain, a businessman with a background in statistical analysis, than another “go along to get along liberal politician” who appears to have the same demeanor and empty-suit quality as Barack Obama. A man without core beliefs and who will throw anyone under the bus should it prevent him from assuming the responsibility which rightly falls on his shoulders.

I do not like Mitt Romney based on what I see. And when the liberal mainstream media falls in behind the idea that Romney is the chosen GOP candidate, the hair on the back of my neck stands up and all of my senses cry out: Danger, Danger.

Say what you will, the plastic doll that is Romney is more likely to continue the policies of Carter, Clinton, Bush and Obama than not. He has proven he is susceptible to lobbying and may be likely to sell us down the drain. Especially to keep up his blow-dried appearance.

-- steve

Reference Links …

Obama Science Czar Led UN Effort to Hide Proceedings, Subvert FOIA, Records Indicate | Competitive Enterprise Institute - Read the CEI FOIA request

Romney’s John Holdren Problem

“The GOP front-runner for 2012 sought advice on global warming and carbon emissions from the president’s current science czar — an advocate of de-developing America and population control.”

“Politics is said to make strange bedfellows, but no coupling in our view is more bizarre than when John Holdren, now President Obama’s assistant for science and technology, once advised GOP presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney on environmental policy.”

“Holdren’s bizarre views are best suited for an adviser to someone like, say, Pol Pot.”

“He views humanity as a plague on the planet and the Industrial Revolution as a tragic mistake. The fewer people, he believes, the better, and he’s not shy about the ways he would use to reduce their number.”

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS

Damning Herman Cain with faint praise ...

We have all heard the term “damned by faint praise,” and that should be the theme when analyzing what the mainstream media and some cable pundits are doing to Herman Cain.

They acknowledge his almost miraculous ascendency in the polls are are asking:

Is Herman Cain the new darling of the Tea Party?

Someone who will rise in the polls like Michelle Bachmann and Rick Perry – only to fizzle out like Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani? Subtly asking whether or not Herman Cain is serious about the Presidency or is he only flogging his newly published book and creating a power base as Sarah Palin or Chris Christie appear to be doing?

They acknowledge his front-runner or parity status is the top tier and ask:

Can Herman Cain beat Barack Obama in the general election?

They acknowledge that Herman Cain appears to be a conservative, speaking of individualism, hard work, self-reliance, lower taxes, smaller government and no-nonsense social positions when it comes to illegal aliens and the entitlement culture. Then they go on to ask:

Can Herman Cain capture the hearts and minds of “independent voters” who would like a more moderate stand on all political issues and would rather vote for someone like a Mitt Romney?

They acknowledge that Herman Cain is bringing the type of thoughtful political discourse on the issues that both political parties have been promising for years. Going on to ask:

Can Herman Cain succeed because he lacks legislative experience and is an unknown quantity when it comes to the art of compromising with one’s political opponents to get things done?

They speak of Huntsman’s experience with China – in the service of Barack Obama – although we know that it was the power and influence of his billionaire businessman father’s political clout that saw him snag political plums like the Ambassadorship. But this only serves as an opportunity to ask:

Can Herman Cain, with no foreign affairs experience, possibly deal with terrorism, Iran, North Korea, China, Syria, Egypt, Russia, Israel and do it with diplomacy and respect?

They talk about the global economy and the financial meltdown occurring in Europe and ask:

How can a Herman Cain deal with foreign economies that are in crisis?

The talk about how tax reform is definitely required and then ask:

Will Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan (9% flat business tax, 9% individual flat tax, and a 9% national sales tax) be the gateway to even higher taxes? Claiming that once those tax levels are established, Congress is certainly going to raise the rates – even if they must wait until Herman Cain is out of veto range. Or that Herman Cain’s plan enabled another tax program vector of adding a NEW national sales tax.

But the most damning praise for Herman Cain’s abilities seems to bring out the ultimate Cain-killer question:

We have seen what Barack Obama’s lack of experience has done to America, can we trust a politically inexperienced man like Herman Cain to lead America? Might he not repeat the failures of Obama? Might he not hire the right advisors – and listen to the wrong people?

The mainstream media has a question and a preferred answer to everything.

Bottom line …

One, the mainstream media and many cable news pundits are covertly partisan and are slanting their coverage. If not to reelect Barack Obama, then to elect a moderate who will give the progressives their win; albeit at a slower pace.

Two, the political establishment on both sides of the aisle are afraid of Herman Cain. They do not know how to deal with a man who clearly knows right from wrong and is willing to debate the issue – loudly and forcefully – in a public venue.

Three, the special interests are afraid of Herman Cain because they are fearful that their gravy train will come to a screeching halt or that they may be held accountable for failing their public mission.

Four, the unions are afraid of Herman Cain because he knows how unions reward merit with mediocrity, replace innovation with complacency; driving costs up, productivity down and inserting themselves in the running of the enterprise that is America.

Five, you can tell the progressive democrats sell-outs in the Black community are worried as they are playing their little race card and referring to Herman Cain as not being “authentically black” as if authentic blacks were all Marxists and entitlement moochers with their hands out. Cain worries these people – he is a black role model for the young and represents the enlightenment that the Marxist always claim is just around the corner after the next election.

Most people are not political geeks and policy wonks – they barely know Herman Cain and his policies. Time will remedy this.

Above all, Herman Cain is not a Marxist, surrounded by fellow travelers trying to implement “technical Marxism” in the United States and setting the stage for a political transition to a European-style social democracy. Where power is shared between the politicians, unions and billionaire oligarchs.

I think Herman Cain is the most refreshing breath of fresh air to hit the stage – blowing the minds of the traditional politicians who will do or say anything to gain or maintain power. He is not at ideologue and he is certainly willing to listen to the American public.

In the final analysis, Herman Cain is a far better man, American and politician than Barack Obama and the majority of Congress. We have seen how the traditional political parties and their chosen politicians have driven us to the edge of the abyss. It is time for a change – and a businessman like Herman Cain is it.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba”-- take nobody's word for it!
"Acta non verba" -- actions not words

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS