Welcome Gene Daily!
GENE DAILY is a Friend we met through our Article V Project To Restore Liberty group on Facebook. He has graciously agreed to be our reporter and correspondent from Europe. His perspective and insight is from the vantage of 'eyes and ears-on the ground'.
The Case for a Compact of States
by Gene Daily
12 June 2014
In the 238th year since the Declaration of Independence.
Over the last few weeks I have been considering whether Obama considers himself a King or a President. With the controversial dealings with the Taliban Terrorists, endangering not only our troops but any U.S. Citizen traveling throughout the world. It is not only the fact that he dealt with Islamic Terrorists, but more importantly did so on his own volition without consulting Congress. These are more the actions of a Ruler, rather than a Chief Executive Officer. In the act of considering whether Obama thinks of himself as a Ruler or President, we must then consider how we reacted to our last Ruler King George III.
In the case of Obama, compared with the grievances which caused the the founders to sit in congress and write then sign the Declaration of Independence, then we must act as those great men did, we must act with all due diligence. A single infraction would never be sufficient to even begin to become upset. Any Chief Executive could make a rash ill considered decision. We must take this opportunity to decide if “We The People” have withstood a “Train of Abuses” enough to take action.
In order for us to come to a decision, it is my contention we should take excerpts directly from men considered to be far more intelligent than most of us now living and certainly more than the author of this work. We can easily compare the abuses of King George III with those of the present offender. We can do so by simply citing one by one those of each and then taking a summation of our ability to withstand them.
King George III stood accused of:
He has made Judges dependent upon his will alone. This offence was in light of the opinion of the King, he and he alone should have responsibility to appoint or remove a judge at his pleasure.
Obama of course cannot actually do exactly the same type of action within his current position. He is not yet a declared Dictator. However consider the following:
He has ignored nearly all of the congressional investigation of illegal practices actually discovered so far. There may be others but I fully believe the act of refusing to cooperate, in essence amounts to control of the Judiciary by preventing their ability to act at all. Let us list but a few of the many violations. Starting with Fast and Furious, which to my knowledge has never been brought to a satisfactory conclusion with clear violations of laws and at the minimum clear violations of moral obligations. Actions which resulted in at least one death of a U.S. Border Patrol Agent.
King George stood accused of:
He has erected a multitude of new offices and sent hither swarms of officers harass our people, and eat out their substance. King George created customs offices to collect additional taxes and to prevent smuggling. These offices were never approved of by the colonies, so having to pay these additional taxes proved to be the demise of many businesses.
Obama has, to all intent and purposes, replicated the actions of King George, albeit in different more under handed ways. Consider the following if you would:
Take for example the EPA attacks on countless industries and all done by creating regulations which have not been passed by congress, but simply created upon the will of the heads of these agencies, with the support of Obama who appointed them. A fine example is the regulations placed upon the coal industry, designed to close them since the profits are no longer available. In regards to harassing our people, one need to look no further than the incident at Bundy Ranch in Nevada. In the case of the Western States, is it correct for the Obama administration, or any administration for that matter to claim ownership, or right of control over vast sections comprising the majority of many of the western States? This is in clear contravention of the constitution, which clearly limits the amount of land stipulated for the use of the Federal Government. Are not the BLM, EPA and other agencies not clearly abusing their power. Some of these agencies are acting under regulations not enacted by congress, but at the recommendation of the individuals appointed by Obama.
King George III stood accused of:
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures.
Obama on 17 July 2008 in a speech stated his intent to create a force within the United States as powerful as the current Armed Forces. Since taking office there have been multitudes of rumours regarding the purchase of vast quantities of arms and ammunition by so many different Federal agencies. Do “We the People” not have the duty and responsibility to question and receive answers for the intended use of such immense fire-power? Since the wind down of operations in the middle-east scores of local law enforcement agencies across each State have been issued with surplus military equipment up to and including military grade automatic weapons, military style training and the acceptance of integration into training exercises. Some Departments have even been issued 35 ton MWRP vehicles. If this is not the creation of Standing Armies within our borders, without a complete and intelligible explanation, I couldn't imagine what else it would be. What is this administration so completely afraid of? Does each State not still have a National Guard? Is it not the right of every Governor to create a State Guard answerable only to local authorities?
In summation, this is by no means a complete list of abuses the current administration has been accused of. It is not even a list one quarter of the length I could cite and substantiate. It is only meant to spark the imagination of the reader. To prompt the reader to consider what our fore fathers considered worth pledging their lives, their fortunes and perhaps most importantly their sacred honour to achieve.
While I do not wish to appear standing for secession at this time, I do wish the reader to consider the fore fathers built in a means by which the Federal Government could be reined in far short of that fateful step. Many have attempted to push for an Article V convention of the States in the past. Is it not at least time to call for a compact of the States? A simple agreement of the several Sovereign States to send representatives to and agreed place of assembly to reach a consensus upon the direction which needs to be taken to right the ship of the Federal Government?
There will be those among the readers who will, like Lincoln and many who followed, ascribe to the belief the Federal Government created the States. I will not take time or space here to refute such an obviously false premise. King George III, through his representatives, signed peace accords with each of the thirteen separate nation which existed upon the North American Continent at the close of the revolutionary war. They came together to create agents to serve their needs following that conflict. The remainder of the decisions regarding that construct has been written into the constitution.
Prior to 1865 the phrase used to describe our Republic was, The Untied States Are” following that change the phrase was revised to be stated, “The United States Is”. The time for considering another change is upon us. Do not shirk to grave responsibilities placed upon us by virtue of the great freedoms placed in our hands by our framers to guard. Many of us in our lifetimes have taken an oath to guard the republic from all enemies both foreign and domestic. The time for a Compact of States is now. Some oaths never end.
12 June 2014
In the 238th year since the Declaration of Independence.
Over the last few weeks I have been considering whether Obama considers himself a King or a President. With the controversial dealings with the Taliban Terrorists, endangering not only our troops but any U.S. Citizen traveling throughout the world. It is not only the fact that he dealt with Islamic Terrorists, but more importantly did so on his own volition without consulting Congress. These are more the actions of a Ruler, rather than a Chief Executive Officer. In the act of considering whether Obama thinks of himself as a Ruler or President, we must then consider how we reacted to our last Ruler King George III.
In the case of Obama, compared with the grievances which caused the the founders to sit in congress and write then sign the Declaration of Independence, then we must act as those great men did, we must act with all due diligence. A single infraction would never be sufficient to even begin to become upset. Any Chief Executive could make a rash ill considered decision. We must take this opportunity to decide if “We The People” have withstood a “Train of Abuses” enough to take action.
In order for us to come to a decision, it is my contention we should take excerpts directly from men considered to be far more intelligent than most of us now living and certainly more than the author of this work. We can easily compare the abuses of King George III with those of the present offender. We can do so by simply citing one by one those of each and then taking a summation of our ability to withstand them.
King George III stood accused of:
He has made Judges dependent upon his will alone. This offence was in light of the opinion of the King, he and he alone should have responsibility to appoint or remove a judge at his pleasure.
Obama of course cannot actually do exactly the same type of action within his current position. He is not yet a declared Dictator. However consider the following:
He has ignored nearly all of the congressional investigation of illegal practices actually discovered so far. There may be others but I fully believe the act of refusing to cooperate, in essence amounts to control of the Judiciary by preventing their ability to act at all. Let us list but a few of the many violations. Starting with Fast and Furious, which to my knowledge has never been brought to a satisfactory conclusion with clear violations of laws and at the minimum clear violations of moral obligations. Actions which resulted in at least one death of a U.S. Border Patrol Agent.
King George stood accused of:
He has erected a multitude of new offices and sent hither swarms of officers harass our people, and eat out their substance. King George created customs offices to collect additional taxes and to prevent smuggling. These offices were never approved of by the colonies, so having to pay these additional taxes proved to be the demise of many businesses.
Obama has, to all intent and purposes, replicated the actions of King George, albeit in different more under handed ways. Consider the following if you would:
Take for example the EPA attacks on countless industries and all done by creating regulations which have not been passed by congress, but simply created upon the will of the heads of these agencies, with the support of Obama who appointed them. A fine example is the regulations placed upon the coal industry, designed to close them since the profits are no longer available. In regards to harassing our people, one need to look no further than the incident at Bundy Ranch in Nevada. In the case of the Western States, is it correct for the Obama administration, or any administration for that matter to claim ownership, or right of control over vast sections comprising the majority of many of the western States? This is in clear contravention of the constitution, which clearly limits the amount of land stipulated for the use of the Federal Government. Are not the BLM, EPA and other agencies not clearly abusing their power. Some of these agencies are acting under regulations not enacted by congress, but at the recommendation of the individuals appointed by Obama.
King George III stood accused of:
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our legislatures.
Obama on 17 July 2008 in a speech stated his intent to create a force within the United States as powerful as the current Armed Forces. Since taking office there have been multitudes of rumours regarding the purchase of vast quantities of arms and ammunition by so many different Federal agencies. Do “We the People” not have the duty and responsibility to question and receive answers for the intended use of such immense fire-power? Since the wind down of operations in the middle-east scores of local law enforcement agencies across each State have been issued with surplus military equipment up to and including military grade automatic weapons, military style training and the acceptance of integration into training exercises. Some Departments have even been issued 35 ton MWRP vehicles. If this is not the creation of Standing Armies within our borders, without a complete and intelligible explanation, I couldn't imagine what else it would be. What is this administration so completely afraid of? Does each State not still have a National Guard? Is it not the right of every Governor to create a State Guard answerable only to local authorities?
In summation, this is by no means a complete list of abuses the current administration has been accused of. It is not even a list one quarter of the length I could cite and substantiate. It is only meant to spark the imagination of the reader. To prompt the reader to consider what our fore fathers considered worth pledging their lives, their fortunes and perhaps most importantly their sacred honour to achieve.
While I do not wish to appear standing for secession at this time, I do wish the reader to consider the fore fathers built in a means by which the Federal Government could be reined in far short of that fateful step. Many have attempted to push for an Article V convention of the States in the past. Is it not at least time to call for a compact of the States? A simple agreement of the several Sovereign States to send representatives to and agreed place of assembly to reach a consensus upon the direction which needs to be taken to right the ship of the Federal Government?
There will be those among the readers who will, like Lincoln and many who followed, ascribe to the belief the Federal Government created the States. I will not take time or space here to refute such an obviously false premise. King George III, through his representatives, signed peace accords with each of the thirteen separate nation which existed upon the North American Continent at the close of the revolutionary war. They came together to create agents to serve their needs following that conflict. The remainder of the decisions regarding that construct has been written into the constitution.
Prior to 1865 the phrase used to describe our Republic was, The Untied States Are” following that change the phrase was revised to be stated, “The United States Is”. The time for considering another change is upon us. Do not shirk to grave responsibilities placed upon us by virtue of the great freedoms placed in our hands by our framers to guard. Many of us in our lifetimes have taken an oath to guard the republic from all enemies both foreign and domestic. The time for a Compact of States is now. Some oaths never end.
Two Tier Heath Care Under Obamacare Coming to USA
Just last week Fox News Ran a segment with Daniel Hannan a EU Parliament Member and Journalist, regarding how the Obamacare roll-out is being considered in Europe. What was missed in all the discussions over the fiasco of a roll-out was an underlying question. Should we have National Health Service in the USA?
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2857282336001/how-obamacare-mess-is-viewed-outside-us/?intcmp=obnetwork
A member of the European Parliament and British Journalist, who is under 80 years old, Daniel Hannan has no other means of considering the question. He has never known life in a country without the National Health Service. The British, later UK, National Health Service began in 1948. Therefore his conversation went to the question of how the President is behaving in regards to the problems presented by the roll-out and the Nuclear Option of Harry Reid and the Senate Filibuster quarrel.
The reader must take into account these facts when considering the consequences of the enactment of Obamacare, given the fiasco of the roll-out does not bode well for the operation of one sixth of the U.S. Economy.
More to the point we must consider what is going to happen to us, meaning we “The Little People”, while they have the best of care. For while the vast majority of the citizens of the USA are required to register and pay for Obamacare out of their own pockets, the elite, such as members of congress and their staff and many others on capitol hill will receive subsidies, or even be exempt from such mundane requirements as the average “Joe the Plumber”.
Of course, there will in the future USA be the confirmed socialists such as Ann Clwyd a member of the UK Parliament in London. She felt that placing her dead husband of nearly 50 years, in a National Health teaching hospital would ensure the best possible care available in the UK. In the end it didn't work out that way, I will refer the reader to the linked article to see the heart-breaking results of her decision.
The reader may contrast that with the growing field of private medical facilities and hospitals now advertising their services on every media outlet available in the UK.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2244912/Ann-Clwyd-MPs-heartbreaking-account-NHS-neglect-husband-Owen-Roberts.html
Or the reader may wish to contract the experience of the unfortunate UK Member of Parliament with the rigours of the King of Spain, Don Juan Carlos de Bourbon. He has been criticised for failing to, shall we say, face the music an submit himself to the care of the Spanish National Health Service. Instead he elected to have a Spanish born doctor flown in from the USA, where the doctor practices at the world famous Mayo Clinic. The King of course is a major supporter of the Spanish NHS except when it comes to a critical operation of his own. I refer the reader to the NY Times article of Sept 26 2013. This was the first article written by the NY Times covering the operation. This article, of course, focuses more on the need for the expertise of the doctor from the famous Mayo Clinic with only a passing reference to the consternation of the Spanish media and public. I happen to read many Spanish media articles and watch many media outlets in Spain. At this time, the King is undergoing further treatment in the world class private hospital, again. He continues under the famous Mayo Clinic doctors care, but then he is King, right?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/26/world/europe/king-juan-carlos-spain-hip-surgery.html?_r=0
When it comes right down to it, will Obama participate in the same care as the rest of the regular, “Joe the Plumber”, or will he as the King of Spain did elect for the care of the world famous Mayo Clinic. He is “The President” after all, right?
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2857282336001/how-obamacare-mess-is-viewed-outside-us/?intcmp=obnetwork
A member of the European Parliament and British Journalist, who is under 80 years old, Daniel Hannan has no other means of considering the question. He has never known life in a country without the National Health Service. The British, later UK, National Health Service began in 1948. Therefore his conversation went to the question of how the President is behaving in regards to the problems presented by the roll-out and the Nuclear Option of Harry Reid and the Senate Filibuster quarrel.
The reader must take into account these facts when considering the consequences of the enactment of Obamacare, given the fiasco of the roll-out does not bode well for the operation of one sixth of the U.S. Economy.
More to the point we must consider what is going to happen to us, meaning we “The Little People”, while they have the best of care. For while the vast majority of the citizens of the USA are required to register and pay for Obamacare out of their own pockets, the elite, such as members of congress and their staff and many others on capitol hill will receive subsidies, or even be exempt from such mundane requirements as the average “Joe the Plumber”.
Of course, there will in the future USA be the confirmed socialists such as Ann Clwyd a member of the UK Parliament in London. She felt that placing her dead husband of nearly 50 years, in a National Health teaching hospital would ensure the best possible care available in the UK. In the end it didn't work out that way, I will refer the reader to the linked article to see the heart-breaking results of her decision.
The reader may contrast that with the growing field of private medical facilities and hospitals now advertising their services on every media outlet available in the UK.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2244912/Ann-Clwyd-MPs-heartbreaking-account-NHS-neglect-husband-Owen-Roberts.html
Or the reader may wish to contract the experience of the unfortunate UK Member of Parliament with the rigours of the King of Spain, Don Juan Carlos de Bourbon. He has been criticised for failing to, shall we say, face the music an submit himself to the care of the Spanish National Health Service. Instead he elected to have a Spanish born doctor flown in from the USA, where the doctor practices at the world famous Mayo Clinic. The King of course is a major supporter of the Spanish NHS except when it comes to a critical operation of his own. I refer the reader to the NY Times article of Sept 26 2013. This was the first article written by the NY Times covering the operation. This article, of course, focuses more on the need for the expertise of the doctor from the famous Mayo Clinic with only a passing reference to the consternation of the Spanish media and public. I happen to read many Spanish media articles and watch many media outlets in Spain. At this time, the King is undergoing further treatment in the world class private hospital, again. He continues under the famous Mayo Clinic doctors care, but then he is King, right?
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/26/world/europe/king-juan-carlos-spain-hip-surgery.html?_r=0
When it comes right down to it, will Obama participate in the same care as the rest of the regular, “Joe the Plumber”, or will he as the King of Spain did elect for the care of the world famous Mayo Clinic. He is “The President” after all, right?
Can We Afford to Wait?
The Senate has voted for cloture ending current debate. The matter now goes back to the House of Representatives. The deadline has been breached and so the massive Federal Machine we all know comes to a grinding slow down. Not really a shutdown, after all only 800,000 federal employees have so far been furloughed.
The Main Stream Media covers the supposed story which in reality, as we all know, is really a non-story designed to distract from the horrors of the implementation of the first day of sign up for ObamaCare.
I have on few occasions written on this actual topic. Normally I write on the effects of the National Health care systems already in effect through most parts of Europe. Since I live in Europe at the present time it seemed more appropriate to write about something that I am actually experiencing, or that close friends or relatives are experiencing.
Now I have received anecdotal evidence of how this may be affecting people I know and care about in the Good Ole USA. While I am not going to embarrass my source on this issue, I feel this may be typical of letters now being received by a great many Americans. The body of the letter and comments from my source; So I got a letter from Blue-cross Blue-shield, my health insurance provider, on Saturday. It explained that my current plan, the plan I chose to fit my individual needs, does not comply with Obamacare and thus had to be cancelled. It went on to say that I shouldn't worry because I had been automatically moved to new plan that does meet the new Obamacare requirements. The details of my new plan are just excellent. My deductible went from $1500 up to $2500, that's 66%. My limit on annual out of pocket expenses went up from $1500 to $6350, up 323%. I'm now covered for a bunch of things I don't want or need, like mental illness inpatient and substance abuse inpatient treatment coverage. Now a rational person might assume that when something I chose to buy, and wanted to keep was taken from me, it would at least cost less to pay for the thing that was forced onto me. Well that's the best part! My monthly premium went up from $139.50 to $229.19, an increase of 65%! I get to pay MORE for something I don't even want... Remember when our fearless leader said if we like our current plan we can keep it? I know I'm not the only person experiencing this. Please share your story, people have to understand what's happening here. And please support Ted Cruz and his allies in the senate. He's one of the few people trying to save us from this monstrosity.
Now I hasten to point out, I do not live in the USA. I live in Europe, as such I have no personal knowledge of letters such as this. I obviously trust my source. I am sure if the letters were to be the only thing in the news just now, it would stir quite a controversy, given the statements made by Obama regarding his signature legislation. It might cause quite a controversy as well considering that the Congress, President, Vice-President and many of their aides are being exempted for having to participate in this revolutionary concept, designed for the betterment of all those not exempted.
While all of the horror of the quasi shut down of the beloved Federal Leviathan plays out on the national scene, certain Governors are waiting for permission. Yes you read that correctly, permission from the Federal Government. Permission to establish industry which in all likelihood will employ at least several thousand, if not tens of thousands of citizens of their citizens. Governor Jerry Brown has signed legislation. That is correct, the former hippie Governor, who has been re-elected to save the State of California, has signed legislation to permit the growing, harvesting and use of industrial hemp within the boundaries of California. This of course has not been allowed since the 1930's in any part of the USA. Industrial hemp after it has been grown and harvested must be imported to be used in different products. It, of course, has been against federal law since it cannot be grown without a permit and no permit on an industrial scale has to this humble writers knowledge ever been issued by the federal government.
The uses of industrial hemp are many and varied, far too many to list here. One use is not, I repeat, is not smoking to cause an effect of any kind. It is after all industrial hemp we are in reference to. Yet in this time of crisis, unemployment, lack of industry and with people actually waiting to invest, the Governor of a sovereign state must wait for permission.
Can the people of the United States continue to have to raise their hands and ask for permission? Much like a school pupil must raise their hand and quietly wait for recognition, before politely asking, “May I do” whatever it is the child needs to do? Do the citizens of a sovereign state need to act like children?
The people, though the actions of their representatives, created the Federal Government, not the other way around. The Sovereign States existed, even had a different form of government prior to the creation of the monster that now faces the citizenry of the several states. A Federal Government which is well armed, with a domestic enforcement department that at any moment may decide to turn upon those same citizens.
I ask once more, in as humble a manner as I can possibly imagine, can the waiting continue? Can the citizens of the several states, those who very identity is contained in the Declaration of Independence. Those who are supposedly countrymen of the self-same brave men and women who defied the greatest power on earth at the time, the might of the British Empire. Do those people need to raise their hands and wait for permission from an entity they created to change whatever the deem as against their interests, or not in the interests of their citizens?
There is a remedy for such travesty as that which is currently afflicting the United States. This remedy was written by the same brave company of people who won against that world renowned and feared power of the British Empire. They wrote that remedy into the second form of government created to further contribute to the happiness and pursuit of liberty of their countrymen. That creation still is enforceable upon the current monster. Please join those at http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/index.html and assist the willing to force change upon the unwilling. The power at this moment still is within the grasp of “We The People”. But the answer to the question still remains, can we afford to wait?
In Liberty
Gene Daily
The Main Stream Media covers the supposed story which in reality, as we all know, is really a non-story designed to distract from the horrors of the implementation of the first day of sign up for ObamaCare.
I have on few occasions written on this actual topic. Normally I write on the effects of the National Health care systems already in effect through most parts of Europe. Since I live in Europe at the present time it seemed more appropriate to write about something that I am actually experiencing, or that close friends or relatives are experiencing.
Now I have received anecdotal evidence of how this may be affecting people I know and care about in the Good Ole USA. While I am not going to embarrass my source on this issue, I feel this may be typical of letters now being received by a great many Americans. The body of the letter and comments from my source; So I got a letter from Blue-cross Blue-shield, my health insurance provider, on Saturday. It explained that my current plan, the plan I chose to fit my individual needs, does not comply with Obamacare and thus had to be cancelled. It went on to say that I shouldn't worry because I had been automatically moved to new plan that does meet the new Obamacare requirements. The details of my new plan are just excellent. My deductible went from $1500 up to $2500, that's 66%. My limit on annual out of pocket expenses went up from $1500 to $6350, up 323%. I'm now covered for a bunch of things I don't want or need, like mental illness inpatient and substance abuse inpatient treatment coverage. Now a rational person might assume that when something I chose to buy, and wanted to keep was taken from me, it would at least cost less to pay for the thing that was forced onto me. Well that's the best part! My monthly premium went up from $139.50 to $229.19, an increase of 65%! I get to pay MORE for something I don't even want... Remember when our fearless leader said if we like our current plan we can keep it? I know I'm not the only person experiencing this. Please share your story, people have to understand what's happening here. And please support Ted Cruz and his allies in the senate. He's one of the few people trying to save us from this monstrosity.
Now I hasten to point out, I do not live in the USA. I live in Europe, as such I have no personal knowledge of letters such as this. I obviously trust my source. I am sure if the letters were to be the only thing in the news just now, it would stir quite a controversy, given the statements made by Obama regarding his signature legislation. It might cause quite a controversy as well considering that the Congress, President, Vice-President and many of their aides are being exempted for having to participate in this revolutionary concept, designed for the betterment of all those not exempted.
While all of the horror of the quasi shut down of the beloved Federal Leviathan plays out on the national scene, certain Governors are waiting for permission. Yes you read that correctly, permission from the Federal Government. Permission to establish industry which in all likelihood will employ at least several thousand, if not tens of thousands of citizens of their citizens. Governor Jerry Brown has signed legislation. That is correct, the former hippie Governor, who has been re-elected to save the State of California, has signed legislation to permit the growing, harvesting and use of industrial hemp within the boundaries of California. This of course has not been allowed since the 1930's in any part of the USA. Industrial hemp after it has been grown and harvested must be imported to be used in different products. It, of course, has been against federal law since it cannot be grown without a permit and no permit on an industrial scale has to this humble writers knowledge ever been issued by the federal government.
The uses of industrial hemp are many and varied, far too many to list here. One use is not, I repeat, is not smoking to cause an effect of any kind. It is after all industrial hemp we are in reference to. Yet in this time of crisis, unemployment, lack of industry and with people actually waiting to invest, the Governor of a sovereign state must wait for permission.
Can the people of the United States continue to have to raise their hands and ask for permission? Much like a school pupil must raise their hand and quietly wait for recognition, before politely asking, “May I do” whatever it is the child needs to do? Do the citizens of a sovereign state need to act like children?
The people, though the actions of their representatives, created the Federal Government, not the other way around. The Sovereign States existed, even had a different form of government prior to the creation of the monster that now faces the citizenry of the several states. A Federal Government which is well armed, with a domestic enforcement department that at any moment may decide to turn upon those same citizens.
I ask once more, in as humble a manner as I can possibly imagine, can the waiting continue? Can the citizens of the several states, those who very identity is contained in the Declaration of Independence. Those who are supposedly countrymen of the self-same brave men and women who defied the greatest power on earth at the time, the might of the British Empire. Do those people need to raise their hands and wait for permission from an entity they created to change whatever the deem as against their interests, or not in the interests of their citizens?
There is a remedy for such travesty as that which is currently afflicting the United States. This remedy was written by the same brave company of people who won against that world renowned and feared power of the British Empire. They wrote that remedy into the second form of government created to further contribute to the happiness and pursuit of liberty of their countrymen. That creation still is enforceable upon the current monster. Please join those at http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/index.html and assist the willing to force change upon the unwilling. The power at this moment still is within the grasp of “We The People”. But the answer to the question still remains, can we afford to wait?
In Liberty
Gene Daily
Is Obama a Psychopath?
The question, “Is Obama a psychopath?”, may seem a harsh critique of the man and his administration. My contention is the answer is in the affirmative and in fact is not harsh at all. The term psychopath is not always derogatory. In fact many great men could be described on some level as psychopathic type personalities. In point of fact, there are tests to determine the level of psychopathy and in certain aspects these factors are determined by levels of eight independent states. These independent states – Machiavellian Egocentricity; Impulsive Nonconformity; Blame Externalisation; Carefree Nonplanfulness; Fearlessness; Social Potency; Stress Immunity and Cold-heartedness. Try thinking of these different states as dial controls on a powerful machine. The higher the settings the more power is delivered. All these factors really divide and reform along three simple things depending on their needs, Self-Centred Impulsivity, Fearless Dominance and Cold-heartedness. When the power settings exceed the maximum allowable, well we could see the results as Jefferey Dalmer for example. In the case of Obama and his administration, the settings are frightfully high, in the range of letting an inexperienced team and driver into a formula one race.
If we are honest with ourselves, we have witnessed all these traits demonstrated especially over the months just prior to and the period following the last election. With the débâcle in Libya, just before the election and the revelations of numerous scandals unfolding this year. Taking into account the manner in which both he and his administration have responded to them. Personally, I believe we may be witnessing what happens when a psychopath occupies the most powerful office in the world and has no experience to handle the challenges. After all for most of his life he has been a community organiser, with no real responsibility for what would happen if the things he demanded were implemented; that is until now.
If we look at some of the traits we would ascribe to influential industry leaders and the corresponding traits in which psychopaths are described, it may be even more troubling for those of us who are able to think outside the influence of the Obama mystique. If we say and industry leader is charismatic, then a psychopath is described as having superficial charm. The leader is self-confident, the psychopath is prone to grandiosity. The leader has the ability to influence, while the psychopath is manipulative.
How many examples can the reader find concerning how these traits have manifested themselves over the last four and a half years of his administration. During much of the first administration we heard that it was all George W's fault. Now that this excuse is getting a little worn, well at this particular moment, the scandals are phony political farce. It doesn't matter that four people died in Libya, what difference does it make is the reply from a famous personage during the last administration. It is phony when certain highly placed people in the IRS felt the need to claim the protection of the Fifth Amendment when questioned about their actions. For every crisis there is in this administration a ready excuse, or the President was not informed, or it was the actions of some as yet unidentified lower level person. This is definitely not the style of another famous Democrat President, Truman had the motto on his desk, “The Buck Stops Here”. For many different reason and in many different ways it seems the proverbial buck never stops in the Obama administration.
In am not a qualified mental health professional by any means. I am simply a person who after observing a President, acting under his powers of executive orders, doing things which I never believed possible, have become increasingly concerned. I might even be described as a critic of his administration, that is OK with me, I feel in good company. Before the reader completely discounts what I have written here, may I suggest a book. “The Wisdom of Psychopaths” written by Kevin Dutton is informative on this topic.
While I am in no respect comparing Obama with Ted Bundy for example, I would also not compare Obama with Winston Churchill. In other words, Simon Cowell may have many of the same traits I mentioned above, the great difference is, he is not in control of the greatest military might the world has ever seen, nor would I want him to be.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
If we are honest with ourselves, we have witnessed all these traits demonstrated especially over the months just prior to and the period following the last election. With the débâcle in Libya, just before the election and the revelations of numerous scandals unfolding this year. Taking into account the manner in which both he and his administration have responded to them. Personally, I believe we may be witnessing what happens when a psychopath occupies the most powerful office in the world and has no experience to handle the challenges. After all for most of his life he has been a community organiser, with no real responsibility for what would happen if the things he demanded were implemented; that is until now.
If we look at some of the traits we would ascribe to influential industry leaders and the corresponding traits in which psychopaths are described, it may be even more troubling for those of us who are able to think outside the influence of the Obama mystique. If we say and industry leader is charismatic, then a psychopath is described as having superficial charm. The leader is self-confident, the psychopath is prone to grandiosity. The leader has the ability to influence, while the psychopath is manipulative.
How many examples can the reader find concerning how these traits have manifested themselves over the last four and a half years of his administration. During much of the first administration we heard that it was all George W's fault. Now that this excuse is getting a little worn, well at this particular moment, the scandals are phony political farce. It doesn't matter that four people died in Libya, what difference does it make is the reply from a famous personage during the last administration. It is phony when certain highly placed people in the IRS felt the need to claim the protection of the Fifth Amendment when questioned about their actions. For every crisis there is in this administration a ready excuse, or the President was not informed, or it was the actions of some as yet unidentified lower level person. This is definitely not the style of another famous Democrat President, Truman had the motto on his desk, “The Buck Stops Here”. For many different reason and in many different ways it seems the proverbial buck never stops in the Obama administration.
In am not a qualified mental health professional by any means. I am simply a person who after observing a President, acting under his powers of executive orders, doing things which I never believed possible, have become increasingly concerned. I might even be described as a critic of his administration, that is OK with me, I feel in good company. Before the reader completely discounts what I have written here, may I suggest a book. “The Wisdom of Psychopaths” written by Kevin Dutton is informative on this topic.
While I am in no respect comparing Obama with Ted Bundy for example, I would also not compare Obama with Winston Churchill. In other words, Simon Cowell may have many of the same traits I mentioned above, the great difference is, he is not in control of the greatest military might the world has ever seen, nor would I want him to be.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
The Case For a 28th Amendment
I have for some time now been a supporter of a drastically smaller Federal Government. It is my belief the current problems in the United States can be traced back to the Lincoln administration. The expansion of the scope and intrusiveness of the Federal government did not begin and end during his Presidency, it was the exigencies of the conflict which began the process. The further expansion can be traced the the reconstruction era, further through the late 1800's and into the 20th Century, even until today with the constant usurpation of power not specifically given to the Federal government.
During the Lincoln administration the cost of the war made it impossible to carry on without the imposition of an income tax. This was put forward as a temporary method of financing the needs of the moment. The first ever tax commissioner was appointed by Lincoln. However, those things the government promises to be only temporary, to often as with the current IRS turn permanent.
The Supreme Court had ruled different ways throughout the latter half of the 19th century, that is until the rise of William Jennings Bryan. It was he more than any other who in the dead of night and through every subterfuge known to politics finally got the 16th Amendment through. This was nearly twenty years after his first run for President on the Democratic Ticket in 1896. He ran twice more, 1900 and 1908. He was the equivalent of today's Obama, except he was never elected. He was called the Great Commoner for his oratory skills and was known for his populist views, now the term would be progressive. He was the Secretary of State for Woodrow Wilson and was credited with the passage of the Amendment. Later referred to by Wilson as his greatest mistake. Originally opposed as “non-democratic, inquisitorial and unconstitutional” by many politicians and news publications of the time. It is my belief that over time this has proven to be the case and other means of taxation can be found that will more readily suit the requisites of modern life and avoid the current temptations of using the practices of the IRS to interfere or to punish those not in agreement with the current or future administrations. The service has grown in size as power completely surpassing the original purpose and intents of the founding fathers which opposed such a practice in the first place.
The 17th Amendment again brings us back to William Jennings Bryan and his Populist (read Socialist) movement of the time. This amendment abrogates certain intents of the framers of the constitution. Their intent was for the Senators to represent the position, needs and direction of their respective States, in effect a seat at the legislative table for the States. If you need further on the Sovereignty of the States, see the treaty of Paris. King George through his representatives acknowledge the Sovereignty of each individual State in the agreement to end the Revolutionary war. The people are represented in Government through the apportioned representation of the House of Representatives. The Senate is designed to have the two Senators represent the interests of the State, to prevent over-reach by the Central Government into the affairs of the States. Since this was not part of the Amendments at the point of a gun issue with the reconstruction era Amendments, how can it be said that it was done to increase the influence of the people in Government? No it was designed to lessen the power of the individual States,to take away their seat at the table of Government.
The 14th Amendment was to further clarify the 13th Amendment which outlawed slavery. The unintended consequences though have been far reaching. This amendment passed at what amounted to the point of a gun. This was part of the reconstruction program after the war between the states of 1861-1865. Through the years legislation and cultural changes have decreased the need for such an amendment. Recently even the Supreme Court acknowledged the changes and decided the states affect by the civil rights laws of the 1960's concerning voting laws no longer had to get the approval of the Department of Justice before changing voter laws.
Yes, I do feel that a simple twenty word 28th Amendment is the way forward to re-establishing the original Federal Government as it was intended. The wording should be as simple as,”1. The fourteenth, the sixteenth and the seventeenth articles of amendment to the Constitution of the United States are hereby repealed”. Of course there would have to be a ratification clause as with all proposals, but in essence it could be that simple. There are many people far more learned and researched than I am that are working on this. Some of those are members of the articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com movement and there are others to numerous to mention. Just like the 18th Amendment was repealed by an Amendment these three earlier missteps can as easily be corrected.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
During the Lincoln administration the cost of the war made it impossible to carry on without the imposition of an income tax. This was put forward as a temporary method of financing the needs of the moment. The first ever tax commissioner was appointed by Lincoln. However, those things the government promises to be only temporary, to often as with the current IRS turn permanent.
The Supreme Court had ruled different ways throughout the latter half of the 19th century, that is until the rise of William Jennings Bryan. It was he more than any other who in the dead of night and through every subterfuge known to politics finally got the 16th Amendment through. This was nearly twenty years after his first run for President on the Democratic Ticket in 1896. He ran twice more, 1900 and 1908. He was the equivalent of today's Obama, except he was never elected. He was called the Great Commoner for his oratory skills and was known for his populist views, now the term would be progressive. He was the Secretary of State for Woodrow Wilson and was credited with the passage of the Amendment. Later referred to by Wilson as his greatest mistake. Originally opposed as “non-democratic, inquisitorial and unconstitutional” by many politicians and news publications of the time. It is my belief that over time this has proven to be the case and other means of taxation can be found that will more readily suit the requisites of modern life and avoid the current temptations of using the practices of the IRS to interfere or to punish those not in agreement with the current or future administrations. The service has grown in size as power completely surpassing the original purpose and intents of the founding fathers which opposed such a practice in the first place.
The 17th Amendment again brings us back to William Jennings Bryan and his Populist (read Socialist) movement of the time. This amendment abrogates certain intents of the framers of the constitution. Their intent was for the Senators to represent the position, needs and direction of their respective States, in effect a seat at the legislative table for the States. If you need further on the Sovereignty of the States, see the treaty of Paris. King George through his representatives acknowledge the Sovereignty of each individual State in the agreement to end the Revolutionary war. The people are represented in Government through the apportioned representation of the House of Representatives. The Senate is designed to have the two Senators represent the interests of the State, to prevent over-reach by the Central Government into the affairs of the States. Since this was not part of the Amendments at the point of a gun issue with the reconstruction era Amendments, how can it be said that it was done to increase the influence of the people in Government? No it was designed to lessen the power of the individual States,to take away their seat at the table of Government.
The 14th Amendment was to further clarify the 13th Amendment which outlawed slavery. The unintended consequences though have been far reaching. This amendment passed at what amounted to the point of a gun. This was part of the reconstruction program after the war between the states of 1861-1865. Through the years legislation and cultural changes have decreased the need for such an amendment. Recently even the Supreme Court acknowledged the changes and decided the states affect by the civil rights laws of the 1960's concerning voting laws no longer had to get the approval of the Department of Justice before changing voter laws.
Yes, I do feel that a simple twenty word 28th Amendment is the way forward to re-establishing the original Federal Government as it was intended. The wording should be as simple as,”1. The fourteenth, the sixteenth and the seventeenth articles of amendment to the Constitution of the United States are hereby repealed”. Of course there would have to be a ratification clause as with all proposals, but in essence it could be that simple. There are many people far more learned and researched than I am that are working on this. Some of those are members of the articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com movement and there are others to numerous to mention. Just like the 18th Amendment was repealed by an Amendment these three earlier missteps can as easily be corrected.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
Time to Challenge “King Obama”
In a recent referendum, Washington State voters decided to legalize marijuana for all adults. When asked, President Obama stated he would see no reason to pursue marijuana activity in these times of crisis. Eric Holder stated he would announce his intentions and possibly seek decisions in Federal Courts.
Yesterday July 25, 2013, several Medical Marijuana outlets were raided up and down the I-5 corridor in Washington State. The DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency) conducted the raids. Even going so far as telling the workers at one of the outlets, “You are in compliance with all Washington State laws, but you are not in compliance with Federal Law and our laws are supreme over state laws.
It is time to reign in the power of Federal Agencies. The compact reached with the Federal Government under the constitution gives distinctly limited authority to the Federal Government. It is my humble opinion they have over-reached their authority and are now in the course of unauthorized tax collection.
The unauthorized tax collection is demonstrated by the DEA seizing the products, bank accounts and even a 50 foot sea going yacht owned by one of the owners of the marijuana outlets. They seized the assets of the owner under the provisions of proceeds of a crime. Yet under state laws these assets were clearly attained through the conduct of lawful business.
It is but another example of “King Obama” and his rogue Attorney General Eric Holder assuming powers not rightfully belonging to them. The voters of Washington State and of Colorado have spoken at the polls and have stated clearly that within the boundaries of their respective states this is not an illegal product.
While personally I have no feeling one way or the other on the matter, the very fact that through a lawfully conducted referendum process a new law was placed on the books of both States. It is incumbent upon the Federal Government to recognize the sovereignty of the people and the States involved.
This unauthorized collection of taxes in the form of seizure of assets is so closely akin to the situation of the colonists when they had the stamp act imposed upon them. The colonists were in fear of the British searching their homes, businesses and personal effects by the British soldiers, which at the time represented the official law enforcement arm of the British Government.
Likewise in present day, a warrant was obtained from a federal judge to conduct the searches and seizures on the premises and to seize property related to the charges. Once the evidence had been seized to substantiate the federal crime, the personal property, such as the boat was seized as proceeds of the crime.
Are the citizens of the USA not the subjects of the Federal Government and of “King Obama” and his substitute Sheriff of Nottingham, in the person of Attorney General Eric Holder? Are we to resort to a modern day Robin Hood or a modern day minute man patrol to resist the depredations of an all powerful federal behemoth?
Washington has a right under the 10th Amendment to the constitution to nullify laws issued by the federal government in contradiction to laws that pertain to matters within their own borders and do not deprive the citizens of that state of any of the liberty cited in the state and federal constitution. Unless and until the Federal Government and the underlings can show beyond a doubt how the federal laws governing the marijuana plant are depriving citizens of their liberty it is of no concern to the federal government how the businesses of Washington State or the State of Colorado conduct their lawful commerce within their respective state borders.
If we do not take a stand on this matter at this time, the next time it may be our guns or our rights to freedom of speech or assembly. The facts of history tells us that liberty is deprived in small measures, not all at once. It is time to limit the size and power of the Federal Government before it is too late.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
Yesterday July 25, 2013, several Medical Marijuana outlets were raided up and down the I-5 corridor in Washington State. The DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency) conducted the raids. Even going so far as telling the workers at one of the outlets, “You are in compliance with all Washington State laws, but you are not in compliance with Federal Law and our laws are supreme over state laws.
It is time to reign in the power of Federal Agencies. The compact reached with the Federal Government under the constitution gives distinctly limited authority to the Federal Government. It is my humble opinion they have over-reached their authority and are now in the course of unauthorized tax collection.
The unauthorized tax collection is demonstrated by the DEA seizing the products, bank accounts and even a 50 foot sea going yacht owned by one of the owners of the marijuana outlets. They seized the assets of the owner under the provisions of proceeds of a crime. Yet under state laws these assets were clearly attained through the conduct of lawful business.
It is but another example of “King Obama” and his rogue Attorney General Eric Holder assuming powers not rightfully belonging to them. The voters of Washington State and of Colorado have spoken at the polls and have stated clearly that within the boundaries of their respective states this is not an illegal product.
While personally I have no feeling one way or the other on the matter, the very fact that through a lawfully conducted referendum process a new law was placed on the books of both States. It is incumbent upon the Federal Government to recognize the sovereignty of the people and the States involved.
This unauthorized collection of taxes in the form of seizure of assets is so closely akin to the situation of the colonists when they had the stamp act imposed upon them. The colonists were in fear of the British searching their homes, businesses and personal effects by the British soldiers, which at the time represented the official law enforcement arm of the British Government.
Likewise in present day, a warrant was obtained from a federal judge to conduct the searches and seizures on the premises and to seize property related to the charges. Once the evidence had been seized to substantiate the federal crime, the personal property, such as the boat was seized as proceeds of the crime.
Are the citizens of the USA not the subjects of the Federal Government and of “King Obama” and his substitute Sheriff of Nottingham, in the person of Attorney General Eric Holder? Are we to resort to a modern day Robin Hood or a modern day minute man patrol to resist the depredations of an all powerful federal behemoth?
Washington has a right under the 10th Amendment to the constitution to nullify laws issued by the federal government in contradiction to laws that pertain to matters within their own borders and do not deprive the citizens of that state of any of the liberty cited in the state and federal constitution. Unless and until the Federal Government and the underlings can show beyond a doubt how the federal laws governing the marijuana plant are depriving citizens of their liberty it is of no concern to the federal government how the businesses of Washington State or the State of Colorado conduct their lawful commerce within their respective state borders.
If we do not take a stand on this matter at this time, the next time it may be our guns or our rights to freedom of speech or assembly. The facts of history tells us that liberty is deprived in small measures, not all at once. It is time to limit the size and power of the Federal Government before it is too late.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
Diplomatic Row Deepens in Europe and South America
Beginning with the grounding of President Evo Morales Private plane on 3 July 2013, diplomatic relations with much of South America has been strained. This began after a statement by President Morales, stating he would grant asylum to the fugitive Snowden, if he applied for asylum in Bolivia. Then when President Morales scheduled his trip home after meetings with Russian officials, suddenly much of European airspace was closed to President Morales. Although the Spanish Government did grant passage it came to late for the plane to continue and President Morales was forced to land at an airport outside Vienna.
Once President Morales was on the ground outside Vienna, Austria, he contacted the airport authorities and told them, “You can't search a Presidents plane under diplomatic authority”. They replied, “Not unless you invite us for coffee.” Can you imagine they wanted me to invite them for coffee? He has confirmed the authorities did not search the plane.
This has not happened previously in the history of aviation during peace time, unless the country was under UN Sanctions which barred leaders from traveling to certain countries. President Morales states he has asked for a written explanation from the countries involved, France, Spain, Italy and Portugal suddenly blocked airspace to him during his flight. He states that relations with the listed European could possibly be easily restored with the required explanations and apologies. President Morales says he wants to know who gave them this information and why the were violating international law. He does not say the same for the United States, whom he believes is guilty of bullying the countries involved into this unheard of actions. Morales reasoning behind blaming the United States relies upon the fact that his aircraft was forced down around 4PM and by 6PM the United States had delivered extradition requests to the Bolivian Government for Snowden.
Once President Morales was cleared through Spanish Iberian airspace his aircraft landed in the Spanish Canary Island for refueling before continuing the his flight to Bolivia.
Upon his return to Bolivia he has continued to be in contact with other leaders in the Organization of American States (OAS) for consultations on what their combined actions against the measures imposed by the United States government shall be. The have also contacted the UN for sanctions against the United States in reference to this incident. This matter has not faded in the least, it has only grown in intensity and scope. President Morales has even gone so far as stating, “I am not afraid of closing the US Embassy in Bolivia.”
Other countries have joined in the diplomatic row, Ecuador has stated that since they have notified people in contact with Snowden they would also consider his request for asylum, they too have come under pressure. They have been informed that should they grant Snowden asylum they would most likely lose their favoured nations position in trade with the USA. President Morales has flatly stated that such blackmail and economic pressure will not work. “They must think they are still in the time of empires and imperialism. They are wrong we are free people.” He further views this action as an insult to the people of the South American and Caribbean communities and they will not be treated as second class people or Presidents.
A summit of the OAS was to be held on Friday, 12 July 2013 and the world awaits the results of the summit. The world also awaits the results of the application for sanctions against the United States concerning this incident.
How long can the actions of the Obama administration be allowed to continue to flaunt international laws and norms? This incident is no longer a simple mistake, it is a pre-planned effort to bully European countries into complying with the whims of department of the Obama administration. Of course, as usual the Obama Whitehouse can deny direct involvement in the matter and claim it was the action of an over active junior clerk of the state department. How long will the American public swallow the, “It is not my fault” excuse? How long can Obama continue to say he is not in control of actions of people who work for him?
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
Once President Morales was on the ground outside Vienna, Austria, he contacted the airport authorities and told them, “You can't search a Presidents plane under diplomatic authority”. They replied, “Not unless you invite us for coffee.” Can you imagine they wanted me to invite them for coffee? He has confirmed the authorities did not search the plane.
This has not happened previously in the history of aviation during peace time, unless the country was under UN Sanctions which barred leaders from traveling to certain countries. President Morales states he has asked for a written explanation from the countries involved, France, Spain, Italy and Portugal suddenly blocked airspace to him during his flight. He states that relations with the listed European could possibly be easily restored with the required explanations and apologies. President Morales says he wants to know who gave them this information and why the were violating international law. He does not say the same for the United States, whom he believes is guilty of bullying the countries involved into this unheard of actions. Morales reasoning behind blaming the United States relies upon the fact that his aircraft was forced down around 4PM and by 6PM the United States had delivered extradition requests to the Bolivian Government for Snowden.
Once President Morales was cleared through Spanish Iberian airspace his aircraft landed in the Spanish Canary Island for refueling before continuing the his flight to Bolivia.
Upon his return to Bolivia he has continued to be in contact with other leaders in the Organization of American States (OAS) for consultations on what their combined actions against the measures imposed by the United States government shall be. The have also contacted the UN for sanctions against the United States in reference to this incident. This matter has not faded in the least, it has only grown in intensity and scope. President Morales has even gone so far as stating, “I am not afraid of closing the US Embassy in Bolivia.”
Other countries have joined in the diplomatic row, Ecuador has stated that since they have notified people in contact with Snowden they would also consider his request for asylum, they too have come under pressure. They have been informed that should they grant Snowden asylum they would most likely lose their favoured nations position in trade with the USA. President Morales has flatly stated that such blackmail and economic pressure will not work. “They must think they are still in the time of empires and imperialism. They are wrong we are free people.” He further views this action as an insult to the people of the South American and Caribbean communities and they will not be treated as second class people or Presidents.
A summit of the OAS was to be held on Friday, 12 July 2013 and the world awaits the results of the summit. The world also awaits the results of the application for sanctions against the United States concerning this incident.
How long can the actions of the Obama administration be allowed to continue to flaunt international laws and norms? This incident is no longer a simple mistake, it is a pre-planned effort to bully European countries into complying with the whims of department of the Obama administration. Of course, as usual the Obama Whitehouse can deny direct involvement in the matter and claim it was the action of an over active junior clerk of the state department. How long will the American public swallow the, “It is not my fault” excuse? How long can Obama continue to say he is not in control of actions of people who work for him?
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
28 June 2013 Obama is Not to Blame
In the climate of deceit, over-reach and near tyranny of several departments of the U.S. Government, Obama is not completely to blame. Obama stated his goals in the run-up to the 2008 election, the 2008 victory night speech and again after winning re-election to the office of President. Are we as adults to dismiss his statements concerning his desire to change how the U.S. is governed? If we do so, we do this at our peril and at the peril of the country we have known. This country and the freedoms that have been given us comes with a duty to protect that freedom. If we choose as a leader a man who clearly seeks to change the entire direction of the country, do not blame him, blame ourselves as a people.
We do have people in the U.S. Government elected to serve as our representatives. They serve in both the House and the Senate. They come from different parties and from differing perspectives to be sure. As conservatives with a traditional view of how the U.S. should be governed, I believe it is incumbent upon those elected under the Republican banner, to do all they can to resist the efforts of Obama. How could one deny the efforts of those elected under the Democrat banner using every manner at their disposal to support the leader of their party as President? Even if it goes against everything we hold sacred, he is the party standard bearer. How could they not support him?
I personally believe we as a people do need someone to blame. As conservatives, everything that could be done was done to defeat Obama in his bid for re-election and it was not enough. So I began looking through history. History would lead me to believe there is a failure of leadership from the third most powerful person in the U.S. Government, Mr. John Boehner. Prior to this administration, others have shown a readiness to be in front of the people identifying the faults in the President during their tenure. Pelosi, for all her failings, was no shrinking violet when she opposed Bush in many areas. Gingrich, led the re-taking of the house with the “Contract With America”. Gingrich nearly ousted Clinton by impeachment while Speaker of the House. This, over what is currently known in the scandals involving the Obama administration, would be small potatoes. Yet when visiting Speaker Boehner's website, none of the on-going scandals are highlighted. Rarely do we hear Speaker Boehner using the “Bully Pulpit” to espouse the belief that what Obama and his administration is doing is wrong. We do get the occasional acknowledgement of a dinner at the White House to discuss important matters. What we don't see is Boehner going on the Sunday political shows to ask the hard questions. I seem to remember seeing a lot of Tip O'Neil during the Iran-Contra affair. I seem to remember Tip O'Neil taking Reagan to task on many issues during his administration.
There have been many Senators on the political shows advocating against more involvement in armed conflicts. In reality it is the House that controls the purse strings. There have been many Senators discussing the issues as it relates to the IRS, the NSA and the DOJ. In reality the departments cannot function without funding. If the funding is withdrawn from the IRS or the NSA or even the DOJ, then compliance with the will of the House is nearly assured.
I do understand the above is very simplistic, sometimes simple may be just what we need. How can the IRS pay out 70 million in bonuses to employees if the funding is not there? It stands to reason the funding cannot be cut overnight. If a substantial threat is put forth, that funding will be withheld in the near future; it might just cause some consternation in those departments. Of course, that would imply the speaker would need to do more than visit the White House for dinner and drinks. But of course, Boehner might not want to miss the next concert.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
We do have people in the U.S. Government elected to serve as our representatives. They serve in both the House and the Senate. They come from different parties and from differing perspectives to be sure. As conservatives with a traditional view of how the U.S. should be governed, I believe it is incumbent upon those elected under the Republican banner, to do all they can to resist the efforts of Obama. How could one deny the efforts of those elected under the Democrat banner using every manner at their disposal to support the leader of their party as President? Even if it goes against everything we hold sacred, he is the party standard bearer. How could they not support him?
I personally believe we as a people do need someone to blame. As conservatives, everything that could be done was done to defeat Obama in his bid for re-election and it was not enough. So I began looking through history. History would lead me to believe there is a failure of leadership from the third most powerful person in the U.S. Government, Mr. John Boehner. Prior to this administration, others have shown a readiness to be in front of the people identifying the faults in the President during their tenure. Pelosi, for all her failings, was no shrinking violet when she opposed Bush in many areas. Gingrich, led the re-taking of the house with the “Contract With America”. Gingrich nearly ousted Clinton by impeachment while Speaker of the House. This, over what is currently known in the scandals involving the Obama administration, would be small potatoes. Yet when visiting Speaker Boehner's website, none of the on-going scandals are highlighted. Rarely do we hear Speaker Boehner using the “Bully Pulpit” to espouse the belief that what Obama and his administration is doing is wrong. We do get the occasional acknowledgement of a dinner at the White House to discuss important matters. What we don't see is Boehner going on the Sunday political shows to ask the hard questions. I seem to remember seeing a lot of Tip O'Neil during the Iran-Contra affair. I seem to remember Tip O'Neil taking Reagan to task on many issues during his administration.
There have been many Senators on the political shows advocating against more involvement in armed conflicts. In reality it is the House that controls the purse strings. There have been many Senators discussing the issues as it relates to the IRS, the NSA and the DOJ. In reality the departments cannot function without funding. If the funding is withdrawn from the IRS or the NSA or even the DOJ, then compliance with the will of the House is nearly assured.
I do understand the above is very simplistic, sometimes simple may be just what we need. How can the IRS pay out 70 million in bonuses to employees if the funding is not there? It stands to reason the funding cannot be cut overnight. If a substantial threat is put forth, that funding will be withheld in the near future; it might just cause some consternation in those departments. Of course, that would imply the speaker would need to do more than visit the White House for dinner and drinks. But of course, Boehner might not want to miss the next concert.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
Who Is Active?
There is much speculation that is active today in the USA. Across many parts of the world we see millions of people marching and protesting. It is estimated some 2 million people participated in the march yesterday in Brazil. We have seen the huge crowds in Turkey and the police reaction there has drawn criticism. Throughout the economic crisis there have been large protests in Greece, Italy, Spain and France. To a lesser extent in other EU countries. In the USA there is a great deal of talk about keyboard protesters, like myself, who use the internet for our opposition. In my mind, much of the US population are already slaves, slaves to the consumer society, slaves to the weekly pay check or slaves to the support of the Government handouts. They simply march on towards the next day, hoping things will get better.
This has happened before in a slave society, it happened after the war of Northern Aggression. At the close of the war, black population was estimated at around 4.4 million or 14% of the population of the USA. As a group, these people were greatly affected by the outcome of the conflict. I am a Southerner and although I lived in the most Northern area of the people supporting the cause, we are a people of oral tradition. This was reinforced by the fact that so few books were published and the war until the early 1900's. From the stories I was told as a child and from the books I have read on the subject, a rather surprising effect came about as the cherished establishment of freedom was told by the Master of the Plantations to those he previously held in bondage. For nearly thirty years the bulk of the black population remained in the south. Working on the same plantations as they had worked as slaves, or they worked as share-croppers dividing their crops with the owners of the land in exchange for the rent of the land. Of course this is in part due to the Jim Crow Laws enacted by the Democrats to keep the Black population suppressed. Another factor that must be taken into account is the south was an agrarian society, Blacks knew if they stayed and abided by the orders given at least they would eat.
The Blacks of the south preferred what they knew and the people that had surrounded them their entire lives than to strike out into an unknown. It took nearly two generations before they moved north in mass. Since the 1970's the population has again started to shift back south. The move today is for no doubt other reasons than they moved north in the first place. People of all colors have more mobility and choice in where and how they live now than they had in the past, which is not my point. My point is that people instinctively resist change.
In the American Revolution it has been estimated less than 10% of the population of the colonies participated in the rebellion. Taken into account that this was really pre-industrialization and since people knew if they stayed put and tended their farms they and their families would eat.
Today, in the modern slave society of the USA consumer culture, it is really much the same. People know if they keep their heads below the parapet, if they are lucky and have a job and don't rock the boat or if they are established on the Government schemes and don't bite the hand that feeds them, they will eat.
I currently live in Europe. Some have said, since I am out of the country it is none of my business. Believe me when I tell you, a change of address does not mean a change of heart. I served in the military, I served in Law Enforcement and I worked in private industry in the USA for most of my life. I am and always will be an American first and foremost. I am older, that is true. To me if I am on a list of those who oppose what this administration is doing, then I am fine with that. If I am fortunate to survive what I believe may be the outcome of what we see happening, then perhaps, if I am truly fortunate, I will be on the list of those who warned of the coming disaster. If the USA is fortunate to survive and return to the values of our forefathers, then those of us who spoke out may even be on a list we can be proud of, for we demonstrated our demand for freedom, for liberty and for the country we were given. We were at birth given a duty to protect that country, whether we knew it or not. Some of us have sworn oaths to protect it from enemies both foreign and domestic. We have no wish to see our country in conflict in any manner not in the national interest. However, we believe that the current leaders are on the wrong track and hope with all our hearts they change direction before any further actions take place, actions of any kind. That is why, for now, we take actions on our keyboards, with every hope to awaken the spirit of the American public to effect the changes needed in our public institutions. For those who ignore our pleas to peacefully effect change should be under no illusions, we do want change, just not the change Obama is demonstrating. The answer to the title, “Who Is Active”, is we are active. To those who deride are efforts, how would you like us to be active. Like the old warning, “Careful what you wish for”, since history is on our side. The USA has seen change, it has happened through activists many times, for now let us be happy we are still talking, but we are active.
In Liberty,
Gene
This has happened before in a slave society, it happened after the war of Northern Aggression. At the close of the war, black population was estimated at around 4.4 million or 14% of the population of the USA. As a group, these people were greatly affected by the outcome of the conflict. I am a Southerner and although I lived in the most Northern area of the people supporting the cause, we are a people of oral tradition. This was reinforced by the fact that so few books were published and the war until the early 1900's. From the stories I was told as a child and from the books I have read on the subject, a rather surprising effect came about as the cherished establishment of freedom was told by the Master of the Plantations to those he previously held in bondage. For nearly thirty years the bulk of the black population remained in the south. Working on the same plantations as they had worked as slaves, or they worked as share-croppers dividing their crops with the owners of the land in exchange for the rent of the land. Of course this is in part due to the Jim Crow Laws enacted by the Democrats to keep the Black population suppressed. Another factor that must be taken into account is the south was an agrarian society, Blacks knew if they stayed and abided by the orders given at least they would eat.
The Blacks of the south preferred what they knew and the people that had surrounded them their entire lives than to strike out into an unknown. It took nearly two generations before they moved north in mass. Since the 1970's the population has again started to shift back south. The move today is for no doubt other reasons than they moved north in the first place. People of all colors have more mobility and choice in where and how they live now than they had in the past, which is not my point. My point is that people instinctively resist change.
In the American Revolution it has been estimated less than 10% of the population of the colonies participated in the rebellion. Taken into account that this was really pre-industrialization and since people knew if they stayed put and tended their farms they and their families would eat.
Today, in the modern slave society of the USA consumer culture, it is really much the same. People know if they keep their heads below the parapet, if they are lucky and have a job and don't rock the boat or if they are established on the Government schemes and don't bite the hand that feeds them, they will eat.
I currently live in Europe. Some have said, since I am out of the country it is none of my business. Believe me when I tell you, a change of address does not mean a change of heart. I served in the military, I served in Law Enforcement and I worked in private industry in the USA for most of my life. I am and always will be an American first and foremost. I am older, that is true. To me if I am on a list of those who oppose what this administration is doing, then I am fine with that. If I am fortunate to survive what I believe may be the outcome of what we see happening, then perhaps, if I am truly fortunate, I will be on the list of those who warned of the coming disaster. If the USA is fortunate to survive and return to the values of our forefathers, then those of us who spoke out may even be on a list we can be proud of, for we demonstrated our demand for freedom, for liberty and for the country we were given. We were at birth given a duty to protect that country, whether we knew it or not. Some of us have sworn oaths to protect it from enemies both foreign and domestic. We have no wish to see our country in conflict in any manner not in the national interest. However, we believe that the current leaders are on the wrong track and hope with all our hearts they change direction before any further actions take place, actions of any kind. That is why, for now, we take actions on our keyboards, with every hope to awaken the spirit of the American public to effect the changes needed in our public institutions. For those who ignore our pleas to peacefully effect change should be under no illusions, we do want change, just not the change Obama is demonstrating. The answer to the title, “Who Is Active”, is we are active. To those who deride are efforts, how would you like us to be active. Like the old warning, “Careful what you wish for”, since history is on our side. The USA has seen change, it has happened through activists many times, for now let us be happy we are still talking, but we are active.
In Liberty,
Gene
Secession A Growing Cry For Freedom 18 June 2013
Secession is a growing cry for freedom all across Europe. As I sit in Europe at this moment there are over thirty active groups seeking freedom as Separatists or Secessionists. A simple Google will reveal the Wikipedia page of active separatist movements across Europe across more than thirty countries in the Greater European Continent. To me, it is interesting that these groups are lumped together as a whole, encompassing groups seeking autonomy and separatists. Let's face it, separatists are secessionists, the ruling powers may not like that word, but a rose by any other name smells as sweet.
It is a conversation that is going on not just in small isolated communities, or by people in their homes while wearing tin foil hats. This is reinforced by the requirements instituted by Wikipedia to be included in the list. First, it must be an active group, with active members. Secondly, the group must be seeking greater autonomy or self-determination for a geographic area as opposed to greater personal autonomy.
While it is true there is a great disparity in size and strength among these groups, there are groups making very strong headway in their drive for independence. Two cases in point are within the confines of one island nation, the United Kingdom. Scotland has won the right to hold a referendum on the topic in the near future, with a straight yes or no vote on independence from the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom itself has a strong voice for independence from the European Union. The fastest growing party in the United Kingdom is the United Kingdom Independence Party; soon it is thought to become the second strongest party in the country. It is rumoured they will replace the Liberal Democrats in the ruling coalition government in the next election. The Conservative Party has announced that if they can retain power in the election of 2015, they will hold a referendum on the question of European Union membership by 2017.
The economic crisis has contributed to the debate in many ways. When the treaties were signed creating the Euro, the countries taking part signed over a number of sovereign rights for what was called “The Greater Good of the Union”. They agreed to restrict the amount of deficit spending and of course, there is no way for them to devalue their own currency, as had been done in the past.
Since the United Kingdom is not part of the Euro, their grievances are due in large part to the rulings of the European Parliament and the European Courts. They contend the Parliament and the courts are reducing the sovereignty of the United Kingdom.
The Spanish region of Catalonia is also seeking separation from Spain. This movement has in one form or another been present for at least decades if not centuries. At this point the latest rumour circulating is they are having talks with the French Government to separate from Spain and join them, since leaving Spain on their own would result in leaving the European Union and that would be catastrophic for them economically.
The movements I have mentioned are but the strongest, most active and successful. Don't take my word for this, Google the term separatists movements in Europe for yourself.
The politicians struggle to find new terms for these movements each day in Europe. Separatism, withdrawal, autonomous rule, limited independence, anything but the dreaded word of secession. The word secession has come to remind people of the great struggle of the War of northern aggression caused by the southern states within the United States wishing their independence from an oppressive Washington D.C. centered government. No, the politicians do not want their populations using words that remind people of past wars. They would prefer if circumstances, such as those being experienced under the current economic crisis, resulted in the orderly withdrawal of any particular country not being able to continue abiding by the restrictions of the European Union agreements. In short if we have to discuss this let's not call it secession.
At the present time, two prominent banking figures in Spain are in jail on corruption charges. Secret accounts are alleged to have been maintained by one of them in Switzerland with deposits totaling over 27 million Euros or about 34 million Dollars US. There have been arrests and accusations leveled at politicians, bankers, and even members of Royal Families across Europe. Again though, with the view towards individual state sovereignty, taken across Europe, this is viewed as happening locally and not impacting on the European Union as a whole. Scandals don't tend to be viewed as affecting the European Union since power is not centralized as it is in the United States.
This brings me to my question. Since Europe, one of the largest operating Socialist movements in the world as a whole, and if we are frank that is what Europe is, can view, with certain restrictions, their members as sovereign entities, why are the member states of the United States not viewed with such regard? It would seem as though the Federal Government in Washington D.C. views it's member states as helpless children, to be guided, chastised, punished, having their allowance withheld or in so many ways treated as wayward children.
Are we in the United States ready to admit we are not capable of governing ourselves? No, I think our history disproves this notion. We are ready to govern ourselves. We need smaller more local government to be more responsive to the views and ideals of those who wish to live as their neighbors. Not to be told what to do by an over protective nanny living hundreds if not thousands of miles distant to our needs and ideas. Secession is a growing cry of freedom around the world; it is time to cry freedom in the USA as well.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
It is a conversation that is going on not just in small isolated communities, or by people in their homes while wearing tin foil hats. This is reinforced by the requirements instituted by Wikipedia to be included in the list. First, it must be an active group, with active members. Secondly, the group must be seeking greater autonomy or self-determination for a geographic area as opposed to greater personal autonomy.
While it is true there is a great disparity in size and strength among these groups, there are groups making very strong headway in their drive for independence. Two cases in point are within the confines of one island nation, the United Kingdom. Scotland has won the right to hold a referendum on the topic in the near future, with a straight yes or no vote on independence from the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom itself has a strong voice for independence from the European Union. The fastest growing party in the United Kingdom is the United Kingdom Independence Party; soon it is thought to become the second strongest party in the country. It is rumoured they will replace the Liberal Democrats in the ruling coalition government in the next election. The Conservative Party has announced that if they can retain power in the election of 2015, they will hold a referendum on the question of European Union membership by 2017.
The economic crisis has contributed to the debate in many ways. When the treaties were signed creating the Euro, the countries taking part signed over a number of sovereign rights for what was called “The Greater Good of the Union”. They agreed to restrict the amount of deficit spending and of course, there is no way for them to devalue their own currency, as had been done in the past.
Since the United Kingdom is not part of the Euro, their grievances are due in large part to the rulings of the European Parliament and the European Courts. They contend the Parliament and the courts are reducing the sovereignty of the United Kingdom.
The Spanish region of Catalonia is also seeking separation from Spain. This movement has in one form or another been present for at least decades if not centuries. At this point the latest rumour circulating is they are having talks with the French Government to separate from Spain and join them, since leaving Spain on their own would result in leaving the European Union and that would be catastrophic for them economically.
The movements I have mentioned are but the strongest, most active and successful. Don't take my word for this, Google the term separatists movements in Europe for yourself.
The politicians struggle to find new terms for these movements each day in Europe. Separatism, withdrawal, autonomous rule, limited independence, anything but the dreaded word of secession. The word secession has come to remind people of the great struggle of the War of northern aggression caused by the southern states within the United States wishing their independence from an oppressive Washington D.C. centered government. No, the politicians do not want their populations using words that remind people of past wars. They would prefer if circumstances, such as those being experienced under the current economic crisis, resulted in the orderly withdrawal of any particular country not being able to continue abiding by the restrictions of the European Union agreements. In short if we have to discuss this let's not call it secession.
At the present time, two prominent banking figures in Spain are in jail on corruption charges. Secret accounts are alleged to have been maintained by one of them in Switzerland with deposits totaling over 27 million Euros or about 34 million Dollars US. There have been arrests and accusations leveled at politicians, bankers, and even members of Royal Families across Europe. Again though, with the view towards individual state sovereignty, taken across Europe, this is viewed as happening locally and not impacting on the European Union as a whole. Scandals don't tend to be viewed as affecting the European Union since power is not centralized as it is in the United States.
This brings me to my question. Since Europe, one of the largest operating Socialist movements in the world as a whole, and if we are frank that is what Europe is, can view, with certain restrictions, their members as sovereign entities, why are the member states of the United States not viewed with such regard? It would seem as though the Federal Government in Washington D.C. views it's member states as helpless children, to be guided, chastised, punished, having their allowance withheld or in so many ways treated as wayward children.
Are we in the United States ready to admit we are not capable of governing ourselves? No, I think our history disproves this notion. We are ready to govern ourselves. We need smaller more local government to be more responsive to the views and ideals of those who wish to live as their neighbors. Not to be told what to do by an over protective nanny living hundreds if not thousands of miles distant to our needs and ideas. Secession is a growing cry of freedom around the world; it is time to cry freedom in the USA as well.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
Where Are You From? 16 June 2013
For years, one of the first questions people ask when they meet me is, “Where are you from?” My first response is Kentucky. While it is not actually accurate, it is true. But you ask, if it is not accurate, how can it be true? I am an unreconstructed southerner. My Great Grand Father, on my father's side rode with Morgan's Cavalry, my Grand Father on my mother's side worked for the Morgan's packing plant. So in short, if you don't know history, the part of southern Indiana that is the Ohio river valley was heavily occupied by federal forces. We did not, nor do I think we would today, take kindly to federal occupation. It was heavier in Kentucky and that state had several battles, although mostly due to Morgan we had a few. When I was young there was still animosity towards southern Indiana by Northerners, due to our assistance to “The Cause”. So when ask, since we did far more business in Kentucky, I just answer Kentucky is where I am from. That way any Northerner can take his shot right up front.
For the last the last fifteen years or so I have lived outside the USA. I have had many discussions with people over the course of the USA and the governments actions in the world. Usually it leads to a discussion of what has changed since 1865, since I see that as the re-founding of the USA. Oh there have been a few attempts at asserting Statehood and many mistaken ideas about what statehood would mean, but none with any real impact. Think about how the USA has grown since 1865. Please tell me why would people fight so hard to achieve statehood, if they didn't think it would give them a chance to govern themselves? Would it perhaps not have been better, to forego the lies and have simply remained territories under federal control?
In the mid 1850's Robert E. Lee was a cavalry officer in Texas and New Mexico; he had served under Winfield Scott in the Mexican war. By 1859 he was back east and led the forces that defeated John Brown in his raid at Harper's Ferry. In total by the time of Virginia's secession Lee had been in the US Army for 32 years. Robert E. Lee was the Son of the revolutionary war hero Henry “Light Horse” Lee. The Secretary of War at the direction of Lincoln asked Lee to take command of the Northern Army being recruited to put down the secession states, Lee declined as Virginia was his home and there would be no other choice for the federal army but to invade Virginia first. The US National Cemetery is at Arlington, Virginia, the Plantation owned by Robert E. Lee and his wife. Lincoln himself ordered that the fallen be buried in Lee's front yard.
As I stated earlier, I travel a great deal. My current passport is of the extended page version, which indicates it is extended by fifteen pages. It it is so full of immigration stamps many officers of different countries take pity upon me and stamp over other stamps so I will not have to renew before the pages run out. My first passport I completely wore out just before it was due to be renewed. In most cases I am required to fill out a landing card before entering a country. Even though I am married to an EU citizen, I have not taken a foreign passport so I am technically an alien, with a right of residence and unlimited leave to remain. On these landing cards, among other questions is the Country of Birth, I answer, Indiana, for nationality I answer United States. These are the correct answers to these questions as recognised by the EU and UK governments. For in Europe they are not Nationalists as is the case in the USA.
Before I close I would like to remind everyone what the term Nazi is. It is defined in many dictionaries and on WIKI as Nazi - Noun - A member of the National Socialist Workers Party. I feel that Nationalism is truly at the root of all of our problems. Too often today, we as citizens look to the federal government for all of life's need and guidance. We in truth have a country of birth, that being the state in which we were born. If there are problems then it is up to us as a people to solve those problems in our own state. Would you allow your local Representative, State Senator or Governor to create and agency or entity of any kind to spy upon you, restrict your right to free speech and get away with the scandals currently facing Washington D.C.? If we would not allow these people to act this way, what makes the supposedly, “Hallow Ground” of Washington D.C. So different? The federal government with few exceptions was established to deal with those states not part of the United states, essentially other countries. It is not a problem of left or right, it is a problem of perception. We are a group of several nation states united in common defence and benefiting from world trade, based upon equitable trade deals as asserted by the federal government. In fact, it is in the area of world trade where the US government should acquire most of it's income
We do not have, nor should we want to adopt a socialist ideology, or any type of that ilk disguised as progressivism as our form of government. Should we actually want to be Nazi?
Now, may I ask, where are you from?
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
For the last the last fifteen years or so I have lived outside the USA. I have had many discussions with people over the course of the USA and the governments actions in the world. Usually it leads to a discussion of what has changed since 1865, since I see that as the re-founding of the USA. Oh there have been a few attempts at asserting Statehood and many mistaken ideas about what statehood would mean, but none with any real impact. Think about how the USA has grown since 1865. Please tell me why would people fight so hard to achieve statehood, if they didn't think it would give them a chance to govern themselves? Would it perhaps not have been better, to forego the lies and have simply remained territories under federal control?
In the mid 1850's Robert E. Lee was a cavalry officer in Texas and New Mexico; he had served under Winfield Scott in the Mexican war. By 1859 he was back east and led the forces that defeated John Brown in his raid at Harper's Ferry. In total by the time of Virginia's secession Lee had been in the US Army for 32 years. Robert E. Lee was the Son of the revolutionary war hero Henry “Light Horse” Lee. The Secretary of War at the direction of Lincoln asked Lee to take command of the Northern Army being recruited to put down the secession states, Lee declined as Virginia was his home and there would be no other choice for the federal army but to invade Virginia first. The US National Cemetery is at Arlington, Virginia, the Plantation owned by Robert E. Lee and his wife. Lincoln himself ordered that the fallen be buried in Lee's front yard.
As I stated earlier, I travel a great deal. My current passport is of the extended page version, which indicates it is extended by fifteen pages. It it is so full of immigration stamps many officers of different countries take pity upon me and stamp over other stamps so I will not have to renew before the pages run out. My first passport I completely wore out just before it was due to be renewed. In most cases I am required to fill out a landing card before entering a country. Even though I am married to an EU citizen, I have not taken a foreign passport so I am technically an alien, with a right of residence and unlimited leave to remain. On these landing cards, among other questions is the Country of Birth, I answer, Indiana, for nationality I answer United States. These are the correct answers to these questions as recognised by the EU and UK governments. For in Europe they are not Nationalists as is the case in the USA.
Before I close I would like to remind everyone what the term Nazi is. It is defined in many dictionaries and on WIKI as Nazi - Noun - A member of the National Socialist Workers Party. I feel that Nationalism is truly at the root of all of our problems. Too often today, we as citizens look to the federal government for all of life's need and guidance. We in truth have a country of birth, that being the state in which we were born. If there are problems then it is up to us as a people to solve those problems in our own state. Would you allow your local Representative, State Senator or Governor to create and agency or entity of any kind to spy upon you, restrict your right to free speech and get away with the scandals currently facing Washington D.C.? If we would not allow these people to act this way, what makes the supposedly, “Hallow Ground” of Washington D.C. So different? The federal government with few exceptions was established to deal with those states not part of the United states, essentially other countries. It is not a problem of left or right, it is a problem of perception. We are a group of several nation states united in common defence and benefiting from world trade, based upon equitable trade deals as asserted by the federal government. In fact, it is in the area of world trade where the US government should acquire most of it's income
We do not have, nor should we want to adopt a socialist ideology, or any type of that ilk disguised as progressivism as our form of government. Should we actually want to be Nazi?
Now, may I ask, where are you from?
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
14 June 2013 Eavesdropping is Centuries Old
Eavesdropping is a centuries old trick yet most Americans are appalled by the scandals surrounding the NSA gathering of information on virtually every form of communication used by the citizens. Should we really be surprised at a narcissistic, insecure, controlling President Obama expanding the power from the use as it was used under President George W. Bush. Under George W. Bush, we are told, it was limited to contacts coming into the USA from a foreign source, or under certain circumstances those going out to a foreign destination. It would seem as it is now used, it covers any word spoken to another person, written to another person or even perhaps muttered to ones self as we sometimes do. If you think it or say it he wants to know. Is it such a far step to think he may have used it in his political battles?
The art of eavesdropping is centuries old and the rulers have always sought to improve the art. This term was first used in the early 1600, at the time of James I of England, an unpopular ruler since he was Scottish. This method came about since government spies would stand under the eaves of a house near a window to listen to conversations of the residents. Of course, if caught, they were only standing under the eaves to be out of the rain while waiting for transport. Since many know of the amount of rainfall in England it is a readily usable excuse. The impetus for this action was described at the time as the need for information concerning the fear of another uprising or plot against the King, probably as a result of the Gun Powder Plot which brought Guy Fawkes (the image of the mask used by anonymous is said to represent Guy Fawkes) to fame. This was explained to the British public as an attempt to protect them from the subversive elements bent on overthrowing the ruling monarch. Another term which was said to come into use at the same time was gossip. Having lived in London for many years, Londoners describe Gossip as coming from the time of James I as well. It is said the King wanted to know what his subjects were thinking and talking about. He would send his agents to the Pubs (Public Houses)with instructions to “Go Sip” later combined to form the term Gossip to describe the information obtained. In these times, as it is in certain parts of England today, the Pubs are where the villagers gather to drink, socialise and discuss events affecting their lives. The amount they drank corresponded to the information gathered.
Emperors, Kings, Dictators and Presidents have use information to their advantage. Even rooms were designed to allow this to be used, hence Chinese whispers comes from a room in the Palace where a word spoken in one corner could be heard in another. One must consider, even then first telephone conversation was overheard, albeit by investors and the government representatives, as Mr. Watson was ask to come to Mr. Bell since he was needed. I, personally had the chance to see first hand how easily this could happen when older equipment was in use. I once managed a small hotel in the Westwood area of Los Angeles. It actually had a working form of the old telephone manual connection switchboard in use. The incoming call would be answered by an operator and then manually switched to the needed recipient. On more than one occasion the operator inadvertently left open the main set and the full conversation would be heard until it was switched to private. When it is considered this was the main form of telephone switching when Hoover came to power at the FBI, is it any wonder he had such a file of “important” information on everyone in D.C.?
The real boon to law enforcement information gathering came when the cordless phone was first in mass usage around the world. It was a simple fact that the cordless phone would broadcast the signal to a base station (what most people saw as the phone cradle charging station) which would then send the signal across the phone connection. It was very simple to intercept that broadcast transmission. All any police department had to do was drive a van with another receiver through a neighbourhood tune the receiver and intercept the call. For many years the public never even knew it was being done. Then when it did go before a court, the ruling came back that the caller had no expectation of privacy as the voluntarily broadcast the signal over public airwaves, much the same as a CB radio or Ham radio. The early analogue cellular phones worked in much the same way, only they broadcast an even stronger signal to reach a repeater.
Many people have wondered for many years if the advancements in satellite technology has made it possible to intercept anything accept direct hard wire transmissions. We as the citizens may never know for sure. What we can be sure of is that if it is possible, thoughtof as possible or even dreamed of as possible it will be attempted. Information is power and from the usurpation of power we have found in this administration new and more invasive techniques are almost certain to be developed to gain that power. Privacy and the first amendment are two sides of the same sword. You may say what you think or believe, but if you do, expect someone to be listening whether you know it or not, eavesdropping is centuries old.
Eavesdropping is centuries old, technology has only made it simpler and easier to accomplish. The test for us is to determine what the penalties should be for those who violate our first amendment and get caught.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
The art of eavesdropping is centuries old and the rulers have always sought to improve the art. This term was first used in the early 1600, at the time of James I of England, an unpopular ruler since he was Scottish. This method came about since government spies would stand under the eaves of a house near a window to listen to conversations of the residents. Of course, if caught, they were only standing under the eaves to be out of the rain while waiting for transport. Since many know of the amount of rainfall in England it is a readily usable excuse. The impetus for this action was described at the time as the need for information concerning the fear of another uprising or plot against the King, probably as a result of the Gun Powder Plot which brought Guy Fawkes (the image of the mask used by anonymous is said to represent Guy Fawkes) to fame. This was explained to the British public as an attempt to protect them from the subversive elements bent on overthrowing the ruling monarch. Another term which was said to come into use at the same time was gossip. Having lived in London for many years, Londoners describe Gossip as coming from the time of James I as well. It is said the King wanted to know what his subjects were thinking and talking about. He would send his agents to the Pubs (Public Houses)with instructions to “Go Sip” later combined to form the term Gossip to describe the information obtained. In these times, as it is in certain parts of England today, the Pubs are where the villagers gather to drink, socialise and discuss events affecting their lives. The amount they drank corresponded to the information gathered.
Emperors, Kings, Dictators and Presidents have use information to their advantage. Even rooms were designed to allow this to be used, hence Chinese whispers comes from a room in the Palace where a word spoken in one corner could be heard in another. One must consider, even then first telephone conversation was overheard, albeit by investors and the government representatives, as Mr. Watson was ask to come to Mr. Bell since he was needed. I, personally had the chance to see first hand how easily this could happen when older equipment was in use. I once managed a small hotel in the Westwood area of Los Angeles. It actually had a working form of the old telephone manual connection switchboard in use. The incoming call would be answered by an operator and then manually switched to the needed recipient. On more than one occasion the operator inadvertently left open the main set and the full conversation would be heard until it was switched to private. When it is considered this was the main form of telephone switching when Hoover came to power at the FBI, is it any wonder he had such a file of “important” information on everyone in D.C.?
The real boon to law enforcement information gathering came when the cordless phone was first in mass usage around the world. It was a simple fact that the cordless phone would broadcast the signal to a base station (what most people saw as the phone cradle charging station) which would then send the signal across the phone connection. It was very simple to intercept that broadcast transmission. All any police department had to do was drive a van with another receiver through a neighbourhood tune the receiver and intercept the call. For many years the public never even knew it was being done. Then when it did go before a court, the ruling came back that the caller had no expectation of privacy as the voluntarily broadcast the signal over public airwaves, much the same as a CB radio or Ham radio. The early analogue cellular phones worked in much the same way, only they broadcast an even stronger signal to reach a repeater.
Many people have wondered for many years if the advancements in satellite technology has made it possible to intercept anything accept direct hard wire transmissions. We as the citizens may never know for sure. What we can be sure of is that if it is possible, thoughtof as possible or even dreamed of as possible it will be attempted. Information is power and from the usurpation of power we have found in this administration new and more invasive techniques are almost certain to be developed to gain that power. Privacy and the first amendment are two sides of the same sword. You may say what you think or believe, but if you do, expect someone to be listening whether you know it or not, eavesdropping is centuries old.
Eavesdropping is centuries old, technology has only made it simpler and easier to accomplish. The test for us is to determine what the penalties should be for those who violate our first amendment and get caught.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
The People Need the Truth
Truth, beyond all else, is the only cure for this administration. In light of the multiple scandals that plague the current administration, it may even be too late for truth to save them.
The people of the United States now face perhaps the most serious dilemma in the nation's history. Faced with multiple scandals, which appear to have only one source, the politics of the current administration, it is time to decide. To decide if the struggle to right the ship is correct, or to allow the ship to sink and build anew. Many who have been following the recent events continue to hear the same rhetoric. The Senate will hold a hearing to determine the facts, the house will hold a hearing to find who is responsible. The evidence is clear, it is “We The People” who are responsible.
Lord Northcliffe, a British Publisher, once said “News is what somebody somewhere wants to suppress, all the rest is advertising”. It does appear then the Obama administration considers a lot of what is coming out to be news. What matters to the citizens of the USA is truth, beyond all else, truth. The only mechanism which will drive the shadows of a secretive government away is truth. The administration seems to be doubling down of their bet that the American people are too stupid to know the truth even if it jumped up and bit them in the proverbial backside. They are counting on scandal fatigue, just as they counted on fiscal cliff fatigue, Benghazi fatigue, fast and furious fatigue and well you get the idea. After all most of this was George W. Bush's fault right?
Valerie Jarrett has recently spoken out about the fact that Attorney General Holder isn't going anywhere. It is rumoured that nothing happens in the White House without her approval. The head of Obama's election campaign said she was present at many of the meetings in which the head of the IRS was in the White House. If that is the case, should she be asked if Valerie Jarrett was also present? It could go a long way to explaining the process which might have happened.
My complaint in most of this lies with the fact that the administration is simply ignoring the House of Representatives requests and subpeanos for information regarding anything which they are investigating, or even worse as in Fast and Furious claiming executive priviledge. The result being the same as the person who always threatens but does nothing to carry out, or has no power to carry out those threats, the threats are simply ignored. Most people know someone who is guilty of acting that way, the result is often we simply count on our past experience and ignore them. Is this not what the administration has experienced? The House issues threats and even once held (for the first time ever for an Attorney General) Holder in comtempt without consequences. Why should they be expected to act any differently than us? If when we were children we learned our parents would yell and scream and threaten but their actions held no real consequence, I hasten to add this was not my experience, would we have learned that actions in life have consequences?
No, above and beyond every other reason that can be put, it is time the administration learned there are consequences. Now is the time to act. No is the time to abolish the IRS. If the IRS person in charge of that section can hide behind the 5th amendment, which is her right, then grant her immunity and get to the truth. For truth beyond all else, in these dark times will finally begin to open the halls and doors of rooms hiding the secrets for the American people. Once that door into the behind the scenes of what happened at the IRS is opened, the doors to many other scandals will open. Once those in power see that they are accountable, the rats will start to run and the little birds will start with their songs of “I'll Tell If You Only Grant Me The Same Deal”.
For in reality, Truth, beyond all else, is the salve to heal the wounded nation.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
The people of the United States now face perhaps the most serious dilemma in the nation's history. Faced with multiple scandals, which appear to have only one source, the politics of the current administration, it is time to decide. To decide if the struggle to right the ship is correct, or to allow the ship to sink and build anew. Many who have been following the recent events continue to hear the same rhetoric. The Senate will hold a hearing to determine the facts, the house will hold a hearing to find who is responsible. The evidence is clear, it is “We The People” who are responsible.
Lord Northcliffe, a British Publisher, once said “News is what somebody somewhere wants to suppress, all the rest is advertising”. It does appear then the Obama administration considers a lot of what is coming out to be news. What matters to the citizens of the USA is truth, beyond all else, truth. The only mechanism which will drive the shadows of a secretive government away is truth. The administration seems to be doubling down of their bet that the American people are too stupid to know the truth even if it jumped up and bit them in the proverbial backside. They are counting on scandal fatigue, just as they counted on fiscal cliff fatigue, Benghazi fatigue, fast and furious fatigue and well you get the idea. After all most of this was George W. Bush's fault right?
Valerie Jarrett has recently spoken out about the fact that Attorney General Holder isn't going anywhere. It is rumoured that nothing happens in the White House without her approval. The head of Obama's election campaign said she was present at many of the meetings in which the head of the IRS was in the White House. If that is the case, should she be asked if Valerie Jarrett was also present? It could go a long way to explaining the process which might have happened.
My complaint in most of this lies with the fact that the administration is simply ignoring the House of Representatives requests and subpeanos for information regarding anything which they are investigating, or even worse as in Fast and Furious claiming executive priviledge. The result being the same as the person who always threatens but does nothing to carry out, or has no power to carry out those threats, the threats are simply ignored. Most people know someone who is guilty of acting that way, the result is often we simply count on our past experience and ignore them. Is this not what the administration has experienced? The House issues threats and even once held (for the first time ever for an Attorney General) Holder in comtempt without consequences. Why should they be expected to act any differently than us? If when we were children we learned our parents would yell and scream and threaten but their actions held no real consequence, I hasten to add this was not my experience, would we have learned that actions in life have consequences?
No, above and beyond every other reason that can be put, it is time the administration learned there are consequences. Now is the time to act. No is the time to abolish the IRS. If the IRS person in charge of that section can hide behind the 5th amendment, which is her right, then grant her immunity and get to the truth. For truth beyond all else, in these dark times will finally begin to open the halls and doors of rooms hiding the secrets for the American people. Once that door into the behind the scenes of what happened at the IRS is opened, the doors to many other scandals will open. Once those in power see that they are accountable, the rats will start to run and the little birds will start with their songs of “I'll Tell If You Only Grant Me The Same Deal”.
For in reality, Truth, beyond all else, is the salve to heal the wounded nation.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
Hillary Rodham Clinton Money, Lies and Politics
Hillary Rodham Clinton has spent her life consumed by three things: Money, Lies and Politics. Any perfunctory google search would reveal a pattern of these components that has been documented historical fact reaching back to her staff days on the House committee preparing for the impeachment of Richard Nixon. Then as a young 27 year old lawyer, she wrangled a position on that staff by using contacts in the Kennedy clan to put pressure to use her. Such was her propensity to lie and obfuscate the Constitution that when she left her boss, Jerry Zeifman did not write a letter of recommendation for her. In his opinion she lied and purposely concealed information from the congressmen on the committee and possibly even hid files from them. In fact she even tried to suggest that the then President Nixon should be denied counsel during his impeachment trial.
She also reportedly boasted, at the time, she was dating a man who would be President of the USA. This was one of three things, she had a great deal of wishful thinking, she was prophetic, or she knew that she was going to make him be President. In any case that man, as we know, was William Jefferson Clinton, who indeed became President Clinton.
After becoming first lady of Arkansas, her desire for Money and Politics necessitated many Lies. The many escapades of Governor Bill and his cadre of state police guards have become part of political folk lore. Least we forget the scandals of White Water, the bank failures, the scandals involving other women, Mena Airport and Barry Seal with the potential drug scandals and money laundering, these were all before the scandals of the Vince Foster death and the ensuing travel-gate investigations.
When the Vince Foster death happened, we learned a little of her administrative style. Her style of hiring much younger women, so they would be obedient, highlighted by the fact she hired 27 people, 26 women and 1 man. She is reported to have said to Madeline Albright concerning this, “We all know what a**holes men can be”. It was reported at the time, she would often having created a problem, storm out and in doing so tell Vince Foster, “Vince fix it”. This appears to have happened just before Vince Foster died and resulted in Travel-gate.
In 1994, we must remember the investigations in Hillary Clinton's involvement in the Arkansas Savings and Loan Débâcle. She told the House oversight committee she had never made a cent from clients representing them in their involvement with the State of Arkansas. Later she said, “For goodness sakes, I'm a Lawyer, you can't be a Lawyer and not represent Banks”. Her impatience and perturbed manner at the time, is reminiscent of her recent attitude in front of another House oversight committee recently where she pounded the desk and uttered the memorable line, “What difference does it make?”.
The true investigation of the Benghazi attacks have only just begun. I have listed the previous history of Hillary Clinton as an investigator, working a police investigation, would look at the previous history of a suspect. This is done in this manner for several reasons. When a police investigator is looking at a possible suspect, they look at that person's past history. First it tells the investigator whether this person has a history of doing criminal or suspicious behaviour. In Hillary's case, I think we can safely assume some suspicious behaviour has happened. Second it tells the investigator if the person is likely to lie when questioned, again in Hillary's case this assumption can safely be made. Next, would that person, if confronted with indisputable facts likely implicate someone else as the perpetrator, personally I doubt she would allow herself to be thrown under the bus alone.
So if we look at what has happened so far, she has been called before the committee. Hillary is anything but stupid. I have no idea if she was speaking under oath at the last appearance. What must happen is that, since Mr. Hicks has testified under oath he spoke to her at 2AM and briefed her on what was happening, she must be called to testified and testify under oath, about her knowledge of the attack and her actions, or lack of actions, in the hours which followed that call.
We must keep always in mind, though it is unannounced, she is in all probability, planning a run for President in 2016. We, as Americans, should do everything we can to keep such a person from ever gaining the reins of power held by the highest office in the land. Remember as well, we were given a Republic for only so long as we can hold on to it. Hillary Rodham Clinton has, for nearly all of her adult life, followed three things at her core: Money, Lies and Politics.
Yours In Liberty
Gene Daily
She also reportedly boasted, at the time, she was dating a man who would be President of the USA. This was one of three things, she had a great deal of wishful thinking, she was prophetic, or she knew that she was going to make him be President. In any case that man, as we know, was William Jefferson Clinton, who indeed became President Clinton.
After becoming first lady of Arkansas, her desire for Money and Politics necessitated many Lies. The many escapades of Governor Bill and his cadre of state police guards have become part of political folk lore. Least we forget the scandals of White Water, the bank failures, the scandals involving other women, Mena Airport and Barry Seal with the potential drug scandals and money laundering, these were all before the scandals of the Vince Foster death and the ensuing travel-gate investigations.
When the Vince Foster death happened, we learned a little of her administrative style. Her style of hiring much younger women, so they would be obedient, highlighted by the fact she hired 27 people, 26 women and 1 man. She is reported to have said to Madeline Albright concerning this, “We all know what a**holes men can be”. It was reported at the time, she would often having created a problem, storm out and in doing so tell Vince Foster, “Vince fix it”. This appears to have happened just before Vince Foster died and resulted in Travel-gate.
In 1994, we must remember the investigations in Hillary Clinton's involvement in the Arkansas Savings and Loan Débâcle. She told the House oversight committee she had never made a cent from clients representing them in their involvement with the State of Arkansas. Later she said, “For goodness sakes, I'm a Lawyer, you can't be a Lawyer and not represent Banks”. Her impatience and perturbed manner at the time, is reminiscent of her recent attitude in front of another House oversight committee recently where she pounded the desk and uttered the memorable line, “What difference does it make?”.
The true investigation of the Benghazi attacks have only just begun. I have listed the previous history of Hillary Clinton as an investigator, working a police investigation, would look at the previous history of a suspect. This is done in this manner for several reasons. When a police investigator is looking at a possible suspect, they look at that person's past history. First it tells the investigator whether this person has a history of doing criminal or suspicious behaviour. In Hillary's case, I think we can safely assume some suspicious behaviour has happened. Second it tells the investigator if the person is likely to lie when questioned, again in Hillary's case this assumption can safely be made. Next, would that person, if confronted with indisputable facts likely implicate someone else as the perpetrator, personally I doubt she would allow herself to be thrown under the bus alone.
So if we look at what has happened so far, she has been called before the committee. Hillary is anything but stupid. I have no idea if she was speaking under oath at the last appearance. What must happen is that, since Mr. Hicks has testified under oath he spoke to her at 2AM and briefed her on what was happening, she must be called to testified and testify under oath, about her knowledge of the attack and her actions, or lack of actions, in the hours which followed that call.
We must keep always in mind, though it is unannounced, she is in all probability, planning a run for President in 2016. We, as Americans, should do everything we can to keep such a person from ever gaining the reins of power held by the highest office in the land. Remember as well, we were given a Republic for only so long as we can hold on to it. Hillary Rodham Clinton has, for nearly all of her adult life, followed three things at her core: Money, Lies and Politics.
Yours In Liberty
Gene Daily
The Hippies are in Charge
With all the recent scandalous information coming out regarding the Obama administration, it appears the Hippies are in charge. In the not too distant past, we as conservatives, were called the “Silent Majority”. Well silence may in fact be complicity. I do understand the different approach that has historically marked the difference between conservative and progressives' approach to distrust of the government and our different reaction to that distrust, I did live through the 60's and 70's.
We, as conservatives, who watched the street protests of the 60's and 70's referred to them as “That Bunch of Hippie Trouble Makers”, out in the street causing problems again. While I did not personally see the Chicago riots of 1968, at that time I was serving in the military having enlisted in August of 1968. While I was not in Haight Ashbury for the 1967 summer of love, I followed enough of the reporting to be able to comment. To myself and many of my contemporaries they were unwashed, undisciplined, dope smoking, unpatriotic, mostly rich college kids. Kids who did just enough college courses, usually of the socialist type of courses, to keep their draft exemptions. I suppose that is why the photograph of Obama holding an obvious joint, while appearing high, upsets me so much. I am also aware that by and large, he has with near malice aforethought, appointed those of a similar mindset. A mindset we felt undermined our American values, our view of ourselves as Americans and what we represent to the rest of the world.
Personally I think it fits in completely with my view of Eric Holder, the uncourageous radical, who denies any armed take over, or even complicity with any armed groups, during his radical college days. A denial I find hard to accept knowing the popular phrase, “If you ain't part of the solution, you're part of the problem”.
I also have my doubts about Hilary, given the company she kept. I remember the phrase from Bill, “I NEVER INHALED”. While I have no doubts about her greed, lust for power and prestige, I doubt she could have been accepted as a part of the group she associated with and not had the same view of the world as they did.
For myself, I confess, I was part of the military during those troubled times. Times when you questioned your country's motives under Lyndon Johnson and the motives of Richard Nixon for different reasons. I questioned as well and, yes during a phase of my life partook in the rebelliousness of the times and the infamous weed and the more powerful cousin hashish. I understand the philosophy of free thinking while under the influence. That was cut short when I was part of a group that had a reel to reel tape enthusiast as a member. One night while expounding our thoughts as a group passing stuff around, he recorded our session. The next day in a clearer state of mind, he played it back for us. We were perhaps more fortunate, we had the chance to listen to ourselves, perhaps they did not and may not have listen to themselves yet. That may be the root of the problem. Though personally, I think Hillary may always remember the line, “What difference does it make”. May that line follow her unto death. If I had my way it would be inscribe upon her tombstone.
After being abroad for many years, I have often heard the leaders of the opposition parties in different countries express the same sentiment. You see in Europe, there are many parties. They are not just confined to two similar parties, they have groups with many differing views. So, after losing an election, the party left out of government, or left out of the coalition which forms the ruling group, the party represents what is called the opposition. Their views are nearly always reported when the ruling parties make an unwelcome decision. Many times the opposition leader will state quite honestly, “It's very easy to have a different policy when you are not ruling the government and don't have to implement that policy”.
That is the problem I believe confronts the “Hippie” government of today under Obama and his administration. They learned long ago the riotous actions of their demonstrations, their groups such as SDS and the more radical splinter groups that followed, would not attract the following they needed for change. Remember, Obama promised, a complete change to the way the government of the USA operates. They are finding, that as the ruling party, it is a different matter altogether to implement those policies.
Yes, the “Hippies” are in charge. The problem is, their form of government does not conform to the Constitution. They are trying to put a square peg in a round hole. This is why their lies keep unravelling, this is why their methods are just wrong, they are in the wrong part of the world. We who make up what was once known as, “The Silent Majority”, must be silent no longer. We as our forefather before us must pledge our lives, our fortunes, and our scared honour to stop them from forever bringing about the downfall of our nation. They are in the process of infiltrating our schools through Common Core. The are attacking our 2nd Amendment rights, they are attacking our 1st Amendment rights through freedom of expression being targeted by the IRS, they are assuming so many powers not listed in the Constitution that it is beyond listing in a short article of this kind.
Just as when Nixon used his powers of office to spy upon and intimidate George McGovern, though it was not needed. Obama is drunk with power. He has moved them in, the Hippies are in power, but we should let them remember they only have a short lease and one that can be terminated at our pleasure.
Yours in liberty
Gene Daily
We, as conservatives, who watched the street protests of the 60's and 70's referred to them as “That Bunch of Hippie Trouble Makers”, out in the street causing problems again. While I did not personally see the Chicago riots of 1968, at that time I was serving in the military having enlisted in August of 1968. While I was not in Haight Ashbury for the 1967 summer of love, I followed enough of the reporting to be able to comment. To myself and many of my contemporaries they were unwashed, undisciplined, dope smoking, unpatriotic, mostly rich college kids. Kids who did just enough college courses, usually of the socialist type of courses, to keep their draft exemptions. I suppose that is why the photograph of Obama holding an obvious joint, while appearing high, upsets me so much. I am also aware that by and large, he has with near malice aforethought, appointed those of a similar mindset. A mindset we felt undermined our American values, our view of ourselves as Americans and what we represent to the rest of the world.
Personally I think it fits in completely with my view of Eric Holder, the uncourageous radical, who denies any armed take over, or even complicity with any armed groups, during his radical college days. A denial I find hard to accept knowing the popular phrase, “If you ain't part of the solution, you're part of the problem”.
I also have my doubts about Hilary, given the company she kept. I remember the phrase from Bill, “I NEVER INHALED”. While I have no doubts about her greed, lust for power and prestige, I doubt she could have been accepted as a part of the group she associated with and not had the same view of the world as they did.
For myself, I confess, I was part of the military during those troubled times. Times when you questioned your country's motives under Lyndon Johnson and the motives of Richard Nixon for different reasons. I questioned as well and, yes during a phase of my life partook in the rebelliousness of the times and the infamous weed and the more powerful cousin hashish. I understand the philosophy of free thinking while under the influence. That was cut short when I was part of a group that had a reel to reel tape enthusiast as a member. One night while expounding our thoughts as a group passing stuff around, he recorded our session. The next day in a clearer state of mind, he played it back for us. We were perhaps more fortunate, we had the chance to listen to ourselves, perhaps they did not and may not have listen to themselves yet. That may be the root of the problem. Though personally, I think Hillary may always remember the line, “What difference does it make”. May that line follow her unto death. If I had my way it would be inscribe upon her tombstone.
After being abroad for many years, I have often heard the leaders of the opposition parties in different countries express the same sentiment. You see in Europe, there are many parties. They are not just confined to two similar parties, they have groups with many differing views. So, after losing an election, the party left out of government, or left out of the coalition which forms the ruling group, the party represents what is called the opposition. Their views are nearly always reported when the ruling parties make an unwelcome decision. Many times the opposition leader will state quite honestly, “It's very easy to have a different policy when you are not ruling the government and don't have to implement that policy”.
That is the problem I believe confronts the “Hippie” government of today under Obama and his administration. They learned long ago the riotous actions of their demonstrations, their groups such as SDS and the more radical splinter groups that followed, would not attract the following they needed for change. Remember, Obama promised, a complete change to the way the government of the USA operates. They are finding, that as the ruling party, it is a different matter altogether to implement those policies.
Yes, the “Hippies” are in charge. The problem is, their form of government does not conform to the Constitution. They are trying to put a square peg in a round hole. This is why their lies keep unravelling, this is why their methods are just wrong, they are in the wrong part of the world. We who make up what was once known as, “The Silent Majority”, must be silent no longer. We as our forefather before us must pledge our lives, our fortunes, and our scared honour to stop them from forever bringing about the downfall of our nation. They are in the process of infiltrating our schools through Common Core. The are attacking our 2nd Amendment rights, they are attacking our 1st Amendment rights through freedom of expression being targeted by the IRS, they are assuming so many powers not listed in the Constitution that it is beyond listing in a short article of this kind.
Just as when Nixon used his powers of office to spy upon and intimidate George McGovern, though it was not needed. Obama is drunk with power. He has moved them in, the Hippies are in power, but we should let them remember they only have a short lease and one that can be terminated at our pleasure.
Yours in liberty
Gene Daily
Obama's Woodward and Bernstein
Where are Obama's Woodward and Bernstein? We, as a society, are 40 years beyond the time of the Watergate Scandal. The information age, whether for good or bad, is upon us. The 24 hour news cycle is part of our lives. The lifespan of a story today, even important stories are normally only a few days. In the seventies, during Watergate, the information dripped out. It was this slow mounting drip that built into the flood of public opinion and the force behind that opinion that brought down the Nixon Administration.
It was seen, at the time, through the pressure of the coming certainty of losing the mid-term 1974 elections, if the Republicans lost control of both houses, as turned out to be the case, then Nixon would face near certain impeachment. In my mind, that is what caused the resignation of Nixon. He was resigned to the fact that facing a Democrat controlled legislature, he would be the first President removed from office by impeachment. Nixon opted for the resignation and probable pardon, which did in fact come through, rather than face impeachment and probable jail time.
Yet, with the importance of the events unfolding surrounding Benghazi, where are the reporters who keep the fire burning? Where are the reporters, who fan the embers to hold the feet to the fire of the government officials charged with over sight? Where are the reporters who would risk everything to find where the witnesses are, or to find and get an interview with the people who were on the ground the night of the attack? The duties of this work has fallen to us by default. The reporters of the today have been corrupted by the greed and avarice of our current society. The television reporters of today, who are paid millions, have a vested interest in keeping the status quo, or have, as exampled by those working for such media outlets such as MSNBC and their kindred souls, a pre-determined political agenda which prevents them from going after their heroes. The talking heads who work for outlets such as Fox News, or the many conservative talk show hosts on radio, have little investigative experience or little knowledge of being out speaking to sources. Instead, they have staff who take phone calls or read articles and put talking points together, much the same as those they are speaking against. We who work for little or no monetary reward are the last bastion of democracy. Our concern is not for the Pulitzer or the high value TV appearances, ours is a deep abiding concern for our nation, our countries honour and for an honest government. While we, as writers, have very little chance to break the BIG STORY, we can though, continue to fan the embers of justice that keep the fires burning to uncover the truth. We have a responsibility to continue to ask the questions. We even need to give them choices, either you find out what happened or you lose the next election to someone who will.
Our elected officials, by and large, are followers. Mostly, they will only respond to what they believe will get them re-elected or elect other members of their party. There are national legislators who will seek to position themselves as putting pressure on the Obama administration. I am of the belief they will do this to garner trades to benefit themselves, there constituents, or their positions on committees, they will not act in the best interest of our country. They can be influenced by pressure from other committee members or worse by the leaders of their own party. These politicians know it is a long time from now to the elections in 2014 and the public, especially Obama supporters will normally accept excuses. We need to make this the exception. The time where we will not rest until we know every detail, we need not worry about the amount of time it takes to uncover the truth. We are not worried about how much these hearings cost, that is the function of government, to answer to the tax payers. The reporters such as Woodward and Bernstein had only their editors to worry about and the number of people following their articles. The Watergate burglary occurred on June 17, 1972, Nixon did not resign until August 8 1974. Woodward and Bernstein and several other reporters knew that if they continued the pressure, if they continued to drip out the story with a follow up story as often as their editors would allow, the drip would turn into a flood and that would break the dam holding back the truth.
A fine example of how legislators tend to follow the party line was shown in yesterdays hearings by the Democrats in the hearings. A majority of these Democrats chose to us their time to either, attack the witnesses without giving them a chance to respond, or to reiterate the findings of the ARB (Accountability Review Board) a body set up to, in my mind, facilitate the cover up. According to the Democrats now, there is nothing to see here folks, just move along. The ARB has been conducted, the President had nothing to do with this, the Secretary of State had nothing to do with this. We have found the failings and are doing what we can to be sure this never happens again.
Review the stories and the manner in which the momentum built between June 1972 and August 1974. Review how the Republicans and the Nixon administration played down all the stories which were reported. The was just a low class burglary, which in truth it was, nothing to see here move along. It was not the break-in that was the problem remember, it was the cover-up.
The choice is ours, do we keep the pressure up on these legislators to find out the truth, or do we just move along and do as we are told?
Yours in liberty
Gene Daily
It was seen, at the time, through the pressure of the coming certainty of losing the mid-term 1974 elections, if the Republicans lost control of both houses, as turned out to be the case, then Nixon would face near certain impeachment. In my mind, that is what caused the resignation of Nixon. He was resigned to the fact that facing a Democrat controlled legislature, he would be the first President removed from office by impeachment. Nixon opted for the resignation and probable pardon, which did in fact come through, rather than face impeachment and probable jail time.
Yet, with the importance of the events unfolding surrounding Benghazi, where are the reporters who keep the fire burning? Where are the reporters, who fan the embers to hold the feet to the fire of the government officials charged with over sight? Where are the reporters who would risk everything to find where the witnesses are, or to find and get an interview with the people who were on the ground the night of the attack? The duties of this work has fallen to us by default. The reporters of the today have been corrupted by the greed and avarice of our current society. The television reporters of today, who are paid millions, have a vested interest in keeping the status quo, or have, as exampled by those working for such media outlets such as MSNBC and their kindred souls, a pre-determined political agenda which prevents them from going after their heroes. The talking heads who work for outlets such as Fox News, or the many conservative talk show hosts on radio, have little investigative experience or little knowledge of being out speaking to sources. Instead, they have staff who take phone calls or read articles and put talking points together, much the same as those they are speaking against. We who work for little or no monetary reward are the last bastion of democracy. Our concern is not for the Pulitzer or the high value TV appearances, ours is a deep abiding concern for our nation, our countries honour and for an honest government. While we, as writers, have very little chance to break the BIG STORY, we can though, continue to fan the embers of justice that keep the fires burning to uncover the truth. We have a responsibility to continue to ask the questions. We even need to give them choices, either you find out what happened or you lose the next election to someone who will.
Our elected officials, by and large, are followers. Mostly, they will only respond to what they believe will get them re-elected or elect other members of their party. There are national legislators who will seek to position themselves as putting pressure on the Obama administration. I am of the belief they will do this to garner trades to benefit themselves, there constituents, or their positions on committees, they will not act in the best interest of our country. They can be influenced by pressure from other committee members or worse by the leaders of their own party. These politicians know it is a long time from now to the elections in 2014 and the public, especially Obama supporters will normally accept excuses. We need to make this the exception. The time where we will not rest until we know every detail, we need not worry about the amount of time it takes to uncover the truth. We are not worried about how much these hearings cost, that is the function of government, to answer to the tax payers. The reporters such as Woodward and Bernstein had only their editors to worry about and the number of people following their articles. The Watergate burglary occurred on June 17, 1972, Nixon did not resign until August 8 1974. Woodward and Bernstein and several other reporters knew that if they continued the pressure, if they continued to drip out the story with a follow up story as often as their editors would allow, the drip would turn into a flood and that would break the dam holding back the truth.
A fine example of how legislators tend to follow the party line was shown in yesterdays hearings by the Democrats in the hearings. A majority of these Democrats chose to us their time to either, attack the witnesses without giving them a chance to respond, or to reiterate the findings of the ARB (Accountability Review Board) a body set up to, in my mind, facilitate the cover up. According to the Democrats now, there is nothing to see here folks, just move along. The ARB has been conducted, the President had nothing to do with this, the Secretary of State had nothing to do with this. We have found the failings and are doing what we can to be sure this never happens again.
Review the stories and the manner in which the momentum built between June 1972 and August 1974. Review how the Republicans and the Nixon administration played down all the stories which were reported. The was just a low class burglary, which in truth it was, nothing to see here move along. It was not the break-in that was the problem remember, it was the cover-up.
The choice is ours, do we keep the pressure up on these legislators to find out the truth, or do we just move along and do as we are told?
Yours in liberty
Gene Daily
An update on what is happening in Europe.
Collapse of European Union
The total collapse of the European Union is coming. Whether the European Union collapse will be a diplomatic exercise or a full scale revolution is still a point of conjecture on the behalf of the diverse population. The total ignorance of the situation is being shown by politicians of all stripes. Nigel Farage of the UKIP (United Kingdom Independence Party), has shown strong showings in recent elections in the UK, based upon his stance of leaving the EU. The German Chancellor MerKel, facing elections in September has been forced to take hard-line approaches to the current problems, further alienating her European partners. The Spanish are facing publicly acknowledged unemployment rate of over 27% and have stated in their best hopes unemployment will not drop below 24% through 2015. The Spanish also are facing overall contraction of a hoped for 1.5% for 2013, probably and underestimate, while only at best a hoped for .05% growth next year, probably a dream. The situation in Italy, during the recent election, only proves that there is no consensus whatever in that country, while in Greece the situation is so bad nearly everyone is ignoring them. Many are predicting the next country to require an economic bailout of massive proportions will be Slovenia. The European Union is on a near constant trajectory of economic decline.
To illustrate the outrageous disconnect with reality, the leader of the opposition in Spain, Rubalcaba of the socialist party, just submitted a proposal to the EU regarding the stabilization funds. In his proposal he wanted the EU to grant permission to use the funds in ways other than shoring up the Spanish banks. Among his proposals were, forbidding the firing of any employee from a business for economic reasons. In other words, if a business collapses, the employees could not be fired if the owner had no money to pay them, the state would subsidise their pay from these funds to pay the employee for the next two years. In what alternate reality is this even possible? Fortunately the EU felt the same as me. Another of his proposals would be to use 30 billions of the funds to provide credit from banks to the unemployed. Isn't it in line with these methods and thinking that brought us to this position in the first place?
Recently it was revealed each of the 54 Spanish members of the European Parliament, spends on average 1400 Euros on Business class flights, equivalent to about 1800 US Dollars. Their position requires several trips each month to Brussels, a flight of approximately 2.5 hours each way. The cost of economy airlines tickets would be an average of approximately 350 Euros and at times even far less. Of course, one would not expect to find such a high class of people on economy flights now would one? Certainly not when the EU is paying for the tickets from the tax collections they receive from the member states. The true state of affairs seems reflected in the case of one 14 year old in Valencia Spain. He had just undergone a life changing operation on his knee. He had every expectation of a full recovery and being able to walk and take part in strenuous exercise just as any other kid his age. His hopes and dreams for a bright future were dashed just as the Doctors were fitting the prosthesis to hold his leg immobile while it healed. The parents were told that the Socialized Medical Plan in Spain would not cover the prosthesis, a cost of 156 Euros. The penniless parents said they would able to pay the amount at the end of the month. The hospital promptly removed the apparatus and instead placed the leg in a full cast. The surgeon told the administrators the cast would not sufficiently hold the leg immobile throughout the healing process. The accountants from the Government Hospital said it was unfortunate since the family was unable to pay on the spot there was simply no choice.
I do find many similarities in the current economic situation of Europe and the economic situation of the United States. The difference is that few people see the coming collapse in either union. No, according to the politicians the Unions will hold at any cost. That seems in my humble opinion to be easy for the politicians to say. They still believe the tax payers can subsidize the salaries of employees when the owner of the business is unable to generate sufficient customer traffic to keep the doors open, or subsidize the 1% life style of their representatives while those same tax payers are unable to feed or house their families properly. They truly believe the banks can just act as conduits to channel the money to the supporters of their policies with no thought to when or how those funds are to be repaid. After all, the only cause that seems to matter to them is keeping the system afloat until they retire and are able to keep their full salary retirement until they die.
Whether the nearly inevitable coming collapse of the European Union while have a sobering if not catastrophic effect on the world remains to be seen. Till the time comes that politicians understand, they are people just like the rest of us and cannot succeed in their dreams of redistribution of everything seems a flight of fantasy to this humble writer.
Yours in Liberty
Gene
To illustrate the outrageous disconnect with reality, the leader of the opposition in Spain, Rubalcaba of the socialist party, just submitted a proposal to the EU regarding the stabilization funds. In his proposal he wanted the EU to grant permission to use the funds in ways other than shoring up the Spanish banks. Among his proposals were, forbidding the firing of any employee from a business for economic reasons. In other words, if a business collapses, the employees could not be fired if the owner had no money to pay them, the state would subsidise their pay from these funds to pay the employee for the next two years. In what alternate reality is this even possible? Fortunately the EU felt the same as me. Another of his proposals would be to use 30 billions of the funds to provide credit from banks to the unemployed. Isn't it in line with these methods and thinking that brought us to this position in the first place?
Recently it was revealed each of the 54 Spanish members of the European Parliament, spends on average 1400 Euros on Business class flights, equivalent to about 1800 US Dollars. Their position requires several trips each month to Brussels, a flight of approximately 2.5 hours each way. The cost of economy airlines tickets would be an average of approximately 350 Euros and at times even far less. Of course, one would not expect to find such a high class of people on economy flights now would one? Certainly not when the EU is paying for the tickets from the tax collections they receive from the member states. The true state of affairs seems reflected in the case of one 14 year old in Valencia Spain. He had just undergone a life changing operation on his knee. He had every expectation of a full recovery and being able to walk and take part in strenuous exercise just as any other kid his age. His hopes and dreams for a bright future were dashed just as the Doctors were fitting the prosthesis to hold his leg immobile while it healed. The parents were told that the Socialized Medical Plan in Spain would not cover the prosthesis, a cost of 156 Euros. The penniless parents said they would able to pay the amount at the end of the month. The hospital promptly removed the apparatus and instead placed the leg in a full cast. The surgeon told the administrators the cast would not sufficiently hold the leg immobile throughout the healing process. The accountants from the Government Hospital said it was unfortunate since the family was unable to pay on the spot there was simply no choice.
I do find many similarities in the current economic situation of Europe and the economic situation of the United States. The difference is that few people see the coming collapse in either union. No, according to the politicians the Unions will hold at any cost. That seems in my humble opinion to be easy for the politicians to say. They still believe the tax payers can subsidize the salaries of employees when the owner of the business is unable to generate sufficient customer traffic to keep the doors open, or subsidize the 1% life style of their representatives while those same tax payers are unable to feed or house their families properly. They truly believe the banks can just act as conduits to channel the money to the supporters of their policies with no thought to when or how those funds are to be repaid. After all, the only cause that seems to matter to them is keeping the system afloat until they retire and are able to keep their full salary retirement until they die.
Whether the nearly inevitable coming collapse of the European Union while have a sobering if not catastrophic effect on the world remains to be seen. Till the time comes that politicians understand, they are people just like the rest of us and cannot succeed in their dreams of redistribution of everything seems a flight of fantasy to this humble writer.
Yours in Liberty
Gene
5 May 2013
Obama's War is Coming
Obama's war is coming. President Putin warned him. Prime Minister Netanyahu told him it was likely to happen. Now it may be here. Last night, while each of us slept safely in our beds, the Israeli Air Force launched missiles and jets at Damascus, Syria, the second bombing attack in the last forty eight hours.
First, on Friday, 3 May 2013, the Israeli Air Force bombed a Military Convoy inside Syria, which they said was transporting weapons to the Hezbollah Group of fighters in Lebanon. This was caused, according to the Israelis, in response to the deal that Hezbollah as struck with the Syrian Regime. By the account of the Israelis, Hezbollah is providing fighters to assist the regime against the Rebel in Syria's civil war. In return Syria provides Hezbollah with rockets to use against Israel. The second strike on 4 May 2013, was against a Military Research site inside Syria on the outskirts of Damascus. This second strike has reportedly killed as many as 400 Syrians and injured an unknown number of others.
I am by no means a supporter of the Socialist Government in Syria. What I am warning of is the links that are below the surface of this conflict. Syria's primary ally in the region is Iran. Iran, as everyone knows is no friend of Israel. The Russians have strategic interests in Syria as they have several sea ports in Syria, for resupply their warships and support ships. The Russians have also had a long standing good relationship with Syria. While they do not support the regimes actions many times, they have always been able to depend upon the regimes support for their needs in the region.
In order to understand how delicate the situation really is, one only needs to look at the last six weeks of activity in the region. Turkey and Syria recently had a stand off concerning possible deployment of the Patriot Missile systems in the region. Israel and Turkey also recently, supposedly in conjunction with Obama's trip to the region, patched up their differences over the deaths of Turkish citizens on Mavi Marmara aid ship. When Turkey called for the deployment of the missile system to establish a no-fly zone over Syria, Russia responded with unscheduled military exercises in the Black Sea off the coast of Syria and with long range flights from Russia into Syria with its nuclear capable bombers. At the same time China conducted unscheduled exercises in the China Seas. This was just after the conclusions of the BRICS meeting in South Africa where they discussed the formation of an alternative to the IMF and committed to forming a new international monetary system of exchange that would not include the IMF. China is also currently in a deal with Iran for the country's oil export for use in China.
It would not be the first time Israel was used as a surrogate operator for the furthering on the US policies in the region. In 1956 when Egypt annexed the Suez Canal, the UK and France conspired with Israel under the direction of, or at least the acquiescence of, the USA. They got Israel to attack Egypt and then once the war had started they intervened under the premise of taking control of the canal to keep it safe for international trade.
No one at this stage knows if there is a replay of that method of staging an event to insure the intervention of international forces to assert control over the region. What is evident though is the world has changed greatly since the US and its allies through NATO and the UN could operate unrestrained to further their empires. The US and their allies have been warned by the increasingly strong BRICS against further interference in the Syrian Civil war. The stage is set for the conflict to begin at any moment. The future is in the hands of the leaders of the West. Will Obama's plan to bring about the fall of the USA become a reality is now in the balance.
The US has a nearly crippling national debt, if it should come to pass the an international conflict of global proportions come to pass, where would the US government acquire the funds it needs to operate the government on a day-to-day basis, let alone finance a global conflict. Should the global conflict we all fear come to pass, would the confidence in the US Dollar as the world's reserve currency be sustained? If the US Dollar should lose the position as the reserve currency the consequences could be catastrophic for the western world.
Yours in Liberty
Gene
Obama's war is coming. President Putin warned him. Prime Minister Netanyahu told him it was likely to happen. Now it may be here. Last night, while each of us slept safely in our beds, the Israeli Air Force launched missiles and jets at Damascus, Syria, the second bombing attack in the last forty eight hours.
First, on Friday, 3 May 2013, the Israeli Air Force bombed a Military Convoy inside Syria, which they said was transporting weapons to the Hezbollah Group of fighters in Lebanon. This was caused, according to the Israelis, in response to the deal that Hezbollah as struck with the Syrian Regime. By the account of the Israelis, Hezbollah is providing fighters to assist the regime against the Rebel in Syria's civil war. In return Syria provides Hezbollah with rockets to use against Israel. The second strike on 4 May 2013, was against a Military Research site inside Syria on the outskirts of Damascus. This second strike has reportedly killed as many as 400 Syrians and injured an unknown number of others.
I am by no means a supporter of the Socialist Government in Syria. What I am warning of is the links that are below the surface of this conflict. Syria's primary ally in the region is Iran. Iran, as everyone knows is no friend of Israel. The Russians have strategic interests in Syria as they have several sea ports in Syria, for resupply their warships and support ships. The Russians have also had a long standing good relationship with Syria. While they do not support the regimes actions many times, they have always been able to depend upon the regimes support for their needs in the region.
In order to understand how delicate the situation really is, one only needs to look at the last six weeks of activity in the region. Turkey and Syria recently had a stand off concerning possible deployment of the Patriot Missile systems in the region. Israel and Turkey also recently, supposedly in conjunction with Obama's trip to the region, patched up their differences over the deaths of Turkish citizens on Mavi Marmara aid ship. When Turkey called for the deployment of the missile system to establish a no-fly zone over Syria, Russia responded with unscheduled military exercises in the Black Sea off the coast of Syria and with long range flights from Russia into Syria with its nuclear capable bombers. At the same time China conducted unscheduled exercises in the China Seas. This was just after the conclusions of the BRICS meeting in South Africa where they discussed the formation of an alternative to the IMF and committed to forming a new international monetary system of exchange that would not include the IMF. China is also currently in a deal with Iran for the country's oil export for use in China.
It would not be the first time Israel was used as a surrogate operator for the furthering on the US policies in the region. In 1956 when Egypt annexed the Suez Canal, the UK and France conspired with Israel under the direction of, or at least the acquiescence of, the USA. They got Israel to attack Egypt and then once the war had started they intervened under the premise of taking control of the canal to keep it safe for international trade.
No one at this stage knows if there is a replay of that method of staging an event to insure the intervention of international forces to assert control over the region. What is evident though is the world has changed greatly since the US and its allies through NATO and the UN could operate unrestrained to further their empires. The US and their allies have been warned by the increasingly strong BRICS against further interference in the Syrian Civil war. The stage is set for the conflict to begin at any moment. The future is in the hands of the leaders of the West. Will Obama's plan to bring about the fall of the USA become a reality is now in the balance.
The US has a nearly crippling national debt, if it should come to pass the an international conflict of global proportions come to pass, where would the US government acquire the funds it needs to operate the government on a day-to-day basis, let alone finance a global conflict. Should the global conflict we all fear come to pass, would the confidence in the US Dollar as the world's reserve currency be sustained? If the US Dollar should lose the position as the reserve currency the consequences could be catastrophic for the western world.
Yours in Liberty
Gene
1 May 2013
Obama is not a King
On May 1st 2013, Obama proclaimed it to be National Loyalty Day, but Obama is not a King, nor should he be regarded as one. We as a people owe our allegiance to first the Community where we live, second to our State and lastly the Constitution. Admittedly, this springs from the trails of the early founders of our country. They were faced with far greater difficulties regarding the work needing to be done, the difficulties in transportation and the distances involved considering the the time and hardships encountered in covering those distances. This sequence of loyalty also caused some of the impetus for starting the revolutionary war. How could a King at such a distance rule over a subject he had no knowledge of, or any regard for how his rulings would impact those who had to live under those rulings? The distance from London to New York is approximately 3400 miles. It took weeks and often considering weather and hardships possibly months to travel that distance. The King had never lived or even visited the land which he ruled and had certainly never experienced the hardships of the land far away. So, the people of the land felt loyalty first to their community, then to their colony and only lastly to their King and country. The people had no representation in the court of the King or in the Parliament that served him, so hence the cry of “No Taxation without Representation”.
But Obama is not a King, he has no divine claim to such a throne as King George III could claim. Yet, in many respects we face some of the same dilemmas today. The distance from New York to Los Angeles is approximately 2800 miles, a scarce 600 miles less than the distance from London to New York, yet these cities are worlds apart, just as the cities then were worlds apart. Many will say, but Obama has visited all of the 50 States (or as he once said all 57), but has he really visited or just stopped through while in a motorcade? Has he experienced any of the hardships of the citizens in the diverse portions of the country? From my own point of view he has experienced very little. Yet he and his appointed administration reign ostensibly supreme. No, I say we are back at square one, Taxation without Representation.
But you attempt to correct me; we have elected representatives in both the House and the Senate, but do we really? They are or must by effect of the amount of money required, part of the ruling elite. In order to be elected to the House, the campaign according to some estimates costs upwards of 1.5 million, perhaps as much as 10.5 million to be elected to the Senate. I understand that much of this money is raised by Political Action Committees and even more from corporations, and that is the problem. Does anyone really believe these groups act with any altruism? No, they act in the interest of those who created them or those corporations that benefit from the election of their chosen ones.
The founders created a different system. A system by which as people of a State they would be represented by their Senators, elected by their state legislators who are closer to their people and responsible to them more readily. The progressives throughout the 19th century sought to overturn this system. Finally, only when William Jennings Bryan was the Secretary of State did they succeed. The 17th amendment was formally adopted in 1913, supposedly to better represent the will of the people. But, with the influence of corporate and political action committees, we again find that it is a game of money, power and influence. The Senators by and large owe no loyalty to their states but only to their political master who control the money. They no longer act under the direction of their home legislatures or Governors, I doubt that John McCain even consults with Governor Brewer from the actions I have seen from him, to list but one example. While I hold his service in the US Military with high regard, at times it has given me the impression he holds himself above criticism as a result of what he suffered. I have watched his “so-called” town hall meetings and seen his contempt of those who disagree with him. I also understand his family ties go all the way back to the revolution, which to me should give extra importance to the will of the people. Yet, he has repeatedly scorned others who invoke the constitution, most recently calling them “Wacko Birds”.
For me it is time to return to representation of the states in the Senate. Time for “The Man Who Would Be King” to remember he is not and to take advice from the states, the original founders of the Republic.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
On May 1st 2013, Obama proclaimed it to be National Loyalty Day, but Obama is not a King, nor should he be regarded as one. We as a people owe our allegiance to first the Community where we live, second to our State and lastly the Constitution. Admittedly, this springs from the trails of the early founders of our country. They were faced with far greater difficulties regarding the work needing to be done, the difficulties in transportation and the distances involved considering the the time and hardships encountered in covering those distances. This sequence of loyalty also caused some of the impetus for starting the revolutionary war. How could a King at such a distance rule over a subject he had no knowledge of, or any regard for how his rulings would impact those who had to live under those rulings? The distance from London to New York is approximately 3400 miles. It took weeks and often considering weather and hardships possibly months to travel that distance. The King had never lived or even visited the land which he ruled and had certainly never experienced the hardships of the land far away. So, the people of the land felt loyalty first to their community, then to their colony and only lastly to their King and country. The people had no representation in the court of the King or in the Parliament that served him, so hence the cry of “No Taxation without Representation”.
But Obama is not a King, he has no divine claim to such a throne as King George III could claim. Yet, in many respects we face some of the same dilemmas today. The distance from New York to Los Angeles is approximately 2800 miles, a scarce 600 miles less than the distance from London to New York, yet these cities are worlds apart, just as the cities then were worlds apart. Many will say, but Obama has visited all of the 50 States (or as he once said all 57), but has he really visited or just stopped through while in a motorcade? Has he experienced any of the hardships of the citizens in the diverse portions of the country? From my own point of view he has experienced very little. Yet he and his appointed administration reign ostensibly supreme. No, I say we are back at square one, Taxation without Representation.
But you attempt to correct me; we have elected representatives in both the House and the Senate, but do we really? They are or must by effect of the amount of money required, part of the ruling elite. In order to be elected to the House, the campaign according to some estimates costs upwards of 1.5 million, perhaps as much as 10.5 million to be elected to the Senate. I understand that much of this money is raised by Political Action Committees and even more from corporations, and that is the problem. Does anyone really believe these groups act with any altruism? No, they act in the interest of those who created them or those corporations that benefit from the election of their chosen ones.
The founders created a different system. A system by which as people of a State they would be represented by their Senators, elected by their state legislators who are closer to their people and responsible to them more readily. The progressives throughout the 19th century sought to overturn this system. Finally, only when William Jennings Bryan was the Secretary of State did they succeed. The 17th amendment was formally adopted in 1913, supposedly to better represent the will of the people. But, with the influence of corporate and political action committees, we again find that it is a game of money, power and influence. The Senators by and large owe no loyalty to their states but only to their political master who control the money. They no longer act under the direction of their home legislatures or Governors, I doubt that John McCain even consults with Governor Brewer from the actions I have seen from him, to list but one example. While I hold his service in the US Military with high regard, at times it has given me the impression he holds himself above criticism as a result of what he suffered. I have watched his “so-called” town hall meetings and seen his contempt of those who disagree with him. I also understand his family ties go all the way back to the revolution, which to me should give extra importance to the will of the people. Yet, he has repeatedly scorned others who invoke the constitution, most recently calling them “Wacko Birds”.
For me it is time to return to representation of the states in the Senate. Time for “The Man Who Would Be King” to remember he is not and to take advice from the states, the original founders of the Republic.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
26 April 2013
An Inexorable Slide to Tyranny
With the passage of the NDAA and his use of executive orders, Obama has managed to bring about an inexorable slide to tyranny. The action taken on March 16, 2012, when President Obama signed executive order 13603 about “National Defense Resources Preparedness.” This act provides Obama with the authority to control food, water, production, material and labour of almost unimaginable proportions. This of course, is not the first time it has been done. Like it has been said, “There is nothing new under the sun.”
In 1933, just shortly after his election, Franklin D. Roosevelt declared a state of emergency. His actions were covered by the NIRA (National Industrial Recovery Act), which essentially gave him the same scope of power that Obama now has. In his inaugural address in January 1933 Roosevelt said, “If we are to go forward, we must move as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of common discipline, because without such discipline no progress is made, no leadership becomes effective. We are, I know, ready and willing to submit our lives and property to such discipline, because it makes possible a leadership which aims at a larger good. This I propose to offer, pledging that the larger purposes will bind upon us all as a scared obligation and with a unity of duty hitherto evoked only in time of armed strife. With this pledge taken, I assume unhesitatingly the leadership of this great army of our people dedicated to a disciplined attack upon our common problems.”
In the same year of 1933 Adolph Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany. In many way both faced similar problems with high unemployment, inflation, lack of consumer confidence, lack of industrial output and a country in the depths of depression. Hitler also managed to unite his countrymen into one unified people under his total control, just as Roosevelt through executive order managed to command the entire nations economy. In Germany this act was called “The Enabling Act”, another name but essentially the same function. For example after the enabling act, Hitler declared public holidays for workers through all industries. While at the same time banning all workers unions.
Throughout much of the late 1920's and into the late 1930's Mussolini in Italy enjoyed support and adulation from liberals and progressives in the USA, so great was his support that an image resembling him was contained within a sculpture representing Atlas in Rockefeller plaza. He was being revered as having unified and put the labour force of Italy to work creating a fast growing Italian economy through collective means.
In January 2013, eighty years after his predecessor, FDR assumed leadership of the collective army of Americans. Obama in his inaugural address for his second term said,”But we have always understood that when times change, so must we; that fidelity to our founding principles requires new responses to new challenges; that preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action. For the American people can no more meet the demands of today’s world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militias. No single person can train all the math and science teachers we’ll need to equip our children for the future, or build the roads and networks and research labs that will bring new jobs and businesses to our shores. Now, more than ever, we must do these things together, as one nation and one people.
While Obama when he signed the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act), pledged he would never think about using the indefinite detention portion of the act upon American citizens, it would be legal under the provisions of the act. He also signed the executive order as stated in the opening of this article and has yet to activate it, although as it stands it would be legal. Remember we are still under a state of emergency begun after Sept 11th by George W. Bush and extended by Obama. Are we to awaken one morning after another attack, another Boston perhaps and find this act also activated?
Remember, as many historians have found, under German law, as it stood at the time, everything Hitler did was legal. Are we also on that inexorable slide to tyranny? Do we wait for these acts to come into play before we respond even to their existence? Will it be too late if we do? Will we as a country who under the constitution are the true rulers of our nation allow this to happen?
Spain has just announced their unemployment rate is over twenty seven percent and they are developing extraordinary measures to combat the situation. How long before the collapse of the dollar, or another oil embargo such as happened in the 1970's, or another war perhaps with Syria, Iraq or North Korea plunges the United states into such turmoil as Europe is now toiling against? No one know the fate of the European Union at the moment, but is the foundations of the United States any more sound than that of Europe or is it simply being held together by the perception of unity, the notion that our once great nation could not be brought down by economic rules which have stood for all time. The Obama administration seems to eschew the notion that the United States is an exception country. Can a country that is not exceptional hope to avoid the the rules that have applied to all other economic conditions throughout all time?
Personally after watching the martial law (whether declared or not) in Boston and the calls for modifying or rights under present conditions being ask for by Bloomberg and others, I think we have started the inexorable slide into tryanny.
Yours in Liberty
Gene
With the passage of the NDAA and his use of executive orders, Obama has managed to bring about an inexorable slide to tyranny. The action taken on March 16, 2012, when President Obama signed executive order 13603 about “National Defense Resources Preparedness.” This act provides Obama with the authority to control food, water, production, material and labour of almost unimaginable proportions. This of course, is not the first time it has been done. Like it has been said, “There is nothing new under the sun.”
In 1933, just shortly after his election, Franklin D. Roosevelt declared a state of emergency. His actions were covered by the NIRA (National Industrial Recovery Act), which essentially gave him the same scope of power that Obama now has. In his inaugural address in January 1933 Roosevelt said, “If we are to go forward, we must move as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of common discipline, because without such discipline no progress is made, no leadership becomes effective. We are, I know, ready and willing to submit our lives and property to such discipline, because it makes possible a leadership which aims at a larger good. This I propose to offer, pledging that the larger purposes will bind upon us all as a scared obligation and with a unity of duty hitherto evoked only in time of armed strife. With this pledge taken, I assume unhesitatingly the leadership of this great army of our people dedicated to a disciplined attack upon our common problems.”
In the same year of 1933 Adolph Hitler was appointed Chancellor of Germany. In many way both faced similar problems with high unemployment, inflation, lack of consumer confidence, lack of industrial output and a country in the depths of depression. Hitler also managed to unite his countrymen into one unified people under his total control, just as Roosevelt through executive order managed to command the entire nations economy. In Germany this act was called “The Enabling Act”, another name but essentially the same function. For example after the enabling act, Hitler declared public holidays for workers through all industries. While at the same time banning all workers unions.
Throughout much of the late 1920's and into the late 1930's Mussolini in Italy enjoyed support and adulation from liberals and progressives in the USA, so great was his support that an image resembling him was contained within a sculpture representing Atlas in Rockefeller plaza. He was being revered as having unified and put the labour force of Italy to work creating a fast growing Italian economy through collective means.
In January 2013, eighty years after his predecessor, FDR assumed leadership of the collective army of Americans. Obama in his inaugural address for his second term said,”But we have always understood that when times change, so must we; that fidelity to our founding principles requires new responses to new challenges; that preserving our individual freedoms ultimately requires collective action. For the American people can no more meet the demands of today’s world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militias. No single person can train all the math and science teachers we’ll need to equip our children for the future, or build the roads and networks and research labs that will bring new jobs and businesses to our shores. Now, more than ever, we must do these things together, as one nation and one people.
While Obama when he signed the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act), pledged he would never think about using the indefinite detention portion of the act upon American citizens, it would be legal under the provisions of the act. He also signed the executive order as stated in the opening of this article and has yet to activate it, although as it stands it would be legal. Remember we are still under a state of emergency begun after Sept 11th by George W. Bush and extended by Obama. Are we to awaken one morning after another attack, another Boston perhaps and find this act also activated?
Remember, as many historians have found, under German law, as it stood at the time, everything Hitler did was legal. Are we also on that inexorable slide to tyranny? Do we wait for these acts to come into play before we respond even to their existence? Will it be too late if we do? Will we as a country who under the constitution are the true rulers of our nation allow this to happen?
Spain has just announced their unemployment rate is over twenty seven percent and they are developing extraordinary measures to combat the situation. How long before the collapse of the dollar, or another oil embargo such as happened in the 1970's, or another war perhaps with Syria, Iraq or North Korea plunges the United states into such turmoil as Europe is now toiling against? No one know the fate of the European Union at the moment, but is the foundations of the United States any more sound than that of Europe or is it simply being held together by the perception of unity, the notion that our once great nation could not be brought down by economic rules which have stood for all time. The Obama administration seems to eschew the notion that the United States is an exception country. Can a country that is not exceptional hope to avoid the the rules that have applied to all other economic conditions throughout all time?
Personally after watching the martial law (whether declared or not) in Boston and the calls for modifying or rights under present conditions being ask for by Bloomberg and others, I think we have started the inexorable slide into tryanny.
Yours in Liberty
Gene
24 April 2013
|
Obama the Fascist/Socialist Progeny of Franklin D. Roosevelt Obama is the progeny of Franklin D. Roosevelt in his approach to social programs and the progeny of European Fascist in his approach to collectivism and nationalist control. |
This day 24th of April 2013, in the venerable New York Times, there is an article espousing the value of the WPA projects (Works Project Administration) of Franklin D. Roosevelt. This WPA was included in the NIRA (National Industrial Recovery Act) of 1933. Essentially it, like the current NDAA, gave Roosevelt authority over virtually everything from industrial output to prices to wages, just as NDAA gives Obama authority over virtually everything at any time he chooses to apply that power.
Let's have a closer look from a world prospective at the time of FDR. Germany had a new leader in place, Mr. Hitler, and he was closely aligned with the Italian Fascist Mussolini. Few people are aware that while many conservatives were opposed to the policies of FDR, he received plaudits for his efforts from both of these foreign leaders. FDR's New Deal and European Fascism grew from the same ideological roots, producing very similar policies, work programs and nationalist views that were not dissimilar. After years of propaganda and historical laurels being laid upon FDR, we think of the German and Italian regimes as completely alien to our culture, when in fact they were organically connected to the the most influential political movements of the twentieth century, progressivism.
It was during the Presidency of FDR the relationship of the average American and the government changed to the greatest degree in American History, with the possible exception of Lincoln and the impact of the war between the states. Prior to FDR the impact on the lives of the average American was very limited, after his administration the government impacted nearly every segment of the average Americans life. It was under FDR that programs such as social security, unemployment benefits, aid for dependent children and literally thousand of other programs were initiated, implemented or planned.
With the Collectivism references in the inaugural address of Obama in 2013, let us remember the words from FDR in his first inaugural address:
“If we are to go forward, we must move as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of common discipline, because without such discipline no progress is made, no leadership becomes effective. We are, I know, ready and willing to submit our lives and property to such discipline, because it makes possible a leadership which aims at a larger good. This I propose to offer, pledging that the larger purposes will bind upon us all as a scared obligation and with a unity of duty hitherto evoked only in time of armed strife. With this pledge taken, I assume unhesitatingly the leadership of this great army of our people dedicated to a disciplined attack upon our common problems.”
With this in mind it is far from the few words most of us are taught about his great speech “We have nothing to fear but fear itself”. I also want to point out that it is little different intone from the motto adopted by Obama and now prevalent on a certain network “Lean Forward”.
It was only the day after taking office when from the east portico of the White House FDR said, “I shall not evade the clear course of duty that will then confront me, I shall ask congress for the one remaining instrument to meet the crisis, the broad executive power to wage war against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given me if in fact invaded by a foreign foe.” Is this so different than the plethora of executive orders issued by Obama, under the theory of “We Can't Wait”, so often expounded by his administration. Obama only seems to do these things far more quietly than FDR with his public announcements and the cooperation of his democratic congress of his time?
On the second day of his administration FDR declared a “National Emergency” and began to implement his autocratic form of governing such as closing banks for the first time in the nations history. It is not only I who have proclaimed the similarities of government between these leaders. When Mussolini reviewed one of the books written by FDR, Looking Forward, Mussolini publicly said, “This is reminiscent of the ways and means by which fascism awakened the Italian people”. When told of the passage of the NIRA act he proclaimed, “Behold a Dictator”.
None other the the famous aviator Charles Lindberg travelled to Germany in the early 30's to travel and view the accomplishments of Hitler's regime. He was given the grand tour and view not only civilian work projects but also military installations. When he returned he briefed FDR on his trip and some of his lessons learned were incorporated into the projects to come into force under FDR.
I write also from personal accounts from German people I met while living in Germany during the late 60's. At the time, while in the US Army, I lived in an apartment in Ulm Germany. My landlady was in her mid seventies at the time so she had been an adult at the time of Hitler and his regime. She had actually read the articles from the German newspaper, Volischer Beobahter. Many of these articles stated such sentiments as, We, too, as German National Socialists are looking toward America. Roosevelt is carrying out experiments and they are bold. We, too, fear only the possibility they may fail. Many of the most favourable reviews of Roosevelt's book “Looking Forward” 1933 and “On Our Way” 1934, were written by German critics.
I write this as a warning. Those who see Obama as infallible, may fall into the same trap as those before them, led to a place of tranny by their own blind faith.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
Let's have a closer look from a world prospective at the time of FDR. Germany had a new leader in place, Mr. Hitler, and he was closely aligned with the Italian Fascist Mussolini. Few people are aware that while many conservatives were opposed to the policies of FDR, he received plaudits for his efforts from both of these foreign leaders. FDR's New Deal and European Fascism grew from the same ideological roots, producing very similar policies, work programs and nationalist views that were not dissimilar. After years of propaganda and historical laurels being laid upon FDR, we think of the German and Italian regimes as completely alien to our culture, when in fact they were organically connected to the the most influential political movements of the twentieth century, progressivism.
It was during the Presidency of FDR the relationship of the average American and the government changed to the greatest degree in American History, with the possible exception of Lincoln and the impact of the war between the states. Prior to FDR the impact on the lives of the average American was very limited, after his administration the government impacted nearly every segment of the average Americans life. It was under FDR that programs such as social security, unemployment benefits, aid for dependent children and literally thousand of other programs were initiated, implemented or planned.
With the Collectivism references in the inaugural address of Obama in 2013, let us remember the words from FDR in his first inaugural address:
“If we are to go forward, we must move as a trained and loyal army willing to sacrifice for the good of common discipline, because without such discipline no progress is made, no leadership becomes effective. We are, I know, ready and willing to submit our lives and property to such discipline, because it makes possible a leadership which aims at a larger good. This I propose to offer, pledging that the larger purposes will bind upon us all as a scared obligation and with a unity of duty hitherto evoked only in time of armed strife. With this pledge taken, I assume unhesitatingly the leadership of this great army of our people dedicated to a disciplined attack upon our common problems.”
With this in mind it is far from the few words most of us are taught about his great speech “We have nothing to fear but fear itself”. I also want to point out that it is little different intone from the motto adopted by Obama and now prevalent on a certain network “Lean Forward”.
It was only the day after taking office when from the east portico of the White House FDR said, “I shall not evade the clear course of duty that will then confront me, I shall ask congress for the one remaining instrument to meet the crisis, the broad executive power to wage war against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given me if in fact invaded by a foreign foe.” Is this so different than the plethora of executive orders issued by Obama, under the theory of “We Can't Wait”, so often expounded by his administration. Obama only seems to do these things far more quietly than FDR with his public announcements and the cooperation of his democratic congress of his time?
On the second day of his administration FDR declared a “National Emergency” and began to implement his autocratic form of governing such as closing banks for the first time in the nations history. It is not only I who have proclaimed the similarities of government between these leaders. When Mussolini reviewed one of the books written by FDR, Looking Forward, Mussolini publicly said, “This is reminiscent of the ways and means by which fascism awakened the Italian people”. When told of the passage of the NIRA act he proclaimed, “Behold a Dictator”.
None other the the famous aviator Charles Lindberg travelled to Germany in the early 30's to travel and view the accomplishments of Hitler's regime. He was given the grand tour and view not only civilian work projects but also military installations. When he returned he briefed FDR on his trip and some of his lessons learned were incorporated into the projects to come into force under FDR.
I write also from personal accounts from German people I met while living in Germany during the late 60's. At the time, while in the US Army, I lived in an apartment in Ulm Germany. My landlady was in her mid seventies at the time so she had been an adult at the time of Hitler and his regime. She had actually read the articles from the German newspaper, Volischer Beobahter. Many of these articles stated such sentiments as, We, too, as German National Socialists are looking toward America. Roosevelt is carrying out experiments and they are bold. We, too, fear only the possibility they may fail. Many of the most favourable reviews of Roosevelt's book “Looking Forward” 1933 and “On Our Way” 1934, were written by German critics.
I write this as a warning. Those who see Obama as infallible, may fall into the same trap as those before them, led to a place of tranny by their own blind faith.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
17 April 2013
The Company You Keep
There is a new Robert Redford movie out called, “The Company You Keep”. For old people like me, it reminds me of the lessons taught in our youth. We were taught, you will be judged by the company you keep. For me that phrase, the company you keep, was conveyed forcefully especially by my Grandmother, the guiding influence on my life till her death.
For her, and many like her, it was imperative to surround yourself with people who would enrich your standing in the community. Your word, given over a handshake, was supposed to be stronger than any contract. To her, the only encumbrance upon that theory was your reputation and your reputation was greatly impacted for the good or for the bad dependent upon The Company You Keep. Your previous conduct, added to those you were known to associate with and by your previous record of keeping your word, summed up how the small town I lived in saw you as a person. Thankfully, in my small town USA, your family background, while it played a part in how others perceived you, was limited as so many of us were economically regarded as poor but happy.
That ethic, it seems to me, has lost most of its impact upon those who are now in the administration. In part I suppose, this is part and parcel of growing up in what is now considered fly over country. A portion of the country who's opinion matters very little to those from the power centers such as Washington, LA, New York and lest we forget Chicago. We must remember, the President matured in his political standing, surrounded and influenced by those leaders of the enlightened few in Chicago.
Perhaps we should again look at those enlightened few who have so influenced our “Great Leader” to find how this may have impacted his thoughts and actions since his arrival in the most powerful position in the world. What were their aims, their motivations and what does history say about their reputations and how should he be viewed in light of The Company He Keeps?
Bill Ayers, about whom there has been much comment but very little context, has admitted he hosted Obama's political coming out party. Ayers is also a self-described revolutionary and an unrepentant terrorist. His only regret according to him is they did not do enough bombing and other direct action. He was part of the Weather Underground Movement, around which the movie, “The Company You Keep”, is based. Part fiction and part fact, the movie conveniently leaves out their close ties to the Black Panthers Party and their group declaration of war against the United States. Bill Ayers was a founding member and leader of this group along with his wife Bernadine Dohrn. They were but two the members who split from the Students For A Democratic Society the original group founded upon the principals of bringing about a revolution in the USA and creating a communist society out of the ashes.
One of the many things I found interesting when I read the wiki on the Weather Underground, was after the signing of the Peace accord in Paris France ending the Vietnam War, the radical elements of the “New Left” fell apart. Did they fall apart or just change course? Did they realize that the method of bombing and trying to incite “The Workers” to begin a revolutionary movement would not work? Did they believe that waiting until they had found their “Golden Boy” (no racial inference intended) would enable the revolution through political means? Is this sort of the reverse of the old definition, “War is just Politics though other means”? In other words, are they conducting war through political means? After all, did Bill Ayers and the remainder of the Weather Underground, including his wife, ever declare peace after their declaration of war?
While this article is not meant to be a movie review, it is meant to help those of you young then some of us who lived through it to help connect the dots. I, Like Bill Ayers who is a little older than I am, Eric Holder who is about 3 weeks younger than I am and many who are Obama's close friends, allies and staff, lived through the 60's and 70's as young impressionable adults. There is no excuse for not knowing, it is even rumored Holder in some ways participated in some events.
There is one final thing to point out. If you look up the movie in imdb.com, you will find it is listed as 2012. In Hollywood that means it was completed. I find it odd it was not released until 2013, just a small detail to consider when 2012 was an election year, with all that entails.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
There is a new Robert Redford movie out called, “The Company You Keep”. For old people like me, it reminds me of the lessons taught in our youth. We were taught, you will be judged by the company you keep. For me that phrase, the company you keep, was conveyed forcefully especially by my Grandmother, the guiding influence on my life till her death.
For her, and many like her, it was imperative to surround yourself with people who would enrich your standing in the community. Your word, given over a handshake, was supposed to be stronger than any contract. To her, the only encumbrance upon that theory was your reputation and your reputation was greatly impacted for the good or for the bad dependent upon The Company You Keep. Your previous conduct, added to those you were known to associate with and by your previous record of keeping your word, summed up how the small town I lived in saw you as a person. Thankfully, in my small town USA, your family background, while it played a part in how others perceived you, was limited as so many of us were economically regarded as poor but happy.
That ethic, it seems to me, has lost most of its impact upon those who are now in the administration. In part I suppose, this is part and parcel of growing up in what is now considered fly over country. A portion of the country who's opinion matters very little to those from the power centers such as Washington, LA, New York and lest we forget Chicago. We must remember, the President matured in his political standing, surrounded and influenced by those leaders of the enlightened few in Chicago.
Perhaps we should again look at those enlightened few who have so influenced our “Great Leader” to find how this may have impacted his thoughts and actions since his arrival in the most powerful position in the world. What were their aims, their motivations and what does history say about their reputations and how should he be viewed in light of The Company He Keeps?
Bill Ayers, about whom there has been much comment but very little context, has admitted he hosted Obama's political coming out party. Ayers is also a self-described revolutionary and an unrepentant terrorist. His only regret according to him is they did not do enough bombing and other direct action. He was part of the Weather Underground Movement, around which the movie, “The Company You Keep”, is based. Part fiction and part fact, the movie conveniently leaves out their close ties to the Black Panthers Party and their group declaration of war against the United States. Bill Ayers was a founding member and leader of this group along with his wife Bernadine Dohrn. They were but two the members who split from the Students For A Democratic Society the original group founded upon the principals of bringing about a revolution in the USA and creating a communist society out of the ashes.
One of the many things I found interesting when I read the wiki on the Weather Underground, was after the signing of the Peace accord in Paris France ending the Vietnam War, the radical elements of the “New Left” fell apart. Did they fall apart or just change course? Did they realize that the method of bombing and trying to incite “The Workers” to begin a revolutionary movement would not work? Did they believe that waiting until they had found their “Golden Boy” (no racial inference intended) would enable the revolution through political means? Is this sort of the reverse of the old definition, “War is just Politics though other means”? In other words, are they conducting war through political means? After all, did Bill Ayers and the remainder of the Weather Underground, including his wife, ever declare peace after their declaration of war?
While this article is not meant to be a movie review, it is meant to help those of you young then some of us who lived through it to help connect the dots. I, Like Bill Ayers who is a little older than I am, Eric Holder who is about 3 weeks younger than I am and many who are Obama's close friends, allies and staff, lived through the 60's and 70's as young impressionable adults. There is no excuse for not knowing, it is even rumored Holder in some ways participated in some events.
There is one final thing to point out. If you look up the movie in imdb.com, you will find it is listed as 2012. In Hollywood that means it was completed. I find it odd it was not released until 2013, just a small detail to consider when 2012 was an election year, with all that entails.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
13 April 2013
A Different USA
Over the course of the last few days there have been many reports of teachers’ political bias in the classroom. Some may have had differing experiences than I, but in my youth I experienced much the same from one teacher with a very different outcome.
What I am about to relate is a story from the 60's, in a mountain mining town out west. Mining towns in American history been known to be fairly rough towns, inhabited by men who were no strangers to drinks and fights. It was during a time in history when there was actually a written codified law stating, two men of roughly equal physical size and strength could mutually agree to combat and as long as the peace of no other citizen was disturbed, their mutual combat was legal. This actually made for a rather peaceful society, as the worst thing you could be called in our town was a coward. So if you pushed something too far and were physically challenged to back it up; then refused to fight, you were labeled a coward and ignored or worse from that time on. I learned early, shall we say to be a diplomatic conversationalist whenever possible. It is under these circumstances I relate the story.
During my sophomore year in high school, my history teacher was a huge supporter of Franklin D. Roosevelt. In fact my family was even supporters of him. I, however, took exception to the teachers’ constant emphasis of the wonderful programs his administration had used to revive the US economy during the 30's. Being an avid reader of history I learned that some programs such as the WPA, had actually been started in Germany before they were used in the USA. This had helped to restart the German economy after the German economy had been hit so hard under the Weimar Republic years. I had also learned that during the building of the Rockefeller Center in New York City, a mural had been included showing Mussolini courageously leading his people forward. I questioned the closeness of the leaders of that time and their common approach to problems. I also noted the anti-Jewish sentiment here in the USA at the time and the turning away of large numbers of Jews from entering the USA prior to and during the War.
This ignited the history teacher as a match to tinder. After reading my paper, he came toward me in a menacing manner. He began to berate me. I simply told him the assignment had been to compare Historical figures of our choice and to relate our feelings and questions regarding them. He exploded and asked me if I had paid any attention at all to his lectures regarding FDR and all the good he had done for the country? I, as softly as I could, explained that while I recognize all the adulation many people had for FDR, I did not regard him as perfect. He then went somewhat mad and began screaming insults while pushing me around the room. Fortunately for me, another teacher came in the see what all the fuss was about. This other teacher would prove to be a valuable witness later. It was at this point, he began swinging wild punches in my direction.
I spent much of my youth during the 1950's and 60's in mountain country. Some of it rural, southern mountain country and some of it mining country out west. My father and most of the men around me at that time were the epitome of what would be called men's men today. My father in his 20's had been a bare knuckles fighter during the depression years. He had taught me the finer points of landing effective punches early in my life. This teaching proved very effective on that particular day. I had finally had enough of being pushed and shoved. By the age of 15, I had grown to over 6 foot tall and weighed nearly 180 pounds. I had just spent the summer working on a cantaloupe farm, usually spending at least 10 hours a day 6 days a week in the field. When I threw the upper cut he never saw it coming. My punch threw him up and over his desk and when landing on his back, we found he was unconscious.
I was taken to the principal’s office. The other teacher explained what he had seen. The principal being a man who had spent many years in the town, explained to the new history teacher, the finer points of what happens when you begin shoving people around in town. The incident, as the principal called it, would be solved by shaking hands and agreeing to disagree on parts of historical figures impact on history. I was asked to be more direct in asking what was required when writing an assignment, although not restricted to how I might write an assignment, just to let the teacher know it might be controversial, as the principal believed all history could be looked at from differing angles.
The teacher took a fresh interest in what the students had to say. The teacher and I both knew we should likely stay quiet towards each other for a while. I learned how close I came to trouble when the sheriff dropped by after school. He took me aside and said that punch could have killed the teacher and no matter what had happened prior to that moment, I would have faced manslaughter charges. Going through court to prove my innocence did not appeal to me. The thought of going to prison appealed to me less, but I also told the Sheriff, the thought of backing down and being pushed around appealed to me least of all. Well, the sheriff replied, I don't think judging by how that teacher looked after the fight I would face being pushed around by him in the future.
When all was said and done, I can't say that history teacher and I became friends. I can say I passed his class with a B grade and we did have some quiet discussions during the rest of my time there.
Yours in Liberty
Gene
Over the course of the last few days there have been many reports of teachers’ political bias in the classroom. Some may have had differing experiences than I, but in my youth I experienced much the same from one teacher with a very different outcome.
What I am about to relate is a story from the 60's, in a mountain mining town out west. Mining towns in American history been known to be fairly rough towns, inhabited by men who were no strangers to drinks and fights. It was during a time in history when there was actually a written codified law stating, two men of roughly equal physical size and strength could mutually agree to combat and as long as the peace of no other citizen was disturbed, their mutual combat was legal. This actually made for a rather peaceful society, as the worst thing you could be called in our town was a coward. So if you pushed something too far and were physically challenged to back it up; then refused to fight, you were labeled a coward and ignored or worse from that time on. I learned early, shall we say to be a diplomatic conversationalist whenever possible. It is under these circumstances I relate the story.
During my sophomore year in high school, my history teacher was a huge supporter of Franklin D. Roosevelt. In fact my family was even supporters of him. I, however, took exception to the teachers’ constant emphasis of the wonderful programs his administration had used to revive the US economy during the 30's. Being an avid reader of history I learned that some programs such as the WPA, had actually been started in Germany before they were used in the USA. This had helped to restart the German economy after the German economy had been hit so hard under the Weimar Republic years. I had also learned that during the building of the Rockefeller Center in New York City, a mural had been included showing Mussolini courageously leading his people forward. I questioned the closeness of the leaders of that time and their common approach to problems. I also noted the anti-Jewish sentiment here in the USA at the time and the turning away of large numbers of Jews from entering the USA prior to and during the War.
This ignited the history teacher as a match to tinder. After reading my paper, he came toward me in a menacing manner. He began to berate me. I simply told him the assignment had been to compare Historical figures of our choice and to relate our feelings and questions regarding them. He exploded and asked me if I had paid any attention at all to his lectures regarding FDR and all the good he had done for the country? I, as softly as I could, explained that while I recognize all the adulation many people had for FDR, I did not regard him as perfect. He then went somewhat mad and began screaming insults while pushing me around the room. Fortunately for me, another teacher came in the see what all the fuss was about. This other teacher would prove to be a valuable witness later. It was at this point, he began swinging wild punches in my direction.
I spent much of my youth during the 1950's and 60's in mountain country. Some of it rural, southern mountain country and some of it mining country out west. My father and most of the men around me at that time were the epitome of what would be called men's men today. My father in his 20's had been a bare knuckles fighter during the depression years. He had taught me the finer points of landing effective punches early in my life. This teaching proved very effective on that particular day. I had finally had enough of being pushed and shoved. By the age of 15, I had grown to over 6 foot tall and weighed nearly 180 pounds. I had just spent the summer working on a cantaloupe farm, usually spending at least 10 hours a day 6 days a week in the field. When I threw the upper cut he never saw it coming. My punch threw him up and over his desk and when landing on his back, we found he was unconscious.
I was taken to the principal’s office. The other teacher explained what he had seen. The principal being a man who had spent many years in the town, explained to the new history teacher, the finer points of what happens when you begin shoving people around in town. The incident, as the principal called it, would be solved by shaking hands and agreeing to disagree on parts of historical figures impact on history. I was asked to be more direct in asking what was required when writing an assignment, although not restricted to how I might write an assignment, just to let the teacher know it might be controversial, as the principal believed all history could be looked at from differing angles.
The teacher took a fresh interest in what the students had to say. The teacher and I both knew we should likely stay quiet towards each other for a while. I learned how close I came to trouble when the sheriff dropped by after school. He took me aside and said that punch could have killed the teacher and no matter what had happened prior to that moment, I would have faced manslaughter charges. Going through court to prove my innocence did not appeal to me. The thought of going to prison appealed to me less, but I also told the Sheriff, the thought of backing down and being pushed around appealed to me least of all. Well, the sheriff replied, I don't think judging by how that teacher looked after the fight I would face being pushed around by him in the future.
When all was said and done, I can't say that history teacher and I became friends. I can say I passed his class with a B grade and we did have some quiet discussions during the rest of my time there.
Yours in Liberty
Gene
Prison or Profit 04-05-2013
American prisons are now a profit center for many private corporations and as such are worth billions each year in profit. Let's look at the numbers, in the past 30 years federal prison population has risen from around 25,000 to nearly 220,000. The vast majority of this rise has taken place since 1992, oddly enough about the time the transition to privately run prisons took place. Coincidentally, about the time for mandatory minimum sentences took place.
Now, before everyone jumps up and down calling me bleeding heart liberal, let me give you a little background. In 1972, after leaving the US Army in 1971, I worked in the Arizona Department of Corrections for a very short time. During that short time I was awaiting an opening occurring in Law Enforcement, where I went on to serve several years as a police officer. It was also during this time I met and worked for Frank Eyman, possibly the toughest man I have ever met. To give you an idea of how tough, this was one of the men who arrested John Dillinger and his gang in Tucson Arizona in the 1930's. He had become warden of the Arizona State Prison at Florence, at the time the only maximum security prison in Arizona, actually the ONLY adult prison in Arizona. If you are still wondering how tough this man was, simply get hold of a copy of the 1969 movie “Riot”, starring Gene Hackman and Jim Brown. The shots in the movie of the prison were mostly shot on location and the Warden played himself. I worked there a few short years later so not much had changed. The prison there had been built as a replacement for the notorious Yuma Prison and had been build just as Arizona became a state in 1912. So with that background in mind let me relate to you my thoughts on this ever growing cancer in our Federal and State Government systems.
Federal Mandatory Minimums take away the local elected judges ability to apply the local community standards to each defendant, based upon his judgement in each case as presented to him. While many people decry the lack of apparent justice in some sentencing and I must admit that while a cop I often felt this way, I have come to the conclusion that the federal, “One Size Fits All”, approach to sentencing is an abomination to our 4th, 5th and 6th amendment provisions in our constitution and contributes to the ever growing budget overruns of our government, while feeding into the coffers of massive corporations benefiting from log prison sentences handed down, in fact required, to non-violent offenders, many times those of minorities. The other effect is to give a local judge the excuse not to use their judicial prerogatives, which in fact they should be held accountable for when elections come up.
I have been outside the system now for decades. I can tell you that many things have changed since I wore a badge. We were personally held responsible for our time, our judgement and our actions. I know because I was there. I took part in enforcing laws some, may I say, I disagreed with but none the less enforced. I rode the single man cars of the time. This means that when you exit your patrol car, you are alone. This in a time before portable radios and before bullet proof vests. This in a time when you were required to wear a name badge above your left breast pocket as much as you were required to wear your badge over your right breast pocket.
Let's look a little farther at the economics of private prisons. This private approach to prisons was suppose to relieve the government from the burden of retirement funds for federal prison officers, the same is true of the ever growing number of states that run private prisons. The private prison provides all security for the prisoners, food and healthcare, all at cost plus profit margin. Reports from prison guards, administrative personnel and staff all are included in the files sent to parole boards for assessment in the hearings to determine the suitability for the prisoners release. Some prisons have gone further and instituted prison work programs, supposedly for the training and rehabilitation of the prisoners. Given these facts and the fact private prisons are of course run for profit how likely is it that the prison would want to lose a profitable resource, in effect the prisoner?
Unless and until we change the prison system to focus upon violent offenders that serves to protect society from such people and stop feeding the beast of a private corporation which feeds upon the incarceration of so many things will not change. It is time we look again at the real cost to society.
In my personal experience most of the young offenders are there for one of several reasons. They have very little hope of a better life when the grow into adulthood, since all they have seen is dependence upon welfare and unemployment.
Now, before everyone jumps up and down calling me bleeding heart liberal, let me give you a little background. In 1972, after leaving the US Army in 1971, I worked in the Arizona Department of Corrections for a very short time. During that short time I was awaiting an opening occurring in Law Enforcement, where I went on to serve several years as a police officer. It was also during this time I met and worked for Frank Eyman, possibly the toughest man I have ever met. To give you an idea of how tough, this was one of the men who arrested John Dillinger and his gang in Tucson Arizona in the 1930's. He had become warden of the Arizona State Prison at Florence, at the time the only maximum security prison in Arizona, actually the ONLY adult prison in Arizona. If you are still wondering how tough this man was, simply get hold of a copy of the 1969 movie “Riot”, starring Gene Hackman and Jim Brown. The shots in the movie of the prison were mostly shot on location and the Warden played himself. I worked there a few short years later so not much had changed. The prison there had been built as a replacement for the notorious Yuma Prison and had been build just as Arizona became a state in 1912. So with that background in mind let me relate to you my thoughts on this ever growing cancer in our Federal and State Government systems.
Federal Mandatory Minimums take away the local elected judges ability to apply the local community standards to each defendant, based upon his judgement in each case as presented to him. While many people decry the lack of apparent justice in some sentencing and I must admit that while a cop I often felt this way, I have come to the conclusion that the federal, “One Size Fits All”, approach to sentencing is an abomination to our 4th, 5th and 6th amendment provisions in our constitution and contributes to the ever growing budget overruns of our government, while feeding into the coffers of massive corporations benefiting from log prison sentences handed down, in fact required, to non-violent offenders, many times those of minorities. The other effect is to give a local judge the excuse not to use their judicial prerogatives, which in fact they should be held accountable for when elections come up.
I have been outside the system now for decades. I can tell you that many things have changed since I wore a badge. We were personally held responsible for our time, our judgement and our actions. I know because I was there. I took part in enforcing laws some, may I say, I disagreed with but none the less enforced. I rode the single man cars of the time. This means that when you exit your patrol car, you are alone. This in a time before portable radios and before bullet proof vests. This in a time when you were required to wear a name badge above your left breast pocket as much as you were required to wear your badge over your right breast pocket.
Let's look a little farther at the economics of private prisons. This private approach to prisons was suppose to relieve the government from the burden of retirement funds for federal prison officers, the same is true of the ever growing number of states that run private prisons. The private prison provides all security for the prisoners, food and healthcare, all at cost plus profit margin. Reports from prison guards, administrative personnel and staff all are included in the files sent to parole boards for assessment in the hearings to determine the suitability for the prisoners release. Some prisons have gone further and instituted prison work programs, supposedly for the training and rehabilitation of the prisoners. Given these facts and the fact private prisons are of course run for profit how likely is it that the prison would want to lose a profitable resource, in effect the prisoner?
Unless and until we change the prison system to focus upon violent offenders that serves to protect society from such people and stop feeding the beast of a private corporation which feeds upon the incarceration of so many things will not change. It is time we look again at the real cost to society.
In my personal experience most of the young offenders are there for one of several reasons. They have very little hope of a better life when the grow into adulthood, since all they have seen is dependence upon welfare and unemployment.
2 April 2013
Healthcare Equals Control
For those of you living in anticipation of the implementation of Obamacare, you may have unexpected surprises in store. Do you want another reason for social workers, ie: some young college graduate out to change the world before experiencing it, coming to your door? Telling you they are taking your children to a state care facility for their own good. Well in the UK, the nation famed for its NHS National Healthcare, that is what often happens and it is soon to come in the USA.
You see when one National Board rules that there is a problem, in protecting the children, the social services are most often tasked with solving it. Since social workers have a wealth of Government school training and usually very little real world experience, but a heavy caseload, their solution, state care.
Just read the excerpt from an article in the UK Daily Telegraph and then with what I have written, read between the lines.
Professor Kevin Fenton, Designate Director of Health and Wellbeing at Public Health England, said drastic measures were needed to tackled what he describes as an "obesogenic environment" and help the 1.3million children who are obese in England to lose weight.
Public Health England is a new body which started work on Monday April 1 “to protect and improve the nation’s health and wellbeing, and to reduce inequalities”.
Now with all the parents afraid to send “little Johnny” out to play, or too busy at work to be home to see to it “little Johnny isn't spending all his time on computer games or television the fact of rising obesity in the USA, what do you think will happen? After all, isn't Obama doing his best to remake the USA into Europe?
Healthcare is important, but name me a Government program or institution that has proven efficient or effective in the long term. If we can't be trusted to solve our own problems, do you want to live in the “Nanny State” that has proven to be a failure to provide “Cradle to Grave” care and is bankrupting Europe?
Your in Liberty
Gene Daily
For those of you living in anticipation of the implementation of Obamacare, you may have unexpected surprises in store. Do you want another reason for social workers, ie: some young college graduate out to change the world before experiencing it, coming to your door? Telling you they are taking your children to a state care facility for their own good. Well in the UK, the nation famed for its NHS National Healthcare, that is what often happens and it is soon to come in the USA.
You see when one National Board rules that there is a problem, in protecting the children, the social services are most often tasked with solving it. Since social workers have a wealth of Government school training and usually very little real world experience, but a heavy caseload, their solution, state care.
Just read the excerpt from an article in the UK Daily Telegraph and then with what I have written, read between the lines.
Professor Kevin Fenton, Designate Director of Health and Wellbeing at Public Health England, said drastic measures were needed to tackled what he describes as an "obesogenic environment" and help the 1.3million children who are obese in England to lose weight.
Public Health England is a new body which started work on Monday April 1 “to protect and improve the nation’s health and wellbeing, and to reduce inequalities”.
Now with all the parents afraid to send “little Johnny” out to play, or too busy at work to be home to see to it “little Johnny isn't spending all his time on computer games or television the fact of rising obesity in the USA, what do you think will happen? After all, isn't Obama doing his best to remake the USA into Europe?
Healthcare is important, but name me a Government program or institution that has proven efficient or effective in the long term. If we can't be trusted to solve our own problems, do you want to live in the “Nanny State” that has proven to be a failure to provide “Cradle to Grave” care and is bankrupting Europe?
Your in Liberty
Gene Daily
National Healthcare What You Need to Know
Living in Europe is a complete change to the USA. Some would say that isn't surprising. That may be correct, but few Americans really know the differences. Of course, I can only speak from personal experience, but isn't that the information you want? None of us trust the government propaganda machine in any country. There is an old joke, “How do you tell if a politician is lying, his lips are moving”. So here is a view from on the ground, just one old guy telling the things he's seen.
I suppose the first question to answer is how good is it? Well if you speak with people in the country they will answer, “Oh it's Great”. Well how do they really know? They have rarely if ever experienced anything else. National Healthcare, or NHS as it is called came to the UK in around 1947, after the Labour party victory over Winston Churchill. They promised, “Cradle to Grave” care for all and to an extent they were exactly correct. The problem is that means they control everything you do from “Cradle to Grave”. Is that what you really want?
I am one of those fortunate people who rarely require anything from a doctor. I have been cared for by the NHS on few occasions, but I have experienced some care and have watched the care given to my wife on several occasions. As I said, it works differently. Even if you know what is wrong, as is the case often with my wife, you MUST first visit your GP. Only a GP can refer you to a specialist. That means you must make an appointment with your GP, which means you MUST sit on the telephone during the time period, 7:45 AM to 8:00 AM as that is the ONLY time they will take an appointment call. Thank goodness for redial, if you are trying to reach them the telephone is invariably busy, necessitating calling again. Let's hope you get through in the moment they hang up from one and before they answer someone else. If not try tomorrow. Now let's assume you get through. You are assigned a doctor among several that work that clinic, not necessarily the one that saw you before, it is who is available next. You are given a time, which means nothing, as it always means a long wait in the waiting room. It could be as long as several hours.
In my wife's case, she is afflicted with kidney stones. Those that have experienced them know they are painful. So the other option is the emergency room at the local hospital. In one instance we were out and several miles from home. We pulled into the nearest hospital and what I saw made us return to the car and her suffer until we could get to another. The entry way floor had been covered in blood from a stabbing victim. As I entered it was apparent this had happened long enough prior that the blood had dried. As we entered I sat my wife on some chairs and visited the reception desk. It so came about, the person there had a moment and as I asked for my wife to be seen, I asked how long the blood had been there. She told me since last evening, see we are short-handed with cleaners and only two people are covering the hospital. She was sure they would get to it sometime tomorrow. As I went to my wife I noticed there was dirt and used bandages in the corner. I ask about them and again got the same story. I would not have my wife sitting in an area so filthy and waiting to be seen in such a place. We moved on at once. The one nearest our home was not so much better in care, but at least it was cleaner. When I learned from my friends later during conversations about the incident, it was down to the unions. You see no one else is permitted to clean, if they are short-handed no one else in the hospital can help, it would be taking work from a union member.
The other incident I think shows some of the problems, involved myself experiencing and attack of urticaria wheels. This is a condition that is a skin rash in the shape of wheels and is painful and of great discomfort. After seeing a GP the next morning, of course, I was referred to a consultant. The wait for a consultant was three days of pain, swelling and discomfort. Finally I saw one. I was allotted seven (7) minutes of her time. She saw the symptoms, asked how painful it was, prescribed a 1000 milligrams of cortisone per day and told me if the symptoms continued return in three months. My wife thought this was a massive amount of cortisone for my system and called a personal friend in Spain. He told her, “If he follows that advice he will be dead in ten (10) days”. Bring him to Spain, I'll have a friend see him. The skin specialist I saw in Spain, with private insurance we have there, told me the same as my wife's friend, it would have killed me. The doctor in Spain handled it with different medication and creams and in two days it was gone. He also told me due to the delay he could not be sure it would not return. He further stated if it had been handled differently it would have been permanently cured. Fortunately I have not had a return. When I returned to the UK I asked the Consultant. She said she was surprised to see the prescription and instructions she had given, she had made a mistake and instead should have written a different dosage and three (3) days not months. She is protected on those types of mistakes being cause for a lawsuit by the NHS. This is due to “Mistakes do happen, due to patient volume”. I was told there would be efforts made to insure it didn't happen again.
There is a body in the UK government referred to as N.I.C.E. It stands for National Institute for Clinical Excellence. The function of NICE is to insure, best practice at lowest cost. In other words, it see to it that even though there may be other drugs or treatments available, those that are shown to work and are the lowest price, if not the most effective, are used and adopted as approved for use. Comforting isn't it to be handled by NICE.
These are just some of what will develop in the coming years under Obama care. It may not be as good as what has been before, but I am sure it will be NICE.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
I suppose the first question to answer is how good is it? Well if you speak with people in the country they will answer, “Oh it's Great”. Well how do they really know? They have rarely if ever experienced anything else. National Healthcare, or NHS as it is called came to the UK in around 1947, after the Labour party victory over Winston Churchill. They promised, “Cradle to Grave” care for all and to an extent they were exactly correct. The problem is that means they control everything you do from “Cradle to Grave”. Is that what you really want?
I am one of those fortunate people who rarely require anything from a doctor. I have been cared for by the NHS on few occasions, but I have experienced some care and have watched the care given to my wife on several occasions. As I said, it works differently. Even if you know what is wrong, as is the case often with my wife, you MUST first visit your GP. Only a GP can refer you to a specialist. That means you must make an appointment with your GP, which means you MUST sit on the telephone during the time period, 7:45 AM to 8:00 AM as that is the ONLY time they will take an appointment call. Thank goodness for redial, if you are trying to reach them the telephone is invariably busy, necessitating calling again. Let's hope you get through in the moment they hang up from one and before they answer someone else. If not try tomorrow. Now let's assume you get through. You are assigned a doctor among several that work that clinic, not necessarily the one that saw you before, it is who is available next. You are given a time, which means nothing, as it always means a long wait in the waiting room. It could be as long as several hours.
In my wife's case, she is afflicted with kidney stones. Those that have experienced them know they are painful. So the other option is the emergency room at the local hospital. In one instance we were out and several miles from home. We pulled into the nearest hospital and what I saw made us return to the car and her suffer until we could get to another. The entry way floor had been covered in blood from a stabbing victim. As I entered it was apparent this had happened long enough prior that the blood had dried. As we entered I sat my wife on some chairs and visited the reception desk. It so came about, the person there had a moment and as I asked for my wife to be seen, I asked how long the blood had been there. She told me since last evening, see we are short-handed with cleaners and only two people are covering the hospital. She was sure they would get to it sometime tomorrow. As I went to my wife I noticed there was dirt and used bandages in the corner. I ask about them and again got the same story. I would not have my wife sitting in an area so filthy and waiting to be seen in such a place. We moved on at once. The one nearest our home was not so much better in care, but at least it was cleaner. When I learned from my friends later during conversations about the incident, it was down to the unions. You see no one else is permitted to clean, if they are short-handed no one else in the hospital can help, it would be taking work from a union member.
The other incident I think shows some of the problems, involved myself experiencing and attack of urticaria wheels. This is a condition that is a skin rash in the shape of wheels and is painful and of great discomfort. After seeing a GP the next morning, of course, I was referred to a consultant. The wait for a consultant was three days of pain, swelling and discomfort. Finally I saw one. I was allotted seven (7) minutes of her time. She saw the symptoms, asked how painful it was, prescribed a 1000 milligrams of cortisone per day and told me if the symptoms continued return in three months. My wife thought this was a massive amount of cortisone for my system and called a personal friend in Spain. He told her, “If he follows that advice he will be dead in ten (10) days”. Bring him to Spain, I'll have a friend see him. The skin specialist I saw in Spain, with private insurance we have there, told me the same as my wife's friend, it would have killed me. The doctor in Spain handled it with different medication and creams and in two days it was gone. He also told me due to the delay he could not be sure it would not return. He further stated if it had been handled differently it would have been permanently cured. Fortunately I have not had a return. When I returned to the UK I asked the Consultant. She said she was surprised to see the prescription and instructions she had given, she had made a mistake and instead should have written a different dosage and three (3) days not months. She is protected on those types of mistakes being cause for a lawsuit by the NHS. This is due to “Mistakes do happen, due to patient volume”. I was told there would be efforts made to insure it didn't happen again.
There is a body in the UK government referred to as N.I.C.E. It stands for National Institute for Clinical Excellence. The function of NICE is to insure, best practice at lowest cost. In other words, it see to it that even though there may be other drugs or treatments available, those that are shown to work and are the lowest price, if not the most effective, are used and adopted as approved for use. Comforting isn't it to be handled by NICE.
These are just some of what will develop in the coming years under Obama care. It may not be as good as what has been before, but I am sure it will be NICE.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
30 March 2013
What Obama Doesn't Understand
Obama is a Social Democrat, not a socialist. Having lived in Europe for several years, during different decades, in different countries, I have seen the vast differences in culture. While I truly believe Obama is a sincere man and truly believes what he is trying to do is best for the USA, he like the other Social Democrat leaders in the EU, is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.
In the minds of Europeans, the USA has such a short history as a united country, whereas in their mind European history stretches back centuries. In a way they are correct, think of it, two of our states, Hawaii and Alaska have only been part of the union since 1959. I am personally old enough to remember when we became fifty states. But what Europeans do not understand is that since we had, for most of our history, a common language and a sense of connection to our former colonial rulers England, in a sense, our history extends far beyond our establishment. More importantly, far longer in unity than nearly all European countries. We more closely and throughout history have aligned ourselves in thought word and deed to the thinking of and the history of England. Though our political history and our national personality differs, in truth we have a great deal of the English in our outlook. In a way our history, like England is a 1000 years old.
When looked at from this prospective, Europe, as a whole, is a mishmash of different histories. Europe has really only been the way it is since the 1950's. If you look even closer it has really only been this way since the late 1970's, since Franco didn't die until 1975. The UK only became what it is today after the Labour Party was elected after WWII. Let's look for just a moment to the real history of Europe. Prior to WWI, Germany was ruled by a Prussian Ruler The Kaiser. Spain was still a Kingdom. France had not fully developed into a democratic country and had not long been out from under Napoleonic rule. In the Twentieth century France had been invaded and conquered three times and in large part participated with Hitler during the occupation. Italy was still only loosely affiliated prior to Mussolini. The Balkan states were territories of Germany, part of what sparked WWI. I have some very interesting conversations with others espousing the long history of Europe. Do they not even remember how long the USSR occupied eastern Europe. Germany has only been the country we know today for about 20 years and is still undergoing change with assimilation of a previously communist portion of their society.
England, in large part is still to this day an “Old Boy's Club”. Independent entrepreneurship are in relation to what happens in the USA is far more rare. France requires compliance with massive regulations to begin a business there. Spain is very complicated with a great need for assistance from the city to obtain permits. Germany is a little simpler, but requires a large tax if you bring in people from outside Germany to perform work in the country.
As we have seen the Euro currency is still teetering on collapse in large part due to cultural differences. The written portion of the Maastricht treaty upon which all this is based, states it's purpose as “An ever closer Union”. This union is still forming. So the history of Europe is far from as settled as ours had been.
I do understand the American people got exactly what Obama promised in his campaign of 2008 and in his re-election of 2012. He promised to do everything in his power to effect a fundamental change in the USA. Those are his exact words, “Fundamental Change”. Should we expect less?
Is it not time to effect a change? Do we really want to continue this experiment of his to convert the USA into the dream of what the European Union wants to become? We are seeing the massive problems developing in the Euro. This has been caused by the overspending of the different governments within the European Union. We have seen this lead to the outright theft of money right out of the accounts of the citizens of Cyprus. We have seen the continuing demonstrations against the austerity measures brought on by running out of money.
As a nation, I think the USA is faced with three possibilities. First, an article V process to irrevocably change back to what our fore-fathers envisioned. Second, and less appealing is a hard run in 2014 to regain the Senate, as we have no way of knowing whether that will work. Third, is an all out civil war.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
Obama is a Social Democrat, not a socialist. Having lived in Europe for several years, during different decades, in different countries, I have seen the vast differences in culture. While I truly believe Obama is a sincere man and truly believes what he is trying to do is best for the USA, he like the other Social Democrat leaders in the EU, is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.
In the minds of Europeans, the USA has such a short history as a united country, whereas in their mind European history stretches back centuries. In a way they are correct, think of it, two of our states, Hawaii and Alaska have only been part of the union since 1959. I am personally old enough to remember when we became fifty states. But what Europeans do not understand is that since we had, for most of our history, a common language and a sense of connection to our former colonial rulers England, in a sense, our history extends far beyond our establishment. More importantly, far longer in unity than nearly all European countries. We more closely and throughout history have aligned ourselves in thought word and deed to the thinking of and the history of England. Though our political history and our national personality differs, in truth we have a great deal of the English in our outlook. In a way our history, like England is a 1000 years old.
When looked at from this prospective, Europe, as a whole, is a mishmash of different histories. Europe has really only been the way it is since the 1950's. If you look even closer it has really only been this way since the late 1970's, since Franco didn't die until 1975. The UK only became what it is today after the Labour Party was elected after WWII. Let's look for just a moment to the real history of Europe. Prior to WWI, Germany was ruled by a Prussian Ruler The Kaiser. Spain was still a Kingdom. France had not fully developed into a democratic country and had not long been out from under Napoleonic rule. In the Twentieth century France had been invaded and conquered three times and in large part participated with Hitler during the occupation. Italy was still only loosely affiliated prior to Mussolini. The Balkan states were territories of Germany, part of what sparked WWI. I have some very interesting conversations with others espousing the long history of Europe. Do they not even remember how long the USSR occupied eastern Europe. Germany has only been the country we know today for about 20 years and is still undergoing change with assimilation of a previously communist portion of their society.
England, in large part is still to this day an “Old Boy's Club”. Independent entrepreneurship are in relation to what happens in the USA is far more rare. France requires compliance with massive regulations to begin a business there. Spain is very complicated with a great need for assistance from the city to obtain permits. Germany is a little simpler, but requires a large tax if you bring in people from outside Germany to perform work in the country.
As we have seen the Euro currency is still teetering on collapse in large part due to cultural differences. The written portion of the Maastricht treaty upon which all this is based, states it's purpose as “An ever closer Union”. This union is still forming. So the history of Europe is far from as settled as ours had been.
I do understand the American people got exactly what Obama promised in his campaign of 2008 and in his re-election of 2012. He promised to do everything in his power to effect a fundamental change in the USA. Those are his exact words, “Fundamental Change”. Should we expect less?
Is it not time to effect a change? Do we really want to continue this experiment of his to convert the USA into the dream of what the European Union wants to become? We are seeing the massive problems developing in the Euro. This has been caused by the overspending of the different governments within the European Union. We have seen this lead to the outright theft of money right out of the accounts of the citizens of Cyprus. We have seen the continuing demonstrations against the austerity measures brought on by running out of money.
As a nation, I think the USA is faced with three possibilities. First, an article V process to irrevocably change back to what our fore-fathers envisioned. Second, and less appealing is a hard run in 2014 to regain the Senate, as we have no way of knowing whether that will work. Third, is an all out civil war.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
28 March 2013
Is This A Form Of War?
As an American living abroad, I am constantly having discussions about where the USA is heading. Recently, I had such a discussion with a highly successful Architectural Engineer in Spain. His focus was on the “Economic War”, his words not mine, happening in the world at the moment. I will include in this post the gist of the conversation omitting further quotes.
There is an alliance in the world referred to as the BRICS. In the USA it is referred to as an emerging market. It is actually an alliance of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. These countries have enormous resources in terms of both Capital and Raw Material. It doesn't stop at just these countries either. Though they are the principles behind the alliance, they endeavour to bring others into their sphere of trading and influence, countries such as Ecuador and Venezuela. Most of us aware of the huge finds of oil off the coast of Venezuela but this holds true as well for Ecuador, only on not such a large basis. Ecuador though holds large deposits of Gold and other precious metals, over which there is currently an ongoing struggle with the natives of the region. These are not the only countries several other South American countries and several African countries are also dealing with the Alliance. The BRICS are even talking about starting their own form of IMF, of course for development purposes, according to their political stance.
The ONLY thing according to my contact holding up the American economy is the following, first in the view of OUR allies at the moment, don't forget that can change,the USA is too big to fail. Sound familiar? Second, the USA Dollar is the current world reserve currency, based upon petrol dollars. That means the world's supply of petroleum is traded in US Dollars. Current sanctions prevent Iran, for example, from trading their oil. This also inhibits the Chinese, with their need for oil. But, what if the BRICS just start to ignore the current standards and start trading in Chinese Currency.
Another point, according to my friend, is the amount of trading needed for materials and sale of Chinese goods into the USA Market. This last one is where it gets really scary. What if the USA Market due to inflation or due to many other possible scenarios becomes a problem. Russia has vast undeveloped reserves. India has a vast number of people to market Chinese products to for a continuation of growth for China.
Check out what the ultra-rich have to say http://conservative50plus.com/blog/sun-microsystems-co-founder-quantitative-easing-is-a-disaster/ . Check out what the former Ambassador John Bolton from the USA to the UN has to say http://conservative50plus.com/blog/is-americas-rising-debt-a-national-security-issue/ . These are people from the USA in the know and shall we say in part “With Skin In The Game”.
Remember not all people in the world like the USA, as my friend does. As a matter of fact Hugo Chavez, the recently deceased President of Venezuela, was on record of not liking the USA. Do we really believe his hand-picked successor would have a different view towards the USA?
Let's for a moment examine one possible scenario. What if China is conducting a form of warfare to dislodge the predominate position the USA holds in the world's economy.
Remember, the USA won the cold war with Russia by driving them into near bankruptcy through military expenditures? If we actually look at that premise, is it a far stretch to think it is possibly a plan to bring China to a more dominate position in the world? The international conference of the BRICS nations just concluded in South Africa. With all the trade and cyber-attacks and other provocations is this type of circumstance outside the realm of possibilities. Is it just possible that China may be unwilling to force a frontal military confrontation with the USA, remember they are known for patience and playing the long game, could this be part of a planned attack through financially maneuvering the USA into a move that causes collapse? China has recently entered into currency swap deals with Brazil and several other countries, this guarantees continued trade in case of a world economic event. Is there something we are not seeing, which is right in front of our noses? This group is also in the process of forming their own international bank and fund, just as a hedge against a potential world economic event. If China continues to show its hostile stripes and there is nothing we can do to prevent their actions, why do we still claim to be the “World Super Power”?
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
As an American living abroad, I am constantly having discussions about where the USA is heading. Recently, I had such a discussion with a highly successful Architectural Engineer in Spain. His focus was on the “Economic War”, his words not mine, happening in the world at the moment. I will include in this post the gist of the conversation omitting further quotes.
There is an alliance in the world referred to as the BRICS. In the USA it is referred to as an emerging market. It is actually an alliance of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. These countries have enormous resources in terms of both Capital and Raw Material. It doesn't stop at just these countries either. Though they are the principles behind the alliance, they endeavour to bring others into their sphere of trading and influence, countries such as Ecuador and Venezuela. Most of us aware of the huge finds of oil off the coast of Venezuela but this holds true as well for Ecuador, only on not such a large basis. Ecuador though holds large deposits of Gold and other precious metals, over which there is currently an ongoing struggle with the natives of the region. These are not the only countries several other South American countries and several African countries are also dealing with the Alliance. The BRICS are even talking about starting their own form of IMF, of course for development purposes, according to their political stance.
The ONLY thing according to my contact holding up the American economy is the following, first in the view of OUR allies at the moment, don't forget that can change,the USA is too big to fail. Sound familiar? Second, the USA Dollar is the current world reserve currency, based upon petrol dollars. That means the world's supply of petroleum is traded in US Dollars. Current sanctions prevent Iran, for example, from trading their oil. This also inhibits the Chinese, with their need for oil. But, what if the BRICS just start to ignore the current standards and start trading in Chinese Currency.
Another point, according to my friend, is the amount of trading needed for materials and sale of Chinese goods into the USA Market. This last one is where it gets really scary. What if the USA Market due to inflation or due to many other possible scenarios becomes a problem. Russia has vast undeveloped reserves. India has a vast number of people to market Chinese products to for a continuation of growth for China.
Check out what the ultra-rich have to say http://conservative50plus.com/blog/sun-microsystems-co-founder-quantitative-easing-is-a-disaster/ . Check out what the former Ambassador John Bolton from the USA to the UN has to say http://conservative50plus.com/blog/is-americas-rising-debt-a-national-security-issue/ . These are people from the USA in the know and shall we say in part “With Skin In The Game”.
Remember not all people in the world like the USA, as my friend does. As a matter of fact Hugo Chavez, the recently deceased President of Venezuela, was on record of not liking the USA. Do we really believe his hand-picked successor would have a different view towards the USA?
Let's for a moment examine one possible scenario. What if China is conducting a form of warfare to dislodge the predominate position the USA holds in the world's economy.
Remember, the USA won the cold war with Russia by driving them into near bankruptcy through military expenditures? If we actually look at that premise, is it a far stretch to think it is possibly a plan to bring China to a more dominate position in the world? The international conference of the BRICS nations just concluded in South Africa. With all the trade and cyber-attacks and other provocations is this type of circumstance outside the realm of possibilities. Is it just possible that China may be unwilling to force a frontal military confrontation with the USA, remember they are known for patience and playing the long game, could this be part of a planned attack through financially maneuvering the USA into a move that causes collapse? China has recently entered into currency swap deals with Brazil and several other countries, this guarantees continued trade in case of a world economic event. Is there something we are not seeing, which is right in front of our noses? This group is also in the process of forming their own international bank and fund, just as a hedge against a potential world economic event. If China continues to show its hostile stripes and there is nothing we can do to prevent their actions, why do we still claim to be the “World Super Power”?
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
The Latest Report,
March 17 2013
The Living Constitution
Hi There
An interview with Justice Sotomayor, the 111th associate justice of the Supreme court of the US, in which refers to the Constitution of the US as a living document still rings in my ears as a bad note would to a musician.
I lived in the UK for over twelve years, on more than one occasion I discussed politics with several Englishmen. One is particularly memorable to me, that of a discussion with a very nice, very intelligent, young university student. We were discussing the US constitution and he said well according to the UK Constitution, I stopped him there. I told him the UK does not have a constitution, we he disagreed with, so I asked him to show me a copy. He told me it is made up of English common law and papers dating back more than 500 years to the Magna Carta (Great Charter), which actually is more like the Articles of the Barons, setting out how the King would deal with the rest of the ruling class, not so much the lower class. I told him fortunately all Americans could show him a copy of the actual “WRITTEN CONSTITUTION” we live under. I also told him, “If it ain't written down it ain't a constitution”. I still think I am right, it is simply an idea in the UK, a thing that can be changed or altered at the whim of a politician or group of politicians.
This brings me back to Justice Sotomayor. I think perhaps she is right. I think the constitution as she alluded to should not stand unchanged as a document written by men who lived and wrote more than 200 years ago, or the amendments done by men who had just won a great civil war such as the 14th, 16th and 17th passed not long after by the progressive movement.
She is correct, it is time perhaps past time that “We the People” wake up to our constitutional duties under Article V and construct and repeal amendments to more clearly define how, “WE the People” want our Government to stay in the box we put it in.
Unless and until we make a stand, they will continue to interpretatively change the document that should mean so much to us. One which the remainder of the world could look to with envy and say the “People” are the true rulers of the USA, as was the intent of the founders.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
An interview with Justice Sotomayor, the 111th associate justice of the Supreme court of the US, in which refers to the Constitution of the US as a living document still rings in my ears as a bad note would to a musician.
I lived in the UK for over twelve years, on more than one occasion I discussed politics with several Englishmen. One is particularly memorable to me, that of a discussion with a very nice, very intelligent, young university student. We were discussing the US constitution and he said well according to the UK Constitution, I stopped him there. I told him the UK does not have a constitution, we he disagreed with, so I asked him to show me a copy. He told me it is made up of English common law and papers dating back more than 500 years to the Magna Carta (Great Charter), which actually is more like the Articles of the Barons, setting out how the King would deal with the rest of the ruling class, not so much the lower class. I told him fortunately all Americans could show him a copy of the actual “WRITTEN CONSTITUTION” we live under. I also told him, “If it ain't written down it ain't a constitution”. I still think I am right, it is simply an idea in the UK, a thing that can be changed or altered at the whim of a politician or group of politicians.
This brings me back to Justice Sotomayor. I think perhaps she is right. I think the constitution as she alluded to should not stand unchanged as a document written by men who lived and wrote more than 200 years ago, or the amendments done by men who had just won a great civil war such as the 14th, 16th and 17th passed not long after by the progressive movement.
She is correct, it is time perhaps past time that “We the People” wake up to our constitutional duties under Article V and construct and repeal amendments to more clearly define how, “WE the People” want our Government to stay in the box we put it in.
Unless and until we make a stand, they will continue to interpretatively change the document that should mean so much to us. One which the remainder of the world could look to with envy and say the “People” are the true rulers of the USA, as was the intent of the founders.
Yours in Liberty
Gene Daily
March 16, 2013
Hi there,
I wonder if the USA has heard about the latest crisis in Spain.
The Law of Unintended Consequences
I wonder if the USA has heard about the latest crisis in Spain.
The Law of Unintended Consequences
This may signal the end of the European Union as we know it. On Friday 15 March 2013, the European courts ruled the repossession process in Spain abusive of Human Rights.
This ruling happened due to a repossession of a simple 139,000 Euro Home. Sounds like a very small sum of money, in truth, however, it has an impact on a more than 187 Billion Euro problem. The law on home repossession works differently in Spain than in the USA. In the USA when a person can no longer pay for their home and it goes into repossession, the normal course of events goes from there to bankruptcy and the person is relieved of their obligations to the lender. Of course, they no longer have a home but they are free from the payments as well. In Spain, the process is the home owner can't pay, the lender repossesses the home and the person is out on the street. The home owner though is not relieved in anyway of the obligation to pay the debt to the lender. Not only that, under current Spanish law, if the homeowner is not able to repay the debt before they die; the obligation is passed on the surviving family. This usually means that the children are then obligated to repay the debt. If not then any surviving family member becomes obligated, including parents, brothers, sisters or anyone the court deems suitable. It is punishable under the fraud laws to evade the debt.
This ruling happened due to a repossession of a simple 139,000 Euro Home. Sounds like a very small sum of money, in truth, however, it has an impact on a more than 187 Billion Euro problem. The law on home repossession works differently in Spain than in the USA. In the USA when a person can no longer pay for their home and it goes into repossession, the normal course of events goes from there to bankruptcy and the person is relieved of their obligations to the lender. Of course, they no longer have a home but they are free from the payments as well. In Spain, the process is the home owner can't pay, the lender repossesses the home and the person is out on the street. The home owner though is not relieved in anyway of the obligation to pay the debt to the lender. Not only that, under current Spanish law, if the homeowner is not able to repay the debt before they die; the obligation is passed on the surviving family. This usually means that the children are then obligated to repay the debt. If not then any surviving family member becomes obligated, including parents, brothers, sisters or anyone the court deems suitable. It is punishable under the fraud laws to evade the debt.
In the case of the loan that brought this to court, the home owner had bought the home on a variable interest rate depending upon the base rate to the bank. When they purchased the home the rate was 4.75%, seems reasonable, when the crisis hit the rates went to 18.9%. Nearly four times the previous rate and the value of the home dropped by fifty (50%) percent. This left the home owner unable to sell the home and unable to pay the loan.
If this had been a case of one loan, it is a tragedy. Since this situation involves several hundred thousand loans in the same situation, it is a national crisis, worth more than 187 Billion Euros. The court has instructed the Spanish Government to resolve the problem, the court has prevented future repossessions until it has been resolved and signaled it would be illegal to proceed without a resolution.
The question facing Europe remains. The Spanish banks have been bailed out - bailed out with the outstanding loans on the books as it stood under law at the time. No one knows what will happen next; do they bail the banks out again? Do they change the law similar to the one in the USA? What will happen to the houses? This is as Margaret Thatcher said, “Socialism works great till you run out of other people's money”.
Any Thoughts and Comments?
All the best
Gene
If this had been a case of one loan, it is a tragedy. Since this situation involves several hundred thousand loans in the same situation, it is a national crisis, worth more than 187 Billion Euros. The court has instructed the Spanish Government to resolve the problem, the court has prevented future repossessions until it has been resolved and signaled it would be illegal to proceed without a resolution.
The question facing Europe remains. The Spanish banks have been bailed out - bailed out with the outstanding loans on the books as it stood under law at the time. No one knows what will happen next; do they bail the banks out again? Do they change the law similar to the one in the USA? What will happen to the houses? This is as Margaret Thatcher said, “Socialism works great till you run out of other people's money”.
Any Thoughts and Comments?
All the best
Gene
March 15, 2013
We all, if we were to admit it, are products of our background and influences. With that in mind, let me introduce myself. I am the epitome of what Jeff Foxworthy described in his routines on “You Might Be A Redneck”. Yes, I have grown older and perhaps wiser but in many ways, I am still that guy. I can remember that little farm near Louisville Kentucky. I can remember, taking baths in the galvanized tub in the front yard in summer, after the water had warmed in the noonday sun. I can remember carrying water into the house from the outside pump for the water to heat in the winter and bathing in the kitchen. I can remember the little house outside: my father had to move every so often. But I also remember some of the smartest people I've ever met, were those good ole boys who gave me guidance in different ways, if you know what I mean.
My Great Grandpa rode with Morgan's Cavalry, he was part of the unit guarding Jefferson Davis as the Confederate administration attempted to relocate after the surrender of Lee at Appomattox. I have known his Great Grandson Robert E. Lee III for several years and just within the last two weeks had coffee and a chat with him.
In short I am a Southerner a Confederate in the classical meaning of the term, a true supporter of states’ rights, states sovereignty and the rights of citizens as individuals not collectively. That is why I proudly put the name of old southern rebel as my email. I have travelled the world. I have met Presidents, of our and of other countries. I have dined with the good and the great. I have drank with outlaws. I have enlisted and stood for our country. I have proudly worn the badge of a law enforcement officer.
I believe in our country and I believe in our constitution, though I may not agree with everything in it. I will support our right to want to live under our constitution and when the time comes, as I believe it has, to change our constitution under Article V, to form a more perfect form of Federal Government to fit our needs and desires.
For your consideration
Gene
My Great Grandpa rode with Morgan's Cavalry, he was part of the unit guarding Jefferson Davis as the Confederate administration attempted to relocate after the surrender of Lee at Appomattox. I have known his Great Grandson Robert E. Lee III for several years and just within the last two weeks had coffee and a chat with him.
In short I am a Southerner a Confederate in the classical meaning of the term, a true supporter of states’ rights, states sovereignty and the rights of citizens as individuals not collectively. That is why I proudly put the name of old southern rebel as my email. I have travelled the world. I have met Presidents, of our and of other countries. I have dined with the good and the great. I have drank with outlaws. I have enlisted and stood for our country. I have proudly worn the badge of a law enforcement officer.
I believe in our country and I believe in our constitution, though I may not agree with everything in it. I will support our right to want to live under our constitution and when the time comes, as I believe it has, to change our constitution under Article V, to form a more perfect form of Federal Government to fit our needs and desires.
For your consideration
Gene
March 12, 2013
The latest news from Europe.
I have learned from news sources in London that Chris Huhne a Former MP and Energy Secretary in the British Parliament and his former wife will be placed in separate Prisons today. They have been sentenced on several charges including Perverting the course of Justice and lying to police. These charges stem from a relatively minor speeding charge several years ago. They will both spend several months behind prison bars.
You might call this revenge gone bad. It began when Huhne's then wife Vicky took the three points on her drivers license, to prevent her husband losing his driving privileges. This is not really an uncommon practice in the age of speed cameras. The problem came to light when the he left her for another woman. The old saying, “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” came into play. She arranged for the matter to be leaked into the press. This brought about an investigation by police and it led to where we are now. Admittedly that is the short version as this matter has boiled in the background for years. It was only a very few years ago just before the last election, Chris Huhne stood for leader of the Liberal Democrat Party and lost. Had he won he would now be a part of the leadership as it is a coalition of Liberal Democrat party and Conservatives which run the administration today.
I have learned from news sources in London that Chris Huhne a Former MP and Energy Secretary in the British Parliament and his former wife will be placed in separate Prisons today. They have been sentenced on several charges including Perverting the course of Justice and lying to police. These charges stem from a relatively minor speeding charge several years ago. They will both spend several months behind prison bars.
You might call this revenge gone bad. It began when Huhne's then wife Vicky took the three points on her drivers license, to prevent her husband losing his driving privileges. This is not really an uncommon practice in the age of speed cameras. The problem came to light when the he left her for another woman. The old saying, “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” came into play. She arranged for the matter to be leaked into the press. This brought about an investigation by police and it led to where we are now. Admittedly that is the short version as this matter has boiled in the background for years. It was only a very few years ago just before the last election, Chris Huhne stood for leader of the Liberal Democrat Party and lost. Had he won he would now be a part of the leadership as it is a coalition of Liberal Democrat party and Conservatives which run the administration today.
I write this piece not because it is earth shattering but because of the difference in politics and police reaction between the UK and the USA approach. Here is a man, a powerful man, with aspirations of being Prime Minister, now facing months behind bars. His political life over, his life of power and privileges over. This because of an attitude of, “I can get away with it because of who I am”. These are my words not his, but they are my impression. Of course, his wife's revenge gone wrong has a lot to do with it. But how different the system. The police took immediate action to investigate when the story was leaked. No Parliamentary investigation, no long hearings, just straight police work. Did it or did it not happen? Then to the courts and trail. Chris Huhne, in my opinion did that right thing by pleading guilty. My question is now, why is the Attorney General Eric Holder above the law? Why can he hide behind national security claims by his pal Obama? What is wrong with the USA when a man equally as powerful in his own realm, that of the UK, can be brought down by lying about a simple speeding ticket and Eric Holder is safe after “Fast and Furious”?
This is not the first time this has happened. As few as 10 years ago another prominent politician was brought down and went to prison when caught on perjury charges in a civil case, not even a criminal case, again I say a civil case.
Think about it before it is too late. Are we allowing OUR politicians to escape unchallenged while other countries make examples of theirs? Are we allowing OUR system to place them in a different untouchable class? Should we?
Best regards
Gene
This is not the first time this has happened. As few as 10 years ago another prominent politician was brought down and went to prison when caught on perjury charges in a civil case, not even a criminal case, again I say a civil case.
Think about it before it is too late. Are we allowing OUR politicians to escape unchallenged while other countries make examples of theirs? Are we allowing OUR system to place them in a different untouchable class? Should we?
Best regards
Gene
March 12, 2013
From Spain
I have two items to report from Spain tonight. This is from the nightly news in Madrid Spain, Unidentifed US Intelligence experts are raising the threat level, This is due to the fact the the Internet is a very dangerous thing. These same unidentified sources failed to say if the internet is being attacked by terrorists or exactly what is so much of a danger about the internet. I will let you draw your own conclusions as we who listen to the report had to do. The second tidbit of information comes from Barcelona. It seems that under the social democracy in Spain, by the way the same sort of government Obama is driving the US towards, is out of sufficient funds to pay the pharmacies for the prescribed National health insurance prescriptions. It seems that though they apologise to the pharmacys there just is not enough money to pay them just now so they will have to wait. Yet with the debt the Obama government is in and continues to accumulate they assure the US Public everything will be just fine when they provide health care. I am so confident they are correct, aren't you?
Your friend, Gene
Your friend, Gene
March 11, 2013
Obamacare
Over the past few weeks I have been relaying news reports from Europe, along with viewpoints of current problems in Europe. Today I would like to speculate on what may be, or should I say, most likely will be, coming to the USA.
Obamacare has been passed into law. Famously put by Nancy Pelosi, “We must pass the bill to find out what's in it”. We as a public along with many from the legislature are unaware of the full impact of this legislation. Let me site one aspect of the United Kingdom's National Healthcare Service and at least a little of the impact. The treatments under the NHS are regulated by a supposedly independent body known as NICE. This acronym stands for National Institute for Clinical Excellence, and let me express in my opinion it is anything BUT NICE and most likely anything but independent.
It is staffed by at least some medical personnel and some bureaucrats. They were originally established, according to legend I think, to seek to provide the standard of treatment and method of approved treatment that would serve the public best. So far as I have been able to determine they do this without public hearing and with little if any public input, even though they were charged with serving the public interest. This often happens in a social democracy because, after all, the “experts” know best.
Since they were established long ago, perhaps as long as the late 1940's, this body has been staffed by OLD establishment types, and acceptable newcomers. They determine which treatments are acceptable and approved along with what medicines are also accepted and approved. Always keeping in mind what the budget constraints are, the age of the patients and the usefulness of the patient to society. Keep in mind the NHS is free at the point of service. That is not to say the service is free, it costs the tax payers in the UK Billions of British Pound Sterling.
So when a new treatment is found or a new medicine discovered it must be approved and sometimes tested by NICE. If it is found to be effect but cost prohibitive, then it is usually not approved. The patient is free to either go private health insurance or travel to another country where it is available or take the treatment, or perhaps lack of treatment offered by the NHS.
All the while, the approval of sexual reassignment for trans-sexuals goes on. This is not difficult to find, just Google “NHS drug approval disputes” and there are several references to this over the last few years to be found.
I understand that Obama calls his "board" Independent Payment Advisory Board - IPAB! As usual under social democracy it will surely sound either helpful or nice or be questionable as to what it really means!
Best regards
Gene
Obamacare has been passed into law. Famously put by Nancy Pelosi, “We must pass the bill to find out what's in it”. We as a public along with many from the legislature are unaware of the full impact of this legislation. Let me site one aspect of the United Kingdom's National Healthcare Service and at least a little of the impact. The treatments under the NHS are regulated by a supposedly independent body known as NICE. This acronym stands for National Institute for Clinical Excellence, and let me express in my opinion it is anything BUT NICE and most likely anything but independent.
It is staffed by at least some medical personnel and some bureaucrats. They were originally established, according to legend I think, to seek to provide the standard of treatment and method of approved treatment that would serve the public best. So far as I have been able to determine they do this without public hearing and with little if any public input, even though they were charged with serving the public interest. This often happens in a social democracy because, after all, the “experts” know best.
Since they were established long ago, perhaps as long as the late 1940's, this body has been staffed by OLD establishment types, and acceptable newcomers. They determine which treatments are acceptable and approved along with what medicines are also accepted and approved. Always keeping in mind what the budget constraints are, the age of the patients and the usefulness of the patient to society. Keep in mind the NHS is free at the point of service. That is not to say the service is free, it costs the tax payers in the UK Billions of British Pound Sterling.
So when a new treatment is found or a new medicine discovered it must be approved and sometimes tested by NICE. If it is found to be effect but cost prohibitive, then it is usually not approved. The patient is free to either go private health insurance or travel to another country where it is available or take the treatment, or perhaps lack of treatment offered by the NHS.
All the while, the approval of sexual reassignment for trans-sexuals goes on. This is not difficult to find, just Google “NHS drug approval disputes” and there are several references to this over the last few years to be found.
I understand that Obama calls his "board" Independent Payment Advisory Board - IPAB! As usual under social democracy it will surely sound either helpful or nice or be questionable as to what it really means!
Best regards
Gene
9 March 2013
Today I have an update to the piece I wrote yesterday regarding the ongoing problems of the European Unions’ impending financial collapse. This is not something many Americans seem aware of, or seem to regard as affecting them. In truth there may be some logic to that line of thought. The problem comes into focus when you consider that Obama is a social Democrat of the sort Europe would be proud to accept into the fold. He would be perfectly at home as the President of the European Union, were there to actually be one of the type he would envision.
This report from the major UK Newspaper, The Daily Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2290480/Romanian-migrants-blamed-rise-crime-German-town-Duisburg.html?ICO=most_read_module is from a city in Germany currently being invaded by the Romanian Roma and the Bulgarian Roma, in other words Gypsies. The city is Duisburg, a city of normal size in Germany, not particularly famous but an old city; a city that had been known for manufacturing. The article primarily looks at the effect on one city area and a block of apartments in one building and the affect it has had on the building and the area surrounding it.
The building has 46 units; in the last year 400 migrants from Romania and Bulgaria have moved into the building. Into apartments built for 3 to 4 people to occupy. Some contain as many as 15 people crammed into the limited space.
With the social benefits to the so-called poor coming from Obama, it is not difficult to imagine the effect when the talk is of the current immigration problems being faced in the USA. Take time to follow the link. Take time to think of the effect of giving status to 11 to 15 million immigrants on the social programs Obama is pushing. As of now it is not too late. But how long, before it will be too late. Are cities not crying out for help in the face the immigration problems they now have? Are states not facing huge budget problems in regards to Obamacare?
In the 1980's Reagan gave amnesty to a couple of million illegal immigrants. Since then the numbers have soared. Under Obama so many more will be given a path. Do we actually think this will not result in more coming? Take the realistic view that we must change now. We must support the effort for an Article V convention for only then we will be back in charge of the country.
Best regards
Gene
Today I have an update to the piece I wrote yesterday regarding the ongoing problems of the European Unions’ impending financial collapse. This is not something many Americans seem aware of, or seem to regard as affecting them. In truth there may be some logic to that line of thought. The problem comes into focus when you consider that Obama is a social Democrat of the sort Europe would be proud to accept into the fold. He would be perfectly at home as the President of the European Union, were there to actually be one of the type he would envision.
This report from the major UK Newspaper, The Daily Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2290480/Romanian-migrants-blamed-rise-crime-German-town-Duisburg.html?ICO=most_read_module is from a city in Germany currently being invaded by the Romanian Roma and the Bulgarian Roma, in other words Gypsies. The city is Duisburg, a city of normal size in Germany, not particularly famous but an old city; a city that had been known for manufacturing. The article primarily looks at the effect on one city area and a block of apartments in one building and the affect it has had on the building and the area surrounding it.
The building has 46 units; in the last year 400 migrants from Romania and Bulgaria have moved into the building. Into apartments built for 3 to 4 people to occupy. Some contain as many as 15 people crammed into the limited space.
With the social benefits to the so-called poor coming from Obama, it is not difficult to imagine the effect when the talk is of the current immigration problems being faced in the USA. Take time to follow the link. Take time to think of the effect of giving status to 11 to 15 million immigrants on the social programs Obama is pushing. As of now it is not too late. But how long, before it will be too late. Are cities not crying out for help in the face the immigration problems they now have? Are states not facing huge budget problems in regards to Obamacare?
In the 1980's Reagan gave amnesty to a couple of million illegal immigrants. Since then the numbers have soared. Under Obama so many more will be given a path. Do we actually think this will not result in more coming? Take the realistic view that we must change now. We must support the effort for an Article V convention for only then we will be back in charge of the country.
Best regards
Gene
March 8 2013
As I sit in Europe there is renewed opposition to immigration from two of the new states soon to be admitted to the European Union. These new states are Bulgaria and Romania. These two countries are renowned in Europe for their corruption, low standard of education, organized gang activity and high unemployment.
The United Kingdom is currently fighting to have limits imposed on the number of migrants allowed to remain in the UK. This stems from the recent experience with the admission of Poland, Lithuania and other recent additions to the EU. At that time the politicians advised the UK and the citizens to expect an average of 5,000 to 7,000 migrants per year. Instead the UK was confronted with a virtual avalanche of approximately 400,000 to 500,000 in the first year. While in the following years it did subside to a level of around 200,000, it is still far above the estimates of the politicians.
Unemployment is at historic levels in both prospective countries. There have just within the last week been riots protesting the living costs in Bulgaria. Is it any wonder the UK, which has recently experienced its own credit downgrade and has high unemployment, but some of the highest level of social programs for the poor in Europe, is worried about the newest potential human avalanche?
Is this not a similar situation being faced by the Border States in the USA? We are told by the US Politicians the immigration numbers are flat. Is this supported by the experience of people in those states? Personally I don't think it is.
Best regards
Gene
As I sit in Europe there is renewed opposition to immigration from two of the new states soon to be admitted to the European Union. These new states are Bulgaria and Romania. These two countries are renowned in Europe for their corruption, low standard of education, organized gang activity and high unemployment.
The United Kingdom is currently fighting to have limits imposed on the number of migrants allowed to remain in the UK. This stems from the recent experience with the admission of Poland, Lithuania and other recent additions to the EU. At that time the politicians advised the UK and the citizens to expect an average of 5,000 to 7,000 migrants per year. Instead the UK was confronted with a virtual avalanche of approximately 400,000 to 500,000 in the first year. While in the following years it did subside to a level of around 200,000, it is still far above the estimates of the politicians.
Unemployment is at historic levels in both prospective countries. There have just within the last week been riots protesting the living costs in Bulgaria. Is it any wonder the UK, which has recently experienced its own credit downgrade and has high unemployment, but some of the highest level of social programs for the poor in Europe, is worried about the newest potential human avalanche?
Is this not a similar situation being faced by the Border States in the USA? We are told by the US Politicians the immigration numbers are flat. Is this supported by the experience of people in those states? Personally I don't think it is.
Best regards
Gene
March 7, 2013
Seventy Years of Encroachment
In light of Rand Paul's wonderful efforts in yesterdays filibuster, perhaps a little background is in order. To understand how all this came about we have to go back to the origins of the problem.
What many people do not understand is, “It Hasn't Always Been This Way”. That might be a nice title for a book. So very few of us have any basis for arguing with the Feds. In truth there has been a very slow process of gradually taking power away from the people.
The first of these agencies to become powerful was the FBI. Hollywood wasn't always bad either. For proof of this simply get a copy of “The FBI Story” starring Jimmy Stewart. I don't often advocate taking history from Hollywood, in small doses it can be useful.
Founded under the original progressive President T. Roosevelt, it was to serve as an unarmed investigative agency for the U.S. Attorney General. The agents couldn't even make arrests except as a citizens arrest in emergency circumstances. In any other case a local Sheriff or a U.S. Marshall to effect an arrest. Such was the case due to nationwide opposition to a “National Police Force”. It was not until the “Kansas City Massacre” of 1933 that a bill was introduced to allow the arming and training of Federal Agents. The Bill called the “Weyburn Bill”, or the Law Enforcement Safety Act, began the debate we currently experience today. The public saw the “Gangsters” like Baby Faced Nelson, Pretty Boy Floyd, John Dillinger, Bonnie and Clyde and others as real threats. The people of the states clamoured for protection against these gangsters and the Fed came to the rescue with the “Untouchables”.
The undermining of local authority began right there and then. It has arrived at its natural conclusion. Those who trade liberty for security neither deserve nor get either, to paraphrase Franklin.
Seventy Years of Encroachment
In light of Rand Paul's wonderful efforts in yesterdays filibuster, perhaps a little background is in order. To understand how all this came about we have to go back to the origins of the problem.
What many people do not understand is, “It Hasn't Always Been This Way”. That might be a nice title for a book. So very few of us have any basis for arguing with the Feds. In truth there has been a very slow process of gradually taking power away from the people.
The first of these agencies to become powerful was the FBI. Hollywood wasn't always bad either. For proof of this simply get a copy of “The FBI Story” starring Jimmy Stewart. I don't often advocate taking history from Hollywood, in small doses it can be useful.
Founded under the original progressive President T. Roosevelt, it was to serve as an unarmed investigative agency for the U.S. Attorney General. The agents couldn't even make arrests except as a citizens arrest in emergency circumstances. In any other case a local Sheriff or a U.S. Marshall to effect an arrest. Such was the case due to nationwide opposition to a “National Police Force”. It was not until the “Kansas City Massacre” of 1933 that a bill was introduced to allow the arming and training of Federal Agents. The Bill called the “Weyburn Bill”, or the Law Enforcement Safety Act, began the debate we currently experience today. The public saw the “Gangsters” like Baby Faced Nelson, Pretty Boy Floyd, John Dillinger, Bonnie and Clyde and others as real threats. The people of the states clamoured for protection against these gangsters and the Fed came to the rescue with the “Untouchables”.
The undermining of local authority began right there and then. It has arrived at its natural conclusion. Those who trade liberty for security neither deserve nor get either, to paraphrase Franklin.
March 3, 2013
It came across Spanish news channel this week, Portugal is back in meetings with the EU. They have failed to reach the target cuts required for the EU Bailout program. It is rumoured the EU will design the cuts for them in order to approve the bailout money. Essentially this is what has happened in Greece.
Greece is now, for all intents and purposes bankrupt. There are documentaries on this that have been done for the BBC, showing how pharmacies are unable to provide prescribed medicines to their clients. It is not because the clients cannot pay for them, although in many cases that is true. It is not because their clients don't have valid prescriptions for the meds, although since a five euro fee to see the doctor has been instituted on the national health service and many retired cannot even afford to go to the Doctor any longer. It is because the national health service of Greece has not paid the bills for the meds in so long a time, the big pharmacies are no longer providing Greece with meds.
The UK has instituted a bedroom tax. No, it is not a tax on sex, yet. The tax is for under-use. This applies when a bedroom is not being used as a sleeping area. his applies to the elderly as well. For many older Brits, they have raised their families in one house for many years. Their children have graduated and married. The saw their home as an investment and those now around retirement age are still living in the family home. Now they will be taxed based upon the number of and relationship of the people living within the home. If a married couple have a four bedroom home and their children are gone, they will be taxed on the under-occupied three bedrooms. It also applies if the child is on military assignment, since they are not physically occupying their room. If they choose to rent the room they are then charged increased council taxes, since there are additional people living in the residence and using community services. They are also taxed on the additional income generated by the renting of the room. So it is a no win situation. Also if they run their business online from a spare room they would be hit by this tax. So, essentially no way out. More to come. A Friend from Across the Pond.
It came across Spanish news channel this week, Portugal is back in meetings with the EU. They have failed to reach the target cuts required for the EU Bailout program. It is rumoured the EU will design the cuts for them in order to approve the bailout money. Essentially this is what has happened in Greece.
Greece is now, for all intents and purposes bankrupt. There are documentaries on this that have been done for the BBC, showing how pharmacies are unable to provide prescribed medicines to their clients. It is not because the clients cannot pay for them, although in many cases that is true. It is not because their clients don't have valid prescriptions for the meds, although since a five euro fee to see the doctor has been instituted on the national health service and many retired cannot even afford to go to the Doctor any longer. It is because the national health service of Greece has not paid the bills for the meds in so long a time, the big pharmacies are no longer providing Greece with meds.
The UK has instituted a bedroom tax. No, it is not a tax on sex, yet. The tax is for under-use. This applies when a bedroom is not being used as a sleeping area. his applies to the elderly as well. For many older Brits, they have raised their families in one house for many years. Their children have graduated and married. The saw their home as an investment and those now around retirement age are still living in the family home. Now they will be taxed based upon the number of and relationship of the people living within the home. If a married couple have a four bedroom home and their children are gone, they will be taxed on the under-occupied three bedrooms. It also applies if the child is on military assignment, since they are not physically occupying their room. If they choose to rent the room they are then charged increased council taxes, since there are additional people living in the residence and using community services. They are also taxed on the additional income generated by the renting of the room. So it is a no win situation. Also if they run their business online from a spare room they would be hit by this tax. So, essentially no way out. More to come. A Friend from Across the Pond.
2 March 2013
Yesterday a march of over 1.3 million people converged on the finance ministry in Lisbon Portugal. Marches were held in 20 cities throughout Portugal, but none as large as the one in Lisbon. The marchers were protesting the latest round of cuts required by the so-called Troika, meaning the European Central Commission, International Monetary fund and the European Central Bank. The Portuguese Government is required to find another 5.2 Billion in cuts over the next 2 years. The hardest hit will be Healthcare, Education and Pensions. The group was swelled considerably by young people, since this group has an unemployment rate nearing 40% age 20 to 35. Portugal is entering it's fifth straight year of contraction with 2013 expected to see a contraction of 2.5% in the economy. Portugal as a country is one of the hardest hit by the financial crisis. They have received over 75 billion in bailouts, who will be there to bailout the USA as the once powerful country heads down the same path. Your Friend Gene Daily
Yesterday a march of over 1.3 million people converged on the finance ministry in Lisbon Portugal. Marches were held in 20 cities throughout Portugal, but none as large as the one in Lisbon. The marchers were protesting the latest round of cuts required by the so-called Troika, meaning the European Central Commission, International Monetary fund and the European Central Bank. The Portuguese Government is required to find another 5.2 Billion in cuts over the next 2 years. The hardest hit will be Healthcare, Education and Pensions. The group was swelled considerably by young people, since this group has an unemployment rate nearing 40% age 20 to 35. Portugal is entering it's fifth straight year of contraction with 2013 expected to see a contraction of 2.5% in the economy. Portugal as a country is one of the hardest hit by the financial crisis. They have received over 75 billion in bailouts, who will be there to bailout the USA as the once powerful country heads down the same path. Your Friend Gene Daily
I begin my reporting on the subject of Austerity Events.
March 1, 2013
Here are two examples. First; In Spain not only have there been huge protests over the austerity cuts in many cities across the country, but for the last several weeks the police have refused to help the bankers. To the people in the USA it may seem strange, but repossessions work differently in Spain. When a person falls so far behind in payments their home is repossessed, as in the USA the police provide assistance to the mortgage holder to take possession. However, it does not stop there. Once you are forced out, you are still obligated to pay the mortgage you could not pay. Yes that is correct, now you don't have a place to live, but you still must pay. If you fail to pay you may be taken to court. If you are unable to pay you may face jail for failure to meet your obligations under fraud statutes. In response to this several old people with no where else to go have committed suicide. At first after several of these incidents the government of Spain put a moratorium in place for a couple of weeks. Then they resumed as before. The last was an old couple in Marbella on the south coast, they chose to commit suicide together rather than see everything they had spent their lives achieving go to the bank and they would still have to pay.. The police have again refused to assist and the government is again in a no win situation.
Second. As I sit in Spain today, the economy of the social democracy created after WWII is collapsing in the EU. Spain of course, for many years after the war was ruled by the Dictator Franco. Following his death in 1975, Spain joined the remainder of Europe installing social programs which are now bankrupting the several countries. Unemployment in Spain is reaching 1 in every 3 people, with youth unemployment far higher. The powerful UK has had it's credit rating downgraded for the first time in decades. Youth unemployment in the UK is above 25%. Large factions of the UK are clamoring for a referendum to leave the EU. Scotland is having their own referendum on leaving the UK. Catalonia is still reaching for independence from the rest of Spain. Unrest and civil protests are rampant and growing each day. Police in some countries have thrown down their riot shields and joined the protesters. The Prime Minister of Bulgaria has resigned over just such action by the police there. The police in Spain are refraining from helping repossess houses due to the large number of suicides resulting from the banks actions But the people of the USA are still hoping and praying that "It can't happen here". Time to begin to be sure it doesn't time for action. Join Article V Project to Restore Liberty and their partners. Do something but don't wait.
Your Friend Gene Daily
March 1, 2013
Here are two examples. First; In Spain not only have there been huge protests over the austerity cuts in many cities across the country, but for the last several weeks the police have refused to help the bankers. To the people in the USA it may seem strange, but repossessions work differently in Spain. When a person falls so far behind in payments their home is repossessed, as in the USA the police provide assistance to the mortgage holder to take possession. However, it does not stop there. Once you are forced out, you are still obligated to pay the mortgage you could not pay. Yes that is correct, now you don't have a place to live, but you still must pay. If you fail to pay you may be taken to court. If you are unable to pay you may face jail for failure to meet your obligations under fraud statutes. In response to this several old people with no where else to go have committed suicide. At first after several of these incidents the government of Spain put a moratorium in place for a couple of weeks. Then they resumed as before. The last was an old couple in Marbella on the south coast, they chose to commit suicide together rather than see everything they had spent their lives achieving go to the bank and they would still have to pay.. The police have again refused to assist and the government is again in a no win situation.
Second. As I sit in Spain today, the economy of the social democracy created after WWII is collapsing in the EU. Spain of course, for many years after the war was ruled by the Dictator Franco. Following his death in 1975, Spain joined the remainder of Europe installing social programs which are now bankrupting the several countries. Unemployment in Spain is reaching 1 in every 3 people, with youth unemployment far higher. The powerful UK has had it's credit rating downgraded for the first time in decades. Youth unemployment in the UK is above 25%. Large factions of the UK are clamoring for a referendum to leave the EU. Scotland is having their own referendum on leaving the UK. Catalonia is still reaching for independence from the rest of Spain. Unrest and civil protests are rampant and growing each day. Police in some countries have thrown down their riot shields and joined the protesters. The Prime Minister of Bulgaria has resigned over just such action by the police there. The police in Spain are refraining from helping repossess houses due to the large number of suicides resulting from the banks actions But the people of the USA are still hoping and praying that "It can't happen here". Time to begin to be sure it doesn't time for action. Join Article V Project to Restore Liberty and their partners. Do something but don't wait.
Your Friend Gene Daily
