Warning: mysql_num_fields() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home4/terryf/public_html/deceptionbyomission.com/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 3096

The Brits Rejected Military Action Against Syria Because of Public Resistance – What About America?

David Cameron was forced to withdraw their support from a Syrian military strike because of public pressure. You know they wanted to but the public outcry was too strong and quite frankly the evidence is not yet clear. France backed out as well.

So what about America?

Obama, Biden, Kerry and the mainstream media just plow ahead disregarding any evidence to the contrary. Fact is, they want war for a variety of reasons and will manipulate the situation in any way they can to make it happen.

Meanwhile, American warships and military stand at the ready as Chuck Hagel (CFR of course) confirmed.

Obama’s source BTW, the Israeli Defense Forces which is the electronic equivalent of our NSA. It intercepted and collected a supposed recording of 2 Syrian officials talking about the use of poisonous gas. However, there appears to be no actual physical evidence that the gas exists.

Reminds me of the slam dunk claims of the Bush regime. The incessant media drumbeat about weapons of mass destruction and Bush’s mushroom cloud reference. The only one’s who acted with complete confidence in the information were Bush, Cheney (CFR), Rice (CFR) and the neo-con experts like CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) members Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Scooter Libby and Douglas Feith.

And the Result of Their “Slam Dunk”?

So what was the result of their slam dunk? A pack of proven lies as it turned out. After 2 years of searching no WMD’s were ever found. The search was quietly abandoned with little mention by the media. What happened to the hype in that case now that our military was firmly entrenched in Iraq for what turned out to be nearly a decade costing our nation over a Trillion $ in debt thanks to our wonderful Federal Reserve set up that can produce money from nothing.

So now, history repeats itself. The Peace President and his sycophants promote military action against a distant foreign nation while neglecting the very real needs that need addressed here such a massive, unprecedented level of debt in the face of unfunded liabilities like Medicare and Social Security that are growing larger every day as the aging baby boomer population reaches retirement age.

Can the War Drums Be Stopped?

Will anything be done to stop this push towards yet another mid-east conflict by our Peace Prize (Kinda tells you how meaningful Nobel Peace Prizes are these days doesn’t it?) winning Secretary General? One can only hope so but the louder the media and our so-called “leaders” beat the war drum, and the less the American public says or does to stop them, the less hope I have. After all, we are the policeman of the world aren’t we?  (At great cost to our nation I may add. Or should I make that police state? Well……not just yet but stay tuned that one is in the works.)

The White House Response to Syria Chemical Event- Predictable. Now, the Media Drumbeat Begins in Earnest. Iraq, Libya Deja vu

Do we have a moment to step back and take a breath from all of this? Or are we (and I use that term very euphemistically since “We, the people” seem to have absolutely no control or input into what our government does with our military, at all!) going to get propagandized into yet another Middle Eastern conflict?

First of all, did our Nobel Peace Prize winning President and every member of his cabinet not take an oath to uphold, protect and defend our Constitution? If so (and you know it is), where is the Constitutional authority to conduct acts of war without the approval of Congress, traditionally a 2/3ds majority?

Anyone who has read even a little bit of our Constitutional intent knows there is none! Anyone who tells you different is well……simply lying, to be blunt.

Washington and others warned against involvement in foreign affairs and a standing army knowing full well that a standing army was not going to be standing around twiddling their thumbs. You have a standing army and guess what? It gets put to use. Foreign problems are a good way to keep them busy.

Why Are We Policing the Entire World?

Why is it necessary for us to use our military to solve the problems of other nations? Don’t we have enough issues of our own to address without having to meddle in the affairs of other nations? Who made us the policeman of the world despite the Constitutional limitations on foreign entanglements and requirement for a formal Congressional declaration of war? Seems to me that a nearly $17 Trillion debt, which is unprecedented in the history of the world, should be a large enough problem to keep our politicians busy without adding significantly to it through involvement in foreign conflicts. But hey, that’s just me.

MidEastMapOf course, there are gross violations of citizen rights in Africa in areas like Darfur, but no media outcry to invade Sudan. Might have something to do with the fact that Syria is right smack dab in the middle of the oil region of the Middle Eastern nations perhaps. Kind of a more key location than Sudan one would think.

 

 

 

Evidence Chemical Event Was Staged- Totally Ignored!

There is evidence that what is happening in Syria has been staged as false flag operation funded by Washington. You won’t see any of that highlighted in the mainstream media. Nada, zippo. Instead we’ll hear the opinions of new world order pushers from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) like John Kerry or the former Obama Administration Ambassador and special assistant on Syria Frederic Hof (also CFR) under the banner of the White House.

Kerry_w_Flag

Long Term CFR Globalist

They did it in Libya, Egypt and just about every successful deposition of a national leader in the so-called Arab spring “revolutions”. Think all the way back to Iraq. All of the drumbeat in the media about WMD’s and mushroom clouds and Saddam and Al Quaeda. All of which turned out to be false. Did that stop our military despite popular opposition to invasion? Not! It won’t in Syria either.

The So-Called Servants Have Become Our Masters

We have lost control of our government- flat out. They control us. We are not free despite all of the hype and smoke and mirrors. We are subjects of the State forced to work to support their construction of a one world government, new world order reign of tyranny.

That is what this is really about. Topple another singular head of state, like Kaddafi was, and replace him with a so-called “democracy” of Muslim terror, abuse and chaos. (See Egypt for details.)

You can pretend it isn’t happening. You can call people who watch all of the pieces being dropped into place fools or tin foil hat paranoics. Doesn’t change the facts of our reality though. This isn’t about protecting the people of Syria or us. This is about a gang of minority elites who think they should rule the world under their New World Order and One World Government.

They are constructing it in front of our very eyes if one simply casts aside the mainstream, endorsed media hype and the CFR cheerleaders who represent the international financiers of the global banking cartel called “central banks” and takes the time to conduct some objective research. None of this is accidental. It is a carefully constructed pattern. All of the so-called Arab spring uprisings, all at the same time and all deposing a singular head of state. Iraq, same deal. Now, Syria.

If they can’t get it done by legitimately funding Al Quaeda based rebel groups (Who hate Christians and the West in the same breath BTW and just want freedom- sharia style of course.), why then they’ll just create a precipitating event. Kinda like a 911 deja vu on a smaller scale but portrayed as morally offensive enough to justify an UnConstitutional launching of our military into the middle of yet another “rebel” uprising brought to you once again by our fearless leader- the Peace President!

Fact is they are becoming our masters. We watch the tube and pacify ourselves with meaningless entertainment like fantasy football while in a daze we are becoming their willing or in the case of some of us unwilling slaves.

Syria? Why just the next step in their formation of the NWO, that’s all. Crack open another beer and return to the tube. After all football, hockey and basketball season all start soon don’t they? Can life just get any better?

The Growing Welfare State- Make More for Not Working

If you earned more for not working than for working, would you work? Many years ago the author of what has been called the most purchased book on Economics, Progress and Poverty, Henry George made the following point: Man wants to gain the greatest benefit for the least amount of effort.

Whether you agree with that statement or not, this basic tendency of human beings is what has driven progress towards the reduction of labor through the use of tools, machinery and innovation. Let’s be honest, most of us would rather spend our time as we choose, doing what we want while still living a comfortable existence. Not everyone of course, but most of us.

Food_Stamps_2010

Not Surprisingly, Food Stamps
Have Gone Through the Roof

So it should not be any surprise when the Cato Institute came out with its conclusions in its latest report, Work Versus Welfare Trade-Off: 2013. Cato has been doing these reports since 1995 so it has had some time to refine its findings.

Here are some of the startling findings:

Some welfare recipients have higher incomes than those in the private sector working for a living. For example, a mother with 2 children in New York is able to collect $38,004 per year in welfare handouts. This exceeds the starting salary of a teacher in the state.

However, the problem is not isolated to New York. In Hawaii, the most generous with benefits, a mother of 2 is eligible to earn $60,590 a year! Over $60,000 a year! That is astounding. Heck, both my son and I work our butts off in demanding skilled positions as does my daughter and none of us earn that much.

In fact, the study showed that in 33 states, welfare recipients earn more than they would than if they worked at a job that paid $8 an hour. In 12 of those states, recipients make more than they would than if they worked at a $12 an hour job.

Now based on the law that Henry George stated above that people want to gain the greatest benefit for the least amount of effort, where is the incentive to work?

The fact is people aren’t lazy so much as they are not stupid. Heck if you can earn as much or even more for not working, quite a few of us would simply choose not to work.

The Downside for Society

There is a problem for society however. According to the Congressional Research Service report to the Senate Budget Committee in the most recent year for which data is available (2011), 83 overlapping federal welfare programs represented the single largest Federal budget item. The total amount spent on these items was roughly $1.03 Trillion. Yes, that is Trillion with a T.

Since 2008, the total federal share of spending on these programs is up 32%. It now makes up 21% of federal outlays which is more than Social Security, Medicare or even defense.

The 10 largest of the 83 programs (which account for the bulk of federal welfare spending) has doubled as a share of the federal budget in the last 30 years. In inflation adjusted dollars, the amount expended on these programs has increased by 378% over that same time period.

Like the often paraphrased statement of Margaret Thatcher, the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money. With a nearly $17 Trillion national debt which is already astronomical, this does not point to a rosy future for this nation.

The government is using that growing debt produced largely out of thin air by the Federal Reserve cartel to turn this nation into a nation of takers rather than producers.

Don’t Buy the Government Recovery Hype

Things are getting scary folks. Think of what could happen when all these bird feeders get suddenly taken away after the dollar collapses. As in Greece, we’re going to have some pretty angry birds flying around. I for one amUncleSam-Handouts2 not looking forward to that day. Perhaps that is why if you pay attention as I have, you will notice an increased police presence without a subsequent rise in active criminal behavior.

Think the puppet masters pulling the strings may know something is afoot? I think the reports above would confirm that conclusion especially if you understand how all unbacked currencies have always ended. Things could get very ugly, very quickly methinks. Stay alert and prepare please. Thank you.

Globablist CFR Larry Summers is on the Fed Short List – It Obviously Ain’t Cause He Needs the Job or Money

While most Americans struggle to make ends meet, some are doing just fine. Of course, having the Larry_Summers_2012right connections to the money powers that be doesn’t hurt either.

Larry Summers is on the short list for the position expected to open up in January for the Federal Reserve. He’s already had some help from his financial cronies that appears to have made him a wealthy man.

According to an article which appeared on Bloomberg.com, when Summers was nominated to be Treasury Secretary in Bill Clinton’s administration, “he listed assets of about $900,000 and debts, including a mortgage, of $500,000.” That would put him in a comfortable position, but probably not among the top 1% these days.

Not to worry however. By the time he returned to serve in the Obama administration, Bloomberg notes, “he reported a net worth between $17million and $39 million.” Not bad huh? Guess his Wall Street ties have been helpful to his economic development.

As Dean Baker, an economist with the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, a politically progressive nonpartisan organization indicates:

“Summers is going to have a very sympathetic approach to Wall Street. These are people he has a background with. I think it’s certainly a negative.”

Some pundits say that a background working in financial institutions is exactly the type of training a Fed Chairman should have. However, what goes unmentioned is that the Fed is a privately held international financier cartel that serves its own interests rather than those of the people it is reported to serve.

Even some of the Democrat Senators criticized Summers role for supporting deregulation during his time in Clinton’s cabinet. According to Bloomberg Obama “defended Summers in response to a question from a lawmaker during a closed meeting, saying the criticism has been unfair. “ Typical of the Change We Need President it seems. The man who promise to attack Washington corruption once in office.

Summers Obviously Ain’t Doing It for the Money

Whether Summers gets the nomination or not he should be just fine. He can always just give public talks. After all, he collected more than $2.7 million in speaking fees from financial firms like CFR Corporate member Citigroup and Goldman Sachs. Of course, both of these firms received significant sums from the taxpayers in the economic bailout. Guess it was only fair that Larry derived some benefits from that as well. Summers is a long term member of the CFR as well. That may have helped him get the gigs as well. Birds of a feather and all.

Meanwhile, Summers cited Citigroup in a 2011 speech as an “example of the U.S. making a profit on the bailout, in footnotes to a speech titled “Prophecies of American decline will prove to be self-denying once again.”

Richard W. Painter, served as an ethics counsel in the White House during the George W. Bush presidency. He also vetted Bernanke when he was first up for the job in 2006. Painter said in a telephone interview with Bloomberg that Summers would, if confirmed, have to cut corporate ties, divest any stock in financial firms, and recuse himself for a period of time from making decisions on the firms that paid him.

 “I don’t see any serious problem here,” Painter said. “We’ve considered people for that job and quite a few governors of the Fed who’ve come directly out of financial institutions.”

Again as is always the case, the fact that Summers, like almost all of the Chairman before him is a well established member of the Rockefeller as Honorary Chairman, new world order pushing Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). All of the too big to fail banks are members too. Tends to maintain status quo you know.

In light of the profits Summers has reaped from his financial cronies, statements like those made by Summers and Painter seem, shall we say, a bit disingenuous.

Like Yellen, if Summers is appointed our march towards the New World Order as envisioned and stated by many other members of the CFR and Trilateral Commision will continue along its merry path leaving our nations freedoms and economic well being in its wake.

NSA Surveillance Turn About – Camera’s on Police Drop Abuse Complaints by 88% in 12 month Study

By now, most of us are aware that the NSA is watching us. This gives, those who claim Federal authority over us high access access to our private lives irregardless of our 4th amendment right of privacy.

Police Camera

Sunglass camera on left.
Photo by Joshua Lott
for The New York Times

However, it also begs another question, just who is watching them?

Well, now that appears like it might be a good idea as demonstrated by a study of camera’s placed on police in Rialto, California.

The result over 12 months of the study which was placed randomly on half of the police in Rialto are a bit of a stunner:

 

 

 

THE Rialto study began in February 2012 and will run until this July. The results from the first 12 months are striking. Even with only half of the 54 uniformed patrol officers wearing cameras at any given time, the department over all had an 88 percent decline in the number of complaints filed against officers, compared with the 12 months before the study, to 3 from 24.

Rialto’s police officers also used force nearly 60 percent less often — in 25 instances, compared with 61. When force was used, it was twice as likely to have been applied by the officers who weren’t wearing cameras during that shift, the study found. And, lest skeptics think that the officers with cameras are selective about which encounters they record, Mr. Farrar noted that those officers who apply force while wearing a camera have always captured the incident on video.

What is one to conclude with results like that? Perhaps that turn about is not only fair play but it works in favor of the preservation of civil liberties and citizen safety.

Sounds like this is one study that should be expanded on a nation wide basis.

Can We Expand This to Politicians?

I wouldn’t even ask for camera’s (which may just produce some X-rated film clips after all is said and done). After all, they can listen in on our phone calls why can’t we listen in on theirs. I mean, they are after all supposed to be public servants aren’t they? Can’t we see if we are getting our money’s worth for their time as our representatives?

Just think of the implications. Our federal spending would probably drop by more than half since those back room vote grabbing and funding deals would be a little harder to pull off.

We might even see the return of some of the liberties in our Bill of Rights that they take an oath of office to uphold, protect and defend as they would be forced to demonstrate their loyalty to their constituents more openly on a daily basis.

I sure would like to get the franchise on the radio channel that would broadcast the calls. I’d probably become a multi-millionaire nearly overnight because my guess is that a station like this would vault to the top of the ratings in each area pretty quickly.

Naaaah…instead for our protection the NSA can listen in to any of our phone calls and street camera’s record our daily movements and we too often get this kind of abuse from police:

For more on the issue:

 

 

 

Alexei Navalny Sentencing Shows the True Face of Putin’s Communist Regime

Alexei Navalny is a lawyer and anti-corruption blogger who used social media to organize large demonstrations against Putin’s government in 2011. The Russian government brought embezzlement charges against Navalny earlier this year. Navalny’s supporters say the charges against him were created in an effort to derail his political career. Until his conviction, on July 18, 2013 Navalny was campaigning to become Mayor of Moscow.Navalny_Alexey

The Russian Judge, Bregai Blinoff, spent nearly 3 hours reading a statement yesterday which summarized aspects of the trial. He pronounced the verdict guilty in the beginning of the statement. He saved the sentence until near the end which was 5 years in a minimum security penal colony and a fine of $15,000. The other accused in the case got 4 years and a fine as well. Methinks the judge doth protest too much.

[kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11 size=”25″ color=”#373737″ ]The Fair Trial?[/kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11]

During the trial Judge Blinoff did not allow the defense to cross examine the one prosecution witness which turned out to be someone who Navalny had previously brought corruption charges against. Additionally, he  denied requests to call 13 witnesses in Navalny’s defense who worked at the company at which Navalny was accused of embezzlement

“I think there is very little doubt, the charges are fabricated and the case is flimsy to say the least.” stated Maria Littman, a political analyst at the Carnegie Moscow Center who says Navalny became a Kremlin target because he was the strongest political challenge to President Putin’s power structure.

The judge found Navalny and his associate guilty of embezzling over a half million dollars from a State owned timber company in 2009. A previous version of the same case was dismissed last year by prosecutors who said they found no evidence of wrong doing.

The investigation was reopened when Navalny published embarrassing revelations about the foreign assets of the head of the state investigation committee.

Navalny, a popular blogger, lawyer and officially registered opposition candidate in the Moscow mayoral election set for Sept. 8, never pleaded guilty in the case. He declared the charges bogus and the trial politically motivated. It certainly seems as though he may have had a point based on the way the trial was conducted if you can call something that resembles the Nazi trials under Hitler a real trial that is.

[kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11 size=”25″ color=”#373737″ ]A Putin Critic[/kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11]

Not surprisingly, in the last few years, Navalny has been one of the most outspoken critics of Vladimir Putin. He publicly called the Russian leader a thief, and labeled his party, United Russia, a group of swindlers and thieves. The criticism contributed to the ruling party’s humiliating 50% showing in parliamentary elections in December. Many experts considered Navalny’s conviction a result of Putin’s vengeance.

There have been other incidents that point to former KGB/FSB higher up Putin using Stalin-like techniques to silence his opposition such as the case of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the multi-billionaire who opposed Putin and was jailed in 2003 under specious charges conducted by another kangeroo court.

[title color=”color-default” align=”scmgccenter” font=”arial” style=”normal” size=”scmgc-1em”]Nice Capsule Summary of Nearly 100 Years of Communist Government[/title]

I think Navalny provided a nice encapsulation of what rule under Communism actually produces. In an impassioned closing argument at his trial, he stated:

and my colleagues will do everything possible to destroy this feudal regime being established in Russia to destroy the system of power under which 83% of national wealth belongs to a half percent of the population.” Corey Flintoff – NPR News –Moscow

In the wake of the verdict and sentencing, massive protests shook a number of major cities in Russia on the day after the trial. In Moscow and St. Petersburg, thousands of people demanding Navalny’s release took to the streets and tried to block traffic. Police intervened and arrested dozens. Navalny was released 24 hours after the sentencing apparently to appease the protestors.

For more on the deception that Russia has transformed see the following books by former KGB higher up Anatoliy Golitsyn:

and also this absurdly priced version:

I think I paid about $10 for my copy of The Perestroika Deception. The fact that it is priced this high tells me that there could very well be people who do not want this information to surface. It is detailed and reveals strategies that you will never get from the mainstream media. It is not even written that well to be honest but the information contained therein is what counts as you would see upon reading it. A valuable source if one is willing to pay the price nevertheless.

New Rice or Old Rice- The Recipe for a Globalist as a Security Advisor Remains the Same

Obama couldn’t get Susan E. Rice in as Secretary of State. She shot herself in the proverbial foot with her inaccurate and misleading statements about the Benghazi scandal which predictably seems to have been taken out of the public eye by the controlled media.

Rice_Susan_E.Rice in the new world order cuisine of globalism seems to a popular ingredient for our past few Presidents.

First we had Condaleeza, who as our National Security Advisor and member of the globalist New World Order pushing Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), failed miserably in the public’s eye during the 911 events. Not to worry for Condy however. Her failure as Security Advisor was apparently success enough to get her promoted to Secretary of State in the eyes of Congress. (Which should tell you something about their real allegiances BTW. It obviously isn’t to the electorate.)

Maybe it was her membership in the CFR and her position on the Board of Chevron that was qualification enough rather than her actual performance in office during a time of attack on her national security? But hey, she did a good job according to President Bush and his sycophants in the Senate. So Condy got promoted. (Normally, that happens when you do a good job. Abnormally, it happens when you have connections. I lean towards the latter explanation myself.)

So it follows that since Susan E. Rice, failed to stay in the race for Secretary of State because of her Benghazi actions, she was given an opportunity of become the next Rice as a National Security Advisor. Guess her qualifications are that she is an African American, female and failed to make the grade for another position. Not to worry Susan, it helped to get the last Rice promoted didn’t it?

[kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11 size=”25″ color=”#373737″ ]The Trilateral Commission Bonus[/kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11]

Like her predecessor, Condaleeza, this Rice is also a member of the CFR. However, the public gets the added bonus of her membership in the Trilateral Commission (TLC) which has been pushing the New World Order since its inception in 1973.

The Trilateral Commission was founded by CFR Honorary Chairman, David C. Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski, also CFR. Rockefeller was chairman of the ultra-powerful Chase Manhattan Bank and a director of the CFR at the time of the inception of the TLC. You can read more about it’s inauspicious history at the August Review. There is also a story there about how the TLC is dominating Obama’s cabinet. (Along with a strong dose of CFR members as well something Patrick Wood of the August Review seems to have a blind spot about. Nevertheless, his information on the Trilateral Commission is some of the best available.)

As a quick background on the TLC let me mention that its first Executive Director Zbigniew Brzezinski, a very strong advocate of one-world idealism, was the author of several books that have served as “policy guidelines” for the TLC. His book “Between Two Worlds” prompted David C. Rockefeller’s interest in creating the Trilateral Commission. For more on the Trilateral Commission you can view the following YouTube video:

Brzezinski served as the Commission’s first executive director from its inception in 1973 until late 1976. He left after our CFR and TLC member President Jimmy Carter appointed him as Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, the position with a new title to which Rice is now being appointed. Coincidental I suppose, if you are willing to accept the premise that these sorts of things happen by accident and are not planned. (As an aside, anyone willing to accept the accidental version of this history can contact me for a cheap price on the Brooklyn Bridge which I coincidentally have on sale- cheap too!)

[kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11 size=”25″ color=”#373737″ ]Former CFR National Security Advisors[/kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11]

After all, if this is coincidental , we have a pretty long list of other coincidences to account for. For example, a look at previous National Security Advisors appears to turn up a pretty heavy dose of CFR members which have included (from newest to oldest):

  • Stephen Hadley (2005-2009)
  • Condoleezza Rice (2001-2005)
  • Samuel R. Berger (1997-2001)
  • Brent Scowcroft (1989-1993)
  • Colin Powell (1987-1989)
  • Frank Carlucci (1986-1987)
  • Robert C. McFarlane (1983-1985)
  • Richard V. Allen (1981-1982)
  • Zbigniew Brzezinski (1977-1981)
  • Henry Kissinger (1969-1975)
  • Walt Rostow (1966-1969)
  • McGeorge Bundy (1961-1966)
  • Gordon Gray (1958-1961)
  • Dillon Anderson (1955-1966)

Whew! Long list of coincidences there huh? Coincidentally, of course, the very first National Security Director, Robert Cutler (1953-1955 and 1957-1958) wrote an article for the April 1956 issue of Foreign Affairs (the CFR’s official publication) entitled “The Development of the National Security Council. Serves as a template perhaps?

Thus, it would appear that Obama’s decision to replace the current resigning CFR Donilon with yet another CFR Rice as a continuation of a long-standing practice among presidents of both parties to move members of the internationalist CFR into this and other cabinet level positions.

However, the added bonus in the Obama cabinet is Rice’s dual globalist mantle of both TLC and CFR memberships. I suppose that makes her a more highly qualified one world government advocates. Something of value to their team but alas it is unfortunately not much help to our Constitutional liberties.

But hey, why take a downgrade from a TLC/CFR former National Security Advisor like Deputy Director Thomas Donilon? You can replace this CFR member with the dual globalist qualifications of a TLC/CFR member  like Susan E. Rice.

Of course, nary a word is spoken or written about any of these affiliations by the mainstream media or any member of Congress. Discussion of these organizations is an unspoken taboo which could land them in the unemployment line.

For more on the Trilateral Commission see:

For more on the Council on Foreign Relations see:

Obama Gets Schooled by African Leaders on Homosexuality

During his recent trip to Africa, President Obama received some no-nonsense responses about the gay marriage issue from top African government and religious leaders as well as citizens.

(President Obama’s response to the questioner begins at 16:54. Senegal President’s Mackey Sall response to the questioner begins at 28:36)

At the joint press conference posted above on 6/27/13 with Senegal’s president, Mackey Sall, Obama declared in response to a question about his calling the DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) ruling a victory for couples seeking equal treatment under the law, the following:

“Well first all, I think the Supreme Court ruling yesterday was not simply a victory for the LGBT community, I think it was a victory for American Democracy. I believe at the root of who we are as people, as Americans is the basic precept that we are all equal under the law. We believe in basic fairness……So, my basic view is that regardless of race, regardless of religion, regardless of gender, regardless of sexual orientation, when it comes to how the law treats you, how the state treats you, the benefits, the rights and the responsibilities under the law, people should be treated equally. And that’s a principle that I think applies universally. And the good news is that it is an easy principle to remember.”

Responding to Obama’s comments and a question directed to him about working to decriminalize homosexuality in Senegal, President Sall quickly made it clear that he and his nation do not see eye-to-eye with America’s chief executive.

“Senegal, as far as it is concerned is a very tolerant country which does not discriminate in terms of inalienable rights of the human being. We don’t tell anybody that he will not recruited because he is gay or he will not access a job because his sexual orientation is different, but we are still not ready to decriminalize homosexuality…It is Senegal’s option, at least for the time being, while we have respect for the rights of homosexuals but for the time being we are still not ready to change the law. Of course this does not mean that we are all homophobic but society has to absolve these issues. It has to have time to digest them without bringing pressure to bear upon these issues.….Please be assured that Senegal is a country of freedom and homosexuals are not being prosecuted, persecuted but we must also show respect for the values of the other Senegalese people.” 

Apparently, many of Senegal’s citizens thought their president should have been more emphatic. “He should have said, ‘This can never exist in Senegal; this can never happen here,’” Tidiane Gueye, a resident of Senegal’s capital city of Dakar, told the New York Times. “Senegal is 95 percent Muslim,” Gueye added. “As a Muslim country, we will not permit laws that allow gays to marry.”

Kenya’s leaders were just as adamant, with Deputy President William Ruto, speaking at a Catholic church on June 30, saying that for those, such as Obama, who embrace homosexuality, “that is their business. We believe in God.” He added that “the nation of Kenya is a God-fearing nation.”

Similarly, Nairobi’s archbishop, Cardinal John Njue, said that Obama might as well “forget and forget and forget” about the legalization of homosexuality in Africa. Speaking of America, Njue said that “those people who have already ruined their society … let them not become our teachers to tell us where to go.” In Tanzania, Anglican Bishop Michael Hafidh said most African leaders would have preferred that Obama keep his opinions on homosexuality to himself and focus on economic issues facing the continent.

A total of 38 countries throughout Africa, where the majority religious faiths are Islam and Christianity, have laws against homosexual conduct.  Of course the bible is pretty clear on the issue as well for those of us that still recognize that document as having some value.

Personally, I think the government doesn’t belong in the issue of marriage at all. And may I also mention that this is nothing more than cultural Marxism which is designed to dismantle the traditional family and the authority of parents along with it, to be replaced by the State of course.

This is What Happens When We Let Obama Get Away with Creating Laws at the Stroke of a Pen

As I noted in my last post, Obama has no Constitutional authority to create laws at the stroke of a pen with his so-called “executive” orders. He has NO such authority granted to him under our rule of law, the document he took an oath to uphold and defend.

If we let the executive undermine our laws it sets a very dangerous precedent. A precedent that is followed by others in positions of influence that undermines our freedoms further.

Case in point: Attorney General of Pennsylvania Kathleen G. Kane who announced on July 11, 2013 that she will not defend Pa’s Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) based on the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the United States Constitution.

Pa_Attorney_General_picture

Now I know some people who believe in gay marriage will applaud her move. However, this is a short sighted point of view. You see, whether or not you defend gay marriage is NOT the point. This declaration on Kane’s part really has little to do with gay marriage if it is allowed to stand. What it really has to do with is the right of the people to govern themselves.

DOMA is a law of the Commonwealth of Pa. Kathleen Kane was elected by the citizens of the Commonwealth State of Pa. to uphold its laws and represent it in court, if necessary. She does NOT have the right to pick and choose the laws the State creates. Her job is to act as a defendant of them. That is what she collects public money to do. She is NOT a judge. She is NOT a jury. She is NOT even a legislator. She is lawyer paid by the people to represent the laws that they must also adhere to.

[kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11 size=”25″ color=”#373737″ ]Inherent Dangers of Kane’s Announcement[/kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11]

She invites lawlessness. If an Attorney General (AG) can ignore whatever laws they choose to ignore or not enforce then what good is the system of law? It can disappear on the whims of the next AG.

For example, suppose you support Pro Death (AKA Pro Choice). However, an AG gets elected in your state and decides that he will not support Pro Death but instead will support Pro Life. Therefore, all agencies that are receiving funding under State law are now to be defunded.

Would that be acceptable to you? Would you simply ignore laws that have been previously constructed and passed in your state now because the AG decided it did not fit his personal agenda and belief system?

This is the kind of lawlessness that Kathleen Kane’s decree invites. Is this lawful or lawless?

[kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11 size=”25″ color=”#373737″ ]Dictatorship of the Elite?[/kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11]

To me it is the rule of the elite deciding for their subjects what is good and right for them, not the rule by law and representation. Are we becoming serfs and servants or do we still have Constitutionally affirmed liberties and rights?

Kathleen Kane, like Obama, invites a dictatorship of the elite. Is that what you want? Them to make decisions for you at their behest? That, you call freedom? Methinks not!

By the People. For the People?

By the People. For the People?

She is not doing her job. Is this what taxpayer money should support? She is paid by the state to work for them. This would be tantamount to a fireman whose job it is to put out fires arriving on the scene to find that the building on fire was a KKK meeting place.

The fireman and the crew decide that since they do not support the KKK, they will simply let it burn down. Fair? Is this what the public is paying the fireman for?

Suppose it were your house and you were a supporter of Ron Paul with a Ron Paul sign in your yard. However, they were supporters of Barack Obama. They decided that they could not in good conscience help a Ron Paul supporter and let your house burn down. Fair?

Well, why not, if we let the Kathleen Kane’s and Barack Obama’s of our nation get away with creating their own versions of the law as they decide?

If we allow these kinds of actions to prevail, this is what we have to look forward to, a dictatorship of the elite with us as their subjects.

Don’t know about you, but as a freedom seeking Constitutionalist, it sticks in my craw!

[kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11 size=”25″ color=”#373737″ ]What is to Be Done?[/kc_heading_pac_16_headline_11]

There is really only one solution. The people of Pa., if they value their freedom to rule themselves as sovereign free people on the land, should rise up and cast out Kathleen on her ear asap! Do your job or get fired is the message that needs to be sent here at both the state and federal levels!

Any other solution than to have her cast our or voluntarily resign is yet another intrusion on the people’s sovereign rights.

P.S.- I didn’t even mention my position on marriage which is that I believe government doesn’t even belong in the issue! Period! It is a personal community level issue, not one of the government. But hey, that is a whole other can of worms as they say. As it stands, Kathleen should be gone asap. After all, if someone chooses to do it their way and not follow the rules of the entity that hires them what usually happens?

And do you really want someone with a wishy washy commitment as your defender? See ya and don’t let the door hit ya in the……is the way I see it.

Obama Signs Executive Order Creating “Kill Switch” for Government Over the Internet. Does He Have the Authority?

The headline on C/Net reads: Obama Signs Order Outline Emergency Internet Control [ on July 6th ] with the subheading: A new executive order addresses how the country deals with the Internet during natural disasters and security emergencies, but it also puts a lot of power in the government’s hands.

The article is concerned that Obama’s executive order could give the U.S. government control over the internet. It is designed to empower an agency like The Department of Homeland Security control over telecommunications and the web during natural disasters and security emergencies.

The communications control referred to above  is sweeping. It covers everything from the  national and international levels to the local level as the following excerpt outlines:

“The Federal Government must have the ability to communicate at all times and under all circumstances to carry out its most critical and time sensitive missions. Survivable, resilient, enduring, and effective communications, both domestic and international, are essential to enable the executive branch to communicate within itself and with: the legislative and judicial branches; State, local, territorial, and tribal governments; private sector entities; and the public, allies, and other nations. Such communications must be possible under all circumstances to ensure national security, effectively manage emergencies, and improve national resilience.”

As noted in the C/Net article critics are concerned about Section 5.2 which essentially gives the Secretary of the Dept. of Homeland Security the power to “oversee the development, testing, implementation, and sustainment” of national security and emergency preparedness measures on all systems, including private “non-military communications networks”

Now’s here is the most disturbing part of the C/Net article to me:

“After being published by the Federal Register, executive orders take 30 days to become law. However, the president can amend, withdraw, or issue an overriding order at any time.”

Constitution? Oath of Office? Remember those Thingys?

Excuse me, but where in the Constitution of the United States of America does it give the executive branch the capacity to create new laws at the stroke of a pen?

Article I, Section 1 clearly reads:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

Article II, Sections 2 and 3 of the Constitution outlines the powers of the executive (The President) and notes that he shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy and Militia “when called into the actual service of the United States”. (That would be a formal Declaration of War approved by Congress BTW not based on UN resolution violations as every conflict we have been involved in since WWII has been justified which is a clear violation of the Constitutional oath of every elected or appointed representative.)

He may grant reprieves and pardons for “offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.” He has the power to make treaties, with the consent of the Senate (2/3ds majority vote). He may appoint Ambassadors and other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court “and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law. All with the consent of the Senate.

Finally, he call fill up vacancies that happen during the recess of the Senate which will expire at the end of the next session.

Now, note- There is nothing in there about creating laws at the stroke of a pen. PERIOD!

What is an Executive Order Really?

An Executive Order is a policy or procedure issued by the President that is a regulation that applies only to employees of the Executive Branch of government. ANY Executive Order that has any effect on individuals that are NOT government employees is a violation of Article I Section I.

Where is the Congress? Do They Have Any Backbones? Do They Actually Care?

Whenever the President issues an Executive Order that extends to all of the people, Congress has a responsibility to the people who placed them in office as their representatives to veto any Executive Order that has any effect on non governmental employees.

When a President issues an unconstitutional Executive Order and Congress allows the order to stand, they are violating their oath of office which pledges them to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Where are they? Why do they not stand up for the people’s rights? The Federal government has no right to intrude into our personal lives according to the 4th amendment right of privacy. Now, Obama writes an executive order which is supposed to apply ONLY to the people in the executive branch that impacts each and every one of us and none of them say anything!

I don’t know about you, but it truly angers and disgusts me.

President or King!

I think that Obama read the wrong job description. He apparently fancies himself as the King! Perhaps that is why the term natural birth no longer applies to the Presidency? It seems that KingBarakCongress has granted him new powers that allow him to create laws at the stroke of a pen without opposition.  The media, compliant because they are controlled, obediently responds as though we now have a new law!

It is not and cannot be so under what should be our rule of law- the Constitution! It is, in fact, a violation of our rights and Obama’s oath of office.

What is more, it is a violation of the oaths of office of each of our spineless and/or traitorous members of Congress.

Our Rights or the Governments?

If “We, the People” value our rights as private sovereign citizens, we should join forces and pretty much sweep the House and the third of the Senate up for re-election clean at the next opportunity (November 2014).

No more Pelosi. No more Boehner. We should pretty much get rid of them all.

Perhaps a few are salvageable but on the whole, we have NO real representatives in Congress.

They represent the vested interests that funded them into office. Not the people. And certainly not our Constitutionally affirmed natural rights which includes the Bill of Rights as it was intended, not the politician/lawyer driven interpretive mess we have today.

With this kind of assumed law-making power taking place, July 4th pretty much becomes a hollow and meaningless holiday. Instead of affirming our independence as a nation of sovereign citizens, we are moving at an ever increasing velocity towards a totalitarian state! If we do not wake up en masse, it will be as Pastor Martin Niemoller put it in Nazi Germany (and this may not be completely accurate but it still makes a valid point):

In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

Are we going to wait until there is no one left to speak up?

The order was signed BTW without fanfare of course, shortly after July 4th our “Independence Day”!

What a sham and a shame on us that holiday has become.

Janet Yellen- A Leading Contender to Replace Bernanke as Fed Head. Just Keeping It All in the Family. Business as Usual

With Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke expected to leave the central bank when his term expires early next year, Vice Chairwoman Janet Yellen has emerged as a top contender for the job.

An economist and former president of the San Francisco Fed, Yellen speaks often about monetary policy and the economy.Janet_yellen

Read full article here:  Janet Yellen a leading contender to head the Federal Reserve – Politico Pro

She is not a shoe in however as Larry Summers and Donald Kohn are also mentioned as possible candidates.

Turns out that Yellen is a strong advocate of low interest rates. In fact, she even stated at one point that if she could, she would have the rates at below 0%.

Now, in case you don’t know rates that low fuel inflation. When money is that cheap to borrow, it tends to encourage the “printing” of money or increase the money supply. Inflation inevitably continues because the more there is of something, the lower its value.

Low interest rates also make it easier for banks to load up on the Fed monopoly money as well.

What a policy like this does not encourage is savings and investment. CD rates remain absurdly low and a joke as a savings mechanism. Rates so low that you end up losing money to inflation if you try saving with them.

CFR Connections of Course

Curiously in her Wiki biography or in the Politco article mentioned above is it mentioned that like Bernanke, Greenspan and about every other Fed Chairman she is a member of the globalist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Started by the international bankster family in 1921, the building that houses the CFR was donated from the Rockefeller family. The honorary Chairman of the CFR is David C. Rockefeller.

Tim Geithner, our current Treasury Secretary is CFR and a former NY Fed Bank President.

The other two contenders mentioned Donald Kohn and Larry Summers are also CFR. ( http://www.cfr.org/about/membe… ). Hey let’s keep it all in the same family right?

The private banking cartel called the Federal Reserve runs the show. Their incubator is the CFR.

Yellen, Summers, Kohn. Doesn’t really matter which of them gets in since nothing will really change at all.

The inflation of the dollar’s value will continue. Our national debt will grow since the parasitic banksters need and use debt to control their hosts.

Eventually, the game will be up. The dollar will implode. But hey, not to worry. They will trot out another Fed controlled replacement. The game will begin anew for a while until we end up as part of their one world government New World Order as Henry Kissinger, George H. Bush, Clinton, Cheney (all CFR BTW) and other notables put it.

New World Order Books List on Amazon

Which Candidate is Better? Or the UN- To Be or Not to Be. I Say- Not to Be What say you?

There will be a runoff election in New Jersey to replace the recently deceased Senator Frank Lautenberg. So the question arose on a Ron Paul support email list as to which candidate is better- a relatively unknown but decidedly conservative doctor Anita Eck or the more seasoned and known, Steve Lonegan.

Now some of us have noted that Steve Lonegan thinks we should remain in the UN and “fix” it. Now if you actually know what the nature and intent of the UN is frankly this is not an organization that can be “fixed”. It’s very nature is toxic to Americanism and personal liberty. A supporter of the Lonegan choice had this to say about Longegan’s support of the UN:

“Even if it were true [that Steve Lonegan supports continuation of the UN], most Congressmen do not have an issue with the United Nations, why should we nit pick this one?”

This was my response to that question (Of course, it didn’t matter because Lonegan was a shoe-in to win with his established Republican connections and did. However, what was said still stands. In the end, neither candidate from either party will really end up changing anything at all. If Lonegan gets elected it will end up being little more than window dressing with NO real change or politics as usual.):

“Your justification for supporting Lonegan completely falls apart when you state “most Congressman do not have an issue with”. The fact is, most Congressman do not have an issue with undermining the U.S. Constitution, ignoring their oaths of office, spending the public’s money, supporting wars that are illegal and not Constitutionally declared, lying to their constituents by making campaign promises that they never intended to keep to get themselves into office and much more.

The intent here is not to elect someone who is in lock step with “most Congressman” because the fact is that “most Congressman” have placed our nation into a situation of insurmountable debt, undermined our personal liberties by trading away our sovereignty to an international body like the UN while completely ignoring our Bill of Rights.

Any Congressman who supports the UN (and Ron Paul was the first to introduce a bill and repeatedly reintroduced it to have the U.S. withdraw from the UN) is part of the problem NOT part of the solution. Any support of the UN is a big deal! They are the elite’s template for world tyranny under a UN world government. Support or compromise on this issue is enough to disregard any politician running for office.

Anyone who doesn’t get that is also part of the problem along with Barack Obama, Henry Kissinger, George W. Bush and his papa, Bill and Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Tim Geithner and many, many others too numerous to mention who support the UN’s agenda.

If you don’t get this issue then please either educate yourself more thoroughly but do not make a fool of yourself by excusing a candidate because he is like “most Congressman”. It is because of “most Congressman” that Ron Paul ran at his advanced age for the Presidency. It is because of “most Congressman” that our nation is bankrupt and headed for economic collapse. It is because of “most Congressman” that our liberties are being traded away with increasing velocity.”

End of Comment

Now, some may find those words a bit harsh, but quite frankly we are losing our country in greater and greater chunks to the UN through the traitors in office who pose as our representatives. If you have bought into the deception that the UN is a peace keeping organization, then please view the following video with an open mind for a view you will not get from the mainstream media:

You may also want to read the following as well for more details:

 

Will that All-American Hot Dog You Get at the Ballpark be going Chinese?

Take me out to the ball game. Take me out to the crowd. Buy me some peanuts and crackerjacks, but you may way to stop there soon. Smithfield Foods Inc., the largest prPig_1oducer of all-American hams, hotdogs and bacon may be sold to Shuanghui International.

Speculators are wondering if U.S. regulators will approve the biggest such takeover of an American company by a Chinese firm- a $5 Billion deal.

Wall Street traders were big on the plan which has sent the company’s stock price up. Some felt that it will increase exports to the Chinese market which will benefit all U.S. pork producers as expressed by Dave Warner, Director of Communications for the National Pork Producers Council who stated:

“This does have the potential to increase U.S. pork exports to China, which would benefit all U.S. pork producers.”

Nevertheless, that may be a little bit of an overstatement. Bloomberg notes that the deal is unlikely to increase U.S. pork producers since China is already over capacity in pork production.

However, Shuanghui could ratchet up production to feed the growing demand for meat in China. The question that brings to mind is what kind of impact will that have for the smaller growers and the quality of pork produced?

Larry Pope, Smithfield chief executive, claims the deal won’t change how the company does business. The company’s headquarters will remain in Smithfield, Va., he said, and there will be no changes to the 46,000-person workforce.

“It will be business as usual — only better — at Smithfield,” Pope said in a statement. “We do not anticipate any changes in how we do business operationally in the United States and throughout the world.”Pigs_1

The fly in the ointment is that this sale must still be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. The problem is that Shuanghui was a company to the 2011 scandal that involved feeding a dangerous additive to pigs prior to slaughter. Elizabeth Holmes, a staff attorney at the Center for Food Safety, says U.S. regulators should take a hard look at the deal.

“They’re supposed to identify and address any national security concerns that would arise,” she said of the committee. “I can’t imagine how something like public health or environmental pollution couldn’t be potentially construed as a national security concern.”

Environmental groups were quick to criticize the deal, too, citing the growing globalization of vertically integrated or factory farming. Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, called it “birth of a cross-border bacon behemoth.”

“Merger mania in the meat industry in recent decades has led to more factory farms in the U.S., with 95 percent of hogs now raised in operations of over 2,000 animals,” she said. “We may export the pork, but we keep millions of gallons on manure right here in U.S. hog raising communities in North Carolina and Iowa.

As noted by Harvest Public Media, Smithfield operations already slaughters more than 16 million animals a year. Smaller producers like Alex Pope, owner of The Local Pig in Kansas City are hoping that a deal with China like this will be taken by consumers as a wake-up call and pay more attention to the quality of the meat they purchase:

“That’s the first step in saying, ‘I don’t want to be a part of that. I want an option. I would like to go to a small local producer, at a farmers market, or at a locally-sourced butcher shop and buy that bacon,’” he said. “Ask them where it came from, where the pigs were raised and how they were treated. If it can spur something like that it would be really great.”

Not to worry for Smithfield if the China deal doesn’t go through Bloomberg reported Wednesday that another Asian company and one from Brazil were preparing bids for Smithfield when the deal was announced.

Perhaps consumers should already be taking a second look at the quality of meat they are consuming. One way or another it looks like our largest pork producer is going to end up in foreign hands. I just can’t see how that can be a good thing for a consumer concerned about quality or their health.

Find out more about what is happening to our food supply with these recommended reads:

New Obama FBI Pick- James Comey. A Former GW Bush Cabinet Member? Huh?

The new FBI candidate choice, James Comey was the former U.S. Deputy Attorney General who served in George W. Bush’s administration from December 2003 to August 2005. He apparently bumped Lisa Monaco off of the short list. Lisa is the 4th Assistant Attorney General for National Security in the Obama administration.James_Comey_Obama_FBI_Appointee

Correct me if I am wrong but I was under the impression we had a 2 party system and that the parties opposed each other. Doesn’t it seem a bit odd to have a current member of the Obama cabinet set aside for a former member of the G.W. Bush administration?

Particularly since Comey contributed to the campaign of Mitt Romney and John McCain when they ran against Obama and is a registered Republican.

Two Party System?

What two party system? Seems like one to me these days.

Obama was the change we needed we were told. During his campaign, he railed against the Bush administration regularly promising us Change We Can Believe In.

How silly of us to think he actually meant it. Then again, thinking and voting don’t usually mix too well especially if it is colored with racist guilt- a typical ploy of the Marxist cadre.

Let’s look at the background of James Comey. Maybe we can discern why he will make such a good choice for FBI head.

Like Obama- Another Chicagoan

Rockefeller_Chapel_Univ_of_Chicago

Rockefeller Chapel
built in 1928

First of all, James, like Lisa Monaco whom he bumped off the short list, is a graduate of the University of Chicago Law School. The University of Chicago is wonderful school which was founded in 1890 by the American Baptist Education Society with a donation from John D. Rockefeller. The law school was founded in 1902 by a coalition of donors led by, of course, John D. Rockefeller. Guess that’s why the chapel on the University of Chicago campus is called the Rockefeller Chapel, in recognition of its funding source the ultra rich Rockefellers.

Not surprisingly, the focus of the University of Chicago law school is noted particularly for its influence on the economic analysis of law. As note by Anthony Kronman, former dean of Yale Law School, “”the intellectual movement that has had the greatest influence on American academic law in the past quarter-century [of the 20th Century]” is law and economics.

Interesting that a law school brought into being by donations from a family who is a major player in the Federal Reserve cartel and our banking system has a law school known for its focus on law and economics. Whoda thunk that connection would turn up?

Wonder if that may be a factor in why someone like Comey makes a good candidate for head of the FBI? Probably, doesn’t hurt.

Banking Background

Then again another factor might be his recent experience on the board of directors of HSBC Holdings plc which is a British multinational banking and financial services organization headquartered in London, UK, founded in 1991.

The origins of the bank lie in Hong Kong and Shanghai, where branches were first opened in 1865. HSBC stands for Hong Kong, Shanghai Banking Corporation which also gives Comey a China/British banking connection. Another essential for an FBI candidate I imagine.

Good Combination I Guess

If Comey is approved, the banking community will have yet another favorable representative in government. With Comey’s University of Chicago background which certainly isn’t anti-banking they get what they need- a sympathetic head in the intelligence community. Betcha there won’t be too many investigations into the financial community during Comey’s term.

Let’s keep our fingers crossed that this one gets quick approval. However, with Comey’s background you can pretty much predict that it will. Bush and Obama such enemies right? Goes to show how much of a dog and pony show most of these elections really are. Meet the new boss. Same as the last, only worse.

The Signs of Inflation are All Around Us

Went out to buy some stamps this afternoon. It got me to thinking about the inflation thingy.

I bought my stamps. They no longer have a price on them, which as a former stamp collector as a kid, I find a bit odd. The USPS now calls them “Forever Stamps”. Supposedly, they last forever. Fat chance of that happening, but hey, it sounds permanent and comfortably sound to boot.

Do ya think our government has an inkling that the price of stamps may be increasing faster than their ability to keep up with the replacement printing required? Never before until the last few years in our nation’s history did we have undenominated stamps? (Pssst………I suspect that they know what is coming down the pike.)

Then, I stopped and bought a cup of medium coffee at Dunkin Donuts and 2 donuts. $1.79 for the coffee with the donuts a total of $3.42 (with a .28 cent discount). Coffee used to be a quarter a cup as I recall for a long time. Since I don’t buy coffee that often $1.79 seemed like quite a jump for me. And donuts about .90 cents a piece? Must be awfully high quality junk food I guess.

Fortunately, we don’t have to worry because the government tells us that inflation is low. Course they leave out, the numbers for food and energy and massage down the housing costs. That does tend to mitigate actual reality a bit one might think.

After all, the national debt is now over $16.8 Trillion or $53,289 or $148,151 per taxpayer. And with sequestration cuts amounting to 2.38% that debt and our deficits don’t look to slow down all that much as a result of reduced government spending.

Now, a Trillion $ sounds like a lot but let’s be honest, for most of us that term is just a word or bunch of numbers . So just what does our national debt actually look like?

Well, take a look at this YouTube video for some perspective on that number and its relationship to our national debt:

So, just how did we get there? Well, that’s a longer story which is shrouded in deception thanks to our politicians and the media. Grab this book for some perspective on the issue. It does a pretty good job of laying out the how’s and why’s of where we are where we are. The author is no newcomer to the scene. He documents the case pretty well with quotes from the main players as well. Worth the read. Check it out.