Fashion Clique or Financial Cult?
- Henry Paulson Jr. ,United States Treasury Secretary
- James H. Lambright, Chairman of the Export-Import Bank of the United States
- Neel Kashkari, Interim Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Stability
- Ed Lazear, Chairman of the Economic Advisory Counsel to the President
"Who controls money controls the world." -
And on a similar note:***
R U A TAXPAYER?
The great and the good of capitalism and free markets held a requiem dinner for the at a secret hideaway this week. As the waiter decanted a fresh bottle of 1985 Chateau Margaux, the blame game began.
"I blame the central banks," growled the bond trader, stabbing the air with a forkful of raw steak. "If hadn't kept interest rates so low at the start of this decade, we wouldn't be in this mess. Talk about refilling the punch bowl when the party guests are already as drunk as skunks!"
"We told you we were not in the business of identifying bubbles, let alone trying to puncture them," replied the central banker, nibbling at a lettuce leaf. "We warned you that , emerging-market yields and volatility in stocks and bonds were all too low, and that you were under-pricing risk."
The central banker took a sip from his refilled wine glass. "Can you imagine the outcry if we had tried to halt the explosion in home ownership? I think you'll find that the true villains are the mortgage lenders; if they hadn't trashed their standards with self-certified and liar loans, the crisis in the housing market would have remained self-contained."
"That's not fair," said the mortgage originator. "We weren't on a level playing field. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were using their implicit government guarantee to distort competition in home loans. We were forced to take on more subprime borrowers just to stay in the game; if it hadn't been for all those clever derivatives products, we would never have been able to recycle all that toxic waste and keep the pyramid scheme afloat."
"Ah, the derivatives bogeyman," chuckled the structured- finance specialist. "Listen, derivatives don't kill markets. Markets kill markets. Everything we did was designed to promote efficiency by allowing investors to disaggregate their risks. I can show you the bills from my lawyers to prove that every product we invented was legitimate"
"All we did was offer advice on the best method of structuring securitization transactions,'' the capital-markets lawyer said. "There would never have been a market for the racier collateralized-debt obligations if the rating companies had done proper due diligence, instead of slapping AAA ratings on anything and everything that offered to pay them a fee"
"You can hardly expect the finest minds in finance to come and work for us when they can earn gazillion-dollar bonuses doing the same work for an investment bank," said the credit-rating assessor. "We relied on the computer models that the banks helped us build, and those models turned out to be, shall we say, less than perfect. Besides, everything was fine until the froze. The problem wasn't over-optimistic ratings, it was an over-reliance on wholesale markets to fund leverage."
The waiter cleared away the dinner plates. The diners all declined dessert -- "Humble pie? No, thanks.'' -- agreeing instead that a couple of bottles of 1982 Chateau d'Yquem would round off the evening nicely.
"I'd never even heard of Structured Investment Vehicles until they started to blow up," said the central banker. "We believed the banks when they said their business model was based on originate-to-distribute; how were we to know that once the music stopped, they were still on the hook for trillions of dollars of liabilities they'd slipped off the balance sheets?"
"Look, domestic savings rates just weren't high enough to provide the kind of leverage we needed to juice our returns to match those of our peers," said the commercial banker. "We had to rely on money-market funds, rather than our deposit base. And the wouldn't have frozen if it hadn't been for those ridiculous mark-to-market rules forcing all of us to prematurely disclose that we owned huge piles of securities that were rotting, before prices had any chance to recover."
"We gave you plenty of leeway to play fast and loose with the truth so that you could stay solvent," said the regulator. "Besides, you were just doing your job of maximizing returns to shareholders. If those greedy investors hadn't forced you to take on more risk, our rules on capital would have been more than adequate to keep the banking system solvent."
"How on Earth was I supposed to fund the retirements of thousands of ex-employees when returns were collapsing simultaneously in every market?" asked the pension-fund manager. "Of course we wanted the banks to work their capital harder. We were in the same boat, trying to move money into new arenas to make a buck or three. We bought derivatives, commodities, we even held our noses and gave money to the . That didn't turn out to be such a good idea."
"Hey, we warned you there would be times like this," said the hedge-fund manager. "If you want years when we deliver 50 percent, 60 percent returns, you have to expect periods when we will lose 20 or 25 percent of your money. You won't see us lining up with our begging bowls at the window."
The waiter coughed, proffering a slim leather folder containing the reckoning for the evening's entertainment.
"You are a taxpayer, I take it?" asked the . The waiter nodded. "In which case, we were rather hoping you would foot the bill."
Ain't That Special?
Physical demand for is very strong on the streets of the good old USA. Americans understand paper money, but deep down, they also trust the value of gold and silver. But a funny twist occurred in my , which is now my 201(k), the K is gone. There are no more 24K contributions.
The US government allows for income tax deductions for contribution to your retirement account. Gold, Silver and Platinum Eagles are recognized as legitimate IRA investments and contributions. The US Government, is such a pal, right? Not so fast.
A funny thing happened on the way to the MINT, to pick up some more Eagles for the golden years, they have virtually closed their doors on Eagle deliveries. Some say that this is an orchestrated attempt to keep bullion out of the hands of the people, so that the people must depend exclusively on fiat money for wealth preservation.
Some say this is part of enslaving Americans by the Government's controlled fiat money and companion tax regime. Others say the lack of Mint deliveries of eagles is a way to reduce demand of bullion and thereby prop up the dollar and suppress . If the Mint is not going to deliver eagles in serious quantities, as they are more than capable of doing, what other currency, beside the dollar, is allowed in your IRA.
Bullion bars, to my knowledge, are not part of the IRS recognized stores of wealth for IRA contributions. When the Mint shuts down substantial deliveries of IRS recognized IRA eagle coinage, while not allowing retention of the bullion bars in your IRA, the Mint, in combination with the IRS, both treasury facilities, are in affect suppressing bullion prices and forcing people to hold fiat dollars for their GOLDEN years, whether they want to or not..
We are stuck with it, and they will make sure we stick with it. Also, the treasury, using its Mint and IRS enablers, can do this with impunity, as the courts have declared the recognition of fiat as lawful money. The Treasury, IRS, Mint, as enabled by the courts, have effectively closed the Mint PM window to the folks.
Ain't that special?
In the mean time, the congress sits there and does not require an audit of the nation's gold reserves, when obvious allegations of serious depletion have been boldly and notoriously made, in public, for all to see, when congress could order such an audit in a heartbeat. Something is just not right there. Maybe it is a national secret, or a national disgrace, take your pick, that no authority wants to make public the surreptitious divestment of the nation's treasure, as that might, in a day, debase fiat into oblivion, and hence, the Ft Knox audit has not been had, over the last 50 years. Ain't that special?
The Government's PPT and the FED have worked their magic, sure enough, time and time again, with their hail Mary plays near the close of the DOW each day, to prop up the markets using "intervention", to give all new found faith in those fiat dollar denominated shares. The President claims he is a free market guy, yet, but in a meltdown, intervention is necessary. So even the President of the United States is now on record that intervention is necessary.
Well necessary is just a how-much indication, not that "intervention" is inherently immoral and contrary to the necessary workings of any capitalistic free market.
So, get this straight, "Intervention", is DC slang and FED speak for market rigging, which just so happens to match well the SEC and CTFC do nothing enforcement of fair market laws with their see-no-evil allowance of the concentrated precious metal short positions allowed to be sustained in perpetuity, to suppress the to prop up the fiat dollar.
Ain't that special?
So, let me, and YOU, get this straight, the Mint violates law and the public trust by limiting deliveries of eagle coinage, while IRS says only Eagles are the only proper precious metal IRA deduction, while the SEC and CTFC turns a blind eye to criminal manipulative concentrated shorts on the COMEX that suppresses gold and silver prices to prop up the fiat dollar, while congress does nothing to ensure and account for the nation's treasure by failing to conduct a gold audit, while the IRS and the courts agree that fiat money is the only lawful money for tax and commerce purposes, notwithstanding the plain language of the constitution, while the President said interventions are necessary thus admitting market rigging, is necessary, where the FEDs bail out the Wall Street banksters who took billions in bonuses, while the Government's PPT props up the general equity market to maintain our rigged markets, and all this is collectively done, in concert, to save
the almighty fiat dollar from devaluation, which fiat is inherently worthless.
Ain't that special?
So get this straight. The entire US Government, in every sector, has been mobilized to prop up inherent worthlessness.
Ain't that Special?
Mr. Bill Murphy, President, , New Orleans.
Mr. Chris Powell's latest from the New Orleans conference was very well done. He suggests that all that is needed for a sound monetary reset about the world is a 2000% upward revaluation of gold.
So lets look at the important power brokers at the G20 meeting this weekend.. Russia and the US have mines and gold reserves. The EU nations have plenty of CB gold.
India, well, they buy gold all the time and can accumulate gold reserves and the people would greatly increase their wealth through gold upward valuations.
The middle east would be supportive with their hoards. China has mines but low gold reserves, but china has US dollar reserves to buy as much gold as desired at current prices, and China can apply pressure as needed.
As I see it, China buying 3000 tons of IMF gold, may be the arm twisting leverage play, that is, sell us the IMF gold, and we all can upward value gold 2000%, and reset the .
Implosion is avoided, and the gold standard reinstituted.
However, Japan would be the lone hold out, having only 1% gold reserves. However, its currency is going through a major upward surge in valuation while gold is presently suppressed.
It would be curious, if gold is capped, while the yen strengthens even more, and the reported gold COT in Japan goes way long of gold during capped prices, in advance of a Chinese buy of the IMF gold. After which, the UN treaties the gold standard as between all nations, and all fiat can float respecting that gold standard.
A return to the gold standard, may be immenent, world wide, to the surprise of friends of gold, so lets keep our eye on the Japan's market COT positions going long of gold.
Gold is on its way back into the monetary system. That is certain.
It is also certain that one method being examined at the highest level is the Federal Reserve Ratio, Modernized and Revitalized and no longer directly connected to interest rates.
If you are one of the gold gang that fears as an advisor to Obama, then you are ignorant of Volcker’s previous position on gold early in his career. I believe he is this time pro-gold because of the Mother of All Crises - his description of the conditions now.
Volcker does not waste words, nor is he glitzy. This is the Mother of All Crises, settlement of which demands a gold criterion which is the FRGCR.
The price will float but around a pivot point of $1650 (or higher). It will more than likely be within $200 based on expansion or contraction of a measure of US international debt.
Nov. 28 Comex December gold futures first notice day
Nov. 28 Comex December silver futures first notice day
its about to happen..... Nov 28th it begine.. will you see it?
ALL IS WELL IN STEPFORDVILLE
MORE ON THE PRE-ELECTION CHICANERY
OF THE PLUNGE PROTECTION TEAM
Ellen Brown, November 3rd, 2008
“The Dow is a dead banana republic dictator in full military uniform propped up in the castle window with a mechanical lever moving the cadaver’s arm, waving to the Wall Street crowd.”
– Michael Bolser, Le Metropole Cafe1
It was another surreal week on Wall Street, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average rising a thousand points while the economy continued to sink into its worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Most of this stellar climb occurred on Tuesday, October 28, when the Dow rose some 900 points, making it the largest one-day stock market rise since the Great Depression. The climb was especially remarkable in that it occurred in just the last two hours of trading, on no particularly good news. Commentators attributed it to an expectation of a half point interest rate cut by the Fed the following day, but the likelihood of a rate cut was not new news two hours before closing, and previous rate cuts have not evoked that sort of dramatic response. When the cut was actually announced, the market yawned and proceeded to drop.
Meanwhile, gold -- the “go to” investment that at one time could be counted on to go up when the economy was tanking -- had its worst month in 25 years. Gold rounded out the month by dropping $60 in a little over a day. Gas prices also ended 31% lower than a mere six weeks ago, all just in time to assure voters on November 4 that their fears of rampant inflation and stock market collapse were unfounded.
Nothing to See Here:
Concealing a $700 Billion Boondoggle
The Stepfordville-like stability of the market may have been engineered for another reason: to divert Congress from reconsidering its $700 billion bailout bill, which is proving to be as disastrous for the taxpayers as it is lucrative for the banks. The bankers are manning the lifeboats as the taxpayers go down with the Titanic. In an October 29 article in The Nation titled “Bailout = Bush’s Final Pillage,” Naomi Klein wrote:
“When the Bush administration announced it would be injecting $250 billion into America’s banks in exchange for equity, the plan was widely referred to as ‘partial nationalization’– a radical measure required to get the banks lending again. In fact, there has been no nationalization, partial or otherwise. Taxpayers have gained no meaningful control, which is why the banks can spend their windfall as they wish (on bonuses, mergers, savings . . .) and the government is reduced to pleading that they use a portion of it for loans. . . .
“By purchasing stakes in these institutions, Treasury is sending a signal to the market that they are a safe bet . . . [b]ecause the government won't be able to afford to let them fail. . . . That tethering of the public interest to private companies is the real purpose of the bailout plan: Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson is handing all the companies that are admitted to the program – a number potentially in the thousands – an implicit Treasury Department guarantee. . . . [F]or the banks, the best part is that the government is paying them – in some cases billions of dollars – to accept its seal of approval. . . .
“[T]he market is being told loud and clear that Washington will not allow the country’s financial institutions to bear the consequences of their behavior. This may well be Bush’s most creative innovation: no-risk capitalism. . . . Meanwhile, every day it becomes clearer that the bailout was sold on false pretenses. It was never about getting loans flowing. It was always about turning the state into a giant insurance agency for Wall Street – a safety net for the people who need it least, subsidized by the people who need it most.”
William Greider, writing in The Nation on the same day, discussed a stinging letter sent to Henry Paulson by Leo Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers, comparing the sale of very similar bank stock to the American public and to billionaire Warren Buffett, who got a much better deal. Greider wrote:
“The swindle of American taxpayers is proceeding more or less in broad daylight, as the unwitting voters are preoccupied with the national election. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson agreed to invest $125 billion in the nine largest banks, including $10 billion for Goldman Sachs, his old firm. But, if you look more closely at Paulson’s transaction, the taxpayers were taken for a ride – a very expensive ride. They paid $125 billion for bank stock that a private investor could purchase for $62.5 billion. That means half of the public’s money was a straight-out gift to Wall Street, for which taxpayers got nothing in return. . . .
“If the same rule of thumb is applied to Paulson’s grand $700 billion bailout fund, Gerard said this will constitute a gift of $350 billion from the American taxpayers ‘to reward the institutions that have driven our nation and it now appears the whole world into its most serious economic crisis in 75 years.’
“Is anyone angry? Will anyone look into these very serious accusations? Congress is off campaigning. The financiers at Treasury probably assume any public outrage will be lost in the election returns.”2
And just to make sure that public outrage is buried, the Plunge Protection Team (PPT) has been busily painting the arid landscape of the U.S. economy with roses and dewdrops.
The PPT Rides Again
For anyone who still doubts the PPT’s existence and ability to control markets, this article will expand on one I posted a week ago on the group and its behind-the-scenes activities. As noted in my earlier article, the PPT is formally called the Working Group on Financial Markets (WGFM) and was created by President Reagan’s Executive Order 12631 in 1988 in response to the October 1987 stock market crash. The WGFM includes the President, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Its stated purpose is to enhance “the integrity, efficiency, orderliness, and competitiveness of our Nation's financial markets and [maintain] investor confidence.” According to the Order:
“To the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of funds therefore, the Department of the Treasury shall provide the Working Group with such administrative and support services as may be necessary for the performance of its functions.”3
In short, taxpayer money is being made available to manipulate markets. The shady history of the PPT was tracked by journalist John Crudele in a June 2006 New York Post series, in which he wrote:
“Back during a stock market crisis in 1989, a guy named Robert Heller – who had just left the Federal Reserve Board – suggested that the government rig the stock market in times of dire emergency. . . .. He didn’t use the word ‘rig’ but that’s what he meant. Proposed as an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, it’s a seminal argument that says when a crisis occurs on Wall Street ‘instead of flooding the entire economy with liquidity, and thereby increasing the danger of inflation, the Fed could support the stock market directly by buying market averages in the futures market, thus stabilizing the market as a whole.’”4
The PPT was to be the Roman circus of the twenty-first century, distracting the masses with pretensions of prosperity. Instead of fixing the problem in the economy, the PPT could just “fix” the investment casino. Crudele continued:
“Over the next few years . . . whenever the stock market was in trouble someone seemed to ride to the rescue. . . . Often it appeared to be Goldman Sachs, which just happens to be where Paulson and former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin worked.”
For obvious reasons, the mechanism by which the PPT has ridden to the rescue is not detailed on the Fed’s website; but some analysts think they know. An antitrust group called GATA (the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee) has been tracking the PPT’s moves for many years. Michael Bolser of GATA concluded in 2004 that PPT money is being funneled through the Fed’s “primary dealers,” a group of favored Wall Street brokerage firms and investment banks. The device used is a form of loan called a “repurchase agreement” or “repo,” which is a contract for the sale and future repurchase of Treasury securities. Bolser explained:
“It may sound odd, but the Fed occasionally gives money [‘permanent’ repos] to its primary dealers (a list of about thirty financial houses, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, etc). They never have to pay this free money back; thus the primary dealers will pretty much do whatever the Fed asks if they want to stay in the primary dealers ‘club.’
“The exact mechanism of repo use to support the DOW is simple. The primary dealers get repos in the morning issuance . . . and then buy DOW index futures (a market that is far smaller than the open DOW trading volume).. These futures prices then drive the DOW itself because the larger population of investors think the ‘insider’ futures buyers have access to special information and are ‘ahead’ of the market. Of course they don’t have special information . . . only special money in the form of repos.”5
With Paulson’s new $700 billion credit card, the PPT obviously has access to much more money than in 2004 – enough money, no doubt, to buy large blocks of some key stocks. Those purchases, in turn, would trigger the program traders’ computers, which follow like robots according to pre-set formulae. Although thousands of stocks are publicly traded, only 30 stocks compose the Dow, making this trend-setting index fairly easy to manipulate.
While the Dow is being propped up by the PPT through massive buying, the gold market is held down by massive short selling, since gold is considered a key indicator of inflation. If the gold price were to soar, the Fed would have to increase interest rates to tighten the money supply, collapsing the housing bubble and forcing the government to raise inflation-adjusted payments for Social Security.
Most traders who see this manipulation going on don’t complain, because they think the Fed is rigging the market to their advantage; but unwary investors are being induced to place risky bets on a nag on its last legs.. The people become complacent and accept bad leadership, bad policies and bad laws, because they think things are still “working” for them economically. Worse, there are insiders to this scheme who must find it difficult to resist the temptation to capitalize on their favored positions. As Chuck Augustin observed in a June 2006 article titled “Plunge Protection or Enormous Hidden Tax Revenues”:
“Today the markets are, without doubt, manipulated on a daily basis by the PPT. Government controlled ‘front companies’ such as Goldman-Sachs, JP Morgan and many others collect incredible revenues through market manipulation. Much of this money is probably returned to government coffers, however, enormous sums of money are undoubtedly skimmed by participating companies and individuals.
“The operation is similar to the Mafia-controlled gambling operations in Las Vegas during the 50’s and 60’s but much more effective and beneficial to all involved. Unlike the Mafia, the PPT has enormous advantages. The operation is immune to investigation or prosecution, there [are] unlimited funds available through the Treasury and Federal Reserve, it has the ultimate insider trading advantages, and it fully incorporates the spin and disinformation of government controlled media to sway markets in the desired direction. . . . Any investor can imagine the riches they could obtain if they knew what direction stocks, commodities and currencies would move in a single day, especially if they could obtain unlimited funds with which to invest! . . . [T]he PPT not only cheats investors out of trillions of dollars, it also eliminates competition that refuses to be ‘bought’ through mergers. Very soon now, only global companies and corporations owned and
controlled by the [financial] elite will exist.”6
A research firm reporting on the unexpectedly high quarterly profits of Goldman Sachs in March 2004 wrote cynically:
“[W]ho does Goldman have to thank for the latest outsized quarterly earnings? Its ‘partner’ in charge of financing the proprietary trading operation -- Alan Greenspan.”7
Henry Paulson headed Goldman Sachs before he succeeded to Treasury Secretary in June 2006, following in the footsteps of Robert Rubin, who headed that major investment bank before he was appointed Treasury Secretary in 1995, just in time for Goldman and other investment banks to capitalize on the drastic devaluation of the Mexican peso. An October 2006 article in the conservative American Spectator complained that the U.S. Treasury was being turned into “Goldman Sachs South.”8
In his October 28, 2008 letter, United Steelworkers president Gerard wrote to Henry Paulson:
“The recipients of the first wave of gift-giving include Goldman Sachs. It has been widely reported that you have surrounded yourself with former Goldman employees as well as individuals from other Wall Street firms. Yet it has never been revealed whether in fact you and they have fully divested yourselves of your Wall Street holdings. Doesn’t it seem just a wee-bit of a conflict of interest for those setting the price of the investment to be either so directly linked to the firms receiving the investments or, even worse, direct beneficiaries of the decision to overpay with taxpayer money? . . .
“Out in the real economy, we need our government to invest in creating sustainable shared prosperity – not play Santa Claus to the scoundrels who have laid waste to the American Dream.”
Where is the public outrage? As the fog of the election lifts from our plundered nation, we wait to see.
Ellen Brown, J.D., developed her research skills as an attorney practicing civil litigation in Los Angeles. In Web of Debt, her latest book, she turns those skills to an analysis of the Federal Reserve and “the money trust.” She shows how this private cartel has usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back. Her eleven books include the bestselling Nature’s Pharmacy, co-authored with Dr. Lynne Walker, and Forbidden Medicine. Her websites are www.webofdebt.com and www.ellenbrown.com.
1 Michael Bolser, “Cartel Capitulation Watch,” LeMetropoleCafe.com (April 18, 2004).
2 William Greider, “Paulson’s Swindle Revealed,” The Nation (October 29, 2008), citing “USW Raises Questions about Treasury’s $125 Billion Investment in Financial Firms,” Market Watch (October 28, 2008).
3 Executive Order 12631 of March 18, 1988, 53 FR, 3 CFR, 1988 Comp., page 559.
4 John Crudele, “George Let Plunge Slip,” New York Post (June 27, 2006).
5 Michael Bolser, “Enough Is Enough,” Midas, LeMetropoleCafe.com (January 26, 2004). See his chart site at www.pbase.com/gmbolser/interventional_analysis.
6 Chuck Augustin, “Plunge Protection or Enormous Hidden Tax Revenues,” LeMetropoleCafe.com (June 30, 2006).
7 The John Brimelow Report, “Goldman Sach’s ‘Partner’,” Midas, LeMetropoleCafe.com (March 24, 2004), quoting Bianco Research report.
8 The Prowler, “Raid on the Treasury,” The American Spectator (October 12, 2006).
by Charley Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The President does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code. Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices. 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.
If the Army & Marines are in Iraq, it's because they want them in Iraq.
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like 'the economy,' 'inflation,' or 'politics' that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.
They, and they alone, have the power.
They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses, provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.
We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
(Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.)
And remember to vote against BOTH Obama and McPalin!!!
own the earth.
Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again.
However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes such as mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in.
But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create money and control credit."
- Sir Josiah Stamp - former Director of