Does Barack Obama have any idea what is going on in the government that he is supposedly running? Scandals are erupting all around him, and he supposedly was not aware that any wrongdoing had taken place in any of those instances. It is almost as if every major government agency has gone rogue and Obama has no idea what the heck they are doing. According to Obama, he often doesn’t learn what those under his authority are up to until he sits down and turns on the news. Should we believe him when he claims ignorance over and over again, or is Obama just trying to protect himself? Whether you are a Republican, a Democrat or an Independent, the revelations that have come out in recent days about the IRS, the seizure of AP phone records and Benghazi should be very alarming to you. Taken together, these scandals paint a picture of a federal government that has become drunk with power, and no matter where you may fall on the political spectrum that is something that nobody should want.
Posted below is a fictional interview that I have created between an anonymous reporter and Barack Obama about the IRS scandal, the seizure of AP phone records, Benghazi and other sensitive topics. Yes, this interview is a bit absurd, but so is the notion that Barack Obama is completely ignorant about so many important things that are going on inside his own government…
REPORTER: “President Obama, the IRS has publicly admitted that they were specifically targeting patriot groups and Tea Party organizations for ‘extra scrutiny’. When did you first learn about this?”
REPORTER: “But how is that possible? We have now learned that the targeting of patriots and Tea Party groups began as early as March 2010. The head of the IRS tax-exempt organizations division was informed about this targeting in June 2011, the chief counsel for the IRS knew about this targeting by August 2011, the deputy commissioner for services and enforcement knew about this targeting by March 2012, and IRS Commissioner Steven T. Miller knew about this targeting by May 2012. Throughout this period of time, the IRS repeatedly lied to Congress when they were specifically asked about the targeting of conservative groups. Are you claiming that nobody from your administration ever had any contact with anyone from the IRS about this?”
REPORTER: That is what the IRS was claiming at first. But now the Washington Post is reporting that “IRS officials at the agency’s Washington headquarters sent queries to conservative groups asking about their donors and other aspects of their operations, while officials in the El Monte and Laguna Niguel offices in California sent similar questionnaires to tea-party-affiliated groups.” That would seem to indicate that this was being coordinated on a nationwide level by someone at the IRS. Would you care to comment on that?
REPORTER: But you were just commenting on it. Don’t you think that the American people deserve the truth about this?
REPORTER: Okay, let’s switch gears. Did you know that the Justice Department was spying on AP reporters just months before the 2012 election? Did you know that two months of cellular, office and home telephone records were secretly obtained without any explanation last April and May?
REPORTER: The Associated Press is now the enemy? Without a free and independent media, what would keep us from descending into tyranny?
REPORTER: But shouldn’t we be alarmed when government agencies target specific groups of people for their political beliefs? Breitbart is reporting that the EPA “has routinely charged conservative and watchdog groups fees that the agency has waived for the mainstream media and ‘green’ groups”. Do you know anything about this?
REPORTER: I understand that these are tougher questions than you normally get from the media. But I think that the American people deserve some answers. For example, would you like to discuss Benghazi?
REPORTER: Very funny Mr. President. What about the Fast and Furious scandal? Would you be willing to talk about that?
REPORTER: Are there any difficult subjects that you would be willing to discuss? I have questions here about the Secret Service prostitution scandal, Solyndra, the new NSA spy center out in Utah, government ammunition stockpiling, the NDAA, drone strikes, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko and Bill Ayers. Would you be willing to answer any of those questions?
View full post on The Economic Collapse
Michael F. Cannon
I blogged earlier about how HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is unethically, and possibly illegally, shaking down industries she regulates to get them to fund ObamaCare’s implementation.
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), the ranking member of the Senate’s Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, says this is “arguably an even bigger issue [than] Iran-Contra,” and ably defends his position against the Washington Post’s Sarah Kliff.
Excerpts from Alexander’s comments:
[I]n Iran-Contra, you had $30 million that was spent by Oliver North through private organizations for a purpose congress refused to authorize, in support of the rebels. Here, you’re wanting to spend millions more in support of private organizations to do something that Congress has refused…
The cause in the first case was the cause of rebels in Nicaragua. And the cause here is to implement Obamacare. Congress has refused to appropriate more for that cause. The administration seems to be making a decision that’s called augmenting an appropriation. Its a constitutional offense that’s the issue…
If you read the report of the Iran-Contra select committee, it said that the executive cannot make an end run around Congress by raising money privately and spending it. That seems to be happening here. That was essentially the problem. There the money came from a different place, but if you look at my statement [the Iran-Contra report said] “a president whose appropriation requests were rejected by Congress could raise money from private sources or third countries for armies, military actions, arms systems, and even domestic programs.” [Emphasis added.] It’s the same kind of offense to the Constitution. It’s the same kind of thumbing your nose at Article 1…
If that’s what they’re saying…that Congress has refused to appropriate the money, then you can’t do it. That’s a curb on the executive.
Alexander has sent a letter to Sebelius requesting information about her extracurricular fundraising activities.
View full post on Cato @ Liberty
How did Barack Obama become Monsanto’s man in Washington?
How did Barack Obama become Monsanto’s man in Washington?
By Jon Rappoport
April 29, 2013
And when are anti-GMO activist groups going to stop saying they’re “shocked and disappointed” by the president?
Shocked and disappointed is polite-speak and politically correct reaction. It’s baloney.
Don’t you get it? Obama has never been on your side. He never deserved your trust.
Disappointment implies he was your buddy and then unaccountably walked away.
The man is a politician. He’s a liar. Different pols have different styles of lying. Some pretend they’re your friend before they screw you over and leave you in the dust.
I’ve previously published Obama’s track record as Monsanto’s number-one political supporter in America.
Meet Monsanto’s prime lobbyist, Barack Obama:
After his victory in the 2008 election, Obama filled key posts with Monsanto people, in federal agencies that wield tremendous force in food issues, the USDA and the FDA:
At the USDA, as the director of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Roger Beachy, former director of the Monsanto Danforth Center.
As deputy commissioner of the FDA, the new food-safety-issues czar, the infamous Michael Taylor, former vice-president for public policy for Monsanto. Taylor had been instrumental in getting approval for Monsanto’s genetically engineered bovine growth hormone.
As commissioner of the USDA, Iowa governor, Tom Vilsack. Vilsack had set up a national group, the Governors’ Biotechnology Partnership, and had been given a Governor of the Year Award by the Biotechnology Industry Organization, whose members include Monsanto.
As the new Agriculture Trade Representative, who would push GMOs for export, Islam Siddiqui, a former Monsanto lobbyist.
As the new counsel for the USDA, Ramona Romero, who had been corporate counsel for another biotech giant, DuPont.
As the new head of the USAID, Rajiv Shah, who had previously worked in key positions for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a major funder of GMO agriculture research.
We should also remember that Obama’s secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, once worked for the Rose law firm. That firm was counsel to Monsanto.
Obama nominated Elena Kagan to the US Supreme Court. Kagan, as federal solicitor general, had previously argued for Monsanto in the Monsanto v. Geertson seed case before the Supreme Court.
The deck was stacked. Obama hadn’t simply made honest mistakes. Obama hadn’t just failed to exercise proper oversight in selecting appointees. He was staking out territory on behalf of Monsanto and other GMO corporate giants.
And now let us look at what key Obama appointees have wrought for their true bosses. Let’s see what GMO crops have walked through the open door of the Obama presidency.
Monsanto GMO alfalfa.
Monsanto GMO sugar beets.
Monsanto GMO Bt soybean.
Coming soon: Monsanto’s GMO sweet corn.
Syngenta GMO corn for ethanol.
Syngenta GMO stacked corn.
Pioneer GMO soybean.
Syngenta GMO Bt cotton.
Bayer GMO cotton.
ATryn, an anti-clotting agent from the milk of transgenic goats.
A GMO papaya strain.
And soon, genetically engineered salmon and apples.
This is an extraordinary parade.
Obama was, all along, a stealth operative on behalf of Monsanto, biotech, GMOs, and corporate control of the future of agriculture.
He didn’t make that many key political appointments and allow that many new GMO crops to enter the food chain through a lack of oversight.
Nor is it coincidental that two of the Obama’s biggest supporters, Bill Gates and George Soros, purchased 900,000 and 500,000 shares of Monsanto, respectively, in 2010.
Records don’t show Monsanto or other biotech giants pouring a landslide of (visible) campaign cash down on Obama, relative to other large donors.
Goldman Sachs was Obama’s number-one $$ donor, and Goldman touts GM-crop commodity contracts, for both buys and sells; but Goldman has its fingers in every significant money pot from Nome to Tierra Del Fuego.
The “Obama riddle” is as plain as the nose on the face of Globalism. Monsanto’s agenda, to monopolize the world’s food supply, is essential to the Globalist blueprint. That blueprint ultimately aims for redistribution of food to the world from a point of Central Planning
As president, Obama has a sworn obligation to Globalism. His oath isn’t to protect the Constitution. Are you kidding?
Every recent president has had an overriding loyalty to Globalism.
Obama’s signing of the Monsanto Protection Act, making that corporation senior in power to the US court system, wasn’t an accident. It was taken in keen awareness of his duty to his Globalist betters.
You won’t, of course, see this disclosed on the evening news.
Here is a president who, like Bush, has no plans for a better world. Obama’s notion of “better” is tied up in the Globalist agenda:
An elite-run bureaucracy, promoting equality and justice, reduces all populations to a lowest common denominator, squashing freedom and prosperity.
Obama’s supporters will never learn the truth, because they’re blinded by the light, which they project on to the persona of the president.
Obama is aware of the con, since he triggered it, and he leverages it.
He’s all nudge-and-wink. “Yes, we’ll help you and you and you. Of course we will.”
He might help you if you make a declaration of dependence. Sacrifice yourself on an altar of despair and then you might earn the right to be fed.
Obama, while on the campaign trail in 2008, was promising transparency in government, was claiming that every person has the right to know what’s in his food (GMO labeling). But clearly, that was all cover and fluff. He was lying through his teeth and he knew it. He’d been vetted for the presidency, and he knew the job entailed joining Monsanto and the larger Globalist agenda as a front man.
He hasn’t changed over the past four years. He’s been a covert agent since the beginning.
Imposter. Charlatan. These words fit Obama. He’s pretended, like Clinton, to care, but he doesn’t. He doesn’t care that GMO food is taking over the country and the world. He wants it to happen. He’s always wanted it to happen.
The sitting president of the United States, Monsanto, DuPont, and Dow, among others, are prepared to do whatever is necessary to make GMO food dominate America.
They intend, through Monsanto-gene drift among millions of plants in ag fields, through increased planting of GMO crops, and through introduction of still more GMO crops, to wrap up the USA in genetically engineered food.
Obama is on board. He’s always been on board.
He is the GMO president.
If tomorrow, the Globalist Rockefellers of this world decided that all food grown in the US should be injected with Prozac, Obama would find a way to help.
Stop making excuses for the man. He’s not a victim of evil forces surrounding his presidency. He signed up for this trip with eyes wide open.
Statistics: Posted by yoda — Mon Apr 29, 2013 12:24 pm
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com
April 6, 2013
Barack XVI and Michelle Antoinette
Obama now reigns over Versailles on the Potomac. And America’s taxpayers are the vassals who bankroll the opulence of King Louis-Barack and Michelle Antoinette." Deroy Murdock (Hoover Institute, Scripts Howard) nails it in his National Review article.
King Louis-Barack and his family really know how to share your pain. The "we’re all in this together" seer of America’s hope and change takes our bucks and we keep the change. "Let them eat lentils" is Michelle Antoinette’s airy solution to her growing food-stamp constituency (is M-Antoinette embarrassed at the girth of her loyal cohort?).
From lavish White House dinners to the non-stop celebrity bashes that run the gamut from the secret 2009 Halloween Bash to the 2013 "private" victory Conga Line bash, Versailles on the Potomac rocks year around. Vacations? How about June 21-27, 2011, trip taken by First Lady Michelle Obama, her family and her staff to South Africa and Botswana. or Michelle Obama’s August 2010 vacation in Spain that cost American Taxpayers $467,585. Here is a partial list from Judicial Watch.
The beat goes on even during the sequester. The Obama girls, ages 12 and 14, spent spring break at the luxurious Atlantis resort on Paradise Island in the Bahamas. The first girls were seen clubbing at a nightclub that caters to pre-teens and teens. Then off to Sun Valley. All with an entourage of Secret Service agents, advance personnel, motorcades, helicopters, and jumbo jets. Moreover, preparations for Michelle’s 50th birthday bash are evidently proceeding as scheduled, as are the plans for their August vacation on Martha’s Vineyard.
The "shared sacrifice" is heartwarming.
Statistics: Posted by yoda — Sat Apr 06, 2013 2:26 am
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com
March 4, 2013
Barack Obama: The Man Behind the Mask
By Steve McCann
Sixty-three months ago Barack Obama officially declared his candidacy for President. Only now are some among the so-called media and ruling elites in America slowly awakening from their self-induced infatuation and beginning to understand who he is. It has become difficult to ignore the overt intimidation, demagoguery and deliberate falsehoods spewed forth by Obama relative to sequestration — a miniscule cut in the growth of federal spending. However, any cursory examination of his past reveals that these tactics are second nature to the man who currently occupies the Oval Office.
Yet there remains a stubborn unwillingness on the part of many to recognize the essential Barack Obama. Perhaps it is unfathomable to them that they could be wrong about someone who was the epitome of their superficial ideal candidate. They are blinded to the danger by their belief that this country, the wealthiest and most powerful nation in the history of mankind, could never be brought to its knees by anyone.
Barack Obama is a product of 1960′s radicalism. His parents, grandparents, mentors, professors and, by his own admission, circle of friends were all disciples of Marxist thought and the tactics of societal revolution. Not only his formative years but virtually his entire life has been an immersion in this mindset — a mindset which includes a deep seated animosity toward capitalism and individual freedom. Virtually all the despots of the twentieth century had the same philosophical convictions and intellectual backgrounds.
What makes this belief system so popular among those who harbor megalomaniacal tendencies is the core tenet that the end justifies the means. With that simple phrase any tactic is permissible under the rubric that the true believers are pre-ordained to govern the people. Thus no lie is too egregious to tell, no strategy to destroy one’s political enemies is out of bounds, and the creation of false crises and faux enemies is not only legitimate but essential. Any leader within government or the national community at large who is captive to this thinking, as Barack Obama has repeatedly revealed throughout his life and political career, must by necessity be devoid of ethics, integrity or morals.
Nearly all the tyrants of the recent past had a unique capacity to mesmerize a large swath of the populace through ability to deliver a speech and create a cult of personality, aided and abetted by a media, if not state sponsored, then one willingly intimidated into doing the bidding of the exalted leader. This ability and extreme narcissism, which Barack Obama has in abundance, is another pre-requisite for despotism.
Another personality trait common to despots is a disregard for life and an unrelenting willingness to use and discard people. While a member of the Illinois Senate, Barack Obama was not only in favor of unfettered abortion rights, he introduced a bill that would make legal the murder of newly born children that miraculously survived an abortion. Throughout his life he has used and manipulated the gullible into being the foot soldiers for his personal ambitions — whether an entire race of people (African-Americans) by playing on his skin color or the elite ruling establishment wallowing in "white guilt." The most overused phrase describing Obama’s actions since he entered the national stage is: "thrown under the bus" and it has been for good reason as in the case of Reverend Jeremiah Wright or many in the media and the Democratic Party.
A well worn tactic by those desirous of becoming autocrats and seizing an ever increasing amount of political power is to keep the populace in a constant state of agitation. As a community organizer and in elected office Obama has a history of using these tactics. Since becoming president he has promoted the escalation of vitriol aimed at inciting retaliation against the tea party movement and conservatives. The demonization of the wealthy has never been so sustained and blatant. The incendiary charge of racism has become the default accusation directed at anyone disagreeing with Barack Obama. As a result racial animosity is approaching levels not seen since the 1960′s. There is open talk of curbing free speech, governing by presidential fiat in order to bypass Congress, threatening to seize guns through legislation and regulation, and promoting blanket amnesty for illegal aliens — all steps geared toward fomenting societal upheaval.
Barack Obama is someone who would willingly inflict pain and suffering on the American people in order to permanently destroy his political enemies and accumulate near dictatorial power for the government he controls. His megalomania does not allow him to care a whit for the citizenry or the long-term future of the country he is pushing into bankruptcy or the nation’s ability to survive in a hostile world.
During the past century millions of people were thrown into a cauldron of indescribable suffering which emanated from the inability of sophisticated, albeit fractured, European societies to overcome economic and societal hardships. They chose instead to be willingly manipulated by prospective autocrats promising to solve their nation’s woes through their ill-conceived vision of utopia. A utopia that that evolved into the near destruction of a continent and the death of untold millions.
If those currently in power in the United States succeed in eliminating any opposition and continue to inexorably increase their control of the government through their tyrannical tactics, aided and abetted by the media, the sycophants in the ruling class and the entertainment complex, there will inevitably be uncontrolled violence and upheaval within America’s borders. The nation’s standard of living will drop precipitously; there will be an irrevocable loss of freedom and ultimately the imposition of foreign influence over a once proud nation.
The sequestration tactics by Barack Obama are but the latest manifestation of his mindset. In order to have a free hand to achieve his tyrannical ambitions, he must make certain the Republican control of the House of Representatives is overturned in the 2014 mid-term elections. This is his current and only objective and he will stop at nothing to accomplish that goal. After all this is who Barack Obama is.
Statistics: Posted by yoda — Mon Mar 04, 2013 1:13 am
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com
2008 Passport office break-in, 2012: Innocence of Muslims explained
Brennan: from Barack to Benghazi
- Doug Hagmann Thursday, February 21, 2013
Benghazi. Few Americans ever heard of the city in Libya until the murder of four Americans, including a U.S. ambassador, on September 11, 2012. Fewer still heard of the movie Innocence of Muslims, until it was suddenly blamed for a non-existent protest outside of a non-existent embassy in Benghazi within hours of the attack.
For two weeks in our nation’s history, the obscure and amateurish video was persistently and very publicly cited as the cause for the protests and murders in Benghazi by the highest ranking officials in the Obama administration. Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice, and others blamed the little known video for the attack on what was deliberately mischaracterized as a U.S. consulate in Benghazi.
Even today, the majority of officials in power don’t seem to want to talk about what happened in Benghazi, and Obama and Clinton repeatedly stonewalled all legitimate investigation of the incident. Why? Because any honest investigation into the activities taking place there would confirm a secret CIA operation intended to arm anti-Assad rebels, including the Iranian and Syrian backed Ansar al Sharia terror group. The purpose of this operation, the objective of which remains in place, is to topple Assad and replace him with a Saudi-backed leader. Based on research and investigation, it appears that somewhere amid the magician’s fog of this illegal “black op” overthrow is John O. Brennan.
The Arabic-speaking John Brennan, who serves as Obama’s assistant for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, and is the choice to head the CIA, has seen his share of exposure in the alternative media lately. Most recently, former FBI agent John Guandolo alleged that Brennan, while working as the CIA station chief in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia from 1996 to 1999, converted to Islam. According to agent Guandolo, Brennan visited Mecca and Medina during the Hajj, which are traditionally off limits to non-Muslims during that period. Former agent Guandolo cites Brennan’s presence and his comments about his visits as evidence of his conversion.
Beyond his possible conversion to Islam, however, Brennan’s other actions are much more troubling, particularly as they relate to his past history with Obama, and more recent history related to Benghazi, drone warfare, and his involvement with an administrative “kill list.” It appears possible that, by nominating Brennan to be the nation’s top spy chief, Obama might be tying up loose ends that are shrouded by controversy. One loose end is the Benghazi operation and the manner in which an obscure Internet video was immediately blamed. Yet another loose end relates to Obama’s passport records while he was on the campaign trail in 2008. These two significant incidents involving questions and controversy, lies and murder, are like bookends to a four-year stint in a star chamber.
Based on extensive investigation by this author, the former might well relate to the latter, as determined by the “digital footprints” and historical digital records of both incidents. Investigation of both incidents finds common digital forensic factors that suggest that the same person or persons involved in the 2008 passport office break-in (or at least the same entities) might be involved in the dissemination of the video Innocence of Muslims immediately following the 2012 attacks in Benghazi. Or, it would appear that way.
It is the professional opinion of this author (holding certification in Internet Profiling) that both incidents, despite this four-year span, appear to involve companies associated with corporate entities serving, or otherwise connected to, the U.S. government. This was determined through analysis of the IP addresses used to upload and change certain characteristics of the video, among other investigative indications.
Based on this research and investigation, the one person identified as seeming to have some level of involvement in the midst of both incidents is John O. Brennan.
2008 Passport office break-in
It has been reported and confirmed that computer files maintained and managed by the United States Passport Office were illegally accessed on three separate occasions in 2008 as follows: 9 January 2008, 21 February 2008, and 14 March 2008. Although the initial story broke in The Washington Times on Thursday, 20 March 2008, an article containing additional information was published two days later, on Saturday, 22 March 2008.
At that time, it was disclosed by State Department spokesman Sean McCormack that three (3) employees of two (2) separate government contracting firms were suspected in the “break-in,” and that the files accessed included those of then-Presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and John McCain. The motives for the accessing of records was unclear, according to investigating officials. The firms that employed the suspects were identified as Stanley, Inc. (a firm that employed two suspects), and The Analysis Corporation(that employed one suspect).
Of note is that, according to published reports, in 2006 the firm identified as Stanley, Inc. was awarded a $164 million government contract to print new U.S. passports. Despite the security breach, Stanley, Inc. (currently a wholly owned subsidiary of CGI Federal, Inc.) announced on 17 March 2008 that they were awarded a five-year, $570 million contract to continue support of the U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Consular Affairs/Passport Services Directorate.
The contract services include the production, operational and business process support training, procurement, administration and evaluation of critical supplies, and facilities management support at the four Passport Centers, and 14 Passport Agencies nationwide, along with the Headquarters’ support offices.
The Analysis Corporation (TAC), based in McLean, Virginia is a wholly owned subsidiary and the intelligence division of Global Defense Technology & Systems, Inc. (GTEC), a defense contracting company that is “focused on mission-critical, technology-based U.S. national security solutions.” It has been since renamed Sotera Defense Solutions.
Founded in 1990, the Analysis Corporation has been working on counterterrorism and national security projects, including (but not limited to) maintaining national “watch-listing” activities. According to open source reports, the intelligence part of GTEC is staffed by former senior officials from the intelligence community. They are operationally involved with nearly every branch of the intelligence community, including the U.S. Department of State, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).
It is important to note that two employees working for Stanley, Inc. were fired. A third employee of The Analysis Corporation was the primary focus of the ongoing investigation. At the time of the break-in, the Analysis Corporation was owned and operated by John O. Brennan (CEO from November 2005 to January 2009). It is also important to note that during this period, John O. Brennan served as a close advisor to Obama in 2008 on matters of intelligence and foreign policy. Following a 25-year career in the CIA, Brennan also worked with the campaign to elect Obama during his first presidential campaign.
With regard to the breach of the passport office files, revelations regarding the results of the government investigation appear to have fallen into a deep, black hole in terms of any publication of investigative findings. Aside from the termination of two of the three suspects, the legal disposition of their cases (including the employee of Stanley, Inc.) remains unknown.
At the time of the passport office break-in, Barack Hussein Obama was on the campaign trail as the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. The news of the breach was made public within a week of the last intrusion. A week later, on 21 March 2008, while Obama was campaigning, he was asked for his reaction by ABC News Jake Tapper. It is obvious that Obama became officially aware that the public had been informed about the level of the breach, and that his personal and confidential biographical information, in addition to his international travels on his diplomatic and personal passport, were apparently “accessed.”
On April 8, 2008, Obama admitted, for the first time in any public venue as a presidential candidate, that he traveled to Pakistan in 1981. It is reasonable to ask whether Obama would have disclosed his Pakistan trip at this time had it not been for his uncertainty about whether or not the information had already been made public.
Even ABC News appeared surprised at this sudden and unexpected revelation, considering all of the talk about Pakistan and U.S. foreign policy during the previous several months. It is critical to understand that Obama never disclosed his Pakistan trip at any time during any policy discussions or debates prior to the passport office breach.
Deeper investigation into the break-in found evidence that, in addition to the passport files, ancillary documentation of Obama, Clinton, McCain and several others was also compromised. Information that would facilitate identity fraud was also breached, as was the credit header information of various individuals. Based on this author’s most recent investigative findings, it is the professional belief of this author that this additional information provides the link between the break-in and an individual known as Lieutenant Quarles Harris, Jr. [Author’s note: “Lieutenant” (and all known spelling variations) is the individual’s given name, and does not represent any “rank” in any military or law enforcement agency.]
It is also important to point out that during the investigation of the breach of the passport office records, The Washington Times reported that “officials do not know whether information was improperly copied, altered or removed from the database during the intrusions” [Emphasis added]. As time progressed, so did the leaks. It was learned that at least one employee at the U.S. Department of State was a co-conspirator in the break-in.
According to published reports, that employee might have shared credit card information obtained during the breach with a man identified as Lieutenant Quarles Harris, Jr.
Based on the continued investigation of this author, it appears that Harris was the intended recipient of stolen credit card information from a State Department employee also involved in the breaches, but he received more than what he bargained for. When he realized the scope of the crime and the explosive nature of the information he possessed, he turned to investigators for protection. He also began to talk with investigators, and ultimately he made a deal with federal prosecutors.
Before he could make good on his deal, Lieutenant Quarles Harris, Jr. was found shot to death in his car on April 17, 2008, just over a month after the last breach. He was found in front of the Judah House Praise Baptist Church in the northeast section of Washington. He had been shot once in the head.
The murder of Harris remains unsolved, and the official account of the murder is that Harris was either a victim of random violence, or his murder was a result of a “street deal gone bad.”
2012: Innocence of Muslims explained
In many ways, the video Innocence of Muslims can be compared to the bloody glove found at Rockingham, a reference to a piece of evidence in the infamous O.J. Simpson murder trial. The video is critical evidence in the murder of four Americans – men who died in a dusty land on the dark continent. Due to the lies perpetuated by those in office, they will be denied earthly justice as Americans continue to passively accept the contemptible hubris of those spinning such tales. In this investigation of multiple murders, felonious and even traitorous activities, however, the video provides important clues in the form of digital bread crumbs. These digital bread crumbs have left a trail directly to the doorstep of agencies involved in playing a supporting role in U.S. counter-terror operations, and those in the government they serve.
The video is the Achilles heel that serves to expose their nefarious cover-up.
Many perplexing questions remain unanswered about the video that Obama, Clinton, Rice, Carney and others blamed on the attack and murders in Benghazi. Although I’ve carefully documented the history of the video that ultimately came to be known as The Innocence of Muslims in a previous report (available here), a few key issues to summarize new and significant findings, however, need to be addressed.
First, it is the professional opinion of this author, based on extensive investigation, that the video was a “made-to-order” production by orders from – and payment by – our own intelligence community. The alleged producer of the video, publicly identified as Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, was associated with an individual known as Eiad Salameh, the cousin of Walid Shoebat, a man well known in counter-terrorism circles. According to Shoebat, Salameh was the subject of an extensive FBI investigation relating to a large-scale fraud operation several years ago.
According to Mr. Shoebat, his cousin Salameh was in the sights of the FBI for three decades. During this period, he had reportedly committed numerous federal crimes that were known to the FBI, but he was never arrested. This author was able to confirm that Salameh was connected to Nakoula, specifically for the purposes of this video, and that the activities of both men were well known to the FBI at the highest levels. This author also confirmed the facts presented by Mr. Shoebat in his 23-page report titled Anti-Muhammad Film “Innocence of Muslims” has a terrorist financier connection that includes major failures at the FBI. However, this author disputes some of Shoebat’s conclusions based on evidence that was unavailable to him.
To be precise, it is the contention of this author, based on an examination of numerous court documents, and the totality of evidence, that the video was created and produced by individuals who were acting as operational assets for the FBI. If this type of activity sounds familiar, it should, as it is the same template that is commonly and frequently used by our government. It is the same template used in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center and numerous “terrorist” operations since.
It appears possible that the FBI had enough evidence of criminal wrongdoing by Salameh and his associates to send him to jail indefinitely. Because Salameh and his associates had contacts with terrorists in other countries and were communicating with them, the CIA became involved as well. Based on the evidence reviewed, it is the professional opinion of this investigator that the causal conduit between the FBI and the CIA was John Brennan, who was acting at the time as the assistant to President Barack Obama for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism operations. Brennan also had numerous contacts within the burgeoning world of private counter-intelligence companies and operatives.
From my investigative findings, it appears that the “order” for the video was placed in 2011, at the time the Arab Spring was gaining momentum. It was also a time when anti-Muslim sentiment and “hate speech” was gaining worldwide attention in the U.S.
A video to incite and inflame Muslims was desired for the dual purpose of causing violent outbreaks for specific times, and to create a catalyst to stifle any criticism of Islam. However, no legitimate film producer wanted the job nor could be trusted in this “black op” assignment. Accordingly, the FBI appears to have given Nakoula (who was associated with Salameh) a choice between cooperation and prison. It appears that he chose the former option.
Using a combination of willing participants and people duped into cooperating, Nakoula used his connections to involve some more well-known members within the “anti-jihad” movement, many who would sign on to any such project without performing any diligent investigation of the people behind the endeavor. While seeming to serve his handlers within the intelligence community, Nakoula was also working for his own personal gain. Despite its actual low budget, the cost to the intelligence agency funding it was high.
The production of the video began in July of 2011, about 14 months before the Benghazi attack. The initial name of this production was called Desert Warrior, but was changed on 30 June 2012 to The Innocence of Bn [sic] Laden. The following day, it “premiered” at The Vine Theater in Los Angeles under that name in order to provide legitimacy. Promotional flyers, written in Arabic, were provided in advance of (and at) the opening. According to public accounts, however, no one showed up to watch the movie, and it was quickly forgotten.
The roughly 14-minute video later appeared on the YouTube channel of a man known as Sam Bacile under the title The Real Life of Mohammed, on 1 July 2012. Clearly, the video had been digitally manipulated in an obviously amateurish manner from the original filming to the final incarnation. Replacement of the original dialogue with obviously antagonistic and insulting lines was clearly evident in the final video that appeared online.
If Nakoula had an operating budget provided by the CIA, why was the video such an obvious amateurish production? The reason, I was told by sources with knowledge of this video, is that much of the money was used by Nakoula and Salameh, who both had criminal histories involving fraud. Essentially, the FBI and the CIA were “out-conned” by a couple of convicted con artists.
Meanwhile, the U.S. operations in Benghazi were being shut down, as the job had been mostly completed and the U.S. was getting pressure from the Turkish and Russian governments. The operatives in Benghazi needed a diversion to finish their operation. A large-scale anti-American demonstration in Tripoli, Cairo or elsewhere would serve as cover to wind things down in Benghazi, and would divert and otherwise occupy the press.
Despite being poorly done, it is important to understand that the video already had its “legend” established. This explains the curiously odd “premier” at the Vine Theater, which was done, not for public consumption, but to establish its fictitious pedigree. In the spy world, “legends,” or well-prepared synthetic histories of a person (or in this case, a video) is vital.
Although far from perfect, the video Innocence of Muslims, having been virtually dormant on an internet channel for months, was suddenly “discovered” by Egyptian television host Sheikh Khalid Abdulla, who first aired the video on 9 September 2012. Well known in the world of counter-terrorism, Abdullah acted as the Middle East conduit for the otherwise useless video. Due to the persistent promotion of that video, protests broke out in Cairo and, more importantly, at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli.
How did Khalid Abdulla even find the obscure video? It is the professional opinion of this author that the answer might be found by identifying the YouTube channel (or channels) on which it was uploaded. Tracing the digital fingerprints of the various incarnations of the video from the first casting call (when it was named Desert Warrior) to its final birthing as Innocence of Muslims, there is an apparent connection to the IP address associated with Stanley, Inc., the company previously referenced in the passport office break-in. From there, the fingerprints get somewhat “smudged,” but a connection is possible to others in the counter-terrorism and defense industry serving the U.S. government. In short, Abdullah was “given” the video by our own intelligence community.
The motive was not only to cause a diversion, but also to facilitate the undermining of First Amendment rights of all Americans, especially as they relate to the criticism of Islam. If this sounds too far out or convenient, take a look at the background of John Brennan, who spent time throughout the Middle East, including Egypt. Furthermore, the U.S. intelligence agencies were heavily influencing the media within Egypt following the toppling of Mubarak and the installation of the Muslim Brotherhood backed regime.
Too much free speech is a bad thing
Even deeper investigation of John Brennan has taken this author to his 1980 graduate thesis titled Human Rights, A Case Study of Egypt, which he wrote while at the University of Texas at Austin. Based on an extensive review of his published thesis, it appears that Obama wants to have, as his top spymaster, someone in favor of government censorship, or media manipulation for government purposes. Brennan’s thesis offers valuable insight into his thinking and logic, especially as it relates to his personal experiences in Egypt. Using such personal experience, he seems readily able to justify government censorship actions, as in the case of Egypt under Anwar Sadat. It is important to consider that in his thesis, Brennan argues that too much uncensored or unchecked freedom could be detrimental to Egypt’s political environment.
Brennan’s overtly pro-Islamic position is evident in the counter-terrorism policies within the U.S. intelligence community. One would be remiss not to note the revisions performed to our internal counter-terrorism training manuals that removed all criticism of Islam under Brennan’s direction.
Given Brennan’s obvious pro-Islamic bias, the views he argued in his graduate thesis (that include favoring government censorship under certain conditions), his history with the CIA, and his close ties to Obama, is it not reasonable to question Brennan’s activities while National Security Advisor to Obama during the Benghazi attack? Even without the evidence described above? Specifically, is it not possible that the blueprint for use of the video not only to cause a necessary diversion, but to create a case against our First Amendment rights, originated with Brennan at the behest of Obama?
Putting it all together
John Brennan, Obama’s pick for top U.S. spy, has recently come under fire for his stance on drone killings, secret kill lists, and in some circles, his alleged conversion to Islam. Some will consider Brennan the obvious choice to head the CIA, given his history with the agency. Few see a different side, a side possibly connected to unseemly activities involving crimes and cover-ups.
Those who object to John Brennan’s nomination are doing so on the basis of the obvious. Such examples include his support for enhanced interrogation techniques, drone use, and the maintenance of a secret “kill list” from the star chamber of the White House.
There are many more important questions about Brennan that need to be asked and answered. Reader, do you care enough about the future of your children and grandchildren to meet the challenge of asking these questions?
I believe I’ve identified questions about his role in the 2008 passport office security breach in which the file of Barack Obama, among others, was accessed. In that case alone, it is reasonable to ask, “What information having significant political capital about Obama and others might be known to this spy legend? Has the spirit of J. Edgar Hoover been resurrected in John Brennan?”
How about his role in the murderous attacks in Benghazi, and the subsequent cover-up? Or perhaps greater still, his role in the Saudi intelligence operation known as Arab Spring?
America has a history of creating great spies. America also has a history of turning out some spies who are adept at working all sides of an agenda, including the opposing sides. At this point in our nation’s history, can we afford to be anything except absolutely certain about the loyalty of our appointees to our country, our Constitution, and our future? No one should be appointed until every question is asked, answered, and verified.
Statistics: Posted by yoda — Fri Feb 22, 2013 1:40 am
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com
Most of the commentary on President Obama’s Tuesday evening State-of-the-Union Address has focused on the seemingly endless list of policy proposals he put forward – education, green energy, manufacturing hubs, minimum wage, and on and on. And understandably so, because that’s the minutia that Congress, the administration, and Washington more broadly obsess over day in and day out.
But if you step back, as I did yesterday in a piece at Forbes, you see a “national industrial policy” not unlike that of Obama’s mentor, Franklin Roosevelt, that is at once, as with Roosevelt, indifferent to constitutional limits and oblivious to economic principles. It’s really quite striking from that perspective. Have a look.
View full post on Cato @ Liberty
American people are being positioned to suffer most due to the accumulation of debt that irresponsible government officials racked up
The Darkest Design of Barack Obama?
- Erik Rush
Friday, January 18, 2013
For some time, there have been unsubstantiated reports of the Obama administration engaging in clandestine negotiations with China toward satisfying America’s debt to that nation via exchanges of land and resources. Such an arrangement would be illegal and treasonous of course, but given its deportment to date, that would not likely deter this administration.
Also, in the face of having trillions of dollars in debt called by China, and the economic catastrophe that would ensue, it is entirely possible that Obama might request and be granted some manner of dispensation from Congress to legitimize this pact.
This week, I presented substantiation to the aforementioned reports, much to the fear and consternation of most people who became apprised of this phenomenon. Referencing sources that have proven reliable in the past, I cited such things as Chinese military operatives engaging in clandestine “research” within U.S. borders, and assessments of land and resources having been conducted by China in recent years, all with the administration’s approval.
All of this falls well within the parameters of Barack Obama’s long-standing desire to bring America down, as it were, punishing the American people for centuries of enjoying the spoils of imperialism, colonialism, and oppression, as well as finally bringing this nation under the heel of communism.
It also explains maneuvers that have taken place over the past few years relative to this administration. Given the economic circumstances in which America found itself when Obama took office, many were horrified at his spending $5 trillion during his first term, and decisions that resulted in America’s debt increasing by approximately $10 trillion. Given his objectives, however, what better way to bring about increasing debt pressure than by more spending?
We’re aware that liberal politicians have treated communist China with a marked naïveté going back to the Clinton administration, allowing them inordinate incursion into our ports and commercial infrastructure, and that Obama has been singing China’s praises with regard to their infrastructure and growth since 2008. In 2011, Republican lawmakers voiced concern that the Obama administration was allowing high-ranking Chinese military officials access to sensitive U.S. military installations.
Thus – which came as an outrage, but no surprise to many – it is the Chinese government that is lobbying Obama to disarm the American public. They foresee a time when there will be widespread anger against them for their role in this obscene arrangement, and would rather not have to militarily engage armed Americans over land or resources that they will control, some of which is in America’s heartland. Some perceive Obama’s spirited pursuit of gun control after the Sandy Hook massacre as typical knee-jerk liberal opportunism, but it is far more than that.
As reported previously in this space, despite Obama’s affinity for communism and show of solidarity with the world’s leftists, the Chinese government thinks him a fool, yet they are more than happy to expand their global influence at our expense.
There has been a certain amount of backlash from conservatives given Obama’s pretentious and autocratic pursuit of new firearms regulation, and even from some Republican lawmakers. This week, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) claimed that Obama has “drunk the Kool-Aid… he’s high on his own power,” and that he will “pay the political price” for gun control, predicting 2010-style GOP Senate victories in 2014.
Obama’s definitely high on power, but I wouldn’t count on him paying any price for his policy escapades; considering the course America is on at the moment, there may not be a midterm election in 2014 at all. If there is, the leftist juggernaut of a compromised press, political organization, and outright fraud proved in November 2012 that it can prevail over all logic, common sense, and ostensible fail safes within the American electoral system. As the press continues to maintain the illusion that Obama is simply another American trying to do the right thing, he has been involved in the darkest machinations, some as yet incomprehensible to the average American.
It is a sad irony that the American people are being positioned to suffer most due to the accumulation of debt that irresponsible (and some outright treasonous) government officials racked up in the first place, but such is the lot of those who are ruled rather than governed.
Erik Rush is a New York-born columnist, author and speaker who writes sociopolitical commentary for numerous online and print publications. In February of 2007, Erik was the first to break the story of President (then Senator) Barack Obama’s ties to militant Chicago preacher Rev. Jeremiah Wright on a national level, which ignited a media firestorm that smolders to this day. His latest book, “Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal ~ America’s Racial Obsession,” examines the racist policies by which the political left keeps black Americans in thralldom, white Americans guilt-ridden and yielding, and maintains the fallacy that America remains an institutionally racist nation. Links to his work are available at Erikrush.com.
Statistics: Posted by yoda — Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:39 am
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com
Barack Obama has greatly expanded the powers of the presidency during his time in the White House, but there is one institution that he simply will not mess with. There is one organization that is considered to be so sacred in Washington D.C. that Obama will not dare utter a single negative word against it. That organization is the Federal Reserve. Even though he has shown that he is unafraid to pick a fight with just about everyone else in Washington, Obama flat out refuses to criticize the Fed and he even reappointed Ben Bernanke for another term as Fed Chairman even though Bernanke has a track record of failure that would make the Chicago Cubs look good. Perhaps Obama is aware of what has happened to other presidents that have chosen to tangle with the Fed. In any event, it has become clear that Obama submits to anything that the Fed says without question, and the controversy over the “trillion dollar coin” is another perfect example of this. For weeks, there has been much speculation in the mainstream media about the possibility that the Obama administration may print up a one trillion dollar coin that it would use to keep paying the bills of the federal government if an agreement to raise the debt ceiling is not reached. But on Saturday the Federal Reserve killed that idea, and we shouldn’t be surprised by that because under no circumstances will the Fed ever accept a threat to their monopoly over money creation in the United States. If the Federal Reserve had allowed Obama to print up a debt-free trillion dollar coin, that would have set a very dangerous precedent for the Fed. The American people would have realized that the federal government can actually create debt-free money whenever it wants and that it does not actually have to borrow money from anyone. That is something that the Fed probably would have moved heaven and earth to keep from happening. But now we won’t ever know how far the Fed would really be willing to go to keep their monopoly over money creation, because Obama has no plans to challenge this latest ruling from “the real boss” of our financial system.
Sadly, most Americans don’t even realize that a private banking cartel has a monopoly over all money creation in this country. In recent years they have abused this power by wildly printing money (“quantitative easing“), and by making more than 16 trillion dollars in secret loans to their friends during the last financial crisis. Under our system, the private Federal Reserve creates money whenever they want, and nobody else gets to create money. It is an insane system, but very, very few of our politicians will ever dare to question it.
At this point, the U.S. Treasury Department is essentially just an arm of the Federal Reserve. That is why it was no surprise that the Fed and the Treasury Department issued a joint statement on Saturday. According to Treasury spokesman Anthony Coley, both the Treasury and the Fed have come to the conclusion that under no circumstances should a trillion dollar coin be printed up by the Obama administration…
“Neither the Treasury Department nor the Federal Reserve believes that the law can or should be used to facilitate the production of platinum coins for the purpose of avoiding an increase in the debt limit”
But of course it was actually the Federal Reserve which made this decision. The following is from a report posted by Zeke Miller of Buzzfeed.com…
The Federal Reserve was responsible for killing a controversial proposal to circumvent the debt limit, a senior administration official told BuzzFeed Sunday.
On Saturday the Treasury Department released a statement ruling out the only remaining alternative to Congress raising the nation’s borrowing limit, which would utilize a loophole in federal law to mint a $1 trillion coin to be deposited in the Federal Reserve and ensure the federal government could pay all bills and debt obligations.
According to that Buzzfeed article, the Federal Reserve would have actually refused to recognize the trillion dollar coin if the Obama administration had tried to deposit it with the Fed…
But it was the Federal Reserve that killed the proposal, the official told BuzzFeed, denying a purely political rationale for the announcement, saying the independent central bank would not have credited the Treasury’s accounts for the vast sum for depositing the coin.
So there you go.
The real boss has told Barack Obama how it is going to be, and Obama plans to meekly comply.
So why is the Federal Reserve so adamant about maintaining their monopoly over money creation?
Well, it is all about compound interest. Albert Einstein once made the following statement about compound interest…
“Compound interest is the eighth wonder of the world. He who understands it, earns it … he who doesn’t … pays it.”
When the Federal Reserve system was initially created back in 1913, the bankers that created it intended for it to be a perpetual debt machine that would extract massive amounts of wealth from the U.S. government (and ultimately from all of us) through the mechanism of compound interest. Each year, hundreds of billions of dollars of interest are transferred into the pockets of the wealthy bankers and foreign nations that own our debt. This is one of the reasons why I preach about the evils of government debt until I am blue in the face. The debt-based Federal Reserve system is a way to systematically steal the wealth of the United States, and it is happening right in front of our eyes, but very few people actually understand it well enough to complain about it.
Unfortunately, we are rapidly getting to the point where we have accumulated so much debt that it is threatening to collapse our entire financial system. The following comes from a recent Zero Hedge article…
By now most are aware of the various metrics exposing the unsustainability of US debt (which at 103% of GDP, it is well above the Reinhart-Rogoff “viability” threshold of 80%; and where a return to just 5% in blended interest means total debt/GDP would double in under a decade all else equal simply thanks to the “magic” of compounding), although there is one that captures perhaps best of all the sad predicament the US self-funding state (where debt is used to fund nearly half of total US spending) finds itself in. It comes from Zhang Monan, researcher at the China Macroeconomic Research Platform: “The US government is now trying to repay old debt by borrowing more; in 2010, average annual debt creation (including debt refinance) moved above $4 trillion, or almost one-quarter of GDP, compared to the pre-crisis average of 8.7% of GDP.“
This is a key statistic most forget when they discuss the stock and flow of US debt: because whereas the total US deficit, and thus net debt issuance, is about $1 trillion per year, one has to factor that there is between $3 and $4 trillion in maturities each year, which have to be offset by a matched amount of gross issuance just to keep the stock of debt flat (pre deficit funding). The assumption is that demand for this gross issuance will always exist as old maturities are rolled into new debt, however, this assumption is contingent on one very key variable: interest rates not rising.
Do you understand what is being said there?
Not only is our debt rising by more than a trillion dollars a year, we also need to roll over trillions of dollars of federal debt each year. If interest rates on that debt start rising, we are going to start feeling the pain very rapidly.
As I have mentioned previously, the average rate of interest on U.S. government debt was 6.638 percent back in 2000. If we returned to that level today, we would be paying more than a trillion dollars a year just in interest on the national debt.
The main thing keeping interest rates low right now is the fact that the U.S. dollar is the de facto reserve currency of the world. If that ends, interest rates on U.S. debt will skyrocket. The following is from a recent article by Chris Ferreira…
The US Dollar is the reserve currency of the world. You need it to buy oil, a vital component of any economy. Since other countries like China cannot print US dollars at their leisure, they have to get it from somewhere. They get it from trade with the US. The US buys products in Asia and the rest of the world with US dollars, and in turn these same dollar surpluses are used to buy oil and US bonds, creating a much needed artificial demand for US dollars.
This is also how the enormous US 558$ billion trade deficit in 2011 was financed. The US has been in a trade deficit since the 1980?s and it continues the grow as jobs and manufacturing are being lost to more competitive nations. The trade deficit also accounts for the national debt. The financing of the debt creates artificial demand for US bonds which helps lower the interest rate and coincidentally helps to raise the debt levels even higher.
Unfortunately, the rest of the world is starting to move away from the U.S. dollar. Over the past couple of years, a whole host of international currency agreements have been signed that are intended to start reducing the use of the U.S. dollar in international trade. For much more on this, please see the following article: “The Giant Currency Superstorm That Is Coming To The Shores Of America When The Dollar Dies“.
Most Americans have absolutely no idea how very close we are to financial catastrophe. The only way we can continue to service our enormous 16 trillion dollar debt is for interest rates on that debt to remain super low. But the only way those interest rates can remain low is for the U.S. dollar to remain absolutely dominant in international trade. Once the rest of the world rejects the U.S. dollar, the game is over.
We are headed for total system meltdown, but neither major political party is going to do a thing about it. They are both just going to continue to meekly comply with the dictates of the real boss of our financial system – the Federal Reserve.
It is imperative that we educate the American people about these things. Please share this article with as many people as you can, and the following is another great article for anyone that does not understand how the Federal Reserve is destroying our financial system: “10 Things That Every American Should Know About The Federal Reserve“.
View full post on The Economic Collapse
What In The World Are Barack Obama And John Boehner Thinking?
By Michael, on December 18th, 2012 Barack Obama and John Boehner both seem absolutely determined to drive U.S. government finances off a cliff. The mainstream media would have you believe that there are vast ideological differences between the two of them and that they are bitter enemies, but that is simply not the case. Both of them say that tax increases are "necessary", but they disagree over the details. Both are seeking about a trillion dollars of spending cuts and about a trillion dollars of new "revenue", but they don’t see eye to eye on how to get there. But overall, they are both definitely playing in the same ballpark. And those numbers certainly do sound impressive until you realize that they are talking about a time span of ten years. Personally, I would love to see federal spending cut by a trillion dollars this year. But that will never happen. A trillion dollars over the course of a decade breaks down to about 100 billion dollars per year. That still sounds like a lot of money until you put it up next to the trillion dollar deficits that we have been running for four years in a row. Even if somehow those spending cuts turned out to be real (which they aren’t), they would still only put a very small dent in our yearly budget deficits. Obama and Boehner both want to continue to have a gigantic federal government that showers people with government money, and both of them want to continue to pass much of the burden for paying for this gigantic government on to future generations. And both of them want to continue to steal more than 100 million dollars an hour from our children and our grandchildren in order to maintain the false bubble of debt-fueled prosperity that we are enjoying right now. This is incredibly foolish and they are leading us down a path that will lead to national ruin.
Sadly, even the pathetically small "budget cut" and "new revenue" figures that they are floating around turn out to be quite hollow when you inspect them more closely.
For example, the "new revenue" figures that both Obama and Boehner are talking about rely on extremely unrealistic assumptions about U.S. economic growth. In order to meet their revenue projections, the U.S. economy would need to grow significantly faster than it is right now and we would need to get through the entire decade without having a single recession.
What do you think the chance of that happening is?
But that is the way that things work in Washington D.C. – our politicians function in a world where it is assumed that everything will work out just perfectly in the future.
For example, if the figures put out at the beginning of the Bush administration were to be believed, we should be absolutely swimming in government surpluses by now.
That didn’t work out too well, did it?
The "spending cuts" are even more illusory.
Obama is projecting that we will save 130 billion dollars by manipulating the way that inflation is calculated for annual increases in Social Security benefits.
But our politicians are already pretending that there is hardly any inflation when any rational person can see that prices are soaring.
So can they really manipulate the numbers to make them look even smaller?
By doing so, they would be cheating elderly Americans out of 130 billion dollars. But I guess this is more convenient for our politicians than going after real government waste.
Obama also plans to save $290 billion by having lower interest payments on U.S. government debt.
Try not to laugh.
The average rate of interest on U.S. government debt was 2.534 percent at the end of November. That is ridiculously low. The only place it is going to go in future years is up.
Back in the year 2000, the average rate of interest on U.S. government debt was 6.638 percent. If the average rate of interest on U.S. government debt rose back to that level, we would be paying out more than a trillion dollars a year just in interest on the national debt.
So Obama’s projection that we are going to save 290 billion dollars over the next ten years by forcing interest rates on U.S. government debt even lower is insanely optimistic. Only a delusional person would make such an assumption.
And most of the savings from the "projected spending cuts" that Obama and Boehner are proposing would not happen until later in the decade.
After all, they don’t want to "hurt the economy" right now.
In fact, Obama is actually proposing that we should increase spending by $80 billion this year so that we can encourage economic activity.
So don’t let anyone fool you with any nonsense about how Obama and Boehner are working on a plan that would get U.S. government finances in order.
No matter how their "negotiations" turn out, we will continue to run trillion dollars deficits year after year with no end in sight.
If Americans want a monstrous federal government that passes out government checks like candy, then they should pay for it. Personally, I think that taxes are already way, way too high and that the government already brings in more than enough money.
If Americans don’t want to pay much higher taxes, then they should tell the government to quit spending money that we don’t have.
But all of this trying to have it both ways has got to stop. We are destroying the future for our children and our grandchildren. We have already run up 16 trillion dollars in debt and we can’t even seem to slow down our reckless debt binge. If they get the chance, someday future generations will curse us for what we did to them.
The funny thing is that John Boehner was supposed to be a "conservative" that was going to do something about all of this debt. But since John Boehner has been Speaker of the House, the U.S. House of Representatives has approved legislation that has increased the size of our national debt by approximately $18,944 per household.
Meanwhile, our economy continues to unravel, good jobs are becoming even more scarce, and poverty continues to explode.
For example, did you know that there are now more than one million homeless students in America? Sadly, it’s true…
The number of homeless students in America topped one million for the first time last year as a result of the economic recession, a number that has risen 57 percent since 2007.
The US Department of Education found that of these 1,065,794 children, many lived in abandoned homes, cheap hotels, stations, church basements and hospitals. Some spent their time sleeping over at the houses of various friends whenever they could. Others fell victim to drugs and sexual abuse, in some cases trading sexual acts for food, clothing and shelter or selling illegal drugs.
Even in the midst of our debt-fueled prosperity, the number of Americans that are dependent on the government just continues to rise.
According to one recent survey, 55 percent of all Americans have received money from a safety net program run by the federal government at some point in their lives.
So how bad will things get when we eventually quit borrowing so much money and we start living within our means?
Nobody is looking forward to that day. Certainly not our politicians. They don’t want to be blamed for all of the painful adjustments that will happen once the party ends.
So they just keep borrowing and spending. But at some point the music will stop and the house of cards will come crashing down.
It won’t happen this week or this month, but it will happen soon enough.
I hope that you are ready.
Statistics: Posted by yoda — Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:12 pm
View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com