Remember your old grade school classes, when the teacher - after licking her fingers - would pass out the day's lesson to the students?

 

 

This is why the democrats always manage to be on the SAME page everyday. And notice how a democrat at a townhall meeting in New Jersey, or one at a townhall in Texas, each use the EXACT same phrases, and tell the same lies almost verbatim.

 

But how?

 

How could a Democrat in New Hampshire, or one in Minnesota - having been home for the last 3 weeks- all be saying the same thing (and sounding like poll parrots) if they were not receiving general talking points from Washington every morning?

 

 

Pelosi: "Well, it's not easy, like with the stimulus, where we kept scaring them about getting laid off, and had 'em worried about rising unemployment numbers."

 

Emanuel; "Hmmm. You're right. But we should've come up with something by now. After all, we were in the same mess with cap and trade for a month, until I came up with that phrase "creating clean energy jobs."  "The suckers sure bit on that one!"

 

Pelosi: "Well Rahm, what's gonna be your big idea this time? Another crisis? Barack's under a lot of pressure from George (Soros). He says if we don't get the bill he wants passed by November, George is gonna make it real tough on him for 2012. And you know what that means."

 

Emanuel: "Yeh...I know. But I kind of like that one Barack began using a while ago...'doing nothing is NOT an option'...maybe we should just forget all the other stuff and keep pounding away with that."

 

(the conference drags out into the early AM) 

 

As we speak, Obama; Pelosi; Reid; Axelrod; Emanuel - all the big ringleaders are under huge pressure from the "big guy" - Mr. Soros!

 

In 2008, Soros played kingmaker:

 

It was George Soros - using the internet - who funneled all those hundreds of millions of dollars into the DNCC's campaign coffers, which enabled them to run zillions of negative TV campaign commercials. 

 

Result? The democrats swept not only the Whitehouse, but the other two Houses as well!

 

Sure people were unhappy with Bush in '08; but how about Congress? Could there have been THAT MANY people who were upset with their local congressman? No way!

 

The democrats won an incredible amount seats last November, and it wasn't just because of dissatisfaction; it was because of huge campaign funding; Democrats outspending Republicans by as much as 5-to 1 in some contests.

 

How does someone like Al Franken - one of the lowliest, ugliest, most graceless and evil-minded persons around - defeat a well-educated, well-spoken classy INCUMBENT like Norm Coleman, and win away his seemingly secure Senate seat?

 

ANSWER: Repetitive, negative campaign ads- and hundreds of them!

 

October 31, 2008: one week before the election - a Minnesota Quinnipiac poll had Franken far behind Coleman- 51% to 41. 

Then, the Franken smear machine switched into overdrive: The DNCC stepped in and spent 1.5 milion dollars to run unending, negative campaign commercials - ALL lies!

 

 

But as it turned out, the whole thing was fabricated! Coleman was not on CREW's "corrupt" list, which contained only three Senators.

 

Another phony Franken ad stated..."Norm Coleman voted to give billions in tax breaks to oil companies"..."Now they're raking in record profits, and we're paying four bucks a gallon for gas!"

 

Michele Bachmann, another heavily-favored Republican from Minnesota, came within a mere 2% from being upset, after suddenly popping up on the Pelosi /Emanuel radar screen for her comments on MSNBC's "Hardball."

 

After accusing Congressional democrats of being 'un-American', Bachmann survived a razor close race that had no business even being close. Pelosi personally had come to Minnesota, and assumed control of Democrat challenger Elwyn Tinkleberg's campaign, injecting a cool 2 million in DNCC money - mostly going towards negative campaign commercials.

 

So the next time you see some arrogant democrat on TV, defiantly answering back at a roomful of shouting constituents- stop wondering why. Their minds were made up last June, when Obama first began talking about reforming health care

 

Emanuel and Pelosi have given their "constituents" (the House democrats) zero leeway: vote FOR the bill - or we work against you!

 

If they vote "nay" they will not get any money from the DNCC (democratic national campaign committee) for the 2010 midterms. This translates to very few TV commercials - the "lifeblood" of incumbency.

 

So even though one's constituents may be pleased with a "no" vote on HR 3200, any House democrat who crosses "Sister Mary Meany" Pelosi will be dealt with harshly; a whack over the head with the yardstick, plus no campaign money- and they will still be in jeopardy (from the right) with the Republican effort to win back the House.

 

Now on the other hand, for democrats voting "yes" on Obamacare (HR 3200), many political goodies shall be forthcoming:

 

- they receive millions in DNCC campaign money; which means hundreds of negative campaign commercials - usually sufficient to defeat ANY challenger

 

- they will receive a flood of earmark money for their home districts: Just think about all those FRONT PAGE stories in local newspapers, with headlines "Local Congressman Brings Home the Bacon" (works every time) .

 

- they advance rapidly up the "key committee" ladder: There are chairmanships galore to be shuffled around; and to the victors go the spoils.

 

So if you were wondering about our democratically-elected Congress...wonder no more. It's no longer up to the constituents - it's up to the power elite in Washington, who can either bribe one to the moon, or cast them off into the political landfill, where they remain buried in ignominy for daring to go against these mafia-like power brokers.

 

Government healthcare (HR 3200) will pass in the House; not because anyone really wants it, but because the democrats have bowed to their money base (George Soros). And if they dare cross him, its just like any chain of command: the big man at the top calling the shots, and all the underlings below, who must answer- or else. 

 

It's all elementary. 

(QUOTE) "The majority, oppressing the individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest, breaks up the foundations of society." --Thomas Jefferson, 1816.

 

And merely 193 years later, Jefferson's caveat now rings true:

 

An outlaw congressional majority - hell bent to destroy the very foundations of society- now reigns over Capitol Hill.

 

Even a gifted visionary like Jefferson could've never imagined mob rule in Congress, in arrogant defiance of hapless constituents back home.

 

Fear is the most powerful motivator; but strangely, to this 111th Congress, they seem to fear no one - even incensed people who could vote them from office.

 

 

Our Founders designed the federal government so that the PEOPLE - not Congress - would be important; going to great lengths to safeguard against excessive taxation, and protect individual freedoms. But above all, they intended that government would leave the individual ALONE.

 

 

Instead of Congress fearing their constituents, we have constituents who fear their Congress. 

 

In the brief span of but 150 days, they have passed/proposed laws that will not only bankrupt our country, debase our currency, but will trample the Constitution itself.

 

Laws that not even Niccolo Machiavelli himself could have dreamed up.

 

Laws designed to destroy the wealth of the upper classes, and prostrate them all under the heel of an out-of-control federal government.

 

Their mindless cap 'n trade law will eventually render tens of millions to the unemployment line. Big Brother socialization of medicine will undermine the happiness and integrity of many millions of lives.

 

But still Congress presses onward - oblivious to the protests from their districts back home.

 

With 256 democratic seats in the House, and 60 in the Senate, the common people are but bugs on the windshield of the Obama/ Reid/Pelosi road grader; a triumvirate of desperados that will stop nothing short of instituting full socialism within the United States.

 

Their unconstitutional actions and power grabs - abetted by our 111th  Congress - are unprecedented in all of American history.

 

 

As these majority leaders delegate public funds toward buying individual votes in Congress, they sign not only the death warrant of our representative republic, but the economy as well.

 

With carbon taxes on energy, and "cradle to the grave" socialized medicine, the future monstrosity our government creates will inevitably enslave us, and impose upon our children unsustainable debt - sure to render them poverty-stricken as well.  

 

And once we've been stripped of our earnings (and savings), resistance will become futile: workers may all end up in welfare lines, dependent on a monthly Obama check. This will indeed be their fate, should Congress continue to act in blind obedience to their blackhearted masters.

 

If voters re-elect these incumbents (as they are likely to do), we can only hope there will still be something remaining of America, once Obama/ Reid/ Pelosi - and our 111th Congress- are done trying to destroy it. 

 

Any questions?

 

As the old saying goes: "There's NO easy way to get rich"...er wait a minute-- did we forget something?

 

What about serving in Congress? Has there ever been a situation when somebody had to give up Congress, because they couldn’t make a living at it?

 

 

Best of all, you can NEVER be fired.

 

Now compare that to the present lot of today's average American:

 

Americans everywhere have lost their jobs-- forced to lower their standard of living. Many middle-class families are eating like peasants: less meat, more potatoes; more beans 'n franks, more mac 'n cheese; less hamburger-- no steak.

 

People have terminated cable TV; they have all but eliminated theaters and eating out.

 

But what if we terminated our out-of-control Congress? What then? The nation would prosper as never before!

 

Congress has their limos; their privately-chartered jet flights, and their private Senate AND House restaurants. They vote themselves pay raises. They vacation on the Riviera, travel to all the great resorts and golf courses of the world-- all on "official business."

 

Their arrogant self-righteousness is rooted in our tarnished voting tradition-- the incumbent "re-election factor." They serve until their "expiration" date; 'till death do they part!

 

 

Abe Lincoln once said, "Integrity is doing the right thing when nobody’s looking;"

 

Hence, we shall proceed to review the top ten examples in Congress: people that-- throughout their terms-- have exhibited shining examples of integrity, and have gone far out of their way to serve both their country and constituents.

 

 

Feinstein offered "to help" the FDIC stem the rise in foreclosures by making sure that Richard Ellis Properties-- a commercial real estate firm led by her husband -- won the "competitive bidding, and then harvested the bounty created by Feinstein's generous assistance in the matter. 

 

But California's people will eventually come to their senses, and re-elect her in a landslide.

 

 

But instead of an obvious insider trading charge, Durban --being a Democrat-- has "immunity". Nothing will be done. He will keep his perks and power, just as Barney Frank did after lying to George Bush in 2005 about the condition of Fannie Mae.

 

About 60% of the  Illinois  electorate voted for Durbin in the last election. Now, with this on the record, he'll probably reach 75% in the next election.

 

 

Interestingly, in May, 2007, she invested $100,000 in T. Boone Pickens’ Clean Energy Fuels IPO (initial public stock offering)  But is this not a flagrant conflict of interest for Madam Speaker? Should she be allowed to own stock in a company which will benefit from legislation she controls?

 

But given her lofty Congressional position, someday she will have to answer for it-- in the afterlife.

 

 

Baucus now is going full throttle to change the US health care system into a (socialized) Canadian version, and has forbade any democrat connected to the medical industry from contact with Republicans.

 

Considering the way he's trying to intimidate lobbyists who'd like to hear what the GOP caucus has to say, you can almost SMELL the totalitarianism of this radical leftist.

 

EXAMPLE #5-- Charles Schumer: 

As a congressman serving in the House, Schumer was censured by the Ethics Committee for having used his taxpayer-paid office staff to collect political campaign contributions.

 

For the last 3 years, he's been the Senate's numero-uno anti-driller. He's quite fine with the $60 billion we send OPEC every month, and the $3-4-gallon price his N.Y.City constituents pay for gasoline. He is also author to the oxymoronic, "we cant drill our way out" defeatist mantra.

 

Gee, could Schumer be getting anything under the table from the environmental lobby toward his re-election campaign? Nah, not an ethical fellow like Schumer; he's above ALL reproach.

 

EXAMPLE #6 -- Henry Waxman:

Waxman's clean air bill will suck so much disposable income from the average American household (estimated between $1800- 3000 annually) that our consumer-driven economy may all but collapse under his final death blow. Say goodbye to your sports car, your "work" truck; and your SUV. The Waxman Bill will eventually legislate them out of existence, much like the EPA did to Detroit 's flourishing muscle car industry in the early 70's.

 

Waxman is yet another that feasts at the environmental lobby's campaign contribution trough.

 

EXAMPLE # 7-- Barney Frank (aka Barney Fwank)

Mr. Fwank's repeated claims (since 2003) that Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac "are doing okay" should be enough to have him thrown off the House Banking Committee. He was against any oversight for these institutions--his efforts at social engineering-- and shielded these GSE"s (Govenmentt Sponsored Entities) from all regulation.

 

Frank's idea for 'affordable housing' led to the near-collapse of the worldwide economy and the current U.S. recession. He should be in jail.

 

Example # 8-- Harry Reid:

In summer of '06  Reid pulled off a secret Las Vegas land deal in which he pocketed a cool $1.1 million for sale of property he hadn't personally owned for years. Once exposed, Mr. Reid then amended his financial disclosure forms, claiming (duh) "he'd forgotten about it."

 

Over the last four years, Reid also used his influence to help a developer-- Nevada super-lobbyist Harvey Whittemore-- clear legal obstacles from a Vegas suburb (Coyote Springs) and develop part of the site for free, receiving tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Whittemore.

 

The contributions not only went to Reid's Senate campaigns, but also to his "leadership fund" to help bankroll the campaigns of Democratic colleagues. Rather nifty eh? Ole dirty Harry will undoutedly ride again in his homestate (Nevada) to win another hallmark victory in 2010.

 

EXAMPLE #9-- Senator Chris Dodd:

Everyone knows about the 4.75% loan Mr. Dodd got from Countrywide, saving him $77,000 interest on his mortgage; but then Dodd bought an Irish estate for a full cost of about $200,000 using "assistance" from a man who had Dodd's "ear" in the Senate.

 

Although the property was worth much more, Dodd covered it by listing the value on his senate tax form as $100,000. Once exposed, Dodd (in a mere coincidence) had the property "appraised" at 600k; but surprise: it's actually worth close to a million.

 

Dodd -- who also managed to protect his all campaign contributors at AIG -- claims it was "never about money." But money is all Dodd ever thinks of. He could care less about his constituents in Connecticutt.

 

EXAMPLE #10-- Ex-Senator Joe Biden:

A recent Google Earth photograph reveals that the lakeside "Joe Biden Compound" in Greenville , Delaware  has at least 4 houses, swimming pool, tennis courts, and various other "swank" amenities.

 

But a review of Biden's 2005, 2006, and 2007 income tax returns indicates he only listed a total net worth of about $470,000. Biden also reported he has no home note, suggesting ALL of his home/homes are paid for.

 

How does a person-- who has never made much more than $150,000 per year-- amass properties in amounts at least 10 times (or more) of what he reports to the Senate?  Interestingly, this certainly didn't seem to impede Biden's nomination as Vice President

 

Americans should take note: These egotistical, greedy, self-absorbed aristocrats operate as though they're completely above the law; and in a sense- as democrats-- they actually are. And as long-serving incumbents, they no longer seem to answer to (nor fear) anyone.

 

This is all a mockery to what Lincoln wrote about in his Gettysburgh address; he spoke of government OF the people, BY the people, and FOR the people.

 

We should require that every newly-elected legislator MEMORIZE Mr. Lincoln 's historic, two-minute speech before they can be sworn in; it's obvious that these lawless lawmakers have totally forgotten why they were elected.

 

 

Congresspeople of all stripes have long been wise to the 'Socratian method' of questioning. Whenever a probing media inquiry comes too close, they simply change the subject, or spout off a standard platitude they may have repeated a million times before. 

 

Finding an honest congressman these days? You'd have a better chance of discovering the Holy Grail.

 

Indeed, truth is all but gone on Capitol Hill. There is absolutely no reliaible information coming out of D.C. from any direction.

 

Spin, baby spin; no matter how hard any may try, they'll never get any semblance of truth from Washington's Congressional con men (er, con persons)...except in the unlikely event they were to commit a "gaffe."

 

In the warped politics of today, a gaffe is when you unintentionally let down your guard, revealing one's ACTUAL position. It's indeed a sad fact when a congress member cannot reveal the truth, lest it may damage their chances for re-election.

 

Ironically, the few ethical people who do serve in Congress are punished when they reach Washington. They get no committees, and are locked out of the spoils, like being blackballed by your own fraternity. So around re-election time-- with nothing to tout-- precious few last beyond their first term.

 

It's a fine way to elect a government isn't it?

 

Congressional con artists can often serve for life using this fail safe formula: Promise everything...deliver nothing, blaming those "failed policies" of your political opponent as the reason for things not accomplished.

 

But extricating truth out of someone like Pelosi would require much more than just basic water-boarding.  The media can probe; congressional Republicans can probe, but they'll get nothing other than the clever, evasive doublespeak from "nanny" Pelosi--mother of all liars on Capitol Hill. 

 

And while were on the topic of truth, let us introduce the new chairman of the Congressional Committee on Dishonesty..."Benedict" Arlen Specter, the "enigmatic" (i.e. lying) chameleon from Pennsylvania, who's taken his Senate re-election campaign lower than a lizard in Death Valley. 

 

Evil genius Specter-- having slithered under his rock-- will lay low for now and concentrate on re-election, arriving upon a most novel way-- web deceit: misrepresentation on the internet; perpetrating one of the most blatant disguises of the truth in congressional campaign history.

 

Several years ago, Specter successfully beat a bout with bone marrow cancer, so evidently a light bulb went off in honest Arlen's head, when he decided to solicit funds under the pretext of finding cures for pancreatic cancer, and other forms of the deadly affliction.

 

But in reality, all donations through his "phishy" website,"Specter for the Cure", actually are funneled directly into the senator's campaign account for re-election.

 

Specter's political skullduggery would be meritorious of a "silver star on the forehead" from Niccolo Machiavelli himself. The web site's home page speaks only of Senator Specter's earnest, forthright desire "to build a bridge over the valley of death" by reforming  government's medical research, cutting red tape, thus..."untangling the hope for accelerated cures."

 

Even sneakier is the website's hidden revelation for these so-called cancer donations, surreptitiously listed way down at the bottom of the second page, and in print that would require an electron microscope to see with the human eye. 

 

Has there ever been a lower low? Can there be anyone more cold blooded on Capitol Hill than the slithering snake in the grass in the persona of  Arlen Specter?

 

And the biggest irony of all, you can bet even money (or better) that next November, the headlines wil read: "Survivor Specter Lands Another Senate Term!"

 

But with honesty now gone within the ranks of our lawmakers, can our nation itself survive much longer before we reach critical mass, and completely descend into chaos? This is what happens when generation after generation of congressional liars work to undermine the basic character of our Republic, and flaunt the trust of the people. 

 

Our Founding Fathers tried to peer into the future, making fair representation in Congress as the cornerstone of our democracy. But they never could have imagined the point we've arrived at today, where ethics in Congress is about as prevalent as a budget surplus, and the members themselves only need answer to their fellow members-- basically amounting to liars overseeing their fellow kindred sprits.

 

The only set principle these people maintain is to have NO principles. Even Socrates himself would be tied in knots attempting to extract any veracity out of this cadre of scoundrels.

 

Our Congress has betrayed us, our media has failed us, and our government is undermining us.

 

 

 

It was the morning of March 1, 1954: Members of the House of Representatives were meeting to discuss immigration policy. Four fanatical Puerto Rican patriots, in favor of statehood for their island, calmly entered the Capitol building, passed through the lobby, and ascended up the stairs to a balcony designated for visitors.
 
Of course this was long before the days of metal detectors and screening searches.
 
As the proceedings went on, the 4 Nationalists unfurled the Puerto Rican flag, then shouted, “Que viva Puerto Rico libre!” Within seconds, astonished members of the House were under attack! Brandishing and aiming their automatic weapons, the four revolutionaries opened fire on the U.S. Congress seated below.

Bullets whistled through the air. Pandemonium erupted in the chamber. Many congressional figures and their staff began screaming in panic as they frantically pushed over one another to get to the exit doors. Others avoided being shot by running to hide underneath tables and behind chairs. It was like Columbine on Capitol Hill.

Before it ended, 30 rounds were fired. Miraculously, only five congressmen were wounded-- none seriously. All government buildings were shut down, and security throughout the city of Washington DC was increased for months afterward.

The revenge-crazed nationalists were at once apprehended. The mass media immediately launched a campaign to demonize the whole Puerto Rican independence movement. The four were ultimately convicted, sentenced to life imprisonment, and Puerto Rico's chances to become the 49th state had been dashed on the rocks of insurrection.
 
It was the most severe act of "taking-it-out-on-Congress" in U.S. history. And of course, the House balcony-observation deck has since been closed.
 
But with the 111th Congress we have seated now, its almost as though many flustered and frustrated Americans would also like to somehow "take it out" on this devil-may-care Congress, for they are indeed (in military parlance) a "target rich environment", a cast of odious anti-Constitutional leftists out to destroy the freedoms of besieged Americans.
 
There there now... calm down-- this is not to imply we lock 'n load and head for DC to attack our legislators, but Americans have had enough, and ironically, our constitution's Founders thought of almost everything but a redress of legislative grievances--i.e. there is no way to "get even" with Congress for making our lives intolerably (and unnecessarily) miserable.
 
But can we afford to wait till 2010 to vote them out? By that time, we may not have a free nation left-- or the cherished lifestyle that goes with it.
 
Now let's go back to September 18, 1948, where Harry Truman addressed a gathering in Dexter, Iowa (the occasion was the "National Plowing Contest"), an occasion used by Mr. Truman to condemn the failure of the Republicans in the 80th Congress to pass a democratic-sponsored farm bill, branding them as the "do nothing Congress"... a name which has stuck ever since in American history.
 
But nowadays, where is the "do-nothing" Congress when we need them?
 
With passage of the $410 billion "Omnibus" spending bill, coming hard on the heels of the $787 billion stimulus package, plus the $700 billion bailout of the financial sector-- along with the prospect of more bailouts, rescues, buy-ins and stimuli to come-- Democrats tell America... "Now is the time to "do everything"... including the approval of our anti-president's 3.4 trillion fiscal travesty of a budget.
 
Nancy Pelosi flatly stated that, "This is what the people of America voted for." But isn't this the worst of the WORST case scenarios-- a radical leftist congress, in control of BOTH houses?

Yes they can!
 
But before we get too negative, let's pretend for a minute and play, "what if?"
 
-What if congress had done nothing for the last 6 months?
-What if they had not passed the TARP, the bailout , the stimulus, the Omnibus, the budget, the "Give" Act, or-- as Mr. Truman had once railed-- had been a "do nothing" Congress?

Answer: just like it always does, our free market economy would be on the way to recovery, and unemployment would be leveling off (or falling), and American taxpayers would NOT be faced with a forever-impossible-to-payback 16 trillion dollar national debt--that's what!
 
But instead, not only are we much deeper in debt, the inflation unleashed by the inevitable borrowing/printing of money will debase (and perhaps ruin) our currency. And to top it off, if we do get a brief recovery, we'll be in for another round of recession, as worldwide interest rates are forced to rise due to the increased competition for credit, to fund Congress' massively misguided amounts of deficit spending.

And we'll undoubtedly be far worse off than we are today. And all for what? Just so these Democrat-socialists can buy the votes to keep themselves in power!

This is the ultimate nightmare scenario, the Freddy Kruger 111th Congress --and it's the ultimate nightmare to which they're exposing all of America.

But why all of a sudden?

It's almost as if this nightmare 111th Congress suddenly emerged from hell, and let loose with an agenda out to eternally punish Americans for sins they did not commit.

We're constantly facing one law after another; one bill after another-- for higher taxes, higher utility bills, outrageous deficit spending, cuts in the military, mandatory government 'volunteer' service, calls for cap 'n trade, forced unionism, no domestic drilling, climate change laws, pollution limits, mandatory abortion, restricting wage limits, breaking contracts, seizing companies, going after opposition groups; ad infinitum ad nauseum.

The horrendous usurping of our language is almost as bad as the legislation itself. And who are these cretins that so brazenly have the nerve to mis-label these fascist, constitution-destroying  measures to abolish our freedoms?

Mandatory abortion is labeled "Freedom of Choice"; mandatory unionism is labeled the "Employee Free Choice Act. Laws to abolish conservative talk radio are labeled the "Fairneess Doctrine". "Voluntary"/mandatory service for our youth is labeled the "Give" Act.

And there's no end! No end to these laws that Americans do not want, are not asking for, and ironically, resemble measures that are more reminiscent of 1935 Soviet Union than 2009 in the United States of America.

And with the cast of congressional characters who are behind it all, it's almost like some fictional horror movie where the tail wags the dog, and a handful of Politburo-like soviet planners decides just how much more misery they can heap upon their subjects-- "Da...it is for their own good! The Proletariet are incapable of making these important decisions for themselves...so we must save them in the spirit of good soviet unionism."

This Congress far exceeds the height of arrogance-- they heap upon us a legislative mountain of misery that keeps climbing ever-higher.

A prime example of this soviet style "enslavement planning " is the Waxman-Markey proposal (Henry Waxman, D- California; Edward Markey, D- Massachusetts)--and predictably, it's been labeled with a sickeningly misleading title..." the American Clean Energy and Security act". But it's provisions would more aptly title it, "the Stalinist plan to destroy America's Free Lifestyle Act".

And this is no exaggeration--it will ultimately lead to America's energy insecurity!

These two supremely arrogant congressional coconut heads want an even more onerous and costly attack on fossil fuels (and the kind of cars we'll be forced to drive) than what has already been proposed--as if that weren't bad enough.

Their bill requires that emissions be reduced 20 percent (from 2005 levels) by the year 2020, and that  emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases be reduced roughly 80 percent by 2050...that's right-- EIGHTY PERCENT!

This is beyond madness.

First of all, the proposal says nothing about how this miraculuos 'clean air' transformation shall occur--only that we get there. So this means that despite the fact that we have enough coal to last until the year 2525 (or beyond), we'll need to go to windmills.

This means that although there's nothing on the horizon to replace oil, we'll have to go to the little insect-like electric cars-- cars that Americans do not want, and that we do not really need.

And it's only the beginning:

If this proposal passes, imagine opening your electric bill in a few years: "Ar-r-r-r-gh! That **!#^#** Obama and these democrats! Why in the *!**^#** did I ever vote for them?

And if this proposal passes, imagine driving one of the green cars of the future:

Gosh-DARN-it! This *#*!!*#** flimsy car won't even go up a steep hill with my golf bag in the trunk. Why in the **#**!* did I ever fall for that Obama con-job about saving the environment, and trading in my gasoline car for this little barfbag-- it's the worst! If I get in an accident with this thing, I'm as good as gone!

Ironically, the Waxman-Markey bill emerges at a time when many Americans are rightfully wary of wide-ranging environmental legislation that will not only spike energy costs,  but could cripple industry--and take away JOBS!

A number of lawmakers around the country ( particularly in the Southeast and coal regions) are crying "foul"-- the natural resources and technology to meet it don't yet exist. There is nothing to replace coal. There is nothing to replace oil. There is nothing to replace the internal combustion engine.

Yet Markey and Waxman must answer to their environmental lobby cohorts, (i.e. Sierra Club, et al) who've contributed gosh knows how much to their campaigns, and for favors they've "earned" from fronting for these fanatical fruitcakes who seek to PERMANENTLY destroy American jobs and lifestyles.

There is no global warming. And climate change is a front for taxing all of America into submission-- a weapon of mass distraction away from America's true problem--these uncontrollable congressional demagogue-crats, who answer to no one-- not even their own consciences!

So what do we do? Term limits? Hardy har! Vote them out? That's even a bigger joke--all of them come from the safest congressional districts in the country. Pelosi from San Francisco; Waxman from Hollywood; and Markey from nearby Boston.

So it's still as it was back in 1954, as the aforementioned Puerto Rican nationalists clearly understood; there was no way for them to get rid of their worst enemies in Washington, other than by taking matters into their own hands-- but they missed.
 
www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

Dateline: November 17, 2008-- it was hailed as a legendary market call from an investing legend. It was the mother of all buy signals. It was a bold call, albeit one grounded in well-established investment theory.

Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor who made his fortune buying stocks on downturns, had advised America to buy stocks; but this time it turned out to be a calamity.

And now Mr. Buffett, Barack Obama's formerly highly-touted economic guru, recently emerged from out of his hiding place and pronounced in his news letter..." the U.S. economy will remain in a shambles through 2009".
 
Oh, but not to worry; Mr. Buffet forecasts..."better days ahead for the country".
 
Sure-- better days ahead-- trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see. Bleak outlooks for all the nation's large banks; and Barack Obama's repeated claims that our nation is in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression-- all are jawboning the stock market southward.

The result? The Dow hit a low this week not seen since the glory days of 1997, below the 7000 level. And the economic tea leaves and news coming out of financial companies is still so alarming that investors feel no other alternative than to head for the exits.

But how concerned is the White House about the impact of the recent $11 trillion in wealth that has vanished from the stock market?

Apparently, not much

"I think it is unwise to believe everything we do is designed to cause an immediate market reaction, or that the score should only be kept by that,'' said Robert (Mr. Smirk- rhymes with jerk) Gibbs.

The smirky-jerky White House press secretary, continued... "If you look at the news of the week, the market probably processes in a lot of information, whether its price increases, or a lot of news throughout the globe about a deteriorating economy". Gibbs then suggested, "it's more likely a reflection of the nation's challenges, not merely a reaction to what the White House is doing."

Translation: anti-president Obama is not responsible for this downturn--it's what "we inherited" from the failed policies of the Bush administration, and a greedy Wall Street taking advantage of Main Street.

But traders and investors alike beg to differ:
 
Stocks are a bet on future performance and earnings. And right now, people have low to no confidence in the fiscal and monetary gyrations the Obama administration is going through. The stock market has incrementally shed value since Mr Obama was nominated, then elected, and then inaugurated--- each event caused another prolonged dip in stock prices.

And now with every doom and gloom statement Mr. Obama  makes (to innoculate him against failure of his program), stocks churn again.  Stock values always decline during periods of uncertainties; and what could be more uncertain than Obama's recent "to-and- fro" pronouncements, which virtually guaranteed the disastrous drops.
 
Every other word out of Obama's mouth is "crisis" or "calamity" or "catastrophe"; and investors and traders alike respond accordingly. A huge psychological component to the underlying market always exists; yet Obama obsessively continues to play his calamitous game of boogie man vs. Wall Street.

But could there be some ulterior motive...a more cunning reason? Is Obama exploiting fear and insecurity to facilitate his socialist power grab?
 
Obama claimed he would be a transformational leader; but the only thing transformational about his anti-presidency is that it will transform the dollar into a worthless currency, and the country into a third-world socialist nanny state.
 
And just WHEN will the media stop their cover-up for their candidate, who became our selected (not elected) 44th president? When does Obama actually become accountable for his policies' impact on the economy?
 
Obama seems to reflect a compulsion to keep driving the Dow down.

Yes indeed, he'll show those "greedy fat-cats" (a.k.a. the American public) who dared to invest in the stock market!  And as he's talking down the Dow, he's dragging down capitalism and the free market economy. It’s all part of his government dependency plan.
 
And going back to ever since his socialist comrades in Congress-- Pelosi & Reid-- took over on March 3, 2007, when the DJ Index closed at 12474, it now trades below the crucial support level of 7000. Support levels are used by Wall Street technicians to predict emotional buy-sell trigger points in market indexes.

So look out below--there may be further downside --a lot further. Just in the first month that Mr. Obama has been in office, the DJI has lost 1000 points.

And the stock market could continue to get pounded with Obama's insane, inane, financial agenda: spending $787 billion (before interest) on the economic debt expansion package (disguised as a stimulus); and then another $400 billion in supplemental spending-- and introducing a $3.5 trillion budget that next year alone will result in the highest annual budget deficit in U.S. history, which will consume an unheard-of 12.3% of the nation's gross domestic product.
 
But that just for starters! Obama forecasts trillions in deficit spending in his first term; then the next week, he's gung-ho for a plan halving the upwardly-spiraling deficit.

So if you were a big money investor, what would you think?

Obama's insanity-calamity deficit-spending profligacy has Wall Streeters heading for the hills; And with Obama on his current socialist, wealth-transfer, tax-hike frenzy, it will only worsen to the point where 1930-32 could become the new market model for Obama's wealth-destroying policies.

Right now, the market climate on Wall Street resembles an old time Japanese horror flick: Wall Street investors fleeing in panic from the Barack Obama wealth destruction monster--breathing his fire of higher taxes and socialism at every American financial institution.

And Wall Street sees the writing on the wall-- their worst, post election fears are coming true--- sensing that Obama is going to keep on spending and spending, with his objective to make the USA into a complete welfare state.
 
But if only Obama would pay attention to history, and truly get behind a sound policy that would stop the bloodletting.

Obama obviously knows that he could stimulate investment by lowering taxes on the "job creators"...the small businesses. But that would mean surrendering---giving up wealth (power) to the private sector-- and undermining his aim to railroad power from Wall Street to Washington.

Currently, investors are longing for the Reagan years, when lower income taxes decreased the cost of capital, and thus lowered the "hurdle rates" for various investments and projects. And the Dow took off in October, 82 and rose magnificently until March of 2000, with the internet bubble bust.

Right now Obama could provide an overnight turnaround if he cut corporate taxes, which would to help bring jobs home from overseas, and also would reduce the cost of capital for more investment.

And if Obama reduced capital gains and dividend taxes from 15% to 7.5%, it also would lower the cost of capital and create more investment. Remember that the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th longest economic growth cycles have occurred after the top tax brackets had been lowered.
 
But Comrade-in chief Obama has other ideas; just look at what happens when he speaks:

On inauguration day you could follow the dive of the Dow as he delivered his address. Whenever Geithner and Bernanke spoke recently, the market dived. After the anti- stimulus bill was passed by Congress, the market dove.

Words are important to the markets; and so far Mr. Obama's words have given the market nothing but negative reassurances.
 
The market trades basically on solid expectations. But the one thing the Street cannot tolerate is uncertainty. And the market is spiraling down in a cyclone of economic bad omens. And worse, the specter of the Obama tax hikes has basically pulled the plug for any type of bounce for the Dow-Jones in the near future.

Wall Street is about creating wealth. But Obama is about destroying wealth. Oppressive tax policies on the wealthy destroy initiative; and destroy the most essential element of future economic expansion--CAPITAL. People seem to be thrown for a loop when that word 'capital' is tossed out there. That includes Barack Obama.

But the maddening question is: Why doesn’t the Chosen One choose to calm the waters? If Obama would only make a simple announcement: "We do not plan on raising taxes for the foreseeable future, because in a downturn, this is a bad idea".

But instead, we get: "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes; not any of your taxes.
 
Translation: if you make over $250K, your lifestyle is going to mimic the stock market--it's about to take a sudden plunge-- and it will take the economy down with it.
 
And all during the prolonged plunge, Obama stubbornly has taken a phlegmatic approach to the massive losses in the market; while all the while, panicked investors and big money speculators--fearing another 1929-- are driven to panic selling.

But Obama doesn't see the losses as suffering for people, but rather an opportunity, because he suffers himself from that incurable disease-- economic socialist liberalism-- a disease which is always terminal, and has no cure.

Economic liberalism's symptoms are many, but the cause is simple-- those who suffer from it have never worked a hard day in their lives. They have no idea of what it takes to earn a buck in the real world; they never have had a real job in the private sector.

Thus according to comrade Obama; anyone who has more money "than they deserve," must surrender the excess to those who have less. A philosophy which is an anathema to Wall Street.

After 1929, the market didn't recover for 25 years, until1954. And for all we know it could go down much more from here, reminiscent of the good ole days of 1930-36.
 
So after 200 years of presidents who have praised the economic strengths of Americans, Obama is celebrating our weakness. His negative words have done almost as much damage to the stock market as all the financial challenges combined.

And Obama knows well the one TRUE economic index to be concerned with: the power a fascist can seize is directly proportional to the severity of the crisis.

Obama has learned well his socio-marxist-fascist strategy: It is much easier to frighten people than to urge them to do the right thing.
 
Barack Obama, former South Chicago community organizer; he was not trained to give people hope and encourage them to strive to be better; his training was to convince people that they were truly downtrodden and oppressed, and that only the government could save them.
 
So Obama welcomes a terrible economy-- it enables him to call it a crisis, and enact desperation measures that steal individual freedom from Americans. Obama wants everyone to need government. And bigger government bestows more power to Washington.
 
Fear and intimidation is a standard policy, Just look at Cuba (or any socialist nation) and you can see that Obama is ruling in the same manner as any socialist dictator would. Thus our anti-president needs a declining economy. It makes it easier to install full-fledged fascistic socialism.
 
Barack Obama- the Marxist man with a populist, preacher-like Mussolini slant.

So what's the best advice to Wall Street and investors alike? Buy "puts" on the option markets; go "short"; brace for further declines.

Until Obama learns the difference between being a leader and being a manipulator, the markets will descend. Until Obama learns how to solve problems, not exploit them, the market will go down.

But if Barack's callous calculations somehow don't work out-- if it's only one term for our fearless, socialist leader-- he'll find out that all along, tax cuts and prosperity (not fear and uncertainty) should have been the way to go.

And "Yes we can", will quickly turn into a..."I wish we did."

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

Here's a thought.

One idea of how to remedy all the Republican's electoral woes--the calamitous loss of GOP congressional seats, and the presidency -- would be their ability to counteract the criminal interference of ACORN.

 

So here is the plan :

 

The Republicans form their own activist group. It shall be known as "CAUSE"... Citizens Against Unamerican Subversive Extremism. And the goal of CAUSE is staightforward in nature-- attack back against ACORN!

 

CAUSE is how Republicans, young and old, unite under one banner, and ACTIVELY hound ACORN, (the pro-democratic, Marxist rent-a-mob) and literally force the media to take notice, thereby exposing the cataclysmic damage that this subversive organization has wrought upon our democracy.

 

CAUSE co-opts ACORN tactics. They would voiciferously picket outside the New York studios of the TV networks, decrying the liberal one-sided anti-conservative news slant, which is basically what keeps the Democrats in business (bid-ness).

 

CAUSE forms phone banks, and calls registered voters in every congressional district, letting them know if their rep in congress is basically voting in line with treasonous liberals, such as Pelosi , Reid, Schumer, Durban, Frank, Markey, Hoyer, etc.

 

CAUSE forms a website (ala Obama) to reach the young (or anyone) for contributions, and a call to volunteerism for the conservative agenda. And moderates are welcome-- you need not be a Republican.

 

Basically, CAUSE is an awareness group to wake up the dumbed-down American public, concerning the disinformation the media is feeding everyone about Barack Obama.

 

CAUSE is unlimited in what can be done. United under one banner (moniker) , the Citizens Against Unamerican Subversive (socialist) Extremism would provide the spark to lead the Republicn party out of its wandering from the desert of political confusion.

 
Haven't the Republicans taken enough? Under one CAUSE, they have the opportunity to respond to the blatantly liberal media bias. And most importantly, under one CAUSE, the Republicans could command the attention of the American public

Take notice Republicans. Look at the  incalculable damage ACORN has accomplished with its well-honed subversive methodology, precisely aimed at enabling the democrats to prevail in almost any close election.

And practice makes perfect.

Take for example the astounding fraudulence in the Minnesota Senate recount, between Republican incumbent Norm Coleman, and democrat Al Franken. The blatant manipulation is largely because Franken's ACORN-assisted side has displayed a remarkable propensity for defying the numbers in the general election.

Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, a democrat (and closet ACORN operative) largely controlled the recount, which saw Mr. Franken pull off a miraculous 950 vote swing in his favor, out of 3 million total votes cast, where Mr. Coleman triumphed originally by 725 votes.

Coleman's winning percentage was only .00024%. Yet Franken's highly unlikely vote swing indicated the recount margin went nearly 70% in his favor, a statistical impossibility.

So how did this all originate? ACORN.

In the election of 2006, the Minnesota ACORN Political Action Committee endorsed candidate Mark Ritchie, who won largely because of financial assistance from a below the radar "527" group -The "Secretary of State Project (SOSP).

The ACORN-funded SOSP backed democrats nationwide, who were running for the offices of secretary of state, knowing full well that if elected, they could likely "fix" possible recounts in any close statewide elections.

ACORN always seems to be able to "see above the horizon". And they play to win. So the Secretary of State Project did very well, judging from Mr. Ritchie's "partisan" performance in Minnesota.

So just how important is the outcome for this Minnesota senatorial seat? It's critical beyond measure.

Right now, the entire next two years in Congress depends on whether the Republicans can keep a 40-seat minority to maintain their filibuster voting bloc. And the margin of Democrats vs. Republicans is tottering between 59-41. So if Franken prevails,  the  current balance would swing to the Democrats. And they could possibly do whatever they want for the next two years, without so much as a sniff toward any partisan opposition.

The result? ACORN will have literally changed the political course of our nation for at least the next 2-4 years.

If we recount all GOP losses in the last two elections (13 Senate seats, 51 House seats and the White House) it begs the question-- how many of these losses were a result of ACORN? We can't know, but most likely at least 2-3rds to 3-4ths of any close races may have been decided by fraudulent voter registrations, which is ACORN's stock in trade.

The problem is that ACORN is always able to fly below the radar. The media is well aware of their influence; yet they say nothing, So this is where CAUSE comes in.

With a pro-Republican organization like CAUSE on the job, all these costly election shenanigans could be countermeasured with CAUSE sounding the alarm--sort of a spy vs. spy situation, or a CIA- KGB type of political intrigue.

Recall the old TV series, "The Man from Uncle". It was the bad spies from the sinister international THRUSH outfit, vs the good guys from UNCLE law enforcement. And it could be relived in true political life form as a CAUSE vs. ACORN scenario...the two organizations, constantly at high-tech political war , each trying to countermand the other's every move.

And make no mistake, war is just what's going on in Congress today. War is the exact description for the bitterly partisan election races that we have now-- there are no gentleman's rules of fair play. The gloves are off. Too much is at stake with every seat in Congress, and with every governor's post in the states. And along those lines, every secretary of state job around the country becomes ever more critical.

If ACORN cannot be reigned in, our democracy will continue to be  a mockery-- it'll continue to be one man, with many votes, in many places--all courtesy of the subversive desperado ACORN operatives, that lurk within the ranks of every state and local election board.

But have faith Republicans.  You can turn this around overnight. Just remember to volunteer for a good CAUSE...your own future survival as a political party.

www.keenobserver.blogtownhall.com

All hiel on Capitol Hill! Yesterday, prime minister Nancy-nazi-Pelosi, read aloud her solemn decree of obedience to the auto industry executives in front of the media..."Thou shalt build the green cars of the future or ye shalt not receive thy remittance from capitol hill!"... And the auto executives knew THIS was coming. But they we're in the process of driving to D.C. from Detroit in hybrid cars, which made the situation all the more polyester in meaning.

But the big question hanging in the balance was not "would they get the bailout"? No; the real concern..." would all three hybrid cars manage to make the ten hour trip without breaking down somewhere?

But most Americans took little note of the event. Oh yes, they're aware that the auto industry is in trouble; Chrysler's on the ropes; Ford is still breathing...and GM is on life support, and needs an immediate $4 billion in walking around money by years end, or it's bye-bye assembly lines, and hello ch. 13, ch 7, ch 11, and any other chapters the bankruptcy lawyers care to toss in.

But dear Americans out there, this news concerns YOU a lot more than Pelosi, the "'Big 3", or the financial bailout. Once again, just like with the recent elections, Americans are content to assimilate little bits 'n pieces here 'n there about news stories that will affect their lifestyles, money, and satisfaction with life in general; but they'll absorb every last bit of news about  their favorite team or soap opera like they were going for a doctorate degree.

Pay attention now...LISTEN UP! What Nancy Pelosi said (or read) yesterday is going to begin to affect you PERSONALLY in the next 2-3-4-5 years, and you will notice it immediately, and will probably HATE IT! What the Nazi was saying, in effect, was that Congress (ahem, ahem) is demanding the auto makers go GREEN.

Ai-yee! Is it starting to sink in? We are all soon going to be driving in, riding around in , or getting hit (maimed/killed) by the green cars of the future! HOW, you axe? Just read on.

Don't we all remember the FIRST time Detroit added something onto our new cars (mandated by Congress-or Ralph Nader) that absolutely drove one into a  passionate fit of anger? Oh man...where do we start?

First it was seat belts in the mid 60's cars. Nobody wore 'em ...they were a little more than some loosely-fastened lap restraint, something like they'd put on you at a kiddie ride; and even when you were a kid you thought to yourself..."is this little strappy-crappy thing supposed to keep me from getting hurt? Ha! why'd they even bother? If the ride DID tip over, this thing wouldn’t do nothin!"

Actually the appearance of the wider, little strappy things in our cars was a federal mandate REQUIRING that all auto manufactures back then had to install restraints to save lives. Great. And so, did that set the trend? Well have to ask Ralph Nader; maybe when he was a little kid he got his idea from some kiddie ride that he obvoiusly didnt think much of. In any event, the world has never been the same.

Back in the 60's, once the seat belt mandate became law for all 3 manufacturers, there was no looking back.

Next it was those incredibly stupid front-passenger head restraints. Aaargh...the first time you spotted one, or sat in a car with one cowering menancingly behind you, you couldn't help thinking..."WHAT in the world is this stupid thing supposed to do ? Prevent whiplash? HOW? No way this thing's gonna do anything if some drunk rear-ends you...hmmmm.

And worse, from the back, all cars now looked as if they were occupied by two giant-headed, alien-shaped passengers. So now, if some hapless car was stalled at a red light ahead, you would feel incredibly stupid after honking and swearing at the car in front you, but then when you finally got around the stalled car, you thought ..oh-uh-duh...nobody home in that car! But because of the stupid, alien head restraints, how would you know?

Next it was the loss of the ultra-cool (literally) side vent windows. Everybody remembers 'em...everybody misses them. You could open them up slantways (diagonally) and have instant air; nice breezy air,cooling and refreshing, and it was neat! The faster the car went, the bigger the blast! Then, in 1969, who's ever idea it was, they disappeared from all the new cars that year...gone. Yes the cool breeze was gone...the fresh air circulation in the car was gone.

Smokers were now a grave nuisance; and were commanded to "CRACK YOUR WINDOW OPEN, DAMMIT!" Tsk tsk . This is one idea they should bring back. But sales of air conditioned cars in the north would drop dramatically.

And then...ta-da! The 70's marked the dawn of buzzer-flasher-warning light civilization. Now the annoying was taken to a much higher level! Open the drivers door...buzzz, "you left the key in, stupid," said the buzzer to the driver...didn't buckle you seat belt? Buzzzzzz! or e--e-e-e-e-e! And what was worse, the buzzer would be persistent, it would not silence itself until you obeyed! And if the car had a low battery, it would ring even more annoyingly, like it needed a transplant operation or something.

But this time drivers fought back. You could go to your old reliable mechanic at your old reliable gas station (yes--they actually fixed your car there back then) and get him to REMOVE the wire to the goddarn buzzer. But then auto manufactures wised up quickly. Too many lives were being lost because seat belt buzzer disablements were jacking up insurance premiums; so the electrical engineers wired them into the horn-harness assembly. So now, instead of the customary, "first thing to do with your new car," was no longer an option...you couldn't foil the seat belt and ignition buzzers anymore; and drivers in America have never been the same.

Next it was unleaded gas. Then the catalytic converter. Sure--they made the air a lot cleaner, but V-8 cars were no longer fun to drive. The unleaded gas had all the punch of charcoal starter in your tank, and the customary fun of peelin' out of Mickey-D's or Arby's, or laying a strip in front of your high school, faded off into the environmental sunset.

It's no wonder the young drivers are ALWAYS at home playing videogames; today's cars are now sterile, and for travel only.

Back then, cars were it. They were gorgeous; even the cheaper economy models resembled mini versions of their big brothers. They had shiny chrome, high compression engines; unbelievably muscular-sounding dual exhausts. You could impress anyone by jamming on the gas, and produce that ear splitting, masculine sound of peeling tires on the pavement. If you pulled up to someone at a stop light, the resulting excitement of a heart-pounding drag-race would be something remembered for the rest of your life.

The old cars had room; you could go to the drive in. They had cache. Everyone knew you back then by what car you drove. You didn’t even need to go anywhere in particular, because just driving around in them and riding in them was fun!

And not only did the cars have sex appeal; they had SENSE appeal. They looked awesome. They sounded awesome, felt powerful, and were exciting to drive. The old crummy AM radios even sounded great because the music back then was awesome. They even smelled awesome. Everybody always liked getting in new cars at the showrooms back then, because they had that SMELL. And whatever that was, they should use it now for perfume or cologne, or air freshener; 'cause a smell like that is something you never forget.

Well now; it's back to reality, Today's cars are no fun. They're not even cars now; they're s.u.v. truck disguises. Sure they're safer than a Soviet tank if you crash, but that's where it ends. So if your never in a violent car crash, then?..oh well... it's the THOUGHT of the safety that's worth it . Yes safety--saving lives...preventing deaths …it’s all about doing good; doing what's right...saving something for the sake of safety. Yes safety.

So stop a second; think...just how dangerous were those, unsafe, super-fun cars of the old days back then? Do we know of any one who might have survived after driving all through that UNSAFE era, when there were no seat belts, no buzzers, no red lights blinking...no head restraints etc. Sure the cars of today are safe, but nobody really likes 'em. And that's WHY the American economy has been going down the tubes ever so slowly, but surely.

Now think about this: is there is any other culture tied into the auto like America? Gasoline runs in our veins.  We're like no other country. Your car is practically your life. It involves nearly everything! Besides walking a little (in good weather), you can do nothing or go nowhere without driving.
 
Everything --our economy, our jobs, our family's and friend's jobs-- is in some way or in some fashion tied into either driving, or the automobile. People work at the "drive thru", people work at restaurants, theaters, bars, retail stores, and banks...everywhere you can imagine. And when people can't drive there; these places suffer.
 
How about the people working in manufacturing? If its metallic or plastic-related, its probably in some way auto-related.

Whenever an auto job was lost in the USA, it resulted in an unlimited negative economic multiplier effect. This meant less work for autoparts makers; less work for metal producers; less work for  local economies everywhere because that laid off auto worker can no longer eat out, deposit a weekly paycheck into the bank, buy a new shirt or shoes, or even see a movie at a local theater, or contribute as much to the church. He has to stay home now, watch TV, and collect "compensation".

This is realty! And this is what Congress has been doing to our entire country for the last 40 years... making our lives more annoying, more miserable, less fun, less exciting, and much-much worse off financially! BUT HEY..HO .. were so  much safer now! Cars are safer...driving into crashes is safer.

Yes America—we’ve traded our semi-affluent middle class lifestyles for a rust belt economy, all because it's now so much safer to get into an auto crash! How **!**!*# stupid! It's stupidity on steroids. This is on par with the stupidity of leaving all of our offshore and Alaskan oil in the ground, and instead buying it from OPEC. And it's also apparently safer to do that, according to Nazi Pelosi, who has decreed, in so many words, that offshore oil is illegal! So why don't we just pass a law that says auto accidents are illegal? It makes about as much sense. Let's all write in to Washington..."no more illegal auto accidents!"

We are literally being made 'safe to death' by these people on Capitol Hill! You can hire 30 million traffic and highway patrolmen, you can install 25 seat and head restraints in every vehicle- whatever--but you cannot eliminate traffic accidents unless you outlaw cars! But these coconut heads in Washington have done a bang-up job of eliminating most of our high paying jobs in one way or another.

QUESTION: what built America's middle class after World War II? It was mainly the auto industry, with the millions of jobs it provided, and the unlimited multiplier effect. Oil companies drilled for oil. Gas stations sold gas. Steel mills made steel, which required miners to mine coal, and iron ore producers to ship ore pellets across all the t Great Lakes to the mills in the east.

Yes, this was the "rust belt" back then. It was the economic envy of the world! A person with no formal education could come out of high school and live a life with a secure income and retirement, all because of the so-called UNSAFE auto industry.

But today, Congress hasn't learned. They won't let the auto companies survive building conventional cars--in the interest of safety again.

But this time, it's the environment, stupid! All that dirty gasoline and oil! Yes... millions of people out there-- coughing, wheezing, choking, gasping for clean air --if we don't start manufacturing plastic, little amoeba-like green cars now! And never mind all the millions of oil workers, coal workers, steelworkers, metal fabricators, gas stations, and the hundreds of thousands of others who'll lose their jobs and be miserable. But hey now...we'll have nice, clean, sparkling, safe air to breathe, and in 20 years, we'll be a third world, economically bankrupt country, with a citizenry riding around on bicycles to get to the store...but they'll be breathing healthy air.

Why would we want to go around this block again? If Congress mandates green autos, Honda and Toyota will certainly beat us with a better product to the market. WHY? Not because they're better than us, but because they have better engineers than us.

Today American kids consider being studious as someone who really knows how to google up an answer. Great.  But can you google a complex answer to a physics question? Or a complex calculus problem? Engineering is about problem-solving.  The curriculum is not for indolent American kids, because they have lost their "study ethic". They shun tough subjects, like math and science..."oh those are for nerds and geeks". They text the answers to test questions to each other. School is not for learning; it's for designer clothes and socializing.

44% of Asian students study engineering in college, vs. 6% of Americans. Admit it... we will never catch up to them in this generation because it's a lost generation as far as academics are concerned.

And if the politics doesn't change, and they keep dumbing down the schools, it'll only get much worse. And in the future the Asians will leave us vulnerable, and perilously dependent on them for almost everything. And we're getting closer to that everyday. Yet Americans returned 87% of their congressional incumbents in the November election. Our national ship of State has become a ship of fools.

It's time to get real about our lives in America. And we will never improve our lifestyles until we improve our economy. And this means manufacturing jobs-- we must make our own goods, earn this money for our selves, and keep it in this country for reinvestment.

And buying a foreign car is only part of the problem. It's the attitude (stupid) that must change. We have to change our attitude to politics. If Americans insist on neglecting what's going on in Capitol Hill on a day-to-day basis, then the aristo-crats in Washington will only laugh all the harder as they continue to legislate more misery upon us, and line their pockets with lobbyist lavishments and campaign contributions.

So now-- what is so vitally important about green cars? Why the urgency? Safety? The Sacred Environment? No, it's because of the environmental lobby, and all the companies who'll benefit from the sea change to these little, hideous (and dangerously quiet) cars of the future! They're about as loud as a wheelchair! You cannot hear them coming! They can't go past 40 miles without a 6-hour recharge. Instead of running out of gas, we'll be worrying, and measuring, and calculating-- "uh gee.. will this thing get me home? Instead of watching the gas guage occasionally, we will now be watching a "power resevoir" guage CONTINUOUSLY.
 
And even hybrid cars (let alone all electric ones) are notoriously unreliable! They have so many moving, whirring, spinning, complex parts and assemblies that they often need service; they're a nightmare to fix, and their cost is prohibitive.
 
And electric cars have no torque: if your batteries are low, you WILL slow down going up a steep hill. But will Nancy Pelosi ever have to drive one? No way. She'll be too busy traveling around in her government issued, VIP, co2-emitting  private jet, that holds her entire entourage of family and friends. And she charges it all to us, the taxpayers!

And is Nazi Pelosi suffering about this? How much does she stand to benefit from campaign contributions from the environmental lobby?

And how about House democrat Henry Waxman, who recently won an important chairmanship from Michigan's John Dingell, a loyal, trustworthy backer of the auto industry. Waxman, 69, won a bruising intra-party battle with Dingell, a staunch supporter of conventional vehicles. These two have long been bitter rivals over clean air policy, and the pace at which to limit greenhouse gasses. And the chairmanship of The Energy and Commerce panel is one of the most important and influential House positions to hold.

But we've saved the best for last! Waxman is from clean-air, economically-bankrupt California, and half of his district encompasses Hollywood! Do you think he might be just a little on the liberal side in his outlook? Representative Henry Waxman believes every American has a right to know basic information about environmental hazards. Yes it's Henry Waxman to the wescue. He's got the green light now; he'll be able to save tens of millions of Americans from the  perilous, deadly, kryptonite-like emissions of carbon dioxide...a proven environmental non-hazard!

Henry Waxman has about a seventh grade level of science comprehension. And by today's standard--let's make that 2nd grade. Waxman is of the belief that C02, carbon dioxide (which is one carbon atom in a co-valent bond with 2 oxygen atoms) is a poisonous gas. Of course ALL plant life would die if Waxman had his way, because plants "inhale" co2, and 'exhale' 02 (oxygen) in the life-sustaining process of photosynthesis. But Waxman knows he must save lives, or else lose the environmental lobby and all the campaign contributions and lobbying perks that go with it.

However, this is only the beginning. Waxman wants conventional cars to get 50 miles to the gallon, something nearly impossible in the laws of Newtonian physics (Energy=Mass x Force). So unless we're talking about an all-aluminum /titanium basic car body, with the equivalent of a lawnmower engine, to push the mass forward with sufficient inertia to reach conventional speeds, basically it would have to structurally resemble a Fred Flintstone yabba-dabba type car to achieve such unrealistically high mileage. This would stymie any auto engineer with a conundrum of how to combine sturdiness, practicality, rigidity, and high mileage.
 
Even the Asians would laugh Waxman out of their country if he tried to promote something as far-fetched like that over there.

But Waxman won't be deterred...he knows his limits (they are virtually NIL) and he's controlling the very fate (with Pelosi) of Americans for generations to come! This man single handedly has the power to author the most damaging (but environmentally sound) auto legislation in the history of the industry! Yes; ain't it grand! Henry Waxman to our wescue again with his wonderful enviwonmental wegulations. Oh happy days Lord --we are saved!

Now once he's done burdening the entire America auto industry with ever more complex regulations, then what? You guessed it... what's left of the rustbelt will now go rotten; and what's left of the auto industry will go to the South, where some of those discharged workers will be hired by Honda and Toyota, to handle the huge influx of new business they reap as a result of the Waxman-Pelosi axis of evil environmentalism...all in the name of saving lives, and losing ouir jobs and the rest of the economy that goes with it!

Until Americans can achieve engineering par with the Asians, they'll run circles around us because they can innovate faster/better than Americans. But the Big 3 can compete in conventional autos because it's less about innovation, and more about improvement and refinements.

But Americans will continue to ignore all this, shrug their shoulders, and go about their "merry" ways, worrying about the economy, but ignoring everything that's happening on Capitol Hill, because it doesn't directly affect them. "Nosiree! Not me! That doesn't affect MY job".

So sleep soundly tonight America, since nothing other than sports or TV, directly affects you. Be confident that Nancy Pelosi will come to the rescue of the auto industry with a bailout, and it'll be Henry Waxman wescuing all the rest of us from our poison air, so we can all hope to survive longer and breathe freely someday again! In the meantime well just all have to somehow live through it.

Hoo-wee! Will wonders ever cease? Barack Obama suddenly silenced many of his critics with his selection of several pro-REPUBLICAN-policied people to his transition cabinet. At a recent news conference at a Chicago hotel, Mr. Obama announced he is retaining Defense Secretary Robert Gates at the Pentagon, and making retired Marine General James Jones his national security adviser.

It is indeed notable that Mr. Gates was a firm supporter of the surge in Iraq. And even more surprising is that General Jones holds an "all the above" strategy on energy policy, and firmly supports offshore drilling, and favors the development of more nuclear and alternative energy.
 
Well, above all else, Mr. Obama has always been a political pragmatist (i.e. one who only does that which is useful to his own advantage). And if Barack, in sniffing the political winds, believes this is the best way to deal with keeping up his post-election approval, then so be it.
 
Remarkably, Obama is garnering accolades from all quarters as..."not being afraid to appoint strong people who may politically overshadow him in his first administration".

John Warner, distinguished retiring Republican senator from Virginia, recently praised our new president elect..."The duo of Gates and Jones instills great confidence at home and abroad, and further strengthens the growing respect for the president-elect’s ability to exercise sound judgment in selecting the best and the brightest to implement our nation’s security policies".   
 
Okay everyone...let's puts some hands together and give it up for Obama! Could he actually be out to govern from the center? Stay tuned next January 21 for the first installment of the Obama administration.

But hark...let us not go overboard! Franklin Roosevelt, (who's situation in the 1930's was almost parallel to that of Obama's present-day economic conundrums), also campaigned back then against Hoover as a centrist, tax-cutting moderate; but then veered sharply left after his inauguration, and unleashed his litany of New Deal big-government initiatives on a depression-stunned America.
 
Even the stock market, which had been tanking precipitously in great fear of the socialist Obama, rallied sharply in support of the centrist Obama in the wake of the announcements. But there's more to the story than just that. What Wall Street dreads even more than the perceived socialism of Obama's big government promises, is the radical leftism of Nancy Pelosi and a democratic Congress, with Obama as their rubber stamp in the Oval office. That's the real fear.
 
Pelosi, as Speaker of the House, is literally second in line to be president, and legislatively trumps Obama in sheer Washington DC political power. As Speaker, she can block any bill, no matter the origin, from even reaching the floor for a vote. And she has never yet missed an occasion to use her unique "veto" power to sabotage republican policies ever since she took the gavel in January, 2007 .

At her swearing-in ceremony, Pelosi too, also promised that she would use her position to govern from the center, and immediately swerved to the left faster than the demise of 4-dollar gasoline.
 
Question: Is there anyone in Congress who sits prettier than Nancy (Nazi) Pelosi? Since 4/5's of her district encompasses San Francisco, she has, what many believe, the SAFEST seat in the House. She also has a net worth of approximately 25 million dollars, much of it Microsoft stock, and in the combined net value of the vineyards she and he husband own in Napa valley. And true to her San Francisco roots, she is the Energizer Bunny of liberalism in her legislative outlook.
 
But curiously, given all the gay initiatives we've seen from the Golden Gate city since the 60's, extreme liberalism didn't appear here just because, "hey, it's San Francisco, stupid".

Most Americans erroneously believe that it was the hippie movement that spawned the roots of America's foremost city of liberalism. But the hippies didn't suddenly spring from the 60’s music of the era, or from the flower power of drugs and free love. It all goes back to the Second World War as the real origin.
 
San Francisco was known as the P.O.D. (point of departure) and re-entry for many men involved in the Pacific theater of the war. And back in the early 40's, in some cities, if you were even SUSPECTED of being gay, you could not only be run out of town, but murdered as well. So if you knew you were of 'different orientation', you wouldn't exactly want to trumpet it in the singles section of the classifieds.

There were a number of large military bases in San Francisco in World War II, and many of those men stationed there were gay. And those searching surreptitiously for the growing list of gay bars and restaurants in this port town got an unknowing assist from the armed services themselves, who routinely posted lists of off-limits places where you'd be subject to arrest by the M-P's (military police).

During the war, many homosexuals were screened out at induction centers on the grounds that they would make poor combat soldiers, and that their presence would threaten discipline and morale. If they did passed induction, the gays (popularly known as "fruits" back then) were subjected to harassment in the barracks, due to their inability to explain to their fellow inductees, "what type of women they liked"; and were easily distinguished by their lack of interest in female companionship when off-base leaves were issued.

Rather than returning home, many gay soldiers (and particularly those dishonorably discharged for homosexuality) stayed or settled in San Francisco after their service ended. Can you imagine a dishonorably-discharged soldier calling home and "HERIOCALLY" telling his mother..."hey ma, great news! You and pa wont have to worry about me fighting in the war...I got discharged for being homosexual! We'll all celebrate when I get home... maybe they'll have a parade uptown for me as a returning fruit".
 
Actually, rather than admit to this dishonorable shame, the discharged soldiers stayed and decided to start the war from home base gay-central...San Francisco USA! And why not? They found more gay men here than in many of the places they came from; and more tolerant too. So this primarily lent origin to the gay/liberal movement of the left coast.

As the 50's came on, the rest of California (and the nation) took notice of this and more gays started coming in to set up underground organizations, clubs, bars, newspapers and magazines. And as the 60's came on, the Vietnam war gave the "hip" or hippie movement the cause-celebre that provided them an impetus to acquire an aura of legitimacy...i.e. "We hippie liberals are out to demonstrate why Vietnam is an illegitimate war; and America has not the right to fight it!"
 
San Francisco today can best be described as a city-nation unto itself. It's the capital of gay that sits by the Bay. It's the city where "it’s all about being one"...and about, "treating everybody as one". It's been aptly described by those who migrate there as, "heaven and hell on earth", depending on one's preference. It's either the city of fruitcakes; or the city of the enlightened attitude. Once again, it depends on one's outlook.
 
The homeless in San Francisco are of particular interest. They travel by day and hang out in packs together. They belong to their own "union", unlike the vulnerable, despondent drug-dependent winos of other cities, who keep to themselves. In unity there is strength; and in San Francisco there is tolerance.

Unlike the harassment they--in most cities--face from police (and disdainful "get a job" citizens), the 'liberated homeless' of San Francisco are a cause unto themselves.

Recently, hundreds of concerned citizens fanned out through all of San Francisco's neighborhoods to tally the thousands of homeless people sleeping on city streets, and to discern whether the city's efforts to address the problem are working. "I walk to work every day, and I see this man on the corner," said a 27-year old volunteer, who moved to San Francisco from Boise, Idaho, several months ago. "I don't have the funds to help him financially, but my heart is burdened to help."
 
Besides tolerance, San Francisco is known as "Amsterdam at night", where hundreds of gay bars, tattoo and massage parlors, and gay strip clubs are omni-present. But unlike in other cities, the liberal culture has professed tolerance, and accepts all alternative lifestyles as par for the course.  Visitors describe it as having an 'underground appearance' in almost every city neighborhood. One recent traveler described the 'jovial' atmosphere as..."pot-smoking wierdos walking around everywhere".

So whither will the San Francisco attitudes of Nancy Pelosi lead, come the next session of Congress? Will she spin her web of liberalism, and overcome the newfound centrism of Barack Obama? This may shape up to be the most interesting drama on Capitol hill since Monica's dress.

And also in the Senate, there may arise another challenge from the radicals, such as Schumer, Reid, Kennedy, and the other wizened senatorial leftists. Will Barack use his Chicago, thug-style politics to handle this cadre of aristocratic liberals? Or will they, in effect, say to him... "Now listen young man; you're here for only 4 or possibly 8 years...we're here for life! So forget all your centrist moderate babble..THIS is how we do things in Washington, my boy".

And by April of next year, we all should know who's likely to emerge triumphant is this likely-to-come power struggle. Meanwhile, the possibility of an unfolding new Washington drama grows ever more suspenseful.

Will Pelosi and Reid railroad the green-behind-the-ears Obama, with their skillful manipulation of House and Senate parliamentary rules and procedures? Or will the Obama presidential express of centrism roll over the opposition? Will our 44th president honor his political debts to the left? Or will he, out of political expediency, forfeit the payback, and let them eat crow?

Capitol Hill, 2009-10, is likely to be where and when the new battle of Constitutional checks and balances will have taken place.

The National Debt Clock in New York City has run out of digits to record the growing figure. The economy continues to get worse. The housing glut endures. Fearful consumers are turning from the yellow of caution to the red alert of panic. Retail stores are doing all but giving away merchandise to avoid going dark next year.  Banks and other financial institutions continue to suffer more losses.

Other than that, the out come for the U.S. economy looks stellar, especially now that the new era of Baracko-nomics is about to get underway! Hi ho and its off to the unemployment line we go!

And to what great economic heights will the Chosen One lead us in his first four years in the new Camelot of Obama?

On his recent "60 Minutes" interview, Barack was asked rather bluntly by CBS"s Steve Kroft: "Is there a point where just going to the Treasury Department and printing more money ceases to be an option?"

Obama : "We shouldn't worry about the deficit next year or even the year after...The most important thing is that we avoid a deepening recession, and we have the tools," the president-elect said .

Atta boy Barack-o! Don't back down! Show everyone that the naysayers were wrong when they accused you of having no working knowledge of either business or economic principles. We know you'll show 'em all when you break out the old reliable democratic tool for any economic problem.. the old reliable printing press in the basement at the Fed.

The primary originator of the printing press as an economic tool, was good ole LBJ. In the late 60's, the Vietnam war costs were spiraling out of control. Johnson was sinking in political quicksand, trying to pay for an unpopular and unexplained war without raising taxes, but yet without cutting all the political promises he made about his Great Society social programs. Congress bitterly opposed his idea of a 6% tax hike, and  all the while, the pentagon's budget was exploding with the war's spiraling costs.

Inflation was bubbling up. The dollar was sinking. Every time president Johnson appeared on TV to announce another troop escalation, he looked as if he'd aged another ten years. Poor LBJ!.."oh woe is me...what can I do?"

So Mr. Johnson decided to set a economic democratic precedent that has flourished to this very day... he would deal with the problem using his new C& P program...Conceal the problem...and keep it Painless-- unleash a new federal reserve strategy-- run the printing presses!

In all its previous wars, the U.S. had paid for them by tax hikes, or selling what the old timers refer to as "war bonds". But Johnson had the fed crank out approximately 200 billion in paper currency to avoid a tax hike, and keep his Great Society ship of state afloat. But by march of1968, the wolf was at the Whitehouse door.

Back in those days, the dollar's role was to act as the world's reserve currency. But the dollar suffered its first black eye when the U.S. began defaulting on that role by allowing its short term liabilities in the form of dollars held by foreigners, to FAR exceed its short term assets in the form of readily available gold. Inflation began to worsen and the dollar began to sink even lower.

Then Richard Nixon attempted to sit on the country's inflationary suitcase, when he went off the gold standard and instituted rent and price controls in 1971. Naturally the suitcase burst open in 1973 when inflation rocketed to 7%. So tricky Dicky Nixon devalued the dollar to juice the U.S. trade balance, and it boomed the economy from the export side of the ledger; and for awhile, the economy thrived for the first part of that year.

But in late 1973, oil prices quadrupled during the Yom Kippur war ,and the U.S. economy  went into an OPEC-stimulated tailspin. But the irreparable damage to the U.S. dollar had been done; never again would it be pegged to the price of gold; it would float up or down in relation to the other currencies of the world.

And then there were those oh so happy days of Jimmie Carter, (the next democratic-economic prodigy), bringing his stellar financial expertise to Washington as a peanut farmer. Carter created the "misery" index-- double digit unemployment, double digit inflation; and double digit interest rates-- a triple header of legendary disaster ! New terms such as "stagflation" were added to our lexicon during the Carter era . He indeed had succeeded in making peanuts out of the economy.

The only thing that saved the country from an economic calamity was the opening of the Alasakan oil pipeline, which saw the price of gas drop precipitously in1977, and gave a huge economic boost because of the big increase it brought to the people's disposable incomes back then.

Clinton, the next democrat, was widely depicted as having balanced the budget, putting everyone back to work, and reducing welfare. But Clinton may have been the luckiest president of the 20th century, largely as a function of  being in the right place at the right time.

Had not Ross Perot siphoned 7% of the vote from incumbent George Bush senior, Clinton would probably be serving out his life term back in Arkansas as its most popular governor since Orville Faubus.

"I will focus on the economy like a laser beam" said Mr. Cinton in 1992! But about all he did was get even luckier as his time in the Oval office progressed.  Deep down Clinton was just another tax & spend liberal vote-buyer, who had to raise taxes (against his campaign promises) to cash all the political chits he owed from the various support groups who got him elected. His luxury tax fiasco (10% on yachts and large boats) illustrated his shallow understanding of economic principles-- taxing the rich puts the middle classes out of work everytime. Boat builders laid off 8,800 workers; and as a result, the unemployment benefits paid out far exceeded the miniscule tax revenues brought in.

When the Republicans won an overwhelming sweep in the Congressional '94 midterms, Newt Gingrich as much as threatened Clinton that..."nothing further would pass unless he reigned in spending and cut welfare into workfare". Its all part of the Clinton book of mythology.

Myth: Clinton put everyone back to work.
Reality: the introduction of personal computer of the 80's had percolated through the economy by the 90's, replacing the paper age with the digital office age. Productivity soared nationwide . Now couple this with the dot-com boom, and concomitant job explosion, and Clinton, who was a largely a bystander to it all, graciously accepted credit as the president of "job creation".

Myth: Clinton balanced the budget.
Reality: this has about as much validity as giving Gore credit for inventing the internet! Ronald Reagan, in conjunction with Tip O'Neil, actually did accomplish making social security solvent by instituting  the original lockbox in the 1980's.

But if the average American of today, worried about his (her) retirement, could just call Mr Clinton onto the carpet now, there are a plethora of questions to be axed.

"Yes Mr Clinton: What was the relationship of the Social Security Trust Fund to the U.S.’s national debt during your 2 terms as president? Was the federal budget actually balanced during this time as every one has been led to believe?  Explain what happened when you were accused of "raiding the Social Security Trust Fund”. Would the Social Security System face financial crisis today if Congress simply didn’t rob the Trust Fund to pay for its expenditures during those years? Is this what Congress did back then? Explain in full detail, please."

The liberal press has led us to believe that the Clinton years were like the days of wine and roses; but just like any myth, the bubble burst in 2001 just as the abominable George Bush entered the Whitehouse. The internet's "unlimited expansion" proved to be quite limited . Clinton's strong promotion of China as "most favored trading nation" began to create the giant offshore sucking sound of America's manufacturing jobs. And  China was the great vacuum cleaner; and Clinton was the one that plugged them in to the world's economy.

Now, add on NAFTA to all that, and history may go on to prove (in due time) that the Clinton years of "prosperity" were those that greased the skids for the U.S. economy to careen downward into its 2nd Great Depression in 100 years.


How about today? Of course the democrats are willing to spend their way to prosperity using the old Lyndon Johnson c-p method of economics. Conceal the problem, and keep it Painless, Yes, those good ole democratic sound  principles-- print our way to prosperity--  then make the problem disappear by saddling the future generations with unbearable debt, because the future generation has no relevance... the only thing that counts is the next election.

Hooray! Lets all cheer for the new era of the Congress with learning disabilities! Barney Frank talks glowingly of tax increases on the wealthy, and breaking out the national charge card... (quote) "I think at this point there needs to be a focus on an immediate increase in spending, and I think this is a time when deficit fear has to take a second seat'.

Is this the way the Obama-energizd tax & spend 111th Congress intends to manage our financial crisis? Joe Biden, during his campaign said..." paying more taxes was patriotic, denying the obvious precedent of Herbert Hoover, who proved that tax hikes during downturns are IDIOTIC. Will they ever learn?

Enter Barack Obama..."Tax hikes on the wealthy are about being fair and achieving balance"...yet more evidence of a learning disabled democrat!

And now, after all this planned runaway deficit spending, we have the bail-out banquet running at full throttle! Congress has voted to increase the national debt to a measly 11 trillion now, with probably another trill or two during the next 2 to 4 years. And what's to stop this leaning-disabled Congress from printing the country into insolvency?

Certainly not the media, who speak nor decry of the reckless financial trends on Capitol Hill. Certainly not all those who are getting in the entitlement line for all the juicy campaign  promises of Obama.

Alexander Hamilton, our first treasury secretary, insisted that the United States pay its debts and practice fiscal prudence. He persuaded Congress to establish a national coinage, a national banking system, and a revenue program to provide for the repayment of the national debt. That then-controversial proposal gave our new nation a chance to grow into the powerhouse it is today.

But what would be the fate of Alexander Hamilton if he were in Washington in this day in time? The media would attack his personal life as a lawyer. Nancy Pelosi would label him a "member of the radical right wingers", with no legislative experience. Barack Obama  would condemn him to the dreaded republican status as "being out of touch" with main street.

So, for how much longer do we sit by silently and watch the democrats print more currency? How much longer can we go down this path toward economic oblivion? How much longer will we borrow until the interest on the national debt (currently 500 billion annually) sinks the ship of state into the ocean of insolvency? How much longer will we reach the point where the dollar is destroyed, and we become the next 1920's era Germany? Will history not repeat itself? Could we expect any different result?

These reckless, treasonous democrats are setting the scene for unprecedented disaster! We are inviting the worst of all economic worlds --a hyperinflationary depression! The democrats are against mining our own energy, and FOR sending our money abroad for OPEC oil. The democrats want to tax our employers, who will then downsize us from OUR jobs. Barack Obama wants to tax big oil with a windfall profits tax, and increase the corporate and capital gains tax, all because its fair? Fair to who?

These disastrous tax policies have already created the current Wall Street slow motion crash; and the housing disaster of declining real estate values. And with Obama in the Whitehouse, and the radical left in control of congress, it'll be gasoline on the fire!

These events have led us up to the current economic crises. And now that we have been  backed into this fiscal corner, the country has two choices.... we either take control of these events, or these events will take control of us,  in either this generation, or the next.

But no matter what the consequences of these corrupt Congressional criminals, once the disaster is upon us, they will be filthy rich and long gone.