Wednesday, February 25, 2009 - Vol. 11, No. 52
An Open, Candid, and
Non-Partisan Response to the President
Dear Mr. President,
First we would like to salute you.
You've ascended to what is no doubt one of the most difficult offices...one of the most difficult jobs on the face of the Earth. Never mind being "Leader of the Free World," the office of President attracts such multitudes of baseless ire, doubt and partisan rhetoric that former Presidents have aged visibly while in office...a fact to which your newly grey hairs can surely attest.
However; you accepted the position.
You campaigned and were chosen by the American people to lead our country out of the current crisis. You had over a year to consider the depth of responsibilities and challenges that would rest on your shoulders, and you assured the American people that not only were you aware of these challenges and obstacles, but you were ready to face them.
It is with knowledge of these facts that we here at The Sovereign Society respond to last night's speech. While it was touted as a "frank but optimistic" outlook on the U.S. economy and our eventual recovery, we found it to be quite the opposite. Granted, it was more frank than the usual ‘damage control' Americans receive from their representatives. But the optimism seemed misguided...failing to appreciate the scope of our crisis. As such it's likely to inspire pessimism in the populace and in the marketplace.
So without further adieu, we'd like to suggest some corrections - not only to promises and policy, but to the underlying perspective with which you develop a framework for recovery.
The Lending isn't Coming Back. Please Stop Hoping it Will
This is a key misunderstanding - one that is crucial to your perspective on the crisis - that must be changed if we are to avoid a protracted Depression.
Numerous times in last night's speech, you spoke of reinvigorating lenders to "get the credit flowing again." We couldn't help but ask: What for?
According to TransUnion, the average bankcard debt per borrower is US$5,710. Our National debt exceeds US$10 Trillion and is quickly approaching US$11 Trillion...working out to over US$35,000 per US citizen We have 19 million empty houses in the U.S. at present, and there's a StarBucks, McDonald's and Wal-Mart on every "Main Street" in the country. So what do American citizens need that credit for? To stave off personal bankruptcy? That is not the way to a real recovery.
Undoubtedly, you might respond that the focus is on reinvigorating credit for American businesses and corporations. If these parties don't have access to credit, then more jobs will be lost and prosperity will suffer further.
To that we respond bleakly; that lending simply isn't coming back.
To understand our perspective there, you must understand the concept of the "Shadow Banking System," as popularized by Nouriel Roubini. You may recognize this term, but we regret to inform you that your stated perspective indicates a lack of understanding as to what the "Shadow Banking System" really is...or was.
Since the last overhaul of the country's regulatory system in the 1930s and 40s, banking activities have spread like wildfire. Hedge funds, Sovereign Wealth funds, and those hopelessly complicated "Structured Investment Vehicles" (SIVs) formed the backbone of this system, which credit derivatives - like CDSs and Mortgage-backed CDOs - and the process of securitization to subsume activities that had once belonged to carefully regulated and managed commercial banks. (The Sovereign Society has been blowing the whistle on this system since 2003...see here)
It's worth noting that the system developed thanks largely to the pointed deregulations that were touted under the guise of creating a "free market," (see the February 24th edition of the Offshore A-Letter), and as such owe their existence to the government you represent...but that's neither here nor there.
The giants of commercial banking like Citigroup and JP Morgan Chase - now in the spotlight as the "too big to fail" targets of nationalization...while it's worth noting that both of these behemoths were created thanks to the aforementioned "strategic deregulation" - were compelled to join in and claim their share of the profits.
Ultimately, we ended up with a nigh-homogenous system, where various banking activities were engaged by various parties at various levels of regulation...until they pushed it too far and the "bubble" burst.
Now, the leverage (or credit), which allowed the Shadow Banking System to rise to prominence, is all but swept away. Gone are the SIVs, the hedge fund profits and the securitization model. And since the system reached a level of near homogeneity, our commercial banks; the keepers of our life savings, our nest eggs and our hopes and dreams - were sucked into the void.
While these commercial banks may have constrained their lending, they haven't drawn it to the dead-stop portrayed in the media. Indeed, according to the Wall Street Journal, banks have actually increased their lending in the past few months.
It's easy to see that we as Americans have the inclination to demonize the "banksters" right now, but it's not all their fault. Rather, the real pain comes from the disappearance of that superstructure... the "Shadow Banking System" that fueled misguided growth with unprecedented levels of (debt-and-credit-based) liquidity.
Jamie Dimon - CEO of JP Morgan Chase - cited this in one of Barney Frank's recent hearings on the subject, "There's a huge amount of non bank lending which has disappeared which is the same thing to the consumer (as the banks)...Finance companies, car finance companies, money funds, bond funds...that withdrew money from the system (when the credit crunch took hold) making it much harder on the system. That created the crisis we now have."
So, to use a format you'll surely recognize;
NOW, THEREFORE; you should acknowledge the fact that this unregulated superstructure - the Shadow Banking System - is gone. And good riddance indeed! That system is what led us to today's crisis. Further, you must acknowledge that there is no reasonable way in which bringing back similar levels of credit will lead us to recovery. Continuing to say so will only diminish the confidence of markets and citizens in your leadership.
What you should do instead - what you must do instead in order to avoid a protracted Depression - is address the existing credit and debt issues that yours and the Bush administration have put off for the last year. That means finally coming up with a reasonable price for those "illiquid assets"...or letting the market do the job. This won't make you popular with homeowners or your investment bank campaign sponsors. But if your duty truly is to the American people then this is the only course of action...political reputation be damned...
Second: Clean up Your Message and Acknowledge the "Power of One"
...Fix the Economy first, and THEN we'll Cure Cancer
This point is ancillary to the first, but it's just as crucial in terms of maintaining the kind of market confidence we'll need to get the economy growing sometime in the next few years;
What's your angle? What's the "shot"...what's your line?
Is it fixing the economy? Then talk about fixing the economy. Don't give us an hour of the same promises we've been spoon-fed by years of politicians. Alternative Energy? Gas is less than two bucks a gallon right now...people would much rather hear about how you're going to keep them working. Reforming Healthcare? Aren't we in the middle of the biggest crisis since - and perhaps even greater than - the Great Depression? Improving Education?
Mr. Obama; you're done campaigning. You've already got the Office, and words won't fix the economy.
Moreover, last night's speech seemed to reflect the compromised and...shall we say "porky" nature of the recovery bills so far passed by a Democratic Congress. US$700 Billion to fix the banks? Yeah, let's throw another US$180 Billion in useless favors on there (like wooden arrow shafts and mining gear) so we can get the votes. Biggest spending bill in American History? Let's throw in a Maglev from Disneyland to keep Harry Reid happy.
But your speech last night - and the aforementioned recovery bills - seem to be rife with "You scratch my back..." politicking. This kind of "governing" (we use the term loosely here) won't convince the people or the markets that the water's safe to start swimming again. It will make them feel like their health and welfare hang on whether or not we've done enough "favors" for the politicians, bureaucrats and sponsors standing between them and the government actions necessary for a swift recovery.
As such, and combined with your flawed perspective on banks and lending, we do not believe that your actions since taking office are likely to enhance America's prospects for a smooth and swift recovery.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Ex-Hitler youth's warning to America
WND Exclusive
Ex-Hitler youth's warning to America
'Every day brings this nation closer to Nazi-style totalitarian abyss'
Posted: November 13, 2008
1:00 am Eastern
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
WASHINGTON – Because it has abandoned moral absolutes and its historic Christian faith, the U.S. is moving closer to a Nazi-style totalitarianism, warns a former German member of the Hitler Youth in a new book.
"Every day brings this nation closer to a Nazi-style totalitarian abyss," writes Hilmar von Campe, now a U.S. citizen, and author of "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America."
Von Campe has founded the national Institute for Truth and Freedom to fight for a return to constitutional government in the U.S. – a key, he believes, to keeping America free.
"I lived the Nazi nightmare, and, as the old saying goes, 'A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument,'" writes von Campe. "Everything I write is based on my personal experience in Nazi Germany. There is nothing theoretical about my description of what happens when a nation throws God out of government and society, and Christians become religious bystanders. I don't want to see a repetition. The role of God in human society is the decisive issue for this generation. My writing is part of my life of restitution for the crimes of a godless government, of the evil of which I was a part."
(Story continues below)
Von Campe grew up under the Nazis, served in the Hitler Youth and fought against the Red Army in the Yugoslavian theater as a tank gunner in the German army. He was captured at the end of the war and escaped five months later from a prisoner of war camp in Communist Yugoslavia.
"It took me a long time to understand and define the nature of National Socialism," says von Campe. "And, unfortunately, their philosophy continues to flourish under different labels remaining a menace to America and free human society."
He writes: "The most painful part of defining National Socialism was to recognize my own moral responsibility for the Nazi disaster and their crimes against humanity. It boiled down to accepting the truth that 'as I am, so is my nation,' and realizing that if every German was like me, it was no wonder that the nation became a cesspool of gangsters. This realization is as valid today for any person in any nation as it was then, and it is true for America and every American now."
Von Campe's message is that political freedom and democratic rules alone are not sufficient to govern humanity justly.
"Democratic procedures can be subverted and dishonest politicians are like sand in the gearbox, abundant, everywhere and destructive," he writes. "What I see in America today is people painting their cabins while the ship goes down. Today in America we are witnessing a repeat performance of the tragedy of 1933 when an entire nation let itself be led like a lamb to the Socialist slaughterhouse. This time, the end of freedom is inevitable unless America rises to her mission and destiny."
Von Campe says he sees spiritual parallels among Americans and his childhood Germany.
"The silence from our pulpits regarding the moral collapse of American society from within is not very different from the silence that echoed from the pulpits in Germany toward Nazi policies," he explains. "Our family lived through the Nazi years in Germany, an experience typical of millions of Europeans regardless of what side they were on. We paid a high price for the moral perversions of a German government, which excluded God and His Commandments from their policies. America must not continue following the same path to destruction, but instead heed the lessons of history and the warning I am giving."
Specifically, von Campe warns Americans their political leaders are on the wrong footing, "denying our cultural and traditional roots based on our unique Constitution and Christian orientation as a nation. Christians don't understand their mission."
Special offers:
Get Hilmar von Campe's "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America."
Previous columns:
Humanity's insurrection against God by Hilmar von Campe
The lost purpose of history by Hilmar von Campe
Ex-Hitler youth's warning to America
'Every day brings this nation closer to Nazi-style totalitarian abyss'
Posted: November 13, 2008
1:00 am Eastern
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
WASHINGTON – Because it has abandoned moral absolutes and its historic Christian faith, the U.S. is moving closer to a Nazi-style totalitarianism, warns a former German member of the Hitler Youth in a new book.
"Every day brings this nation closer to a Nazi-style totalitarian abyss," writes Hilmar von Campe, now a U.S. citizen, and author of "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America."
Von Campe has founded the national Institute for Truth and Freedom to fight for a return to constitutional government in the U.S. – a key, he believes, to keeping America free.
"I lived the Nazi nightmare, and, as the old saying goes, 'A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument,'" writes von Campe. "Everything I write is based on my personal experience in Nazi Germany. There is nothing theoretical about my description of what happens when a nation throws God out of government and society, and Christians become religious bystanders. I don't want to see a repetition. The role of God in human society is the decisive issue for this generation. My writing is part of my life of restitution for the crimes of a godless government, of the evil of which I was a part."
(Story continues below)
Von Campe grew up under the Nazis, served in the Hitler Youth and fought against the Red Army in the Yugoslavian theater as a tank gunner in the German army. He was captured at the end of the war and escaped five months later from a prisoner of war camp in Communist Yugoslavia.
"It took me a long time to understand and define the nature of National Socialism," says von Campe. "And, unfortunately, their philosophy continues to flourish under different labels remaining a menace to America and free human society."
He writes: "The most painful part of defining National Socialism was to recognize my own moral responsibility for the Nazi disaster and their crimes against humanity. It boiled down to accepting the truth that 'as I am, so is my nation,' and realizing that if every German was like me, it was no wonder that the nation became a cesspool of gangsters. This realization is as valid today for any person in any nation as it was then, and it is true for America and every American now."
Von Campe's message is that political freedom and democratic rules alone are not sufficient to govern humanity justly.
"Democratic procedures can be subverted and dishonest politicians are like sand in the gearbox, abundant, everywhere and destructive," he writes. "What I see in America today is people painting their cabins while the ship goes down. Today in America we are witnessing a repeat performance of the tragedy of 1933 when an entire nation let itself be led like a lamb to the Socialist slaughterhouse. This time, the end of freedom is inevitable unless America rises to her mission and destiny."
Von Campe says he sees spiritual parallels among Americans and his childhood Germany.
"The silence from our pulpits regarding the moral collapse of American society from within is not very different from the silence that echoed from the pulpits in Germany toward Nazi policies," he explains. "Our family lived through the Nazi years in Germany, an experience typical of millions of Europeans regardless of what side they were on. We paid a high price for the moral perversions of a German government, which excluded God and His Commandments from their policies. America must not continue following the same path to destruction, but instead heed the lessons of history and the warning I am giving."
Specifically, von Campe warns Americans their political leaders are on the wrong footing, "denying our cultural and traditional roots based on our unique Constitution and Christian orientation as a nation. Christians don't understand their mission."
Special offers:
Get Hilmar von Campe's "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America."
Previous columns:
Humanity's insurrection against God by Hilmar von Campe
The lost purpose of history by Hilmar von Campe
Comparisons between Nazi leader, Obama draws strong reaction
Former Hitler Youth author angers both right, left
Comparisons between Nazi leader, Obama draws strong reaction
Posted: November 22, 2008
10:50 pm Eastern
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
A new book by a former Hitler Youth, which condemns totalitarian fascism and communism, has drawn angry reactions from both the American political left and the political right.
The book is "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America" by Hilmar von Campe.
In an appearance on Michael Savage's nationally syndicated talk-radio program, von Campe pointed to similarities between the rise of totalitarianism under Adolf Hitler and the current social and political trends inside the United States, specifically mentioning the policies of Barack Obama as being similar to national socialism, which von Campe lived through.
Get Hilmar von Campe's "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America."
On the right, Michael C. Moynihan writing for Reason Online downplayed any parallelism, writing, "Now that Naomi Wolf's breathless tale of America's collapse into fascism has been further repudiated (unless, that is, Hitlerian countries routinely elect people like Barack Obama), perhaps it's time for the hysterics on the right to tremble in fear at the forthcoming machtergreifung. First, the psychopathic radio host and 'world famous herbal expert' Michael Savage hosts former Hitler Youth member Hilmar von Campe 'to discuss similarities between President-elect Obama and the rise of totalitarianism under Hitler.' Not much you can say to that, except to point out that beyond the big, excited crowds, there are absolutely no similarities."
On the left, Mother Jones was quick to join in, referring to von Campe as "one of a bevy of conservative authors who in the weeks before the election whipped up the fear that Obama was the modern-day version of the Nazi dictator. In an Oct. 28 WorldNetDaily column, he wrote, 'Socialist Hitler destroyed free society in a few months. Socialist Obama is close to his steppingstone.'"
Mother Jones called Savage "an over-the-top purveyor of extreme rhetoric" who, in their opinion, was not breaking new ground by scheduling von Campe as a guest. "But it's a signal the say-anything right is not dumping the Obama-as-Hitler argument," they continued. "Will this stuff play even to the GOP base? This sort of talk, if it becomes widespread in the months and years ahead, is more likely to separate the brimming-with-resentment conservatives from more responsible Republicans – which certainly won't make the GOP's repair job any easier. But politics aside, the continued use of this hysterical rhetoric raises this question: Do these agitators who liken the historic 2008 election to Hitler's putsch hate America?"
In the lead up to the presidential election, Media Matters placed von Campe alongside radio host Mark Levin and other media figures who allegedly compared Obama to Hitler or the Nazis.
(Story continues below)
Other liberals are fighting mad about the Obama-socialism connection in the WorldNetDaily article "Ex-Hitler youth compares Obama to Nazi rise", calling it "the most controversial essay in the final week of the election season."
Evidence that Obama was a socialist emerged in the days leading up to the election, revealing that he "belonged to a socialist political party that sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.").
The attack by liberals on von Campe for pointing out how Obama's political views echo this Nazi Germany agenda has not deterred the former Hitler Youth from speaking out.
"Every day brings this nation closer to a Nazi-style totalitarian abyss," he warns. "Today in America we are witnessing a repeat performance of the tragedy of 1933 when an entire nation let itself be led like a lamb to the Socialist slaughterhouse. This time, the end of freedom is inevitable unless America rises to her mission and destiny."
As a person who survived the nightmare of Adolf Hitler, von Campe believes he carries a sober responsibility to warn Americans how quickly free society can be destroyed through socialist ideology.
Special offer:
Get Hilmar von Campe's "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America."
Previous story:
Ex-Hitler Youth issues dire warning to America
Comparisons between Nazi leader, Obama draws strong reaction
Posted: November 22, 2008
10:50 pm Eastern
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
A new book by a former Hitler Youth, which condemns totalitarian fascism and communism, has drawn angry reactions from both the American political left and the political right.
The book is "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America" by Hilmar von Campe.
In an appearance on Michael Savage's nationally syndicated talk-radio program, von Campe pointed to similarities between the rise of totalitarianism under Adolf Hitler and the current social and political trends inside the United States, specifically mentioning the policies of Barack Obama as being similar to national socialism, which von Campe lived through.
Get Hilmar von Campe's "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America."
On the right, Michael C. Moynihan writing for Reason Online downplayed any parallelism, writing, "Now that Naomi Wolf's breathless tale of America's collapse into fascism has been further repudiated (unless, that is, Hitlerian countries routinely elect people like Barack Obama), perhaps it's time for the hysterics on the right to tremble in fear at the forthcoming machtergreifung. First, the psychopathic radio host and 'world famous herbal expert' Michael Savage hosts former Hitler Youth member Hilmar von Campe 'to discuss similarities between President-elect Obama and the rise of totalitarianism under Hitler.' Not much you can say to that, except to point out that beyond the big, excited crowds, there are absolutely no similarities."
On the left, Mother Jones was quick to join in, referring to von Campe as "one of a bevy of conservative authors who in the weeks before the election whipped up the fear that Obama was the modern-day version of the Nazi dictator. In an Oct. 28 WorldNetDaily column, he wrote, 'Socialist Hitler destroyed free society in a few months. Socialist Obama is close to his steppingstone.'"
Mother Jones called Savage "an over-the-top purveyor of extreme rhetoric" who, in their opinion, was not breaking new ground by scheduling von Campe as a guest. "But it's a signal the say-anything right is not dumping the Obama-as-Hitler argument," they continued. "Will this stuff play even to the GOP base? This sort of talk, if it becomes widespread in the months and years ahead, is more likely to separate the brimming-with-resentment conservatives from more responsible Republicans – which certainly won't make the GOP's repair job any easier. But politics aside, the continued use of this hysterical rhetoric raises this question: Do these agitators who liken the historic 2008 election to Hitler's putsch hate America?"
In the lead up to the presidential election, Media Matters placed von Campe alongside radio host Mark Levin and other media figures who allegedly compared Obama to Hitler or the Nazis.
(Story continues below)
Other liberals are fighting mad about the Obama-socialism connection in the WorldNetDaily article "Ex-Hitler youth compares Obama to Nazi rise", calling it "the most controversial essay in the final week of the election season."
Evidence that Obama was a socialist emerged in the days leading up to the election, revealing that he "belonged to a socialist political party that sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.").
The attack by liberals on von Campe for pointing out how Obama's political views echo this Nazi Germany agenda has not deterred the former Hitler Youth from speaking out.
"Every day brings this nation closer to a Nazi-style totalitarian abyss," he warns. "Today in America we are witnessing a repeat performance of the tragedy of 1933 when an entire nation let itself be led like a lamb to the Socialist slaughterhouse. This time, the end of freedom is inevitable unless America rises to her mission and destiny."
As a person who survived the nightmare of Adolf Hitler, von Campe believes he carries a sober responsibility to warn Americans how quickly free society can be destroyed through socialist ideology.
Special offer:
Get Hilmar von Campe's "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America."
Previous story:
Ex-Hitler Youth issues dire warning to America
We are SUPPOSED to be Constitutional Republic
By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Another U.S. soldier on active duty in Iraq is joining a challenge to President Obama's eligibility to be commander-in-chief, citing WND's report on 1st Lt. Scott Easterling, who has agreed to be a plaintiff in a lawsuit over the issue, as his inspiration.
"I was inspired by 1LT Easterling's story and am writing you to inform you that I would like to be added as a plaintiff against Obama as well if you feel it would help your case," the soldier, identified for this report only as a reservist now on active duty in Iraq.
His letter was directed to California attorney Orly Taitz who, along with her DefendOurFreedom.us Foundation, is working on a series of legal cases seeking to uncover Obama's birth records and other documents that would reveal whether he meets the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
Easterling, who confirmed separately to WND that he is questioning Obama's authority, wrote to Taitz that, "As an active-duty officer in the United States Army, I have grave concerns about the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the office of president of the United States."
(Story continues below)
The second soldier wrote, "I am an Army reservist who was activated last August and am currently serving with a military police battalion in Camp Bucca, Iraq. I will be here until at least June 2009."
He continued, "When I enlisted last year I had to show my birth certificate, as well as my driver's license, high school diploma, college transcripts, social security card; I also filled out loads of paperwork to include listing the names, addresses and phone numbers of my family members and had to answer any questions regarding foreign travel.
Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 270,000 others and sign up now!
"I think it is reasonable for Obama to prove his citizenship status thus certifying his eligibility. I too raised my right hand and swore an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States," he told Taitz. "I believe the case you are filing could very well determine if we are in fact a Constitutional Republic or a nation of mob rule. I would be honored to be a part of your efforts."
Perhaps anticipating a wave of outrage from Obama supporters, he asked that he be given no "unnecessary publicity," although his name eventually would become public when a case is filed.
Taitz told WND she was making contingency plans that could include her travel to Iraq should a military case be brought against the soldiers who are speaking their minds about Obama.
"I told him if there is any prosecution, he can get in touch with me. I would even fly to Iraq and work with the attorney there to provide his defense," she told WND.
She said undoubtedly a part of the defense would be a demand for documentation on Obama's actual qualifications to serve as U.S. president.
WND has reported on multiple legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." While representatives for Obama has called such claims "garbage," the Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."
Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Several of the cases have involved emergency appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court in which justices have declined to hear arguments. According to a report from the Associated Press today, another such case has been rejected. The appeal by Cort Wrotnowski alleged Obama was a British subject at birth and, therefore, ineligible to be president.
There was no comment from the court, the same treatment the justices have given cases brought by several other lawyers, including Philip Berg, Leo Donofrio and Taitz.
WND reported yesterday when Easterling agreed to be a plaintiff in Taitz' case.
Soldier Scott Easterling
Taitz told WND she had advised Easterling to obtain legal counsel before making any statements regarding the commander-in-chief, but he insisted on moving forward. His contention is that as an active member of the U.S. military, he is required to follow orders from a sitting president, and he needs – on pain of court-martial – to know that Obama is eligible.
Taitz said other legal cases questioning Obama's eligibility filed by members of the military mostly have included retired officers, and courts several times have ruled they don't have standing to issue their challenge.
Easterling, however, is subject to enemy fire and certainly would have a reason to need to know the legitimacy of his orders, she argued.
"Until Mr. Obama releases a 'vault copy' of his original birth certificate for public review, I will consider him neither my Commander in Chief nor my President, but rather, a usurper to the Office – an impostor," Easterling's statement said.
Here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama's eligibility:
* New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.
* Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.
* Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.
* Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.
* Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.
* Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
* Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.
* In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
* In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.
* In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.
* California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.
In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama's eligibility include:
* In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.
* In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.
* In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.
* In Washington, L. Charles Cohen vs. Obama.
* In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.
WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi had gone to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama's birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Another U.S. soldier on active duty in Iraq is joining a challenge to President Obama's eligibility to be commander-in-chief, citing WND's report on 1st Lt. Scott Easterling, who has agreed to be a plaintiff in a lawsuit over the issue, as his inspiration.
"I was inspired by 1LT Easterling's story and am writing you to inform you that I would like to be added as a plaintiff against Obama as well if you feel it would help your case," the soldier, identified for this report only as a reservist now on active duty in Iraq.
His letter was directed to California attorney Orly Taitz who, along with her DefendOurFreedom.us Foundation, is working on a series of legal cases seeking to uncover Obama's birth records and other documents that would reveal whether he meets the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
Easterling, who confirmed separately to WND that he is questioning Obama's authority, wrote to Taitz that, "As an active-duty officer in the United States Army, I have grave concerns about the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the office of president of the United States."
(Story continues below)
The second soldier wrote, "I am an Army reservist who was activated last August and am currently serving with a military police battalion in Camp Bucca, Iraq. I will be here until at least June 2009."
He continued, "When I enlisted last year I had to show my birth certificate, as well as my driver's license, high school diploma, college transcripts, social security card; I also filled out loads of paperwork to include listing the names, addresses and phone numbers of my family members and had to answer any questions regarding foreign travel.
Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 270,000 others and sign up now!
"I think it is reasonable for Obama to prove his citizenship status thus certifying his eligibility. I too raised my right hand and swore an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States," he told Taitz. "I believe the case you are filing could very well determine if we are in fact a Constitutional Republic or a nation of mob rule. I would be honored to be a part of your efforts."
Perhaps anticipating a wave of outrage from Obama supporters, he asked that he be given no "unnecessary publicity," although his name eventually would become public when a case is filed.
Taitz told WND she was making contingency plans that could include her travel to Iraq should a military case be brought against the soldiers who are speaking their minds about Obama.
"I told him if there is any prosecution, he can get in touch with me. I would even fly to Iraq and work with the attorney there to provide his defense," she told WND.
She said undoubtedly a part of the defense would be a demand for documentation on Obama's actual qualifications to serve as U.S. president.
WND has reported on multiple legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." While representatives for Obama has called such claims "garbage," the Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."
Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.
Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.
Several of the cases have involved emergency appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court in which justices have declined to hear arguments. According to a report from the Associated Press today, another such case has been rejected. The appeal by Cort Wrotnowski alleged Obama was a British subject at birth and, therefore, ineligible to be president.
There was no comment from the court, the same treatment the justices have given cases brought by several other lawyers, including Philip Berg, Leo Donofrio and Taitz.
WND reported yesterday when Easterling agreed to be a plaintiff in Taitz' case.
Soldier Scott Easterling
Taitz told WND she had advised Easterling to obtain legal counsel before making any statements regarding the commander-in-chief, but he insisted on moving forward. His contention is that as an active member of the U.S. military, he is required to follow orders from a sitting president, and he needs – on pain of court-martial – to know that Obama is eligible.
Taitz said other legal cases questioning Obama's eligibility filed by members of the military mostly have included retired officers, and courts several times have ruled they don't have standing to issue their challenge.
Easterling, however, is subject to enemy fire and certainly would have a reason to need to know the legitimacy of his orders, she argued.
"Until Mr. Obama releases a 'vault copy' of his original birth certificate for public review, I will consider him neither my Commander in Chief nor my President, but rather, a usurper to the Office – an impostor," Easterling's statement said.
Here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama's eligibility:
* New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.
* Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.
* Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.
* Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.
* Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.
* Chicago attorney Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
* Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.
* In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
* In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.
* In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.
* California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters.
In addition, other cases cited on the RightSideofLife blog as raising questions about Obama's eligibility include:
* In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed.
* In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed.
* In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade.
* In Washington, L. Charles Cohen vs. Obama.
* In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.
WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi had gone to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama's birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.
hoodwinked again?
Posted: February 24, 2009
10:25 pm Eastern
By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
When President Obama went to Fort Myers, Fla., to emphasize the nation's need for his economic stimulus plan, he promised to help a pleading homeless woman get back on her feet in a highly publicized exchange – but recent reports now reveal the woman may, in fact, be an owner of multiple properties.
"I have an urgent need," the elderly black woman identifying herself as Henrietta Hughes told Obama at a Feb. 10 town hall rally.
She nearly broke into tears, telling the president her family is desperate and homeless.
"The housing authority has two years waiting lists, and we need something more than the vehicle and the parks to go to," she said. "We need our own kitchen and our own bathroom. Please help."
The audience applauded as Obama kissed her on the cheek.
"We're going to do everything we can to help you, but there are a lot of people like you. We're going to do everything we can." Obama promised the well-dressed woman. "I'll have my staff talk to you after the town hall."
National media called her "The face of the economic crisis," while critics suggested the heartfelt moment may have been staged.
(Story continues below)
| |  |
After the incident, Chene Thompson, wife of Florida state Rep. Nicholas Thompson, R-Fort Myers, said she would allow Hughes to stay in her home without charging rent.
"Basically, I offered Ms. Hughes and her son the opportunity to stay in my home rent-free for as long as they need to," Thompson told WBBH-TV in Fort Myers. "I'm not a millionaire, I'm not rich, but this is what I can do for someone if they need it."
Hughes and her son, Corey, later declared to MSNBC that they had found hope with the help of God and Obama.
"I'd just say thank you very much, we appreciate you," said Corey, though it was Thompson who ultimately provided the helping hand.
While the media echoed the inspiring story, Florida's CBS affiliate, Southwest WINK News, revealed that Hughes had refused assistance for her allegedly homeless family before the appearance with Obama.
The director of We Care Outreach Ministry, Tanya Johnson, told the station she offered Hughes a home for three months in January – but the woman refused to accept her offer.
"We would have allowed her to stay for the first 90 days, no income. You know free," she said.
Johnson said she gave Hughes and her son money, food and free job training courses – but the woman refused again.
"We have extended a lot of her services to her," Johnson said.
Nonetheless, Hughes told the station she's never cheated the system and never chose to be homeless.
A blogger on Sweetness & Light researched property records for Hughes and found that the woman owned as many as three homes in recent years. She sold one in 2005 – two years after she allegedly began living in her car with her son – for a significant profit.
Hughes granted full ownership of a second home to her son, and the blogger suggests that Hughes made the transfer to meet income requirements for continuing to collect Social Security Disability Insurance and Medicare benefits.
No sales records could be located for the third home – and some say it could be an indication that Hughes still owns it.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Devious or Just Plain Stupid...You decide
Tuesday, February 24, 2009 - Vol. 11, No. 51
The U.S. Government:
Devious or Just Plain Stupid...
You Make the Call
Dear A-Letter Reader,
Ben Bernanke - the "Sultan of Spin" himself - came out this morning and echoed the misguided hopes of CNBC's Trillion Dollar Survey from January. He optimistically believes that the crisis will be resolved before the end of 2009...that 2010 will be a year of recovery.
His hopeful yet empty words caused me to reflect on the progress of government intervention through this crisis so far. And I can come to only one conclusion;
I'm praying that they're devious.
That their measures are intended to fail. That they've got some secret plot...a conspiracy going on. Otherwise it means our leaders - political and economic - are just plain obtuse - complete with dunce caps.
Because there's no other way to explain the abysmal failure of rhetoric and ‘policy' over the course of the last year. It's either deliberate or just thanks to incompetence. And with a darkening future ahead of us, we can only hope that it isn't the latter.
So I'm done holding it in. I've been watching this farce play out for months and it's time to let loose the broadside on these fools...smashing their misconceptions, half-truths and lies of omission to little bits.
Enough with the talk...it's time for the fireworks.
The Free Market Didn't Fail; The Regulations Did
Truthfully, every time I hear some politician talk about how this is an example of the failure of free markets, I want to whack the guy on the head with a rubber mallet.
There's a fine line between free markets and the deregulation that's allegedly intended to create a ‘free-er' market...and that's a distinction most fail to notice.
And in the last few decades we haven't had anything even closely resembling a free market. Instead, we've had a 21st century banking system that's governed by a gutted 1940s regulatory structure.
I'm talking about some of more dangerous "free market reforms" of the Clinton/Bush era. The repeal of the Glass Steagall Act - which kept the banking system functional from the Great Depression through the end of the 20th century - and the 2004 decision to lift leverage limitations on American banks.
Were these regulations removed with the intention of creating a free-er marketplace? In my humble opinion; absolutely not.
These were crucial safety nets for our highly-regulated economic system that got in the way of bankers' profits. Removing them wasn't a free market initiative, and it didn't create a free market. It just made the whole situation far more dangerous.
If anything, the massive amounts of lobbyist money that made this deregulation possible prove - beyond a shadow of a doubt - that the U.S. government is too compromised to properly manage the economy.
Meanwhile, the government-mandated ratings agencies continued to stamp their seal of approval on questionable mortgage-backed securities. And the SEC continued to let Madoff and Stanford go about their business, long after they were warned of Madoff's shenanigans.
You're probably starting to see that it wasn't the free market that created today's problems, but the false sense of security brought on by "strict" government regulations.
So yeah, let's go ahead and build a bigger safety blanket. One that costs more, makes the market even less efficient, and ultimately proves to be as dodgy and inconsistent as the existing regulatory system. Now that's genius.
Taking it a step further; the size and scope of this crisis could be pinned directly on the Federal Reserve. That's right; Greenspan's 'liquidity experiment' and years of rock-bottom interest rates were the lungs blowing up the bubble. But that's a different story altogether.
Moving on to Lie # 2...
A Novel Idea for Politicians: Quit Lying and Make up Your Mind
This is a big one.
Asking a politician to tell the truth or actually make up his mind...well that's like asking a teenager to drive 20 miles under the speed limit. It's just not going to happen.
Generally, that's because telling the truth is bad for a politician's business. No problem there...I can respect that. But what about when it's actually a good thing for the country?
Take right now for instance. The markets are running scared. They're beaten down and oversold, waiting for a single ray of hope or even just some consistency. What do they get instead?
They get bald-faced lies like the most recent joint statement from the Treasury, FDIC, OTS, OCC and the Fed...one that macroeconomist Mike Shedlock calls "a Purposeful Joint Lie." A document so filled with puffery and damage control that it could make Ben Bernanke blush.
They get a government that fails to warn them that one of the people's newest acquisitions - AIG - is set to declare the single largest loss in corporate history. They get a President who tells the press that years of trillion dollar deficits are on the way...only to backpedal a few weeks later and promise deficits half that size by the end of his first term.
Hey government; I've got a novel idea. How ‘bout you pick a story, and stick to it?
Want another shining example? Look no further than "illiquid assets." Know why they're illiquid? Because the government won't pick a value and stick to it.
The "illiquid assets" aren't worth face value, and they'd fetch maybe a third of their value in the secondary market (for sake of argument). But ever since Paulson's "Master Liquidity Enhancement Conduit" (MLEC) in the summer of 2007, the government's been waffling back and forth with half-hearted promises to pay 75% of face value...perhaps more...perhaps less. They just haven't made up their minds.
So instead of having the market's clearing mechanism do its magic, working out deals and determining a fair market value for these securities - so that we can all move on with the lengthy road to recovery - we've got the government in there gummin' up the works.
Faced with the decision of either shaking the rotten apples out of the tree or forcing taxpayers to pay for those rotten apples, they've chosen indecision. And the market's not happy about that.
Paving the Road to Great Depression II
Remember, sequels are always bigger, more violent and less entertaining than the original. Oh, and they also have a knack for rehashing the worst parts of the original.
But seriously folks, let's set the stage before I'm dismissed as a ‘fearmonger' by people that don't know all the facts. It surprises me that so much of the news media has reverted to questioning whether this is even the biggest slump since the Great Depression. Have they been reading the same news I have?
Both George Soros and Nassim Taleb have gone on record as saying that we're facing a bigger slump than the Great Depression. In a little-known interview regarding his interest rate policy, Greenspan warned that this event could make the Great Depression, "look like a Sunday Picnic." And at least nominally speaking, you can safely say that this is the biggest asset price bubble in the history of human civilization. So yes, it can be a little unnerving.
And yes; a full-blown Depression is in the range of possible outcomes.
Especially if bumbling politicians and the Fed keep themselves firmly lodged between the economy and a recovery. Just look at 1990s Japan or 1929 America. In both cases, authorities got involved and mucked up the works. Unlike the barely-remembered 1920-21 slump, a deep recession that quickly corrected itself thanks to non-intervention.
Not that they couldn't be helping if they wanted to. They'd just have to make up their minds, quit pandering to their "sponsors" or just plain get out of the way. But that's not likely any time soon.
(To learn how you can cut through this mess yourself, read Chairman John Pugsley's full Lies Report)
spending our way to savings? by Bobby Eberele
How to be a Left-Wing Budget Balancer
 |  |  Add Bobby as a Friend on Facebook Follow TeamGOPUSA on Twitter Follow ActionGOPUSA on Twitter Comment E-mail |
February 24, 2009 at 7:32 am
The Obama administration has barely had time to get settled into the job, yet the actions of this new president have already transitioned into the surreal. Under Barack Obama, every problem facing this country comes with a liberal remedy and a huge, taxpayer-funded price tag. Economy in trouble? Throw money at it. Banks failing? Throw money at it? Mortgage mess? Throw even more money at it?
Obviously, there are numerous problems with this approach, and they all fall under the umbrella of "common sense." However, common sense is an attribute in short supply in Washington, DC. What's even crazier than the proposed socialist solutions by Obama and company, is the fact that Obama is now screaming about the deficit. Does anyone really think that Obama or the liberals in Congress would actually cut any government program with the exception of the military and defense?
That's right... Barack Obama is now talking about "slashing the deficit." This talk is coming from the man who pushed for (and received) a stimulus bill in the neighborhood of three-quarters of a trillion dollars. What did he do after handing the country the biggest dose of government spending and control in history? He followed up with a speech requesting a quarter of a trillion dollars to tackle the housing and mortgage crisis... that's right, everything is a crisis with him.
So, there's a trillion dollars of taxpayer money being thrown at the problem. Never mind the fact that the stock market continues to go down, that this is money America doesn't have, and that people can solve problems better than government.
The spending doesn't stop there, however. Now, the House Democrats are proposing $410 billion in their latest spending bill. As noted in the news story, "The measure includes thousands of earmarks, the pet projects favored by lawmakers but often criticized by the public in opinion polls." The bill represents "an increase of roughly 8 percent over spending in the last fiscal year."
That's right... an 8 percent increase. This increase is much higher than the inflation rate, and comes when the nation is already getting all those liberal stimulus dollars.
Barack Obama, of course, supports this increase in spending, but is suddenly seeing the need to "slash the deficit." What gives? Believe it or not, the Associated Press, in its story on Obama's pledge to cut the deficit, actually provides a clue to this motivation. The AP reporter actually writes, "With his re-election race just a few years away, he also has an interest in avoiding being labeled as a big-government, big-spending Democrat."
If even the AP sees politics being played with Obama's budget comments, that's really saying something. Just reading the sentence makes me shake my head. The guy just got elected, and he's already posturing for reelection? And the AP words this action as if it's to be expected. After all, his reelection is "just a few years away." Hello! He just took the oath of office!
So, how does Obama do it? How does he slam the country with massive spending and government intervention and then balance the budget? The answer is simple, and it starts with a big, capital T. That's right... taxes. Taxes, taxes, and more taxes. Of course, the liberals don't expect all Americans to bear this burden. Tax increases for the "rich" will do just fine. It's pathetic.
As CNSNews.com reports, "With massive tax increases waiting in the wings for American taxpayers when the Bush tax cuts end in 2010, the Obama administration and Congressional Democrats will soon turn their attention to taxes." President Bush's tax cuts will expire next year unless Congress renews them. Without the renewal, the citizens of this country will face a massive tax increase.
The top tax rate would jump from 35% (which should be already be illegal) to 39%. For the record, I support the Fair Tax and always have. However, as long as the income tax is in place, no one should have a percentage higher than 15% and it should be fair. Everyone should pay their share. A "rich" person will always pay more because he or she makes more. It's simple math. So, the idea that this person should also be assigned a higher percentage to pay is just plain wrong.
The current 10% tax bracket would climb to 15%, but I'm sure Obama would say, "Well that's not fair" and try to raise the upper brackets even higher. What would that do to the economy and job creation?
Our big spending president will become a watchdog for the budget just in time for reelection. How convenient. But we all know that no program will be cut. No experiment in social engineering will see its funds disappear. No department which takes freedom away from individuals and places the control with the government will see that power diminish. No, instead, Obama will tax and tax and tax. That's change we can all believe in.... and change we can do without.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
