Author: Chief Visionary Officer & Founder

by

Following the Debt Ceiling Drama | Pro Publica

By Braden Goyett

Congress has until August 2nd to raise the debt ceiling, the cap on the amount of money the Treasury can borrow to pay the government’s bills. As the clock keeps ticking, you may still have unanswered questions. How dire could the consequences of not raising the debt ceiling be? What are the possible solutions? Here’s a reading list to help you keep up.

Following the debt ceiling debate in real time:

Slate has an updating infographic that lets you see how much money the Treasury has in its bank account right now [2]. For the latest news and analysis, the Wall Street Journal has a frequently updated live blog [3]. The Economist is also doing daily debt ceiling updates [4]. Some good people to follow for updates on Twitter include CNBC’s @JimPethokoukis [5], TIME Magazine’s @MarkHalperin [6], CBS’s @NorahODonnell [7], NBC’s @LukeRussert [8] and @KellyO [9], Slate’s @daveweigel [10], Talking Points Memo’s @brianbeutler [11] and the Bipartisan Policy Center (@BPC_Bipartisan [12]). Today we’re curating tweets with debt ceiling news and analysis [13] on our homepage—check out the module in the top right. For breaking updates, Topsy can be a useful tool for finding the latest articles and tweets on the debt ceiling [14].

The basics on the debt ceiling (including where it comes from):

An earlier guide of ours answers basic questions about the debt ceiling [15], like “What is the debt ceiling, really?” and “Is the debt ceiling necessary?” The New York Times also has a useful FAQ that gets into some of the finer points of the history of the debt ceiling system [16]. Poynter has a guide to common misconceptions about the debt ceiling [17] that can help you cut through misleading coverage. It’s important to note, as Poynter does, that raising the debt ceiling doesn’t mean that we’re increasing spending, but that we’re letting the Treasury borrow money to pay for things we’ve already agreed to spend on. Here’s how NPR Correspondent Robert Smith explained the situation to Poynter:

“The way I put it is that Congress has already ordered the pizza. They approved the pepperoni. They called up and had someone deliver it,” Smith said via email. “Now the pizza guy is knocking at the door, and asking to get paid. If you don’t raise the debt ceiling, it’s like saying we didn’t want that pizza in the first place. Maybe he’ll go away if we don’t answer.”

The New York Times has a helpful chart that breaks down which policies have contributed to the national debt [18] over the Bush and Obama administrations. This chart, tweeted James Fallows at the Atlantic, “should accompany every story about the debt ceiling debate.” The White House released a more detailed chart breaking down the sources of the national debt [19] on Tuesday. Talking Points Memo explains that most of the U.S. national debt is actually owed to the United States [20]—it’s money that some government agencies have borrowed from each other. The Guardian’s data blog has a rundown of which foreign countries the United States owes, and how much we owe them [21]. If you want to go in-depth into the topic, there’s a compilation of academic research on the debt ceiling [22] up at Ezra Klein’s Washington Post blog.

What might happen if the debt limit isn’t raised:

Basically, anyone and anything that relies on federal government funds may not get paid, including members of the U.S. military and military contractors and people receiving Social Security checks. The New York Times has a story detailing what may happen to state governments if the debt ceiling doesn’t get extended [23]. Bloomberg has an interactive that lets you take on the role of the Treasury trying to decide which of its bills to pay [24].

The U.S. credit rating might get downgraded, which could raise the cost of borrowing and cause panic in financial markets and dumping of U.S. bonds. The IMF said today that a downgrade could be “extremely damaging” to the world economy [25]. Forbes has a piece weighing the potential consequences of a credit rating downgrade [26] and whether or not it’s inevitable. Read more…

by

How to Fix Congress – Start the 28th Amendment!

“If you want something in your life you’ve never had before, be prepared to do something you’ve never done before.”

Whether you agree fully or partially, or not at all,…please consider forwarding this on so that concerned voters can see this and decide for themselves to act, to forward or not.   Please read & thanks very much !

The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified!  Why?  Simple!  The people demanded it.  That was in 1971…before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones, etc.

Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land…all because of public pressure.

I’m asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.

In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message.  This is one idea that really should be passed around.

CONGRESSIONAL REFORM ACT OF 2011

1. Term Limits. 12 years only, one of the possible options below..

A. Two Six-year Senate terms
B. Six Two-year House terms
C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms

2.  No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

3.  Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.

All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately.  All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people.

4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.

5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%

6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 10-1-11

The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career.  The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.

If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S. ) to receive the message.  Maybe it is time.

THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!

by

Audit of the Federal Reserve Reveals $16 Trillion in Secret Bailouts | Unelected

The first ever GAO(Government Accountability Office) audit of the Federal Reserve was carried out in the past few months due to the Ron Paul, Alan Grayson Amendment to the Dodd-Frank bill, which passed last year. Jim DeMint, a Republican Senator, and Bernie Sanders, an independent Senator, led the charge for a Federal Reserve audit in the Senate, but watered down the original language of the house bill(HR1207), so that a complete audit would not be carried out.

Ben Bernanke (pictured to the right), Alan Greenspan, and various other bankers vehemently opposed the audit and lied to Congress about the effects an audit would have on markets. Nevertheless, the results of the first audit in the Federal Reserve’s nearly 100 year history were posted on Senator Sander’s webpage earlier this morning.

What was revealed in the audit was startling: $16,000,000,000,000.00 had been secretly given out to US banks and corporations and foreign banks everywhere from France to Scotland. From the period between December 2007 and June 2010, the Federal Reserve had secretly bailed out many of the world’s banks, corporations, and governments. The Federal Reserve likes to refer to these secret bailouts as an all-inclusive loan program, but virtually none of the money has been returned and it was loaned out at 0% interest. Why the Federal Reserve had never been public about this or even informed the United States Congress about the $16 trillion dollar bailout is obvious — the American public would have been outraged to find out that the Federal Reserve bailed out foreign banks while Americans were struggling to find jobs.

To place $16 trillion into perspective, remember that GDP of the United States is only $14.12 trillion. The entire national debt of the United States government spanning its 200+ year history is “only” $14.5 trillion. The budget that is being debated so heavily in Congress and the Senate is “only” $3.5 trillion. Take all of the outrage and debate over the $1.5 trillion deficit into consideration, and swallow this Red pill: There was no debate about whether $16,000,000,000,000 would be given to failing banks and failing corporations around the world.

In late 2008, the TARP Bailout bill was passed and loans of $800 billion were given to failing banks and companies. That was a blatant lie considering the fact that Goldman Sachs alone received 814 billion dollars. As is turns out, the Federal Reserve donated $2.5 trillion to Citigroup, while Morgan Stanley received $2.04 trillion. The Royal Bank of Scotland and Deutsche Bank, a German bank, split about a trillion and numerous other banks received hefty chunks of the $16 trillion.

When you have conservative Republican stalwarts like Jim DeMint(R-SC) and Ron Paul(R-TX) as well as self identified Democratic socialists like Bernie Sanders all fighting against the Federal Reserve, you know that it is no longer an issue of Right versus Left. When you have every single member of the Republican Party in Congress and progressive Congressmen like Dennis Kucinich sponsoring a bill to audit the Federal Reserve, you realize that the Federal Reserve is an entity onto itself, which has no oversight and no accountability.

Americans should be swelled with anger and outrage at the abysmal state of affairs when an unelected group of bankers can create money out of thin air and give it out to megabanks and supercorporations like Halloween candy. If the Federal Reserve and the bankers who control it believe that they can continue to devalue the savings of Americans and continue to destroy the US economy, they will have to face the realization that their trillion dollar printing presses will eventually plunder the world economy.

The list of institutions that received the most money from the Federal Reserve can be found on page 131 of the GAO Audit and are as follows..

Citigroup: $2.5 trillion ($2,500,000,000,000)
Morgan Stanley: $2.04 trillion ($2,040,000,000,000)
Merrill Lynch: $1.949 trillion ($1,949,000,000,000)
Bank of America: $1.344 trillion ($1,344,000,000,000)
Barclays PLC (United Kingdom): $868 billion ($868,000,000,000)
Bear Sterns: $853 billion ($853,000,000,000)
Goldman Sachs: $814 billion ($814,000,000,000)
Royal Bank of Scotland (UK): $541 billion ($541,000,000,000)
JP Morgan Chase: $391 billion ($391,000,000,000)
Deutsche Bank (Germany): $354 billion ($354,000,000,000)
UBS (Switzerland): $287 billion ($287,000,000,000)
Credit Suisse (Switzerland): $262 billion ($262,000,000,000)
Lehman Brothers: $183 billion ($183,000,000,000)
Bank of Scotland (United Kingdom): $181 billion ($181,000,000,000)
BNP Paribas (France): $175 billion ($175,000,000,000)
and many many more including banks in Belgium of all places

View the 266-page GAO audit of the Federal Reserve(July 21st, 2011): http://www.scribd.com/doc/60553686/GAO-Fed-Investigation

Source: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-696
FULL PDF on GAO server: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11696.pdf
Senator Sander’s Article: http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=9e2a4ea8-6e73-4be2-a753-62060dcbb3c3

by

545 vs. 300,000,000 People | Orlando Sentinel

By Charlie Reese
Orlando Sentinel



Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

 Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

 Have you  ever wondered, if all the politicians are against  inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don’t propose a federal budget. The President does.

You and I don’t have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don’t write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don’t set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don’t control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

CONGRESS, PRESIDENT & SUPREME COURT

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

 I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress.

In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.  

I  excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don’t care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The  politician has the power to accept or reject it.  No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator’s responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party. 

What separates a  politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall.  No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood  up and criticized the President for creating deficits.

The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

 The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes.

Who is the Speaker of the House? John Boehner. He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

 It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted — by present facts — of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can’t think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable  directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it’s because they want it unfair. 

If the budget is in the red, it’s because they want it in the red. 

If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it’s because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan. If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it’s because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

 Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to  lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like “the economy,””inflation,” or “politics” that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

 Those 545 people, and they  alone, are responsible.

 They, and they alone, have the power.

 They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.

 Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

by

The Insane Cost of Government | Uncommon Wisdom

By Larry Edelson

Editor’s Note: The American’s for Tax Reform Foundation’s Cost of Government Day Report is a mindbender. If this isn’t a steady march towards national, corporate socialism then what?

The Cost of Government Day (COGD), the day of the calendar year on which the average American worker has earned enough gross income to pay off his or her share of the spending and regulatory burdens imposed by government on the federal, state, and local levels, is now August 19, the latest date ever recorded.

In simple language, it means that the average American must work 230 days, or 63% of the year, to pay for the full cost of government.

That’s pretty darn amazing. And frightening. It essentially means that 63% of your labor output belongs not to you and the loved ones you care for, but to Washington.

Here’s how it breaks down:

  1. Federal spending: The average American worker has to labor for 104 days just to pay for federal spending, which consumes 28.6% of national income. That compares to 90 days in 2008, a 15.5% increase. The chief increase in costs were the bailouts of the financial crisis. The bailouts cost the average American 14 days of worth of work to pay for them.
  2. State and local spending: This is also costing us all, big time. In 2010 the average American had to work 52 days just to pay for state and local government expenditures.
  3. That’s up from 42.5 days in 1999. A whopping 22.3% increase in costs.
  4. The regulatory costs of the federal government: Another shocker ― the average American worker must labor 48 days just to cover the costs of federal regulations. And then there’s …
  5. Another 26 days you must toil to pay the costs of state and local regulations.

I don’t know about you, but the cost of government is insane. 63 out of every 100 hours you work is to pay for government?

You get to keep only 37% of your labor?

It’s high time we got rid of big government. That ratio needs to be inverted, at a minimum. We should keep at least 75% of our labor.

Government should cost far less, way less. Less than one-quarter of our labor output, in my opinion.

Source: Uncommon Wisdom

by

Fourteen Propaganda Techniques the “News” Uses to Brainwash Americans | Truthout

4791170070_5461047792_o-e1526759569429By Cynthia Boez

Editor’s Note: The mainstream media has served a propaganda purpose for decades since the Cold War and even though this article from 2011 was originally written with Fox News in mind, it now applies equally to many other news sources including The New York Times, CNN, Washington Post, etc.

There is nothing more sacred to the maintenance of democracy than a free press. Access to comprehensive, accurate and quality information is essential to the manifestation of Socratic citizenship – the society characterized by a civically engaged, well-informed and socially invested populace. Thus, to the degree that access to quality information is willfully or unintentionally obstructed, democracy itself is degraded.

It is ironic that in the era of 24-hour cable news networks and “reality” programming, the news-to-fluff ratio and overall veracity of information has declined precipitously. Take the fact Americans now spend on average about 50 hours a week using various forms of media, while at the same time cultural literacy levels hover just above the gutter. Not only does mainstream media now tolerate gross misrepresentations of fact and history by public figures (highlighted most recently by Sarah Palin’s ludicrous depiction of Paul Revere’s ride), but many media actually legitimize these displays. Pause for a moment and ask yourself what it means that the world’s largest, most profitable and most popular news channel passes off as fact every whim, impulse and outrageously incompetent analysis of its so-called reporters. How did we get here?

Take the enormous amount of misinformation that is taken for truth by Fox audiences: the belief that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and that he was in on 9/11, the belief that climate change isn’t real and/or man-made, the belief that Barack Obama is Muslim and wasn’t born in the United States, the insistence that all Arabs are Muslim and all Muslims are terrorists, the inexplicable perceptions that immigrants are both too lazy to work and are about to steal your job. All of these claims are demonstrably false, yet Fox News viewers will maintain their veracity with incredible zeal. Why? Is it simply that we have lost our respect for knowledge?

My curiosity about this question compelled me to sit down and document the most oft-used methods by which willful ignorance has been turned into dogma by Fox News and other propagandists disguised as media. The techniques I identify here also help to explain the simultaneously powerful identification the Fox media audience has with the network, as well as their ardent, reflexive defenses of it.

The good news is that the more conscious you are of these techniques, the less likely they are to work on you. The bad news is that those reading this article are probably the least in need in of it.

1. Panic Mongering. This goes one step beyond simple fear mongering. With panic mongering, there is never a break from the fear. The idea is to terrify and terrorize the audience during every waking moment. From Muslims to swine flu to recession to homosexuals to immigrants to the rapture itself, the belief over at Fox seems to be that if your fight-or-flight reflexes aren’t activated, you aren’t alive. This of course raises the question: why terrorize your own audience? Because it is the fastest way to bypasses the rational brain. In other words, when people are afraid, they don’t think rationally. And when they can’t think rationally, they’ll believe anything.

2. Character Assassination/Ad Hominem. Fox does not like to waste time debating the idea. Instead, they prefer a quicker route to dispensing with their opponents: go after the person’s credibility, motives, intelligence, character, or, if necessary, sanity. No category of character assassination is off the table and no offense is beneath them. Fox and like-minded media figures also use ad hominem attacks not just against individuals, but entire categories of people in an effort to discredit the ideas of every person who is seen to fall into that category, e.g. “liberals,” “hippies,” “progressives” etc. This form of argument – if it can be called that – leaves no room for genuine debate over ideas, so by definition, it is undemocratic. Not to mention just plain crass.

3. Projection/Flipping. This one is frustrating for the viewer who is trying to actually follow the argument. It involves taking whatever underhanded tactic you’re using and then accusing your opponent of doing it to you first. We see this frequently in the immigration discussion, where anti-racists are accused of racism, or in the climate change debate, where those who argue for human causes of the phenomenon are accused of not having science or facts on their side. It’s often called upon when the media host finds themselves on the ropes in the debate.

4. Rewriting History. This is another way of saying that propagandists make the facts fit their worldview. The Downing Street Memos on the Iraq war were a classic example of this on a massive scale, but it happens daily and over smaller issues as well. A recent case in point is Palin’s mangling of the Paul Revere ride, which Fox reporters have bent over backward to validate. Why lie about the historical facts, even when they can be demonstrated to be false? Well, because dogmatic minds actually find it easier to reject reality than to update their viewpoints. They will literally rewrite history if it serves their interests. And they’ll often speak with such authority that the casual viewer will be tempted to question what they knew as fact.

5. Scapegoating/Othering. This works best when people feel insecure or scared. It’s technically a form of both fear mongering and diversion, but it is so pervasive that it deserves its own category. The simple idea is that if you can find a group to blame for social or economic problems, you can then go on to a) justify violence/dehumanization of them, and b) subvert responsibility for any harm that may befall them as a result.

6. Conflating Violence With Power and Opposition to Violence With Weakness. This is more of what I’d call a “meta-frame” (a deeply held belief) than a media technique, but it is manifested in the ways news is reported constantly. For example, terms like “show of strength” are often used to describe acts of repression, such as those by the Iranian regime against the protesters in the summer of 2009. There are several concerning consequences of this form of conflation. First, it has the potential to make people feel falsely emboldened by shows of force – it can turn wars into sporting events. Secondly, especially in the context of American politics, displays of violence – whether manifested in war or debates about the Second Amendment – are seen as noble and (in an especially surreal irony) moral. Violence become synonymous with power, patriotism and piety.

7. Bullying. This is a favorite technique of several Fox commentators. That it continues to be employed demonstrates that it seems to have some efficacy. Bullying and yelling works best on people who come to the conversation with a lack of confidence, either in themselves or their grasp of the subject being discussed. The bully exploits this lack of confidence by berating the guest into submission or compliance. Often, less self-possessed people will feel shame and anxiety when being berated and the quickest way to end the immediate discomfort is to cede authority to the bully. The bully is then able to interpret that as a “win.”

8. Confusion. As with the preceding technique, this one works best on an audience that is less confident and self-possessed. The idea is to deliberately confuse the argument, but insist that the logic is airtight and imply that anyone who disagrees is either too dumb or too fanatical to follow along. Less independent minds will interpret the confusion technique as a form of sophisticated thinking, thereby giving the user’s claims veracity in the viewer’s mind.

9. Populism. This is especially popular in election years. The speakers identifies themselves as one of “the people” and the target of their ire as an enemy of the people. The opponent is always “elitist” or a “bureaucrat” or a “government insider” or some other category that is not the people. The idea is to make the opponent harder to relate to and harder to empathize with. It often goes hand in hand with scapegoating. A common logical fallacy with populism bias when used by the right is that accused “elitists” are almost always liberals – a category of political actors who, by definition, advocate for non-elite groups.

10. Invoking the Christian God. This is similar to othering and populism. With morality politics, the idea is to declare yourself and your allies as patriots, Christians and “real Americans” (those are inseparable categories in this line of thinking) and anyone who challenges them as not. Basically, God loves Fox and Republicans and America. And hates taxes and anyone who doesn’t love those other three things. Because the speaker has been benedicted by God to speak on behalf of all Americans, any challenge is perceived as immoral. It’s a cheap and easy technique used by all totalitarian entities from states to cults.

11. Saturation. There are three components to effective saturation: being repetitive, being ubiquitous and being consistent. The message must be repeated cover and over, it must be everywhere and it must be shared across commentators: e.g. “Saddam has WMD.” Veracity and hard data have no relationship to the efficacy of saturation. There is a psychological effect of being exposed to the same message over and over, regardless of whether it’s true or if it even makes sense, e.g., “Barack Obama wasn’t born in the United States.” If something is said enough times, by enough people, many will come to accept it as truth. Another example is Fox’s own slogan of “Fair and Balanced.”

12. Disparaging Education. There is an emerging and disturbing lack of reverence for education and intellectualism in many mainstream media discourses. In fact, in some circles (e.g. Fox), higher education is often disparaged as elitist. Having a university credential is perceived by these folks as not a sign of credibility, but of a lack of it. In fact, among some commentators, evidence of intellectual prowess is treated snidely and as anti-American. Education and other evidence of being trained in critical thinking are direct threats to a hive-mind mentality, which is why they are so viscerally demeaned.

13. Guilt by Association. This is a favorite of Glenn Beck and Andrew Breitbart, both of whom have used it to decimate the careers and lives of many good people. Here’s how it works: if your cousin’s college roommate’s uncle’s ex-wife attended a dinner party back in 1984 with Gorbachev’s niece’s ex-boyfriend’s sister, then you, by extension are a communist set on destroying America. Period.

14. Diversion. This is where, when on the ropes, the media commentator suddenly takes the debate in a weird but predictable direction to avoid accountability. This is the point in the discussion where most Fox anchors start comparing the opponent to Saul Alinsky or invoking ACORN or Media Matters, in a desperate attempt to win through guilt by association. Or they’ll talk about wanting to focus on “moving forward,” as though by analyzing the current state of things or God forbid, how we got to this state of things, you have no regard for the future. Any attempt to bring the discussion back to the issue at hand will likely be called deflection, an ironic use of the technique of projection/flipping.

In debating some of these tactics with colleagues and friends, I have also noticed that the Fox viewership seems to be marked by a sort of collective personality disorder whereby the viewer feels almost as though they’ve been let into a secret society. Something about their affiliation with the network makes them feel privileged and this affinity is likely what drives the viewers to defend the network so vehemently. They seem to identify with it at a core level, because it tells them they are special and privy to something the rest of us don’t have. It’s akin to the loyalty one feels by being let into a private club or a gang. That effect is also likely to make the propaganda more powerful, because it goes mostly unquestioned.

In considering these tactics and their possible effects on American public discourse, it is important to note that historically, those who’ve genuinely accessed truth have never berated those who did not. You don’t get honored by history when you beat up your opponent: look at Martin Luther King Jr., Robert Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln. These men did not find the need to engage in othering, ad homeinum attacks, guilt by association or bullying. This is because when a person has accessed a truth, they are not threatened by the opposing views of others. This reality reveals the righteous indignation of people like Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity as a symptom of untruth. These individuals are hostile and angry precisely because they don’t feel confident in their own veracity. And in general, the more someone is losing their temper in a debate and the more intolerant they are of listening to others, the more you can be certain they do not know what they’re talking about.

One final observation. Fox audiences, birthers and Tea Partiers often defend their arguments by pointing to the fact that a lot of people share the same perceptions. This is a reasonable point to the extent that Murdoch’s News Corporation reaches a far larger audience than any other single media outlet. But, the fact that a lot of people believe something is not necessarily a sign that it’s true; it’s just a sign that it’s been effectively marketed.

As honest, fair and truly intellectual debate degrades before the eyes of the global media audience, the quality of American democracy degrades along with it.

Source: Truthout

by

The Cycle of Freedom | Republic of USA

Ever wonder why America stands as a symbol of Freedom amongst all the nations? History can teach us about cycles. The Roman Empire was a Republic too. What happened and how can we be part of the solution? A well-known self-destructive cycle of democratic behavior has been attributed to an eighteenth century Scottish judge and historian by the name of Alexander Tytler.

Tytler lived at the same time as the American Founding Fathers and described a repeating cycle in history. Whether Tytler is the original author or not; focus upon the truth in these words.  The concept of democratic self-destruction has been proven accurate, right here in America.  I quote the following:

  1. From bondage to spiritual faith – Our ancestors fled the tyranny of King George
  2. From spiritual faith to great courage – The Declaration of Independence
  3. 
From courage to liberty – The American Revolution
  4. From liberty to abundance – The Industrial Revolution
  5. From abundance to complacency – The signing of the Federal Reserve Act
  6. From complacency to apathy – The Great Depression
  7. From apathy to dependence – The entry into the United Nations
  8. 
From dependence back into bondage – Everything that has happened since: wars, socialism, the patriot act, etc.

The final stage of the cycle is the fall back into bondage. Thomas Jefferson provided the perfect warning with this statement, “A government big enough to give you anything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.”

America’s founding fathers warned us repeatedly to remain forever vigilant in the protection and preservation of individual liberty and freedom.

“Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories.” – Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query 14, 1781

What is complacency?

Complacency is the feeling of contentment or self-satisfaction, especially when coupled with an unawareness of danger, trouble, or controversy.  Extended periods of peace and prosperity have resulted in American complacency and today, generations who no longer understand the foundations of our abundance, what it took to achieve it and what it takes to conserve or preserve it for future generations, are on the verge of losing it all.

What is apathy?

Apathy is the absence or suppression of passion, emotion, or excitement; – lack of interest in or concern for things that others find moving or exciting.   Since the early 1960’s American complacency has led to apathy.  American voters stopped taking the time to engage in self-governance at all, not even finding so much as an hour of their time once every four years to go to a voting booth and play a part in deciding the direction of their free nation .   www.grandfather-economic-report.com/voting.htm#trend

Today, over 50% of Americans are now dependent upon the federal government and the federal trough for their happiness. Every national election is about what our federal government can do for us personally, not what we are able to do for ourselves as a result of individual freedom and liberty in the land of equal promise. www.grandfather-economic-report.com/piechart.htm

Increasingly ill-suited to navigate the individual choices inherent with freedom, a growing number of Americans have come to rely (depend) upon politicians and their government to solve personal challenges they no longer feel capable of solving themselves.

“Do we really think that a government-dominated education is going to produce citizens capable of dominating their government, as the education of a truly vigilant self-governing people requires?” — Alan Keyes

There’s been plenty of education about rights, but very little education about responsibilities.  Even in those cases where responsibilities are being taught, the emphasis isn’t on being vigilant in the manner that would be required of us in order to protect and preserve our republican form of government, the original vision of our founding fathers.

Benjamin Franklin said, “A nation of well-informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the region of ignorance that tyranny begins.”

What happens next is up to us.  We do not have to repeat history and end up back as slaves. What will you do to break this brutal cycle of tyranny to liberty, and the slow descent back into tyranny?  Albert Einstein wrote, “The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.”

Only you can stop tyranny. Only you can break the bonds of apathy that infects and destroys our desire to care about whether our children will grow up as slaves.  What you are willing to tolerate – you will never change.

We can choose to follow one of two paths in life. One path leads to action; and is filled with reason that leads to the light of knowledge. The other path leads to inaction and is filled with doubt and uncertainty that leads to darkness and despair. You make the choice on which path you want to travel.

In June 1961, Robert F. Kennedy wrote, “Laws can embody standards; governments can enforce laws – but the final task is not a task for government. It is a task for each and every one of us. Every time we turn our heads the other way when we see the law flouted – when we tolerate what we know to be wrong – when we close our eyes and ears to the corrupt because we are too busy, or too frightened – when we fail to speak up and speak out – we strike a blow against freedom and decency and justice.”

When we join the Republic we are committing ourselves to change.  How do we do that? It begins with a decision to change from our complacent and apathetic ways. Standing up and saying, No more will we remain in the same condition.  We must do it deliberately and on purpose.  Yes, we do have a choice, it is called involvement.  It is called contribution. It is called doing.

As our Republic grows we are blessed with so many with talents, abilities and skills.  Your participation is invaluable.  No effort is too small.  We all have a stake in our success.  The Republic and your fellow Americans are counting on you.  Here are some ways you can participate.

  • Go to your Assembly meetings.
  • Attend the calls.
  • Self educate.
  • Volunteer to help.
  • Ask questions.
  • Offer your skills.
  • Bring your ideas.
  • Share your expertise.
  • Give your input.
  • Commit to your Assembly.
  • Vow to take part.
  • Form committees.
  • Donate equipment & supplies.
  • Take time – make time.
  • Spread the word.
  • Run for an office.
  • Engage!
by

Citizens Rising for the Constitution – Liberty Gets a Lobby | We the People

THE GREAT SEARCH IS ON: WILL YOU ANSWER THE CALL?

WE THE PEOPLE OF EACH STATE TO ESTABLISH A NON-POLITICAL CONSTITUTION LOBBY IN EACH STATE WITH THE SOLE PURPOSE OF HOLDING ELECTED OFFICIALS ACCOUNTABLE TO THEIR LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONS.

Most of us know now that Individuals and Small Groups cannot prevail. Our Rights are being taken away. Millions of Freedom-Loving Americans must come together.

A CONSTITUTION LOBBY, OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE WHICH RESTORES THE POWER WHERE IT IS MEANT TO RESIDE IN THE FIRST PLACE – WHICH PROVIDES THE ORGANIZATION, FUNDING AND POWER TO BE A RECOGNIZED, RESPECTED FORCE – A NON-POLITICAL “WATCH-DOG” OF MILLIONS OF FREEDOM KEEPERS, WHOSE MEMBERS ENSURE GOVERNMENT WILL NO LONGER AND NEVER AGAIN BE ABLE TO STEP BEYOND THE BOUNDARIES DRAWN AROUND THEM BY OUR CONSTITUTIONS.

Not to be viewed as a NEW organization or NEW group, but a Coalition of like-minded Pro-Constitutional groups, organizations and individuals who merge their expertise and their passion for Liberty and come together to do what we cannot do alone or in an un-organized manner.

“The People are the only sure reliance for the preservation of liberty.”
“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.” – Thomas Jefferson

“No matter how many pro-freedom politicians we elect to office, the only way to guarantee constitutional government is through an educated and activist public devoted to the ideals of the liberty [sic].” – Ron Paul

AMERICA SHALL BE FREE.
– Bob Schulz & Judith Whitmore
We The People Foundation

by

Handcuffs Have no Place in Public Schools | Care2 Petitionsite

A student who was handcuffed to a railing for an entire day for not wearing a belt had to eat his lunch while handcuffed. Another student, 15 years old, was handcuffed to a railing for hours just for greeting her friend too loudly in the hallway.

This type of punishment is disturbing and inappropriate. Tell Jackson Public School District in Mississippi that you want it to end. »

These students are not being punished for criminal behavior, but for very minor offenses, like not wearing the right color of shoes. The punishments violate the U.S. Constitution and make the children feel like they are going to school in a prison, which ultimately will only increase their likelihood to become criminals.

A lawsuit filed by the Southern Poverty Law Center is in progress.

by

China Has Divested 97 Percent of Its Holdings in U.S. Treasury Bills | CNSNews.com

By Terence P. Jeffrey

China has dropped 97 percent of its holdings in U.S. Treasury bills, decreasing its ownership of the short-term U.S. government securities from a peak of $210.4 billion in May 2009 to $5.69 billion in March 2011, the most recent month reported by the U.S. Treasury.

Treasury bills are securities that mature in one year or less that are sold by the U.S. Treasury Department to fund the nation’s debt.

Mainland Chinese holdings of U.S. Treasury bills are reported in column 9 of the Treasury report linked here.

Until October, the Chinese were generally making up for their decreasing holdings in Treasury bills by increasing their holdings of longer-term U.S. Treasury securities. Thus, until October, China’s overall holdings of U.S. debt continued to increase.

Since October, however, China has also started to divest from longer-term U.S. Treasury securities. Thus, as reported by the Treasury Department, China’s ownership of the U.S. national debt has decreased in each of the last five months on record, including November, December, January, February and March.

Prior to the fall of 2008, acccording to Treasury Department data, Chinese ownership of short-term Treasury bills was modest, standing at only $19.8 billion in August of that year. But when President George W. Bush signed legislation to authorize a $700-billion bailout of the U.S. financial industry in October 2008 and President Barack Obama signed a $787-billion economic stimulus law in February 2009, Chinese ownership of short-term U.S. Treasury bills skyrocketed.

By December 2008, China owned $165.2 billion in U.S. Treasury bills, according to the Treasury Department. By March 2009, Chinese Treasury bill holdings were at $191.1 billion. By May 2009, Chinese holdings of Treasury bills were peaking at $210.4 billion.

However, China’s overall appetite for U.S. debt increased over a longer span than did its appetite for short-term U.S. Treasury bills.

In August 2008, before the bank bailout and the stimulus law, overall Chinese holdings of U.S. debt stood at $573.7 billion. That number continued to escalate past May 2009– when China started to reduce its holdings in short-term Treasury bills–and ultimately peaked at $1.1753 trillion last October.

As of March 2011, overall Chinese holdings of U.S. debt had decreased to 1.1449 trillion. Read more…