Categories

Archives

The Fallacy of ‘Spending Cuts’

14 Jul 2011 2 comments

This morning I read an article at Godfather Politics and the latest-greatest ruse in the efforts of Congress and pseudo-prez to put of reckoning with the impossible national debt.? This is all brought upon us by the desperate “need” to bump up the debt limit.

I usually dislike videos, but take one minute to watch this CATO goodie:


Okay, here’s the deal.? We have known for some months that spending and the? debt-limit were at odds, and that something has to give.? Having this FY”s $1.65 TRILLION deficit staring us in the face and “necessitating” pushing up the debt limit finally, after much ado the criminals in D.C. finally cut $39 Billion (NOT trillion) from the Spending Side.? 1.4 of? 1% of the problem — not even a good token.? But Congress gave it’s Gov a Continuing Resolution (one of several) to defer the problem for a month or two.

Well, the latest CR is now expiring, and there is no solution in sight.? Why?? Because we People know, and Congress knows as well, that we must either bite the debt bullet NOW, or we can simply raise that nasty little debt limit and play the game for a little longer.? How much longer?? Who really knows, but not much longer.

So then come pseudo-prez with a “brilliant” proposal to raise taxes $600 billion.? That went over like a lead balloon, remember?? So pseudo-prez comes back with a WOW FOUR TRILLION DOLLAR Spending Cut!? Sounds so great, huh.? Well sorry, that “spending cut” proposal was NOT about today, it was not a cut at all!

That “cut” proposed that rather than the next decade having $10 trillion in more DEFICITS, they would reduce that Deficit to $6 trillion.? IOW not ending deficits at all, only having them be not quite so huge.? What does that mean?? Raising the debt limit another $6 trillion.? Well, that met with a no-no from Republicans, BUT they have now come back proposing that the $4 Trillion cuts are too great, so how about $2 Trillion in cuts?? Keep in mind now, that would mean the next decade’s deficits would be reduced from $10 trillion to “merely” $8 trillion.

Enough for now – August 2nd is coming – and we can expect the D.C. dummies will continue to play.

 

0
0
  
Debt, NewPosts none

PEOPLE or CITIZEN, WHICH ARE YOU?

12 Jul 2011 7 comments

This is a repost of the full article? “PEOPLE or CITIZEN WHICH ONE ARE YOU?” from the amazing website http://www.1215.org/ which has a mind-boggling understanding of Common Law.? When you’re finished here, I strongly recommend that you visit the site.? It’s not exactly the easiest site to navigate, but hey, you’ll eventually find your way to a ton of good stuff!

PEOPLE

The Preamble does not specifically define the word “People.” Nevertheless, the definition becomes apparent in the context of the other words and prior history.

HISTORY

Before the United States existed, there was no legal government. A group of representatives, acting “in the name and by the authority of the good people of these colonies,” declared the independence of the colonies from the British Crown and the state of Great Britain.

From the beginning, in the 1776 Declaration of Independence, the people were acknowledged as the source of authority, i.e. the sovereignty which authorized the Declaration of Independence.

Next came the 1778 Articles of Confederation. The states that existed by the authority of the people, created those Articles while in Congress assembled. That didn’t work as well as expected.

In 1787 the people themselves came forth “to ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America” [see Preamble]. On September 17th, 1787, the states held a convention and all those present unanimously joined in. [see last paragraph of U.S. Constitution]

So, in 1787, unanimous concurrence was achieved and the Constitution was born, later to be ratified.

PREAMBLE

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

STRUCTURE OF PREAMBLE

TRUSTOR: We the People [trustors]

VENUE: of the United States

PURPOSE: in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty

BENEFICIARY: to ourselves and our Posterity,

ENABLING ACTION 1: do ordain [declare the law]

ENABLING ACTION 2: and establish [bring into existence]

WHAT: this Constitution [articles of incorporation for trust]

TRUSTEE: for the United States of America. [trustee]

ANALYSIS OF PREAMBLE

The Preamble defines the context in which the remainder of the Constitution must be interpreted. Most of it is self explanatory. Here’s an explanation that points to popular sovereignty:

After the Declaration of Independence, but before the ordainment and establishment of the Constitution, the people of the United States pretty much handled their own affairs using the common law. They were not subject to any higher authority other than the authority of the common law as administered by the people themselves (self governance). Although the states did exist, they only existed by the authority of the people. Every man was a king, and every woman a queen–and none had any subjects. Upon declaring our independence, we all became sovereigns and members of the peerage (nobility).

“The people of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. Through the medium of their Legislature they may exercise all the powers which previous to the Revolution could have been exercised either by the King alone, or by him in conjunction with his Parliament; subject only to those restrictions which have been imposed by the Constitution of this State or of the U.S.”

Lansing v. Smith, 21 D. 89., 4 Wendel 9 (1829) (New York)
“D.” = Decennial Digest
Lansing v. Smith, 4 Wend. 9 (N.Y.) (1829), 21 Am.Dec. 89
10C Const. Law Sec. 298; 18 C Em.Dom. Sec. 3, 228;
37 C Nav.Wat. Sec. 219; Nuls Sec. 1`67; 48 C Wharves Sec. 3, 7.
NOTE: Am.Dec.=American Decision, Wend. = Wendell (N.Y.)

The enabling actions in the Preamble are significant because there is simply nothing in the use of those words to imply that the People relinquished any of their own power and authority. The People declared the law (ordain) without taking away from themselves the authority to declare law again in the future. The People established the Constitution without taking away from themselves the authority to establish anything else in the future. In other words, the people gave birth to the Constitution without giving up any of their own power and authority.

What was before, continues to be so today.

From the context of the Preamble, one may conclude that the laws of the United States do not apply to People. The People, as ordainers and establishers of the country are sovereigns of the country, may not be involuntarily subjected to the laws of the United States.

Because of Amendment X (“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” the government has no authority, and cannot assume any authority over the People. Government powers may not reach beyond that which is constitutionally granted. In order for the government to subject People to its law it is necessary for the People to relinquish their sovereignty. Sovereignty is a natural right which cannot lawfully be relinquished involuntarily. Any removal of sovereignty must be accomplished voluntarily by the subject himself.

DEFINITION OF CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES?

HISTORY

Before ratification of the Amendment XIV , there was no legal definition of the term “citizen of the United States.” The term was used, but only generally. After the Civil War the slaves were freed but there was no legal basis to recognize them as having any rights. Amendment XIV partially solved that problem.

“Free the slaves,” was the rallying cry combined with the Civil War that resulted in Amendment XIV. Amendment XIV created a new class of person called “citizen of the United States.” Any ex-slave could now claim citizenship, and, by the way, so could any of the People if they so chose to do. Amendment XIV made possible the voluntary relinquishment of personal sovereignty.

It was also during the mid 1800′s that the various governments took control of the school systems. The curriculum shifted from civics (the study of natural rights and common law) to American government (the study of civil privileges and statutory law). Emphasis was also refocused on “good citizenship”. To blunt the people’s perception, the civil privileges were called civil rights. The transition from teaching “natural rights” to teaching “civil rights” took about 100 years (from the 1850′s to the 1950′s). During the 1950′s the school systems changed the courses named from “Civics” to “American Government.” Hardly anyone now is aware of the subject of civics as a school course.

The phrase, “citizens of the United States,” is defined in the Constitution for the United States of America, Amendment XIV:

AMENDMENT XIV

Section 1. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Section 5. “The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.”

STRUCTURE OF AMENDMENT XIV

WHO: All persons

QUALIFICATION:
(A) born or naturalized in the United States, and
(B) subject to the jurisdiction thereof

PURPOSE: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

ENFORCED BY: The Congress

ENFORCEMENT METHOD: Legislation

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF AMENDMENT XIV

As discussed above, the People are sovereign. The People are not subject to the jurisdiction of the federal government, even though they are born in the United States.

Amendment XIV inverts the relationship. One of the qualifications to be a citizen of the United States is that one must be born or naturalized in the United States. Another qualification is that one must be, “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” It is not possible to be a citizen of the United States without being born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. But, if you are born or naturalized, and if you are subject to the jurisdiction, then you automatically qualify as a citizen of the United States.

From the point of view of the federal enforcers, the qualifications are worked in reverse. They reverse-interpret Amendment XIV as saying that if you say you are a citizen of the United States, then that automatically means you are totally subject to its jurisdiction [and have been born or naturalized]. This opinion is not shared by the judicial branch. See 14 C.J.S. 426, 430:

The particular meaning of the word “citizen” is frequently dependent on the context in which it is found[25], and the word must always be taken in the sense which best harmonizes with the subject matter in which it is used[26].”One may be considered a citizen for some purposes and not a citizen for other purposes, as, for instance, for commercial purposes, and not for political purposes[27]. So, a person may be a citizen in the sense that as such he is entitled to the protection of his life, liberty, and property, even though he is not vested with the suffrage or other political rights[28].

“[25] Cal.–Prowd v. Gore, 2 Dist. 207 P. 490. 57 C.A. 458.
[26] Cal.–Prowd v. Gore. 2 Dist. 207 P. 490. 57 C.A. 458.
La.–Lepenser v Griffin, 83 So. 839, 146 La. 584
N.Y.–Union Hotel Co. v. Hersee, 79 N.Y. 454
[27] U.S.–The Friendschaft, N.C., 16 U.S. 14, 3 Wheat. 14, 4 L.Ed. 322
–Murray v. The Charming Betsy, 6 U.S. 64, 2 Cranch 64, 2 L.Ed. 208
Md.–Risewick v. Davis, 19 Md. 82
Mass.–Judd v. Lawrence, 1 Cush 531
R.I.–Greeough v. Tiverton Police Com’rs, 74 A 785, 30 R.I. 212
[28] Mass.–Dillaway v. Burton, 153 N.E. 13, 256 Mass. 568″

In any case, if you fail to object to the government’s view of citizenship, then you will most certainly be subjected to the laws of the government. That means no rights, only privileges. To see a list of privileges granted or denied to the citizens (there is no list for the People’s natural rights because the People automatically have all rights), see People’s rights vs citizen’s rights

?ONE OF THE PEOPLE OR ONE OF THE CITIZENS?

The first issue to be resolved in any court proceeding is that of jurisdiction. Does the one entity have jurisdiction over the other entity? One should never go into court without a clear understanding as to whether he is there as a citizen, or there as one of the people.

If you claim you are a citizen of the United States, then it is strongly implied (though not necessarily true) that you are subject to the laws of the United States. On the other hand, if you are one of the People, then it is legally implied that you are a legal king, with a sovereignty superior to that of the United States, and subject only to the common law of the other kings (your peers). In short: the People are superior to the government, the government is superior to the citizens. That is the hierarchy.

?PEOPLE —> GOVERNMENT —> CITIZENS

As a king you “are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative.” You can do what you want to do when you want to do it. You have your own property and your own courts. There is no limit as to what you may do other than the natural limits of the universe, and the sovereignty of a fellow sovereign. You should treat the other sovereign in accordance with the Golden Rule, and at the very least must never harm him. Your sovereignty stops where the other sovereignty begins. You are one of the owners of the American government, and it is their promise that they will support your sovereignty (i.e. they have promised to support the Constitution and protect it from all enemies). You have no allegiance to anyone. The government, your only [public] servant, has an allegiance to you.

As a citizen, you are only entitled to whatever your sovereign grants to you. You have no rights. If you wish to do something that would be otherwise illegal, you must apply for a license giving you special permission. If there is no license available, and if there is no specific permission granted in the statutes, then you must apply for special permission or a waiver in order to do it. Your only allegiance is to your sovereign (the government), and that allegiance is mandated by your sovereign’s law (the government, though not absolutely sovereign, is sovereign relative to you if you claim to be a citizen of the sovereign).

Here is a typical example:

As one of the People you have a right to travel, unrestricted, upon the public highways. You have right to carry guests with you in your automobile. You have a right to own a gun and that right shall not be impaired by your servant, the government. You have a right to a grand jury indictment and a trial by jury, that is a trial directly by the people, not the government.

As one of the citizens, you may not travel by automobile unless you are either a licensed motor vehicle driver, or you are a passenger with permission to be on board. Gun ownership is a privilege subject to definition and regulation. You do not have a right to a jury trial in all cases, and no right to grand jury indictment–a trial is a trial by the government, not the people.

More favorite links on 1215.org – there are so many!

http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/index.html

http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/lectures/introduction/index.html
?(3 audios on common law, very interesting, 4 hours total)

0
0
  
NewPosts, RuleOfLaw, Source Links , , , , ,

August 2nd Default will be blamed on the Republicans!

07 Jul 2011 No comments

This morning I started with a GoogleSearch for “”August 2nd” Default”" and zipped up 14 million returns.

Who did not KNOW this would be coming?? The Left is already well along on developing it’s Blame Strategy.? Beginning with this:

“The world as we know it may very well end on August 2nd. This won?t be the end of the world in a metaphysical or spiritual sense, but rather in a financial and economical one because of the incredible, almost unbelievable stupidity of the extreme members of the Republican Party. These wing-nuts…”? If you care to read more of that diatribe, Go Here>

I submit that quote not because the author has any truth to provide, but to show you all the spin which has already begun.

I have been saying “Oh yeah, the Republicans will give up their bluster about refusing to raise the debt limit”, because the Left will spin it all to make it seem as though the Republicans are at fault for default and the collapse of America”. ? So here it begins already, and I can say that “I Told You So!”.

In a nutshell, here’s the problem:

The FY deficit is $1.65 Trillion – that is the DEFICIT for this FY ending September 30th.? The only way of covering that shortfall is by allowing the Treasury to sell more debt, that being nothing more valuable than another issue of fiat money.? TheFed “buys” that debt as “agent” for the Treasury and resells it (at some discount rate) to others, being investors, businesses with excess cash, other countries, etc.

The Federal revenue (from taxes) is only about 70% of the obligations, which means that 30% of everything the Treasury pays out must be borrowed.? If the debt limit of $14.3 Trillion is not raised, it has been calculated that on August 2nd the Treasury MUST default on 30% of it’s payment obligations.

There are two ways of avoiding raising the debt limit.? Whether for a Nation or for a company, the only rational solution is to immediately cut expenditures to match revenue, by NO LESS than the amount remaining due this Fiscal Year.?? Keep in mind that will take care of ONLY a relatively short period of time – next FY it starts all over again!

That means defunding favorites like the EPA, OSHA, FBI, NEA, TEA, AgDept, Czars, Justice Dept, ICE, IRS, Foreign Aid, FEMA, FCC, ATF, BLM, BIA, FTC, ZeroCare, NASA and ALL PORK,until the outgo is equal to OR LESS THAN revenue.? NEVER forget that the only place Gov gets revenue is from YOU!? Why send them any more to maintain the charade?? This Gov is beyond saving, and Good Riddance!

In case you’ve forgotten, thus far Congress has managed not $1.65 Trillion in cuts, but only a token? $39 Billion.

The other way?? Last week Obama came forth with another non-solution, asking for a $600 Billion tax increase as a “Reward”??? for raising the debt limit.? Look, Stupid, when you are up to your ass in alligators you don’t feed them, you get the hell out of the swamp!

So what will happen?? The Republicans will cave, because they’re too damn chicken to bite the bullet and get real about the coming economic collapse.? They will raise the debt limit or perhaps even agree to Remove that pesky detail.? It won’t be on Principal or rational economics, it will be simply that they don’t want to be blamed for the collapse.

Now despite that the worst of this ballooning debt is the fault of the Democrats a.k.a. Collectivists, since 2006 and made much worse since the election of pseudo-prez in 2008, rest assured that the Left will spin the blame for any default to the Republicans, who will be unequal to the challenge.? Therefore the debt limit WILL be raised, the buildup to collapse will continue but be a bit delayed, and We the People will continue to be screwed by this Government We so revere.

In case you’re wondering, that collapse became unavoidable on the Day of TARP, and we have seen nothing but “tinkering” since that day.? The tinkering has continued with bailouts and stimulus and many things, but nothing has improved while the debt continues to pile up.

This collapse will be much more than another “recession dip”, it’s going to be The Greatest Depression, and this insane Government will simply disappear.? The Keynesians and the Left and the grey Middle RINOS and other confused politicos will disappear along with their (not our) Government.

If there is a Question here, it is simply WHAT is ANYONE going to do to prevent it?

Are you ready now to help formulate a Voluntary System, where the people chose and pay for what they want, in the free market?? Or do you want to just continue self-abuse and more Rulers and just become extinct?

 

0
0
  
Collapse, Congress, Debt , , , , , , , , , , ,

Happy Independence Day

03 Jul 2011 No comments

Our Flag for Liberty within a Voluntary system

Our New Flag

0
0
  
Restart, Voluntary , , , , ,

What If?

01 Jul 2011 1 comment

Old Glory

 

I hear the comment constantly on TV, “We want to make sure this neeeveeeer happens again”, and I always sneer because of course it is going to happen again no matter what steps are taken because human nature will win out.
Since I believe human nature does always win out, I’ve thought about how to avoid ever again having an illegal President in the White House, and how we avoid ever again having a corrupt Congress when we cannot replace all members at the same time except violently and none of us wants violence.? Goodness, most Americans don’t even want to have to see someone slapped, let alone injured.
So, in thinking of this, I’d like to throw out a few thoughts to all interested parties to see how this would fly.
I am not sure in what order the following would need to be done, but the steps would be:

Eliminate the federal government as we know it – NO elected officials in a centralized place denoting federal government.

Return all issues to the states, restoring their rights and sovereignties.

Have ONLY state elections

Have the governor of each state or his appointee represent that state on a Board that would set standards for management of the nation’s business

There would be no federal laws

There would be a military, and the governors would appoint a commander in chief to oversee the military.

There would be a hired management company to manage the nation’s business, and the governors would hire them and could fire them.? This company would make none of the rules, and would write NO laws and would have NO legal force except with their own employees,? but would follow the governor’s directives.

There would be transparency, openness.?? There would be no paid agency or bureau within the national? scene.

States would be supreme, and NO ONE would overrule them.? This would involve setting some rules – any state official caught taking bribes or having the appearance of same could be fired on the spot by the state legislature, and if they would not do their job, THEY could be fired immediately and replaced by the district they represented.? States could divvy up on what would be needed in the way of programs, agencies, etc, and those would be paid by the state.

No taxes could be levied at the federal level.? All taxing would come from the state, and if the state is smart, it will only tax for those things citizens are willing to be taxed for.

In essence the US Constitution would have to be altered to take these changes into account and make them legal.? The only Amendments allowed to stand would be the Bill of Rights.

There is still much to add, but I honestly believe this type of change would make what has happened to our country a lot more difficult to replicate, would provide more freedoms to individuals and to companies, would return sovereignty to the states and to the individuals within each state.? Politicians would HATE this idea because it would pull them back where they belong – working for the US citizens.

0
0
  
Congress, Constitution, Elections, Force, NewPosts, Taxation , , , , ,

The Astounding Potential of Plasmic Power in PlasmERG Engine

I don’t usually distract myself with stories such as this, but assuming this is truth, the word needs to be spread far and wide.? Maybe we can use this in our efforts for a Voluntary System?

The American company PlasmERG has developed a plasmic power technology that utilizes the power of plasma to power engines. These engines have the potential to revolutionize the energy landscape, and benefit human civilization in countless ways.


PlasmERG noble gas engine


by Hank Mills with Sterling D. Allan
Pure Energy Systems News

If you have not read about the American company PlasmERG, and their “Plasmic Transition Process”, you should do so immediately. Their technology offers a solution the energy crisis, a way to end the use of fossil fuels, and the potential to jump start a new technological age — among other benefits!

The general concept of the “Plasmic Transition Process” is fairly simple to understand. A cylinder (similar to one that can be found in an internal combustion engine) is filled with a mixture of cheap and inert gases, then sealed. A magnetic field produced by a coil wrapped around the cylinder is turned on to “pinch” or compress the mixed gases. Next, high frequency radio waves are emitted into the cylinder to ionize the gases. Finally, a high voltage ball of electricity is formed between four electrodes on the cylinder head. This sequence of events creates a plasma ball that starts to grow. This ball of plasma expands, and produces a linear force against the piston. As the piston cycles, only the magnetic field is maintained. The ionization field on the transition coil is reduced to the voltage on the cylinder coil. The RF is also turned off. The electrodes controller watches the cylinder to detect the starting signature of the event and it turns off the high voltage and tells the master controller to switch the others out as well.

More from PlasmERG>

+2
0
  
Documents, NewPosts , , , , , , , , ,

CBO Warns Congress: US Headed for European-Type Debt Crisis

25 Jun 2011 1 comment

OF COURSE .. it wasn’t going to be long before the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) weighed into the mix of various positions on the US National Debt.

CBO is now warning Congress .. guess what Congress .. the way you’ve been spending will soon bring the USA Government to the brink of a Crisis very much on-line with what is seen in Europe.

Some of the points that are brought out in the article are:
– the US Government DEBT is on track to EQUAL (yes, EQUAL) the Annual Size of the US Economy within a decade (That’s shorter of a time frame that most think!)
– CBO is noting a REAL POSSIBILITY of a “Sudden Fiscal Crisis”
– CBO Notes that Investors can /lose confidence/ (and yes, that has ALREADY happened)
– $9.7 TRILLION in DEBT held by CHINA, other Foreign States, AND Investors ..
– REMAINDER of $14.7 Trillion is US Debt ($5 Trillion) held by .. such as the Social Security (FICA) Trust Fund (nervous yet?)
– This is requiring the US To BORROW .. more than 40 Cents out of every Dollar!

NOW we are also aware that there’s some LAWMAKERS have walked OUT of the conference (being moderated by Biden) ..
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/top-republicans-walk-vp-bidens-debt-talks/story?id=13917319&page=3
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/23/us-usa-debt-cantor-idUSTRE75M3SA20110623
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/boehner-holds-line-no-new-taxes-and-budg

AND the ISSUE of Tax increases also at an IMPASSE ..
(Link to a poll I put up yesterday on SH, with LINKS to multiple msm Articles)

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/geithner-calling-for-higher-taxes/question-1909455/

BIDEN Refusing to talk to the Media as he LEAVES the Building ..

and House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan noting this about the CBO Report ..
“As Congress debates the president’s request for an increase in the statutory debt ceiling, the CBO warns of a more ominous credit cliff ? a sudden drop-off in our ability to borrow imposed by credit markets in a state of panic,”

YES .. this is NOTHING Really /new/ ..

but the CBO .. IS DEFINITELY Driving home a point here .. THIS IS SERIOUS ..

NOW let’s NOT forget to NOTE the words and thoughts of OTHER Politicos (that have been a part of this .. HORRIBLE BUILD-UP of Debt)
– Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (Senator since 1986!)
“I am concerned by reports the group may be focusing on a limited package that will not fundamentally change the fiscal trajectory of the nation”
– Senator Harry Reid (Senator since 1986!)
“We absolutely need to reduce our deficit. We know that,”
“But economists tell us that reducing spending is only half the equation. The other half is measures to create jobs.”

HAVE to ASK the Following ..
– WHY is it that Medicare/Medicaid are the Programs being looked at and highlighted in these talks?
– WHY NOT look at ALL forms of Public Aid as well .. Welfare, AFDC, Section 8 Housing, Food Stamps, etc?
– WHY is it they are NOT LOOKING at .. why is the US Government ‘giving away’ Funds to Foreign Powers/Entities at this time?
– WHY are they NOT looking at Ensuring that ONLY CITIZENS (and Legal Residents of the USA) are helped with Aid?
– WHY are they NOT enforcing Existing Laws in re: ILLEGAL entry to the US (and WHY are they also allowing ILLEGALS to collect Public Aid)
– WHY is the US Federal Government supporting ‘Sanctuary Cities’?
– WHY do they /think/ they can /create/ jobs at all? (isn’t that the ROLE of PRIVATE Business and the Middle Class?)

There’s plenty of other questions to ask .. WHY is CONGRESS just /focused/ in such a short-sighted manner .. as they’ve done down through the DECADES (obviously)?

Here’s the link to the articles
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=11659
http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/06/cbo-report-shows-debt-would-be-unsustainable-even-clinton-era-tax
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/22/debt-ceiling-cbo-report-_n_882180.html
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/26/cbos-2020-vision-debt-will-rise-to-90-of-gdp/
http://www.moneynews.com/Headline/DebtShowdown/2011/06/23/id/401082?s=al&promo_code=C7D7-1

Also posted on:

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/cbo-warns-congress-us-headed-for-european-type-debt-crisis/question-1911907/

0
0
  
Debt, Economics , , , , , , ,

Russell Longcore on the Constitution

17 Jun 2011 2 comments

My highly intelligent “friend” Russell Longcore, seen first with writings in LewRockwell.com and now rarely missing a day on his own DumpDC.com, delivered there a most intriguing article which I reposted if you wish read it in full. I quote his following gem about the validity of the Constitution:

So what exactly is this Constitution?

I think it could only be called a loose agreement between certain people at the time that it was written and ratified. It is not a treaty ratified between sovereign states, which would have the weight of law. It cannot be considered a legal contract, since legal contracts have characteristics that the old constitution does not have.

It was ratified by votes in the several states. But ratification in any form didn’t turn it into a legal document with enforceability and authority.

The old constitution’s sentiment seeks to secure blessings to themselves and their posterity, meaning future generation of citizens. But a loose agreement cannot by law or reason bind any future person to its details. Contracts cannot obligate persons who will live in the future, either. They can only obligate persons who are living presently and who sign and receive the contract.

The old constitution is not a legal contract. The Constitution never bound any two or more parties in a legal way, nor did it ever purport to bind anyone. A timeless principle in contract law is that the contract is not valid until the contract is signed by all parties and delivered to the parties, or the representative of any signatory party. Any party may refuse to sign or deliver a written instrument and thus invalidate the contract. The US Constitution was not signed by anyone or anyone’s legal representative. It was not delivered to anyone or their representative. No one in the USA, either alive or dead, has ever signed the Constitution as a legal contract between parties. So how could it be a legal document with binding authority or validity?

So we here today, in striving to write a new Constitution to replace our battered old Constitution, should somehow deal with exactly Longcore’s excerpt above. The essence of that is simple, one cannot be bound by a contract to which he was not a party and did not sign. Thus every American who ever lived thru some part of the many years under the present Constitution has been unwittingly coerced to live under the rule of a government created to which he has never agreed; nor was he given any opportunity to agree or disagree with that Constitution.

Today, even having now the available tools of (comparatively) fast post, a new census, FAX, and internet, whatever we might decide here can never come close to securing the signature of every American. Going beyond today, once children reach the age of “majority” they would become more unsigned citizens. Therefore, despite never having been “legally bound” everyone is Forced to comply.

If there be ports of entry where immigrants enter, of course their entry could be conditioned upon them signing certain documents. The same could be a condition of citizenship. But those many who sneak across the borders will of course never have such “opportunity”. The gaps grow larger.

Let’s hear the reader’s suggestions about how to address this very serious matter in a new Constitution for a Voluntary System, or for any system whatsoever.

Those out there sitting on the sidelines are invited to join in, of course!

+5
0
  
Constitution , , , , , , ,

JUST THINKING; HISTORY REPEATING ITSELF

08 Jun 2011 1 comment

I created a blog on Sodahead the other day named ?WILL 2012 LEAD TO THE RE-BIRTH OF A NATION ??

My thoughts were seeing the amazing parallels of the times in early America and what lead up to the final act of war. ?I see today the policies of the Progressive Democratic Party repeating history.

So what were the signs and happenings of that day that eventually led to the birth of a new Nation …

In 1766, a new government came into power in Great Britain. This new government, like those before it, came to the conclusion it needed to raise additional money from the colonies. Charles Townshend was the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Townshend immediately began investigating means to increase revenue from the colonies and to make colonial governors and judges independent of colonial control, to create a more effective means of enforcing compliance with trade regulations, and to establish the controversial precedent that Parliament had the right to tax the colonies. He came up with the idea of placing a duty on items imported into the colonies.

To help enforce the Townshend Acts, 4,000 British army troops were sent to Boston beginning in 1768.

http://www.historycentral.com/revolt/Townshend.html

http://www.historycentral.com/revolt/british.html

The event began on King Street, today known as State Street, in the early evening of March 5, 1770 in front of Private Hugh White, a British sentry, as he stood duty outside the Custom house. ?A young wigmaker’s apprentice called out to a British officer, claiming he had not paid his bill. The officer had in fact settled his account and ignored the insult. ?The apprentice gathered some friends and continued his complaints and some began throwing rocks. ?Each side exchanged insults until a Private White left his post and challenged the boy apprentice striking him on the side of the head with a musket. This attracted a larger crowd.

When threatened by the mob the troops fired leaving three civilians dead at the scene, eleven injured, and two died later.? This act of aggression helped spark the rebellion, which culminated in the American Revolutionary War.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boston_Massacre

On the evening of December 16th, 1773 thousands of Bostonians and farmers from the surrounding countryside packed into the Old South Meeting house to hear Samuel Adams. Adams denounced the Governor for denying clearance for vessels wishing to leave with tea still on board. After his speech the crowd headed for the waterfront. From the crowd, 50 individuals emerged dressed as Indians. They boarded three vessels docked in the harbor and threw 90,000 pounds of tea overboard.

http://www.historycentral.com/revolt/Tea.html

In 1774 the British parliament gave its speedy assent to a series of acts that became known as the “Coercive Acts”; or in the colonies as the “Intolerable Acts”.

http://www.historycentral.com/revolt/Coercive.html

Great Britain hoped that the Coercive Acts would isolate radicals in Massachusetts and cause American colonists to concede the authority of Parliament over their elected assemblies. It was a calculated risk that backfired, however, because the harshness of some of the acts made it difficult for moderates in the colonies to speak in favor of Parliament.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intolerable_Acts

In 1774 Jefferson wrote ?A Summary View of Rights of British America? to the King ?

?Scarcely have our minds been able to emerge from the astonishment into which one stroke of parliamentary thunder has involved us, before another more heavy, and more alarming, is fallen on us. Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate and systematical plan of reducing us to slavery.?

http://libertyonline.hypermall.com/Jefferson/Summaryview.html

On May 25th, 1774, the Massachusetts General Court elected members to the Governor’s Council. Governor Hutchison vetoed 12 of the members, including John Adams.

On August 10th, 1774 John Adams and the delegation set off for Philadelphia. The delegation arrived in Philadelphia twenty days later, after visiting Hartford, New Haven and New York on the way. They began meeting members of the other delegations.

On September 5, 1774 the entire delegation met. All of the colonies, with the exception of Georgia, had sent representatives. The Congress was divided between militant and conservative delegates. The conservative delegates wanted to buy time to allow the British government to come to its senses. The more militant delegates wanted to take immediate action against the British.

http://www.historycentral.com/revolt/Cont.html

The Revolutionary War started in 1775.? Five years after the Boston Massacre.

Whether you wish to admit it or not we are losing our citizenship and becoming subjects to the Progressive Democratic Party and exploited in whatever way best suits Washington.

It?s a shame and it is scary but I believe history is going to repeat itself as more and more states gather together in a common alliance against illegals, drug cartels, loss of state rights, and the constant attacks against our 1st (Speech), 2nd, (Arms) and 4th (Privacy) Amendments.

I believe we better vote for a strong leader in 2012 to bring us through it and that strong leader is NOT the Obama!

0
0
  
Congress, Constitution, Elections, Force, Immigration, Secession

U.S. has $61.6 Trillion in Unfunded Obligations; $534,000 per Household

Title from notification via VisionAmerica.org to AP article at USA Today:

The federal government’s financial condition deteriorated rapidly last year, far beyond the $1.5 trillion in new debt taken on to finance the budget deficit, a USA TODAY analysis shows.

The government added $5.3 trillion in new financial obligations in 2010, largely for retirement programs such as Medicare and Social Security. That brings to a record $61.6 trillion the total of financial promises not paid for.

This gap between spending commitments and revenue last year equals more than one-third of the nation’s gross domestic product.

Medicare alone took on $1.8 trillion in new liabilities, more than the record deficit prompting heated debate between Congress and the White House over lifting the debt ceiling.

Social Security added $1.4 trillion in obligations, partly reflecting longer life expectancies. Federal and military retirement programs added more to the financial hole, too.

Corporations would be required to count these new liabilities when they are taken on ? and report a big loss to shareholders. Unlike businesses, however, Congress postpones recording spending commitments until it writes a check.

The $61.6 trillion in unfunded obligations amounts to $527,000 per household. That’s more than five times what Americans have borrowed for everything else ? mortgages, car loans and other debt. It reflects the challenge as the number of retirees soars over the next 20 years and seniors try to collect on those spending promises.

If this isn’t enough to boggle your mind, read more>>

 

Are you ready now for a Voluntary System and true Liberty?

 

 

 

0
0
  
Debt, Economics, Essence, Voluntary , , , , , , ,
Powered by WordPress Web Design by SRS Solutions © 2012 Copyright? We only expect due credit and a link-back. Design by SRS Solutions