Annual Federal Spending Increased By 16 Percent In 2009

Annual Federal spending increased by 16 percent in 2009The U.S. Census Bureau recently announced that Federal domestic spending increased to $3.2 trillion in 2009, which equals approximately $10,500 per person living in the United States.

This level of spending marked a 16 percent increase from 2008 and it represents the largest spike since the Census Bureau began collecting data in 1983. The annual increase was due in part to the $787 billion stimulus package called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which was signed by President Barack Obama in February 2009.

The Bureau revealed that the state with the highest per capita Federal spending was Alaska with $20,351. The lowest was Nevada with $7,148 per person.

Entitlement programs Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security accounted for about 46 percent, or $1.5 trillion, of the spending. The one-year increase for these programs was $136 billion.

The data shows that salaries and wages for Federal employees totaled nearly $300 billion, with 46 percent of that share going to the Department of Defense.

The government spent about $86 billion on unemployment compensation last year, which was a 115 percent increase from 2008.

Clamping Down On New Technologies

With the advent of new communications technologies like voice-over-Internet and text messaging, the Feds are having a tough time monitoring our conversations. And they aren’t particularly happy about it.

So to better monitor domestic “terrorists” like returning veterans, Ron Paul supporters, small government advocates and Tea Party members — according to the Department of Homeland Security — President Barack Obama will soon propose new legislation to mandate that the U.S. government have access to all forms of communications, “including encrypted email, transmitters like BlackBerry, social networking  Web sites like Facebook and software that allows ‘peer-to-peer’ messaging like Skype,” writes Salon.com’s Glenn Greenwald.

What Obama and his Justice Department goons are looking for is complete and instant access to all communications. Or, as Greenwald writes, “…every communication and all other human transactions must be subject to government surveillance. Nothing may be beyond the reach of spying agencies. There must be no such thing as true privacy from government authorities.”

And don’t think a compliant Congress — even if Republicans gain the majority in one or both Houses — won’t go along. Richard Falkenrath, a top-level Homeland Security official in the George W. Bush administration and now a principal in the private security firm Chertoff Group — led by the serpent-headed former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff — thinks such monitoring is a great idea.

In an op-ed piece that ran in The New York Times Aug. 9, just after media reports came out that United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia were banning the use of BlackBerrys within their borders, Falkenrath wrote, “Among law enforcement investigators and intelligence officers [in the U.S.] the Emirates’ decision met with approval, admiration and perhaps even a touch of envy.”

The last administration drove a stake through the heart of privacy with the passage of the completely unpatriotic USA PATRIOT Act. There were a few howls about the loss of liberty from some Democrats, but Republicans quickly jumped on board.

But this intrusive legislation — coupled with the recently announced intention to require U.S. banks to report all electronic money transfers into and out of the country (as opposed to just those exceeding $10,000) — will end any vestiges of freedom.

And for those of you who spout the pabulum, “I don’t break any laws so I don’t care if they monitor me,” consider this. Greenwald reminds us that Senator Frank Church (D-Idaho), after leading the investigation into the spying abuses of the decades prior to the 1970s and the growing surveillance technologies of the National Security Administration had this to say:

“That capability at any time could be turned on the American people and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter. There would be no place to hide.”

He added that if a dictator ever took over, the NSA “could enable it to impose tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back.”

Obama was hypocritical when he criticized UAE and Saudi Arabia for their actions regarding BlackBerry and then turned around and advocated for the same thing. Couple this with his Internet Kill Switch Bill proposal — supported by Senators Joe Lieberman and Jay Rockefeller (who want to give the President the power to turn off the Internet in order to be more like China) — and you see we have a totalitarian regime just one step away from a dictatorship.

Pro-immigration Reform Group Believes GOP’s ‘Pledge’ Is Lacking

Pro-immigration reform group believes GOP's 'Pledge' is lackingA nonprofit organization recently criticized GOP House leaders for failing to address immigration reform in their "Pledge to America."

Federation for Immigration Reform (FAIR) expressed its concern that the issue was ignored in the 45-page document, which was written and released by Republicans last month. The pledge included a three-pronged approach to immigration reform: establishing operational control of American borders, working with state and local law enforcement to implement immigration laws and strengthening visa security.

FAIR said that the three points mentioned in the pledge were important, but the group believes that Republicans failed to include certain "vital ingredients" in their proposal.

"The 'Pledge to America' major themes are economic growth and jobs creation. If House Republican leadership is serious about that, then it cannot ignore the impact millions of illegal aliens have on jobs and wages or ignore the need to dry up the jobs magnet with more vigorous enforcement," said Dan Stein, president of FAIR.

According to KeenNewsService.com, Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) introduced an immigration bill on Oct. 1. In a press release, Menendez said the bill addresses strengthening border security and requiring the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants to register with the government, pay their taxes and learn English.

Omega-3 Fatty Acids May Improve Diabetics’ Symptoms

Omega-3 fatty acids may improve diabetics' symptomsIndividuals who suffer from diabetes may want to consider adding nutritional supplements to their diet as researchers have found that omega-3 fatty acids could reduce inflammation and insulin resistance.

Scientists at the University of California, San Diego used mice to conduct their research and looked at cell molecules which respond to fatty acids. By focusing on a G-protein receptor (GPR120), the researchers discovered that GPR120 is only found in mature fat cells located on pro-inflammatory macrophages — white blood cells in the immune system.

When GPR120 is not working, inflammation can occur. However, when this protein is exposed to omega-3 fatty acids it activates, creating a strong anti-inflammatory response.

Jerold Olefsky, one of the researchers involved with the study, said that the findings could mean there is a "possible way to [treat] the serious problems of inflammation in obesity and in conditions like diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular disease through simple dietary supplementation."

The American Diabetes Association reports that more than 23 million adults in the U.S. suffer from diabetes. Nutritional supplements, such as omega-3 fatty acids, may allow these individuals to lead a healthier lifestyle.

Running Away, Outside The Main, HIIC And Gold

*Running from the president.  When I lived in Georgia, Governor Roy Barnes was not my favorite politician. He was too much of good-ol’-boy power broker/dealer for my taste. But I’d take 100 of him over Jimmy Carter, I must add. And he just went up a notch in my regard: When Barack Obama visited the Peach State, Roy (who is running for governor again) wouldn’t get within 100 miles of him. And he’s the Democrat nominee. Wonder how many other Democratic contenders are doing the same thing?

*The far left of the so-called “mainstream.”  The latest smear campaign from the left-hand side of the political spectrum is that those nasty Tea Party candidates are “outside the mainstream” of American politics. Right. The same folks who will spend us into bankruptcy and welcome avowed communists to their rallies claim that these libertarian/conservatives are just “too radical.”  I wish John Adams or Patrick Henry were around to show what being a radical really looks like.

*Are we becoming a hick nation?  Oops, sorry, the acronym isn’t HICK, it’s HIIC. And it stands for Heavily Indebted Industrialized Countries. In case you didn’t guess, it’s not a good thing. According to many analysts, the U.S., Europe, Japan and Great Britain are becoming very poor credit risks. And that ain’t good. Speaking as a concerned American, what’s to become this HIIC nation from becoming a HICK? I suspect we’ll know more come Nov. 3.

*Could you price that in gold, please?  Just as I was putting the finishing touches on today’s Straight Talk, a friend sent me this fascinating factoid: Ten years ago it took 498 ounces of gold to buy the typical home in the U.S. Today, that same house will cost you 138 ounces. Would anyone like to argue that houses have dropped in value by 72.3 percent in the past 10 years? Or maybe the problem is with our yardstick — that is, how we measure how much things cost.

— Chip Wood

Ad Campaign Blasts Lack Of Decision On Taxes, Gathers Signatures For Petition To Congress

Ad campaign blasts lack of decision on taxes, gathers signatures for petition to CongressCongress may have adjourned until after the November midterm elections without making a decision on next year's taxation policy, but that hasn't stopped tax cuts proponents from launching an intense ad campaign.

The nationwide initiative — sponsored by Liberty Central, a nonprofit organization that helps citizens fight for liberty — appears on a range of conservative websites, including Rush Limbaugh's. It aims to gather 100,000 signatures for a petition against the tax hikes that will result if Congress fails to extend the cuts passed by the George W. Bush administration 10 years ago.

The ads also blast the decision not to vote on the issue until the lame-duck session of Congress after the elections.

"It's frightening to think how little restraint Congress will exercise after its members are no longer campaigning," said Sarah Field, Liberty Central COO and general counsel.

"They've already demonstrated time and time again that they're willing to cast aside their constituents in pursuit of a narrowly-defined political agenda," she added.

The campaign is part of the "October is Mobilization Month" initiative, through which Liberty Central works to get out the vote in the run-up to the elections. 

CAPS Continues To Ring Immigration Alarm For California

CPS continues to ring immigration alarm for CaliforniaCalifornia is the most populous state in the nation and the biggest destination for illegal aliens, two facts that an immigration reform nonprofit believes are putting the Golden State in grave danger. 

Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS) has just revealed the results of a new analysis, which found that many of the state's ills — including environmental devastation, multibillion-dollar budget deficit and poor performance of public schools — can be traced back to uncontrollable immigrant population growth.

Among the issues highlighted by Sustainable California: the Unmentionable Problem of Population is the fact that the Golden State has a higher population density than Europe and the measure is set to exceed that of China by the middle of the century. By 2040, the state's population is expected to swell from 39 million to 54 million.

California is also the least-educated in the nation, as measured by the percentage of workers with a high school diploma, and spends nearly $22 billion on benefits for illegal aliens while facing an estimated $14.4 billion budget deficit in 2010–11.

The organization's representatives have expressed frustration with politicians who have failed to push through a comprehensive immigration reform out of fear for electoral backlash.

"Politicians, by their nature, focus on short-term issues and choose to ignore the long-term crisis of population growth that lies beneath so many problems," said Marilyn DeYoung, chairwoman of the board of CAPS.

She added that "with this report, we hope to make it a little harder for all of California's political candidates to disregard the issue." 

A Trillion Reasons to Buy Gold Now

I can already hear some of you saying, “Now Chip really has lost his mind. Doesn’t he know gold is the most expensive it’s ever been? It’s been hitting new highs day after day for weeks.  Why on earth would he tell us to buy some now?”

I can answer that objection in one sentence: If you don’t own any gold, you need to. The sooner the better. Yes, gold may come down in price a bit. In fact, I’d be surprised if it doesn’t. But not far. And not for long.

If you’re waiting to buy when gold is back under $1,000, you’d better put some money in your will. Then tell your great-grandchildren to buy some with it. Because I don’t believe you’ll see that price again in your lifetime.

What makes me so certain? Refer back to the headline above. I’m talking about the trillions of paper dollars that will be cranked out non-stop by the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve over the next decade. The lowest estimates for our deficits over the next 10 years come to $10 trillion.

The more dollars that flood into the economy, the less each one will buy. You see it in higher prices for everything. Why is a loaf of bread or a bottle of milk 20 times more expensive than when your parents were young? Because our government has caused the dollar to lose 93 percent of its value in the past 100 years. I’ll save the lecture on Keynesian economics for another day, but many of you know the quotation by John “Candy” Keynes that explains what’s happening.

And please don’t count on Congress to solve the problem. Sorry to put any die-hard Republicans on the spot, but can you tell me how much Federal spending was reduced under Ronald Reagan? Let me hear a chorus of “Zero!”  Right you are. How much did the two Bushes cut spending? Can you say “they goosed it to the moon?” Right again.

Even if the Republicans gain control of both branches of Congress this November, there isn’t much they can do to slow down the spending spree. Almost every entitlement is not only written into law, increases in those same entitlements are also written into law.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I do believe there will be a political solution to our country’s runaway spending. There has to be, because there are only two other possibilities: a total economic collapse or an armed revolt. And frankly, I don’t want to be around for either one.

Solving the economic mess that the Democrats and Republicans have created won’t take place overnight. It will be like turning around a giant ocean liner.  First you have to slow it down and then you have to start very gradually moving in the opposite direction. Depending on how far you’ve gone, it can take you a long time to get back to port.

Folks, it’s going to take a long time to get back to Constitutional government. Heck, it took the socialist schemers more than 150 years to get us to this point. How could we possibly believe we can undo everything they’ve done in one election? It can’t happen.

But we can get started. We can put a freeze on new government hiring; we can eliminate hundreds of programs and put limits on thousands more. We can stop acting like the world’s policeman (or in the eyes of many, like the world’s bully), close scores of overseas bases, and bring thousands of our boys and girls home.

Even more important, we can stop killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. Stop taxing producers to death. It’s that simple. We can encourage new businesses to open, new investments to be made and new jobs to be created. We can encourage the same thing that’s worked dozens of times before in our history: Get government out of the way so free people will go to work and solve our problems.

A robust economy will mean more money for almost everyone — definitely including the ones who collect it for Uncle Sam. We won’t have to borrow more; we won’t have to flood the country with worthless specie. We can pay our bills and start reducing our deficits by doing things that get the economy growing again.

And yes, I’m simple-minded enough to believe that lowering taxes, slowing spending, reducing regulation and letting free enterprise work will do all of this… and more.

But in the meantime, I urge you to own an asset that can protect your purchasing power against both inflation and deflation. My earnest recommendation is that you own some of the world’s best and oldest money — gold and silver. People have trusted it for more than 5,000 years as a way to protect their wealth. Can you think of anything else that has worked as well or lasted as long?

While there are many ways to exchange some of your depreciating dollars for non-depreciating assets like gold and silver, let me mention two of my favorites. Go to the Internet and you’ll find many, many more:

  1. For gold, I prefer the coins issued by the U.S. Mint. The gold Eagles are, in my opinion, one of the most beautiful coins ever made. There is no such thing as owning too many of them. But also consider the Buffalo, another one-ounce coin from the U.S. Mint. This is one of the world’s few 24-karat gold coins, which means it is .9999 pure, without a bit of alloy added to it.
  2. For silver, while the silver Eagles from the U.S. Mint are also lovely, the bags of so-called “junk silver” are a much better value. These are circulated dimes, quarters and half-dollars made by the U.S. Mint before 1965. These 90 percent silver coins come in bags of $100 or $1000 face value. They are instantly recognized, impossible to counterfeit and, unlike gold coins, have never been confiscated. And they happen to make an unmistakable “clink” when dropped on a wooden table.

The “spot” price of gold and silver changes throughout the day; so do the premiums various dealers charge. That is why it is important to shop around for the best deal. When you do, make sure you’re comparing apples to apples, not apples to kumquats. Unless you’re picking up your purchases locally, they should come to you via insured, registered U.S. Mail with a return receipt requested. Know all of these costs before you buy.

There are thousands of dealers around the country who will be happy to sell you all of the gold and silver you want. You probably have some in your own town or city. Here are four national dealers I know and trust. All of them have been in business for years and have excellent reputations.

*Asset Strategies International is a boutique precious-metals firm based in Rockville, Md. They’ve been around for 28 years and are known for good prices and even better service. Find them at www.assetstrategies.com or call 800-831-0007 or 301-881-8600.

*Camino Coin Company was founded by Burt Blumert, one of my personal heroes in the battle for liberty. His successors are doing a wonderful job of maintaining the same high standards and low costs for which he was famous. They’re in Burlingame, Calif., at www.caminocompany.com. Phone 800-348-8001 or 650-348-3000.

*Gainesville Coins in Tampa, Fla., also comes highly recommended. Although I’ve never been a customer, I have many friends who are. They all speak very highly of the staff and the service they receive. Check the firm out at www.gainesvillecoins.com or call 813-482-9300.

*Kitco is a giant operation based in Toronto, Canada. I’m told their website gets more than a million hits a day — in large part because they’re one of the best places in the world to find stock and metals prices. I know some people who go there two or three times an hour. The company is busy and so is their landing page. But their prices and service are also good. See for yourself at www.kitco.com or call 877-775-4826 or 514-876-4202.

And to anticipate an accusation I know that some of my liberal readers are just itching to make: No, I do not make a penny on any of your purchases from any of these people. I wrote this piece because I believe, like the Wise Men of old, you should own some gold.

But this time, don’t give it away or let it be taken from you. Put some of your depreciating dollars into real wealth. Put it into gold and silver. Then start enjoying the “sleep at night” comfort that comes from knowing you have some wealth that rust can’t corrode and politicians can’t inflate.

Until next time, keep some powder dry.

— Chip Wood

The True Story of The Bilderberg Group by Daniel Estulin

[pl_amazon_book_order src=”http://rcm.amazon.com/e/cm?t=perslibedige-20&o=1&p=8&l=as1&asins=0979988624&fc1=000000&IS2=1&lt1=_blank&m=amazon&lc1=0000FF&bc1=000000&bg1=FFFFFF&f=ifr”]

A shadow government made up of a select group of powerful political and wealthy elites meets annually to chart the course of world affairs. This group — which today includes many familiar names like Rockefeller, Kissinger, Clinton, Bush, Ford and Greenspan — advocates for a single world government in which they hold all the power.

Named for the opulent hotel in which the first group of the world’s elites and power brokers met in Oosterbeek, Netherlands in 1954 — the Hotel De Bilderberg — the Bilderberg group operated clandestinely for many years. But a few intrepid reporters, alarmed by the group’s growing influence in world affairs and driven by a love for the truth and a passion for freedom, have managed to pierce the veil and peer inside their secret enclave.

Daniel Estulin is one of them. At great hazard to himself, Estulin has become a thorn in the sides of the world’s most powerful people. And he has documented what has uncovered in his international bestseller, The True Story of The Bilderberg Group.

The book begins like a spy novel with Estulin describing an encounter he had while covering a Bilderberg meeting in Toronto in 1996. It was at this meeting that the Bilderberg group received its first significant media coverage.

One of Canada’s most widely read newspapers, the Toronto Star, had a large headline that day that read: “Black Plays Host To World Leaders.” The story chronicled how Canadian publisher Conrad Black had offered $295 million to gain control of Canada’s largest newspaper chain and survived a week’s worth of annual meetings for his Hollinger, Inc., but was also hosting a “four-day, closely guarded meeting of world leaders and royalty just north of Toronto.”

The story named about 100 of the attendees. That same day the Toronto Sun noted the group was meeting and it (Bilderbergers) was unhappy that suggestions were being made that the private event was part of a system of secret government.

Estulin and other part-time Bilderberg chasers celebrated. And then Estulin left to meet one of his contacts who had meeting information for him.

After meeting with the contact and receiving some handwritten notes about the proceedings, Estulin was about to step into the elevator to leave the building when the contact shouted, grabbed his arm and pulled him back. The floor of the elevator was missing and Estulin had almost plunged 800 feet down an elevator shaft.

This is just one of several instances of danger and intrigue Estulin has experienced since he began covering the Bilderberg group. Most were not this frightening, but all go to show that he is operating in a world with different rules.

In The True Story of The Bilderberg Group, Estulin shows the relationship that the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations have with the Bilderberg group. He names the members and attendees of these organizations, and you’ll be astonished at how almost all of the higher ups in government and the CEOs of large corporations are a part of shadow government.

And they do make up a shadow government that forces world events — sometimes slowly, sometimes quickly — in a direction that will allow them to achieve the goals of a One World Government. One in which they hold all the power and all the wealth and those who aren’t part of their “select” society are mere vassals of one large state.

This quote, attributed to David Rockefeller in 1991 at the Bilderberg meeting in Baden-Baden, Germany by several sources, speaks volumes about the goals of the Bilderberg group:

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications, whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”

As Estulin points out, the mainstream media have for years been represented at Bilderberg meetings but have pointedly abstained from providing the meetings with any coverage. This is by design, he writes, and he lays in great detail how most of the major media corporations are essentially controlled, through Chase Manhattan Bank, by the Rockefellers.

If not, they are controlled by other Bilderbergers: The aforementioned Conrad Black who once owned more than 440 media publications around the world, from The Jerusalem Post to Canada’s The National Post; Rupert Murdoch, who owns the Fox News and Sports channels other cable channels, The Weekly Standard, the New York Post and dozens of other newspapers around the world and Direct TV; and Sumner Redstone, CEO of Viacom, an international media conglomerate that touches virtually every major segment of the media industry.

Estulin explains how and why many of the events in American politics are orchestrated by the Bilderberger group. For instance, how did an unknown governor of Arkansas rise to prominence, gain the presidency and push through the North American Free Trade Agreement. One answer: The Bilderberg group.

Clinton was “anointed” for the presidency during the 1991 Bilderberg Conference in Baden-Baden. While there it was suggested he take a trip to Moscow, which he did immediately upon leaving Baden-Baden. There he met for 90 minutes with Soviet Interior Minister Vadim Bakatin, a cabinet official for President Mikhail Gorbachev. Gorbachev was in the midst of a hotly-contested Presidential election which he lost just six days later to Boris Yeltsin. But Yeltsin appointed Bakatin to his cabinet.

“It appears,” Estulin writes, “that President Clinton was sent by the Bilderbergers directly to Moscow to get his KGB student-era, anti-Vietnam War files ‘buried’ before he announced his candidacy for the U.S. Presidency, which occurred some two-and-a-half months later.”

It’s reported that Clinton promised Yeltsin that, in exchange for the “burial” Russian warships would be given full refueling and other port privileges at all U.S. Navy bases — a promise that was kept more than once.

But Clinton was neither the first nor the last U.S. President owing an allegiance to the Bilderberg group. Estulin notes that since 1928 all sitting U.S Presidents have been CFR or TC members or Bilderbergers or have had their staffs filled with them (in the case of Lyndon Johnson and George W. Bush).

Estulin has done a marvelous job of peeling back the layers to expose the Bilderbergers — with photos and documentation secreted out of the annual meetings — and explain how the shadow government directs world affairs. He lays out in great detail the designs of the Bilderbergers using their own words.

This book is a must-have for anyone who wants to truly understand who is making decisions and framing the message that affects the world today, and who wants to learn exactly what the ultimate goal is of those individuals.

Watchdog Group Challenges Google To Debate Its Privacy Policy

Watchdog group challenges Google to debate its privacy policyLibertarians have long been concerned about the government's intrusion on citizens' privacy through wiretaps and other surveillance methods. However, there may be another threat on the horizon.

Corporate efforts to track individuals' habits and preferences have apparently been underestimated, which has prompted Consumer Watchdog (CW) to express concerns over Google's failure to engage in a public debate over its policy on consumers' online privacy.

The non-profit organization is running a digital advertisement in New York City's Times Square with a caption reading "Why won't Google debate your privacy with Consumer Watchdog?"

"Google's executives are discussing new frontiers of ad exploitation and sponsoring political discussions at Washington events, but they won't engage in a meaningful discussion of the company's most fundamental issue: online privacy," complained the organization's president, Jamie Court.

Among the biggest concerns are issues such as tracking people's Internet activity, including sites visited and purchases made online. As such, CW hopes its campaign will attract support for "Do Not Track Me" legislation to protect online consumers.

It also sponsored a national poll which showed that 86 percent of Americans are in favor of privacy protections that would require Internet providers to offer an option for consumers to choose to make their online activities anonymous. 

Supreme Court To Determine First Amendment Boundaries In Snyder v Phelps

Supreme Court to determine First Amendment boundaries in Snyder v. PhelpsThe First Amendment will be the focus of a high-profile case that goes before the nation's highest court this week.

During the first week of the Supreme Court's 2010-2011 term, opening arguments were made in Snyder v Phelps. The court will determine if the freedom of speech and peaceful assembly rights protect a group of protesters who demonstrated near a fallen soldier's funeral in 2006. The soldier's father, Albert Snyder, is claiming emotional distress and believes that such protests should not be allowed.

The Phelps family of the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kan., is known for picketing near military funerals, holding signs that have slogans such as "Thank God For Dead Soldiers." The family has expressed their conviction that God is punishing American soldiers because of the country's tolerance for homosexuality.

"A lot of people have an understandable visceral reaction against this speech, but the First Amendment often protects speech that is vile," Eugene Volokh, a professor at the UCLA School of Law wrote in a brief to the Supreme Court.

The court's newest term marks the debut of Justice Elena Kagan, who is one of three women on the nine-justice panel. Kagan, the former Solicitor General in the Justice Department, was nominated by President Barack Obama to the Supreme Court in March and sworn in on Aug. 7. During her confirmation process, she faced significant opposition from many conservative lawmakers who painted her as an activist judge with a liberal agenda. 

DNC Chairman Blasts GOP Senator Over PBS Interview

DNC Chairman blasts GOP Senator over PBS interviewExpecting a victory in the November midterm elections, Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) has outlined which legislation the GOP would seek to repeal during the 112th Congress. In the process, he drew ire from some prominent Democrats. 

In an interview on PBS Newshour, Cornyn — who also serves as the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee — said that if his party regains the majority, it will "pretty quickly" move to overturn key pieces of legislation supported by President Barack Obama, such as the healthcare reform and financial regulatory bill.

He did admit, however, that due to Obama's veto power any repeal would be unlikely to become law.

Nevertheless, Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine pointed out that Cornyn was not the first Republican to advocate a similar course of action, and suggested that it shows the GOP is "out of touch with middle-class Americans' concerns."

"Senator Cornyn and Republicans might act like they're promising change, but really they're just promising more of the same policies that failed so miserably and put us on the brink of a second Great Depression," he concluded. 

Pumpkins May Make Healthful Fall Treats

Pumpkins may make healthful fall treats Carving a jack-o-lantern is a fun way to get into the spirit of Halloween. However, it can also be a way to boost immunity and support heart health.

Pumpkins are loaded with healthy antioxidants. The bright orange color indicates high levels of beta-carotene, a nutrient that has been shown to support vision and heart health. According to the Mayo Clinic, beta-carotenes have been shown to help asthmatics control their symptoms and give the immune system a boost, which may be important as cold and flu season approaches.

In addition to beta-carotenes, pumpkins are good sources of a range of other nutrients. They have high levels of calcium, potassium, zinc and vitamin C, according to information from the University of Illinois.

Rather than discarding the insides after carving jack-o-lanterns or leaving them out all season as decorations, individuals may want to use them in their cooking to take advantage of their health benefits. Pumpkins are often baked into muffins, Danishes and pies. Their seeds also make healthful snacks after they are roasted.
 

With Liberty And Justice For Some

Just under a month ago, patriots filled the space in front of the Lincoln Memorial for a demonstration.

Fronted by conservative icons Glenn Beck and erstwhile Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin, the Restoring Honor rally was massive. And when I say massive, I’m talking Rosie O’Donnell visiting the Twinkie factory massive.

The Democrat leadership quailed at the sight of a half-million spirited citizens standing up to be counted in opposition to the increasingly unhinged tyranny which President Barack Obama vomits down upon us from on high. Even the most desperately thorazine-deficient mainstream media outlets couldn’t deny the taxpaying muscle on full display.

Instead, they turned to the rhetorically geriatric tactic of reading Democrat Party authored hate speech memos mocking the intelligence of the Tea Partiers, calling attendees racist, and in a couple of cases, manufacturing laughably fictional tales of diabolical doings on the part of those opposed to Democrat dominance.

And then the Left decided to try and play with the varsity. A group which calls itself “One Nation Working Together” — in reality the usual collaboration of thugs like the Service Employees International Union, racist hate groups like La Raza, and even the artists formerly known as the NAACP (more accurately acronymed the NAACK — National Association for the Advancement of Cop Killers), announced a plan to hold a “One Nation” rally on the same real estate occupied by their foes.

Wingnuts nationwide polished their tinfoil hats and downloaded all the latest talking points so they could join in the hatefest. Then… they no-showed. Perhaps lower-echelon liberals didn’t want to miss out on their local ACORN chapter’s “How to steal votes and influence hookers” seminar.

Whatever the reason, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s minions are rushing headlong toward an electoral Little Big Horn; and compared to the Restoring Honor turnout, Saturday’s ironically-monikered “One Nation” rally was a Pop Warner consolation game played next door to the Super Bowl.

Among the top-of-the-bottom-rung orators who cracked One Nation’s big can of crazy: MSNBC 4th-stringer Ed Schultz. Ed howled with indignation. He shrieked at the top of his lungs. He sweated butter (Ed should consider his health). He thundered like he’d just been informed that Martha Coakley had been whipped by Scott Brown again.

Granted, picking on poor Eddie is like swatting a fly with an AC-130. But even I couldn’t devise the sharpest blow Ed suffered as a result of his rage during the One Nation circus. According to The Daily Caller’s Matthew Boyle, those few foot soldiers of the left who did sneak out of their parents’ basements reacted to Schultz’s barbaric yawp with bewilderment.

They had no idea who he was. The 4th pitcher in creepshow channel MSNBC‘s starting rotation — who guaranteed he could personally deliver a crowd as large as Restoring Honor — and he was as well received as Al Gore at a convention of narcoleptic coal miners.

Meanwhile, the biggest gunners in the Democrat brigade apparently forgot to load their weapons. The labor union schutzstaffel SEIU was supposed to bring busloads of purple-shirted storm troopers to cheer their fuehrers forward. And while the goons did leave a carpeting of familiar purple signs and more litter than a second-rate carnival, their numbers were as underwhelming as a speed-dating session at which all the bachelorettes are Janet Napolitano doppelgangers.

For such sensitive folk, they certainly did their part to justify the wages of the park cleanup crews. Perhaps the SEIU thought resurfacing the Mall in purple Astroturf would be good for recruiting. Or maybe they didn’t think there would be enough senior citizens on whom they could pound.

The Reverend Al Sharpton was there, along with fellow professional huckster Rev. Jesse Jackson. Evidently, neither of their regular congregations was able to…. ooh… awkward. Also in attendance were some of the folks Democrats would rather had stayed in their yurts, like the Communist Party USA. (Yes, Virginia, they do exist).

By Monday night, Schultz was back in his cage at MSNBC, apparently suffering from some kind of exertion-related delusion. He claimed the One Nation freak show was equal in size to the Restoring Honor rally, although pictures of the two shown side-by-side reveal a discrepancy larger than the population of a medium-sized city, or medium-security Federal penitentiary (not that a One Nation attendee would know anything about that).

But the best comment of the day honors have to go to our pal Al (Sharpton):

“This is what America looks like.”

Communists, racists, thugs, union filth and wingnut media “entertainers?”

Um… Al? Please tell Ed: you guys really need to get Outside the Asylum more often.

Mission Creep

America’s undeclared war on Pakistan is escalating. In response to an increasing number of unmanned drone attacks and NATO incursions into Pakistan — including a helicopter attack that killed three Pakistani soldiers — gunmen are attacking NATO convoys providing supplies to United States troops in Afghanistan.

Apparently President Barack Obama subscribes to the Bush Doctrine: The policy created by President George W. Bush that “justified” making war on any country he decided was a threat. That’s not a policy the Left approved of under Bush. Nor should the Left approve of Obama’s undeclared wars simply because Obama has a big “D” after his name.

Congress has abdicated its Constitutional authority to declare war and has given the President — first Bush and now Obama — carte blanche to make war wherever and whenever he desires. And Obama — like Bush before him — apparently recognizes no sovereign borders. How else do you explain blatant military incursions in Pakistan and threats to send armed, unmanned drones to Yemen and other countries to kill “terrorists” who have not attacked America?

The Joint Resolution in Congress authorizing the President to wage war in Afghanistan following the 9/11 false flag attack on U.S. targets in New York and Washington, D.C., gave the President authority to “…use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”

The 9/11 Commission report blamed the Taliban in Afghanistan for harboring CIA creation Osama bin Laden. Of course, the findings in that report have since been called into question by the commissioners who wrote it and many others as more and more information and analysis has leaked implicating agents of the U.S. government in a cover-up of the events surrounding events of that day.

The U.S. military has been in a constant state of war for more than nine years. U.S. troops are abused and worn down from long deployments, and billions have been spent propping up the military-industrial complex and paying mercenaries six-figure salaries to conduct black ops around the globe. Despite all that the War on Terror continues… even if Obama no longer calls it that.

Here at home we are constantly bombarded with new government-issued warnings about the threat of more terror attacks to come in the U.S. and warnings about travel overseas. To combat the “threat” of terrorism here, governments are irradiating U.S. citizens at airports and highway checkpoints, deploying rolling backscatter scanners, installing cameras to watch our every move, planting GPS systems on our vehicles, scanning our emails and communications for “anti-government” sentiment and labeling as terrorists returning veterans, Ron Paul supporters, those advocating for smaller government and Tea Party members.

Some are starting to take note of the mission creep around the world. Few seem to notice — or care — about the mission creep at home.

“Just keep us safe,” say the people.

The shadow government’s will be done.

Allah, Oil And America’s Future

(Part two of a two-part series. Part one, Is It Time To Say, “To Hell With Islam?” ran Sept. 22)

Islam is one of the biggest threats facing America. Yet President Barack Obama and key Democrats are Islam appeasers and Muslim apologists. Does the President and his supporters act out of woeful ignorance or willful sabotage?

Consider that Obama has thrown the weight of the Presidency behind the building of the New York City Mosque next to 9/11 Ground Zero.

"As a citizen and as President,” Obama said, “I believe that Muslims have the right to practice their religion, as everyone else in this country. And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America. And our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable."

This is not the first time that Obama has been an advocate for Muslim rights. In a speech at Cairo University last year the President made a spectacular overture to the 1.5 billion Muslims of the world when he called for, “a new beginning.”

In that speech Obama spoke of a complete withdrawal of United States forces from the Middle East and, regarding the conflict President Obama said, "We do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan… We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and now Pakistan.”

Obama apologized for the CIA’s involvement in Iran’s democratically elected government in 1953, an event that for many Muslims was the beginning of American interdiction.

“Since taking office, President Obama has reached out to the Muslim world as a whole,” said International Herald Tribune columnist Roger Cohen last month in an op-ed in The New York Times.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich couldn’t agree more. CNN reported that, at the Fifth Annual Value Voters Summit in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 17, Gingrich warned America faces a dire threat.

"We are at a point where our establishment is sliding into policies of such disastrous impact that they will in fact fundamentally challenge the survival of America as we know it," Gingrich said. "On the one front we have a secular socialist machine led by (President) Obama, (House Speaker Nancy) Pelosi, and (Senate Majority Leader Harry) Reid, and on the other front we have radical Islamists who would fundamentally change this country into a system none of us in this room would recognize."

Gingrich also said he will oppose any efforts to impose Sharia on the U.S. Yet the former House Speaker doesn’t have a vote. Pelosi and Reid do. Their support for Islamic rights — whether near Ground Zero or around the world — is troubling.

Backing Islam Or Locking In Oil?
To be fair, Obama is not the first U.S. President to sooth Arab sensibilities. Washington has been influenced by Arab interests for decades.

Earlier this month The Tablet wrote: “There is an Arab lobby in the United States — one as old as, if not older than the Israel lobby and it has helped to shape U.S. foreign policy and economic life since the end of World War II.”

Arab’s influence encompasses everyone from U.S. Foreign Service officers, Arab-American activists, Islamist ideologues and even Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. And no administration had closer ties to the Saudi Royals than George W. Bush’s.  Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin, Saudi Arabia’s former U.S. envoy, was even nicknamed Bandar Bush. All this Arab influence in America can be traced to a single commodity: Oil.

Oil provides 40 percent of the world’s energy and 96 percent of the world’s transportation energy. According to the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, world oil consumption will surge by 60 percent in the next decade. That means even more money for Saudi Arabia. According to Mark Steyn in his book, America Alone, The End Of The World As We Know It, the Saudis are already spending billions to fund, “mosques and madrassas [sic] in every corner of the planet. Oil isn’t their principal export, ideology is — petroleum merely bankrolls it.”

This should put a red light over the Middle East which in 10 years will hold 83 percent of the remaining global conventional oil reserves.

The Dirty Truth About Democrats
Access to Arab oil explains some, but not all of the reasons Obama, Pelosi and Reid are pro-Islam. After all there is another huge energy producer whose resources almost equal that of Saudi Arabia. Yet this nation is given no quarter by the President or the Democrats in Congress. It seems hard to understand why when this country is America’s closest ally, a friend for 200 years and shares the same language, culture and religion as the United States. Yet Canada — with its vast oil sands — is the target for attacks by the Liberal Elite in Washington.

The Canadian oil sands will send America nearly 1 billion barrels of crude oil this year, making Canada the number one supplier of crude oil, ahead of Saudi Arabia.

Annual U.S. Imports from Canada of Crude Oil and Petroleum Products

Yet Canada’s oil sands have been attacked by Democrats as being an unethical environmental atrocity. There are reports that Left-leaning members of Congress want to ban oil sand imports into the U.S. Apparently it would be better to accept more oil from Saudi Arabia than from its northern neighbor; better to buy crude from the Arab Kingdom that spends a fortune financing al-Qaida and other extremists than to buy it from an ally whose soldiers fight and die next to their American brothers in the God-forsaken mountains of Afghanistan.

The Democrats in Congress who make cozy with Arab special interests have lost sight of the fact that in Saudi Arabia there is no democratic voice, women have no say; while torture and executions are a daily occurrence. While Canada gave every assistance to the U.S. during 9/11 — I saw waves of commercial airplanes approaching Calgary International Airport that morning — it was Saudi Arabia that was the inspiration for the attack. Saudi Arabia is where Osama bin Laden made his fortune and it was home for 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers.

Hypocrites Favor The House Of Saud
In his new book, Ethical Oil, The Case For Canada’s Oil Sands, Ezra Levant writes: “If Saudi Arabia didn’t exist, it would take a science fiction writer in an apocalyptic mood to invent it.”

Yet Liberal Democrats in Congress are already lining up against Canada’s oil sands. Last month Pelosi visited Canada to gather ammunition to either tax or block future oil sands imports to America.

Some Democrats are campaigning against government approval for the final stage of the Keystone Pipeline project linking the oil sands to Texas refineries. And Pelosi has the power to expedite or delay clean energy legislation currently before the Senate.

According to the Montreal Gazette, “Ms. Pelosi’s mind is made up. The Alberta oil sands are a last-resort fuel for Americans best eliminated as quickly as possible.”

Alberta’s oil sands do have environmental issues. Some 1,600 ducks died after landing on a giant sludge pond which is part of the oil sand’s landscape. That is a lot of ducks to be sure, but only a tiny fraction of the number of birds that are killed every year by wind turbines. It might come as comfort to the Greens that very few ducks are killed as a result of Saudi oil production, in part because there are no ducks in the desert.

However I do have news for Liberal Democrats like Pelosi. While you support women’s rights and oppose the death penalty, you should note Saudi Arabia freely executes people, especially women. The nation has the highest per capita capital punishment rate in the world. (America’s other great Arab ally Pakistan, beheads and tortures nearly the same number of people each year.)

What is chilling is that people like Pelosi and Obama see evil in things like Canada’s oil sands but appear blind to the dangers of Islam and the ambitions that some within it have against the West. One can only hope that these leaders simply don’t know better. To entertain something more sinister is dismaying.

Yours for real wealth and good health,

John Myers
Myers’ Energy and Gold

Empty Calories Are Causing Rise In Childhood Obesity

Empty calories are causing rise in childhood obesity Poor food choices are leading to an explosion in obesity among the nation's adolescents, according to a new study conducted by the American Dietetic Association.

The results, which were compiled by examining responses to the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, showed that 40 percent of the total calories consumed by young people are empty calories in foods like sugar-sweetened drinks, deserts, pizza and whole milk.

Researchers said that more education is needed to warn children of the dangers associated with eating food that is high in fat and calories and low in vitamins and other important minerals. Additionally, they called for changes in the nutritional value of food offered at schools and other public places.

"The epidemic of obesity among children and adolescents is now widely regarded as one of the most important public health problems in the U.S.," Jill Reedy and Susan M. Krebs-Smith said in their report. "Most experts agree that the solution will involve changes in both diet and physical activity, in order to affect energy balance.

Sugar-sweetened beverages, such as soda and juice, were identified as one of largest problems, as 10 percent children's total calories come from these sources.
 

Rahm Emanuel Becomes The Latest Obama Official To Leave White House

Rahm Emanuel becomes the latest Obama official to leave White HousePresident Barack Obama named his new chief of staff on Oct. 1 following the long-expected departure of Rahm Emanuel.

The President appointed Pete Rouse, who was Obama's chief of staff during his Senate tenure, as the interim replacement for Emanuel, who is resigning to run for mayor of Chicago. According to CNN.com, Rouse does not relish being in the spotlight and does not want the new position to become permanent.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs recently praised the former chief of staff for his service, saying that Emanuel has been "the energetic, inspirational leader" on Obama's staff.

Emanuel is not the first staff member to leave the White House. Christina Romer and Peter Orszag resigned from their positions on Obama's economic teams, while Larry Summers, his chief economic coordinator, will leave to teach at Harvard University at the end of the year.

According to Economist.com, David Axelrod, the president's political adviser, and Robert Gates, the defense secretary, are rumored to be on their way out as well.

"This is a president who does his deciding alone, no matter how widely he consults. Just as well, perhaps. Mr. Obama faces the prospect of a lonely summer in 2011," the article stated. 

U.S. Government Acquires X-ray Technology That Can Scan Vehicles

U.S. government acquires X-ray technology that can scan vehiclesA worldwide supplier of innovative X-ray equipment recently confirmed that it finalized a multimillion dollar contract with a U.S. government agency for the delivery of an innovative surveillance and detection system.

American Science and Engineering will provide the government with a modular Z Backscatter system, which can help bomb technicians remotely search vehicles for explosive devices. The technology was designed to scan a suspect object and produce an X-ray image.

If explosive components are detected, the system will allow the operator to defeat the device using precision targeting data. The Backscatter system, which security experts say can help in their counterterrorism strategy, has also been used at U.S. airports to produce full-body images of passengers.

According to The Christian Science Monitor, the government's recent acquisition of car-scanning technology has raised ire among privacy advocacy groups.

"This really trips up the creep factor because it's one of those things that you sort of intrinsically think the government shouldn't be doing," Frederick Lane, a Vermont-based privacy expert, told the news source. "But, legally, the issue is the boundary between the government's legitimate security interest and privacy expectations we enjoy in our cars."

Critics of the technology believe that scanning Americans without their knowledge is a violation of their constitutional protections, according to the news provider. 

Official Appointed By Obama Did Not Work For Free, Received Six-Figure Compensation

Official appointed by Obama did not work for free, received six-figure compensationDebunking prior reports that the executive compensation czar hand-picked by President Barack Obama would work pro bono, a watchdog group recently revealed that the official received a six-figure salary.

Kenneth Feinberg, who was appointed to be the Special Master for TARP Executive Compensation by Obama in 2009, was in charge of establishing compensation levels for top leaders at companies that were bailed out by the Federal government. Several media sources, including Forbes magazine, reported that Feinberg would not be paid for his services.

Judicial Watch, a public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, has discovered U.S. Treasury Department documents that reveal Feinberg's annual salary of $120,830.

"This is yet another reason why more of these Obama czars should go through the Senate confirmation process, rather than being simply installed into power," Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.

Feinberg, who is currently the administrator of the BP oil disaster fund, recently drew criticism from the administration that appointed him. According to the St. Petersburg Times, Associate U.S. Attorney General Thomas Perrelli wrote a letter to Feinberg, urging him to devote "whatever additional resources are necessary" to speed up the allocation of $20 billion to compensate business owners and other citizens affected by the oil spill. 

The McDonald’s Effect

Ray Kroc, the founder of McDonald’s, was born 108 years ago this week. The onetime milkshake machine salesman was born on Oct. 5, 1902. Today it is almost impossible to grasp how huge the company he founded has become.

McDonald’s has some 15,000 restaurants in this country, with 85 percent of them owned by franchisees. And listen to what those outlets have accomplished: More than half of the workers in America today got their very first job at a McDonald’s somewhere. The company has made more millionaires — and especially more black and Hispanic millionaires — than any other entity ever.

Kroc died in January 1984, just 10 months before McDonald’s sold its 50 billionth hamburger. That’s eight burgers for every man, woman and child on earth today. When some genius had each order-taker ask, "Would you like fries with that?" sales (and our waistlines) increased dramatically.

Today, of the 90 meals a month we consume, the average American eats three of them at McDonald’s. Or at least they get their food there; most customers pick up their order at the drive-up window. But we’re not all dining on Big Macs. Today McDonald’s sells as much chicken as it does beef.

And here’s a fun factoid: Years ago, the Washington, D.C.-area McDonald’s sponsored a television show called "Bozo’s Circus." On it the company spokesman, Ronald McDonald, was played by a 25-year-old Willard Scott. You’ll know him better as the Today Show weatherman who celebrates centenarians’ birthdays.

— Chip Wood