Why Does Obama Want New Graduates In Perpetual Debt?

President Barack Obama signed an executive order that lets borrowers pay no more than 10 percent of their monthly income in student loan payments. The measure, according to media reports, expands on a 2010 law that covered those who started borrowing after October 2007 and kept borrowing after 2011. The new order allows those who borrowed earlier to participate.

Now, almost three of every four college graduates leave college heavily in debt. As Paul Craig Roberts reported Tuesday, 260,000 college graduates were employed at or below the Federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour as of March 31. The latest jobs report by the Bureau of Labor Statistics showed that job prospects for graduates were dismal.

In its phony statistics, the BLS claimed 217,000 jobs were created in May. Of those, most were in wholesale trade, retail clerks, transportation and warehousing, employment services and temporary help, wait staff and bartenders, and healthcare and social assistance, with healthcare and social assistance providing the most. These are not the jobs for which people go to school.

Almost 3 million people are graduating with either an associate’s degree or a bachelor’s degree this year. They are beginning to flood the market looking for work. And as they do, they’re saddled with an average of $30,000 in student-loan debt.

Most of those who graduated last year are either unemployed or underemployed. In other words, they’re holding a job that did not require a bachelor’s degree. Their prospects for a good job are akin to playing the lottery.

In May, there were 700 fewer jobs for lawyers over the previous month. There were only 4,100 new jobs for accountants or bookkeepers; 4,500 new architect and engineer jobs (a number that includes secretaries and office managers); 1,800 new jobs in management; and almost 12,000 fewer education jobs.

Government guaranteed loans made it possible for many who couldn’t otherwise afford it to attend prestigious universities. That influx of easy money from the government drove up the costs of tuition across the board, making it impossible for anyone but the very rich to afford college without first obtaining a student loan. As is usual in government meddling, it’s created a vicious cycle of easy money chasing higher prices.

But the result is students are saddled with burdensome debt — debt they cannot absolve themselves of through good-paying jobs or through bankruptcy. And now Obama’s policies are encouraging more students to take on more debt because they can now kick the payment down road. The policy simply creates more debt slaves.

Another Day, Another Mass Shooting

There was another mass shooting last week. I’m sure you heard about, given that it was all over the news.

A gunman entered a laundromat and opened fire, injuring at least six people. Most of the victims were young adults, but two were teenagers aged 14 and 16. The gunman was still at large. There was no word on whether he was responsible for the 30 other shootings that occurred in the same area over a three-day span that included the laundromat attack.

What? You didn’t hear about it? No. I guess not. It was ignored by the mainstream media.

Unlike the shooting in Las Vegas, the perpetrators couldn’t be tied — however loosely — to the statist’s favorite villains: the National Rifle Association, Cliven Bundy, the liberty movement or — gasp — rural white people, aka “rednecks.” And the shooting took place in another gun-free zone: Chicago, which has some of the strictest gun laws in the Nation.

So the media ignored it. After all, it’s Chicago. Gang-related. Barack Obama’s and Rahm Emanuel’s town. Where guns are outlawed, so only the outlaws have guns.

Another day, another gangland shooting. That doesn’t fit their agenda, so you don’t need to hear about it.

Natural Cold And Cough Remedies Provide Chemical-Free Relief

Spring has sprung out all over, and with it comes allergy symptoms. But don’t reach for over-the-counter medicines for relief. Try the natural way.

These herbs provide safe relief without the harmful chemicals and side effects:

  • Goldenseal, peppermint and echinacea: Decongest sinuses, improve circulation and support the immune and lymphatic systems.
  • Chamomile: Has anti-inflammatory properties that offer relief to dry, itchy eyes. Place cool, wet chamomile tea bags over your eyes and leave them there for several minutes.
  • Stinging nettle: Works as an antihistamine, targeting the immune system’s response to allergens. It helps to reduce allergy symptoms like itchy eyes and sneezing. The dose should be 300 mg to 500 mg per day of stinging nettle in capsule form. You can also drink tea made from the plant’s fresh or freeze-dried leaves.
  • Thyme: Acts as both an antimicrobial and an expectorant; 1 or 2 teaspoons will help soothe sore throats and quell coughs.
  • Honey: Boosts the immune system and is a treatment for sore throats and coughs. It can be combined with thyme to double the effectiveness of the two ingredients.
  • Ginger: Helps to clear the throat and open the sinuses. It can be used in a soothing tea and/or mixed with honey. Mix 1 or 2 teaspoons of dried ginger — or minced ginger, if fresh — into hot water and let it steep. Inhale the vapors for a couple of minutes, then drink it for relief.
  • Cayenne pepper: Eases sore throat pain and prevents the release of histamines. Sprinkle a couple of shakes of cayenne powder in water and gargle with it two or three times a day.
  • Herbal inhalation: In a bowl, mix 3 teaspoons each of peppermint, thyme and nasturtium in 2.5 pints of boiling water and let stand for five minutes. Lean your head over the bowl, cover with a towel and inhale the aroma for about 10 minutes or until you feel your nose and chest clearing. Repeat two or three times per day.

H/T: Natural Society

California Bill Would Make All Sex Rape Without Prior Verbal Consent

If a California Democrat has his way, “yes” will mean “yes” only if both parties say “yes” out loud before sex.

A bill has been proposed that requires California colleges and universities to adopt policies concerning campus sexual violence, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking policies containing an “affirmative consent” policy in order to receive State funds for financial assistance.

In other words, all sex on campus would be treated as sexual assault unless a conversation about the act occurred beforehand, and the couple demonstrates they obtained “affirmative consent” before engaging in sexual activity. The bill describes “affirmative consent” as an “affirmative and conscious decision by each participant to engage in mutually agreed-upon sexual activity.”

The bill states the consent must be “informed, freely given, and voluntary,” and, “It is the responsibility of the person initiating the sexual activity to ensure that he or she has the consent of the other person to engage in the sexual activity. Lack of protest or resistance does not mean consent, nor does silence mean consent.” The bill also states that the existence of prior sexual relationship or dating relationship could not be assumed as an indicator of consent.

Writing for Legal Insurrection, attorney Hans Bader says, “Since most couples have engaged in sex without “verbal” consent, supporters of the bill are effectively redefining most people, and most happily-married couples, as rapists. By demanding verbal discussion before sex, they are also meddling in people’s sex lives in a prurient fashion. (Whether consent is explicit is often inversely related to whether sex is really welcome, with grudgingly consensual acts often being preceded by more explicit discussion and haggling than acts that are truly welcomed and enjoyed… Disturbingly, it’s not just sex they want to regulate, but also ‘sexual activity’ in general. The bill may require affirmative consent before multiple steps in the process of foreplay that leads to sex, even between couples who have engaged in the same pattern of foreplay before on countless occasions.”

Bader notes that requiring people to have verbal discussions before sex violates their privacy rights under at least two Supreme Court decisions, and also would ban foreplay as commonly occurs among married and unmarried couples alike.

But wait! I thought it was only conservatives who wanted to get into everyone’s bedrooms.

H/T: Breitbart.com

You Posted My REAL NAME!!!

You idiots!!! I just posted a comment against gun background checks, and before I realized it, you posted it under my REAL name, and my Facebook page, without giving me a chance to delete the post!!!

Are you people complete idiots? WHY would you think I would want to post something under my real nema on such a touchy subject, AND to have it linked to my Facebook page, which is my professional page? (I am a motion picture actor.) In Hollywood, anti-gun posts can get you fired from movies, or cause you to lose roles that you apply for. 

I want you to DELETE the post I made, and REMOVE it from my Facebook page. I also want you to make it possible for people to post under a pseudonym. 

We live in insane times, and there are some crazies out there. My post referenced those crazies. Might it not cross your mind that perhaps ONE of those crazies might take offense to what I posted, and perhaps want to hunt me down and cause me great injury or death? 

I can’t believe you people ever graduated from High School. 


Dear G.H.

You need to direct your ire inward. It is quite clear when you begin to make a comment under “Facebook Conversations” that the system is pulling in your Facebook profile. Your selected Facebook image even appears at the left side of the comment box. At that time, you are given the opportunity to log out, though you cannot post via Facebook once you do.

If you wish to comment anonymously you have the option of creating a Disqus profile with the pseudonym of your choice.

This begs the question: Are you sure you ever graduated from high school?

Best wishes,

P.S. The moderator has removed your comment. All you had to do was ask. The insults weren’t necessary.

The Case For Obama’s Impeachment

There is clear and convincing evidence that President Barack Obama has on numerous occasions willfully committed treason and high crimes and misdemeanors and should be removed from office.

The “crimes” that led to the impeachment of both Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton and the resignation of Richard Nixon pale in comparison to Obama’s. Johnson’s “crimes” were purely political. He favored a policy of benevolent reconciliation with the Southern States following the Civil War. He issued a series of proclamations that directed the Southern States to hold conventions and elections to reform their governments; he attempted to veto a number of bills establishing military districts to oversee the new State governments; he vetoed an incumbent protection act called the Tenure of Office Act; and he fired Secretary of War Edwin Stanton, who was working against him at every turn. Those moves were all contrary to the wishes of the Republicans who controlled both houses of Congress in the aftermath of the war. The impeachment vote in the Senate failed by one vote on all three counts to receive the two-thirds majority necessary to remove Johnson from office.

Clinton was impeached for perjury to a grand jury and obstruction of justice in the Paula Jones sexual harassment suit and the related independent counsel’s investigation in the Monica Lewinsky affair and various other Clinton misdeeds. Forty-five Senators—all of them Republican—voted to remove Clinton from office over the perjury charge. Fifty voted to remove him for obstruction of justice. Though Clinton was clearly guilty, not one Democrat in the Senate voted to impeach. And, in fact, the Senate voted 100-0 to not hear any live witnesses in the trial.

Nixon, of course, resigned a couple of weeks after the House opened its impeachment hearings over his role in the cover-up of the Watergate break-in and other allegations of his misuse of office, the facts of which were just coming to light at the time.

The “I-word” hit the mainstream media after war-loving, chicken hawk and John McCain-lapdog Senator Lindsey Graham warned Obama that Republicans would call for his impeachment if he released more prisoners from Guantanamo Bay without Congressional approval. Before that, anyone mentioning impeachment was shouted down and cast by the media and the establishment as nutty, kooky or… wait for it… a conspiracy theorist. Obama responded to Graham’s threat by having his underlings release news that another Gitmo prisoner may soon be sprung.

I am under no illusion that the impeachment proceedings are in the offing, regardless of what Obama does. Neither is Obama. Graham’s threat was as idle as an inattentive parent’s threat to a misbehaving child. When you hear a parent tell his child “No” over and over, and then hear him say, “You do that once more and you’re in trouble,” you know that child is never disciplined — and the child knows it, too. This is Congress and Obama.

Neither Republicans nor Democrats in Washington, D.C., are interested in anything other paying lip service to the Constitution while solidifying their respective grips on power and transferring America’s wealth to their favored crony partners. That is all that matters in D.C. Neither party will intentionally do anything to upset their cushy apple cart.

And the MSM, which long ago abandoned any pretense at objective journalism, are beholden to the elites and in the tank for the regime, drunk as they are on being next to the power structure. You can’t expect real journalism with a lineup like this:

  • ABC Senior Correspondent Claire Shipman is married to outgoing White House Press Secretary Jay Carney.
  • CNN President Virginia Moseley is married to Hillary Clinton’s Deputy Secretary Tom Nides.
  • CBS President David Rhodes is the brother of top Obama official Ben Rhodes, who is responsible for rewriting the Benghazi talking points.
  • ABC President Ben Sherwood is the brother of Obama special adviser Elizabeth Sherwood.

However, six years of this lawless regime is more than any sane person should be expected to endure. Even leftist legal scholar Jonathan Turley called Obama “the president Richard Nixon always wanted to be.”

So here are my articles of impeachment — in no particular order — for the undocumented usurper currently despoiling the People’s House: Barack Hussein Obama.

  • He provided aid and comfort to the enemy by releasing five suspected terrorists and former members of the Taliban who participated in or orchestrated attacks against Americans.
  • He violated a law he signed six months prior requiring him to notify Congress 30 days before releasing GITMO detainees.
  • He has willfully and repeated violated Article I, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution by continuously amending the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare.
  • He knowingly and willfully violated Article I, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution by signing the ACA, knowing full well it was a bill for raising revenue that had originated in the Senate.
  • He engaged in fraud by repeatedly lying to the American people about the effects of the ACA by claiming that Americans could keep their current coverage and physicians if they chose.
  • He exercised an abuse of power by instructing, through his proxies, agents of the Internal Revenue Service to target conservative organizations and his critics for extra scrutiny and audits.
  • He participated in an obstruction of justice and a criminal conspiracy by hindering a Congressional investigation into the Internal Revenue Service targeting scandal and using Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice in that obstruction.
  • He provided aid and comfort to the enemy by ordering or allowing the sale of arms and ammunition to al-Qaida-linked terrorists in Syria and by dispatching agents of the government to advise and train in the use of the those weapons and in military tactics.
  • He failed, despite repeated requests by the U.S. Consulate, to provide the security necessary to ensure the safety of U.S. personnel and the Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
  • He knowingly and willfully denied military assistance to Americans under attack at the Benghazi Consulate, resulting in the trashing of the U.S. Consulate building, the theft of sensitive documents and the deaths of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens.
  • He knowingly and willfully lied and ordered his proxies to lie about the circumstances surrounding the attack on the U.S Consulate in Benghazi, thereby perpetrating a fraud on the American people in order to ensure his re-election and to cover up his illegal gun running operation.
  • He violated the War Powers Act by failing to gain Congressional approval for the military attack on Libya that resulted in the overthrow of the Libyan regime.
  • He provided aid and comfort to the enemy by using the American military and intelligence organizations and allowing the sale of arms and ammunition to al-Qaida-linked terrorists in order to assist them in overthrowing a legal regime in Libya that Congress had not declared war upon.
  • He has repeatedly made war on various Middle Eastern countries with the use of drone attacks without the approval of Congress in violation of the War Powers Act and in violation of Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.
  • He has ordered the murders of at least three American citizens without due process in violation of Amendments 5, 6, 8 and 14.
  • He has repeatedly used the Environmental Protection Agency to contravene Congress and pass laws harmful to American businesses and consumers, in violation of Article I, Section 1.
  • He has repeatedly violated the 4th Amendment by allowing agencies under his direction to continue to spy upon, wiretap and collect personal information of American citizens who are not criminal suspects.
  • He has repeatedly violated Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution by disregarding laws passed by Congress, including, but not limited to, U.S. immigration laws, civil rights laws and the Defense of Marriage Act.
  • He knowingly allowed the illegal sale of weapons to Mexican narco-terrorists that were later used to kill Americans, including border agent Brian Terry.
  • He obstructed justice by participating with Attorney General Holder in a cover-up of the Fast and Furious gun running scheme.
  • He knowingly and willfully violated Article IV, Section 4 by failing to protect the border States against invasion, and in fact encouraged that invasion through his rhetoric and with the use of executive orders that contravened U.S. immigration law.
  • He knowingly and willfully violated Article IV, Section 4 (guaranteeing a republican form of government to each State) by strong-arming, intimidating and threatening to withhold funds from the States of Oklahoma, Texas, Montana, Rhode Island and Arizona in order to coerce the people and legislatures of those States and prevent the passage of laws according to the citizen’s wishes.
  • He instructed his Interior Secretary to ignore the orders of Federal courts to lift a moratorium on deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, which denied oil workers an opportunity to earn a living and damaged the U.S. economy.
  • He broke established precedent and contravened established bankruptcy law, to the detriment of the bond holders and the advantage of his campaign contributors (auto unions) in the General Motors bailout.
  • In the auto bailout, he knowingly and willfully deprived numerous auto dealers of their dealerships for political reasons in violation of Amendments 4 and 14.
  • He repeatedly transferred funds from the U.S. Treasury to his cronies and campaign contributors for use in failing green energy schemes.
  • He violated Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution by appointing officers without first obtaining the “Advice and Consent of the Senate.”

In his book Faithless Execution, Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment, Andrew C. McCarthy notes: “Impeachment is a grave remedy on the order of a nuclear strike.” Obama’s lawless Presidency has been nothing less than a nuclear strike on the U.S. Constitution, which now lies in tatters.

“Impeachment is a political remedy: even if palpably guilty of profound transgressions, a president will not be ousted without a groundswell of public ire,” McCarthy writes.

In his case for impeachment, McCarthy breaks Obama’s high crimes and misdemeanors into seven articles. They are:

  • Article I: The President’s willful refusal to execute the laws faithfully and usurpation of the legislative authority of Congress.
  • Article II: Usurping the Constitutional authority and prerogatives of Congress.
  • Article III: Dereliction of Duty as President and Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces.
  • Article IV: Fraud on the American People.
  • Article V: Failure to execute the Immigration Laws faithfully.
  • Article VI: Failure to execute the laws faithfully: Department of Justice.
  • Article VII: Willfully undermining the Constitutional rights of the American people that he is sworn to preserve, protect and defend.

Those articles contain many of the charges laid out above. But they also include Obama’s defiance of Congressional law and court orders in obstructing the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project, his defiance of Federal law requiring him to address Medicare insolvency, his undermining of and contempt for Congress’ duty to conduct oversight of Federal agencies, his dereliction of duty by imposing unconscionable rules of engagement that endanger American troops, lying about Iran negotiations and assisting that country with its nuclear program, politicization of the DoJ, politically motivated selective prosecution by the DoJ, DoJ investigations and other intimidation of journalists in violation of Amendment 1, systematic stonewalling of Congress, abridgement of Amendment 1 in appeasing Islamic supremacists by adopting repressive sharia blasphemy standards, suppression of information about Islamic terrorism, including its occurrence at Ft. Hood, abridgement of Amendment 1 by vindictively targeting and prosecuting high-profile critics, and his abridgement of Amendment 2 by joining an international treaty despite Congressional opposition.

McCarthy notes that since impeachment is a political rather than a legal remedy, the burden of proof is different. But he also states that as long as there is no groundswell of opposition to the President’s actions from the public, there will be no impeachment.

I’ll go one step further: As long as there is not a two-thirds majority of Republicans in the Senate, there will be no impeachment. But even in the off chance that Republicans were to somehow come up with 66 Senators willing to remove the President, the Republicans would not have the stomach to attempt it because the sycophantic media would gin impeachment up as a racial issue and stir up street riots that would make Watts riots look like a park stroll.

The ensuing carnage would likely result in the removal of the entire power structure in Washington. And the establishment — whether it sides with the Democrats or Republicans — will agree it can’t have that.

Update: In the wake of the growing chorus of calls for Obama’s impeachment, the GOP establishment has publicly announced it cares more for power than the Constitution.

Obama’s Refugee Crisis

President Barack Obama’s dismissal and violation of U.S. immigration laws has created a refugee crisis on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Yesterday, Breitbart.com released leaked images of illegal immigrants warehoused in overcrowded conditions in Texas. Most of them are unaccompanied children — including girls under the age of 12 — who have crossed from Central America, through Mexico’s drug cartel-controlled territories and into Texas.

U.S. Immigration and Customers Enforcement is being overwhelmed, and this falls at Obama’s feet because of his decision to halt deportations of young adult illegals. The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program allows immigrants who arrive prior to age 16 to remain in the U.S. This includes anyone 30 or younger on June 15, 2012. These so-called “Dreamers” are being approved at a rate of 96 percent of all immigrants who apply.

Department of Homeland Security announced yesterday the program — which was to have lasted two years — was being renewed. This will allow 560,000 young adult and children illegals to remain in the U.S. with no fear of deportation.

The prospect of gaining legal status through this program has caused an influx of young illegals into the U.S. Of course, once those children and young adults achieve even a quasi-legal status, they will be able to bring family members across the border with them.

So far, Obama’s “fix” for the Texas disaster has been to ship masses of the illegals to other sectors in California and bus stations in Arizona where they are either sent away with “orders” to appear for a hearing at a future date, or they are just dumped at bus stations.

Scandal-Ridden Massachusetts DCF Agrees To Free Justina

The Connecticut girl kidnapped by the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families and imprisoned in Boston Children’s Hospital for more than year has been cleared to return home by the courts. But she has not yet been released, as the legal system continues to drag its feet.

Last week, Justina’s family and attorneys with the Liberty Council filed a motion in Juvenile Court requesting she be returned to her parents, Linda and Lou Pelletier. Massachusetts DCF indicated it would not object to the motion.

In mid-May, Justina was transferred from Massachusetts to a Connecticut facility. Since then, she has been receiving treatment from Tufts Medical Center, the same place she received treatment before her kidnapping by the State of Massachusetts in February 2013.

“Today is a significant event for Justina and the Pelletier family,” Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, who is representing the Pelletier family, said May 30. “We believe and hope that the Pelleteir family will soon be reunited.

“After nearly 16 months of separation, Justina requires much healing; physically, emotionally and spiritually,” said Staver. “The completion of the Plan is a very positive development and brings us almost full circle to where this process started, before DCF took custody of Justina: Tufts Medical Center is finally providing Justina’s healthcare once more.”

While under the care of her doctor at Tufts Medical Center, Justina was living a fairly normal life with her parents in West Hartford, Conn., despite suffering from mitochondrial disease, a genetic condition that has required several surgeries and continued medication prescribed by specialists. But when her parents took to her Boston Children’s to have her treated for symptoms of the flu, doctors there changed her diagnosis to somatoform disorder, took her off her medications and contacted DCF. The Pelleteirs were then escorted from the hospital.

Justina was then placed in a psychiatric ward, where she was denied medications that were working and had others forced upon her without her parents’ consent. Her health has since deteriorated to the point that she often needs a wheelchair. Her parents, meanwhile, were cast into an alternate universe for 15 months where the DCF and courts cast aspersions on their character, conspired to keep them separated from their daughter, prevented them from consulting on her care and silenced them with gag orders.

Last month, DCF head Olga Roche was forced to resign under pressure from Massachusetts legislators who expressed concern over various DCF funding misappropriation scandals involving several now dead children under the agency’s supervision, as well as its treatment of Justina.

That agency, as well as the State’s family court system and several other State agencies, are now under the gun, thanks to a trial revealing massive corruption in various State offices.

For more on the history of Justina’ plight, read Hospitals Are The New Prisons and It’s 14 Months Of Torture For Justina Pelletier.

The Two Hands Of Big Brother: Losing Our Liberties Update

I began publishing my monthly newsletter The Bob Livingston Letter™ (subscription required) in 1969. The following is an excerpt from an article in the June 1999 issue in which I commented upon the burgeoning surveillance state which even then was increasingly viewing Americans as terrorists needing to be secretly spied upon. While Edward Snowden’s “revelations” of the depth and breadth of government spying on Americans surprised many, readers of The Bob Livingston Letter™ were long ago alerted to government spying programs. And, curiously, 15 years after the fact, Attorney General Eric Holder has just announced he’s going to “revive” the same Clinton-era anti-terror task force, as if the National Security Agency’s domestic spying program is inadequate to the task.

For those who do have a mind and spirit to resist, the U.S. government has proposed creating a Soviet-like KGB within the Department of Justice, ostensibly called a “National Terrorism Intelligence Center.” You are now a terrorist, you see, if you believe in self and local governments and States’ rights. This plan was first articulated in the Council on Foreign Relations journal, Foreign Affairs, by several authors, including the former Central Intelligence Agency director and deputy secretary of defense, John Deutch, and a Harvard professor, Ashton Carter, who occupies a chair sponsored by the notorious globalist-socialist Ford Foundation. They propose a centralized intelligence gathering and collection apparatus which would coordinate all such information for “U.S. government bodies, supporting defense and intelligence operations, and law enforcement agencies.”

In short, the center would combine the active intelligence gathering approach of the national security agencies, which are not legally constrained in their forcing investigations, with the domestic authority and investigative resources of law enforcement agencies. In other words, this super-agency would have no foreign or domestic constraints for snooping on and policing the American people.

The CFR writers claim the feel-good justification of such a huge organization would be “to protect established civil liberties.” Yet this super-agency “would be exempt from pretrial discovery in the trials of indicted criminals.” Whoops! So much for those vaunted civil liberties!

How close are we to actually having a U.S. Government KGB? Attorney General Janet “Johnny Waco” Reno has announced that:

… the Clinton administration is readying a new terrorism response plan to ensure a coordinated federal effort and to practice working with state and local authorities…

… an agreement with the Pentagon, the National Security Council and the Federal Emergency Management Agency to act as the lead agency for the preparedness program.

How have we come to this point, that free Americans could be viewed as terroristic enemies in the very nation their forefathers created? Part of the answer is that America has been subjected to a long-term, clever process of demoralization and destabilization from within…

More Court-Approved Torture Coming To Georgia?

Areas of Georgia may soon join metro Atlanta and the States of Tennessee and Wyoming as places that will allow officers to forcibly withdraw blood during traffic stops.

“We’re not out here to violate anybody’s rights,” said Powell Harrelson of the Georgia Governor’s Office of Highway Safety and Metro Police, in a classic case of political doublespeak. That office is pushing for forced blood draws if a driver refuses to submit to a field sobriety test during a traffic stop. The Georgia Court of Appeals ruled the practice lawful in January.

State and local police have already planned Operation Thunder, a summer-long activity by State Troopers and local police that will saturate certain areas of the State with traffic checkpoints and stepped-up patrols.

Chatham County judges have not decided whether they will sign off on forced blood draws. The idea has drawn the ire of lawyers who say the State can make a sufficient case with dash-cam video and field sobriety tests. Under Georgia law, refusal to take a field sobriety results in an automatic one-year driver’s license suspension.

DUI attorney Doug Andrews told a Georgia television station he is worried about unintended consequences that might spring from inserting a needle into an unwilling driver’s arm. “They’re gonna hurt someone,” he said.

And it brings to mind how things got out of hand in New Mexico, when a man was stopped for running a stop sign and police thought that during questioning he clenched his buttocks in a suspicious manner.

Fourteen hours later, without granting his consent, the man had undergone X-rays, several rectal exams and a colonoscopy as police searched for drugs that were not there.

Forced medical procedures — whether blood draws or rectal exams — are torture and have no place in American jurisprudence. They are simply more signs of the burgeoning police state.

Diet Drinks Help Weight Loss? Fat Chance!

Another day, another farcical “study” on the “benefits” of drinking diet sodas.

This one, reported on Denver’s local CBS affiliate, claims drinking diet sodas is better for losing weight than drinking water. This is “good news for diet soda lovers who also want to drop some pounds,” the reporterette breathlessly proclaimed in her report.

According to the story, researchers at the University of Colorado took 300 people and divided them into two groups. Both groups followed a “diet and exercise program,” but one could drink zero-calorie beverages while the others were restricted to drinking only water. After 12 weeks, those who drank diet beverages lost an average of 13 pounds while the water drinkers lost an average of 9.

The report itself was not included with the CBS report, but is available here.

Researchers determined that there was a reduction in total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol in the group consuming diet beverages.

One interesting tidbit from the study, hunger increased slightly in the water group while it decreased in the diet soda group. But digging through the weeds, you find that study participants were all consumers of diet sodas prior to the study. That means the water-only group were undergoing a significantly greater lifestyle change to take part in the study.

Besides, the “study” measured weight loss only and did not take into account where the weight came from or whether the participants were healthier at the end of the study.

Diet sodas are in no way healthy, and they may be even more detrimental to health than regular sodas.

People who drink diet soda daily have a 61 percent higher risk of suffering a stroke or heart attack than those who drink no diet drinks, according to the American Stroke Association’s International Stroke Conference. Researchers have concluded that drinking two or more sodas a day almost doubles your chances of developing kidney disease. And it’s worse for women.

The sweetener aspartame, commonly known as NutraSweet, is one of the most commonly used artificial sweeteners in diet beverages. It is a neurotoxin.

In the body it breaks down into phenylalanine, aspartic acid and methanol. When methanol is heated above 86 degrees F, it converts into formaldehyde. The human body’s resting temperature is 98.6 degrees F.

A University of Texas Health Center study found that the more diet sodas a person drank, the greater chance he had of becoming overweight. Artificial sweeteners disrupt the body’s ability to regulate calorie intake based on the sweetness of foods, according to an animal study by researchers at Purdue University.

Diet sodas are very acidic, and the acid dissolves tooth enamel, leading to tooth decay.

Oh, and buried at the bottom of CBS Denver’s story was this nugget: “The study was funded by the American Beverage Association.”

And this passes for journalism.

The Magical World Of Political Speech

“Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” – George Orwell

I keep the above George Orwell quote near me at all times. It serves as a reminder to me to decipher political speech whenever I see or hear it.

Political speech contains magical properties. It mesmerizes the masses because it is more illusory than a David Copperfield grand finale.

But political speech is dangerous. While it sounds innocuous, it is as deadly as a bear trap hidden beneath the leaves or a siren singing her song. It can grab you suddenly, or it can ensnare you subtly. Either way, you learn too late that you have been conned and there is no escape.

The magic of political speech is not happenstance. There are change agents at work in the inner sanctums of power whose job it is to create special words and phrases that are used in political speech. Those words and phrases are repeated over and over by the elites in order to dumb us down and create a conditioned response.

The process of dumbing down and the conditioning of the mind to create a nation of good, obedient subjects loyal and subservient to political authority and to the legitimacy of the political order begins early on. We are now several generations into the plan by the elites to create a Nation of state-worshiping ignoramuses taught pseudo-history and inculcated with a loyalty to and dependence upon big government. For many — if not most — of the Nation’s young people below the age of 25, government provided them with most of their meals while the majority of their days were spent submitting to government authority figures (teachers/principals/school officers) in rigid, structured environments that dissuade original thought.

Also aiding the elites and politicians in this effort is an army of “journalists” who never stray far from the official line of the State apparatus. They are eager to spread their lies and half-truths because that ensures them their seats near (or even inside, in the case of the Barack Obama Administration) the halls of power. On that rare occasion one of them strays too far from the party line, retribution is swift and harsh (see Helen Thomas and Sharyl Attkisson). This discourages dissent.

Politicians have learned that the more lies they tell, the more lies we believe. And the more lies we believe, the more dependent we become. Conversely, the fewer myths, lies and deceptions we succumb to, the less dependent we are and, therefore, the more liberty we enjoy.

I long ago learned the power of propaganda. I have watched as otherwise intelligent and thoughtful people have had their minds so manipulated by political speech that they acted contrary to their own best interests without a second thought. It seems that organized and sophisticated propaganda is able to operate outside the threshold of intelligence. In other words, without some imperative to trigger inquiry, very intelligent people buy into lies and myths the same as the general population. The lies and myths then become conventional wisdom. The human mind rarely accepts a challenge to conventional wisdom.

When confronted with a challenge to the established belief system, the mind closes off. When this happens, the individual employs avoidance behavior, writes off the new knowledge as conspiracy theory and labels it as kooky, insane or stupid. The information is then dismissed, never to be considered again, even when the facts support the new knowledge. Psychologists call this quirk of human nature cognitive dissonance. It means the rejection of information not in harmony with previous beliefs.

The esoteric purpose of propaganda is to extract wealth and labor illegally as concealed involuntary servitude or to steal the people’s liberty right out from under them, and even have the populace to thank the thieves for doing so, especially if it is done under the guise of keeping the people “safe” or to “save the children” from some danger, real or imagined. Those who use propaganda to persuade the populace against their best interests create myths and sell them as benefits.

The elites also use distractions for this purpose. These distractions serve to draw the people’s attention away from the important issues and focus it on the mundane and the trivial, much as the illusionist uses sleight of hand. These distractions can be events that occur naturally or by chance, which are then seized upon by the elites. But sometimes the distractions are artificial creations — also called “false flag events” — designed and triggered for the specific purpose of refocusing the attention of the populace. (Bill Clinton’s bombing of a Sudanese aspirin factory at the time of his deposition in the Paula Jones case and at the peak of the Monica Lewinsky scandal is a prime example.)

Often, these distractions serve a dual purpose. For instance, the callous and senseless murder of six people by the mentally depraved Elliot Rodger on May 23 has mesmerized the populace. It has created some distraction away from the burgeoning Veterans Affairs scandal, the Internal Revenue Service scandal, the Benghazi scandal and the ongoing collapse of the economy and Obamacare. But more sinister is its use by the gun controllers and hoplophobes to once again attempt to advance their assault on the 2nd Amendment.

Congressman Steny Hoyer employed classic political speech (or doublethink) in announcing that Democrats will try to steal more 2nd Amendment liberties by expanding background checks on weapons purchases through an amendment to an upcoming bill. While acknowledging that expanded background checks would have made no difference in the Rodger case, Hoyer said Congress must do something. (By the way, half of Rodger’s victims were killed with knives and five of the 13 injured were struck with his car. Curiously, Hoyer did not call for background checks on knife and car purchases.)

There is nothing lawmakers love more than making laws, even when they know their laws won’t accomplish their stated purpose. This is particularly true of those laws that take more authority for the state, or if they enrich the fascist system. For lawmakers, the “unintended consequences” of their laws are just like gravy, because then they get to pass more laws to correct the unintended consequences. This, of course, leads to more “unintended consequences” and the passage of more laws.

Obama is a master of classic political speech. In a political fundraiser in Chicago last week, he moved from blaming George W. Bush for his problems and put the onus on the Founding Fathers.

According to Obama, he is unable to move his agenda forward because the Constitution requires each State be represented by two Senators. “Obviously, the nature of the Senate means that California has the same number of seats as Wyoming. That puts us at a disadvantage.”

This, of course, is nonsensical on its face and is pure argle-bargle. Democrats control the Senate 53-45 with one socialist and one independent, both of whom vote with Democrats. However, it reveals something of Obama’s true nature. That is, he wishes to be a dictator and he detests the republican system of government our Founders gave us, but which we have almost totally lost to fascism.

But of course, in the world of political speech, such tommyrot as this is accepted as great political philosophy and applauded by the sychophants and toadies.

Certainly, the current regime has not cornered the market on magical political speech and propaganda; but it has more weapons in its arsenal than any before it.

The Real Question

Commenting on Does The Tea Party Still Matter,
Dan says:
May 29, 2014 at 9:21 a.m.
The REAL question may be :
How many in the TEA Party have given up on the Republican establishment
after seeing the cheating and subterfuge that takes place within it.


Commenting on Are Americans Ready For A Revolution?,
Douglas W. Rodrigues says:
May 28, 2014 at 7:20 a.m.
A bloody civil war with the subversives being targeted first, will be the only thing that reverses the treason going on in Washington now. Washington is 99% corrupted, and is beyond help. Too much big money controlling the politicians. Too much voter cheating. Too much power mongering. Too little concern for the American citizens. Ironically, this situation is caused by the Americans themselves who haven’t a clue about who they vote for and are too stupid to understand the subversion and treason in Washington.

Obama Considered Deploying Military On Bundy Ranch

President Barack Obama considered deploying the U.S. military during the Cliven Bundy Ranch standoff in Nevada under the approbation of a Pentagon directive on military support to civilian authorities signed in 2010.

The Department of Defense directive provides U.S. commanders with the emergency authority to use military support to quell domestic disturbances where needed to “prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property” and when “necessary to restore government function and public order.” A second condition is when Federal, State or local authorities “are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for federal property or federal governmental functions.”

The military assistance can include loans of arms, ammunition, vessels and aircraft, and also authorizes the use of drones in operations against domestic unrest, though it prohibits the use of armed drones.

The directive and information that Obama considered deploying the U.S. military in Nevada were revealed by Bill Gertz of The Washington Times Wednesday and famously ignored by the rest of the corporate establishment media. Deploying the military in a domestic law enforcement scenario is a violation of posse comitatus.

A defense official opposed to the directive told Gertz, “This appears to be the latest step in the administration’s decision to use force within the United States against its citizens.”

Actually it’s not the latest, though it may be the latest revealed. The regime has been arming alphabet soup agencies at an alarming rate, even as it works in nefarious and extra-legal ways to disarm law-abiding Americans and propagandizes against them. All the while, the regime is arming al-Qaida-linked terror groups in Libya, Syria and elsewhere, demonstrating exactly who the regime considers “terrorists.”

According to Gertz, defense analysts say there has been a buildup of military units within non-security-related Federal agencies, notably the creation of Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams. “The buildup raises questions about whether the regime is undermining civil liberties under the guise of counterterrorism and counternarcotics efforts,” according to Gertz.

Agencies with SWAT teams include the Department of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Education Department.

So not only has the regime assumed the authority to disappear Americans without trial or habeas corpus under the Congress-passed National Defense Authorization Act, it has assumed under a simple DoD secretary’s signature the authority — and granted it to military commanders — to attack Americans with wanton force if it determines they are a threat. And the second most powerful man in American government, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, has called Bundy supporters “domestic terrorists,” which crosses the threshold needed by the NDAA and the directive to deploy force against Americans standing up to government abuse and overreach.

9th Circuit Again Justifies Government’s Theft Of Property

Last July, I told you about a case involving California raisin growers and their battle with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Depression-era Raisin Administrative Committee. That case is now back in the news — and likely headed back to the Supreme Court — after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals again ruled in favor of the raisin cartel by upholding its authority to fix prices and steal half of a farmer’s raisin crop without compensation.

The case has been kicked around various courts for more than a decade. It began when California raisin growers Marvin and Lena Horne, owners of Raisin Valley Farms, decided they were tired of complying with crop set-asides established arbitrarily by a bunch of paper-shuffling government functionaries, especially once the government went back on its agreement and quit compensating them for what it took. In other words, the USDA quit just strong-arming farmers and resorted to strong-armed robbery — transferring their product to crony capitalist corporations like Minute Maid.

The Raisin Administrative Committee’s job is to fix raisin prices. So once farmers have an idea on the size of the year’s harvest, the Raisin Administrative Committee tells the farmers how much of their product they must place in a reserve pool (i.e., handed over to the king as tribute). That reserve pool cannot be sold in the United States and must be surrendered to raisin packers that then package and sell the raisins to the U.S. government for school lunch programs or at reduced prices overseas.

Farmers were to receive some compensation (though not market prices) for the raisins set aside. But thanks to dwindling profit margins, farmers weren’t compensated in 2003, even though 47 percent of their crop had to be handed over to the government.

Horne decided that if he packaged and sold his own raisins, rather than run them through the cartel, he could circumvent the order. Other raisin producers, sensing an opportunity to benefit from all their labor rather than only that portion the eggheaded bureaucrats thought they should, decided to follow suit.

The raisin cartel wasn’t happy with this tactic. The USDA promptly slapped the Hornes with fines and demanded payment for the raisins they didn’t surrender. Horne said the fines and payment totaled about $1 million — much more than he and his small farm could muster. So he sued.

The USDA, joined by crony corporations benefiting directly from the theft, argued the case had nothing to do with taking but was a case about the Hornes violating farming regulations. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, unsurprisingly, agreed with the USDA.

The Supreme Court, in a 9-0 decision, sent the case back to the 9th Circuit with orders to hear the case on its merits. It did; then it ruled against the Hornes again, claiming that “the Marketing Order (that sets the amount confiscated) ensures ‘orderly’ market conditions by regulating raisin supply.” Evidence that this has never been so, but that — like the Federal Reserve’s money printing — it has only produced price bubbles and bursts, was ignored. The ruling essentially means that government taking is not a taking if the government intends to compensate the victim, even if the victim is ultimately not compensated at all.

The 9th Circuit ruled the property taken was not “real property” such as land, but only involved the Horne’s “personal property.” The judges noted the Hornes could “avoid the reserve requirement… by planting different crops.”

If the Hornes take the case back to the Supreme Court as expected, it is one that is well worth watching. Government price fixing has historically benefited corporatocracy to the detriment of the American consumer by creating artificially high prices and food shortages. Recall that during the Depression, marketing orders under the New Deal philosophy of “managed abundance” and prosperity through “universal monopoly” and “universal scarcity” led to the destruction of crops and livestock while Americans were standing in food lines begging for food.

Even now, Americans pay artificially high prices on food because of regulations setting quotas on food production and because of subsidies to paid to farmers to grow (or not grow) one crop at the expense of another.

Minimum Wage Laws Kill Jobs

A business exists for one purpose: to provide profit for the shareholder(s). Failing that, every business will eventually close its doors.

To meet its purpose, that business must provide a good or service the public needs or wants at a price the consumer is willing to pay. This is economics broken down to its simplest form.

Over the past few months, there have been protests and strikes by fast food workers at various locations across the U.S. and in Europe for a higher minimum wage. They are operating under the false assumption that a business can pay its employees more than they return in productivity.

Anticipating a sharp rise in wages, the fast food industry is looking to alternatives to paying workers more than they are worth. It is turning to technology.

In 2011, McDonald’s deployed 7,000 kiosks in its European stores. Restaurants like Jimmy Johns, Potbelly and Wow Bao have already deployed on-site kiosks and mobile apps, enabling their customers to skip lines and place orders with a few finger taps and the swipe of a debit or credit card. The restaurant chains Chili’s and Applebee’s have also placed small kiosks on their tables that allow customers to order and pay without interacting with the human wait staff. Last month, Panera Bread announced it would bring in self-ordering kiosks and mobile ordering to all its locations over the next three years.

McDonald’s, which depends on drive-thru customers for about 75 percent of its American business, has begun testing mobile ordering in Salt Lake City and Austin, Texas. The company is apparently eschewing the kiosk idea in the U.S. because of the drive-thru traffic and for other reasons.

For the firm Nextep Systems, which specializes in touch-screen self-order systems, sales in 2013 were up 50 percent over 2012. According to a study by the University of Oxford, there is a 92 percent chance that all fast-food preparation and serving will soon be automated. Industry analysts predict at least a 5 percent to 10 percent drop in food industry employment in coming years.

Look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics employment data and you will see that food industry employment is one of the few sectors currently seeing consistent month-to-month hiring increases. A rise in the minimum wage will kill that growth.

By manipulating wages, government will hurt those it claims to be looking out for. Young, entry-level job seekers will see their employment prospects dwindle; and the young and the poor — the primary purchasers of fast food — will see their prices rise even more than demanded by food inflation, which is approaching double digits.