Archive for May, 2009

Written by Jean Barwick
Conservative Women’s Action Network (CWAN.org)
May 29, 2009

As Second Circuit Judge Sonya Sotomayor moves into the vetting process for a seat on the nation’s highest court, volumes of opinions both for and against Sotomayor have flooded the media. Long before Justice Souter’s official announcement that he would be leaving the Supreme Court, we knew that certain rules to name his successor were already in place. We knew, for instance, that the nominee would not be a male, would not be a typically middle class white American, and, most disturbing, would not embrace a philosophy of impartial justice.

The administration’s selection of Sotomayor reflects both her view and the administration’s view of the new role of a Supreme Court justice. In a 2005 panel discussion at Duke University, Sotomayor stated, “All of the legal defense funds out there, they’re looking for people with Court of Appeals experience. Because it is the Court of Appeals is where policy is made.” There it was – her public assessment of the limitations of the judicial role, supported with taxpayer money – loud and clear. She went on to mock Constitutional tradition by adding her version of clarity to her remarks: “And I know, and I know, that this is on tape, and I should never say that. Because we don’t ‘make law,’ I know. Okay, I know. I know. I’m not promoting it, and I’m not advocating it. I’m, you know…” As Daffy Duck would say, “Chortle, chortle, snort, snort.”

Then there’s the now classic Sotomayorism, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn¹t lived that life.” White House press secretary Bob Gibbs’ defense of those words wasn’t just comical, it was pathetic. He suggested that Americans familiarize themselves with the whole statement from The Berkeley La Raza Law Journal. Here it is:

“Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice O¹Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases,² the statement continues. ³I am not so sure Justice O¹Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes that line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am also not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, as Professor Martha Minnow has noted, there can never be a universal definition of wise. Second, I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn¹t lived that life.”

I am struck again and again by the insidious and pervasive sense of entitlement that seems to catapult people with long-standing societal grievances into leadership positions in our government at the behest of the new American voter. The criteria for leadership have evolved into meeting standards of “inherent physiological or cultural differences” rather than achievement. The struggle for equality and justice for all is an ideal firmly entrenched in our Constitution. Raising the blindfold of justice to take a quick peek at gender, race and culture only to set a lower standard is dragging our people backward, not moving us forward. Finding and embracing the lowest common denominator should be reserved for math class, not used to guide and govern a great nation.

Sonya Sotomayor, SCOTUS, Supreme Court Justice, Obama, Sotomayorism

Written by Jean Barwick
Conservative Women’s Action Network (CWAN.org)
May 21, 2009

The Federal Reserve Act was signed into law in 1913 by Woodrow Wilson to establish a private, centralized banking system for the United States. Charged with the lofty goal of ending recessions, bank panics and depressions which its predecessors, the First (1791) and Second (1816) Banks of the United States, the Free Banking Era (1837-1862) and a national banking system (1862-1913) had not been able to accomplish. A particularly severe economic crisis in 1907 prompted politicians and wealthy bankers to take another run at creating a powerful centralized national banking system and in 1913, the Federal Reserve came into being. In its nearly 100-year history, the Federal Reserve has been no more successful at achieving its goals than its predecessors. The market crash of 1929 and our current economic crisis are the hallmarks of a fatally flawed banking system.

As the name implies, the Federal Reserve appears to most Americans as a government institution. The Fed is actually a privately held 12-bank corporation staffed by its own member banks, Wall Street wonders and a number of international conglomerates. In addition to maximizing profits for its shareholders, 100% of which are private banks, the Fed is charged with guiding monetary policy by overseeing open market operations. The Fed’s Open Market Committee, staffed by the Fed’s own member banks, determines the amount of money the Fed makes available to other banks and sets institutional and consumer credit conditions. The conflict of interest between the Federal Reserve and U.S. monetary policy is staggering.

Over the last year the Fed has assumed unprecedented power. The March 2008 move to fund JPMorgan Chase’s bid to buy Bear Stearns at more than 50 times assets is particularly controversial since the CEO of JPMorgan sits on the board of the New York Federal Reserve and participated in the secret negotiations to buy Bear Stearns.

In September 2008, the Fed made an even more stunning financial move by announcing an $85 million loan to AIG to become an 80% stockholder in the failing insurance company. Widely reported as a government takeover, the acquisition was nothing of the sort. The Fed is a private corporation. What the media didn’t grasp was the unprecedented role the U.S. Treasury played in the deal. The Treasury Department began selling bonds to finance the Fed’s borrowing shortfalls!

Historically the Fed issues Federal Reserve Notes in exchange for U.S. bonds to provide Congress the funding it can’t raise from tax revenues. In the unprecedented financing of the AIG deal, the government received the Fed’s toxic debt in exchange for the government’s risk-free triple-A securities.

Adding insult to injury, the Fed received a little perk from the Stimulus Bill. With taxpayer funding, the Fed is now allowed to pay interest to its privately owned member banks on reserves those banks are required to hold in the central bank. Taxpayers are paying interest to the Federal Reserve bank on its own for profit reserves!

Oversight of the Federal Reserve is long overdue. Its manipulation of open market operations and the bond market to create its own reserves to enrich bank executives and stockholders is nothing short of corruption. Add to that the authority to collect interest from taxpayers on reserves it generates at will is a move that has the potential to collapse the U.S. economy.

We live in a time when our government has co-opted the independent Fed and is effectively nationalizing our banking system and automobile industry. Student loans have already been nationalized. Our energy companies will be next. Are we trying to catch up with Venezuela?

“All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing.”

Reprinted from The Williamson Herald

History of Federal Reserve, Obama, Bernanke, Federal Reserve, US Banking system

Restricting the right to assemble? This is unreal. San Diego County is saying in order to hold a Bible Study group in a home/residence the sponsors must acquire a permit costing thousands of dollars.

Couple Ordered to Stop Holding Bible Study at Home Without Permit

Pastor David Jones and his wife Mary have been told that they cannot invite friends to their San Diego, Calif. home for a Bible study — unless they are willing to pay tens of thousands of dollars to San Diego County.

“On Good Friday we had an employee from San Diego County come to our house, and inform us that the Bible study that we were having was a religious assembly, and in violation of the code in the county.” David Jones told FOX News.

“We told them this is not really a religious assembly — this is just a Bible study with friends. We have a meal, we pray, that was all,” Jones said.

San Diego County CA, Pastor David Jones, Bible Study Group

There is a huge concern that all votes are counted EXCEPT for the military vote! Especially when that vote relates to our deployed troops.

From Brian Faughnan at American Issues Project

Among those who have studied the issue of military voting, there seems to be little disagreement that there is a problem. While there’s no agreement as to precisely many how many members of the military are denied the right to vote, the number is significant. One recent estimate by the Congressional Research Service says that at least one-quarter of the absentee ballots requested by members of the Armed Services are not ultimately counted. And note that this figure does not consider the problem of servicemen and -women who are unable to file an official request for a ballot. Military retirees say that many are unaware that they have a right to request an absentee ballot, or are unable to gain access to a computer or telephone to do so.

The House Committee on Administration recently heard testimony from on the problems faces by our men and women in the military. Retired Gunnery Sergeant Jessie Jane Duff described the problem this way:

Due to language barriers and different technology services available, there isn’t a flow of information from newspapers and television stations like most experience here in the states. The information is limited based upon various armed forces radio, television, and military newspapers. The reality is, information flows slowly to the majority of personnel. Many locations throughout the world don’t have the technology that Americans take for granted in their Blackberry or iPhone.

The Marine Corps is an expeditionary force. Mail to overseas locations must go through a central Fleet Post Office address in San Francisco or New York before it is forwarded through the Military Postal System to the overseas location. When Marine Corps personnel are training, they are usually in austere conditions and train to reflect combat conditions. Everything is geared towards combat readiness and the Marines, along with other military personnel, focus strictly on that purpose. Field operations have limited services and mail is delayed even in non- combat environments.

Our access to voting information was minimal and due to the nature of our work, Internet and computer access was limited. We spent hours, weeks, and even months in field operations to support training. During training cycles, there wasn’t a 9 to 5 day or a 40 hour work week. Deadlines often pass before personnel realize an election is right around the corner. Delays with overseas mail often prevent absentee ballots being received and returned to the states in time to meet the deadlines.

This is so wrong. We always hear from both Democrat and Republican legislators how we HAVE to support the troops yet the number of legislators sponsoring this bill is pitiful!

H.R. 2393:Military Voting Protection Act of 2009
To amend the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act to improve procedures for the collection and delivery of marked absentee ballots of absent overseas uniformed services voters, and for other purposes.

Sponsor
Rep. Kevin McCarthy [R-CA22]

Cosponsors [as of 2009-05-22]
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers [R-WA5]
Rep. Eric Cantor [R-VA7]
Rep. Pete Olson [R-TX22]
Rep. Howard McKeon [R-CA25]
Rep. Robert Latta [R-OH5]
Rep. Tom Cole [R-OK4]
Rep. Henry Brown [R-SC1]
Rep. James Sensenbrenner [R-WI5]
Rep. Todd Tiahrt [R-KS4]
Rep. Tom McClintock [R-CA4]
Rep. Elton Gallegly [R-CA24]
Rep. Roscoe Bartlett [R-MD6]
Rep. Erik Paulsen [R-MN3]
Rep. Ken Calvert [R-CA44]
Rep. Gregg Harper [R-MS3]
Rep. Mary Bono Mack [R-CA45]
Rep. Michele Bachmann [R-MN6]
Rep. William Thornberry [R-TX13]
Rep. Dan Boren [D-OK2]
Rep. Daniel Lungren [R-CA3]
Rep. Donald Young [R-AK]
Rep. Edward Whitfield [R-KY1]
Rep. Trent Franks [R-AZ2]
Rep. Michael Rogers [R-AL3]

S. 1026: Military Voting Protection Act of 2009

Sponsor
Sen. John Cornyn [R-TX]

Cosponsors [as of 2009-05-21]
Sen. James Inhofe [R-OK]
Sen. Mark Begich [D-AK]
Sen. Pat Roberts [R-KS]
Sen. Jon Kyl [R-AZ]
Sen. Kay Hutchison [R-TX]
Sen. David Vitter [R-LA]
Sen. John Ensign [R-NV]
Sen. Charles Grassley [R-IA]
Sen. Claire McCaskill [D-MO]
Sen. Saxby Chambliss [R-GA]
Sen. Richard Burr [R-NC]
Sen. Ron Wyden [D-OR]

Everyone needs to call their Representative and Senators to ask them why they AREN’T co-sponsoring this bill! I see that neither of my Tennessee Republican Senators are co-sponsors nor is my Democrat Representative Lincoln Davis a co-sponsor. There is no excuse for any legislator not jumping on board for this bill. None! Nada! Zilch! Zero!

Put their feet to the fire, every single one of them to co-sponsor this bill. NOW.

House of Representatives and Senate Capitol Switchboard – 202-224-3121

Tennessee Senators:
Sen. Lamar Alexander 202-224-4944
Sen. Bob Corker 202-224-3344

Tennessee Representatives:
Rep. Phil Roe 202-225-6356
Rep. John J. Duncan, Jr. 202-225-5435
Rep. Zach Wamp 202-225-3271
Rep. Lincoln Davis 202-225-6831
Rep. Jim Cooper 202-225-4311
Rep. Bart Gordon 202-225-4231
Rep. Marsha Blackburn 202-225-2811
Rep. John S. Tanner 202-225-4714
Rep. Steve Cohen 202-225-3265

Military Voting Protection Act of 2009, MVP Act, HR 2393, S 1026

Written by Sherry Kelly of CWAN.org

The all knowing, pompous talking heads of the Republican Party have no idea what is going on in the country. They appear on the equally all knowing TV News programs and prognosticate that the Republican Party is losing members because they will not embrace a more moderate philosophy.

They are incensed that Conservatives do not want the Party to rally around moderates like Colin Powell, Tom Ridge and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Powell came into national prominence under Republican Presidents yet he consistently supported Democrats like Kennedy, Carter, Johnson and Obama. The Party is supposed to honor this kind of loyalty? Why would we want to hang our Party’s future on a man who has yet to expound one fundamental, political belief? He only speaks in general platitudes leaving the moderates breathless over his supposed intellect.

California has the lowest credit rating of any state and is deeply in debt, looking for a bail out. Is this the model the Party wants to emulate? Schwarzenegger is not a shining example of Republican values.

We had a Presidential candidate in 2008 who embraced all the issues that appeal to moderates and he was not successful. It is time that the blue blood, country club leaders of today’s Republican Party realize that their time has passed. They seldom win elections but seem content to socialize with the “ beltway elite�.

Only when the Party decides to get back to their basic principles and values will they again be trusted by the electorate and regain power. The moderates are too willing to compromise and go along with the Democrats.

The base of the Party, who has won elections, is poised and ready to rumble. There is a coalition forming and getting stronger daily, waiting for the right time and leadership, to take this country back. It will be done with or without the help of the moderates. Hopefully their concern and love of their country will convince them to join fellow Republicans to defeat the leftist Democrats. If not, it will be more than a Republican defeat; it will be the defeat of America.

Sherry Kelly

May 29, 2009

gop base, gop moderates, colin powell, tom ridge, arnold schwarzenegger, sherry kelly

Did you think the housing decline was over? Glenn Beck doesn’t think so and I think he’s right. The shoe that hasn’t bottomed is the commercial real estate market!

History of Home Values, housing market, Glenn Beck

This is just too humorous to pass up. Joe Biden is the gift that keeps on giving!

Obama, Biden, TOTUS, teleprompter, AF Academy, Colorado Springs, Biden Gaffes

Obama’s energy advisor Secretary of Energy Steven Chu thinks all roofs should be white to save energy! This is a ‘Nobel’ Prize winning physicist and Obama’s go to guy for all things green. Tells you alot about the worth of a Nobel Prize these days.

Obama’s green guru calls for white roofs

He said lightening roofs and roads in urban environments would offset the global warming effects of all the cars in the world for 11 years.

“If you look at all the buildings and if you make the roofs white and if you make the pavement more of a concrete type of colour rather than a black type of colour and if you do that uniformally, that would be the equivalent of… reducing the carbon emissions due to all the cars in the world by 11 years – just taking them off the road for 11 years,” he said.

I guess that all people of color also need to be bleached white to offset global warming effects!

Obama, energy, Secr Steven Chu, Kook Kook a Chu, white roofs, global warming, junk science

There is nothing these Democrats controlling Congress and Obama will not do to kill the capitalist engine and destroy the US economy.  To pay for all their wild spending and socialist mandates they finally have gone where they never dared to go in the past.  A National Sales Tax or Value Added Tax (VAT). 

From Francis Cianfrocca at Redstate

So at some point, you’re stuck. You can’t confiscate all business profits because that will leave you without an economy, and you can’t suck out all the private capital because the high interest rates will leave you without an economy. And higher income and payroll taxes are verboten, because you promised to cut those taxes. (And besides, it’s politically expedient to do so.)

There’s only one answer: a VAT, or value-added tax. Europe and Canada have had one for years, and it generates a gusher of revenue because it’s largely hidden from view. What happens is that every business that adds value to a good or service pays a tax on that value. The tax gets baked into prices at every step, so there’s no big ugly percentage that a consumer has to pay, as with a sales tax.

You start off with a tiny percentage, maybe less than 1 percent, and you expand it steadily as you need revenue. In Europe and the UK, it’s gotten up to the high teens now. This of course is in addition to income and payroll taxes.

Cianfrocca links to a Washington Post story which tells about the

latest move by Democrats and Obama to push this new hobbling and crippling of the economy.
At a White House conference earlier this year on the government’s budget problems, a roomful of tax experts pleaded with Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner to consider a VAT. A recent flurry of books and papers on the subject is attracting genuine, if furtive, interest in Congress. And last month, after wrestling with the White House over the massive deficits projected under Obama’s policies, the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee declared that a VAT should be part of the debate.

“There is a growing awareness of the need for fundamental tax reform,” Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said in an interview. “I think a VAT and a high-end income tax have got to be on the table.”

It’s been a constant barrage from Obama and the Democrats how this deficit is a ‘Bush’ caused situation. The numbers (which don’t lie) tell a different story:

Jim Hoft (from Gateway Pundit) writes a story at American Issues
explaining with indisputable facts how the Bush economy was pretty amazing considering the 911 attacks and fighting 2 wars while having to rebuild a military downsized and defunded through the Clinton years.

This wasn’t a one time event. During the Bush years, despite the 2000 Recession, the attacks on Sept. 11, the stock market scandals, Hurricane Katrina and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Bush Administration was able to reduce the budget deficit from 412 billion dollars in 2004 to 162 billion dollars in 2007, a sixty percent drop. In 2004, the federal budget deficit was 412 billion dollars. In 2005, it dropped to 318 billion dollars. In 2006, the deficit dipped to 248 billion dollars. And, in 2007, it fell below 200 billion to 162 billion dollars. During the Bush years, the average unemployment rate was 5.2 percent, the economy saw the strongest productivity growth in four decades and there was robust GDP growth. These were amazing accomplishments considering the unexpected challenges. You certainly didn’t read much about this in the press.

What changed in 2007? The Democrats took clear and commanding control of the House and Senate!

But, things changed in 2007. Democrats took over Congress, gas prices started to rise, and at the end of the year and into 2008 several financial institutions started to crumble as the housing bubble began to burst. Of course, it should be noted that President Bush publicly called for the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac 17 times in 2008 alone before Congress acted. Democrats, on the other hand, blocked reform numerous times. It was later reported after the 2008 election that Bush had nothing to do with the financial crisis. Hoover Institution visiting fellow Scott S. Powell wrote in Barron’s in February of this year that the present crisis began in the 1970s, during the Carter administration, with passage of the Community Reinvestment Act to stem bank redlining and liberalize lending in order to extend home ownership in lower-income communities. This risk was acknowledged in the Bush administration’s first fiscal-year budget, released in April 2001. Sadly these warnings were ignored by Congress.

As much damage that the high gas prices caused in 2007 has done nothing to stop Democrats from eliminating domestic oil drilling or to develop anything other than additional taxes on energy while attempting to destroy the oil industry in the US, instead relying on unproven and weak alternatives for energy sources. The Cap and Trade bill will do nothing but tax individuals, tax companies while creating a junk trading system called Cap and Trade which inevitably will become the Democrats new Wall Street bubble.

US National Sales Tax, VAT, Value Added Tax, Obama, Democrats, Cap and Trade, Sen Kent Conrad, Senate Budget Committee

Political animals contort their beliefs to pander to anyone and anything. Zach Wamp is the consumate political animal. He supported a 90% income tax bill specifically for AIG employee bonuses. He thought supporting this targeting of specific individuals would make him ‘look’ supportive of the little people. He guessed wrong on that issue considering the backlash of that unconstitutional bill.

Now Zach Wamp is sucking up to Tn Speaker Kent Williams who lied and stabbed in the back his own caucus in support of Jimmy Naifeh and Tn Democrats.

TN, GOP Governor Primary, Zach Wamp