Alternative to Bailout Plan

Update: Our position is any action by Congress and the President on any measure regarding a recovery plan or bailout is solely unconstitutional.

Nothing in the U.S. Constitution guarantees investors, homeowners, wall street bankers and investment firms anything from the taxpayers.

All that's guaranteed is your innate and inherent rights which include the right to fail or succeed, pursue a profession, career, job status, make good or bad purchases, and so forth and so on you get the idea.

Should Congress act on anything over the next days or weeks, we will all know we have lost any last shred of Liberty we once possessed in what the Founders created - an independent nation.

It turns out we're beholding to foreigners for loans since the USA is in a deficit situation to the tune of trillions of dollars nobody will reveal how many trillions.

we're borrowing and borrowing and will be borrowing for this recovery plan or bailout plan.

So anyone who thinks they actually own a piece of real-estate property - you do not. Even if it's paid for and no mortgage or debt on it. think your income earnings are yours, not if the federal government needs all of it to pay off its so-called debt and obligations.

Tell Congress No Recovery Plan No Bailout No You Re-elected or elected to another higher office say President or Vice President if you vote for this. Period.

Net the Truth Online

PA U.S. Rep. John Murtha toll free number

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_Murtha

PA U.S. Sen. Casey toll free number

Washington, D.C. Office:
383 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Phone: (202) 224-6324
Toll Free: (866) 802-2833

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bob_Casey

Lou Dobbs Tonight interviewed Marcy Kaptur and Rep. DeFazio on the failure of the bailout plan in the House of Reps. The pair said the Senate is about to vote on something similar to the House possibly tomorrow.

they said there was a different proposal they support which does not require any government or taxpayers monies.

the interview was short and heated with Dobbs adding fuel to the already blazing fire of citizen outcry...

Kaptur suggested the Senate measure should be filibustered and recommended viewers visit a youtube site Let's play wallstreet bailout

(Searching)

http://www.kaptur.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=287&Itemid=1

Burgess quickly interjected voters and taxpayers should call the Capitol tomorrow...

Transcript clip to follow...

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/2008.09.30.html

Video

Reps Kaptur & DeFazio describe a BETTER PLAN on Lou Dobbs Show

Net the Truth online

Here

http://userinterfacepatterns.blogspot.com/2008/09/key-players-in-bailout-deal.html

Rep Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) on the Bailout Bill Failure

http://cspanjunkie.org/?p=668

Rep Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) on the Bailout Bill Failure

http://tpzoo.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/lets-play-wallstreet-bailout-marcy-kaptur-d-oh/

Meanwhile reposting as the article may not be available in five days

Congresswoman: Criminal Insiders Behind Bailout Bill

Rep. Kaptur: Normal legislative process has been shut down,
high financial crimes committed, Republican Michael Burgess
says “martial law” has been announced


Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Monday, September 29, 2008


Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur boldly slammed the bailout bill
this past weekend as the work of criminal insiders who have
shut down the normal legislative process to commit “high
financial crimes” and defraud the American people, while Rep.
Michael Burgess warns that “martial law” has been declared.


The two Congress members are part of a growing minority of
representatives sounding the alarm about the dictatorial
nature of the bailout bill, which is expected to be up for a
vote in the House today, with most in Congress having not had
the opportunity to even read the legislation.


The bill is expected to reach the Senate on Wednesday as a
raft of outraged politicians cry foul about being strong-armed
and accused of being unpatriotic for opposing the carte-
blanche passage of a piece of legislation that fundamentally
centralizes control of the financial infrastructure of the
country into the hands of the government and the Federal
Reserve.


“We are Constitutionally sworn to protect and defend this
Republic against all enemies foreign and domestic. And my
friends there are enemies,” Kaptur told the House floor.


“The people pushing this deal are the very ones who are
responsible for the implosion on Wall Street. They were
fraudulent then and they are fraudulent now.”


“My message to the American people don’t let Congress seal
this deal. High financial crimes have been committed,” added
the Democrat from Ohio.


“The normal legislative process has been shelved. Only a few
insiders are doing the dealing, sounds like insider trading to
me. These criminals have so much political power than can shut
down the normal legislative process of the highest law making
body of this land,” Kaptur concluded.


Elsewhere, Rep. Michael Burgess (R-TX) said that the only
information he had received about the bailout was what talking
points to use on the American people and that he had been
thrown out of meetings for not blindly supporting the bill.


Ominously, Burgess also comments, “Mr. Speaker I understand we
are under Martial Law as declared by the speaker last night.”


Absent any proper hearings concerning the legislation, Burgess
called for the legislation to at least be posted on the
Internet for 24 hours so that the American people could “see
what we have done in the dark of night.”


Watch the comments of Burgess followed by Kaptur.


http://www.prisonplanet.com/congresswoman-criminal-insiders-
behind-bailout-bill.html

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy/browse_thread/thread/04f643ae8e5456ba

Related

Related

Ron Paul: You Can Not Place Value Into Assets That Are Worthless!
Posted on September 27, 2008 by dandelionsalad

http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/09/27/ron-paul-you-can-not-place-value-into-assets-that-are-worthless/

Rumors of martial law
0 Add a Comment Monday, September 29th, 2008
by leftystrat


http://www.lockergnome.com/leftystrat/2008/09/29/rumors-of-martial-law/

Rep Burgess: We Are Under Martial Law! As Declared By The Speaker Last Night! (updated)
Posted on September 28, 2008 by dandelionsalad

http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/09/28/rep-burgess-we-are-under-martial-law-as-declared-by-the-speaker-last-night/

Palin: Voter Hollerin Out What about Pakistan = Gotcha Journalism

Update: At least Palin didn't cause a gaffe in response to Couric - again - during an on location interview and say "... more of the Mc Same..." wouldn't that have been a YouTube winner.

clip

Palin doesn't specify where she gets her news
Oct 1, 11:20 AM (ET)

...Although Palin told Couric on Monday that she didn't have a "debate coach," the campaign said she is getting advice from McCain's top campaign strategist, Steve Schmidt, and campaign advisers Tucker Eskew, Nicolle Wallace and Mark Wallace.

"I have quite a few people who are giving us information about the record of Obama and Biden, and at the end of the day, though, it is - it's so clear, again, what those choices are. Either new ideas, new energy and reform of Washington, D.C., or more of the same," Palin said.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081001/D93HPC3G0.html

Who can believe Sarah Palin's latest accusation in response to Katie Couric's question about her remarks to a voter on what she'd do about Pakistan?

John McCain sitting right next to her on the set.

Gotcha journalism? A voter, a constituent, asks a pertinent question, Palin gives an answer that differs from John McCain's position, and that's "Gotcha Journalism?"

Right...

Net the Truth Online

Exclusive: McCain, Palin Answer Critics
Katie Couric Asks Palin If She Contradicted McCain On Pakistan And Her Response To GOP Criticism
COLUMBUS, Ohio, Sept. 29, 2008

...John McCain: Of course not. But, look, I understand this day and age of "gotcha" journalism. Is that a pizza place? In a conversation with someone who you didn't hear … the question very well, you don't know the context of the conversation, grab a phrase. Gov. Palin and I agree that you don't announce that you're going to attack another country …

Couric: Are you sorry you said it?

McCain: … and the fact …

Couric: Governor?

McCain: Wait a minute. Before you say, "is she sorry she said it," this was a "gotcha" sound bite that, look …

Couric: It wasn't a "gotcha." She was talking to a voter.

McCain: No, she was in a conversation with a group of people and talking back and forth. And … I'll let Gov. Palin speak for herself.

Palin: Well, it … in fact, you're absolutely right on. In the context, this was a voter, a constituent, hollering out a question from across an area asking, "What are you gonna do about Pakistan? You better have an answer to Pakistan." I said we're gonna do what we have to do to protect the United States of America.

Couric: But you were pretty specific about what you wanted to do, cross-border …

Palin: Well, as Sen. McCain is suggesting here, also, never would our administration get out there and show our cards to terrorists, in this case, to enemies and let them know what the game plan was, not when that could ultimately adversely affect a plan to keep America secure.

Couric: What did you learn from that experience?

Palin: That this is all about "gotcha" journalism. A lot of it is. But that's okay, too...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/29/eveningnews/main4487826.shtml

Concerns about Palin's readiness as test looms
Ahead of Thursday debate, McCain running mate's popularity begins to slip
By Adam Nagourney
updated 3:27 a.m. ET, Tues., Sept. 30, 2008

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26952469/

Potential Fraud in Duplicate Voter Registrations?

It's a situation ripe for fraud and abuse.

Net the Truth Online

Warning for College Student Voters
Last week, Virginia’s Montgomery County, home to Virginia Tech, issued a press release regarding proper protocol for college students registering to vote. In interviews with Inside Higher Ed Tuesday, it was described by turns as “unsubstantiated,” “chilling,” and (more generously) as not “incredibly encouraging or friendly.”

It reads, in part: “The Code of Virginia states that a student must declare a legal residence in order to register. A legal residence can be either a student’s permanent address from home or their current college residence. By making Montgomery County your permanent residence, you have declared your independence from your parents and can no longer be claimed as a dependent on their income tax filings — check with your tax professional. If you have a scholarship attached to your former residence, you could lose this funding. And, if you change your registration to Montgomery County, Virginia Code requires you to change your driver’s license and car registration to your present address within 30 days.”

The county registrar of elections said Tuesday that the memo was intended to counteract the absence of cautionary information given to students signed up through the ubiquitous get-out-the-vote registration drives.


http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/09/03/voting

Zuckerman: Bailout for Same People Who Caused Crisis by Greed

Crisis caused by the greedy Wall Streeters, says Mort Zuckerman on Morning Joe. And we, the taxpayers, are going to be bailing out the same people who caused the financial crisis by their own greed.

"Astonishing," says Zuckerman.

Zuckerman basically called the taxpayers sitting ducks.

Get the MSNBC transcript.

See our earlier post.

MSNBC continues talking to a round of spokespersons, legislators, etc.

Lawmaker says you can't ask the taxpayers to pay for the bailout and then simultaneously continue the spending. Repeal Community Reinvestment Act, that's in part what got us into this crisis...

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R) Financial Services Committee

Net the Truth Online

No Difference Between Candidates Fincancial Crisis

The Debate that wasn't all it was billed.

Video: First Presidential Debate - Oxford, MS

http://www.clipsandcomment.com/2008/09/27/video-first-presidential-debate-oxford-ms/

The First Presidential DebateSeptember 26, 2008 Following is a transcript of the first presidential debate between Senators John McCain and Barack Obama in Oxford, Miss., as recorded by CQ Transcriptions

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/transcripts/first-presidential-debate.html

Lehrer's first lead question

Let me begin with something General Eisenhower said in his 1952 presidential campaign. Quote, "We must achieve both security and solvency. In fact, the foundation of military strength is economic strength," end quote.

With that in mind, the first lead question.

Gentlemen, at this very moment tonight, where do you stand on the financial recovery plan?

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/transcripts/first-presidential-debate.html

Lehrer's followup question point blank using terminology "recovery plan"...

LEHRER: All right, let's go back to my question. How do you all stand on the recovery plan? And talk to each other about it. We've got five minutes. We can negotiate a deal right here.

But, I mean, are you -- do you favor this plan, Senator Obama, and you, Senator McCain? Do you -- are you in favor of this plan?

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/transcripts/first-presidential-debate.html

Both presidential candidates were asked about the bailout plan first question as we can see.

Both gave a general answer which showed one commonality. Wall Street will be bailed out in some way.

After their initial remarks wherein nothing of substance was said, Moderator Jim Lehrer pressed further asking what each would do if President after the plan - whatever plan - is enacted - to deal with and hopefully settle the financial crisis. Again, neither were specific, but it was clear each was on board with some sort of a bailout plan.

Lehrer pressed even further wording his question again to get a yes or no answer, he even suggested the pair give a yes or no answer on the plan...

Barack Obama noted something had to be done, quickly.

reading into that, his answer was OK on the substance not so OK until there are details.

John McCain when pressed if he supported the plan said, "Sure."

While listening to the remainder of the two candidates' remarks, we stand by our original estimation - both are the same same coin. Merely different sides.

One will look you straight in the face all night and say little, the other won't look you straight in the face all night and say little - about the most horrific potential economically since the Great Depression.

Go figure.

We don't have to. The reason both said nothing about the bailout how it will work, or not, how it will affect their whichever Presidency - is their Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) pals, and their conservative or liberal guru think tanks, have not yet figured out how to sell this sight unseen (pass it quickly, quickly) boondoggle and windfalls to who - you - the public.

The suckers who are going to have to pay for the bailout ultimately.

The pair didn't address the financial crisis because nobody could tell them beforehand in their practice sessions why Warren Buffet will be able to base a so-called loan of his personal wealth to one of the better financial institutions on an immediate pay back of potentially some 10 percent of new "assets" or profit.

Meanwhile the U.S. public's loan that's really a tax-free gift will have no chance in hell of ever being paid back!

Mort Zuckerman basically said the same thing on Morning Joe. Buffet is helping out on the more stable while the taxpayers are getting stuck on the riskier "mortgages."

(Uh try stocks... dipping dipping gone...)

... manifest bailout of the same people who caused this problem... says Zuckerman.

The administration has warned that, unless Congress acts quickly, the economy could plunge into a depression.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13809.html

Again. Go figure if you'all want. But the answer is the power elite behind both candidates (CFR, et al) could not provide a definitive reason why the taxpayers have to pay out nearly a trillion dollars - and with the interest far more than that to the same gang as Zuckerman unhestitatingly reveals (which was surprising as all get out since reportedly he holds membership in the CFR) WHO CAUSED THE CRISIS with their his words GREED!

Zuckerman basically called the taxpayers sitting duck$$$$.

See how it works? Congress will borrow the money from foreign investors as those are the only ones with any money like Japan and China and maybe even Russia with their Caspian Sea oil potential to bail out the same greedy people who got us in to this MESS.

Net the truth Online

More

http://www.politico.com/

Bailout by Political Parties Should Be Thwarted with Write In Names

Antics by both majority political parties on the bailout proves both are mints of the same coin, just different sides.

As the coin flips in the air right before the eyes of a mesmerized public, the illusionary cover used by both since the creation of the Federal Reserve some 85 years ago remains in place undisturbed.

The U.S. taxpayers fall for the act time and time again.

think the Republican conservative base in Congress has stopped the act with questions about the $700 billion. Nope. They delayed for a short time to benefit John McCain, but they have always been supportive of some sort of "bailout" of whoever, apparently somehow someway, Wall Street.

Both parties are accepting of using monies the taxpayers can't supply but will have to eventually pay after the monies are "borrowed." From whom will we be borrowing? Foreign countries. Who will get the interest on the borrowing? Nobody knows for sure.

the system is the downfall of a United States of America once envisioned by our founding fathers and framers of the United States Constitution so long ago as pretty much debt free - pay as you go.

If any part of a bailout goes through, no matter the provisions, despite the so-called safeguards, we citizens of the United States will have been the fools a Congress and a President, current or future, know we are.

And they will all be at the helm ready to fool us again and again and again.

It's time for the fools of the USA to turn into ghouls by Monday and scare these legislators into doing our will, or we will rise up on Election Day and we will vote, but we will write in names, or leave blanks, causing the entirety of the nation's election process to come at a standstill.

Not one vote should be received by any candidate in the House of Representatives, in the Senate up for reelection and not one vote to Senator John McCain or Senator Barack Obama should a bailout plan go through.

well there will be one or two their own and their spouses and voting-aged family.

But what if the day after the election all they all got was a few hundred votes if that. something wrong with the voting machines? Paper ballots eaten up by optical scanners?

Meanwhile did everybody catch neither candidate fully answered the opening question in the great debate put to them by Jim Lehrer about the fincancial crisis and a plan - what do they support?

Pretty much they said the same thing... protect the taxpayers...

same coin... they're laughing the minute they get back on the "plane."

Net the Truth Online

Debate Highlights Warning Huffington Post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/first-obama-mccain-presid_n_129569.html

Ron Paul on the Bailout Proposal
By admin • September 24, 2008

http://www.ronpaul.com/2008-09-24/ron-paul-on-the-bailout-proposal/

Prayer Opening Public Meeting Constitutional Challenge Awaits

should the local board approve a plan to reinstate formal opening prayers at the beginning of commissioners meetings, shouldn't there be a legal challenge awaiting the action?

What would happen if a non-believer objects to any prayer at the beginning of the meeting, and voices that concern? They'd likely be evicted and charged with public disturbance.

It is testing the constitutional limits currently by having a "silent" prayer prior to the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America.

In other words, officials are endorsing religion and a particular religious practice stepping on the right of individuals to choose no religion or no religious practice.

The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion. It doesn't guarantee the access to use a religious practice - prayers - at publicly held meetings.

Net the Truth Online

County commissioners reconsider opening prayer
By Mary Pickels
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, September 26, 2008

Fayette County commissioners might reinstate the practice of holding an opening prayer before public meetings instead of the silent prayer.

The Rev. Ewing Marietta, pastor of Liberty Baptist Church in Uniontown, said he would be willing to coordinate the speakers and provide guidelines, including length of prayer and tailoring of words specifically to the board members and their governing of the county.

He said the opportunity to pray at the meetings would be open to any clergy.

Previously, a rotating roster of clergy offered prayers to open the meetings, Commissioner Vincent Vicites said.

"It worked well," he said.

The practice changed over time as the composition of the board changed, he said.

"I felt very strongly about opening prayer," Vicites said. "I thought that was a good way to start our meetings."

Commissioner Vincent Zapotosky said he had no problem discussing a proposal to develop a plan for review...

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/news/fayette/s_590233.html

Early Voting Allowed Ohio Without Reason Declaration

this situation is deserving of an enormous amount of scrutiny.

Democratic Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner has instructed local elections boards to have policies in place to allow first-time voters to both register and vote on the same day from the start of absentee voting Sept. 30 to the voter registration deadline on Oct. 6.

The calendar glitch - approved by a Republican Legislature, signed into law by former GOP Gov. Bob Taft and used since the midterm elections in 2006 - will allow tens of thousands of unregistered voters a chance to register and cast a ballot on the same day.

Overlaps have been around for more than 20 years, and some absentee voters have cast ballots during such windows in previous elections. But this is the first presidential general election in which Ohioans can vote absentee without having to provide a reason, such as living out-of-state.

Ohio Republican Party Chairman Bob Bennett has said that Brunner improperly interpreted state law and accused Democrats of trying to hijack the election.

Republicans say Ohio law requires voters to be registered for 30 days before they can be given a ballot, and that allowing same-day registration and voting is illegal. They say same-day voting creates an opportunity for voting fraud...

http://www.examiner.com/a-1596834~Ohio_GOP__Dems_spar_over_early_voting_window.html

On the one hand, if the early voter (who registers at the time of voting) uses a paper ballot and not an electronic voting machine to submit a voted ballot, there is at least a piece of paper as a record documenting the ballot.

The elector's name can also go through a thorough review by election officials to determine eligibility for voting. In the event the voter's registration is challenged, election officials still have time to determine eligibility status.

However, what happens if a same day early voter in Ohio votes during the early week, then treks on over to Pennsylvania in a little known county wherein the voter registration rolls are bloated with names that should have been removed long ago. And that voter votes in that PA county as well.

Think such can't happen? It has. In fact, in Fayette County during the recent Primary Election, one woman reportedly voted in Greene or Washington county and then came on over to Fayette and was permitted to vote by provisional ballot. At least, the provisional ballot situation was able to be reviewed and the actual ballot was never actually cast because the woman's name was disqualified.

But what if the woman voted in Greene or Washington by Absentee and then also voted in Ohio using the same day early voting process?

Would she ever be caught? Very unlikely.

Not only could a situation like that occur.

The early voting same day registration process if a paper ballot is what will be used will likely include use of a central optical scan unit which election officials employ to cast the ballot - as is.

We all know that voters often do not thoroughly read directions on how to cast a ballot or fill out a paper ballot. documented incidents of marking the ballot and creating a double vote that is an over-vote - voting for more selections than permitted for an office.

By law, those over-voted ballots are supposed to be rejected, or voided.

But enter election officials who may have the power to determine whether or not such over-votes are acceptable potentially looking like a 'stray' mark, maybe even one erroneously caused by a crease in the paper ballot!

For this reason alone, the Ohio early voting with same day voter registration is ripe for fraud and should be more than carefully watched if permitted to continue.

What will happen in a close presidential election if absentee ballots or same day early voting ballots actually determine the outcome of this historic election?

Chaos. No matter which majority party wins.

Net the Truth Online

September 12, 2008 19:39 Age: 12 days
Ohio Republicans Sue Over Voting Rules - Wall Street Journal
BY: AMY MERRICK The Ohio Republican Party spearheaded a lawsuit Friday over an initiative from the office of Democratic Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner that would allow some early voters to register and vote on the same day.

The suit once again ramps up the battle over voting procedures in a critical swing state with 20 electoral votes. But the parties' roles are reversed from 2004: This time, a Democrat is setting the rules, and the state Republican Party is charging that the rules favor Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate.

Conflicts over voter registration and voting procedures are heating up across the U.S. as the Nov. 4 election approaches. In Wisconsin, the Republican attorney general sued a state board this week over a process of comparing voter names with driver's-license records. In Michigan, Republicans announced a plan to challenge voters based on foreclosure lists. The Florida Department of State made a last-minute announcement this week that it will begin enforcing a controversial law, which requires matching an identifying number on voter-registration forms with government databases that critics say are prone to mistakes.

In Ohio, a recently enacted state law allows residents, for the first time in a general presidential election, to vote early by absentee ballot without providing a justification. Advocates for the homeless and other groups say they will direct new voters to take advantage of the overlap between early voting, which begins Sept. 30, and voter registration, which ends Oct. 6. During that window, citizens can register and vote simultaneously. The outreach efforts are expected to benefit Democrats.

http://projectvote.org/index.php?id=683&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=2543&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=682&cHash=d84b63a15c

Politics
Voter Registrations Could Face Legal Challenges
by Pam Fessler

Listen Now add to playlist

Morning Edition, September 12, 2008 · Political groups are wrangling over voter registrations and access to the polls. In Ohio, Democrats and Republicans are fighting over interpretation of a state law, which Democrats say allows voters to register and immediately cast an absentee ballot. Republicans say that opens the door to fraud.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94545601

Ohio GOP Sues Brunner Over Implementing Same-Day Registration and Voting
Submitted by Jeff on Fri, 09/12/
...The leading election law expert in Ohio, Prof. Dan Tokaji of the Mortiz College of Law at the Ohio State University, has called the ORP's objection to the overlap "blatant voter suppression," and calls Brunner's interpretation "exactly what the law says and what it allows."

Today's lawsuit is a clear sign that the GOP is gearing up a campaign of voter suppression and intimidation across the battleground states, further evidenced by news that the GOP in Michigan plan to challenge the voting rights of homeowners who are enduring foreclosure proceedings and that a GOP official in Ohio refuses to rule out similar challenges here.

http://www.ohiodailyblog.com/content/ohio-gop-sues-brunner-over-implementing-same-day-registration-and-voting

Small check-box, big dust-up in


OH Posted: Friday, September 12, 2008 6:13 PM by Carrie Dann
Filed Under: States, 2008

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/12/1389424.aspx

Poverty Status Remains Due to Politics says Commissioner

Poverty question answered
09/16/2008
Updated 09/16/2008 12:44:46 AM EDT
Email to a friendPost a CommentPrinter-friendly
Last week an editorial was written about a question asked at a meet the candidate forum. The question was, "Why are Fayette and Greene counties still the second- and third-poorest in Pennsylvania?"

While I cannot comment on Greene County, as for Fayette County there are three reasons, those being: politics, bureaucrats and self-serving interests.

Angela M. Zimmerlink Fayette County commissioner

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20122114&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Responses at Herald-Standard

Reader Comments

Added: Tuesday September 23, 2008 at 07:50 AM EST
Primary Reason Poorest
Our local educational system is the primary reason Fayette and Greene counties are ranked the highest in the poorest economic category. Both counties lack a 21st century approach to education in our numerous public schools and both produce a discouraging rising secondary school drop-out rate. In this day and age with so many resources available statistics like these are simply inexcusable.

While politically, nepotism remains sacrosanct in hiring practices, a worse aspect of our school system which enables the stagnation is called "tenure," or more starkly, "unions."

Those remain "political" throwbacks and will continue despite any so-called legislative "fix" to "consolidate" local school districts.

It's time for our state legislators to act, not with Rep. Tim Mahoney's so-called consolidation - but not really - plan, but with a total break-up of the public school monopoly.

They should all each and every one be privatized and permit the private sector to actually produce an educated group of students who can rise above any economically distressed conditions in the counties.

Conditions accepted, maintained, and managed as is by the very people voters elect to public office.

The real and obvious distressed status is also a mentality the politically connected use to keep the counties down, and their own political power on the rise.

It doesn't seem to matter who is in office, the grants and special tax-abatement treatment in programs like LERTA and KOZs continues for some but not for all.

the only way to eliminate the mentality is for the voters in the state election system to demand independent political party participation in the political Primary election process.

Alongside the names of candidates from the PA Democrat and Republican parties should be names of candidates in all of the following parties, at every level of office:

America First Party of Pennsylvania
Communist Party of Pennsylvania
Constitution Party of Pennsylvania
Green Party of Pennsylvania
Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania
Reform Party of Pennsylvania
Social Democratic Party of Pennsylvania
Socialist Party of Pennsylvania

There will be very little change - if any - unless and until a Third-Party candidate has equal access to the same politically charged election system as the two-majority parties in Pennsylvania. (And the nation, by the way)

As for the Housing Authority and its abolishment, and likewise for tax-free zones, if Commissioner Zimmerlink would use her inherent power as a commissioner and alone make the motions at a commissioners' meeting, and the motions failed for lack of a second, a public effort of support for her efforts would ensue. Over the next 3 years, with Commissioner Zimmerlink making the motions at every single meeting, and with the continued publicity, a growing grassroots effort to rid the county of the unconstitutional Housing Authority and the unconstitutional KOZs would rise to a level that could not be ignored.

Either both would be gone from our corner of PA, or there would be newcomers elected to the board of county commissioners.

Hold Them All Accountable

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20122114&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Added: Monday September 22, 2008 at 08:59 AM EST
Social Programs will remain in Fayette Co and elsewhere
Both Jo Smith and Mr. Lutes have made some valid points with respect to the social programs in Fayette County. I do respectfully disagree when they look upon me as the person responsible for the social programs and/or public housing. If one looks at my voting record when I was a mbr of the 5 person FCHA board one would see often times the votes were 4-1 and often times I made a Motion realizing that I would not garner a 2nd let alone two votes. I believe the point was missed by the below writers. Low income housing is needed in Fayette Co and I would prefer that it be derived from a private company and not a taxpayer account, however, throughout the US there are Housing Authorities and one cannot simply nor should one simply make a Motion to abolish without a plan or support from others who would be willing to help make the transition. Knowing that I did in my votes and Motions work towards not expanding the FCHA but at times it was not supported by fellow board mbrs and it was not because I did not get along with them it was because the commissioners (past and present) appointed board mbrs to the FCHA who believed in the mission of maintaining and providing for public housing in Fayette County. I am proud of my efforts and my accomplishments for the time I volunteered my time as a board member because I realized what I could not accomplish while making positive changes in the system. Thanks for your comments.

Commissioner Zimmerlink, Uniontown PA

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20122114&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Added: Sunday September 21, 2008 at 09:50 AM EST
Stupid and excuses
Ok first Mr. Lutes I take great offense when you say I am stupid. Unless I read your comments wrong you called people in Fayette County Stupid. I dont think you really meant that did you? Hard working people are not kept on a chain. I personally have no chain upon me. I work very hard make good money and owe no one anything. I understand your frustrations and the social issues that plight this county but your generalizatons are way off base.

Fayette county is not the problem here. Mrs. Zimmerlink the Social programs that plight Fayette County should be abolished. You Alway blame someone else for what you can not do or do not want to do. Sean Cavanaugh didnt have a vote on the FCHA and he busted the cooruptiion. Sean changed this Couny for the Good and He never had anyone carrying him or backing him. Did he always do it right probably not but he got some things done. Look at the Fayette Business Park he pushed that idea when All the big money people were supprting FAy Penn and countering the Idea. Now I am sure you going to say that You do not have the votes. YOUR first term you had Two Republicans and you could not get along with Hardy or at least it seemed that way to us the general public. Now you say yu cant get along. Well Sean, Vince and Ron Nehls (god rest his soul) didnt always get along but SEAN got things done. He did not always have a second vote but he showed people the path and he pushed.

It is easy to complain and point out problems Commissioner it is harder to get them done.

As for your many invitations to those who challange you stop trying to deflect your job duties. You Tell me "I invite you to come in" and I tll you I dont want to. You say " i will meet with you " and I say if I wanted to be elected to county Government I would run againnst you and beat you. Then you Tell Mr. Lutes (who I do not think I ever met and do not agree with on any issue) to run and become elected because you could use the help. Maybe he doesnt want to. It is our Constitutional Right to point out what we think your doing wrong. If we meet I would like to discuss the Constituion with you because obviously you have no idea what rights Mr. Lutes and other Fayette County Rsidents have under this document.

Jo Smith, Dunbar PA

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20122114&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Added: Friday September 19, 2008 at 07:30 PM EST
Why Fayette County is poor
Years of free traders, unfettered capitalism, and conservative financial ideology at the state and federal level, that's why. Factor in the purposeful strangulation of public education by these same charlatans and you get poor, uneducated people in every state.

Marcy Roberts, Masontown, Pa

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20122114&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Added: Thursday September 18, 2008 at 12:52 PM EST
Zimmerlink Comment Shows Complicity
Angela Zimmerlink implies that she did not make the motions to abolish the FCHA because the motions would not have received a second and would have failed.
So what? So what if the motions fail? At least if the motions are made you could say you did what you could to rid the county of this illegal, unconstitutional agency.
Doing anything less is simply an unacceptable cop-out.
As for running for office, I did that twice and learned that people like most those that fool them best.
In addition, I have volunteered to sit on boards in the past and would welcome your nominating me to sit on a board at any time.

Brian K. Lutes, North Union Twp., Fayette Co., PA

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20122114&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Added: Thursday September 18, 2008 at 06:40 AM EST
Zimmerlink calls for people to step forward
Mr. Lutes writes that Zimmerlink is complacent and helped to keep Fayette Co impoverished referencing that she did nothing to abolish the Fayette Co Housing Authority. In 1998 I volunteered my time to serve on the FCHA board for a 5yr term and was then reappointed for another 5 yr term. Anyone remotely interested in Fayette Co surely knows the actions I took as a board member. The inaction Mr. Lutes references is me not making a Motion to disband the FCHA. How do you think that vote would have gone Unanimous or 4-1? As a commissioner, if a Motion was made to rid the county of the HA how do you think that Motion would go? Which Vince do you think would vote in the affirmative? During my tenure as a FCHA board mbr I was effective with results. I also chose to make Motions that not only were in the best interest of those involved but also Motions that could possibly garner at least ONE or more votes of support. Perhaps one of the answers to this complacency Mr. Lutes talks of would be for him and like-minded residents to offer to serve on Boards and or run for office. I could use the help

Angela Zimmerlink, Uniontown PA

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20122114&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Added: Tuesday September 16, 2008 at 11:42 AM EST
Zimmerlink Correct, But Also Complicit
Commissioner Zimmerlink is 100orrect, but is herself complicit in scenario that keeps Fayette poor.
While it is possible that Zimmerlink does not fully understand how her own actions & inactions perpetuates the vicious cycle of intentional poverty, I doubt that is the case.
What we have in Fayette is the perfect package of apathy bundled with fear and laziness in a population that has been groomed to be docile sheep for more than 50 years and any public official that does not do everything they can to expose this is complicit in the scam as Zimmerlink is.
Those that run Fayette do not want citizens to be independent and self-supporting on a large scale because if poverty truly goes away they would not be able to receive the millions upon millions of dollars they use to run the social programs that are justified by the poverty conditions.
The social programs that are justified by the poveety conditions employ hundreds, if not thousands, of friends & family of the political powers in Fayette. Those same friends & family then work very hard to convince the "customers" of the social programs that the programs are needed and that anyone that comes along and talks about abolishing them is Satan personified and the politicians that are "giving" them the program are the Apostles.
Unfortunately, far too many Fayettnamese are completely comfortable with this and obviously too stupid to realize they are being kept on a chain with an acceptably sized water bowl within sight.
Zimmerlink contributes to this by not making motions to abolish these programs, such as the Fayette County Housing Authority, that she knows full well should not exist.
However, I must give her credit for picking up on a theme I presented years ago to abolish the Fayette County Zoning operation.
Fayette is poor by design and will continue to be unless and until the sheep lft their heads out of the trough and look around to see the clippers coming.

Brian K. Lutes, North Union Twp., Fayette Co., PA

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20122114&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Related

Countywide zoning makes great sense
Guest commentaryBy Ray Polaski
09/19/2008
Updated 09/19/2008 12:55:45 AM EDT

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20128210&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Reader Comments

Added: Thursday September 25, 2008 at 06:22 PM EST
Best Government is Less Government
Ignoring the lead sentence provided by Commissioner Zimmerlink is prudent. When one is on the right side of not only desiring limited government, but in a position to deliver limited government, there isn't really any need to be prudent to protect the "government" entity that has become intrusive and power grabbing.

If the "zoning" can be handled on the truly local level, at the municipality, then the "planning" and the "community development" likewise can be handled at the local municpality level.

The idea is for government to be as local as possible because that is the level of government that is simply closest to the people. And that level has the better chance of not only being more representative of the people, but being more limited and more accountable.

As far as addressing the historic assets of the county, when did this become another role or duty for county government?

At any rate, should a motion be presented to abolish the Department of Planning, Zoning, and Community Development, the support will be quickly forthcoming from these quarters in the event the motion dies for lack of a second.

Of course, should Commissioner Zimmerlink make a motion to eliminate county zoning, that would be more than welcome, as well. Obviously, she's already got some public support for that not only here but on local radio talk show programming.

Hold Them All Accountable

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20128210&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Added: Thursday September 25, 2008 at 09:48 AM EST
Zimmerlink Given Bad Advice?
Commissioner Zimmerlink says that it was told to her that the Commissioners did not have the authority to abolish the FCHA.
This is technically correct as according to the Municipal Authorities Act states that only the "Authority" itself can end it's existance. This is why I have said for years that Zimmerlink, in her role as a member of the FCHA Board, should make the motion to abolish the authority, in essence to self terminate.
However, the same Municipal Authorities Act also states that the political body that created the authority, in this case the Fayette Co. Commissioners, can take over the authority's operations, which would entail the FCHA Board of Directors being eliminated, and then the Commissioners could simply end the operations and auction of the authority's assets such as buildings, vehicles, and anything else.
For anyone to contend that the people that live in the authority's communities would be put out on the street is ludicrous. The tenants, recipients actually, would simply pay rent to the new owners of the properties and they would still qualify for assistance from the myriad of social welfare programs ruining Fayette.
By eliminating the FCHA and auctioning off it's assets we could return some of the taxpayers investmentsin this sham operation and put the properties on the tax rolls.
Brian K. Lutes, North Union Twp., Fayette Co., PA

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20128210&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Added: Wednesday September 24, 2008 at 11:07 AM EST
Transition period needed for local zoning
Any suggestion for me as an elected official to make a Motion simply to abolish the county zoning dept is done so without understanding county government. First, the county office is Planning Zoning & Community Development. I propose taking county government out zoning issues and setting the stage for the local municipalities to decide if they wish to have local zoning and if so for a smooth transition. To do anything less would not be prudent or a sound decision as an elected official. The writers of these Postings are aware that I as a Commissioner have made Motions knowing I would not garner a 2nd but did so anyway. With the support of another Commissioner, we would reorganzie the current office because by County Code and otherwise there are still responsibilities that would fall under this county office. I would think that Hold Them Accountable writer D I believe is aware of this or at least given the background should be aware. To respond to the puzzlement as to why I pursued the Historic section I did so because I do not know what the outcome of my zoning elimination initiative will be and if county zoning remains than at least historic assets are addressed in the zoning ordinance. As far as public support,I havent seen or heard any yet. I never indicated in any way that I would not make a motion to eliminate countywide zoning in fact I did the opposite stating my position, asking for support and working on a suggestion course of action. I welcome the input of D, Mr. Lutes and any other person having the interest to contact me at my office.

The confusion perhaps on me stating I would not make a motion when I knew I would not garner a 2nd was with respect to the FCHA abolishment AND I also stated that I would never simply make a motion for the sake of it as it was told to me that we did not have the authority to abolish and even if that issue could be argued it would be irresponsible to simply abolish an authority without any plan of action for those living in public housing and under Section 8 programs.

Again, I welcome a phone call. Thanks
Commissioner Angela Zimmerlink, Uniontown PA

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20128210&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Added: Tuesday September 23, 2008 at 08:34 AM EST
Make Motion to Abolish County Zoning Dept.
At the next and upcoming September county commissioners' meeting this Thursday, Commissioner Zimmerlink should make a motion to eliminate the Fayette county planning and zoning department and the related though independent UCC "code" enforcement arm of county government.

Should the motions not receive a second and/or not pass, then she'd have the publicity necessary to mount a local grassroots effort of support for her causes.

Anything less is simply political grandstanding, the like of what we've experienced in the past administrations with many others before her.

what's been puzzling is her support for including zoning protection for historical properties in the updated county code. If she were truly opposed to county zoning on principle, she would have drawn a line in the sand prior to the last election when groups and organizations pushed for such an inclusionary measure in the County Code. She not only complied, she took on the cause and received support from those quarters.

Failing to gain a second vote is no reason to continue to talk the talk but not walk the walk, so to speak. Despite the inaction of her fellow commissioners, Zimmerlink has 3 more years to make the motion/s at every single board of commissioners' meeting.

Hold Them All Accountable

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20128210&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Added: Monday September 22, 2008 at 09:19 AM EST
Decision to have Zoning should be made on local level
Mr. Lutes is correct on 4 issues. (1) No municipality/county is Required to have a zoning program (2) the 10 municipalities in Fayette that have separate zoning apart from the County are indeed paying twice in that those residents pay for county zoning through county taxes yet have township zoning (3) Washington/Westmoreland (and other counties) do Not operate countywide zoning (yet those counties are not on the bottom of the economic development list) (4) political pressures keep zoning on the county level (and it doesnt stop there certain politicians quietly become involved in the Planning Commission, Zoning Hearing Board, and UCC.

Ray Polaski states "if it's not broken, dont fix it" well it is broke and has been broken but commissioners lend a deaf eye and blind eye to this broken system. Within these boards and departments the left hand often does not know nor care what the right hand is doing so to say we have experts is totally wrong.

As far as developers wanting the offices to be inclusive and that they favor this that too is incorrect as evidenced by the many complaints received in the commissioners office.

I initiated and Moved to eliminate county administration of zoning not only because I believed I had the support of at least another commissioner which then meant the next step could be taken and a plan of action could be pursued. My disappointment is that fellow Commissioner Zapotosky has somewhat changed his position that he stated at the State Music Theatre Candidate Night because now he has stated that he wants the county to maintain some role in the process.

Zoning should be completed eliminated on the county administration side and the 32 municipalities can decide just as others do in other counties whether or not they want zoning and whether or not they wish to join together for combined services.

Public support is needed on this issue.

Commissioner Zimmerlink, Uniontown PA

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20128210&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

Added: Saturday September 20, 2008 at 11:30 AM EST
Polaski Just Doesn't Get It!
Mr. Polaski says that the municipalities can't afford to run their own zoning programs so the county should continue doing it.
He shows his ignorance of the situation, but that is not surprising seein that he made his living from another agency that should not exist, the Fayette Co. Redevelopment Authority.
Polaski should know that no municipalaity, including counties, is required to operate a zoning program by state law.
Quite simply this means if a particular municipality can't afford to operate a zoning program they won't have a zoning program. It's just that simple.
As it stands now, the municipalities that do operate their own zoning programs are paying twice for the service as a portion of their county taxes goes to the operation of the county zoning office that they receive no service from.
In addition, zoning is a form of fascism and should not exist.
Furthermore, it is not needed in Fayette and the program was not implemented as a result of citizen demand. The political powers simply decided to implement zoning so they could exercise even more power over who does what in Fayette. That is why it was implemented; Not out of some desire to protect the the quality of life in Fayette because, clearly, they are not genuinely concerned with that.
Lastly, our neighboring counties of Washington & Westmoreland, which both have larger populations and budgets, do not operate county wide zoning programs.
The Fayette County Zoning office should be abolished immediately and county real estate taxes should be cut by the amount saved by eliminating the office.

Brian K. Lutes, North Union Twp., Fayette Co., PA

http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20128210&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=468562&rfi=6

More

Zoning

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_there_a_list_of_township_zoning_rules_for_north_union_township_in_fayette_county_pennsylvania

$700B Federal Financial Patriot Act

Says MSNBC news report, quoting somebody... the bailout plan presented by the Administration includes sweeping new powers for the Treasury Dept.

What sounds right about this action? Nothing...

Everybody is not on board

http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/john-mccain/22846/opposition-growing-to-mother-of-all-bailouts-moab/

Hardball features Jim Cramer... must take action within the next 5 to 7 days or ...

...hopes to tell people they can be part of this process too...

MSNBC Transcript Chris Matthews hardball

More

Dispossession by Decree
by William Norman Grigg

However, it's impossible to blame the electorate for the most recent act of mega-larceny, the Federal Reserve's $85 billion bailout of the American International Group. This was done by the FED – a nominally private entity that exercises immense political and economic power without constitutional standing or accountability of any kind. Congress didn't appropriate the necessary funds for that bailout. Nor was the money set aside through executive action, the entirely illegal method now commonly used to commit the United States to immensely expensive undertakings such as wars of aggression against distant, helpless countries.

The FED's action amounts to the $85 billion purchase of a private company, on behalf of the federal government, using public funds – without political accountability of any kind. Outrageous as it is, this action may have the healthy, if thoroughly unintended, consequence of illustrating just who actually runs our political system and economy.

As the immensely perceptive economic analyst Michael Rozeff points out, on this Constitution Day we have witnessed an unprecedented arrogation of power by the unelected government that actually rules us. True power in our putative republic is actually exercised by the oligarchy that created, empowered, and controls the Federal Reserve.

Oh, sure, that oligarchy will allow elected officials to play-act the role of representatives or "Deciders," and every once in a while it will countenance a very limited form of political competition. But the really serious business – such as the disposition of the lives of the subject population in wars, or the re-allocation of their wealth for the benefit of politically favored constituencies – is simply too important to be left to the vagaries of representative politics. Thus we are routinely reminded that some issues are insulated from the public by being enshrined as part of the sacred "bipartisan consensus."

The nationalization of AIG is on that list, which explains why today we hear a palpably relieved silence from Capitol Hill, when the air should be shredded by expressions of bitter outrage over the FED's action. "Until this week," notes the Financial Times, "it would have been unthinkable for the Federal Reserve to bail out an insurance company...."

Actually, this was never "unthinkable" at all. Current FED Commissar Ben Bernanke has actually gone on record touting the Central Bank's ability to exnihilate what it's pleased to call "money" in any quantity its supervisors deem necessary in order to buy up anything it desires. And as I predicted almost exactly three years ago, the collapse of the debt bubble has left the FED and its controlling oligarchy in a position to conduct the "big buy-out" – the nationalization of practically everything in the supposed effort to prevent a depression.

"There's no limit to what the Fed is prepared to do," points out investment analyst Richard Daughty, the widely quoted "Mogambo Guru." "The only tool it has is inflation – creating money out of nothing. And Bernanke has explicitly stated that the Fed has the statutory means to use the money it creates to buy anything and everything, including stocks, bonds, houses, and raw land. It's entirely possible that someday we'll see the banking cartel literally owning everything – and Americans are letting this happen."

Given that the FED claims the power to buy both investment instruments and real property, why couldn't it buy an ailing insurance conglomerate? But then again, AIG is not your typical insurance company. It has affiliates in some 130 countries (some of which are now experiencing an old-fashioned bank run) and "counter-party relationships" with nearly every major financial institution on the face of the globe. That's a somewhat florid way of saying that AIG owes everybody money, and if it can't pay its debts, the entire financial services industry may collapse.

The problem here, of course, is that AIG is going to collapse, despite the FED's willingness to custom-print the company tens of billions of "dollars." AIG has been deeply involved in insuring the secondary mortgage bond market. This is why, over the past several years, its value has collapsed like a deflated soufflé.

According to letter sent by former AIG CEO Hank Greenberg just yesterday, AIG has lost "over 90% of its value." That has to be considered a criminally self-serving estimate of AIG's actual worth. Greenberg, it should be remembered, was forced out as CEO about three and a half years ago in the middle of an Enron-style accounting scandal in which the company admitted to overstating earnings by $1.7 billion.

Owing to the firm's size, historic reputation, political clout, and prominent place on the Dow, an investigation never made significant headway, and we have no way of knowing the extent to which the company's accounting was corrupt. So when Greenberg admits that the company has lost something north of ninety percent of its value, we are justified in rounding its actual value down to zero and simply letting nature run its course.

That's how things would work out for an honest entrepreneur whose business simply didn't work. But that's not how such things play out for the Power Elite. Picture the world financial market as a hugely overbuilt skyscraper resting on a badly compromised foundation.

The core pillars supporting the structure are rotten and about to collapse, and the failure of any one would rapidly induce failure in all of them. The sensible approach would be to get as far as possible from the impending collapse. The Power Elite's approach is to force commoners to work in the basement shoring up the mortally stricken building while the Important People evacuate.

That won't work, of course, and the inevitable collapse will wipe out those left in the basement – but, hey, that's just the price that has to be paid to save the Important People, who are, after all, more Important than the rest of us.

Deranged financial commentator Jim Cramer didn't take refuge in metaphor to express – and endorse – the perspective presented in my illustration. "Frankly, I don't really care if my community bank is doing well," insisted Cramer. "I care about AIG and the fate of Western banks, all of which have relied on AIG at some point for a risk transfer."

Let banks fail across the length and breadth of the land; let millions be left destitute, and misery be poured without mixture on the heads of the common folk – the FED must protect the interests of super-rich criminals at AIG and kindred institutions.

The anxiety over AIG's fate reflects its role not only as a pillar of the global financial system, but the prominence of the company within the Power Elite. This has been pointed out by the Christian Science Monitor, a publication that has hardly earned a reputation as a purveyor of "conspiracy theories."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w46.html

Grigg's blog post

http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/09/dispossession-by-decree.html

Grigg's blog

http://www.freedominourtime.blogspot.com/

Grigg fired from JBS New American

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

Alex Jones Jim Cramer goes off on everybody

http://www.infowars.com/?p=4091&cp=all

what, buying up the mortgages that nobody can pay back?

Net the Truth Online

Foreign Bondholders Drove the Fannie/Freddie Bailout
by: William Patalon III posted on: September 12, 2008

http://seekingalpha.com/article/95160-foreign-bondholders-drove-the-fannie-freddie-bailout

William Norman Grigg

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=william+norman+grigg&btnG=Search

Pennsylvania election regulations

Last day to REGISTER before the General Election ……………………. October 6
Last day to apply for a civilian absentee ballot ………………………….. October 28
Last day for County Boards of Elections to receive voted civilian………. October 31
absentee ballots

http://www.dos.state.pa.us/elections/lib/elections/030_important_dates/importantdatesupcoming.pdf

Paperweights scare close airport

Shepard Smith updates the trio the scare that wasn't.

The airport was closed down because of a couple of paperweights that somebody said was grenades.

Shep still mocking everybody who listened to Jeraldo...


JetBlue evacuates NY JFK terminal
September 22, 2008

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--jetblueevacuation0922sep22,0,7957672,print.story

McCain's Poll Numbers Retreat

Update Pennsylvania

Record Pa. voter registration pads Democrats' edge
10/7/2008, 4:26 p.m. EDT
By PETER JACKSON
The Associated Press

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — Democratic registration has surged by 13 percent and Republican ranks have shrunk by 1 percent as a record 8.6 million people in battleground Pennsylvania registered to vote in the 2008 presidential election.

Last-minute registrations on Monday, the deadline, still have to be counted, but the total released by Pennsylvania's State Department already far exceeds the previous record of 8.4 million set in 2004.

http://www.pennlive.com/newsflash/pa/index.ssf?/base/politics-1/1223411643267130.xml&storylist=penn

A.B. Stoddard on MSNBC says the downward movement in John McCain's numbers is due to Wall Street situation.

Obama 50 percent. McCain 43 percent.

Map stats

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10

Economic Fears Give Obama Clear Lead Over McCain in Poll
By Dan Balz and Jon Cohen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, September 24, 2008; A01

The poll found that, among likely voters, Obama now leads McCain by 52 percent to 43 percent. Two weeks ago, in the days immediately following the Republican National Convention, the race was essentially even, with McCain at 49 percent and Obama at 47 percent.

As a point of comparison, neither of the last two Democratic nominees -- John F. Kerry in 2004 or Al Gore in 2000 -- recorded support above 50 percent in a pre-election poll by the Post and ABC News.

Last week's near-meltdown in the financial markets and the subsequent debate in Washington over a proposed government bailout of troubled financial institutions have made the economy even more important in the minds of voters. Fully 50 percent called the economy and jobs the single most important issue that will determine their vote, up from 37 percent two weeks ago. In contrast, just 9 percent cited the Iraq war as their most important issue, its lowest of the campaign.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/23/AR2008092303667_pf.html

Are Bibles 'giants' set for return?


The benei Elohim saw the daughters of Adam, that they were fit extensions."

Genesis 6:2 (Interlinear Hebrew Bible)

New experiments in genetic engineering could open the doors for the return of fearsome "giants" described in the Bible – the offspring of human women and fallen angels – warns author Thomas Horn in his best-selling book, "Nephilim Stargates: The Year 2012 and the Return of the Watchers."

In the Book of Genesis, beings of great stature called "giants" appear, which some biblical scholars believe came into existence after powerful angels known as 'Watchers' descended to earth and used women (or their biological matter) to construct bodies of flesh, which they used to "extend" themselves into the material world.

The Apocryphal books of Enoch, 2 Esdras, Genesis Aprocryphon and Jasher support the Genesis story, adding that the sin of the angels grew to include genetic modification of animals as well as humans. The Book of Jasher, mentioned in the Bible in Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18, says, "After the fallen angels went into the daughters of men, the sons of men taught the mixture of animals of one species with the other, in order to provoke the Lord" (4:18).

"This clear reference to the Genesis 6 record illustrates that animals were included in whatever cross-species experiments were being conducted, and that this activity resulted in judgment from God," explains Horn. "The Book of Enoch also supports this species-crossing report, saying that the fallen angels who merged with women also sinned 'against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish' (7:5,6). The Old Testament contains associated reference to genetic mutations, which developed among humans following this activity, including unusual size, physical strength, six fingers, six toes, animal appetite for blood and even lion-like features among men (2 Sam 21:20; 23:20)."

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=75592

McCain Doublespeaks on Expansion Government Role

During the 9/11 Presidential Forum, held at Columbia University on September 11 and broadcast on Fox on Saturday, McCain was asked what he'd do differently after 9/11.

His response included that he'd have initiated different programs and would have expanded Americorps...

A few minutes later, McCain responded to a question about mandatory service, and he said there were enough government programs, and his basic philosophy is not to expand government programs... he said we already have the Peace Corps and Americorps and he'd be careful about expansions.

His attempting a joke by snoring and pretending to fall asleep when asked about age got a laugh, but really, McCain cracking a joke about his own age is getting "old."

Obama would've asked more of the country than to be super-consumers after 9/11. It was initially unclear unclear whether Obama suggested or implied he'd have initiated a mandatory service call from his comment.

Later, Obama said when there is a war, it's an obligation of many, not some...

“If we are going into war, then all of us go, not just some,” Senator Barack Obama declared.

Is asked about ROTC on campus, should they be invited back.

Obama answers, yes... we made a mistake there...

Asked specifically about how do you get more in the military short of a draft... Obama says need inspired... brings up potential of civilian corps... civil engineers who can do some of the things our military is currently doing...

Currently, Obama has presented a national service plan in the form of a bill... he also said he would not set up a bureaucracy, but he wants to set up an energy corp...

Net the Truth Online

Live Video: 9/11 Presidential Forum

Last Edited: Friday, 12 Sep 2008, 1:44 AM GMT
Created: Friday, 12 Sep 2008, 12:00 AM GMT

http://www.myfoxspokane.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=7413441&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.1.1

Transcript: ServiceNation Presidential Forum at Columbia University
Filed Under Barack Obama, John McCain, Presidential Campaign 2008


STENGEL: Senator, as recently as this past Sunday, you talked very openly about the fact that Americans should have been asked to do more than go shopping or traveling. What would you have done as president in those circumstances, to make people aware of what they should do as Americans, after 9/11?

MCCAIN: Well, first of all, I would have called them to serve. I would have created organizations ranging from neighborhood block watch to making sure that our nuclear power plants are secure, to immediately proposing to Congress legislation, such as Senator Evan Bayh and I proposed, service to country, to create additional organizations, to expand AmeriCorps, expand the Peace Corps, expand the military.
Obviously, we were facing a new threat. Obviously, we needed to, at that time, take advantage of the unity in the United States of America. We weren’t Republicans on September 11th, we weren’t Democrats, we were Americans. And I think that if we had asked for a concrete plan of action, both on the part of federal, state and local governments as well as by the Congress of the United States as well as, frankly, talking directly to the American people, on the need for us all to serve this nation, I think perhaps we — but, you know, I have to tell you something, Rick.

http://www.clipsandcomment.com/2008/09/11/transcript-servicenation-presidential-forum-at-columbia-university/

Transcript: ServiceNation Presidential Forum at Columbia University
Filed Under Barack Obama, John McCain, Presidential Campaign 2008
(Source: CNN) (Deleted CNN Intro)

STENGEL: Let’s stay on the subject of military. You authorized a really interesting military policy, and it was started out as a bill that you mentioned you and Evan Bayh co-sponsored and then you inserted in the Defense Appropriations Act that blends military and civilian service, the 18-24-18 policy, which I won’t explain. But it’s leading me to a larger question. Why wouldn’t we have compulsory military service in America that has a civilian component? That if someone wants to opt out of military service, they can do their civilian service, like in your bill, and that it would become a unifying thing for America?

MCCAIN: Rick, first of all, I think that as much as I treasure our military service, there’s lots of ways to serve our country, too. And I want to emphasize that. I know we’re talking a lot about the military. But there’s so many ways to serve this country and there’s so many ways that are noble and wonderful, both at home and abroad. So I want to make that perfectly clear.

I think that it’s very clear AmeriCorps has been one of the astonishing successes. Peace Corps, we’ve seen the success for a long time, because Jack Kennedy obviously originated it.

But we have seen these volunteer organizations succeed. And if we need to, whether it’s connected to the military or not, provide them with sufficient reward and sufficient recognition.

You know, a lot of these young people are more proud of the fact that we recognize the ones walking around with the red jacket that say “City Year” than they are about the money.

MCCAIN: You know? I mean, that’s what they’re all about.

So I’d be glad to reward them as much as possible. But you want to be careful that the reason is not the reward of financial or other reasons, but the reward is the satisfaction of serving a cause greater than yourself. That would be fine with me. Finding new ways to serve. That’s what this next few years should be all about.

WOODRUFF: Senator McCain, Senator Obama has put forward a national service plan to do some of the things you talked about, the two of you agree. But his has a price tag of around $3.5 billion. Is that an amount of money you’d be willing to spend? More, less? I mean, is that in the ballpark?

MCCAIN: I’d be glad to spend money. I don’t think that should be the first priority in the kinds of benefits that are reaped from the kind of thing we’re trying to seek.

I haven’t agreed with all of what Senator Obama has proposed, but I think they’re very good proposals there. Some of them are new, some of them are obviously not.

But I also want to emphasize there, it doesn’t always have to be run by the government. That’s why we also ought to understand that faith-based organizations, other volunteer organizations that are completely separate from the government, have nothing to do with the government, are amongst the most successful.

So let’s not get entrapped by the idea that the government has to run these voluntary organizations and volunteer kinds of programs, because a lot of times the job can be done better with our encouragement.

WOODRUFF: So you’re not in favor necessarily of a distinct government role?

MCCAIN: Oh, we have a distinct government role — the Peace Corps, AmeriCorps, all of these other organizations. But I want to be careful about expanding it when — my philosophy is let’s not have government do things that the private sector can do, or other organizations can do. That’s just my theory of government.

http://www.clipsandcomment.com/2008/09/11/transcript-servicenation-presidential-forum-at-columbia-university/

Time Report
McCain, Obama Keep It Civic
By Kate Pickert Friday, Sep. 12, 2008

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1840733,00.html

Clip (date not documented on site reference)

“After 9/11, when America was united, I wouldn’t have asked Americans to go shopping or take a trip. I would have asked Americans to serve, find ways to serve, and provide ways to serve.I would ask people - first and foremost - to consider joining the military. I would have expanded the Peace Corps. I would have expanded AmeriCorps. I would have setup neighborhood volunteer organizations. I would have asked everyone to serve in some way. I believe Americans would have responded very affirmatively.Yes, I would expand AmeriCorps. Yes, I would expand the Peace Corps."


http://servicevote.org/content/view/278/118/

McCain's previous opposition to Americorps

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ): "I was wrong about AmeriCorps."
In 1993, Sen. McCain voted against the creation of the AmeriCorps program
and later joined with Congressional Republican
in efforts to zero-out funding. In January 2000 he said, "I was wrong
about AmeriCorps... I was extremely skeptical at first, mostly
because I didn?t trust the authors. But I?ve got to say that, over all,
the program?s been a success. And it was a failure on my
part not to recognize that earlier." [Klein, New Yorker, 1/17/2000] McCain
was also a cosponsor of the AmeriCorps
reauthorization bill in the 106th Congress.

http://clinton5.nara.gov/library/hot_releases/January_15_2001_7.html

More resources

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0809/11/se.01.html

Interesting reads

http://beltwayblips.com/story/time_release_on_candidates_9_11forum/

http://cbs5.com/national/barack.obama.john.2.815646.html

Note: Actually, if you review the videotape the audience actually clapped when Obama answered yes, he'd bring back the ROTC on the campus...

Sep 11, 2008 8:06 pm US/Pacific
Obama, McCain Upset Columbia Students During Forum
A Night Of 9/11 Healing In NYC Gets Awkward When Both Candidates Push For Return Of ROTC To Campus
McCain Blames Harsh Tone Of Campaign On Lack Of Town Halls
NEW YORK (CBS) ― It wasn't a night to ruffle feathers, but Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain may have unintentionally done that very thing when they proposed that ROTC be brought back to Columbia University

http://cbs5.com/national/barack.obama.john.2.815646.html

The Sarah Palin Doctrine

Charles Krauthammer (CK) defends Republican Party presidential nominee John McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin's response to Charlie Gibson's question about the "Bush Doctrine" in his piece entitled Charlie Gibson's Gaffe by pointing out he coined the Bush Doctrine in a 2001 article. CK explains further the defining two-parter forming the Bush Doctrine expanded after 9/11, and all three parts were superseded by a fourth.

First the transcript (we heard first-hand) but did not hear the word No, preceding Gibson's stating "the Bush Doctrine (enunciated) annunciated September 2002, before the Iraq War."

ABCNEWS Excerpts

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/Story?id=5782924&page=2

CHARLES GIBSON (ABC NEWS)

(Off-camera) Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?

GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN (REPUBLICAN VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE)

In what respect, Charlie?

CHARLES GIBSON (ABC NEWS)

(Off-camera) Well, what do you interpret it to be?

GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN (REPUBLICAN VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE)

His world view?

CHARLES GIBSON (ABC NEWS)

(Off-camera) No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated in September 2002, before the Iraq war.

GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN (REPUBLICAN VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE)

I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell-bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made, and with new leadership, and that’s the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.

CHARLES GIBSON (ABC NEWS)

(Off-camera) The Bush doctrine, as I understand it, is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any other country we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with that?

GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN (REPUBLICAN VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE)

Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country.

http://www.clipsandcomment.com/2008/09/12/transcript-sarah-palin-interview-with-charles-gibson-part-i/

transcript of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s interview with ABC News’ Charles Gibson

GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?

PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?

GIBSON: The Bush — well, what do you interpret it to be?

PALIN: His world view?

GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, annunciated September 2002, before the Iraq War.

PALIN: I believe that what President Bush has attempted to do is rid this world of Islamic extremism, terrorists who are hell-bent on destroying our nation. There have been blunders along the way, though. There have been mistakes made, and with new leadership, and that’s the beauty of American elections, of course, and democracy, is with new leadership comes opportunity to do things better.

GIBSON: The Bush doctrine as I understand it is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense, that we have the right to a preemptive strike against any country that we think is going to attack us. Do you agree with us?

PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligent and legitimate evidence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/11/raw-data-palins-interview-with-abc-news/

Clip

In the cover essay of the June 4, 2001, issue of the Weekly Standard entitled, "The Bush Doctrine: ABM, Kyoto, and the New American Unilateralism," I suggested that the Bush administration policies of unilaterally withdrawing from the ABM treaty and rejecting the Kyoto protocol, together with others, amounted to a radical change in foreign policy that should be called the Bush doctrine.

Then came 9/11, and that notion was immediately superseded by the advent of the war on terror.

In his address to the joint session of Congress nine days after 9/11, President Bush declared: "Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime." This "with us or against us" policy regarding terror -- first deployed against Pakistan when Secretary of State Colin Powell gave President Musharraf that seven-point ultimatum to end support for the Taliban and support our attack on Afghanistan -- became the essence of the Bush doctrine.

Until Iraq. A year later, when the Iraq war was looming, Bush offered his major justification by enunciating a doctrine of preemptive war. This is the one Charlie Gibson thinks is the Bush doctrine.

It's not. It's the third in a series and was superseded by the fourth and current definition of the Bush doctrine, the most sweeping formulation of the Bush approach to foreign policy and the one that most clearly and distinctively defines the Bush years: the idea that the fundamental mission of American foreign policy is to spread democracy throughout the world. It was most dramatically enunciated in Bush's second inaugural address:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457_pf.html

Now let's think. Ask the regular man or woman on the street, what is the Bush Doctrine and do you agree with it, or disagree with it?

We bet nobody, absolutely nobody, will name the one CK says supersedes the previous ones. Nobody will say: spread democracy around the world.

Except for a few who have read CK and are biting into his explanation, or drinking the koolaid, so to speak, responders to the question will - unlike Charlie Gibson's "anticipatory self-defense" either use one word, "pre-emption," or in street language, use two words: "strike first."

Gibson had the question exactly right. Do you AGREE with the Bush Doctrine?

Had Palin been aware of CK's publication and coining of the phrase "Bush Doctrine" and its subsequent expansion, Sarah Palin would have, not could have, or should have, but would have answered Charlie Gibson with a three or even four part question.

Charlie, as Palin had taken to uttering Gibson's first name throughout the interview, the Bush Doctrine includes these several parts.

Which one do you want me to address? All four? OK.

I agree. President Bush was right to withdraw from the ABM Treaty.

I agree. President Bush was right to reject the Kyoto Protocol.

I agree.

I agree.

Notice, Palin didn't actually answer whether she agreed with the Gibson pick.

Palin did cleverly imply that the Bush Doctrine as Gibson presented was missing a key facet: an "impending" attack on the United States.

Few have caught Palin's intention in her answer. To justify the Bush Doctrine Charlie Gibson defined as "premptive strike."

Palin's responses were not only the sign of a regular politician, they were the sign of a dangerous one. One who changes historical facts to suit one's own purposes.

Beware of the Palin Doctrine.

See if you can define it in one word.

Net the Truth Online

CK on Fox Panel

'Special Report' Panel on Sarah Palin's First Big Media Interview
Saturday, September 13, 2008

rush transcript of "Special Report With Brit Hume" from September 12, 2008. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHARLIE GIBSON: Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?

PALIN: In what respect, Charlie?

GIBSON: The Bush--what do you interpret it to be?

PALIN: His worldview?

GIBSON: No, the Bush doctrine, enunciated September, 2002 before the Iraq war, that we have a right to a preemptive strike against any other country that we think is going to attack us.

PALIN: Charlie, if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANGLE: Now, Charles, critics say she seemed a little unsure of herself there about what the Bush doctrine was. What do you make of that?

KRAUTHAMMER: Fred is right. It was Charlie Gibson's gaffe.

And this was reported by liberals as if it was a huge mistake that she stumbled, she didn't seem to understand what the Bush doctrine was, and he informed her.

Well, he didn't. He got it wrong. He assumed there's one Bush doctrine. In fact, there are at least four versions which succeeded each other over the eight years of this administration.

And the one that is currently understood as the Bush doctrine, the one that has been around since 2005, is the one enunciated by the president in his second inaugural address, "the freedom agenda," in which he said that the success of the liberty at home is dependent on the success of liberty abroad.

And that is what everybody understands today as the Bush doctrine. It superseded the understanding of the Bush doctrine which Gibson had proposed.

If you hear liberals gleefully say that Iraq has destroyed the Bush doctrine, it is not destroying the idea of preemptive war, it is destroying the idea of spreading democracy.

So Gibson is the one who made a mistake, but he had that kind of condescending sneer that you get among the establishment in instructing a person who to them now appears as a moose hunting rube...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,421882,00.html

Charlie Gibson's Gaffe

By Charles Krauthammer
Saturday, September 13, 2008; A17

"At times visibly nervous . . . Ms. Palin most visibly stumbled when she was asked by Mr. Gibson if she agreed with the Bush doctrine. Ms. Palin did not seem to know what he was talking about. Mr. Gibson, sounding like an impatient teacher, informed her that it meant the right of 'anticipatory self-defense.' "

-- New York Times, Sept. 12

Informed her? Rubbish.

The New York Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong.

There is no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration -- and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today. It is utterly different.

He asked Palin, "Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?"

She responded, quite sensibly to a question that is ambiguous, "In what respect, Charlie?"

Sensing his "gotcha" moment, Gibson refused to tell her. After making her fish for the answer, Gibson grudgingly explained to the moose-hunting rube that the Bush doctrine "is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense."

Wrong.

I know something about the subject because, as the Wikipedia entry on the Bush doctrine notes, I was the first to use the term. In the cover essay of the June 4, 2001, issue of the Weekly Standard entitled, "The Bush Doctrine: ABM, Kyoto, and the New American Unilateralism," I suggested that the Bush administration policies of unilaterally withdrawing from the ABM treaty and rejecting the Kyoto protocol, together with others, amounted to a radical change in foreign policy that should be called the Bush doctrine.

Then came 9/11, and that notion was immediately superseded by the advent of the war on terror. In his address to the joint session of Congress nine days after 9/11, President Bush declared: "Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime." This "with us or against us" policy regarding terror -- first deployed against Pakistan when Secretary of State Colin Powell gave President Musharraf that seven-point ultimatum to end support for the Taliban and support our attack on Afghanistan -- became the essence of the Bush doctrine.

Until Iraq. A year later, when the Iraq war was looming, Bush offered his major justification by enunciating a doctrine of preemptive war. This is the one Charlie Gibson thinks is the Bush doctrine.

It's not. It's the third in a series and was superseded by the fourth and current definition of the Bush doctrine, the most sweeping formulation of the Bush approach to foreign policy and the one that most clearly and distinctively defines the Bush years: the idea that the fundamental mission of American foreign policy is to spread democracy throughout the world. It was most dramatically enunciated in Bush's second inaugural address: "The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world."

This declaration of a sweeping, universal American freedom agenda was consciously meant to echo John Kennedy's pledge in his inaugural address that the United States "shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." It draws also from the Truman doctrine of March 1947 and from Wilson's 14 points.

If I were in any public foreign policy debate today, and my adversary were to raise the Bush doctrine, both I and the audience would assume -- unless my interlocutor annotated the reference otherwise -- that he was speaking about the grandly proclaimed (and widely attacked) freedom agenda of the Bush administration.

Not the Gibson doctrine of preemption.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457_pf.html

More

Palin vs. Gibson, Round 1
The ABC News anchor flummoxes the GOP amateur.
By Jack Shafer
Posted Thursday, Sept. 11, 2008

http://www.slate.com/id/2199999/

James Fellows

The Palin interview

http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/09/the_palin_interview.php

Mika Interviews Dad

Just had to turn to Morning Joe for a little bit as the family get-together was enticing. Mika Brzezinski sat in on the gang's interview of her father, former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski ... he recently completed a book with Brent Scowcroft... the gang includes Ron Suskind...

ZB: ...we started a war in Iraq that was not necessary... refused to seriously negotiate with Iran about the nuclear situation... avoided Pakistan and Afghanistan... we've made things worse... way we dealt with region made things much more inhospitable... pleads a case for both candidates... though he supports Barack Obama... we don't know the world... next president must use the bully pulpit to educate the public on the new world... doesn't endorse a particular candidate in the book...

Mika

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

Projection Earth Cooling

Old Farmers Almanac: Global cooling may be underway

The Old Farmer's Almanac is going further out on a limb than usual this year, not only forecasting a cooler winter, but looking ahead decades to suggest we are in for global cooling, not warming.
Based on the same time-honored, complex calculations it uses to predict weather, the Almanac hits the newsstands on Tuesday saying a study of solar activity and corresponding records on ocean temperatures and climate point to a cooler, not warmer, climate, for perhaps the next half century.

"We at the Almanac are among those who believe that sunspot cycles and their effects on oceans correlate with climate changes," writes meteorologist and climatologist Joseph D'Aleo. "Studying these and other factor suggests that cold, not warm, climate may be our future."

It remains to be seen, said Editor-in-Chief Jud Hale, whether the human impact on global temperatures will cancel out or override any cooling trend.

"We say that if human beings were not contributing to global warming, it would become real cold in the next 50 years," Hale said.

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/news/2008-09-09-farmers-almanac_N.htm

Glenn Beck: Bailout Stealth to Socialism

Glenn's introduction on his Wednesday program to the topic of the government's takeover of Fannie and Freddie is a must view/read.

Senator Bunning was unequivocally superb.

Ron Paul was more than well spoken on the grossness of the Federal Reserve, and the irresponsibility of Congress.

Net the Truth Online

Obama Responds to Lipstick Comment Controversy; Can Hillary Help Obama?; Automakers Seek Government Bailout

Aired September 10, 2008

First, welcome to "THE REAL STORY." Two months ago Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson responded to investors` worries over the mortgage market by issuing this long-winded never-ending statement that says, "Today our primary focus is supporting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in their current form as they carry out their important mission". I guess the key word in that statement was "today."

Eight weeks later those companies are no longer in their "current form". In fact, there is hardly any company left in them at all. They are more like a massive government agency. Goody.

I don`t remember voting for that agency or authorizing over $5 trillion in debt to be put on our country`s already bloated balance sheet. Do you remember that vote?

Here`s the one that will make blood shoot out of your eyes. Senator Chris Dodd, he`s the guy who usually has no problem spending your money. Even he is irritated over his lack of influence on this.

After hearing about the take over, he said that it`s probably necessary. Sure would like to know more.

I`m sorry. What did you say? You would like to know a little more? I`m sorry to be a stickler on details here, but weren`t you the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee? I`m pretty sure you are. I thought you would inquire about multi-trillion dollar takeovers before they happened. Call me crazy.

"THE REAL STORY" is that we have lost control over our financial system. It`s like you know that game "Whack the Mole?" We`re so focused on bashing the head of whatever pops up in front of us, it surprises us, we have no long-term plan, we have path to victory. May I quote the Democrats? We have no exit strategy.

Our only vision for the future is that all of our losses should be socialized so we can pretend that we don`t have problems anymore. Forget about tomorrow. We have no problems today.

It`s like that "shared prosperity" that you keep hear being from Obama; you know, minus the prosperity part. Here`s the question. Nobody seems to be asking this. If we are to believe our leaders that Bear Stearns, Freddie and Fannie all had to be rescued to save our entire financial system from collapse, what does that say about our financial system?

Are these people really trying to tell us that America`s economy could be brought down by one mismanaged company? And if so, these people are guilty of gross negligence for getting us into this position. If not then they are lying.

Either way, you can see why our leaders are held in such high regard right now. The truth is that scaring people with threats of collapse is right out of the Communist manifesto. You convince people that they can`t survive without the government and lo and behold, they will run to the government.

There is no trust with our leaders and no confidence and worse, no accountability in Washington. When a Republican administration can take us this far down a Socialist road with so little objection, I can`t imagine what is coming our way next.

Republican Senator Jim Bunning is from Kentucky. Apparently he can`t imagine it either. He`s called for the resignation of Hank Paulson and Fed chairman, Ben Bernanke yesterday. Good for you, Senator. Good for you.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0809/10/gb.01.html

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0809/10/gb.01.html