Subscribe to RSS
Your Ad Here

Posts tagged as: bailouts back to homepage

The Marco Rubio Fraud(0)

My thoughts on what some in the Tea Party call the Conservative Savior. Who really is Marco Rubion and what does he stand for? Is he just a puppet for the Bush family? This and much more. Subscribe to my channel for weekly updates and follow me @Fabian4Liberty

Ben Bernanke Tries to Convince America that the Federal Reserve is Good and the Gold Standard is BadComments Off

Ben Bernanke has decided that he needs to teach all of us why the Federal Reserve is good for America and about why the gold standard is bad.  On Tuesday, Bernanke delivered the first of four planned lectures to a group of students at George Washington University.  But that lecture was not just for the benefit of those students.  Officials at the Fed have long planned for this lecture series to be an opportunity for Bernanke to “educate” the American people about the Federal Reserve.  The classroom was absolutely packed with reporters and just about every major news organization is running a story about this first lecture.  So the Federal Reserve is definitely getting the publicity that it was hoping for.  You can see the slides from the presentation that Bernanke gave to the students right here.  It is pretty obvious that one of the primary goals of this first lecture was to attack those that have been critical of the Fed over the past few years.  In doing so, Bernanke “stretched” the truth on more than one occasion.

The entire event was staged to make Bernanke and the Federal Reserve look as good as possible.  Prior to his arrival, the students gathered for the lecture were actually instructed to applaud Bernanke….

The 30 undergraduates at George Washington University sent up a round of applause. It was, they’d been told beforehand, “appropriate, even encouraged, to politely applaud” Tuesday’s guest lecturer.

But as noted above, this lecture was not for the benefit of those students.  AUSA Today article even admitted that “addressing the public directly” was one of the real goals of this lecture….

For Bernanke, the GW lectures serve a dual function:

They give him a chance to reprise the role of professor he played for more than two decades, first at Stanford and then at Princeton, where he eventually chaired the economics department.

And they give him a way to expand his mission of demystifying the Fed. As part of that campaign, Bernanke became the first Fed chief to hold regular news conferences and conduct town-hall meetings.

In addressing the public directly, Bernanke has also sought to neutralize attacks on the Fed, some of them from Republican presidential candidates.

So what did Bernanke actually say during the lecture?

Well, you can read all of the slides right here, but the following are some of the highlights….

On page 6 of the presentation, Bernanke makes the following claim….

“A central bank is not an ordinary commercial bank, but a government agency.”

Well, that is quite interesting considering the fact that the Federal Reserve hasargued in court that the Federal Reserve Bank of New York is not an agency of the federal government and that the various Federal Reserve banks around the country are private corporations with private funding.

So did the Federal Reserve lie to the court or is Ben Bernanke lying to us?

And what other “agency” of the federal government is owned by private banks?

It is even admitted that the individual member banks own shares of stock in the various Federal Reserve banks on the Federal Reserve website….

The twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks, which were established by Congress as the operating arms of the nation’s central banking system, are organized much like private corporations–possibly leading to some confusion about “ownership.” For example, the Reserve Banks issue shares of stock to member banks. However, owning Reserve Bank stock is quite different from owning stock in a private company. The Reserve Banks are not operated for profit, and ownership of a certain amount of stock is, by law, a condition of membership in the System. The stock may not be sold, traded, or pledged as security for a loan; dividends are, by law, 6 percent per year.

The Federal Reserve always talks about how it must be “independent” and “above politics”, but when they start getting criticized they always want to seek shelter under the wing of the federal government.

It really is disgusting.

On page 7 of the presentation, the following statement is made….

“All central banks strive for low and stable inflation; most also try to promote stable growth in output and employment.”

Well, on both counts the Federal Reserve has failed miserably.

Right now, if inflation was measured the same way that it was back in 1980, the annual rate of inflation would be more than 10 percent.

And when you take a longer view of things, the inflation that the Federal Reserve has manufactured has been absolutely horrific.

Even using the doctored inflation numbers that the Federal Reserve gives us, the U.S. dollar has still lost 83 percent of its value since 1970.

The truth is that inflation is a “hidden tax” that is constantly destroying the value of every single dollar that you and I hold.  Those that attempt to save money for the future or for retirement are deeply penalized under such a system.

As far as employment goes, the total number of workers that are “officially” unemployed in the United States is larger than the entire population of Portugal.

The average duration of unemployment is hovering near an all-time record high and almost every measure of government dependence is at an all-time record high.

So the Federal Reserve is failing at the exact things that Bernanke claims that it is supposed to be doing.

But instead of directly addressing many of the specific criticisms that have been leveled at the Fed, Bernanke instead chose to spend much of his lecture talking about the problems with adopting a gold standard.  The following are statements that were pulled directly off of the slides he used during his speech….

-”The gold standard sets the money supply and price level generally with limited central bank intervention.”

-”The strength of a gold standard is its greatest weakness too: Because the money supply is determined by the supply of gold, it cannot be adjusted in response to changing economic conditions.”

-”All countries on the gold standard are forced to maintain fixed exchange rates. As a result, the effects of bad policies in one country can be transmitted to other countries if both are on the gold standard.”

-”If not perfectly credible, a gold standard is subject to speculative attack and ultimate collapse as people try to exchange paper money for gold.”

-”The gold standard did not prevent frequent financial panics.”

-”Although the gold standard promoted price stability over the very long run, over the medium run it sometimes caused periods of inflation and deflation.”

-”In the second half of the 19th century, a global shortage of gold reduced the U.S. money supply and caused deflation (falling prices). Farmers were squeezed between declining prices for crops and the fixed dollar payments for their mortgages and other debts.”

Bernanke spent more time on the gold standard during his speech than on anything else.  At one point during the lecture, Bernanke made the following statement….

“To have a gold standard, you have to go to South Africa or someplace and dig up tons of gold and move  it to New York and put it in the basement of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and that’s a lot of effort and work”

Bernanke even blamed the gold standard for the Great Depression.  On a slide entitled “Monetary Policy in the Great Depression”, Bernanke made the following claims….

•The Fed’s tight monetary policy led to sharply falling prices and steep declines in output and employment.
•The effects of policy errors here and abroad were transmitted globally through the gold standard.
•The Fed kept money tight in part because it wanted to preserve the gold standard. When FDR abandoned the gold standard in 1933, monetary policy became less tight and deflation stopped.

Bernanke seems to want to frame the debate over monetary policy is such a way that the American people are given only two alternative systems to consider: the Federal Reserve and a gold standard.

But the truth is that there are a vast array of both “hard money” and “soft money” systems that would not include a central bank or a gold standard at all.

So the truth is that the American people would have many different systems to choose from if they wanted to shut down the Federal Reserve and set up something new.

In the past the U.S. government has issued debt-free money and it could certainly do so again.

But in his lecture, Bernanke did not even mention how the Federal Reserve creates money or how whenever new money is created more debt is created.

Under the Federal Reserve system, the money supply is designed to continually increase, and whenever more money is created more debt is also created.

In a previous article I discussed how more money is created on the federal level….

For example, whenever the U.S. government wants to spend more money than it takes in (which happens constantly), it has to go ask the Federal Reserve for it.  The federal government gives U.S. Treasury bonds to the Federal Reserve, and the Federal Reserve gives the U.S. government “Federal Reserve Notes” in return.  Usually this is just done electronically.

So where does the Federal Reserve get the Federal Reserve Notes?

It just creates them out of thin air.

Wouldn’t you like to be able to create money out of thin air?

Instead of issuing money directly, the U.S. government lets the Federal Reserve create it out of thin air and then the U.S. government borrows it.

Talk about stupid.

The designers of the Federal Reserve system intended to trap the U.S. government in a debt spiral that would expand perpetually.

So has their design worked?

Well, just look at the chart below….

Today, the U.S. national debt is more than 5000 times larger than it was when the Federal Reserve was first created.

So I guess you could say that the results have been spectacular.

The Federal Reserve system also greatly favors the big Wall Street banks that it is designed to serve.

When those big banks get into trouble, the Federal Reserve snaps into action.

According to a limited GAO audit of Fed transactions during the last financial crisis, $16.1 trillion in secret loans were made by the Federal Reserve to the big Wall Street banks between December 1, 2007 and July 21, 2010.

The following list is taken directly from page 131 of the GAO audit report and it shows which banks received money from the Fed….

Citigroup - $2.513 trillion
Morgan Stanley - $2.041 trillion
Merrill Lynch - $1.949 trillion
Bank of America - $1.344 trillion
Barclays PLC - $868 billion
Bear Sterns - $853 billion
Goldman Sachs - $814 billion
Royal Bank of Scotland - $541 billion
JP Morgan Chase - $391 billion
Deutsche Bank - $354 billion
UBS - $287 billion
Credit Suisse - $262 billion
Lehman Brothers - $183 billion
Bank of Scotland - $181 billion
BNP Paribas - $175 billion
Wells Fargo - $159 billion
Dexia - $159 billion
Wachovia - $142 billion
Dresdner Bank - $135 billion
Societe Generale - $124 billion
“All Other Borrowers” - $2.639 trillion

What about all the rest of us?

Did we get bailed out?

No, we were told that if Wall Street was rescued that the benefits would trickle down to the rest of us.

Unfortunately, that has not exactly worked out.  In article, after article, afterarticle I have detailed the horrible economic suffering that the American people are still going through.

But what Bernanke and the Fed have done is create inflation in commodities such as oil which is affecting the household finances of nearly everyone in America.

The average price of a gallon of gasoline in the United States is now up to $3.87.  That is an all-time record high for the month of March.

So far in 2012, the price of gasoline in the United States has risen by 17 percent.

Thanks Bernanke.

Over the past several decades, every time there has been a major spike in gasoline prices in the United States, a recession has always followed.  If you doubt this, just check out this amazing chart.

So will we soon see another recession?

If we are lucky.  Hopefully the next downturn will not be a full-blown depression.

The truth is that the Federal Reserve does not help us avoid booms and busts.  Rather, it creates them.  The Fed was at the heart of the housing bubble which helped bring on the last financial crisis when it crashed, and the current ultra-low interest rate policies of the Fed are creating more bubbles which will have devastating long-term consequences.

So Bernanke does not have anything to be proud of, and his track record has been absolutely nightmarish.

Hopefully the American people will not believe the propaganda and will take an honest look at the Federal Reserve.

When you take an honest look at the Federal Reserve, there is only one rational conclusion: Congress should shut it down, lock the doors and throw away the key.

Source: The Economic Collapse.

Bailing Out Banks is InflationaryComments Off

The latest wave of financial-market turmoil has been caused in particular by growing investor concern about the financial health of commercial banks, especially banks in the eurozone.

It seems that investors have been increasingly losing confidence in banks’ ability to live up to their payment obligations under “normal” market conditions and to generate sufficient profits going forward.

Such an interpretation may contribute to explaining the depressed valuations of eurozone bank stocks, which have lost around 71 percent of their value since the start of 2007.[1] In contrast, losses for US bank stocks amounted to (just) around 50 percent.

CONTINUED at the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Written by Thorsten Polleit.

A Great Long Weekend of Economics, Football & Food(1)

*Written by Rob Rimes.

I’ve been spending so much time covering the 2012 presidential election that I really needed a break from it all. Sure, there were the Nevada caucuses this past weekend and I do plan to write my two cents on the results but I was thoroughly distracted by three days of greatness. Saturday was spent at the Hilton in Naples, FL at an all-day event held by FEE: the Foundation for Economic Education. Sunday was full of lots of meat, beer, a bounce house and the Super Bowl. Monday capped off the long weekend with an event at the Ritz-Carlton that was put on by one of the greatest libertarian think tanks in the world, the Cato Institute.

Friday night, I planned to get to bed early, as I wanted to be bright and alert for the all-day FEE event in my hometown. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get to sleep so I sat in my room, sipping a tall glass of 1792 Ridgemont Reserve Bourbon while picking at some leftover BBQ ribs and watching ‘Battlestar Galactica’ on Netflix, as I haven’t watched the newer series but was a big fan of the original as a kid. I typically don’t get into shows until they are over, as I hate the suspense of waiting week-to-week for cliffhanger resolutions. After that, I tried to kill time in ‘Just Cause 2′ on my PS3 but I just couldn’t doze off. It was well after 3 a.m. before my head finally hit the pillow, which seemed like the quickest sleep I ever had when my iPhone alarm started blaring Wu-Tang Clan’s “Bring the Ruckus” at 6 a.m.

Saturday – FEE’s 1st Annual Winter Freedom Academy: 

So I woke up, showered, killed a bowl of Cracklin’ Oat Bran with a peanut Sweet & Salty bar, threw on a three piece suit, jumped in my car and drove down to the Naples Hilton half-asleep nursing a heavy hangover. Needless to say, I was ready for ten or so hours of hardcore economic thinking. Truth be told, as soon as I hit the hotel, I wandered into Shula’s Steakhouse looking for a tequila sunrise. Apparently it was too early and the bartender wasn’t working yet so I had to fill up on bagels and Diet Coke, which had a very negative effect on my mind and my nerves, as I gave up caffeine a month or so prior. It did nip that hangover in the bud though.

While waiting to move into the hall where the event was being held, I had a good long talk with one of my local heroes, Ismael Hernandez, who runs the Freedom & Virtue Institute. I also spoke to my friends from the Libertarian Party of Collier County, FGCU’s Eagles for Liberty and the Ayn Rand Society for Individual Rights of Naples (ARSIRN). After immersing myself in philosophical and political discussion for a good forty-five minutes, I felt ready to begin my day of economic awesomeness.

The event was emceed by Michael Yashko, who not only did a great job at coordinating and managing the event, but also gave a fantastic presentation on the Founding Father’s Constitution versus the abhorrent version of that sacred document we are stuck with today. I’m not sure if anyone at FEE was filming the event but if they did, I’d definitely link to the video on TheSwash.com as part of our Tuition Free Tuesdays weekly feature.

Yashko was then followed by Professor Nikolai Wenzel who teaches at Hillsdale College as well as Florida Gulf Coast University. Prof. Wenzel’s presentation was a perfect compliment to Mr. Yashko’s as it was about constitutional constraint and government mischief. Wenzel gave a great lecture and like Yashko’s (and really all the lectures at this event) I’d love to post video of it to the Swash so that our loyal SwashPeeps could experience it for themselves.

The next speaker was Lawrence Reed, who I have had the pleasure of seeing several times now between events held by FEE – which is the organization he is the president of, The Southwest Florida Young Republicans and Eagles for Liberty, who are FGCU’s chapter of the more widely known Students for Liberty. Mr. Reed’s lecture was called “Money Mischief Since the Founders”. It was an amazing lecture jam-packed with so much knowledge that taking notes was damn near impossible but it did give me several ideas for articles I should probably write. Like his other lectures I’ve seen, one about the myths of the Great Depression and another that compared the United States to Rome during its collapse, this fifty minute lesson was a real treat and had me captivated the whole time. I leaned over to my friend Shawn when Mr. Reed wrapped up and whispered, “I could sit through four hours of this guy.” He nodded in agreement.

The next speaker was Ismael Hernandez who gave an incredible speech about compassion. Not government compassion with a gun to your head but real honest truthful compassion and how to express it effectively. Mr. Hernandez spoke about his past and how he grew up in Puerto Rico as a communist raised by a Black Panther father and how he came to America and experienced this country for himself without the direct influence of communist rhetoric. After telling his very personal tale and giving the audience the rundown on how compassion truly works, the crowd got to their feet and applauded Mr. Hernandez for his great story and his invaluable insight.

After Ismael Hernandez’s great lecture, we all went off to lunch. I was fortunate enough to partake in a special luncheon with Lawrence Reed that helped to benefit students wanting to go to FEE camps to learn about economics. At that lunch, I was seated next to both Michael Yashko and Lawrence Reed, which was awesome in itself. While munching on salad, a turkey sandwich and a cookie, I got two more doses of Mr. Reed, who went on to tell those of us at the special luncheon two stories. One was about Nicky Winton who saved 669 mostly Jewish children from the Nazis and found homes and safe passage for them in Britain. The second story was about a pirate radio station somewhere in Soviet controlled Europe. I can’t even begin to try and retell these tales, as Mr. Reed did it in such a profoundly poetic way. However, both these stories were really touching and went to show that no matter how bad we think we have it in the United States right now, it could always be very much worse. In retrospect, this is why we need to fight for liberty and freedom because it isn’t a stretch to envision an America that could fall that far.

After lunch, we went right back into more fantastic lectures. Professor Bradley Hobbs of FGCU gave us a pretty awesome lesson about business and economics. He spoke to us about his personal experiences growing up on the Space Coast where, as a kid, he worked for his father in the family pharmacy. The business has been so successful over the years that it has grown large enough to fill up an entire strip mall, minus a bagel shop and a medical supply store that the family also owns. Hobbs lectured greatly and had a very pleasant demeanor that made his presentation enjoyable, which made me feel like I should go back to school and take up economics at FGCU. The college is practically in my backyard, therefore much closer than George Mason where I was thinking of applying if I decided to go back to college.

The next speaker was former CEO of BB&T, John Allison. Mr. Allison, who has had several appearances on one of my favorite shows – ‘Stossel’, has been known to be a big fan of Ayn Rand and her philosophy: objectivism. In fact, Mr. Allison used to assign ‘Atlas Shrugged’ to all of his senior executives as required reading. He has referred to ‘Atlas Shrugged’ as “the best defense of capitalism ever written.” He’s been a large contributor to the Ayn Rand Institute and through the BB&T Charitable Foundation has given dozens of colleges and universities millions of dollars to start programs devoted to the study of Rand’s work. Apart from all this backstory, Mr. Allison gave one of the most inspiring lectures of the day. He talked about leadership and how to properly grab the reigns of a company or any situation and take control effectively and respectfully. John Allison gave us insight into the TARP bailouts and how he fought against them but ultimately lost and was forced to partake in the financial tyranny. He spoke heavily against regulation, especially in the financial industry. Truth be told, I walked away from these lessons with the intent to leave Wells Fargo and put all of my money in BB&T. You have earned a new customer Mr. Allison, even though you no longer work for BB&T.

Following John Allison was author John Blundell. This well-spoken Englishman talked to us abut his newest book ‘Ladies For Liberty: Women Who Made a Difference in American History’. Blundell, who wrote a well-respected book about Margaret Thatcher turned his attention to many of the woman who have played a major part in building and shaping America throughout the years. He gave us some deep insight into the book and how it came to be and through his passion he sold me on buying a copy on the spot: call me an easy sell. I got to talk to Mr. Blundell one-on-one while he signed my book where we briefly discussed the possibility of him doing a follow-up book about woman who fight for liberty today.

After Blundell, two FGCU professors closed out the day. First up was Dean Stansel, who gave a great talk about taxes at a more local level. He pulled out a bunch of studies he did for the Cato Institute that showed the correlation between taxation and economic growth in various cities throughout the last several years. It didn’t teach me anything I didn’t already know but it did present a lot of data, collected through Stansel’s hard work, that solidified my beliefs even further.

The last of the final speakers was Professor Carrie Kerekes. Prof. Kerekes gave us a pretty solid rundown of FGCU’s economic and business programs. I feel like it was a thirty minute infomercial for FGCU but it was effective and made me incredibly happy to know that there was a university, just down the street, that was teaching the right side of economics. If I do indeed end up going back to school, I think I may be a future student of several of the professors who spoke at this FEE event.

Once the event was officially over, I got a tequila sunrise or six and sipped them down at the bar in the hotel lobby where I mingled with the other attendees. I didn’t hang long, as I don’t nurse my alcohol and was pressed for time as I had to drive down to my boss’ lounge to celebrate two of my other bosses’ birthdays. I left that crazy party fairly early however, as I was tired from a previous night of no sleep and a day full of awesome economic discussion.

I do have to say that the FEE event was, by far, one of the greatest economic and political events I have ever attended and trust me, I’ve been to a lot more than my fair share. If you are in the Naples area and you don’t go next year, you’re certainly missing out on a great day; consider me a FEE lifer at this point.

Sunday – Super Bowl XLVI:

The following day was Super Bowl Sunday and even though I couldn’t care less who won between the New York Giants and the New England Patriots, I was geared up to party with my peeps and indulge in a lot of food and booze. It’s hard watching American football when it isn’t a New Orleans Saints game but the overindulgence in food and booze made dealing with my team not being in the big game much more bearable.

I kicked the day off by going to my mum’s where I watched the Chelsea v. Manchester United game, which may have been the best EPL game I’ve seen this season even though it ended in a tie. Between kicks and goals, my mum and I emptied two cans of Pabst Blue Ribbon into a bowl full of flour and made some real serious beer bread. Shortly after this, I helped my friend Michael make our special treat: meat turtles. Essentially, you take a giant mound of ground sirloin and mix it up with a bunch of shredded cheese and whatever sauces you may want to put in it. You then wrap the big ball of meat in a shell of bacon – woven together. You then stick three hot dogs through it – making four feet, a head and a tail, which creates the shape of a turtle (see pic to the left).

So we took our meat turtles (made of Kobe beef and Kobe bacon) and our beer bread to Michael’s co-worker Mikey’s house. Lots of Mikes I know but it gets even more confusing when Mikey’s father and grandfather are also both named Mike. Anyway, we blew up a bounce house, drank beer and had a real party going even before the Super Bowl kicked off. To compliment the day even more, Mikey’s dad made a monstrous beef brisket and a giant mound of pulled pork. There was also BBQ chicken, homemade baked beans and so much other food that listing it all would take entirely too long for me to type and too long for you to read. Plus this is making me hungry again.

The food was beyond amazing! I gorged until I couldn’t move, waited a while and gorged again. We all drank beer and whiskey to wash down the giant mounds of meat scattered throughout the large kitchen and followed that up by firmly planting ourselves in recliners in front of a giant screen to watch the game. I missed parts of the contest between the Giants and Patriots as I kept nodding off into sporadic but very short-lived food comas. When I was able to be mobile enough to get up, I only did so to cut myself a piece of red velvet cake. I was on a serious mission and it was mission accomplished!

In the end, the Giants won and I couldn’t find anymore PBR or whiskey.

Monday – The Cato Institute’s Policy Perspectives 2012:

I woke up late Monday morning, as my alarm either didn’t go off or I somehow crawled across my room, turned it off and then crawled back into my bed. While that is theoretically possible, I’ve never made it comfortably back to my bed after turning off my alarm. Usually I awake to find myself curled up in the fetal position trembling from being in my boxers on my very cold tile floor. It’s kind of like waking up on a frozen lake with nothing more than swimming trunks on. Luckily for me, I didn’t find myself on the floor and I didn’t have to fight off hypothermia as I showered and threw on a suit to head down to the Ritz-Carlton, Naples Resort for the Cato Institute event featuring Tucker Carlson, David Boaz, Ed Crane and Robert Levy.

I arrived at the Ritz-Carlton just before 10 a.m., so I at least got there before the opening reception and was able to score the best table in the house for attendees who weren’t a part of a larger group. The early bird most definitely catches the worm and in my case, these words were never truer, as the table I selected was quickly filled with a few other like-minded early birds – one of which provided me with one of the best moments of my life.

The woman who sat to my left came to my table and asked if she could sit there or if it was reserved. I told her anyone could join me, as I was by myself with seven empty chairs surrounding me. She sat down and I’m not sure how we arrived to this point but we started talking about objectivism. After several minutes of discussing Ayn Rand’s philosophy, this woman – who’s name is Elayne Kalberman, opened up and told me that she used to work for Rand. In fact, she was the sister of Nathaniel Branden, a very close confidant and partner of Rand who helped bring her philosophy to the world.

Mrs. Kalberman went on to tell me that she used to be a part of a group that would meet with Rand weekly at her home to discuss ‘Atlas Shrugged’ while it was being written. This small group of intellectuals met in an effort to make sure that Rand’s philosophy was coming through and that all the points that she needed to make were hit effectively. So here I am, sitting in a room full of libertarians of all ages who would probably worship this woman, if they were even slightly aware of her presence there and I was the lucky guy that got to sit next to her out of the 400 plus other people!

I’m not going to discuss the details of all the things she told me and the stories I found so engaging and incredible, as they are her tales to tell, not mine but it is worth mentioning that we talked for a few minutes about the fall of one-time objectivist and Rand ally Alan Greenspan. Mrs. Kalberman and I discussed the Federal Reserve, inflation and she shared her insightful thoughts and solutions on it with me. We spoke about her brother and about the fact that there was a falling out between their family and Ayn Rand. One thing she did say, that I will share, as I know others who knew Rand felt the same way, is that Mrs. Kalberman didn’t like the way Ayn Rand treated young people who wanted to better understand objectivism. Rand was often times mean and had a very abrasive attitude towards those wanting to come to the same conclusions Rand arrived at.

Mrs. Kalberman and I also talked about Murray Rothbard, my favorite economist and someone who she had a lot of dealings with throughout the years. She was a pleasure to sit next to and a very nice woman. I hope to one day cross paths with her again as I couldn’t fully pick her brain on things due to the fact that we only had a few minutes here or there to discuss these things between all the different speakers who were at the event.

Speaking of which, the event was emceed by Cato’s Robert Levy who is not only hilarious and quick-witted but also a great teacher and speaker. Next up was Cato Founder and President Ed Crane who gave us an informative Powerpoint presentation that included a great scene from ‘Monty Python’s Life of Brian’ about people needing to be individuals and not a collective desperate to follow a leader. Cato’s Executive VP David Boaz lit up the room with his lecture, as he always does. He talked about effective ways of reclaiming freedom and entertained the crowd with his sharp and witty ways. All the Cato speakers aren’t just near-geniuses they are all practically stand-up comedians who know how to properly mix together their lessons and their humor in a way that keeps everyone engaged.

This was followed by a reception in the courtyard outside of the event hall where I may have drank too much “lady wine” – my name for white wine. After the fifteen minute binger, we were brought back into the large hall for lunch. We were served some sort of strange salad with a green dressing that was more like an emerald-colored Béarnaise sauce than actual salad dressing. The main course was a chicken cutlet covered in tomato sauce with a strange potato thing and a mixture of spinach leaves and mushrooms, which was surprisingly the tastiest thing on the plate. Dessert was a small rectangle thing that looked like it came straight out of ‘Alice in Wonderland’. When I bit into it, I realized that it was the world’s fanciest piece of key lime pie. I don’t mean to knock the Ritz-Carlton, as they host events incredibly well, but being the food snob I am, I wasn’t all that impressed with the culinary display on this day.

After lunch we got the main event, which was a great lecture by Tucker Carlson who owns the Daily Caller, works for Fox News and has previously worked for CNN and MSNBC. He talked about the 2012 presidential race and gave us all some of his personal insight on Ron Paul, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum. He talked about supporting Ron Paul during his 1988 run for president when he ran under the Libertarian Party. He spoke about Rick Santorum the man but understands why people are turned off from him due to his stance on social issues. Tucker told us about his relationship with Newt Gingrich and mentioned that Newt’s office is practically next door to his. He also talked about Romney being the “prefect candidate”.

Tucker explained that all the things that the voters gripe about they actually don’t care about because it rarely, if ever, sways the consensus. He talked about how people always point to flip-flopping but defends it saying that when you get all the facts and new data becomes available, you should take the best stance and in certain cases, that could mean that a politician flip-flops. Realistically, the issue is what they flip-flopped on and why, not just that they switched positions. While I understand this point and agree with it to some degree, I do feel that politicians should be real students of the game and truly study up and know what it is they are voting on or supporting. I’m not a politician but if I don’t know something as fully as I should, I tend not to comment on it and I’m honest about it when pressed on it. Maybe it’s different when you’re playing the games that the Beltway Suits play.

He also told us that the night before the Cato event he was in Chicago with Andrew Breitbart and a few others where they had dinner with domestic terrorists and leaders of the Weather Underground, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. He said that they pretty much denied everything Tucker asked them about and that these fighters for socialist causes hosted the dinner event in the penthouse of one of Chicago’s nicest and tallest buildings. Maybe it took place in the penthouse that the Joker crashed in ‘The Dark Knight’, seems fitting anyway. In any event, Tucker finished by telling us that Ayers asked where he was going from there and Tucker responded by telling him a Cato Institute event, which caused Ayers’ lip to quiver.

During the Q & A session after the lecture, Tucker said that he didn’t believe Ron Paul would run third party and that Gary Johnson going third party and potentially getting a Paul endorsement would most certainly split the vote and get Obama re-elected. Tucker said that Obama was beatable and then went on to talk about how Ron Paul is resonating with people and that the GOP is essentially careless in not embracing him and more of his ideas, as it could cost them the race. He was also asked if Hillary Clinton would run as Obama’s VP but Tucker was certain she wouldn’t and then shared some recently acquired insider knowledge that she may become the new head of the IMF or the World Bank. He then spoke about how Joe Biden is made to look dumb by the press who are fed stories from the White House but in actuality, even though he is an outspoken passionate blowhard, he understands the game much more than Obama and is actually a solid VP for the Democrats.

At the end of Tucker’s time on stage, people quickly filtered out of the large hall, as I walked towards the front of the room to talk to the man. We talked about a few different issues but the most important part, at least for me, is that he was very complimentary of what it is I do. We talked about building Internet new sites from the ground up and he gave me some solid advice on what I need to do to take TheSwash.com to the next level. We talked about the difficulty in getting started and how to build your brand and bring in other contributors. He said that he really likes the name “The Swash” as it was really memorable and it sounded “dirty”. It was a great discussion with a great guy that only wanted to offer advice and to help out another guy clawing his way up from the bottom of the barrel to the top.

Tucker dipped out and so did I while running into a good friend and congressional candidate Trey Radel. I talked to my friend Trey and mentioned interviewing him for the Swash. He’s game and I’m going to try and set something up. He’s already got my vote, not because he’s a friend – I have other friends in the hunt, but because of his stance on NDAA, SOPA and PIPA. He’s also a very pro-constitution candidate, which we don’t have enough of. This was followed up by a thirty minute wait in the valet line and a trip to my local watering hole to reflect on the awesome weekend.

I did good this round.

Detroit ‘Comeback’ Ad Filmed in New OrleansComments Off

One of the most popular Super Bowl advertisements last night was the Chrysler ad featuring Clint Eastwood, titled “Halftime in America.”

The spot is supposed to be encouraging, as it focuses on the resilience of Detroit. “It’s halftime. Both teams are in their locker room discussing what they can do to win this game in the second half,” Eastwood says in the spot. “It’s halftime in America, too. People are out of work and they’re hurting. And they’re all wondering what they’re going to do to make a comeback. And we’re all scared, because this isn’t a game. The people of Detroit know a little something about this. They almost lost everything. But we all pulled together, now Motor City is fighting again.”

But contrary to what the might ad suggest, the spot was actually filmed in New Orleans and Los Angeles. “Yes, part of it was filmed in New Orleans . . . and some was filmed in various parts—such as Los Angeles,” Dianna Gutierrez said. She specifically points to the tunnel scenes as being taken at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum, while the stadium shots were in New Orleans.

Asked whether any part of the ad was filmed in Detroit, Gutierrez said that previously taken footage from various parts of the Motor City was used. No image of Detroit was shot for the specific use in this ad.

“Detroit’s showing us it can be done. And, what’s true about them is true about all of us,” Eastwood says in the ad. “This country can’t be knocked out with one punch. We get right back up again and when we do the world is going to hear the roar of our engines. Yeah, it’s halftime America. And, our second half is about to begin.”

Yet, while Detroit’s comeback might be the message of Eastwood’s ad, its physical imagery comes from New Orleans and Los Angeles.

Source: The Weekly Standard.

The Mitt Romney Problem, Part I: Smaller Government(1)

*Written by Rob Rimes.

Introduction:

I don’t hate Mitt Romney but I am certainly not a fan, which should be obvious at this point. I do hate the goddamned media for giving him an unfair advantage over the other candidates but truthfully, that isn’t his fault. Romney isn’t the absolute worst presidential choice out there, which many of my colleagues and readers may disagree with vehemently, but he is still a progressive statist bastard that is hellbent on controlling the lives of all of us in an effort to keep the giant wheel of the establishment machine rolling. I have been nasty to the guy many times in my countless diatribes about the 2012 election but my distaste and malcontent has been for a very good reason. Point being, I know that Romney can’t save this country and I feel that this is painstakingly obvious even though I find myself completely befuddled over the fanfare and support that this guy gets, not just form the media – their support is understandable, but from the conservative voting public who are all pretty much in unison behind this guy’s idea of smaller government, less taxes and squashing the budding police state. This guy will not solve any of those problems. In fact, he will only magnify them and dig our giant pit of legislative bullshit deeper and deeper. Hell, the pit is practically bottomless at this point but electing Mitt Romney will only solidify that fact even further.

I’m certainly not saying that Obama is a better choice out of the two. Realistically, I don’t think there is much difference between one or the other. This is a prime example of there being just one big government party with two wings: one that wears blue shirts with donkeys on them and one that wears red shirts with elephants on them. The worst part about this is that most “conservatives” are following Romney, as well as Gingrich and Santorum, believing in the hypocritical rhetoric that they’ve got a small government guy on their side who will fight for them. Realistically, those who support these guys are ignorant in economics and foreign policy. It is incredibly unfortunate but as Ron Paul said in a recent debate, “Conservatives have lost their way.”

Now I can’t completely cover every negative thing on Romney’s record, as there is a lot, but I am going to talk about a few points. In the end, it is really your decision as to where you want to put your vote but you really need to think this through and ask yourself where you want to be in four years. Do you want to be climbing out of the hole or do you want to be yelling at the guys that are still digging and digging?

Smaller Government:

The first thing worth getting into is definitely the issue of Mitt claiming that he’ll work towards making government smaller. Mitt Romney, who has preached for this over the course of all these debates, has a really shitty record of practicing what he’s been preaching. In reality, Mitt has been feeding into the desires of the voter base and has been stringing them along with his version of the popular rhetoric of the day. The sad thing is that many of the people who support this douchenugget are taking all this bullshit at face value and not looking at reality. Truthfully, maybe Romney actually believes his empty words and his supporters might not be adept enough to see through the Orwellian doublespeak. Let me rundown his track record of big government bullshit by ripping the fucking band-aid off: exposing the man’s economic sores.

I could write a whole damn article about the monstrosity that is Romneycare but I won’t bore you or myself with the details that have already been recycled a million times and beaten into the ground with Thor’s hammer by every critic for several years now. I’m over the Romneycare issue personally. I don’t like it, I think it’s shit, it was the blueprint for what became Obamacare but it was done at the state level, not the federal level and most Bay Staters still approve of it, so that is their economic cross to bear.

One thing that many Romney supporters don’t know or just choose to ignore is the fact that he significantly raised taxes in Massachusetts while he was governor. While preaching fiscal conservatism and pimping himself out as friendly to business, Governor Romney increased the tax bill on businesses by $300 million! He and his cronies also approved hundreds of millions of dollars worth of higher fees and fines on businesses in just four years! Many business owners were incredibly dissatisfied with Romney as governor. Essentially, corporate taxes under Romney almost doubled in just his one term.

I guess the tax hikes were necessary though, as Romney drastically increased spending in Massachusetts. In 2006, Ol’ Mittens increased spending in just that year by 7.6 percent. In 2007, he increased spending again, this time all the way up to 10.2 percent. During just his four years in office, he increased state spending by a total of 20.7 percent! That’s a lot of debt thrown on the taxpayer but at least those hefty tax hikes on corporations absorbed some of the burden. Maybe this tax burden accounts for the fact that Mitt Romney managed the 47th ranked state, out of 50, in the realm of job creation. That brings me to my next point.

Romney has been touting his job creation success while working at Bain Capital. He proudly boasts about creating corporations like Staples, Sports Authority and Steel Dynamics, all of which have created hundreds of thousands of jobs. However, as governor, unemployment was a real problem in Massachusetts. Sure, he did great in the private sector and as Romney himself has said, “Jobs are created in the private sector.” However, all of his job creation skills didn’t translate to success when he reached office. So what makes the public think that this job magician’s magic wand will suddenly work this time? Yes he is a self-professed business master but he couldn’t tap into that while running Massachusetts so essentially his trial run at it was a failure. On the issue of Romney’s job creation woes, Boston Herald business reporter Bret Arends wrote:

During the four years Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts, it had the second worst jobs record of any state in America…it wasn’t a regional issue. The rest of New England created nearly 200,000 jobs.

The question no one ever seems to ask Governor Romney is how many jobs were destroyed in an effort to build his monstrous corporations. Now I am not attacking him for building giant successful businesses, as that is the nature of the beast – good or bad. I am just trying to point out how skewed these sorts of statistical claims are because if you created say 300,000 jobs but your new businesses eliminated the jobs of say 250,000 people whose businesses you closed down through competition, well then you’ve only really created 50,000 jobs. This is a simple ballpark example but it should show you how some statistical claims can be made when you only tell one side of the story. Hell, government has been using these sorts of statistical tactics for years when releasing inaccurate numbers to sway public opinion for a candidate, a bill or whatever else they have needed public approval on.

Another issue that shows how non-small government this ass clown is, is the TARP bailouts. Mittens hates when people bring the subject up and has gone as far as lying and completely denying that he ever supported it but there is tons and tons of evidence that says otherwise. In fact, Romney was incredibly passionate about poorly run banks getting a massive taxpayer funded bonus for sucking at business. On CNN, a few years back during the bailouts, Romney said:

I think there is a need for economic stimulus. Americans have lost about $11 trillion dollars in net worth. That translates into about $400 billion dollars a year less spending that they’ll be doing, and that’s net of additional government programs like Medicaid and unemployment insurance. And government can help make that up in a very difficult time. And that’s one of the reasons why I think a stimulus program is needed.

Sounds like small government to me! So why would he be so pro-big bank? Well, let’s look at his top campaign contributors from a recent list. His top contributor is Goldman Sachs who gave $354,700. Next up is Credit Suisse Group at $195,250 and Morgan Stanley at $185,800. Every other contributor in the six figures is also in the banking industry. You’ve got HIG Capital, Barclays, Kirkland & Ellis, Bank of America, PricewaterhouseCoopers, EMC Corp. & JPMorgan Chase. His top ten contributors are all fucking banks! Occupying Wall Street should start on Mitt’s front lawn! This shows a sharp contrast from Ron Paul whose top three campaign contributors are the Air Force, the Army and the Navy. Paul’s biggest contributor is also a lot less than six figures. So who really understands the plight of the average person? Romney is so far up on the Wall Street crony capitalist ladder than he can’t remember how to get down – not that he wants to.

People that call Barack Obama the Wall Street president haven’t seen anything yet. On campaign contributions from the big banks, Obama has made significantly less than Romney. Goldman Sachs gave Obama $49,124, Morgan Stanley coughed up $28,225, Bank of America gave $46,699, JPMorgan Chase came in at $38,038 and Citigroup was at $36,887. You do the math but it is obvious who the bailed out banking industry supports.

Another thing worth noting is that Romney has gotten more money from lobbyists than all other Republican candidates combined. I guess you need all that special interest money to work towards smaller government. Damn it! That Mitt Romney doublethink is taking over my brain!

The fact of the matter is, love it or hate it, Mitt Romney has a proven track record of being nothing less than one of the heads on the big government hydra. He is an economic nightmare but because people take him at his word and don’t look at his record, he can continue to dupe the masses into thinking that he’s on their side.

Mitt Romney will say anything to get elected.

Continued in Part II: Foreign Entanglements..

Who Won the Debate?: January 23rd 2012 EditionComments Off

*Written by Rob Rimes.

Let me start by saying that even though I’ve referred to other debates as the worst, this one definitely took the cake and showed us just how godawful these things can be. This debate came to us from Tampa, Florida and was hosted by NBC. Brian Williams was the moderator and he was a shitty one at that. To start, there were no intros and the audience was not allowed to participate in any way. This means that the crowd could not applaud, boo or get fired up like they have in most previous debates. While I understand that this is done to speed up the process and fit in more quality time with the candidates, it creates bad television and boring debates, especially when the candidates argue incessantly for long periods of time and the moderator is too chicken shit to break it up and stick to his own rules regarding time. My biggest regret about watching this goddamned thing is that I only had one beer in the whole fucking house. I was also too lethargic from a 20 oz. New York strip to get up and mix a stronger drink. At least the ecstasy I got from my giant piece of premium American red meat kept me from losing my shit and going completely insane throughout this episode of ‘Three Statists and a Constitutionalist’.

So we start with Newt Gingrich being asked to respond to Mitt Romney recently calling him “erratic” and a “failed leader”. Woohoo! Here we go already starting with the personal attacks over policy issues. Gingrich immediately dropped several Reagan references and was shocked that he didn’t get any applause. Oh yes, the crowd must stay silent or be forced to stare into the droopy eyes of Brian Williams who has been known to turn people into hipster liberals with just a quick glare. This didn’t bode well for Newt as he was waiting for the crowd to react to his empty one-liners. Gingrich said he was like Reagan, who ignored Carter and went on to win the election. Really Newt? You’re ignoring the attacks against you? Funny, because every show I’ve seen you on, you’ve just gone on and on about all the attacks against you.

Gingrich is immediately given a second question, as Williams asks him how he has changed since being Speaker of the House. Gingrich says that as Speaker he had four consecutive balanced budgets, which he says is unheard of. He also brags about how many jobs he created and how he reformed welfare. This is also funny because in a recent interview he took the Romney approach and said government doesn’t create jobs the private sector does. So which is it Newt?

Brian Williams then directs his attention to Mitt and I can already tell that Paul and Santorum are probably going to get the shaft on time this round. Romney is asked if he is electable, which is a dumb fucking question. It’s a dumb question when anyone is asked this, really. Romney talks about how he saved the Olympics and created tons of businesses. He doesn’t actually answer the question he just runs through his already well-known yet well-rehersed talking points. He then switches to attacks on Gingrich and disses him for talking bad about the Paul Ryan Plan and for aligning with Nancy Pelosi on several occasions.

Newt Gingrich says that he isn’t going to spend the entire evening “chasing Mitt’s misinformation.” Yes he will, just keep reading. Gingrich says that the American people need a discussion on how the candidates are going to beat Obama and that they need to move passed the bullshit. Romney jumps in and points out that 88 percent of the Republicans in the House of Representatives voted against Newt, which caused him to resign from his position in disgrace. Mitt also points out that Newt’s approval rating when he left Congress was 18 percent. Romney then takes a stiff shot at Gingrich when he says that we can’t retake the White House if the person leading the fight was in the pocket of Freddie Mac. This fight then goes on forever and Brian Williams just lets them duke it out regardless of time restraints and the fact that there are other candidates who haven’t even talked yet. Gingrich tries to explain how he left Congress, which is all bullshit and just leads to him arguing with Romney over who has the most inaccurate attack ads. I thought you were ignoring the attacks and weren’t going to spend the evening “chasing Mitt’s misinformation”? Can we please discuss the real issues?!

Rick Santorum finally gets asked a question and as much as I loathe the guy, I’m glad to see him at this point. Of course he is asked to comment on the Romney-Gingrich spat because Brian Williams wants the two feuding idiots to be front and center to help discredit the GOP as a whole. Santorum rambles some nonsense about painting a positive vision for the country and adds that he creates a real contrast to Mitt and Newt. Um, not really homeboy unless you’re referring to the religio-fascist part. Santorum then claims to “..have a track record of being a strong conservative.” Well that depends on what your definition of a conservative is, as it varies greatly from candidate to candidate.

Brian Williams then takes a shot at Santorum and says that he lost his seat in the Senate by 18 percent. This was of course after Santorum bragged about winning the seat in a liberal state. Santorum responds to the criticism by saying that the Republican governor in Pennsylvania lost worse than he did that same year. What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Santorum also physically crouched down when he was rambling incoherently and actually said the word “crouch down”. Thanks for the visual buddy.

Finally Ron Paul gets brought into this thing! Williams reminds us that Paul once said that he never visualized himself as winning the nomination so why does he think he can win now. Paul says that he doesn’t sit around and dream about being in the White House like everyone else on stage. He points out that, according to polls, when he is put head-to-head with Obama he has a better chance at beating him than anyone else in the GOP. Paul also clues the masses into the fact that Iowa was just a straw poll and the real winner hasn’t yet been decided, as it will be the person who acquires the most delegates. He’s asked if he will run third party because every goddamned moderator has to seemingly ask this question. Once again, Ron Paul says that he has no intentions to do so. He is then asked if he would ever support Newt. Paul gives Gingrich props on his stance with the Federal Reserve and the gold standard but adds that he needs to change his stance on foreign policy. Newt responds by giving Paul some props on economic issues.

They then get into the boring topic of Mitt Romney’s tax returns which just shifts all the attention back to Tweedledum and Tweedledumber – that being Romney and Gingrich, you can choose which is which. Romney says that his income tax info will show how he made profits and rewards. He then goes on to claim that he’ll drop corporate tax rates while reshaping the entire tax code in an effort to simplify it. Gingrich jumps in and channels Mitt’s dad, who released a dozen years worth of tax information. Newt then says something about a Hong Kong tax model. This guy’s always pulling obscure shit from other countries. Romney jumps back in and says he and his father disagreed on many things and unlike his dad, he will only release a few years worth of his personal tax data. Romney then goes on to say that he inherited nothing and made his own mark in the world. He name drops Staples, Sports Authority and Steel Dynamics as ten minutes have passed without mentioning them. Truthfully, I think everything Mitt says is a pre-recorded statement and he just moves his lips to the words.

The mic in this rap battle is then passed back over to Santorum. He takes a shot at Newt and Mitt when he says that they claim to support capitalism but how can they make that claim when they supported the bailouts. Santorum says that we should have allowed these moronic financial institutions go through bankruptcy. What some people might not know though is that Rick Santorum wasn’t in office at the time of the bailouts so he couldn’t vote on TARP; so it is easy for him to say he didn’t support it. When looking a little deeper however, Rick Santorum did support the bailout of the airline industry. So would he have really rejected TARP? Based off of the $15 billion dollar airline bailout and his past voting record with other things, Santorum looks to be a pro-TARP motherfucker. Lucky for him he lost his seat in the Senate and didn’t get stuck with TARP on his record.

Newt is asked about more criticism from Mitt, who apparently claimed Gingrich “peddled influence” with Freddie Mac. Why couldn’t this be addressed the first time in this very same debate when Newt was asked to comment on Mitt’s criticisms? Time wasting bullshit! Newt said he never “peddled influence” and added that Romney’s approach about the Freddie Mac situation is nasty. Gingrich claims that he never lobbied for them and actually says that he brought in experts to teach his staff how to not lobby. Sorry, I just find that laughable. Romney quickly lashes back at Gingrich saying that Freddie Mac doesn’t pay “historians” as much as they paid Newt. Romney also points out that Gingrich was pushing GSEs every chance he got, which is a form of lobbying. Newt said he only made $35,000 per year, which is a lie. Why do people like either of these shady bastards? Aren’t Americans sick of criminals in power?

The Mitt-Newt show goes on for a long time as these two duke it out with no buzzer going off and Brian Williams sitting quiet – wasting our precious fucking time on this bitch fight. Williams, after minutes of this nonsense finally cuts in to stop it but only because NBC has to go to commercial break. Brian Williams has the spine of a squid.

After the commercial break, the issue of the housing crisis comes up. Santorum is the first person asked to address it. He claims that he saw the crisis on the horizon and tried to stop it. Yep asshole but you were about a decade behind Ron Paul on seeing it. Santorum, while explaining his fallacious knowledge on the subject, actually utters the phrase: “Let capitalism work.” Hilarious! This guy doesn’t know what capitalism is! Santorum immediately follows up his pro-capitalism line by saying that the government needs to step in and help the people who have lost their houses. Here we go with the doublespeak! Santorum continues by saying that people need the freedom to get out from under these houses and get relief. Really dude? Just “let capitalism work”?

On the same issue, Paul is asked if the government owes the people anything. Paul says that they owe the people a free market and sound money. He says that the interest rates were kept too low for far too long. Ron Paul says that he introduced legislation to help prevent the housing bubble from bursting years before it actually did. He declares that the bubble and the consequences of these actions were easy to spot but no one in Washington did. Paul says that the government needs to get out of the way. He then closes by saying that the Federal Reserve dumped so much debt on the taxpayers after wiping the slate clean with banks and corporations they bailed out.

Brian Williams, who apparently wants to suck Mitt’s dick, gives us another Mitt-Newt session when he brings them in on the housing issue. Romney says that the government has to help the people they fucked but immediately after that says that the government has to get out of it. Which is it bro? Gingrich says we need to repeal Dodd-Frank as it would improve the economy overnight. He says that the bill led big banks to get bigger. Newt is asked if the financial system is overregulated, which just proves how stupid Brian Williams is. Romney jumps back in to monopolize more time and says that the markets need regulation to work. What? What happened to capitalism? He then adds that we need up-to-date regulation not that old shitty regulation.

Williams, who wants to keep Romney in the spotlight, switches the subject and asks him about opening up Cuba. Mitt actually says that he’d be glad if Fidel Castro died and went to see his maker.. WTF?! Romney says we can’t talk about opening up Cuba but we need to support those in the country who want freedom. Okay, so how are we supporting them by contributing to making their economy shit? Why do you think that it is so easy for Castro to convince his people that America is bad? This is why! Romney wants to help Cubans by punishing them and not “giving in”.

Gingrich adds to Romney’s “glad when Castro’s dead” comment by saying that he won’t meet his maker but that he’ll essentially go to Hell. Newt starts talking about a “Cuban Spring”. He says that we need to reach out to younger Cubans who want freedom. Of course he, like Mitt, wants to do this without working with them in a productive and positive way. These guys must believe in magic.

When the discussion shifts back over to Ron Paul, he says that he has a lot to teach these guys on foreign policy. Ron Paul calls Newt and Mitt’s tactics “isolationist”. Funny watching Ron flip the script when every idiot out there calls him an “isolationist” as the idiots don’t really get what it means. Paul points out that the Cold War is over and the Cuban Missile Crisis was 50 years ago. He adds that we prop up Castro with our sanctions and embargo as it helps him stay in power by gaining support through pointing the finger of blame at the United States. Paul reminds the candidates that we used to talk to the Soviets and currently talk to the Chinese while we’ve had major problems with both. He even adds that we went in and talked to the Vietnamese after the disastrous Vietnam War. He says that we are living in the dark age if we are going to refuse to talk to Cuba.

Santorum, who apparently ignored Paul’s great insight, calls for us to use sanctions against Cuba until the Castro brothers die. He says that for right now we have to keep the current policy active and we shouldn’t embrace Cuba until the dictators are dead. Santorum then goes on a dumb tangent about how Cuba works directly with jihadists. Here we go with the fear mongering!

On Iran, Romney says we need to build a super strong military to scare the fuck out of everyone. Gingirch says that we are a country that likes peace and stability. Apparently he means between all the wars he wants to bring forth. Gingrich adds that he feels that we should defend the freedom of the sea. He then shares his thoughts on Obama, saying that Iran keeps testing us because our president is weak. Ron Paul gets in the Iran talk and says that our blockade of Iran’s strait is an act of war and tells us to imagine if the roles were reversed. Paul points out that Iran needs the Strait of Hormuz as much as we do. He warns us all that we have too many wars and the thought of invading Iran is ridiculous as we don’t have any money.

Santorum is asked how he would attack Iran when they have such a large target list. Santorum doesn’t answer that, he immediately goes right into the fear mongering he is so good at. He says that if Iran gets a nuke, the whole world will change. He then says that Obama’s Iran policy is a failure and feels that no one in power is serious about the Iranian threat. He then claims that Iran’s leadership is the equivalent to having a country ran by Al-Qaeda. He hammers the point that it is reckless to not try and stop Iran from building a nuke. He then flips the script and starts rambling about manufacturing and energy in Florida.

The candidates are then asked why it is okay for them to court voters in Spanish while they are all in favor of English as a national language. Gingrich says that the common bond that unites a country is one language. He says that there will be 300-400 languages used in the U.S. very soon so we need to unify the people with just one. Romney agrees with Newt before rambling about Massachusetts teachers teaching in other languages. Ron Paul steps in and says that we need to have one language at the national level but adds that if states want ballots in Spanish, such as Florida, it is their right to do so. Paul says that you can make English the official federal language without interfering in what the states want to do.

On illegal immigration, Newt says that the children of illegals should be allowed to join the military so they can go off and die for his senseless wars. Romney says he would not sign the DREAM Act in its current form but he would if it included military service. Romney then goes on a weird rant that illegals should “self-deport” themselves, go back to their country of origin and apply for legal citizenship. Santorum, who didn’t think the “self-deportation” comments were obscure, says that people have been self-deporting for awhile now due to our shitty economy. Santorum keeps referring to illegal immigrants as “they” as if they are something other than individuals.

Newt is asked about sugar and goes on to ramble about sugar types. Romney, who gets a bunch of money from Florida sugar farmers, says that we need to kill sugar subsidies. He then goes on a rant about homes in Florida, diverting his attention away from sugar. Romney says that too many homes in Florida are underwater. OMG! Global warming is drowning us! Oh.. wait.. that was a figure of speech.

Ron Paul is asked some dumb question about saving the Everglades and then we go to a commercial break. Why couldn’t they ask that dummy Santorum about the Everglades? He’s a snake, he’d have more invested in the issue. We also get Williams asking abut the Terry Schiavo case, which happened years ago and has nothing to do with anything that is going on right now. Gingrich and Paul address it but it is just a time-waster.

Romney is asked if space is a priority. He says “yes” but adds that Obama doesn’t have a real vision for NASA and because of that, Florida is suffering. Actually dude, I live in Florida and I’m doing okay, so don’t speak for me. Mitt says that the right mission for NASA needs to be determined by the president. Um.. I thought you were a capitalist guy? Romney then adds that NASA shouldn’t be solely funded by the government but that it should be funded by a collaborative effort of the military and companies that have ties and can benefit from the institutions work.

Keeping with Romney, he is asked what he’s done to promote conservatism. Mitt gives the stupidest answer when he says that he has created a family and worked in the private sector. Really, that’s your answer? Gingrich is then brought in and asked to comment on Mitt and replies with, “I don’t want to spend my time commenting on Mitt.” Well what the fuck was he doing the first half of this goddamned debate?! Santorum jumps in and rants and whines about a bunch of shit regarding Gingrich and Romney not being as conservative as he is.

Brian Williams then asks Ron Paul if Gingrich and Romney are insufficiently conservative. Why didn’t Williams ask if Santorum was? Ron Paul says that it all depends on what your definition of conservative is. He points out that conservatives have lost their way completely and asks how can a person be conservative when they’ll cut food stamps but won’t stop wasteful spending overseas. He adds that you can’t have smaller government if you keep creating all these wars. He also adds that you can’t promote personal liberty and then try to legislate all the crap that the GOP wants.

Mittens says that he has a solid conservative record, just look at it. Okay dickbag. He then diverts and brags about how Ted Kennedy had to take a loan out on his house to beat him in the governor’s race back in the 90′s. Yeah, he still beat you dude. He finishes his soulless rambling by saying he will repeal Obamacare and leave health care up to the states.

Gingrich is asked about his numbers being on the rise and what scares him the most about possibly becoming president. He just says that the next president will face enormous problems. No shit cuntpickle! He then warns that there are too many huge special interest groups working against the country and only for their own benefit. Somehow he expects to defeat that. This ends the debate, twenty minutes early and Brian Williams introduces NBC’s crack staff to analyze the debate for the remainder of the time. I turn off the TV.

God this shit was awful.

Grading Scale:
Grade B: Ron Paul
Grade D+: Newt Gingrich
Grade D: Rick Santorum
Grade D-: Mitt Romney

The Fear That Fed Money BringsComments Off

US influence on decisions made in Europe, battle over a bailout, more quantitative easing, Fed as the instrument of liquididty, Ron Paul wants to abolish the US Federal Reserve, countries rushing to sell bonds, France fears downgrading, magnification of debt, Greece default still a worry.

The hand of the US elitists shows more each day in the decisions being made in Europe. Mario Draghi, ex-Goldman Sachs, Trilateralist and Bilderberg, is putting everything in place just the way the US elitists want. We are about to see full scale quantitative easing. One trillion in loans times fractional lending of 3 to 9 to whatever will give Europe the funds it needs indefinitely. Europe is going to be a rerun of what we have seen in the UK and US. In behalf of German voters who are 65% against such funding, Chancellor Merkel has refused to allow issuance of Eurobonds or an expansion of the EFSF. Draghi at the head of the ECB is now putting pressure on Mrs. Merkel to drop back to a more defensive position. The intrigue is at its height. If Frau Merkel gives into Draghi she and her party will not score well in the next election and may even lose political control. That could cause Germany to consider leaving the euro, which would destroy the euro zone. There are major dangers here and all the players are well aware of it. Agreement will take time and if it is not reached everything could short circuit, other than the fact that the Fed has put the funds in place. The other objective of getting Germany to whole-heartedly accept the bailout and stimulation is another matter. Confusion reigns even among the participants. The US, UK, France and their front men, Draghi, Monti and Papademos are all moving forward. The price will be very high from an inflationary standpoint, but to the elitists that isn’t even a consideration. They could care less. That is why you want to have your assets invested in gold and silver related assets. We could be headed toward another Weimer episode.

What we are seeing worldwide is another expansive use of money and credit creating better known by the euphemism, quantitative easing. In June, the Fed will announce its latest version that has been secretly underway for the past few months. The Fed is the instrument of liquidity, because it is appointed. By using the Fed everyone’s covered politically. That lets the political types slide into the election not having to be worrying about finances and the economy. It will all be designated the Fed’s fault. This will do the Fed lots of damage. If Ron Paul is elected president these actions could lead to the Fed’s demise. Long-term unemployment is still about the same and the housing situation is worsening, not improving. U-3 unemployment figures at 8.5% are almost meaningless. It is U-6 that counts less of course the birth/death ratio and that is 15.2%, or real unemployment of 21.5%.

This past week the euro hit its lowest level versus the dollar in 15 months. Investors certainly see the short-term positives of more than a trillion dollar injection to the banks and sovereigns of Europe, but they are looking beyond that. They see major long-term damage to the euro caused by this massive injection of new liquidity. Unless there is a breakdown in Greece, or another European sovereign, the euro should make it in 2013. That may be so, but banks that just borrowed $850 billion from the ECB have re-deposited $587 billion of those funds back with the ECB. That means only $263 billion was used in other ways, or about 15%. Normally banks would lend overnight to other banks, lending banks do not trust other banks, hence, the massive deposits at the ECB. The lending is for three years or less at 1%, but this program may go on indefinitely as perhaps the programs in the UK and US will as well.

In addition to this really open ended financing many countries are rushing to sell bonds, as $90 to $100 billion has to be refinanced in Europe. That is $203 billion in just the first quarter.

The European bond market is looking at Greece, which wants Greek bondholders to take a 60% to 75% haircut. Sixty percent of those bonds are held by banks and about 40% by hedge funds that will take large losses. In the case of new bond sales they should not sell to private investors. If they sell to sovereigns the debt burden will be smaller and hence the total bill.

CONTINUED at The International Forecaster.

10 Reasons Why Even Liberals are Choosing Paul Over ObamaComments Off

It’s a seemingly absurd idea on the surface: Why would democrats and liberals want to vote for Ron Paul (a Republican) over President Obama? Maybe because they want freedom instead of tyranny, it turns out. Because if you’re a total slave to the police state, it doesn’t really matter whether you’re on the left or the right, does it?

Here, I give you ten solid reasons why even liberals and progressives are supporting Ron Paul. And by the way, I don’t worship Ron Paul or any individual. What I honor isthe principlesthat Ron Paul stands for — the very same principles President Obama has outright abandoned in his broken promises and disturbing reversals against the American people. Out of all the candidates, only Ron Paul has the ethical and moral strength to carry out his office from a place of principle rather than betrayal.

#1) Ron Paul supports decriminalizing marijuana and ending the War on Drugs. Obama does not.

Remember when Obamapromisedhe would decriminalize marijuana, but now his own administration continues to raid legal drug dispensaries in California? That’s a classic Obama lie: Say one thing to get elected, then turn around and do the exact opposite.

Ron Paul, on the other hand, openly supports decriminalizing marijuana and ending the failed War on Drugs. Although he doesn’tpromoterecreational drug use (and neither do I), he understands that treating weed smokers as hard-core criminals is ethical, morally and economically wrong. See my related article on Snoop Dogg and his recent drug bust in Texas:http://www.naturalnews.com/034612_S…

#2) Ron Paul supports the freedom to choose what you eat and drink, including raw milk, but the Obama administration continues to run armed raids on raw milk farmers

Under Ron Paul, the FDA would be forced to end its vicious armed raids on Amish farmers and raw dairy producers. Obama has openly allowed such armed raids to continue under his watch, refusing to even take a stand for food freedom in America.

Ron Paul understands thatliberty is the most important component of abundance. If you are not free to choose what you want to eat, smoke what you want to smoke, and choose your own type of medicine and health care, then you are a slave, not a citizen. Ron Paul seeks toget Big Government out of your life, away from your kitchen, out of your medicine cabinet and away from your children.

#3) Ron Paul would seek to eliminate FDA censorship of the scientifically-validated health claims for herbs, nutritional supplements and natural remedies

Under Bush and Obama, the FDA’s continued censorship of truthful statements about medicinal herbs, homeopathy and nutritional supplements has been fully supported by the White House. Obama is just a corporate puppet, of course, and that means he does whatever the powerful corporations tell him to do — especially the Wall Street and Big Pharma corporations. So it’s no surprise he hasn’t taken a stand to support health freedom for foods and supplements.

But Ron Paul has pushed theHealth Freedom Protection Actyear after year (http://www.naturalnews.com/019382_H…), tirelessly working tolegalize nutrition in Americaand restore Free Speech for Chinese Medicine herbs, Western medicine herbs and dietary supplements. Where Obama wants people to remain ignorant and malnourished, Ron Paul wants to restore your right to know the truth about supplements and natural medicine. As Ron Paul said in late 2005:

“The Health Freedom Protection Act will force the FDA to at last comply with the commands of Congress, the First Amendment, and the American people by codifying the First Amendment standards adopted by the federal courts. Specifically, the Health Freedom Protection Act stops the FDA from censoring truthful claims about the curative, mitigative, or preventative effects of dietary supplements, and adopts the federal court’s suggested use of disclaimers as an alternative to censorship. The Health Freedom Protection Act also stops the FDA from prohibiting the distribution of scientific articles and publications regarding the role of nutrients in protecting against disease.”

#4) Ron Paul would shut down secret military prisons like Gitmo, but Obama wants to expand those prisons and fill them with Americans!

It is now common knowledge that Obama lied when he said he would shut down Guantanamo Bay. As it turns out, Obama actually signed the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) on New Year’s Eve (when no one would notice). The NDAA grants the U.S. government the claimed “legal” right to “indefinitely detain” U.S. citizens, throw them in secret military prisons, interrogate them and even kill them withno due process. All this can now take place without a person even beingchargedwith a crime, much less given their day in court. (http://www.naturalnews.com/034537_N…)

Obama quietly signed this bill on New Year’s Eve, hoping no one would notice. This is how low his morals have stooped, by the way — to signing traitorous bills in the dark of night, on the evening before a major holiday where half the nation is hung over from alcohol. Why no signing ceremony with full coverage by CNN, huh? Maybe it’s because nationaltraitorsdon’t want their crimes against the United States Constitution to be filmed on camera.

In signing this, Obama violated his own oath of office, nullified the U.S. Bill of Rights, and essentially committed an act of mass civil rights violations against the People of America. Rep. Ron Paul, on the other hand, is one of the very few people who has openly and sternly opposed this unlawful NDAA which blatantly and arrogantly violates the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights.

This single point alone outweighs everything else you might think about Ron Paul. Even if you disagree with Ron Paul on other issues, none of that really matters if you’re rotting away in a secret military prison for daring to protest in a public park, for example.Without the Bill of Rights, nothing else really mattersbecause tyranny takes over. The Bill of Rights must be defended first and at all costs. It is the only thing limiting the power of government and protecting the People from tyranny. Without it, we are all little more than slaves to a military dictatorship.

#5) Ron Paul is anti-war, Obama is pro-war.

Remember when Bush was the President, and everybody on the left was screaming about getting us out of all those wars in the Middle East? Funny how they suddenly fell silent when Obama took over the reins from Bush and continued running those same wars, isn’t it?

Ron Paul is solidly anti-war. Although he agrees with the need to “defend our shores,” he also believes that the United States has no moral authority (nor financial stability) from which to engage in running around the world as some sort of global police force, intervening in the business of nations,especially in the Middle East.

He is solidly against a war with Iran even as all the other candidates seem to be almost desperate to throwother people’s sons and daughtersonto the front lines of violent conflict. Only Ron Paul truly honors the troops bybringing them home. All the other war-mongers who say “support our troops” are really screaming, “Let our troops get killed overseas!” And unlike Gingrich, Ron Paul actually served his country as a military man, even with a child to care for:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ron-pau…

#6) Ron Paul’s wants to end the Fed and stop bailing out wealthy banksters, while Obama is a Wall Street sellout

Don’t you find it astonishing that, under the Obama administration, wall street crooks like Jon Corzine have been involved in thetheft of billions of dollarsfrom American farmers and investors, yetno one has been indicted, prosecuted or criminally chargedfor those crimes?

Under the Obama administration, white-collar crime gets a wink and a nod. That’s because people like Vice President Joe Biden actually worship Jon Corzine (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm3V…). Wall Street crooks were some of the largest contributors to the Obama election campaign, and they continue to promote both Obama and Mitt Romney.

Ron Paul, on the other hand, gets no support from the criminal banksters. That’s because he pledges to reign in the Fed, end the disastrous trillion-dollar bailouts and halt the theft of money from U.S. taxpayers by the wealthy elite.

Once again, this reason alone is enough of a reason to vote for Ron Paul.He’s the only candidate who doesn’t support the financial criminals on Wall Street. Maybe that’s why the crooked corporate media keeps smearing him in the news… they’re all tied in with the same crooks who run Wall Street.

#7) Ron Paul does not need a teleprompter to tell you what he believes, and his message has remained consistent for over 25 years

Obama needs a teleprompter to figure out what to say. That’s because he’s mainly a puppet who says what he’s told to say and signs what he’s told to sign (like the NDAA, which he of course promised he wouldn’t sign but did anyway).

Ron Paul needs no teleprompter. He doesn’t have to keep track of which lies he told in which speech to which group. That’s because Ron Paul tells the truth every time, and his message is the same whether he’s in Iowa, New Hampshire or Texas.

Ron Paul isn’t sexy, trendy or hip. Instead, he’s honest, reliable and ethical. Gee, those might be good qualities for leaders to possess, ya think?

#8) Ron Paul is not really a Republican loyalist

This should come as quite a relief to the Democrats out there. Ron Paul is really aLibertarianwho is running on the Republican ticket thanks to the necessary mechanisms of our two-party system. Most of today’s Republicans are just as corrupt as status quo democrats. They start wars, stage false flag terror events and hand out trillions of dollars in bailouts and government contracts to their corrupt buddies.

Ron Paul is none of that. He’s a humble, highly intelligent and principled individual who often votesagainsthis fellow Republicans on bills that run counter to the United States Constitution.

If Ron Paul wins as a Republican, that would of course give Republicans some additional power in Congress, but Ron Paul answers to no one other than God and the People. As all the corrupt corporate lobbyists realized long ago,Ron Paul thinks for himselfand cannot be bought off, no matter how high the offer. He sticks to principles, he honors the Constitution, and he is dedicated to improving the future of our nation, period!

#9) Ron Paul wants to legalize Free Speech (again)

Isn’t it interesting how many of the OWS protesters are now being forced to pay daily fees for the “privilege” of protesting? Gee, I thought America was a free country, and I thought you could peaceably assemble anytime you wanted and shout your grievances to your government. Guess not:http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=FF2F1…

Now the police state pepper spraying has begun, all under Obama of course, who now wants to send Americans into secret military prisons and deprive them of their due process rights. If you believe in the First Amendment and freedom of speech, youcan’tbelieve in Obama! He is the polar opposite of freedom (plus, he flat out lies a lot).

Ron Paul has fought for the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution fordecades, and he has a PERFECT voting record in defending it. He does not waver. He does not bend. He fights for your freedoms in a way that no other Democrat or Republican has ever done.

If you want Free Speech to be legal again in America, vote for Ron Paul.

#10) Ron Paul wants to criminally investigate the crooks in Washington

Most Democrats and Republicans are all crooks who just cover each other’s backs. Yeah, you raped a little kid, but I stole a billion dollars from the taxpayers, and we’ll just agree to both remain silent. Sound familiar? That’s what happens in Washington D.C. almost daily.

Ron Paul thinkselected officials should follow the law. Shock! What a concept! Along with that, he also believes that Attorney General Eric Holder should not run guns into Mexico as part of a staged scam to blame the Second Amendment. Gasp!

Who else dares to say the bureaucrats in Washington are crooks who should becriminally investigatedfor their crimes against the People? You won’t find status quo officials pursuing any of this, of course, becausethey’re all corrupt!

Only Ron Paul stands out above the lawless corruption and criminal-mindedness of the status quo in Washington D.C. He is the “anti-insider,” the one man who actually threatens the entire corrupt system (which is why the press smears him every single day). This is why the recent voting in Iowa was falsified and rigged to make sure Ron Paul wouldn’t win (this was openly admitted by the Republican leaders on local radio). The crooks in Washington absolutely do not want Ron Paul to become President, and that alone should be sufficient reason to put Ron Paul into office!

You want real hope? Real change? Support Ron Paul

If you love the way things are today — unemployment on the rise, a government drowning in debt, soldiers coming home in body bags, your friends and neighbors rotting in prison after getting caught with a little weed — then vote for Obama! He’s happy to carry on the insane policies that have led us to this point in history.

But if you wantreal changein America, support Ron Paul.Make a donation today, so that he can raise the necessary funds to clobber “Mittens” Romney and win the Republican nomination. Then we’ll have a faceoff between Barack Obama and Ron Paul, and there’s no question Paul would win that contest if the voters still have a couple of brain cells functioning when they go to vote.

Make your donations at:
www.RonPaul2012.com

Or support theSouth Carolina money bombby donating here:
http://ronpaul-2012.org/mbpledge_sc…

Source: Natural News.

About Us

We’re definitely not progressives or neo-conservatives. Chances are, you will not like us if you are either of those.

“I put the bastards of this world on notice that I do not have their best interests at heart. I will try and speak for my reader. That is my promise, and it will be a voice of ink and rage.” - Paul Kemp

Social networks

Most popular categories

© 2011 TheSwash.com All rights reserved.