• Feed RSS
There was an error in this gadget
0
On Oct 15, 5:02 am, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Instead of legislation and petitions, how about just NOT JOIN
> Scientology?  Is that an option?  I think it is.
> ---------------------------
>
> Fair point of course, but I think the issue is why is law enforcement
> ignoring criminal complaints - apparently hundreds of them.
>
> Correct?

Don't ask me. I have not seen the evidence. I don't know why they
would not pursue legitimate accusations.
Do you? I don't have a theory on it. Maybe Scientology has good
lawyers, but that shouldn't mean anything. What do you suppose is the
reason? You seem convinced.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

socialism intrinsically tends towards anti-semitism since it wants no inequality and no distinctiveness or particular non-state commitments and relationships


 

Videos at source.  Wow.


--S.




More Anti-Semitism at Occupy Los Angeles

While there have been intense arguments in the media recently about hints of anti-Semitism which have erupted at New York's Occupy Wall Street protest, very little attention has been paid to similar problems cropping up at other "Occupy" events around the country.

Below you will find some photographs and a video taken at the Occupy Los Angeles encampment which reveal how there is a growing encroachment of anti-Semitic "Jewish bankers" conspiracy theories becoming more and more evident at these events. Obviously not everyone at the "Occupy" protests is an anti-Semite, but the fact that these statements and views fit so neatly into the whole anti-banker milieu, and often go completely unchallenged by fellow protesters, should give everyone cause for concern about where this whole movement is heading.

The first four pictures show the signs close up. The second four pictures show the same signs in context as they appeared at the Occupy Los Angeles protest, to prove beyond any doubt that these are authentic. Below them is a video of an Occupy Los Angeles speaker spinning more conspiracy theories.

All Los Angeles photos and video here were taken by Ringo, and will appear in future reports at Ringo's Pictures. This is the first time any of them have been shown online.

(Below the Los Angeles images there is a gallery of videos [many already well-known] of anti-Semitic protesters at the New York Occupation, along with transcriptions.)

First, at Occupy Los Angeles:


"End the Fed. Turn off the spigot!!!", with an illustration showing Stars of David (containing the word "Zion"), missiles, and dollar signs, implying either that Jewish influence in the Federal government is what causes war funding, or that Jews pressure the government to send military aid to Israel, or both.


"Bizarre and incredible as it sounds, humanity has been colonized by a satanic cult called the ILLUMINATI…This cult represents Masonic and Jewish bankers who finagled a monopoly over government credit which allows them to charge interest on funds they create out of nothing. Thus, the people who control our purse strings are conspiring against us…They have orchestrated TWO WORLD WARS and are planning a THIRD."

This ancient stereotype of the evil and greedy "Jewish bankers" is the precursor to the "greedy Wall Street bankers" so hated by the Occupiers.


"It's Yom Kippur: Banks should atone!" Hmmmm…why would the banks and bankers engage in a Jewish ritual practice (atonement on Yom Kippur) if they weren't Jewish? Again, we return to the "Jewish bankers" theme.


"Humanity vs. the Rothschlds" [sic -- he means "Rothschilds.]

In earlier centuries up through WWII, anti-Semitic "Jewish banker" conspiracy theories frequently focused on the Rothschilds, a prominent European Jewish family which owned many financial institutions.

Speaking of the Rothschilds conspiracy theories, and the belief that the Jews "funded WWII," this video by Ringo of a speaker at the Occupy L.A. protest shows that the anti-Semitism is creeping into standard anti-capitalist speeches:

[video]


Here's a transcript of what she said starting at 0:39 into the video:

Occupy L.A. speaker: "How many people know that the wars, in WWII, both sides, were funded by the Rothschilds? Those are the bankers. So banking and war is very intertwined."

And in case anyone wants proof that these signs were indeed at the Occupy Los Angeles protest, here are photos of them in context, with the Occupation encampment around them:


Just to be complete, here is a gallery of videos taken at the New York Occupy Wall Street protest.

First up is the now-infamous "Lotion Man," arguing with a Jewish passerby:

[video]

Lotion Man: "I got a job, Mo. I do have a job. You're a bum, Jew. Man, I'm a Jew. Why are you fighting with us? You got the money, that's why you're fighting, you Jewish man. My father worked 40 years, and we have a foreclosed house, my mother's dead, she had a heart attack from stress. You tell the corporations to stop calling my mother."

Jewish passerby: "What?"

Lotion Man: "What? [Mocking] Uh? Uh? Duhduhduhduhduh. You can't even speak English? Are you Israeli? Go back to Israel. Israel. Go back to Shalom Israel. … I have a job. I'm a college graduate. I'm in the Local 1 Plumbers' Union. Who are you to tell me I need a job? Look at you, you short little man. Go away. I don't wanna argue. Bye! Keep it moving. Occupy Wall Street, Occupy Wall Street."

Also note that the person who took the video said (about Lotion Man's statement that he too is Jewish) "By the way, during the course of his performance, he told me that he was white, Puerto Rican, Jewish, and African-American."

Next up is a guy who's been standing at the protest for weeks, holding up blatantly anti-Semitic signs and ranting about Jews, to the consternation of Jews in the vicinity:

"Blame the Jews."

That's the message one Wall Street protester was trying to spread in Lower Manhattan to anyone that would listen.

A new video posted to YouTube shows the protester loudly and aggressively proclaiming "the Jews control Wall Street."

In the nearly 6-minute video, the man is seen standing in Zuccotti Park ranting against Israel and Jews while holding a sign reading "Hitler's Bankers – Wall St."

The protestor, who would not give his name to those gathered around him, is also seen arguing with members of the public who took offense to his choice of words.

A number of others also ask the protester if Fox News had paid him to stand and display his sign to which he responded: "[expletive] Fox News, that's [expletive]. [Expletive] Jew made that up."

Here's the video:

[video]

The Occupiers, completely unable to accept that their arguments have attracted kooks with similar and overlapping beliefs, begin to formulate their own ridiculous conspiracy theory that he is an agent hired by Fox News — as you will see in this transcript, starting at 1:30:

Anti-Semitic Occupy Wall Street protester: "The Jews control Wall Street! These are the Jews! The Jews control Wall Street. Google it! Google Wall Street Jews. Wall Street Jews! Their names are Jewish — do the homework, do the research. The Jews control Wall Street!"

Bystander: "Hey, didn't I see you getting out of that Fox News truck parked over there by the corner?"

[Later, starting at 3:24]

Blogger: "Tell me something: Know what? People are saying that Fox News gave you $50. Did you get paid $50 to hold that sign?"

Anti-Semitic Occupy Wall Street protester: "Fuck Fox News and that bullshit."

Blogger: "Did anyone pay you to hold that sign?"

Anti-Semitic Occupy Wall Street protester: "No! A fucking Jew made that up."

Blogger: "No one paid you to hold that sign?"

Anti-Semitic Occupy Wall Street protester: "No."

Here's another video of the same guy, with a transcript starting at 1:14:

[video]

Anti-Semitic Occupy Wall Street protester: "Google 'Jews control Wall Street.' Google "Jewish billionaires.' Google 'Jews and the Federal Reserve Bank.' The small ethnic Jewish population in the country, they have a firm grip on America's media, finances, and other areas of production."

Interviewer: "So what would you say to people who say you're anti-Semitic or don't like Jews?"

Anti-Semitic Occupy Wall Street protester: "I would tell them that Jesus in the Gospel according to St. John, Jesus referred to certain elements in the Jewish community as 'children of the devil,' Chapter 8 I believe. But, having said that, the fact of the matter is that there is clear, the fingerprints of these Jewish billionaires and hedge fund managers and bankers is clear and convincing."

Interviewer: "So are you against all Jews, or just…?"

Anti-Semitic Occupy Wall Street protester: "I'm against the Jews who are robbing America, or who are silent about their brethren robbing America. Google 'Jewish billionaires.' Half the billionaires in this country are Jewish. Jews represent 2% of the population, but they are that 1% that seems to control America. And you can also Google 'Jews control America.' There's a lot of research that's been done to prove that there appears to be some kind of ethnic grip on the American economy."

…etc.

The interviewer wrote an article on The Blaze to accompany these videos, in which he also includes an interview with a "non-leader" of the Occupy Wall Street group saying the the anti-Semite doesn't represent the rest of the protesters.

Here is yet another video of the same guy, with a transcript starting at 0:33:

[video]

Anti-Semitic Occupy Wall Street protester: "I have to say that Jews have usurped the authority of the majority of the people of this country. And they're doing it in a conspiratorial manner. And everyone is afraid, everyone is shaking in their boots to admit that one ethnic group is dominating America."

This article in the Chabad Lubavitch Headquarters News discusses how some observant Jews at the New York Occupy Wall Street protest are becoming increasingly upset at the incipient anti-Semitism in the protest messages, and are trying to counter it:

Daniel Sieradski, a new media activist and participant in the protests, says he is reaching out to Jewish participants at the protest.

Sieradski has also found a small, fringe element that has "chosen to co-opt the protests as an opportunity" to spread hatred and anti-Semitic rhetoric, among participants, and hopes to dispel negative Jewish stereotypes and to "fight those using Jew-hatred," by his presence there.

Leftists at the protest are hyper-senstitive to accusations of anti-Semitism, and have struck back with counterattacks.

This article in New Voices, the National Jewish Student Magazine, downplays the sign-holder as "the entire anti-Semite community of the Occupy Wall Street protest," claiming there are no other anti-Semites there.

And the left-leaning pro-Occupy PoliticsUSA site published articles entitled Nazi Obsessed Fox News Attacks Occupy Wall Street As Anti-Semitic and A Terrified Rush Limbaugh Mines the Gutter Of Anti-Semitism To Attack the 99% which go to great lengths to dismiss the charges of anti-Semitism.

But with the emergence of the new evidence from Los Angeles presented above, the charges are getting harder to ignore.

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Report any problems, suggestions or abuse to Individual-Sovereignty-owner@yahoogroups.com

.

__,_._,___

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0




"ONE MAN WITH COURAGE IS A MAJORITY" Thomas Jefferson

A message to all members of Patriot Action Network

Some BIG News:

http://ironicsurrealism.com/2011/10/15/the-american-nazi-party-stands-in-solidarity-with-occupywallstreet/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogivists%2FtZjd+%28Ironic+Surrealism+%29

 

and

http://libertynews.com/2011/10/15/occupy-l-a-protester-run-the-jews-out-of-this-country/

 

We KNEW Marxist-Socialists were behind Occupy Wall Street, and now we see National Socialists are part of this consortium too.

 

 

Visit Patriot Action Network at: http://resistance.ning.com/?xg_source=msg_mes_network

 
To control which emails you receive on Patriot Action Network, click here


--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0
He is trying to find his birth certificate before the 2012 election

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0



YouTube Help Center | Change Email Preferences

SenatorRandPaul just uploaded a video:

Senator Rand Paul's speaks with Fox's Hannity on GOP Job's bill More

You can unsubscribe from notifications for this user by visiting My Subscriptions.

© 2011 YouTube, LLC
901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
Where are these criminal complaints?  Who is making them? 
 
What are the allegations?

On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 8:02 AM, GregfromBoston <greg.vincent@yahoo.com> wrote:
Instead of legislation and petitions, how about just NOT JOIN
Scientology?  Is that an option?  I think it is.
---------------------------

Fair point of course, but I think the issue is why is law enforcement
ignoring criminal complaints - apparently hundreds of them.

Correct?

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0
10-15% is in the low side for good service, but justified with poor
service, bad service is $.01

On Oct 14, 4:49 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> **
>            New post on *Fellowship of the Minds*
> <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/author/dcgere/>  Are they
> crazy?<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/10/14/are-they-crazy/>by
> dcgere <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/author/dcgere/>
>
> <http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/thumbnail2.jpg>
> San Francisco restaurant workers support 25 percent tip standard
>
> Of course, this comes from San Francisco...
>
> Mercurynews.com<http://www.mercurynews.com/food-wine/ci_19098081?IADID=Search-www.mer...>
> : *There's a move on to make 25 percent the standard tip in San Francisco
> restaurants.* Media sources report that San Francisco restaurant workers are
> behind it with support from some high-class restaurants.
>
> But, tipping always has been a personal matter. The restaurant norm now is
> about 15 percent or 20 percent. The IRS says 15 percent is about right for
> workers' tax purposes.
>
> Mike Alexander of Antioch said, "They have to be kidding. *The whole purpose
> of a tip is to reward service. If the price is dictated it's not a tip. *If
> they're serious they'll meet a lot of resistance. It seems like everyone is
> trying to squeeze another buck out of us."
>
> "If they try it, people will vote with their feet," said Candel Garcia. "*Tips
> should be earned, not expected.* I usually tip 10 percent or 15 percent,
> which I think is fair. If they really want a bigger tip they might try to
> increase their service to justify it."
>
> Tom Grey of Antioch wants to know how they came up with the 25 percent tip
> idea. "The government puts 15 percent as the tax tab for individuals getting
> tips. Does anyone really think restaurant workers will admit to the
> additional income and report it to the IRS? I'm sticking with 15 percent as
> my restaurant tip."
>
> Farrah Harper of Brentwood thinks of a negative effect. "*If servers think
> they automatically will get a 25 percent tip, they could very easily slack
> off and relax on the service they provide*," she said. "I'm sticking with my
> 20 percent tips. If the service is really great, I can up that amount, but
> that doesn't happen very often."
>
> "They're being greedy. How can anyone make a tip percentage standard?" asked
> Charles Piggett of Antioch. "There is one thing that does affect size of the
> tip, guilt feelings. Some people are ashamed to appear as a cheapskate so
> they over-tip. That doesn't work for me. I don't need anyone else telling me
> how to spend my money."
>
> Valerie Green of Oakley disagrees. "*Given the terrible state of our
> economy, I think 25 percent is not unreasonable*," she said. "I usually do
> 20 percent, but everyone needs some extra money now and I'm all for it. I'm
> going to go with 25 percent starting with my next meal out."
>
> Antioch's Cliff Lane is thinking out of the box. "If you want to reward
> service, start tipping the help in fast food places. These people work for
> minimum wage and get no tips," he said. "Tips are for quality service. If
> you get it, give a tip. In restaurants I usually leave 20 percent. Given the
> rising prices for meals now, a 20 percent tip does include a raise."
>
> Yes Ms. Green, given the state of our economy, let's set a minimum tip
> percentage above the normal standard tip rate for what should be based on
> performance.  Makes sense to me.
>
> Any restaurant that sets a tip standard (separate from a gratuity placed on
> large parties) will not be getting my service!
>
> DCG
>  *dcgere <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/author/dcgere/>* | October
> 14, 2011 at 1:43 pm | Tags: San
> Francisco<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?tag=san-francisco>|
> Categories:
> Economy <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=17656840>, Idiots In
> General <http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/?cat=9120582> | URL:http://wp.me/pKuKY-9ZH
>
>   Comment<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/10/14/are-they-crazy/#res...>
>    See all comments<http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/10/14/are-they-crazy/#com...>
>
>   Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage
> Subscriptions<http://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=49883164090367a8ae3126d288a16eee&...>.
>
> Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser:http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/10/14/are-they-crazy/
>     Thanks for flying with WordPress.com <http://wordpress.com/>

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.


Exclusive: Ron Paul's Agenda To Include Eliminating Five Government Departments And He Will Take $39,336 Presidential Salary
David Brody
CBN News Chief Political Correspondent
October 14, 2011 6:13 PM

Ron Paul's detailed agenda for America will be disclosed next week and a senior official with his campaign tells The Brody File that it includes eliminating five governmental departments, cutting one trillion dollars in spending and Dr. Paul would take a presidential salary of just $39, 336, which is the median salary of the American worker (The President's base salary is normally $400,000).

The five departments that would be abolished are the Departments of Education, Energy, Housing and Urban Development, Commerce and Interior. However, while the departments would be eliminated, the plan would be to roll certain functions into other departments. For example, the Department of Education would be done away with but pell grant programs would be phased in somewhere else.

There's a lot more details to come but those will be unveiled Monday in Las Vegas.

The mainstream media wants to continue to discount Ron Paul even though his poll numbers are healthy, his fundraising is strong and his message is resonating. Now, in this 2012 campaign, he has developed a new wrinkle as he tries to make a concerted pitch to pro-life social conservatives by talking up the value of human life. Ron Paul is not called Dr. Paul for nothing. He's an obstetrician.

Coming off his big straw poll victory at the Values Voter Summit, he's now out with an extremely compelling pro-life ad. Watch below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkAsLPrnJGc&feature=player_embedded

While Ron Paul may not win the nomination, his constitutional conservative beliefs have already won him something far more valuable and long lasting: changing the discourse in American politics. My guess is the Godfather of the Tea Party would rather have that be his legacy than becoming President of the United States. The media scoffed at him in 2008 but who's having the last laugh?

The Brody File will be interviewing Ron Paul next week in Las Vegas.

http://blogs.cbn.com/thebrodyfile/archive/2011/10/14/exclusive-ron-pauls-agenda-to-include-eliminating-cabinet-secretaries-and.aspx

Newt wasn't always so upset about the Fed

Published: Friday, October 14, 2011, 12:20 AM
By Paul Mulshine/The Star Ledger

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eQ5xa7AjPXM

It's nice to see Newt Gingrich jumping on the Ron Paul bandwagon.

But back when he was Speaker of the House, Gingrich was quite comfortable with the Fed. In fact he led the fight to repeal Glass-Steagall, a move that many argue was a key factor in the financial meltdown that occurred in 2008. Consider that when he talks about jailing "the politicians who put this country in trouble."

Check this excerpt from an April 1998 New York Times article on the effort to repeal Glass-Steagall and Gingrich's cozy relationship with  Alan Greenspan:
It pitted Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin, who opposed the bill, against Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, who favored it.
All but a handful of big banks opposed the bill, as did nearly all small and medium-sized banks and savings and loan companies. Wall Street backed the bill, as did insurance companies. Consumer groups fought the bill.
While the debate has less to do with ideology than with members of Congress forced to choose among powerful friends, the end game came down to partisan maneuvering. Republicans from Speaker Newt Gingrich on down scurried through the afternoon to line up the necessary votes.

Meanwhile here's Ron Paul's view on Glass-Steagall:

Dan Mangru: Now some experts point to the repeal the Glass-Steagal act, which separated banking from stock trading and is one of the precursors of the bank crisis of 2008, where banks were allowed to take excessive risks. Would you be in favor of bringing back this regulation?
Ron Paul: You know it's interesting, I voted on the Glass-Steagal change and I voted against it. The free market though would not have a Glass-Steagal. Banks could do what they want and they have to suffer the consequence. The reason I voted against it, that bill did have some bad parts to it, but one of the reasons I argued against it, repealing it, it was that it was going to put a greater burden on the banks and the taxpayer was at risk, at greater risk through the FDIC and other insurance programs of the government. So I saw that as a greater burden on the taxpayer and voted against it. But I'm for the free market and free market banking, therefore you would have no rules against banks being involved in commercial and investment banking.

 Newt has only one problem, but it's a big one: Guess what it is. If you can't figure it out, watch the video below.
ALSO: In a tweet, Newt gives credit where it's due: "there is no question ron paul was the first serious national leader to take on federal reserve history will recognize him." Read this piece on Lew Rockwell about how Paul has framed the issues that are being debated now - and how he gets the least time to speak despite dominating.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=C-NIbZXNRns

http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2011/10/post_151.html
0

The Dawn of Late Fascism
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

The downgrading of US debt this summer didn't have huge economic consequences, but the psychological ones were truly devastating for the national elites who have run this country for nearly a century. For a State that regards itself as infallible, it was a huge blow that market forces delivered against the government, and it is only one of thousands that have cut against the power elite in recent years.

Another recent example was the vanishing of the much-vaunted Obama jobs bill. He pushed hard for this scheme for a month. He made an FDR-like national speech that attempted to whip up a public frenzy. He promised that if the legislature passed his law, supply and demand for workers would magically come together. We only need to agree to spend a few hundred billion more!

Well, the bully pulpit has become the bull-something pulpit. It seems that hardly anyone even took the speech seriously as a political point. It was reviewed and treated as the theater that it was, but the universal reaction to the specifics was a thumbs down, even from his own party.

No, Obama is not FDR. This is not the New Deal. The public will not be browbeaten as it once was. The polls show a vast lack of even a modicum of confidence in political leadership, the failures of which are all around us.

The longer the depression persists, the more the rebellious spirit grows, and it is not limited to the Wall Street protests. Poverty is growing, incomes are falling, business is being squeezed at every turn, and unemployment is stuck at intolerably high levels. People are angry as never before, and neither political party comes close to offering answers.

The State as we've known it – and that includes its political parties and its redistributionary, military, regulatory, and money-creating bureaucracies – just can't get it together. It's as true now as it has been for some twenty years: the Nation State is in precipitous decline. Once imbued with grandeur and majesty, personified by its Superman powers to accomplish amazing global feats, it is now a wreck and out of ideas.

It doesn't seem that way because the State is more in-your-face than it has been in all of American history. We see the State at the airport with the incompetent bullying ways of the TSA. We see it in the ridiculous dinosaur of the post office, forever begging for more money so it can continue to do things the way it did them in 1950. We see it in the federalized cops in our towns, once seen as public servants but now revealed as what they have always been: armed tax collectors, censors, spies, thugs.

These are themselves marks of decline. The mask of the State is off. And it has been off for such a long time that we can hardly remember what it looked like when it was on.

So let's take a quick tour. If you live in a big metropolitan city, drive to the downtown post office (if it is still standing). There you will find a remarkable piece of architecture, tall and majestic and filled with grandeur. There is a liberal use of Roman-style columns. The ceilings indoors are extremely high and thrilling. It might even be the biggest and most impressive building around.

This is a building of an institution that believed in itself. After all, this was the institution that carried the mail, which was the only way that people had to communicate with each other when most of these places were first erected. The state took great pride in offering this service, which it held up as being superior to anything the market could ever provide (even if market provisions like the Pony Express had to be outlawed). Postmen were legendary (or so we were told) for their willingness to brave the elements to bring us the essential thing we needed in life apart from food, clothing, and shelter.

And today? Look at the thing that we call the post office. It is a complete wreck, a national joke, a hanger-on from a day long gone. They deliver physical spam to our mail boxes, and a few worthwhile things every once in a while, but the only time they are in the news is when we hear another report of their bankruptcy and need for a bailout.

It's the same with all the grand monuments of yesteryear's statism. Think of the Hoover Dam, Mount Rushmore, the endless infrastructure projects of the New Deal, the Eisenhower interstate highway system, the moon shot, the sprawling monuments to itself that the State has erected from sea to shining sea. As I've explained elsewhere, these all came about in an age when the only real alternative to socialism was considered to be fascism. This was an age when freedom – as in the old-fashioned sense – was just out of the question.

The State in all times and all places operates by force – and force alone. But the style of rule changes. The fascist style emphasized inspiration, magnificence, industrial progress, grandeur, all headed by a valiant leader making smart decisions about all things. This style of American rule lasted from the New Deal through the end of the Cold War.

But this whole system of inspiration has nearly died out. In the communist tradition of naming the stages of history, we can call this late fascism. The fascist system in the end cannot work because, despite the claims, the State does not have the means to achieve what it promises. It does not possess the capability to outrun private markets in technology, of serving the population in the way markets can, of making things more plentiful or cheaper, or even of providing basic services in a manner that is economically efficient.

Fascism, like socialism, cannot achieve its aims. So there is a way in which it makes sense to speak of a stage of history: We are in the stage of late fascism. The grandeur is gone, and all we are left with is a gun pointed at our heads. The system was created to be great, but it is reduced in our time to being crude. Valor is now violence. Majesty is now malice.

Consider whether there is any national political leader in power today the death of whom would call forth anywhere near the same level of mourning as the death of Steve Jobs. People know in their hearts who serves them, and it is not the guy with jack boots, tasers on his belt, and a federal badge. The time when we looked to this man as a public servant is long gone. And this reality only speeds the inevitable death of the State as the 20th century re-invented it.

http://lewrockwell.com/rockwell/dawn-of-late-fascism193.html

Americans in Denial: Futile Elections and Teflon Candidates
by Scott Lazarowitz

If these talk radio shows I listen to are indicative of the American population in general, and Republicans and conservatives in particular, then, stop the world, I'm getting off. The statists among the Republican field of presidential candidates propose to change things a little bit here and there, but in them and their supporters there is a severe psychological denial and stubborn refusal to recognize that the entire system of central planning in Washington needs to go. It is inherently flawed.

The deniers and fantasizers are saying that, as long as anyone but Barack Obama is elected in 2012, then things will get better. No, they won't. Many people are fixated on making sure that the Republicans choose someone who is "electable," and they actually think that the Teflon Guy, Mitt Romney, is that candidate. However, one talk show caller to the Howie Carr show in Boston this week had it right: Romney will be just like McCain was in 2008, handing the election over to Obama on a silver platter.

But, even if Romney does get elected, and given that many of these pundits and political junkies are statists and think only in the short term, they never seem to be considering what happens after Romney's inauguration. Will he do anything about the Federal Reserve, or Wall Street? Or stop the murderous warmongering? Nope. These statist candidates who love their central planning bureaucracies will not change a thing in Washington, even though it is those very central planning bureaucracies, especially the Fed and the national security-military complex, that have been destroying America.

On one of those annoying radio talk shows this week, conservative talk host Michael Graham took a call from someone in favor of ending the Federal Reserve "monstrosity," and Graham's reply was something like, "oh, and instead give Congress control over our money," and so forth. But did Graham allow the caller to respond, possibly suggesting another alternative, such as having a free market in money with competitive currencies? Nope. Graham just concluded the conversation and took another call.

And talk host Howie Carr had a caller who disliked Romney and said he was between Herman Cain and Ron Paul. Carr seemed to agree with some of the caller's positive comments about Paul, "except that Paul is crazy," and "says crazy things." Yeah, like closing down the Federal Reserve and allowing the people to have their freedom once again, and ending the police state and ending the warmongering that does nothing but provoke foreign people to act against us. Crazy, man. Ending those things is crazy. Keeping the status quo of statism is sane and reasonable. Welcome to 1984.

And, when political consultant Frank Luntz was interviewed by Sean Hannity, Luntz accused the media of trying to cause Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry to attack (and thus destroy) each other. Yeah, so? Is there something wrong with that? Please let the statist warmongers destroy each other, before they destroy us!

Meanwhile, over at the White House, Barry and Evita are working feverishly on their invitations for Inauguration Day, 2013.

Incidentally, Howie Carr is the one who wrote two books on organized crime mobsters, one on the notorious "Whitey" Bulger and one on Bulger's hit man, Johnny Martorano. Perhaps Carr should consider writing a book on the criminal Wall Street and government gangsters, and how they embezzle the people's hard-earned wealth through the Fed and banking cartel.

I honestly don't know why I continue to listen to these radio talk shows. While some of these talk hosts are willing to point out Romney's flaws, in hearing many of their callers, however, one would have to conclude that Romney literally bathes in Teflon. During the 1980s, with one scandal after another, and because nothing stuck to Ronald Reagan, President Reagan was known as the "Teflon President." But he had nothing on Mitt Romney.

Even the terribly negative economic effects of Romney's socialist and fascist medical plan in Massachusetts do not seem to influence voters. People don't seem to care that, as governor, Romney was a champion of Big Government. And is it really that easy for people to forget Romney's publicly expressed affection for the late Sen. Ted Kennedy when Romney signed the RomneyCare atrocity into law? And Romney's snubbing of a medical patient in a wheelchair, when the patient asked if Romney would have him and his doctor arrested for using medical marijuana. Yes, Romney wants to make sure the patient is insured, and then he can arrest him.

Frankly, when I see a politician who exhibits the kind of carnival barker-like gestures that Romney does, I feel afraid, very afraid. But because he is made with Teflon, nothing sticks. Right behind Romney in Teflon content is Texas Gov. Rick Perry. Oh, well.

I think that, thanks to government-controlled American schooling, many Americans are in denial about how broken and unfixable our current federal, statist system of central planning is. They are in denial of the truth that our government's foreign policy has been invasive of other peoples, and that such an interventionist policy is immoral. But when people hear those criticisms of our government, as Future of Freedom Foundation President Jacob Hornberger noted, so many people confuse the government (filled to the rim with corruption and imbecilic bureaucrats) with the actual country, America. During the 2008 presidential campaign, many people perceived Ron Paul as "blaming America" for terrorism and 9/11, when Paul was actually blaming the government's counter-productive, interventionist foreign policy.

But on the talk radio shows and the TV pundit shows, so many people continue to shrug off Ron Paul and his support of freedom and individual rights, and the sanctity of voluntary contracts, private property and the rule of law. It's as though the deniers are afraid of Paul's views, as though they fear freedom and personal responsibility, and that such fears are why they don't seem to want to consider Paul's candidacy.

But in the event that Ron Paul does not win the Republican nomination for president, I strongly suggest that he leave the Republicrat Party for good and run as a third party Independent. Some people fear that such a move will siphon votes away from the Republican nominee and ensure an Obama reelection, even though a Romney nomination is what will ensure an Obama reelection. But others believe that a Ron Paul third-party candidacy will siphon anti-war, pro-civil liberties votes away from Obama. The best thing such a move would do is it would bother the hell out of those conservative radio talk hosts, especially Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin. Just that in and of itself would make a Ron Paul-third party run simply delightful.

However, in the end, it doesn't matter who is elected in 2012, because the whole system of central planning is inherently flawed, and it can't be reformed. I'm sure that Ron Paul disagrees with me on that, but the idea of "limited government" is impossible. Central planning doesn't work in money and banking, immigration, and certainly not in national security.

America needs to get rid of the one thing that has been the biggest cause of America's destruction, the federal government. The country needs to decentralize, states need to secede and become fully independent and sovereign, just like the Soviet Union did, and the functions of money and security especially need to be de-monopolized away from government control. Have Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity ever even considered such ideas? Or are such ideas just too "crazy" to be considered?

But the bottom line for me is this: I've got to stop listening to those annoying talk radio shows!

http://lewrockwell.com/lazarowitz/lazarowitz31.1.html

Tea Party Presidential Election Primer: Paul v. Cain on Economics
Written by Thomas R. Eddlem   
Friday, 14 October 2011 11:08

With the recent decline in the polls of the candidacies of Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann, Tea Party members have two top-tier candidates to consider as an alternative to the liberal Massachusetts Republican Mitt Romney: Herman Cain and Ron Paul.

But how do these two Tea Party favorites stack up on economic issues? Here's a quick survey on their differences:


TARP Bailout

One of the biggest issues leading to the formation of the Tea Party movement was -­ after the burgeoning deficit -­ reaction against the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) law. Many Americans joined the Tea Party to stop what was obviously political favoritism being sold by fear-mongering government leaders, and it resulted in a number of pro-TARP Republican veterans losing their primaries and anti-TARP Republicans winning the November 2010 general election.

During the housing bubble, profits were privatized. But once "too big to fail" Wall Street banks saw major losses on risky bets made in the real estate market, they came crying to Washington and demanded taxpayers pick up the shortfall. Establishment politicians in Washington obliged, selling the bailout package with a heaping helping of fear. Mitt Romney said "all the jobs" in America would be gone if the trust funds of the super-rich were not bailed out using the tips of cab drivers and waitresses.

Herman Cain: Cain called TARP a "win-win for the taxpayer" in an October 20, 2008 column. "Unprecedented problems require unprecedented solutions. The actions by the Treasury are a win-win for the taxpayer." After Congress passed the TARP bailout, Cain complained about how the money was doled out, but not about the principle of crony-capitalism where profits are privatized and losses are socialized. Cain said in the October 11 Bloomberg/Washington Post debate, "They were discretionary in which institutions they were going to save, rather than apply it equitably, which is what most of us thought was going to be done. The implementation of it is where they got off-track." Cain has never made it clear who he believes should have gotten a bailout that didn't, or even if he believed that every failing institution should have been bailed out by taxpayers, but it's clear from that statement that he believed that the taxpayer bailouts didn't go far enough.

Ron Paul: Congressman Paul publicly opposed the TARP bailout and voted against the bill as Congressman. He charged that the bailout was the antithesis of the free market. Instead, Paul asserted, "What we've had is cronyism, it's interventionism and inflationism, and corporatism. That's what is wrong. What we need is more freedom, not more government."


Federal Reserve Audit/$16 Trillion Secret Bailout

If the TARP bailout using taxpayer dollars was bad, the Federal Reserve bailout was much worse. The Federal Reserve secretly lent at least $16 trillion in funds funneled through various Federal Reserve emergency facilities -­ more than the entire size of the U.S. economy, and 22 times the size of the TARP bailout -­ to favored banks and corporations from 2008 through 2010. And the Federal Reserve Bank steadfastly refused to release the bailout information even to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) until Bloomberg won a Freedom of Information lawsuit in December 2010.

After Bloomberg won partial access to the bailout information, the GAO was able to come up with the $16 trillion figure as the bailout total. What came out of the GAO partial audit was that the Federal Reserve highly favored elite Wall Street banks with the following funds: $2.5 trillion for Citigroup, $2.0 trillion for Morgan Stanley, $1.9 trillion for Merrill Lynch and $1.3 trillion for Bank of America.

Cain: Herman Cain -- a former chairman of the Kansas City branch of the Federal Reserve Bank -- was an opponent of a GAO audit of the Fed until 2011, telling Neil Boortz's radio audience in December 2010: "There's no hidden secrets going on in the Federal Reserve to my knowledge. And I tell people, we've got 12 Federal Reserve Banks. Find out which district you are in, call them up and go from there. We don't need to waste money with another commission or an audit." Cain now says (in the Bloomberg debate) that he never opposed an audit, but that he doesn't care if one is done. "I have also said, to be precise, I do not object to the Federal Reserve being audited. I simply said, if someone wants to initiate that action, go right ahead. It doesn't bother me. So  you ­ I've been misrepresented in that regard. I don't have a problem with the Federal Reserve being audited. It's simply not my top priority."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiAkeFJXwUk&feature=player_embedded

Paul: Ron Paul has been a longtime critic of the Federal Reserve, and has for years sponsored a bill called "The Federal Reserve Transparency Act," which calls for a full GAO audit of the Fed. Paul's bill won the support of every House Republican and a third of the Democrats in the last Congress, and a watered-down version of it was passed into law in 2010. In the current Congress, as Chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee that oversees the Fed, Paul has held frequent hearings on the Fed and called for more transparency in its operations.


Housing Bubble/Economic Crash Avoidance

A healthy economy is a key goal of the Tea Party movement. While low taxes and regulations are key to producing a healthy economy, a President who can foresee and avoid an economic bubble and bust cycle that results in demands for bailouts is essential. Governments create financial bubbles, such as the NASDAQ bubble of the late 1990s and the housing bubble of the early 2000s. Where do Cain and Paul rate on diagnosing the problem in the last bubble and calling for a cure?

Cain: Herman Cain has recently admitted he had no clue that the economy wasn't on sound footing throughout the housing bubble (and as late as his column of September 1, 2008, just two weeks before Wall Street giant Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy). But he at least partially diagnosed the housing bubble after the bubble blew up. "What I missed in 2005 was just how bad Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had distorted the housing market," Cain told MSNBC's Chuck Todd on October 12, 2011. "I honestly did not realize just how bad it was, just how bad the whole bundling and derivatives thing was, and that we were on the brink of a total financial meltdown. So I learned later on by looking into it deeper that the situation was a lot worse than I thought in 2005."

Paul: Ron Paul began attacking the housing bubble as early as September 6, 2001 and fully diagnosed the problem as including an artificial incentive to borrow from the Federal Reserve Bank as well as the GSEs and the Community Reinvestment Act: "The Federal Reserve credit created during the last eight months has not stimulated economic growth in technology or in the industrial section. But a lot of it ended up in the expanding real estate bubble, churned by the $3.2 trillion of debt maintained by the GSEs, the Government Sponsored Enterprises. The GSEs, made up of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Bank have managed to keep the housing market afloat in contrast to the more logical slowdown in hotel and office construction.... Instead of the newly-inflated money being directed towards the stock market, it now finds its way into the rapidly expanding real estate bubble. This too will burst as all bubbles do. The Fed, the Congress, or even foreign investors can't prevent the collapse of this bubble."


Economic Advisors

Most Presidents are not expected to be economic geniuses; they can sometimes substitute solid economic advice for actual economic knowledge. Herman Cain noted this in his October 12 interview on MSNBC. "Well, it's real simple, Chuck," Cain replied to a question about why Americans should trust his economic agenda after failing to see the biggest bubble of his lifetime. "I have economic advisors working with me now who spend time studying these various analyses." This is a valid point. A President who has solid economic advisors, and who defers to them, can compensate for lack of economic knowledge without the public suffering unnecessary economic crashes.

Cain: Herman Cain has only publicly named one economic advisor, Rich Lowrie of the metro Cleveland, Ohio area. Lowrie is a Managing Director of a Wells Fargo branch. Wells Fargo is a giant bank that received among the largest bailout funds through the TARP program ­ $25 billion ­ in addition to another $169 billion in secret loans from the Federal Reserve Bank during the economic crisis. Liberals have sneered that Lowrie doesn't have "credentials," i.e., a degree in economics. But neither does Ron Paul's chief economic advisor (see below), and most of the accredited economists missed the housing bubble/bust anyway. Nevertheless, it's unclear what Lowrie's ability to diagnose the economy is from his scant published record.

Cain gave some indication of the kind of advisor he might hire in the October 11 Bloomberg/Washington Post debate when he was asked who was the best Federal Reserve Chairman over the past 40 years. Cain named Alan Greenspan ­ the Fed Chairman from 1987-2006 who blew up the housing bubble by suppressing interest rates to then-record lows ­ as the man Cain thought did the best job.

Paul: By way of contrast, Ron Paul's top economic advisor since his 2008 presidential campaign has been EuroPacific Capital CEO Peter Schiff. Schiff has a long public record on economic prognostications. And he was laughed at regularly on national television shows from 2005-07 for claiming a housing and financial crisis was looming. But his predictions were so accurate in calling the housing bubble/bust that fans built a YouTube video "Peter Schiff was right" that has garnered millions of views. He even famously told a conference of the Mortgage Bankers Association in 2005 and 2006 that the housing bubble was about to pop.

Paul, asked who did the best job as Fed Chairman in the Bloomberg debate, said none would be acceptable to him. But he added that Paul Volker, the Fed Chairman from 1979-87, was at least successful in taming runaway inflation at the end of the Carter administration and laying the groundwork for the Reagan-era economic growth.


http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/9375-tea-party-presidential-election-primer-paul-v-cain-on-economics
0

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0
Posted yesterday morning at Electric Politics, a podcast interview
with Dr. Xiaolong Qiu, author of the Inspector Chen mysteries, which
have sold over a million copies and been published in twenty
languages. Xiaolong -- a Ph.D. in comparative literature from
Washington University -- discovered that he could best write about
contemporary China through the means of police procedurals, set in
Shanghai. So this interview is both about writing and about what's
happening in China.

As always, if you enjoy the podcast please redistribute the link.

Enjoy!

http://www.electricpolitics.com/podcast/2011/10/the_art_of_writing.html

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Instead of legislation and petitions, how about just NOT JOIN
Scientology? Is that an option? I think it is.
---------------------------

Fair point of course, but I think the issue is why is law enforcement
ignoring criminal complaints - apparently hundreds of them.

Correct?

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.



---------- Forwarded


 

 

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/11/occupy-wall-street-has-an-anti-semitism-problem/

 Occupy Wall Street Has an Anti-Semitism Problem

Abe Greenwald | @abegreenwald</mail/u/0/s/?view=att&th=133048e78f8df0d7&attid=0.1&disp=emb&zw> 10.11.2011 - 2:29 PM

</mail/u/0/s/?view=att&th=133048e78f8df0d7&attid=0.2&disp=emb&zw></mail/u/0/s/?view=att&th=133048e78f8df0d7&attid=0.3&disp=emb&zw></mail/u/0/s/?view=att&th=133048e78f8df0d7&attid=0.4&disp=emb&zw></mail/u/0/s/?view=att&th=133048e78f8df0d7&attid=0.5&disp=emb&zw></mail/u/0/s/?view=att&th=133048e78f8df0d7&attid=0.6&disp=emb&zw>

A quick sampling of the anti-Semitism on display among the Occupy Wall Street set yields the flamboyant and aggressive protester who yells,"You're a bum, Jew" at his yarmulke-wearing interlocutor; the conspiracy theorist  who laments that "Jewish money controls American politics," and warns the Russians not to let the Jews take over Russia too; and  the self-described Nazi with the swastika tattoo who regrets that America has been handed over to "other people." Ah, people power.
The Jew-hatred among protesters and sympathizers is diverse and unapologetic. It is, in fact, atmospheric. Tune in randomly to live television coverage of the spectacle and you'll see—as I did—placards scapegoating Israel, Zionism, or "Hitler's bankers."  Check out the continuous flurry of protest-supporting tweets and blog posts, and you'll get more of the same.
Does anyone recall how hard the media worked to portray the Tea Party as bigoted? The false accusations of racial slurs, the cropped photograph of the gun-wielding Tea Partier—who turned out to be black, the tortured racial interpretation of the Tea Party's desire to "take the country back"?
Despite the press's efforts there would be no denying that in the 2010 midterm elections the Tea Party supported a multi-ethnic set of candidates straight out of a Benetton ad. And while Occupy Wall Street enumerates classic anti-Semitic conspiracy theories in the name of progressivism, Herman Cain has become a Tea Party favorite, beating Mitt Romney by 41 percent to 7 among the movement's supporters.
Where the Tea Party couldn't be tagged as racist no matter how hard liberals tried, Occupy Wall Street protesters are literally boasting of their Nazi credentials. This striking distinction speaks to the core asymmetry of the two phenomena. The Tea Partiers held up signs that read, "Don't Soak the Rich"; Wall Street Occupiers' placards counter: "Soak the Rich." The purpose of the Tea Party was to get government out of all Americans' lives. The point of Occupy Wall Street is to scapegoat fellow Americans. And wherever political scapegoating takes place, anti-Semitism is sure to follow.
In a November 2010 COMMENTARY article, Ruth Wisse observed that "the doctrine of anti-Semitism arose in the 19th century not to address the realities of the Jewish situation but to meet the political needs of others and to satisfy the political ends of others." In the 21st century it serves the same purpose. Wisse wrote:  "Anti-Semitism works through the strategy of the pointing finger. Through political prestidigitation, the accuser draws attention away from his own sins…by pointing to the Jews, whose demonically inflated image and luridly portrayed wickedness make them a plausible explanation for whatever ails his regime." Welcome to Occupy Wall Street.
Anti-Semitism is the preferred medium of the pitchfork crowd. And today as the Manhattan mob heads uptown to protest at the homes of American business leaders (for their ""willingness to hoard wealth at the expense of the 99 percent") there can be little doubt that that's whom we're dealing with.
Outside of immigrant-rich America, class warfare is often synonymous with ethnic prejudice itself. The Jews or the Gypsies or the Southeast Asians simply constitute the class to be held accountable. Class warfare is the pointed finger as economic philosophy. It eats away at the national project, lays waste to the self-reliant citizen, and disguises prejudice as justice. Liberal pundits and leftist intellectuals are at pains to impose upon the protesters a thoughtfulness that just doesn't exist. In the New York Times, Todd Gitlin wrote, "This new protest style is more Rousseau than Marx." But in truth there is no new protest style. What we're witnessing is dumb, ugly, dangerous, and very old. And we will see a lot more anti-Semitism as this toxic swarm grows.

 

 

 


__._,_.___
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:

New Members 1

Visit Your Group
Please follow Yahoogroups TOS http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

**COPYRIGHT NOTICE**
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,
any copyrighted work in this message
is distributed under fair use without profit or payment
For non-profit research and educational or criticism purposes only. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Music we send is from our personal collections.
We are sharing it with you for your listening pleasure. 
Please support the Artists by purchasing their albums.

Groups Of Interest:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GaysUnited
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SayitloudgayandProud
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Comeventwithme
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ProJewishProZionistGroup
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stillnotjustmusicanymore
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/whateverreturns


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Politics_Dailly/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/House_Of_Trolls
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/The_Free_Abortion_Debates
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
__,_._,___

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: F
Date: Friday, October 14, 2011
Subject: [LibertarianMedia] the "revolutionary" ruse by pseudo-revolutionaries and their owners continues...
To: SMIRK <smirkers_of_the_world@yahoogroups.com>


 

The "revolutionary" ruse by pseudo-revolutionaries and their owners continues....
Occupy Wall Street and 'The American Autumn': Is It a 'Colored Revolution'? — by Michel Chossudovsky – Part 1 (October 13, 2011)
http://www.lust-for-life.org/Lust-For-Life/OccupyWallStreetAndTheAmericanAutumn/OccupyWallStreetAndTheAmericanAutumn.htm
For more, see:

"Occupy Wall Street", like Everything Obama, is a Soros-funded "Con"

http://rasputins-rantoramathon.blogspot.com/2011/10/occupy-wall-street-like-everything.html
... and...
To avoid walking into one more fund-engineered trap, it's wise to check the money trail....
The whole MoveOn.org group is completely funded by him, and they are seizing the occupy movement like the Republican Party seized the tea party movement which was started to raise volunteers and money for Ron Paul, who is still never shown on stage or talking by Fox, CNN, MSNBC, et. al.
MoveOn.org is to George Soros as the long-ago [recuperated] ecology movement is to the Rockefeller family: an investment property.
For the latter, see:
The 'Rocke-Nazi' Faction of the Capitalist Plutocracy — A Working Definition
http://point-of-departure.org/Point-Of-Departure/ClarificationsArchive/RockeNaziFaction/W_RockeNaziFaction-n1.htm
For MoveOn, see:
"Occupy Wall Street", like Everything Obama, is a Soros-funded "Con"
http://rasputins-rantoramathon.blogspot.com/2011/10/occupy-wall-street-like-everything.html
Soros: The Man Behind MoveOn — by Clarice Feldman (September 21, 2007)
http://malcontentralphie.blogspot.com/2010/11/george-soros-man-behind-moveonorg.html
George Soros Buys the Nomination; Obama Borrows It — by Ed Hamler (July 4, 2008)
http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2008/2008_20-29/2008-27/pdf/78-79_3526.pdf
The Hidden Soros Agenda: Drugs, Money, the Media, and Political Power
http://www.aim.org/special-report/the-hidden-soros-agenda-drugs-money-the-media-and-political-power/
Obama's British Funder, George Soros, Is A Profiteer Of 'Bush's War' — by LPAC (June 14, 2008)
http://www.rense.com/general82/omab.htm
George Soros Money Behind Occupy Wall Street Protests
http://politicons.net/reuters-george-soros-money-behind-occupy-wall-street-protests/
Moveon.org Moves in on Occupy Wall Street Protests
http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/03/moveon-org-moves-in-on-occupy-wall-street-protests/
==============================
If you put something in "color" versus "black and white", the techno-fetish generation will follow it anywhere... even into the self-evolving slaughterhouse of neo-feudalism. And the most cowardly will "lead" you in with censorship, threats, bullying, and assination if you do not "shut up" and follow!
best,
Frank

__._,_.___
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group
If you would like to invite some of your friends or unsubscribe please send an e-mail message to pc93@bellsouth.net
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
__,_._,___

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
0


-----


"Underpaid Teachers" Richly Rewarded

Posted by Neal McCluskey

Everybody knows that teachers are underpaid, right? Actually, we don't know what teachers should be paid because individual teachers aren't allowed to negotiate their pay with the people using their services--unions and politicians do the bargaining. Still, a few stats in aWashington Post article about a proposed contract for Washington D.C. public school teachers suggest that, if anything, many D.C. teachers are overpaid.

Using salary information in the article, we see that under their current contract D.C. teachers must work 7 hours a day for 192 days, and their starting salary is $39,000. Per-hour, that comes to $29.01, which beats the mean hourly pay for all D.C. residents by 59 cents.

Under the proposed contract, the starting salary would become $42,500 to work 7 ½ hours for 196 days, actually dropping the hourly rate by 10 cents. Importantly, though, the four extra days would be dedicated to "training," and the extra half-hour to "planning," so there really wouldn't be much work added to the teachers' load.

As impressive as these starting salary numbers are, though, the real eye-opener is at the topof the teachers' salary ladder.  Currently, the highest rung on the ladder is $75,000, or a hefty $55.80 an hour. Adjusting that to 40 hours per week for 50 weeks a year (roughly what most people work) the highest paid teacher would get an annual salary of $111,600 – not bad! Under the new contract that would become even more generous, with the unadjusted salary rising to $87,000, the new hourly rate hitting $59.18, and the "normal" annual salary reaching $118,360!  And, of course, none of this includes teachers' benefits, which are generally considered to be more generous than what's available in the private sector.

Now, before anyone starts calling for my head, as happened the last time I wrote on this topic, let me say I don't doubt that that many teachers work beyond their contracted hours. Of course, there's also no question that lots of people work in excess of their time "on the clock." With that in mind, the hours in the teachers' contract are what teachers have agreed to, so it is the only fair basis on which to calculate their remuneration.

So let's put this in perspective. As mentioned, a starting D.C. teacher makes more per hour than the average wage for all D.C. residents. Even more surprising, under the proposed contract a teacher making the top wage would get $12.16 more per-hour than the average D.C. citizen in a management position, including sales managers, marketing managers, and IT managers. Indeed, the only managerial group that would make more than teachers on an hourly basis would be the absolute head honchos -- chief executives.

And here's the kicker: What have D.C. teachers produced to deserve all this money? According to the Post article's main point, a school system so decrepit that parents are leaving it in droves.




--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list (libertarian-352@meetup.com)
This message was sent by bruce (majors.bruce@gmail.com) from Low Country Libertarians.
To learn more about bruce, visit his/her member profile
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here

Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 | support@meetup.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.