For Any And All Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:

It was recently announced in several online media sources that the Mexican government, in their "partnership" with the U.S. in securing the nation's southern border with Mexico, has fired all their existing border agents, and hired new university educated border guards now armed with state of the art technology in order to work in concert with the U.S. on security issues.

I guess this public relations announcement was meant also to engender favorable response in the United States for Mexico's efforts to address the historically porous southern borders, which have progressively become worse each and every decade with respect to the security and crime that has occurred in the American border states.

Interesting, it appears the United States is now using foreign governments now in order to "stimulate" the economies of Silicon Valley. This announcement failed to mention that the American government under [George Bush entered into an initiative of literally billions in "foreign aid" to Mexico in order to address the border situation.

In other words, it was the American people and taxpayers that picked up the tab for Mexico's new agents university training and high tech gadgetry. Globally socializing now border security with other nations for Silicon Valley's corporate welfare and profit.  Or using the taxpayers and increasing the inflationary taxes and deficit to feed its now favored industries - the Silicon Valley telecom and security gadget industy.  I guess the contracts on the Iraq War aren't paying enough to get those Wall Street numbers where they would like them to be for those private investors though publicly funded for their next campaigns.

The main use of these new agents, since they will be at their posts primarily at the official ports of entry, appears to be in order to collect Mexico's VAT taxes for purchases being brought back from the U.S. across their borders for their citizens purchases at the local Wal-Marts in the border towns, in order to seize more of those U.S. dollars for Mexico's treasury.

And in order to possibly catch the stoned marijuana dealers that are stupid enough to attempt to cross Mexico's borders with the proceeds from their latest run. Trained dog sniffers came along with this gift from the U.S., it appears.

These measures can hardly be meant to address the true security threats and criminal activity that primarily endangers those Americans living in the border states from the drug cartels and criminal auto theft rings that cross those borders literally at will. Since they hardly wait politely in line for the security checks at the official ports of entry - but instead use the over 500 miles of open desert that is totally unsecured.

Which is also the port of entry for most of the illegal immigrants brought in by the human smuggling rings that also operate cross borders. With maps printed by the local Mexican governments in order to so do.

And although mention is made, as per Ms. Clinton's errant assessments and comments, with respect to also these measures intended to stop the smuggling of guns from the U.S. into Mexico - as any who have lived in a border state for any length of time is well aware, the machine guns and heavy artillery that those cartels obtain don't come primarily from the U.S. at all, but through their own southern borders with South America.

So, it appears in this public relations press release an attempt to silence those that have been calling for true border security at our southern borders now, especially eight years after 9/11 and with the increases annually in that amount of both illegal immigrants, and criminal activity that pours over those borders on a daily basis.  Which has, of course, now contributed (along with the increased property and auto insurance rates, and predatory loan practices of unregulated California lenders who sold most of those "creative" junk feed escalating loans in the West) to the high rate of jobless and homeless now in the border states in being the states with the highest rates of foreclosure during this housing crisis bar none.

With the border state residents in the inflationary taxes which will result in these foreign aid bills for Mexico actually resulting in paying for their continued victimization and abuse.  We are a bankrupted nation for all intents and purposes, but still handing out foreign aid like candy for other countries, while our government officials negligently and beligerantly at this point leave America's own borders vulnerable and unsecured - their primary function and duty.

 Mexico got the gadgets while the Americans living in the border states continue to get the shaft.

I wonder how many more will be stripped of their lives and property until Washington finally gets the message.  Is this part of the "we all must sacrifice" agenda here.  Sacrificing the lives and property of the legal Americans living in the border states for this global socialism agenda and to appease the Mexican government in continuing to provide employment for their citizens at the cost of the livelihoods of Americans?  And no less pick up the tab for it, endure the six hour emergency room waits for lawful citizens treatment, and smile or feel that Americans have somehow done their patriotic duty?

It appears Washington does have a problem with the definition of the type of patriotism the founders were also speaking of, in addition to being able to read the provisions of both their jobs, and legal limits with respect to U.S. citizens.  And that foreigners were not Americans until achieving citizenship status, and going through an application process, medical exam, learning the language toward truly assimilating.  And cutting their ties to their former homes of origin, even if those countries afforded dual citizenship.  This country did not, only allegiance to it.

Or perhaps is it their intent to cut loose the border states eventually, therefore leaving more discretionary tax revenue for those in the East to distribute to their Wall Street banking benefactors in the process?  Mexico's form of government is not at all similar to ours, nor its own Constitution with respect to foreigners found unlawfully in their country.  Nor anyone suspected of criminal activity upon a Mexican citizen.

It appears more and more the border state residents have become strangers in a strange land - their own country.

http://enews.earthlink.net/article/top?guid=20090816/4a879250_3421_1334520090816108637384

In all the debates and townhall meetings, public forums and the like it has amazed me that what is occuring is simply discussions of what the eventual health care reform legislation should look like and encompass, and not at all the fundamental violations of American's "right to choose or not choose" whether to be insured, or at what level of care.

There are many religions that prohibit invasive medical treatments in their practices. We do have freedom of religion in this country, and would appear any such legislation mandating that Americans must have health care coverage is an abridgement of quite a few of the Bill of Rights freedoms that our founding fathers fought and died in order to secure.

This legislation is being promoted by the left wing for feel good reasons most of all at least at the citizen level. What is being also missed is the parties and industries involved and who is being consulted, and also the inherent benefits to them in any such legislation. Politically and otherwise.

Although the Democratic Party has always held itself out to be the party of the people, rather than industry - Mr. Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi clearly demonstrated that they are just as much big business political lackeys as those in the Republican Party have historically been.

In fact, two of Mr. Obama's most ardent supporters and campaign contributors are Warren Buffett and Bill Gates. This legislation stands to profit both enornously, since one is a Wall Street guru heavily invested in the health care industry through his Geico Insurance (which provides and gives discounts to government employees), and the other the founder of Microsoft, who stands to also profit handsomely with the National Health Care Database which was included with the stimulus bills (and hidden for the most part from the public) sums for the software to begin this massive unconstitutional undertaking.

Placing the most personal and private information any American has on a federally accessible database would have the founding fathers storming the White House and shouting for the call to arms.

Both are also believers and support foundations that are dedicated to zero population growth, as are many members of the Democratic Party from the 1960's era that were involved in that movement. And the U.N. and WHO are also believers in population control and promote seminars and initiatives dedicated to it.

And interestingly enough, both Mr. Buffett and Mr. Gates have three children (not two, replacement) of their own.

So the hypocrites abound in this legislation, which for all intents in purposes, Hippocrates had nothing to do with. And would end up compromising many ethical doctors Hippocratic oaths also in the process in governmentally determined treatment plans, rathr than physician determined. And it appears neither does the AMA anymore, another announceed supporter for the provisions contained in Mr. Obama's proposed "solution." Using the "corporate" medical community when many within it are vigorously also opposed to any such legislation.

Which is sounding more and more like the "solution" Hitler used in order to determine who was and was not ultimately worth of life, or whose life was worthy for the "greater good" of the Fatherland.

China instituted the "one birth" rule for their population under Communist control long ago. And in the process, infancide rates due to sexual preferences became commonplace.

Lady Liberty had different plans for this nation, and more heart and soul.

It is difficult watching loved ones age and the physical deterioration that goes along with it. It also forces us many times to address our own mortality and untimely end.

In our fast food world now of Twitter and turnaround mastectomies, is life and death now to be determined according to what is more expedient and cost effective for the state (i.e., politicians and their stock portfolios, since all future legislation will be directed toward reducing more and more the "insurers" or health care industries risk and losses if history now serves correctly).

How many elderly people have they spoken to that value each and every day they have left, so long as they are still able to breathe? And while they may be in pain, isn't pain a part of all facets of life be it emotional or physical and simply just makes those painfree moments all the more cherished?

In light of all the news recently carried in the mainstream media reports of all the homeowners that are now being stalled, waylaid and denied sums under Obama's much ballyhooed "foreclosure rescue" and with all the monies thrown at these banking institutions and "new jobs" for those greedy realtors and ex-mortgage banking officials now restructuring or counseling some of those victims, it appears to be time to take a step back and probe a little deeper into the hows and whys of this situation.

Is there another agenda here that is the true goal in these continuing outrageously escalating actions coming off the Hill?

While many of these homeowners are awaiting word and the processing of their applications, the banks are continuing to collect those outrageous sums that were in some of those loans marketed which were at sub-prime and interest only flex rates and that are the subject of the bulk of the type of offered in the last ten years primarily, and under terms most of those homes have been or are in foreclosure. 

Tacked onto most of those loans were significant late fees for late payment, processing fees, reappraisals, junk fees which are once again now being collected against those homeowners in these restructurings while they are "pending.".

Of course,literally hundreds of thousands have and had already lost theirs when this downturn and tsunami began back in 2006 for real.

Another 300,000 in July according to RealtyTrac also saw their homes go on the auction block, and Bank of America, based out of California (one of those who received a massive amount of those bailout sums) reported it has only renegotiated 4% of its existing loans that were "at risk."

The head of Countrywide Loans, also based out of California and "assumed" by Bank of America under the terms of bailout (with Bank of America then being "assumed" by Merrill Lynch, a Wall Street investment house), was placed in charge of renegotiating those loans, and would assume that he is the official reporting on the Bank of America stats.

Interestingly though, Merrill Lynch's name has been kept for the most part out of this process.

Most of those subprime offerings were rebundled and resold over the stock exchange, many to foreign investors. Washington, of course, afforded Wall Street to "globalize" the U.S. economy with that of other nations progressively, so much so that now when an earthquake strikes in the Far East, the economic impact is felt now in Middle America.

Compromising in so doing the U.S. economy and American citizens economies also progressively in the process.

All of these "economic forecasts" with respect to the economy that the Fed releases, and those economists on Wall Street on the mainstream media networks that have been reporting recently that economic indicators are looking more "hopeful" are evaluating those economic indicators with respect to the global economy and not the U.S. economy at all.

So when they predict that this economy will "rebound," they are speaking of the world's economy - not the United States or average Americans.

In fact, it is the average Americans now in the loss of their homes and jobs that are being asked to sacrifice now in the name of "global socialism" of this economy for the Wall Street bankers most of all and global stock exchange, not simply Wall Street and the NYSE.

And, of course, also by our own Federal Reserve which is owned by several prominent European banking houses since these debts are being added and "billed" to the U.S. and America in order to "stablize" the global economy.  Americans now eating the debt for foreign investment bankers across the globe.

At this point a fundamental question thus must be asked: Could this be simply a rather sophisticated Federal Reserve/Washington pyramid scheme along the lines of Bernie Madoff?

These renegotiated loans and loan terms which even are being executed from all reports are similar to the old ones. Not fixed, low interest loans. But flex adjustable or "interest only" ones, along the same lines as the old ones. Some still are being based on the European markets LIBR rates and not that much ballyhooed "zero interest" Federal Reserve "prime" rate at all you keep hearing about in order to pump up the Fed's image with Americans.

It is also clear another fundamental question needs to be asked in light of all these reports now on the "stalls" after pouring literally billions into those Fed branch banks in order to assist American homeowners "at risk."

Are those banks really actively attempting to save these American homeowners from losing those properties, or merely acting as "agents" for Wall Street and Washington in renegotiating or "buying down" some of the foreign investors who bought some of those securities, while continuing to collect those outrageous sums and fees from American homeowners while, for all intents and purposes, those banks ultimate aims are to simply score a piece of real estate for the bank then future profit and gains in the turnover or flipping of them?

And in satisfying some of those foreign investors who invested in these rebundled "risky" investments in the first place, are these banks under that bailout bill which was sped through Congress so quickly last September offering "shares" of these American banking interests in satisfaction for their investment, thus the aim truly is further amalgamating our economy with that of the world in shares of now even U.S. banks owned by foreign interests with Washington's complicit and express consent outside Constitutional authority and thus treason of it? 

It is clear that the founders in fighting a war to break free from foreign dominion and control in that War of '76 established a "union" of soveign states and our economy was never intended to be merged with the global one to begin with in any manner whatsoever as a sovereign nation established for just such purpose -sovereignty over foreign dominion and control   

In effect it appears clearly that Washington is using those banks which they continue to claim are "private" banks although publicly owned and branches of our governmentally created Federal Reserve in order to secure America's position in Earth, Inc. and also in what appears to be the ultimate aim of a totally merged global economy and in effect then world government in the process?

What is also interesting now to take note of also due to news coming off the Hill is where 77% of those foreclosure actions are located, and which banks were involved in marketing in those states.  The top five states on the list just so happen to also be border or Sunbelt states whose primary industries are tourism, both domestic and global.

All have also had significant increases in local taxes and insurance rates which have skyrocketed due to the massive costs of the illegal immigrants who also live within those states and for which those states citizens have been subsidizing since the last Reagan amnesty in the 1980's.

Due to the focus on tourism as a state industry, that industry is one of the primary employers of those illegal immigrants for those resorts, restaurants, casinos and developers who prefer hiring this cheap labor in order to skirt around the added costs that are involved in hiring Americans due to withholding taxes which are mandated to be withheld for Social Security, unemploment compensation and the like.
And a host of other regulatory provisions on the workplace and license standards that are required for those in the construction industry, another major industry which hires and prefers this cheaper labor.

Is it the intention of Washington to then, after force feeding another illegal immigrant amnesty as appears is now also another of Obama's plans even after the American people had spoken loud and clear in 2006 under the Bush Administration with respect to this issue, in manipulating this crisis and forcing prices of homes in those states down now for over three years the purpose to then have available a great deal of housing in order to resell by those banks or "flip" at such time and after those banks raped lawful Americans during this "foreclosure rescue scam" for those over 12 million illegal immigrants?

Foisting then off those foreclosured upon properties and subsidized with also taxpayer monies involved (including the tax monies of those foreclosed upon owners) in those still ursurous loans that will then be sold to many non-English speaking newcomers with the legalese and fine print involved that many Ameicans were duped into signing by those banks and realtors for their profits most of all, in order to then set up these "new" Americans for the next wave manipulated by the Fed and Wall Street? 

Many of those loan terms are being extended to 40 YEARS for those mostly poorly constructed stucco and chicken wire homes so that in another 10-15 years this cycle will be repeated, as this cycle is no mimmicking that of the 70's recession (although far worse) in their market and currency manipulations for the "global" marketplace playing roulette with people lives and homes in the process for their own amusement and gain?

Bankers make profit when homes turn over, not when citizens actually pay them off. And the greater the turnover rate, the greater the profit.

The Bosnian refugees were given automobiles by the Clinton administration for those mostly scientists who were the bulk of those immigrants taken in at that tiime. Many American children can report on the brand new cars their fellow Bosnian students were driving courtesy of the American taxpayers and Uncle Sam.

It was also reported that over 20,000 deemed "vulnerable" Iraqis have also been taken in during this war. Many of them middle class. And due to the border "drug war" (in name only since our southern borders still remain unsecured eight years after 9/11), many middle class Mexicans have bought a great many of the houses in the San Diego area recently that were part of the original wave three years ago.

Nevada (a high tourism and casino state, and thus a high illegal immigrant employment state) had the highest foreclosures last month and topped the list.

Is this how truly low those in Washington have sunk in order to desecrate the very government the founders fought and died for merely 200 years ago, while waving the flag and claiming how much they "love" America?

Which America are they speaking of - the America of Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and John Adams?

Or this new one under a world government more similar to that of Hitler, Stalin and Lenin?

With the people merely the worker bees for the "great good" of world socialism, and their homes and properties theirs for the taking?

Obama's getting REALLY desperate at this point about his plans to force the industry sponsored health care reforms down the American people's throats come hell or highwater.

Proof?  At a recent townhall type meeting, Obama used the "threat" of a worsening economy if health care reform isn't done, and isn't done now.  He pointed to his "success" in the recent announcement that there had been a drop in unemployment rates last month, the first one since August 2008.

Not mentioning, of course, that that drop just may be due to the fact that many Americans unemployment benefits at this point have run out, or that there is temporary and seasonal jobs available during the summer months that our college students used to have that are now being filed by those with masters degrees, or at least bachelor's.

Also, failing to mention that last month there was also a 7% increase in the number of home foreclosures over the month before, with another 300,000 losing their homes.  If Americans have lost their homes and jobs, just how ARE they going to afford any health insurance coverage at all, be it government issued or private carrier?  The hypocricy and spins are getting more and more ludicrous by the day.

Mr. Obama's "foreclosure rescue" remedy is now being used by those banks apparently in order to stimply buy down the debt and repay on some of those foreign and rebundled investors' investments, while continuing to collect the usurous late fees, interest, appraisal fees and costs on those homeowners until finally lowering the boom.  A scam, as it were, dressed as a rescue for homeowners in order to skirt around the government's unlawful actions in affording those banks to resell those mortgages on the secondary market in the first place.  And who are merely using the Federal Reserve branch banks in order to now satisfy those investors, after raping the American people of their homes anyway.  Many of whom paid down payments that were far in excess of minimum downs also in order to even get some of those predatory loans they were marketing. 

Most sold out of sunny California, where Silicon Valley is profiting actually the most now in the "science based" technology focus of this and the last administation and the war in the Middle East, while then still claiming poverty in the process.  Disneyland doesn't end at the parking lot after exiting the tram in that state.  No do white collar criminal activities, and maybe the welcome signs should remove Arnie's name as Governor, and replace it with Jack Sparrow.

The only economic strengthening measure that would result from this heinous legislation at this point would be when those privatized state and federal lockups are turned into debtor's prisons for the stimulus of those "corporate" entities, and strengthening the economies of mostly the banks when the new usurous payday loan sharks afford the young then to open up medical 401(k)s for their future medical needs.

I really wouldn't put it past those banks that this health insurance reform is simply another stimulus for the banks, in order to diversify and rape the American people with their outrageous loans, fees and charges some more.

Since a good many of those insurers also hold massive Wall Street investments also in those Fed branch banking institutions.  As do most in Washington.

Appears this bill is meant to strengthen the economies of the Tories on the Hill most of all.  If not, then why is there no provision that, as civil servants, they MUST be covered by the cut rate governmental plan, and buy THEIR own supplements with their six figure salaries out of their also taxpayer paid Cadillac federal pension plans?

 

Under the guise of "stimulating the economy," the terms of the Making Homes Affordable Act is beginning to bear scrutiny.  Just whose economy is the focus of this stimulus?

Due to many recent reports in the mainstream media with respect to Obama's foreclosure rescue and remedy under this "solution" which was passed by Congress after the bank "bailouts," with now lawsuits being filed, and inordinate delays with many, many additional homeowners losing their homes right and left, I began again doing some research on the holdups and complaints.  And the provisions of the program.

There were another 300,000 homeowners made homeless last month according to RealtyTrac.  Over 77% of the homes that are being foreclosed upon are homes in the states of California, Nevada, Arizona, Florida and Michigan.  Michigan is no surprise due to the fact that unemployment there is off the charts due to the difficulties which have been reported in the outsourcing of jobs which has occured in the auto industry. 

It is also, coincidentally, the home state of IndyMac Bank which was one of the primary lenders of some of those creative loans backed by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.  And a state with an inordinate amount of properties that are "governed" by another layer of government given the power of foreclosure for nonpayment of added property taxes in the form of homeowner's associations.

The other states listed in the top five are all Sunbelt states, having an inordinate amount of retirees and those on fixed incomes, and "retirement communities" also with this added layer of government and extra property taxes in the form of homeowners associations. 

And California just so happens also to be the home of a great many also of those lenders for homes financed in those states, with IndyMac, Countrywide and Bank of America holding a great many of those subprime and creative adjustables that were marketed heavily during the boom, and then rebundled and resold on the stock exchange also mostly to global investors.

It appears what has been occurring is that while all these homeowners at risk of losing their homes are in processing for renegotiated loans due to now the lower valuations of their properties, those interest and late fees are continuing to pile up and are being collected at a rather high rate under those original loan terms.  Also, for most of he counseling or interventionary actions by these service providers, there are fees also involved for their services which are being mostly picked up by the taxpayers, but also in nominal fees to these homeowners in some cases.

Bank of America has reported it only has renegotiated less than 4% of its loans at risk.  And was one of those rebundlers and is based out of Los Angeles (although now owned by Merrill Lynch under the terms of the behind closed doors bank bailout).

In the end, most of these homeowners after continuing to pay what they can which is being credited first to the late fees and interest, of course, are in the end losing their homes anway.

Not to be reading any deviousness on the part of these banks and lenders, or Washington (although at this point the evidence now points to the fact that Washington and the bankers are clearly bedfellows in this manipulated crisis), could it possibly be that this entire "Act" was simply another "stimulus" for Wall Street and the financial sector for the U.S. banks at the expense of both the American people, and some of those foreign investors?

Could some of these banks, as "agents" of the federal government now since those notes were unlawfully allowed to be resold on the global market outside our Constitution's provisions with respect to "globalizing" our economy to begin with,  be merely negotiating down the balances due to those foreigner investors, with the banks then foreclosing anyway and getting a bang up steal in reassuming those properties in the process for their own real estate portfolios? 

Banks only do make money when homes "turn over," not when they are paid off.  And so do the corporate foreclosure lawyers, realtors and any number of other industries that are tied to banking such as title companies, appraisers and the like.

A great many of the Bosnians refugees who were taken in during the Clinton era received new automobiles for themselves and their children who were driving age, from reports of parents who have had children in U.S. schools with many of the Bosnia refugees.

The homes in which the prices are being most depressed are high illegal immigrant states also, and there has been word that another attempt to legalize these individuals is going to be another of Mr. Obama and this Congress's major focuses.

I wonder if a new home in the West or Southwest or reduced rate American taxpayer backed loan is going to be part of that package?

At the news that continues to come off the Hill, such a move wouldn't surprise me in the slightest at this point.

After all, bankers profit and Wall Street's survival, no matter what the cost to any and all native or naturalized existing American Joe the Plumbers or the American middle class in this nation, appears to be the major focus here. 

 

 

 

For Any And All Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:

It was reported in the mainstream media today that the jobless rate had a minor decline the month of July, the first such decline since August of 2008, with the Obama Administration then taking credit and predicting this was a "strong indication" that perhaps the jobless rates and unemployment would begin to correct after the losses which have occured this past few years.

The jobless rate according to the Department of Labor is hovering at about 9%.  I would say those figures would be low, since it doesn't take into consideration those individuals who have lost their small businesses during this economic tsunami (who are not eligible to collect unemployment) nor those whose benefits have expired and are still not working with little likelihood that their situations will change anytime in the near future in their former lines of work.  Also July is a big vacation month for many, and vacation pay can and is lower than workweek pay in many instances and also many are now working as temporary help for any overflow.  Temporary labor needs are higher now in seasonal industries such as retailing and the needed temporary "back to school" workers specifically hired for short term employment needs.

After all, Obama himself laid off literally thousands in Detroit with the prediction that those jobs would not be coming back.  So what is an ex-autoworker really to do that has spent his entire life on a production line what with the outsourcing that has occurred that has eroded our industrial base here at home to less than half it was during the Industrial Revolution which, along with our agricultural base, kept this country a major economic power for well over 150 years?

Mr. Obama and this Administration's focus is on green jobs and science based technology.  In other words, promoting Silicon Valley most of all and the large public utility companies.  But these measures have been tried before, in the late 1960's and 1970's and it actually was the environmentalists and such that actually prevented new energy sources from being developed and utilized during the last gasoline crisis when prices went from less than 30 cents per gallon to well over $1.00.  The largest price increase since the automobile was invented by Henry Ford.

The wind tunnels and turbine energy sources were banned since none of those liberals wanted those ugly towers in their communities.  Nuclear power was developed as an alternative source of energy with promises to local communities that cleaner nuclear energy would result in lower energy costs for all.  What then happened after all those bond elections and federal grant and ratepayer's monies were spent to build those nuclear power plants?

Those public utility companies were then privatized by the local governments for added revenue in sales taxes, and the rate payers utility bills did not go down - they went up in order to provide for the investors dividends and other capital gains on their investment.

Thus, the costs of energy now in Phoenix who has the largest, Palo Verde Generating Station, less than 50 miles from the metro area have exploded due to its privatization and lack of any true regulation anymore by the state in the costs it now passes on to the ratepayers for their investors' profit.

And now has stooped so low as to recently institute a rate increase based upon an "inspection" done by the Federal Nuclear Regulatory Agency (instituted after both the Chernobyl and Three Mile Island disasters) supposedly calling for some expensive repairs that were then passed off once again to the rate payers for the fines and costs of bringing the plant now into compliance (although this plant is actually much newer than some on the East Coast which was finished in 1988, and thus was built after those disasters and included upgraded safety precautions and measures during its construction).

After work on Palo Verde was finished, Arizona unemployment also climbed considerably since it had started also on the science and technology bandwagon as the home of Hughes, Honeywell, and other government contractors, and its reliance on its historic sustainable industries - copper, cattle, cotton and citrus - fell by the wayside in furtherance of those objectives, and as a state marketing itself mostly to retirees for their early retirement years.  In the process, the climate which had made the state a haven for those with respiratory diseases and afflictions, ended up driving out more than it brought in insofar as permanent or long term residents, which has contributed to the urban sprawl and transient nature for the majority of those that call Arizona a "temporary," at best home.

Now it is also one of the states facing the largest number of unemployed and homeless due to the mortgage foreclosure mess, since along with many of those new and "transient" residents came also the East Coast, Western and Midwest real estate speculators and land fraud "get rich quick" artists.

The focus now of the state has swung to the Obama agendas in the health care sector specifically, although at this point most of the retirees that do end up retiring in Arizona usually when their health begins to truly fail end up moving back to their homes of origin in order to be closer to extended family members.

But I digress except to make a point.

Since a good portion of the population is not at all gifted in the field of science and technology naturally, no matter how much the focus of our state and private universities and money is poured into them in order to facilitate this agenda, just where is Washington planning to "outsource" our agricultural base for all the land that is going to be needed for these wind towers, nuclear generating plants, and new "green" manufacturing plants anyway?

Are they planning on turning Kansas and Nebraska into one huge wind turbine, or nuclear generating station in order to meet the entire Northern Hemisphere's future energy needs?  And the State of Texas or New Mexico into one huge solar panel for those in the Southern?

We already have the technology, but the people were not at all impressed with the technology that came along with that technology, after all, in the 1970's. 

So what does Mr. Obama and this Administration think has changed since that time, other than the fact that due to those same environmentalists our petroleum reserves and offshore wells have been literally hamstrung by regulatory codes and laws on limits of production, atmospheric or environmental particulates that have been so broad based that Nebraska's farmers are fined during planting seasons for excess particulates, and we are now in wars and buying more and more foreign oil due to a segment of the population that is never satisfied no matter what "alternative" fuels or greener technology is proposed. 

Including, from Mr. Obama's positions during the election campaign, himself as one of those liberal leaning wackos for whatever reason, Wall Street or his base.

So other than placing all Americans health care records on a national database and invading their rights to privacy over their most personal property and information, their very own physical health, and passing a stimulus for Wall Street again at the American public's expense fining now those power plants or setting up galactic bidding wars for Wall Street's benefit without removing the environmental restrictions which have gotten us into this mess to begin with, just where are all those now laid off GM workers and the other now unemployed going to find their own job stimulus for jobs in which they are qualified since it is clear they would also not meet the criteria for the loans now being offered up by those banks and lenders for educational purposes due to either their age, or their financial prospects and ability to repay?

I suppose what I am really saying here is that I'd put the cork back on that champagne if I were you.

 

For Any And All American Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:

In an interview with CNN published several days ago given by Timothy Geithner, Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Geithner stated that the economy is giving signs that it is headed for an eventual rebound.

But my question is:  for whom?  And just who has he spoken with recently, or what statistics is he using?

The last several months have seen the amount of foreclosures and also those jobless continue to escalate at unprecedented levels.  Recently, the House (yes, America, your misrepresentatives) just passed what is potentially going to be the largest increase in taxation in this country since the 16th Amendment with respect to Americans utility bills, which are already off the charts in most areas of the country:  The Cap & Trade Tax.

Conservative estimates have been that this new scheme for the Wall Street brokers and bankers will most likely increase Americans utility bills the first year alone over $1,400 per PERSON.  Not household.

The most massive layoff ever occurred recently in Detroit, one of the cities hardest hit also with the foreclosure mess.  Those middle class GM workers I'm sure are much appreciative of the anticipated extension of unemployment benefits they will receive.  Most of which are less than half of their former salaries.  And that $600 credit isn't going to go very far paying those utility bills either.

If Mr. Geithner's predictions are based upon the "global" market and Wall Street, then Mr. Geithner, Mr. Obama and those on the Hill have certainly insured its survival with all the legislation since the "bank bailout" fiasco, for an industry that has progressively also escalated their "junk fees" and costs in their "flex loan" offerings for those mortgages they sold to the American public and then resold on the "global" exchange.

While also lobbying for changes in the bankruptcy code precluding Americans from writing off any of their high usury fees and costs should they actually use some of that great credit and have an unexpected large expense arise, such as ballooning property taxes and insurance costs, that makes them unable to pay that double digit interest.

Of course, the Americans lost their homes, while the foreigner investors recouped their investments, enough to even send their highest paid executives to a retreat at one of California's Four Star resorts.  California, of course, being the home of the lenders who underwrote most of those bogus loans.

Which then turned around and pleaded bankruptcy, when Silicon Valley must be making money hands over fist due to the continuing war, and the telecom bill that just resulted in many Americans having to ditch their antennae and pay instead for cable subscriptions to "stimulate" the telecom companies profit margins even more.

Mr. Geithner must be polling the financiers who are profiting with his predictions is the only conclusion I could come to after reading the piece since it was truly difficult to pinpoint just what he is using as his crystal ball, of course at the cost of Joe the Plumber for these progressive Wall Street stimuluses, who I am sure doesn't have a lot invested in the stock market other than maybe a college fund for his kids.

Although that also won't tie him over once those "global warming" taxes also kick in, not to mention the health care he most likely will now have to fork over for his journeymen apprentice helpers under the new L. Ron Hubbard/Orwell Universal Health Care Plan.

Tell me, Mr. Geithner, just whom were your consulting for your predictions?  And since a great many now are on the breadline, or the homeless shelter, just where is the investment capital going to come from with so many Americans now living hand to mouth as it is, or saving for those "global warming" taxes once they hit?

I know, the "global" community will continue to buy up most of America's industrial base, and its infrastructure at an even faster clip than it already has.  I hear the French are now invested in the Grand Canyon and that new platform they just put in, and I'm sure could come up with a down payment on the rest since I do believe they still have some extra cash and some of those dollars of ours which helped during the rebuilding after World War II?

Have you arranged for the realtor and "for sale" sign for the White House yet?

Oh, heads up America.  In the article Mr. Geithner did indicate that in order for this recovery to progress and have the desired result, there most likely would have to be some increases in taxes in the form of a VAT or value added tax on manufactured goods which will, of course, raise prices again for the consumers.

And he also spoke of what "success" the Cash for Clunkers program had been which was funded at 1 billion and provided for $4,500 rebates for people who traded in their older gas guzzlers for newer, fuel efficient models.

But I question whether the success of this program is as was represented, since with the average automobile with all the bells and whistles and computers now involved, well over $20,000 even for the lower end models, in most states that credit wouldn't even pay the license, sales tax and registration fees.

Seems another "stimulus" instead meant for the state and local coffers more than anything.

Certainly not for the auto industry, as stated in the article, since those GM plants in Mexico and China are humming right along and due to the cheap labor and with that Hummer deal thrown in to China to sweeten the deal as our major creditor at this point from the propaganda on the MSM, GM isn't hurting and had one of the fastest bankruptcy restructuring (post bailout) ever for a major U.S. corporation.

And John McCain, of course, was also interviewed.  And gave credit somehow also to the "success" of the stimulus.

I wonder if he's been back to Arizona recently, or spoken with many in the Grand Canyon State, one of the top three consistently in home foreclosures?  Or visited and walked through some of the wash areas in metro Phoenix or Tucson lately? 

Or visited the local soup kitchen because there are quite a few Joe the Plumbers there due to the amount of day laborers who have taken many of their jobs as those small businesses and construction trades do seem to be some of the primary employers in most areas of the country right now.

So cheer up, Middle Class America, Mr. Geithner has things well under control....for the "global market economy," which you are subsidizing for what is nothing more than world "economic" socialism.

As Mr. Obama said:  We all must make sacrifices.

Maybe a start would be that all federal employees must also divest themselves of their taxpayer paid health care plans and benefits, and sign up for the new "government" sponsored program to help cut that deficit and be on parity with their constituents in this government initiated economic crisis.  And their federal pensions contributions sliced and switched to 401(Ks) heavily invested in U.S. industries, rather than their global investment portfolios.

Isn't it time those on the Hill practiced what they preach and layoff a few of those government workers?

After all, the recently published staff budget for the White House alone is over 32 million with over 400 employees.  I think Adams had less than six, and it wasn't even done yet.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/02/geithner.economy/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

For Any And All Constitutional Conserve-atives:

Another story beaten to death by the mainstream media and the Obama Administration came to a conclusion Thursday at the White House with Mr. Obama, Mr. Biden, Dr. Gates and the Cambridge police officer who "arrested" Dr. Gates purportedly due to a "crime in progress" call he received at the Gates residence having a cold one for all the news cameras.

With all the spin that has been occurring in the mainstream media, much of which since 9/11 has left much to be desired in the way of factual journalism and which act more as media reps for "their" politicians due to Big Business corporate ownership and who merely play off each other with respect to political news on the Hill, even the details of this supposed "crime" have been questionable.

Starting with the fact that it has now been reported it was a "senior citizen" who made the call. I'll let that one go for now, since it appears now the seniors are going to be brought into this political circus perhaps for poor eyesight in not recognizing Dr. Gates in the middle of the afternoon, mind you.

The spins on this "story" have been just too incredible to believe at this point.

And appears at least in my educated opinion watching how this has progressed now for almost a week and a half, this was a staged event being used for political purposes most of all. Especially now that even Colin Powell was on Larry King putting in his two cents with respect to supposedly a dereliction of protocol in that an "adult supervisor" (or SWAT negotiator?) hadn't been called in to mediate.

Mr. Obama has been losing points fast with the American public, especially in light of his "solutions" which have not been solutions at all per his campaign rhetoric but simply continuations of the same agendas and even upping the civil rights violations now on the American people of the Bush Administration.

Other than calling for closing Guantanamo he is really 0-3 on his promises to end the war, look out for Joe the Plumber and the middle class (tell that one to the laid off GM workers in Detroit, I dare you), and solving the mortgage mess and crisis.

There was just something a little strange about the "convenience" of this entire incident, and the amount of press it received for my liking. And it appears a good many other Americans also. Good way to shift the pressure and heat off the Hill for the next tax scam on the American people, the L. Ron Hubbard/George Orwell "Science Based" Universal Health Care Plan.

And also keep the racial thing alive as a diversionary tactic and method to use to facilitate civil unrest since civil unrest means the government can use it also as an excuse for much of its extra-Constitutional now security measures against Americans so long as they can keep the fear factor alive.

Inciting civil unrest actually is how many communist leaders and governments came to be. And just why aren't our own borders secured, or some of these foreign individuals from Middle Eastern countries with active terrorist cells not simply deported at this point?

Or, in fact, since America is still at war (although never called Constitutionally or "legally" declared under Bush or that Congress) then why aren't all non-green card holders deported at this point until we have ended this "conflict" or "engagement" or whatever the heck it is since it appears those on the Hill have about as much clue as the American people why we are STILL now eight years later over there? 

And all foreign entry visas denied until it is? 

After all, I'm sure Mr. Powell is aware of this.  After any attack on any military installation in this country is it not SOP that the "base" is locked down until any additional threats are addressed, and all passes then denied to any and all entering or leaving the base until the crime is solved and perpetrators brought to justice?  The military bases in this country actually have far greater "common defense" provisions than our entire country - especially for those living in the border states most of all due to the criminal activity, theft and violent crimes that can be directly tied to it. 

Many Americans could sure use those jobs.

I know, the finale for "So You Think You Can Dance" is next week and Nigel and that other British MC just might have to miss it and the shows producers and network would then have to get an American replacement that might result in a point or two drop in the ratings.

That health care "solution" in appointing a Health Care "God" using actuarial tables for treatment plans is looking more and more like the "science based" Cap & Trade scam which was propagandized to the hilt, and quite obviously meant to feed the Wall Street bankers for that carbon credit market that will be initiated on the backs of the American public in higher utility bills that wipe out that little crumb of a tax rebate and credit thrown out at election time.

Especially now when those inflationary taxes and utility bills start soaring off the charts, in addition to the continued loss of jobs and homes that is still escalating.

I wonder how many members of Congress are heavily invested in energy development and utility companies. Or for that matter Wall Street itself. Maybe 100%?

And then the "spins" on the Beer Summit being a "teachable moment" for America and America's children.
 Please.

Does Mr. Obama and those serving now in our federal government in all three branches truly think that they are examples that America's children should use for role models? A Commander in Chief that speaks of transparency, while hiring three law firms to prevent disclosure of his birth or academic records in order to even verify that he meets the minimum qualifications of the Office of the Presidency? 

A Supreme Court that has gotten increasing more and more political and sovereign favoring in its rulings with respect to Americans Bill of Rights protection, and has refused over six legal challenges to Obama's citizenship status? 

And A Congress that just engaged in a "sleight of hand" in order to also circumvent all those challeges in using a bogus "Resolution" congratulating Hawaii on its 50th anniversary as a state by including a cute little sentence introducting this Resolution with respect to Mr. Obama's birth again without any clear evidence or documentation, in order to also deny the people their right to review the evidence that Obama meets those absolutely minimal requirements (although clear that his status, from the founders "intent" with respect to that provision would clearly make him a foreigner and not "natural born" or "naturalized" American at all, due to reasons behind that provision itself, and their intent in so providing).

Forget the next Beer Summit. Our taxpayer dollars would be better spent in group therapy for those holding federal office, and would assist in at least minimally reducing that federal deficit and taxpayer bite that already has left more Americans homeless and jobless than at any time since the Depression.

Do I hear "Cheers" out there in the South, West and Midwest?

For Any and All Conserve-ative Constitutionalists:

This week another "politically" generated news story has literally been beaten to death in the mainstream and web media, and that is the story regarding the arrest and detainment of a black Cambridge professor by a white police patrol officer, who just so happened to be a close personal friend of the current resident of the Executive Office on the Hill, Barack Obama.

This story has gotten more media coverage than it would appear the actual facts of the case would engender, as have quite a few in more recent years due to the turn our news sources have taken from being factual and informative watchdogs with respect to reporting real hard hitting news on current political events to more of a National Enquirer on celebrities and politicians personal lives, or on the flip side, PR press agents and media spinners in cahoots with Washington with respect to any and all real political reporting.  Or knowledge either of our Constitution with respect to the criminal fraud and conduct which continues to go on at our nation's capitol and in fact now being intensified under the Obama Administration at a far greater clip and pace than the former Bush Administration.

For heaven sake, Colin Powell now was even given air time on Larry King dissecting this situatuion, of course as ex-military using his military experience to put in his two cents.  Unfortunately, what Mr. Powell fails to realize is that your average neighborhood isn't Iraq, and the police actually work for the U.S. citizens and the police are not our commanding officers and can and do overstep their boundaries more and more so it appears due to the focus now on training police to suspect everyone and anyone of "terrorism" making the police now terrorists themselves, especially young graduates with this "new" training.

He also spoke of an "adult" supervisor being called in.  Weren't these two men both adults?  Or at least over 21?  And this entire incident with all the publicity now surrounding it seems there is an agenda here to either keep the racial thing an ever present "threat" (terrorism) or also to threaten the public that if the police should attempt to arrest you on your own property, then don't simply comply with their requests, but don't dispute their assumptions or work even verbally?

Officers are now pulling guns for traffic violations in some areas of the country.  And it appears the federal government is facilitating now not only this domestic surveillance, but civil unrest due to just such tactics in no longer recognizing that Americans do have "unalienable" and civil rights.  Or maybe these jack boot police methods are simply meant to stimulate the economies of the industry which wrote some of those unconstitutional "Acts" post 9/11 - the lawyers in this country.  After all, we have more than all of Europe combined at this point, most of which are not trained in the true law at all.  Our Constitution.

And at this point with all the brouhaha surrounding it, is begining to sound more and more suspect as another attempt to keep the racial thing alive and in the media.  Stories such as these given so much press, and especially due to the fact that this conveniently was an acquaintance and friend of Obama's, means there is an agenda here, folks, and it is to deflect and distract.

A legal tool those educated in America's law schools or who have worked in that now "industry" are quite familiar with, and whom hold many seats in government and also dominant the staffs of most Congressional members and the Executive office.  It's the old "smoke and mirrors" defensive tactic now being utilized nationwide in conjunction with the corporate news media organizations.

I guess government classes were also skipped by those majoring in journalism in our universities and the "dumbing down" of America progressively which has occurred has actually been facilitated by Washington itself now that the Department of Education is determining local school curriculums now more and more.

No wonder more and more parents are choosing to home school their kids.  And their tyranny now even is beginning to rear its ugly head in this respect.

Several state and some government agencies are now using their regulatory powers to attempt to preclude homeschooled or "alternatively educated" citizens from working within the federal or state government.  We now have "education discrimination" rearing its head in order to socialize education in this country.  State and federal laws also dictate even private school curriculums at this point.  These new requirements which are now being concocted expressly state in some of their published material that a "public school and public university" education is required for the jobs listed.

Good way to also water down and use the regulatory agencies then in order to simply "regulate" away any and all private or charitable religious or faith based schools while not directly attacking the Bill of Rights Constitutional protections in the process.  So far it appears little progress has been made on this due to its blatant Constitutional abridgment.  It appears Big Daddy government wants not only now to socialized medicine and decide who lives and dies ultimately in this country, but socialize education and control, and parent the citizens from birth to death in the process.

Even though with the current tax structures the way they are, whether Americans use the public education system or not, they are paying for it one way or another.

What was interesting about this Gate case was the fact that it not only made the news (and national media attention) at all, but just where did this "scoop" come from anyway? 

And who reported the "crime in progress" since it would appear it would have had to have been one of his own neighbors since it is rare indeed now that officers even patrol neighborhoods anymore, rather are too busy earning that federal grant money parking outside local sports bars and restaurants in order to catch the social drinking crowd as now more and more revenue collectors for the states rather than "common defense" for the communities as in past generations.  There is much suspicious about this entire "story," and story it appears to be.

Thus, neighborhood security is another one of those former governmental functions for which the taxpayer pay local taxes and for which they now do not receive those services, and more and more neighborhoods across the country have been placed in the position of then having to pay for private security.  We are now "privatizing" another governmental function and supporting the science and technology bottoom lines in home security devices through again state and federal negligence in using those public sums for public purposes.  Crime now actually has become a "job stimulus" and Washington's "jobs and the economy" focus seems a little bent at this point insofar as whose jobs and whose economies they are truly interested in stimuluating, and at whose expense.

It appears the foreigners and criminals are actuallly now unofficially the "citizens" Washington truly is now representing.  Or purposely enabling to commit their crimes, shall we say.

Since without their help and support, those campaign donations from their corporate benefactors might dry up.  Truly address crime prevention, or secure our borders and just look at how many industries bottom lines might be compromised.  The home security and gadget companies.  Silicon Valley.  Medical & health profession.  Pharmaceutical industry.  Behavioral health specialists.  Funeral directors.  The greatest industry that has been stimulated post 9/11 is the first in the list, the gadget industry, and in additional now online web schools majoring in "degrees" in Homeland Security now for a few thousand for their "bachelor's" programs.  But the real beneficiaries especially are....

The lawyers most of all, who dominate all three houses of government in some capacity or another.  In fact, they are now writing 1,000 page bills which our Congressional representatives are voting on without reading as a further "job stimulus" for the legal industry.  Of which our Pres claims to be one.  But certainly not a Constitutional lawyer, that much is clear.

How much is one American life worth?  Apparently, to those on the Hill in addition to sacrificing thousands due to the open borders situation which continues post 9/11 and in our state legislatures also, less than their next Washington fundraiser or cocktail party, or seat on the next corporate Board for them or their relatives.   And now with the L. Ron Hubbard Health Care Plan being formulated, will clearly be reduced to dollars and cents now from the federal trough once elected.  U.S.A. Inc. has been operating like General Motors for decades, so that merger and joint venture simply another to add to its massive Wall Street holdings.

I wonder all told how many shares in how many Fortune 500 companies do the members of Congress have in their stock portfolios combined.  How many in the health care industry or sector? 

And isn't legislating for more and more laws favoring private industry and big business the ultimate in conflict of intrerest, and insider trading?  Isn't this type activity on the part of the "government" the very actions which also lead to that Boston Tea Party so long ago?  Isn't AIG (based in London) a prime example of favoritism for a global industry at the ultimate expense of the colonists in this country and contrary to the very foundations and wording contained within the Constitution with respect to foreign "interests" in any respect, and the intent of the founders in its framing?

How much do Bill Gates and Warren Buffett stand to gain from this Orwellesque Health Care Plan, anyway?  How many shares of AIG have been transferred to Mr. Buffett (heavily invested in the insurance industry) by Mr. Geithner at this point due to that "behind closed doors" unconstitutuional bailout at this point?

I wonder why no one, with that National Health Care Database and the Health Care Czar "God" in Washington has even pointed out what a great political tool and weapon this new health care plan could be for any and all future administration for perceived political enemies?

Property theft and other such property crimes in fact are the highest crimes bar none than any other in most metropolitan cities and states, and has increased in leaps and bounds the past twenty years as the local governments collect more, but provide less in public services for those taxes, while paying out more instead to their private grant and no bid contract recipients.    

And if Dr. Gates was a Cambridge professor, upon this officer's investigation of the "crime in progress" with his attempting to break into his own home in which he was locked out, wouldn't the officer have patted him down or requested he empty his pockets before actually arresting him and thus easily able to confirm that it was his own house that he was breaking into?

This entire story seems another simply to "humanize" President Obama as the "good guy" and more a public relations stunt in order to charm the public, a public that is getting increasingly angry over the quite evident lack of any true "hope" or "change," and nothing more than a new Administration focused on feeding Wall Street and their own political careers most of all, rather than performing or restricting themselves to their Constitutionally outlined duties and functions.

Like ending the war.  Taxing the insourcing and outsourcing corporations which have resulted in the loss of literally thousands of American jobs.  Securing America's borders.

You know, the boring stuff of public office.

We are, after all, still in this "no win" war, the middle class in Detroit was just stripped of their jobs, unemployment,  joblessness and homelessness are at their highest levels since the Depression, and Mr. Obama's L. Ron Hubbard Orwellesque Health Care Reform and its increased costs and wayward spending agendas instead of addressing the bad legislation and negligent actions with respect to regulatory functions on many of these industries which occurred under  many prior Congresses and Administrations and which is what lead to this economic disaster,  and the continuing now war I suppose wouldn't increase the rating numbers enough to hike up the rates by those networks for the ad spots for those beer commercials.

But Dr. Gates, the officer and Obama will be having a beer, demonstrating what a "regular guy," and Average Joe the Pres actually is with his domestic diplomatic skills.  Great guy, that Pres.  Remember that when the pink slip arrives, how much he promised to "change" the tax burdens and increasing homelessness of the average middle class guy, after all. 

You know, when all that new taxpayer stimulus money was earmarked fundamentally for "new home buyers" or simply to temporarily renegotiate some of those usurous loans which were sold to the public, without any changes in the practices of the banks and lenders in those predatory loans to simply trap a new generation of middle class buyers or prolong the agony of those currently in danger of losing theirs especially now when the inflationary and those new "Cap and Trade" taxes kick in increasing your utility payments for those Wall Street bankers profit margins yet again.

Interesting also that a great many university professors, especially East Coast Ivy League professors, also belong to the Council on Foreign Relations, that New York "think tank" that also is populated with Fortune 500 Wall Street companies and under Rockefellar grant monies (who also fund the ACLU) directly determine through their members and their members within the Senate and House Foreign Affairs committees, our foreign policies.  Like the war now in the Middle East.  Apparently the Council's legal counsels and members are advising them on the "smoke and mirrors" defense also.

And also new legislation.  Such as the "Cybersecurity Act" that resulted in the House Energy Committees switchboard being shut down during the Cap & Trade debates for Wall Street and the bankers also bottom line due to being "overwhelmed," by faxes and emails from the public, while they then just went ahead and passed the bill anyway.  Illegally, actually, since such a tax is fundamentally illegal under our existing Constitution as not at all a function of the federal government in the slightest, and based upon fabricated and inconclusive "evidence," funded by the banks, utilities and energy companies who will be the beneficiaries.  

And some of those university professor"scientists" conducting a great many of those expensive seminars on global warming are also on the Council on Foreign Relations with those Fortune 500 global trade association members.

At least this one pushed the "First Dog" stories and Michelle's wardrobe choices off the front pages.

Spin, dstract and deflect.  The new political tap dance is getting real, real old - and most of today's journalists do appear to now be receiving their salaries through federal grant monies.   Through either their "corporate" employer, or directly.

 

 

Since Barack Obama assumed the Office of Presidency in January, there has been much activity going on in Washington in attempt to reportedly "fix" the economic and other problems which were facilitated under the former Bush administration and salve the discontent in the United States that the majority of the citizens now have with the goings on in our nation's capitol.

While Obama has been on whirlwind tours of the United States and Europe promoting his economic solutions, and throwing money right and left at whatever fire springs up (such as the GM bailouts, and his "foreclosure" solutions), his policies have left much to be desired and actually have further sunk this country into an economic quagmire without truly addressing any of the problems which lead to this.

Self-serving politicians who have consistently for decades acted for their own political interests and benefactors, rather than the Constitution and citizens of the nation in their proscribed duties and functions.

It is difficult in this day and age to get elected to state of federal offices without a huge campaign war chest.  This was not so in prior generations and it got me to investigating just why, particularly in this last half century, most campaign elections have become more and more costly, and yet less and less effective in bringing about any true change in governmental policies, or even sound and Constitutional government.

And the answers I found were actually quite simple and enlightening.

You cannot have a true Constitutional Republic and "representative" government when those "representatives" are not "representatives" of the districts of citizens they are elected to represent.

And this has been the case now for well over seventy-five years.

How did this distortion of our true intended form of representative government come about?

By veering from the "intended" provisions of the founders of the country in the election of the leaders at both the state and federal levels.  Although not "written in stone" in the Constitution, it was a very simple restriction and gentlemen's agreement that the founders felt didn't even bear inclusion in the Constitution at all, since it was assumed within the framework of the document itself.

Any and all donations to candidates running for elective office for any seat in any public service position throughout the country would necessarily have to be both a resident of the district in which he represented, and also restricted to financing and promotion by only those living within his respective district.

In other words, a candidate could not accept any sponsorship or donations from outside his legislative district, in order that he truly was a representative of his constituency within that district.

And returning to those "legal" yet unstate provisions once again would turn help also dilute the influence of the "corporate" and special interest groups that reside on K Street and hang around the Halls of Congress with their hands out seeking their "corporate" welfare on the backs of the American people rather than working for a living.

Such as those now in the energy and health care field, and Wall Street, who are looking for handouts at the American public's expense, when they have already made a good portion of the population right now literally homeless and jobless.

Congress had no inherent authority to institute "campaign finance" laws at all, other than to restate the obvious:  Any and all candidates for federal or state office must both reside in their districts, and were precluded from accepting ANY outside donations other than from those in their own representative district.  And for any and all "corporate" donations (which were precluded since "corporations" were not people actually at all), then the address of the principal or statutory office would be used as their district.

Wake up, America.  These Congressman and Senators have been accepting unlawful campaign donations and been in violation of the true campaign finance laws for literally decades, in order to pick and choose which industries will benefit them personally the most and ensure their political survival.

And rewinding to the "intent" within the framework of our Constitution, might just bring about true change, rather than the Obama (Bush in drag) version.

For Any and All American Constitutional "Conserve"atives:

Last night I listened to part of Obama's new "road trip" and public relations spiel regarding the health care reform he and the Democratic Congress (and their Republican also Global Socialist members) are hatching in Washington.

At the end of the spiel all I could think of was that his health care "reform" is nothing more than "reforming" medicine and health care along the lines of any corporate enterprise. On a cost/benefit business model with an actuary in Washington then determining what types of treatment will be "approved."

In other words, Obama is now creating a new position within his administration whoever the new "health czar" will be.

God.

Or at least that is what the job description should read with the power which will be given over human life and death in this country.

Listen up, America. Do you really want some federally trained lackey in Washington determining whether or not your spouse, child or other family member "deserves" or is worthy of treatment for their health care needs?

And just who are you going to sue or bring charges against if that treatment is denied, anyway? It is you who are paying for that coverage, yet the only recourse that would be available to you would be to file a claim with the same entity that denied you the treatment to begin with.

The federal government.

And what if you have religious beliefs that preclude invasive medical treatments, or also rely more on homeopathic remedies rather than running to the doctors at the first sign of a cold or flu?

Should you be forced to pay for medical treatments and costs that will continue to escalate beyond your ability to pay at some point, as I do believe there will also be differences in the costs to citizens included within that bill according to their age?

And just how can the government "fine" you for not purchasing a government issued "product," or "service" which is what it is, because it is the government and not the health care provider or doctor who will be in charge of your treatment plan?

Do "business models" work for a vital service that all Americans most likely will need at some time or another in their lives? And what about the state plans, will citizens still be paying taxes for those state social service agencies on top of the expansion of DHHS that will be required in order to administer this massive plan?

Or will those state plans be "merged" with the states ceding more of their duties and functions to federal control, with then more state revenue to spend indiscriminantly in not having to come up with those matching sums? Just when will we phase out state government altogether, because that would be a huge tax savings to all Americans at this point since this does appear to be the plan from all appearances?

How much of those health care taxes will then be going into administrative costs for more federal government workers and THEIR salaries and benefits?

Is this the type of "jobs stimulus" Obama was referring to, expanding government to the degree that pretty soon everyone in this country will be somehow working for the U.S. government with Uncle Sam then doling out the spoils?

Isn't that the definition of pure communism?

The health care industry is licking its lips over this one, because it will be "bare bones" coverage and they will then get the opportunity to market those "supplemental" plans that they most likely will never have to pay off on.

Just why DO you think the AARP is involved in these talks? Who do you think has a huge share of the market with respect to their "supplemental" medicare plans at the present time?

And just why is it that this is being tailored to meet the needs of the industries which are raping the American people for their health care costs now as it is?

Obama and this Congress and Administration are getting scarier by the moment.

This is Soylent Green and Hitler wrapped into one, yet being marketed as a "solution," to a government created situation to begin with in not performing its governmental function in regulating some of those industries sufficiently but rather getting into bed with them for politicians personal political careers.

Warren Buffett must be making plans to buy Africa as a real estate investment in order to shelter some of that windfall profit he will be making, since included within the bill are measures which require the public to use "approved" health care providers for the cut rate plans.

Maybe that is also part of the plan, installing owner/CEOs in the various third world countries funded by their corporate holdings (of course funded also by the public in their public offerings, which market is then manipulated by the European bankster/owners) in the industrialized West and Far East so that the G-20 conferences are in truth of fact nothing more than corporate Board of Directors' meetings for Earth, Inc. of the principal owners with the world's population at that point nothing more than disinterested shareholder/members working for the planet's "corporate" greater good. Robot workers, in other words, at the mercy of the planet/state.

Did L. Ron Hubbard or Orwell write this script?

After all, Obama and this Congress and Administration are big believers in "science" based technology. Even predicting the planet's demise thousands of years down the road is within their grasp (although not tomorrow's ice storm or path of the next hurricane).

Maybe they left a word out. "Science fiction" based technology, perhaps?

And the little workers bees worth in the event of downtime then determined according to actuarial tables configured according to job position and risk/benefit losses at time of injury or their life expectancy.

At this point, all those on the Hill need to have a mental health check and/or check in to the nearest psychiatric ward.

After all, WE'VE paid for their coverage for years.

NeoCon/Global Socialist Lindsay Graham To Support Sotomayor Appointment

Mainstream news sources reported today that Senator Lindsay Graham, the NeoCon Republican from South Carolina in the vein of John McCain, the pre-eminent liberal global socialist (though formally aligned with the Republican Party in name only), has given his support for the Sonia Sotomayor appointment of Barack Obama to fill Justice Souter's seat on the Supreme Court bench.

Between Arlen Specters defection to the Democratic Global Socialist Party, and John McCain's selection by the Republican Neocon wing which has evolved since Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan's deaths, it would appear that really the now One Party Global Socialist Party, although unofficial, is a point of fact.

Ms. Sotomayor's "grilling" by the Senate Judiary Committee was really nothing more than a joke at best, and appeared more directed toward the individual members of the Senate Judiciary attempting to make points for their respective runs for re-election, and some face time in the public.

I especially liked one of the questions from the junior senator also from Arizona, that former bastion of Conservatism.  John Kyl's major question and thrust (as a lawyer) in the questioning was to pose a question with respect to a decision in a case Ms. Sotomayor rendered, as to what legal "precedent" she used in her determination.

It appeared merely a "politically" based question in order to then reinforce in the minds of the public that judicial determinations are to be primarily rendered according to higher court, or earlier Supreme Court decisions and their rulings.  When such is not the case at all, nor were precedents to be the determining factor in any rendering before a judicial body in this country.

Merely the "stated" law as found in our Constitution.  Which supersedes any and all federal or state statutes even.  Rendered according to the "common useage" language contained within the Constitution itself, as a contract actually.  Which cannot be alterered, amended or changed without the consent of the parties to that contract.  So basically most of those amendments even after the 10th with respect to many extra-Constitutional issues (not the slavery issue, which was contentious at the time) were not "lawfully" ratified since the 9th Amendment itself would have required such amendments be placed by the states before the people prior to their agreement to any amendments to it.  Absent, of course, calling for another Convention in order to come up with a new one.

And especially limited construction of any and all cases brought under the First Ten Amendments.  The words "unalieanble" mean God-given, and not even the Supreme Court can "tamper" with those rights, since to do so would undermine the "natural law" upon which that Bill of Rights is based.   But that has not been the case.  And that is why there are now more and more "political" judicial determinations rendered, and why our jails are so full.  The fact that in the "home of the free" is in the top three with respect to number of inmates just about says it all in how both the states and federal government have abridged their functions and are not protecting freedom and liberty, and those "unalieanble" rights, but actually progressively attempting to remove them through dilluting them beyond recognition at this point. 

Which is why Congress was not intended to be in session year around, and serving was a civil servant position.  Too much time and too big a federal government has resulted due to the fact that we now have "career" politicians rather than statemen and women.  Who are "making work" and "removing" civil rights and expanding government simply to have something to do, it would appear.  Limited sessions means those serving also are truly residents then of the states and constituents of the people they are representing.  Not citizens and residents of Washington, D.C., their primary residences.  At this point it appears they all must represent the North and particularly Washington, D.C. since the only access most citizens have to their representatives is through email contact, while the lobbyists from foreign governments and national commercial interests and their offices are just down the street - their true constituents, that was clear, during that Cap & Trade nightmre of a treason. 

So the question on reliance on "precedence" as fundamental in any Court rendering was a "politically" based question and meant to confuse the public and as a statement of reassertion of federal authority and "politically" determined "precedents" as Mr. Kyl, the lawyer's, understanding of the "Rule of Law."  Which it fundamentally is not.  The facts of the case and merit under the Constitution, and its provision are fundamentally "the law," any and all federal or state statutes to the contrary.

The Supreme Court justices are sworn to uphold the Constitution, after all, not their predecessors rendering of it, especially those decisions which have been increasingly politically based, and have no foundation whatsoever in it.

Such as the Kelo decision in which the Court ruled that a private citizens home and land can be "taken" in order to "transfer" their wealth and property to a private developer.

Absolutely no foundation in the Constitution at all in that rendering.  None whatsoever.  In fact, the founders left England due to just such sovereign "takings" giving their land and homes to those in which the sovereign granted titles of nobility.  If anything, that decision was actually the most egregious violation of the Constitution ever committed in this country.

And rendered under a Republican (NeoCon) administration, and supposedly "conservative" court.  I beg to differ.  The Court has not been "Conservative" since Marbury v. Madison, as Jefferson was quoted to also state on many occasions.  The Court began making the Constitution a "thing of wax" and usurping more and more power almost before the ink was dried.

Which has also had a great deal to do with where we are today as a nation, now living under "global corporate socialism," with a President now with far more power than that Office was ever intended to have.

Graham had a close race his last re-election bid from last reports.  Lets hope those in South Carolina this time elect a "representative" or at least pressure Mr. Graham to come out of the closet and declare his true party affiliation, along with most of the Democrats and Republicans on both sides of the aisle that are now progressively destroying both our Constitution, and national sovereignty in this now "globalized" economy and government.

The Global Socialists on the Hill's stripes are becoming more and more evident now each and every session, and their true masters, the global bankers who run our Federal Reserve and U.S. Chamber members (global East India Company) now calling the shots on both our domestic and foreign policy for global commerce and profit, their only constituent.

For Any and All American Constitutional Conservatives:

During the last week there has been a great deal of reporting on internet sources that the mortgage crisis and home foreclosure situation is looking up, and that there has been an increase in sales for the third straight month of homes sold throughout the nation.

And just where are those figures coming from?

No surprise, the National Association of Realtors who just might have an ulterior motive in spinning or inflating the numbers due to the market conditions at the present time, and number of jobless and homeless now which has swept the nation since the manipulated "mortgage" crisis and bank bailouts which just so happened to occur during the last presidential election cycle.

In fact, the June 19-21 headline of USA Today also said it all:  Foreclosures Heading Through The Roof."

More Americans are lining up at the soup kitchen, than at the realtors offices, since the homeless now and jobless stats are really off the charts and not this high since the last great depression, also manipulated by the European owned Federal Reserve, branch bankers and Washington.

As far as my personal knowledge and reports from my former home state of Arizona, one of the states hardest hit due to the boom and bust cycle and the many retirees on fixed incomes that also were hard pressed to come up with increasing property taxes and insurance which contributed to some of what is occurring also left out by the media, and those predatory "interest only" and other "creative" loans sold mostly by regional and national California domiciled banks, this claimed increase in sales and "recovery" appears to be wishful thinking.

In Arizona, California, Michigan, Nevada and Florida due to also progressive overbuilding in those states for literally decades, and now thousands unable to qualify for fixed rate low interest loans with black marks on their credit records at this point, it will take literally decades - if ever - for the housing market to stabilize, from this 45 year Arizona resident. 

In those western border states now in particular, due to the open borders situation I'm sure that also has affected the marketability of those houses significantly, since who wants to live in a state in which there is a foreign invasion and civil wars now going on due to federal negligence in "providing for the common defense," its actual primary function.  Instead of now attempting to "reform" the health care industry according to a "business" model ala Soylent Green and Adolph Hitler on cost/benefit actuary "business" modes and standards.

Plus the fact that few now in this country trust the banking industry now in general.  Nor are willing to go into those sliding scale and interest only loans that they are still marketing, some of which are not even based on the U.S. prime interest rate, but the European market.

Nothing essentially has changed which lead to this catastrophe to begin with.  And most in the boomer generation or younger have moral difficulties paying "usurous" sums in order to purchase a home, a home which is now in many areas of the country due to the loan terms nothing more than a foreclosure contract to begin with.

So...nice try, realtors.  Since a great many of you also pushed and marketed to many of those retirees and others more home than they really could afford in order to get higher commissions also in the process, the trust in your "industry" also now is about zilch.

Especially those of us who lost ours, and who have made sure we speak the truth, rather than the spins, on just what lead to this, and the commercial and banking interests that were truly responsible - of course, along with the criminal element now residing on Capitol Hill and in our state legislatures who have been in collusion with the corporate interests and their primary "special interest" campaign backers for literally decades.

And the National Association of Realtors is high up on that list also. 

Along, of course, with the bankers and their minions - the foreclosure lawyers and scam artists and their breathren in federal and state government.

It was reported in the mainstream media that a solution to the California budgetary crisis is expected by Sunday.  Apparently, there has been some concern in the Golden State due to the fact that it has been reported that some of the banks are refusing the IOUs which have been issued in order to fund governmental contractors which have not been paid due to this crisis.

And it is clear this is no more than a P.T. Barnum spectacle in order to gain more and more leverage with the California residents in the mess that has occurred due to that states progressive liberalism over the years.

Since California most of all, due to the continuing war in the Middle East, should be in the black and not the red at all if they were utilizing those public sums primarily for the state government's true Constitutional functions, rather than also funding special interests primarily with grant monies and no-bid contracts as occurs throughout the nation now in the corruption in state and municipal governments.

After all, Silicon Valley is the largest producer of all the now high tech security devices that are being installed throughout the nation, and one of the largest holder of federal contracts for technology needs in this continuing war, and are huge mega holders of U.S. government contracts.

And I wonder if this is actually the case, why the Hollywood elite have not thought of having their own benefit for the State of California instead of the next AIDS or PETA benefit.

Most of them due to their wealth and global holdings could float the state for a number of years if they were taxed at the rate the middle class actually is, or even the lower income workers - rather than having access to their offshore accounts, and tax attorneys who work the "privileges and immunities" on capital gains so well for all of them for their shell corporations, and trust accounts.  Rather than being taxed on the truth "worth" of their holdings or "property."

And California is primarily a liberal Democratic state or "blue" state, yet many of whose individuals are the direct beneficiaries of the claimed Republican favoritism for the wealthy on those capital gains benies.  Go figure.

In fact, while many of the people throughout the country are now facing homelessness and joblessness in increasing numbers, I read an article this week that David Arquette is planning on holding a sit in for the global Food for the Hungry in New York shortly in order to raise a few million in order to feed those living in third world countries.

I wonder if he has visited his local Los Angeles soup kitchen lately, since the class of individuals now is including the former middle class in increasing numbers.

Or why he didn't simply write a check from his own excess wealth instead of using it for a PR stunt and in order to "socialize" the donations for a cause in which he individually supports and believes?  He could donate his own wealth and it would take care of quite a number, I would suspect.  Or maybe the sums he pays to his tax accountant.

It was also interesting to note that California is not a right to work state, so many of the California public employees are outraged since they now feel they are being victimized by this also "budget crisis."  Since they are state employees and public servants, I wonder where in the California or U.S. Constitution it gives public employees the right to "unionize" in order to gain more taxpayer sums for themselves?  The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) is also playing politics with the issue (and just what other citizens in other countries does this U.S. "corporate" union claim it represents?)

Municipalities are nothing more than "state actors" for the states themselves, so this is truly confusing that state employees would be allowed to unionize to get more of the taxpayer bite to begin with.

Although the CPI and statistical data published by the U.S. Department of Labor is a joke in and of itself (artificially concocted due to the fact that most union contracts and salary increases are tied in directly to the CPI, so there is some also "creative accounting" on those figures that bear no actual relevance to the true increases in costs for many products and services), teacher's salaries have gone up at three and four times the rates of inflation, as have several other of the public service occupations.

And with California also primarily one in which there is an additional layer of government in most newer suburban  areas in the form of homeowners associations collecting taxes for former municipal services such as street repairs, street lighting and such, just wonder where all that revenue that the state has collected truly has gone?  Since they are collecting more revenue, but providing less each and every year and transferring those costs back onto the public in those "socialized" land ownership communities.

If they are under "balanced budgets" initiatives, just how are they also then entering into multi-year contracts then with developers and other government contractors to begin with?  How is that "legally" possible?

Sounds more like the classic case of fiscal mismanagement and misappropriation of funds is the true root of California's claimed budgetary woes.  And maybe a few too many of those Sacramento pow-wows and state benefits given to the likes of the Donald Trumps & Co. at the state resident's expense for the global tourism industry and U.S. Chambers agendas in turning the U.S. into nothing more than a tourist attraction and investment opportunity for foreigners. 

All at the cost of their fellow countrymen and their jobs and other "property" for their global monopolies and fellow "corporate" brothers and subsidiaries benefit at the ultimate price of the small businessesmen and any and all emerging American entrepreneurs due to their strangleholds now on a great many of the U.S. market due to favoritism and their "greased palms" political connections.

The delusion goes on.  And nowhere more than the home of the "OC," "Desperate Housewives," and "Californication."

That state is a world unto itself, whose delusion and fantasy extend far beyond Disneyland.

Although most of this week I have not been watching much of the Sotomayor grilling by the Senate Judiciary Committee since I do find watching now any and all of these televised "dog and pony" shows somewhat revolting, I have unavoidably read a few of the headlines and some of the blurbs on the internet with respect to the newest stage presentation by those on the Hill.

These sham hearings and such now are getting a little too incredible to believe.  And Ms. Sotomayor really should be up for Best Actress by a Member of the Judiciary, since it is clear this branch above all others is and has not served its function whatsoever almost since the ink was dried on our Constitution after that convention so long ago.  Jefferson said as much not many years later, especially after Marbury v. Madison, when he said:

"The question whether the judges are invested with exclusive authority to decide on the constitutionality of a law has been heretofore a subject of consideration with me in the exercise of official duties. Certainly there is not a word in the Constitution which has given that power to them more than to the Executive or Legislative branches."

    —Thomas Jefferson to W. H. Torrance, 1815. ME 14:303

"The Constitution . . . meant that its coordinate branches should be checks on each other. But the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch."

   —Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, 1804. ME 11:51

"To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves."
   —Thomas Jefferson to William C. Jarvis, 1820. ME 15:277

"In denying the right [the Supreme Court usurps] of exclusively explaining the Constitution, I go further than [others] do, if I understand rightly [this] quotation from the Federalist of an opinion that 'the judiciary is the last resort in relation to the other departments of the government, but not in relation to the rights of the parties to the compact under which the judiciary is derived.' If this opinion be sound, then indeed is our Constitution a complete felo de se [act of suicide]. For intending to establish three departments, coordinate and independent, that they might check and balance one another, it has given, according to this opinion, to one of them alone the right to prescribe rules for the government of the others, and to that one, too, which is unelected by and independent of the nation. For experience has already shown that the impeachment it has provided is not even a scare-crow . . . The Constitution on this hypothesis is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please."

   —Thomas Jefferson to Spencer Roane, 1819. ME 15:212

"This member of the Government was at first considered as the most harmless and helpless of all its organs. But it has proved that the power of declaring what the law is, ad libitum, by sapping and mining slyly and without alarm the foundations of the Constitution, can do what open force would not dare to attempt."

   —Thomas Jefferson to Edward Livingston, 1825. ME 16:114

In this humble American's opinion, the most dangerous statements Ms. Sotomayor made during her grilling on Tuesday was actually the most heralded by members of both of the "ruling" parties on the Hill, the Democrats and Republicans (Global Socialist Party) or at least some of their "representatives."

She has backtracked and now seems almost robotic in the questioning.  And some of the questions do appear mostly petty and being used to gain points by both political parties and not at all relevant to the matter at hand.  Does Ms. Sotomayor recognize the Constitution as it was written and intended by the founders as "the law" she continues to refer to?

It doesn't appear so.  She has made several comments with respect to "applying the law to the facts at hand."  Which all sounds well and good.  But she also has stated that in such determinations she also will use appellate and Supreme Court judicial precedents in her findings.  Which is what is truly scary.  Since that has brought us to the "political" judicary we have today rather than the "Constitutional" one.

With the court of public opinion or politics superceding the express provisions contained within it with respect to the government's place also as accountable, and not sovereign, to the people and acknowledging that the Bill of Rights is there to protect the people, and not the corporate.

In fact, it is there to protect the people from "corporate" or "governmental" abuse, which hasn't been the case in many of her own rulings, or those of the federal judiciary again since that ink dried.

Many of those past decisions had no foundation in the Constitution.  Especially Roe and Kelo in more recent history.

And with respect to Roe, her comments have been that this case is "settled law."  "Settled" by whom?  The judiciary in that Roe case?  Hardly, since the Supreme Court has no authority to "make law" whatsoever.  And it will only be "settled" law when Congress and both Houses actually get down to the hard business of defining, for Constitutional purposes, just when "life" begins in order to protect both women and doctors throughout the land from being prosecuted for "murder."  That is what is truly required.  But it is such a hot button political issue that our Congressional leaders continue to "use" that Supreme Court also in order to avoid doing the hard work of government and as elected leaders.

Instead, they are more concerned with how much foundation they have on and how many "public" appearances they can squeeze in in order to prove to the folks back home that they are worth their five figure salaries, expense accounts, and federal pension plans.

For heaven sake, we are now over 30 years past Roe, and until Congress defines "life" with respect to criminal convictions, we will continue to have doctors with social disorders that are constantly torn between their Hippocratic oaths, and Roe.  And cut rate "coat hanger" section and suction clinics.

I mean with partial birth abortions and the methods used in some of those cut rate "clincs," in their section and suction methods for these late term (after 20 weeks) premature deliveries, how far are we actually from the coat hanger abortions of old, with women's lives still compromised due to this risky procedure.  And yet those on the Hill have so far not at all addressed this PROCEDURE, let alone the definition of just when life begins and ends for Constitutional purposes.

And although not an Obama fan in the slightest since his actions post inauguaration have been more along the lines of George Bush in his reverence for our Constitution, and is no Constitutional lawyer, his critieria with respect to seeking a nominee with empathy really was not at all far off as a very important factor in any judicial selection.

As the founders recognized in not requiring religious test for federal office, there are matters that may come before these "Supreme" beings that go beyond the stated law.

I would have been more interested in questions regarding the Courts assertions of a self-determined "right of refusal" of citizen petitions to the Court when there is no provision within our Constitution as a "government of the people" for the Supreme Court to deny hearing any valid petition of a citizen with respect to the Bill of Rights or Constitutional questions if it is within their legal jurisdiction.  And it is within their legal jurisdiction on any and all Bill of Rights matters, or for that matter the current positions of "supremacy" and "refusal" with respect to the Court's continued refusals of U.S. citizen petitions demanding actual evidence and proof of Mr. Obama's citizenship status, when those requirements and provisions are minimal at best, and definitely provided by the founders for a very valid reason with respect to the Office of the Presidency.

I would have been interested in questions regarding whether or not the transparency which should and is required by any such government of the people, she would also be open to having televised and public coverage of some of their en banc deliberations, or hearings, except with respect to national security issues - and even in such cases, with technology the way it is today there can be bans on satellite transmissions for such deliberations, or transcripts issued for public distribution.

I would have been more interested in her responses to such questions as:  If the Teri Schiavo case was appealed to the court today, what is your "life" stance in the matter of a disabled yet still physically viable human life, and also the right of such a citizen or her nearest kin to petition the justices for such a determination as a "duty" of the Court under the Constitution.

It is clear, again, these hearings are no more than formalities.

She will rule, or accept or deny cases, as "politically" as all prior justices have, according to the current Administrations "will."  Since her salary and very livelihood depends on "politics" and not "the law," as an appointed and not elected official, and due to the polticalization of the other two branches, no accountability to her true employers, "the people."

And, of course, her "globalist" political affiliation most of all.  Where how we "look" to the world now or how those justices rule in accordance with global public opinion appears to be having more and more sway, and that glass encased document just down the street, far less with each passing year and Administration.