Here's To American Constitutional Conservatism: Not The British Variety!

(Edited)

As the New Year approaches on a new decade in a new millenium, the political landscape in the United States has fundamentally changed, of that there is no doubt.

The outrage of the American people on the continuing interventionist War in Iraq in the name of a nebulous War on Terror post 9-11 is now in its ninth year under the Obama Adminstration, continuing the Bush agendas and a "new" Congress that fundamentally hasn't changed in its support and loyalty to agendas that fly in the face of the U.S. Constitution, other than obscure the issues using partisan politics in order to gain votes at election times, and then basically continue the status quo.

The word "conservative" has been bantered about, and a plethora now of "liberty" websites can now be found on the web, again in order to obscure the agendas here and provide mainly a forum for Americans outraged with a tone deaf and rogue Administration and Congress to hear their voice.

However, more and more these sites appear to be forums for venting and organized protesting by professional protest organizers holding symposiums and conventions, with paid speakers and trinkets for commercial purposes.

Using these conventions and such in order merely to gain funding from Uncle Sam as "educational" institutions, with even disclosures that ban any "free speech" or even hint of taking legal measures as provided in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution in order to remove those now in office thorough legal or Constitutional means - i.e., filing the proper lawsuits and/or criminal complaints charging those members with treason, and calling for their arrest by the public's peace "officer" in charge of such matters in the Halls of Congress as intended by the founders, the Sargeant at Arms acting on warrants - "citizens' arrest" warrants were also the 'common law" measures in days gone by before political correctness was the order of the day.

Or at least one or two of those "misrepresentative" individuals on the Hill also doing so, and filing formal charges also dictated by his oath of office, and his duty to be an advocate for the Constitution before political party, or special interest backer.

Nor do most of these afford truly any free speech with respect to also discussing true revolution and overthrow of those in Washington per the original American revolution although radical even in their time, unfortunately was their last resort and method after all though peaceful methods can also be used enmasse for an outraged public in writing petitions foregoing political correctness for actual truth - but these groups appear to be fronted and organized using the same marketing techniques as that claimed "conservative" television media source, Fox TV.

Using a lawyer or other "authority" figure for its ownership and registrar, and usually a younger blond woman as their "techie" or second in command.

Like pairing Bill O'Reilly with Meghan Kelly, or the "bring out the lawyers" type reporting of a Nancy Grace trying cases now in the media prior to even charges being filed, or using "leaks" from police or other fringe "sources" in order to sway the public now in a great many high profile criminal cases now in this country, or as can be found on the local FOX affiliated networks for their news teams.

Which is, after all, well known to be owned by a British Conservative if such a "label" is used for its political postures and positions by and large, not a U.S. Conservative one at all, Rupert Murdoch.

Use of the word "libertarian" also describes a few of the positions contained on this and many claimed "conservative" station commentators, unfortunately a libertarian is actually fundamentally just as "liberal" in Constitutional construction as the far, far left insofar as most of their positions and align more with anarchy with calls for deregulation or "privatization" of vital publicly funded U.S. industry monoplies, global corporate entities and governmental functions.

Such as support for the privatization of U.S. and state prisons, public untility companies and the airlines which have progressively occurred. Now affording foreign governments even to own controlling shares of some of America's nuclear generators in the process.

How can you have true airline security protecting American lives, when foreign governments now own controlling shares of some of those regional and national airlines, not simply internationally ones?

Wonder why so many of these "terrorism" attacks now throughout the world have only been recent occurrences?

Globalization, and erasing of national sovereignties does tend to place each and every nation at greater risk of using "merged" economic tools as the weapons of those that wish to push their political agendas, or redress their grievances on a massive scale against civilian targets not simply military - because it get far greater press nowadays. Mostly from those "global" media sources hungry to sensationize each and every incident of loss of life - with now more and more spins and reporting ad infinitum.

Remember, the 9-11 tragedy was broadcast and reported for over seven full days replaying over and over again the attack on the second tower (with full camera crews there less than an hour after the first attack, in the financial district at that, during rush hour New York traffic?

Are those targeted by the "mainstream" two political party focused as "conspiracy" theorist so far off in some of their analysis as to how far fetched and unusual some of the details of that event are now in hindsight with all the film that is now available, and shock and rage of the "post traumatic stress symdrome" American public now somewhat receding enough to get through to any American with half a brain that there are some rather disturbing questions STILL surrounding that incident contrary to "official" reports?

While 9-11 and its attacks were "claimed" by an extremist Muslim groups, now it appears with the global unrest now going on, on a different scale, how many disturbed people during hunts for high profile crimes in the past in this country have claimed responsibility simply for the media attention alone?

Or with the media now being used by the government as a tool for national security in order to also now target and terrorize the American people themselves with their "watch lists" and "political ideology" profiles, even using the Bill of Rights "unalienable" (God-given rights) to somehow justify believing your average American believing in those inherent rights now and outraged at the progressive striping of them after an internal attack actually by foreigners (and the shoe bomber was also British, remember) "terorists" to be "watched."

Seems to me this is a case of the extremists in Washington now attempting to pull rank on the citizenry as tyrants, not representatives of the people but their "stakeholders" and global corporations most of all, corporations that actually have no allegiance at this point to any country whatsoever - with the U.S. media a primary global corporate entity at this point, with its foreign subsidiaries, and correspondents.

British conservatism still acknowledges the "sovereign" (monarch or in this instance, Washington and the President) as the source of all true power, any and all representations to the contrary, or somehow has now focused on calling for the states to file petitions and resolutions "reasserting" state sovereignty throughout the nation, although the 10th Amendment actually speaks for itself and needs no further "resolves."

This is something the British Conservative wouldn't understand in thedifferences between "their" conservatism, and "ours" since there are no "states" really in Britain, simply "subjects" of the realm.

And actually, in prior the 9th Amendment actually supercedes the 10th, affording the American people actually sovereignty from both federal and state government, outside their proscribed Constitutional duties and functions under both the U.S., and each state's Constitution(s).

"Res Ipsa Loquitor" is the standard under over 700 years of common law precedent in actually the powers and duties given to the judiciary in Constitutional interpretation in America as based in its "Republican" form of government, with the government actually subservient to the people with respect especially to those Bill of Rights protections included which are quite different than Britains. "The thing as it is written and speaks."

This provision, however, is not acknowledged either by the British Conservative networks, although select judicial decisions have been disputed - nor as with the AIG bailout, even mentioning the "foreign" nature of that British based corporation to begin with, rather simply disputing the "bail out" of a select insurance provider at the cost of the American people.

Not its illegality under the U.S. Constitution in even entertaining "billing" the American people for a non-U.S. domiciled global corporation - based, of course, in Britain, although apparently "run" by an American, operating out of the British Mayfair office.

Huh? Who sits on its Board? Primarily, the British, of course. With Americans influence diluted by the composition of its Board.

An American Conservative recognizes that the War in '76 was as much about "taxation without representation" as it was about unlawful taxation for a globally produced product that was given a "monopoly" by the sovereign, demanding that the U.S. colonials pay for an inferior product, and then an "extra" fee by the sovereign for so providing.

It was a public/private partnership that the colonials had no "voice" whatsoever in its "monopoly" over something so cherished by them as the freedom to select the type and brand of tea they wished to drink, or a number of other products that the East India Company was given "sovereign rights" to with respect to the U.S. market.

Sort of like some of our global and U.S. Fortune 500 corporations, and enforced taxation now for auto insurance and the pending health care deform bills.

Forced taxation and "exclusivity" now in "associations" of these large major manufactures, financial service providers, and even home builders, without any real recourse nor regulation for the citizenry absent huge, expensive, and cost prohibited now litigation for any "breaches," and with respect to mandatory auto insurance, transfer of a governmental power (settlement of property claims and disputes) to a third party without by the consent of the governed, or effective legislation and regulatory powers over them protecting the people from "corporate" abuse.

Just think what the new health care deform bill will be like insofar as costs and the smoke and mirrors that will go on with this new public/private partnership being entered into between the sovereign and the health care providers that will be on those "approved" lists insofar as denied claims, or excessive increases in premium amounts - since there is absolutely no provision for any regulatory agency charged with oversight, or fines or penalties levied against those insurance providers - simply the people once again.

British Conservatives believe in removing even the minimal in many cases existing regulation at both the federal and state levels in the name of "freedom" for those global and national concerns, a position which is diametrically opposed to the positions of those "Indians" that boarded that ship in Boston Harbor those many years ago.


And also support the War on Terror as a "just war" and redress of the attacks of 9-11, no matter how far afield at this point it has gone from the "just war" and "defensive" war provisions in the U.S. Constitution itself.

They are also the onces that support curtailing immigration from the South using whatever "state" methods work - including barricades and blockades within metropolitan city limits and using "search and seizure" methods without either warrants, or again within neighborhoods and communities - and not simply at state, county or federal boundaries and borders.

In other words, British Conservatives believe that the "end justifies the means," and that the states do not have any obligation to adhere to the Bill of Rights with respect to recognizing that in so doing, you are violating also legal American citizens with such methods and creating actually war zone conditions within city neighborhoods and civil unrest by those very methods.

Destroying communities, supporting unjust wars, and offering and supporting global monopolies of vital U.S. industries, real estate and land, and America's very infrastructure is not at all "conservative" nor "American" even for the "greater good," which is actually communism and socialism - but global socialism and communism, not even national socialism and communism.

It is British sovereignty with the "government" and "sovereign" above the people, and actually more aligned with global communism at its core.

Or a British form of "government" and takeover of America, only this time from the inside, since many of the banks which actually fund and "underwrite" those debt notes issued by the Federal Reserve are European, mainly British, banks. And even those in the U.S. with heavy European and British connections also such as Goldman Sachs, and Lehrmann Brothers - two that were recipients of "bailout" monies.

Such beliefs quite obviously spread on BOTH sides of the now fabricated and "false" two party system.

Barry Goldwater, Mr. Conservative, said it best years ago, one who was branded a "war monger" during Viet Nam due to political party propaganda, but actually made these quotes, and voted his "conscience" as an American conservative:

I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden.

I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is "needed" before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents "interests," I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can. pg 15. The Conscience of A Conservative (1960)

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!

Those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth. And let me remind you, they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyrannies.

Absolute power does corrupt, and those who seek it must be suspect and must be opposed. Their mistaken course stems from false notions of equality, ladies and gentlemen. Equality, rightly understood, as our founding fathers understood it, leads to liberty and to the emancipation of creative differences. Wrongly understood, as it has been so tragically in our time, it leads first to conformity and then to despotism.

I told Johnson and old colleagues on Capitol Hill that we had two clear choices. Either win the [Vietnam] war in a relatively short time, say within a year, or pull out all our troops and come home.


Here's to the return of true American sovereignty and Constitutional Conservatism in 2010, and return to Constitutional government, "of the people, by the people, for the people," and not special interests, or global socialism!

And an understanding of the true meaning and motivations of that Boston Tea party so long ago!

Freedom from "global" foreign influence, ownership or control.

Senate Passes In Your Face Health Care Deform

Well it's official.

On Christmas Eve,while Santa was flying through the globe delivering his gifts to all the children of the world, the United States Senate robbed those same children of their fundamental rights in the most "in your face" gesture yet to the American people and trashing of the United States Constitution.

Even more so than the also bogus Cap & Trade bill (passing on U.N. and global taxes to the American people once again for an unconstitutional federal function, and without their implied or express consent in an manner whatsoever, nor amendment of the Constitution in order to so do).

Even more so than the bank and financial sector bailout, billing the American people yet again for the debts of the 2006 campaigns, and also a global London based insurer, again without their express or implied consent and outside Constitutional authority.

And are posing for the cameras now as if this is somehow a victory - while the lackey Republicans that were also in on this scam play the victims when actually with a vote such as this one, it appears that the same agenda is occurring here as has many prior bills in the past.

Each party takes a turn in order to be the "heavy" for unconstitutional legislation that outrages the public.

But since both parties have control of the American electoral process (also unconstitutionally), nothing really ever changes except the demonstrations of contempt both parties show for both the intended government which our founders fought and died in order to secure for their posterity, and also the American people themselves - the ones who they betray with each and every illegal Act favoring their corporate benefactors.

Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama are global socialists - but then so were George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and John McCain actually and were behind the global bank bailouts for the gain of the global market at the cost of the American people.

This bill is the largest tax (also with that Cap & Trade scam, and all those expenses now the taxpayers must pick up for that bogus Copenhagen meeting) ever to be passed by any U.S. Congress in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution since FDR's Social Security - and look just what is going on with Social Security, which was meant to be a "temporary" tax actually from its inception in order to guarantee at least a minimal income to all those that were affected by the Great Depression way back when, also manipulated by the very same European international banking cartel members that are behind this current recession in the U.S. for Europe's and the "global" market's mostly gain.

And with so many in this country now losing their homes and jobs right and left, inflicting another tax on the working class Americans, middle America and that midle class who are most affected, just shows that thumbing their nose at the American people is something that this Congress, as with the last, has absolutely no problem in doing.

And now what is occuring is that the Republicans are "threatening" to use this act of treason in order to gain seats for the 2010 elections.

Not, of course, bringing all those that voted for this clearly unconstitutional measure up on charges of treason.

Using it, rather, once again for political purposes just goes to show that the "outrage" was an act, and that this passion play for the American public and media means that now legislation is orchestrated with the precision of a Hollywood spectacle, with the outcome, whether the people like it or not, directed by the special interest groups and financial sector.

Voting these lackeys out won't do it America.

It appears tar and feathers is the only thing that just might, and getting that Sargeant at Arms in the Halls of Congress to start earning his taxpayer paid salary and arrest these suckers, which actually was one of his primary jobs - if you read the Constitution the only protection those "misrepresentatives" have from arrest are while traveling to and from the House and Senate floors in order to cast their votes.

And would appear those founders put in that language for a very good reason, in order that the people would have a recourse and those misrepresentatives only "limited" immunity from arrest due to the enormous power they possessed.

With the founders knowing that with those granted such powers, abuses were more than likely to occur.

Such as this one, and so many others since 9-11 it is getting hard to keep track.

Because apparently those now holding those offices are tone deaf, and need remedial reading classes and continuing education in American history and high school government classes.

But since last night after midnight was "officially" a Senate holiday, I just wonder whether this vote was even "legal" or not?

Such a game would not be beyond those now holding office, in order to protect them from charges of treason.

Such as the new game of passing unconstitutional measures in one branch, but then not passing them in the other yet then funding them anyway in appropriations bills thereafter.

Then after funding unfinished and illegal legislation, creating new bills instead granting regulatory authority then to the agencies without then legal authority to so do due to the "illegality" of those bills in the first place.

And then as the coup d' gras, using then the media to publicize and "terrorize" the public for compliance or direct the state legislatures to pass those measures at the state level on threat of removal of funding for some unrelated true federal function as their "bribe" or extortionary tactic on more and more illegal legislation to also then manipulate the public for their ultimate ends and appease most of all their special interest backers behind a great deal of these measures in the process - the ones that "invested" all those billions in their employee legislator in order to "buy" legislation feeding their corporate coffers at the public's ultimate expense.

In other words, corporate America, as with this bill, is using our Congress now as nothing more than a marketing representative, buying legislation most of all in order to sell their products, and then also reduce their risks and losses in the process for their corporate bottom line profits - which they then feed back to their "employee" legislators.

Oh the webs we weave. And this is just another example of how truly "misrepresentative" every single one of those legislators actually is at this point in both honoring their oaths of office, and also their true constituency.

The American people. Not their bankers or their special interest benefactors "corporately," in violation of America's true form of government as contained within that glass case a few short miles down the street - and the document which provides for the very offices in which they now hold yet show such little awareness of its provisions more so now within the last eight years than any other period in history.

The U.S. Constitution.

Political Incorrectness: MSM Continues Misdefinition of A Conservative

While gathering some research for additional evidence with respect to just how far afield our mainstream news sources and media have become, and nothing more now than branches of their owners and Boards of Directors political beliefs or both mainstream political parties, I came across an article and review of the new movie, "Avatar" directed by James Cameron.

In the review it indicated that several critics have made references to the content in labeling it as anti-war and pro-environmentalist although visually very entertaining.

Mr. Cameron is an avowed environmentalist that was also quoted as indicating that the United States has a habit of "raping natural resources and invading countries and displacing indigenous peoples without giving anything back."

The only thing I can state with that particular comment as a displaced Arizonan, whose political landscape has fundamentally changed into one of pro-liberalism due to the influx of mostly Californians from Mr. Cameron's home state who have left theirs due to most of the laws which have been passed due to the liberalism which have progressively bankrupted them, and now in Arizona creating the very same scenario, along with those from Canada and the East Coast, with their demands also for jacuzzi's and fountains in the desert, and propensity to also be one of the states in which most of those "displaced" refugees are also funneled after many of the prior wars of the last few decades, it would appear the same comment would apply to what is now occuring in this country with the displacement of many natural born and naturalized Americans from their jobs and homes due to now "globalization" and not only starting these wars and then taking in those refugees, but providing many with benefits and tax breaks that the average American is not entitled to.

Such as the Bosnians who attended my children's school (mostly with parents in the "science and technology" fields) and who were given brand new cars in order to attend classes.

But what was really unbelieveable in the article was that it also referred to the fact that Ed Morrissey, a supposed "Conservative" commentator, had mentioned on the website "Hot Air" that most "conservatives" would be staying away from the movie due to its anti-war stances.

I would like to know just what Mr. Morrissey's definitions of "conservative" are, because a true American Conserve-ative does believe in preserving the Constitution as it is written with the intent of the founders ever present, unless lawfully amended through the amendment process, which also includes acknowleding the 9th Amendment and placing any and all such amendments before the people of this country for their voice and vote.

And believes in Constitutional interpretation with respect to the Supreme Court's powers and duties in the common law and American jurisprudence precedent which stood for over a hundred years in "Res Ipsa Loquitor" or "the thing as it is written (or speaks)."

Not inserting words, or amending it without going through the formal amendment process in any and all such "opinions" and determinations, such as expanding presidential or Congressional power and authority without any basis in Constitutional provision.

And that Supreme Court decisions are applicable only to the "case at bar" or facts of the matter before it. Not broad based precedent throughout the land with respect to American Bill of Rights issues, especially.

And since this country was founded on the "just war" doctrines and made provision for "defense" of THIS country, would also dispute that any true American Conserve-ative would still be in support of the Middle East War on Terror since it is not at all at this point a truly "just war" nor a "defensive" one.

Conservatives believe in conserving both the blood and treasure of this nation, and not exploiting its people and their "property" for global gain or the "greater good."

Which is actually more global communism which is where we are about now, not American conservatism.

Facilitating wars in order to increase dominion most of all in the name of "democracy," a form of government the U.S. fundamentally is also not.

Barry Goldwater, the former Senator and U.S. presidential candidate from my former home state of Arizona, was a Conservative - probably THE Conservative of the boomer generation and before.

Who, even after the whipping he took in the 1964 election branded a "war monger," actually became more Conservative in his elder years in calling that war what it actually was - a horrendous mistake that was entered into also as our first major interventionist conflict (although Korea also somewhat) and for which the boomer generation has never seen a true end to war in some part of the world, particularly the Middle East since World War II and which continuing conflicts are based on a British agreement and accord, no less, entered into between a British Lord and European banker even prior to World War I (the Balfour Doctrine).

He must be watching a lot of Fox, since it appears his definition aligns more with the British version of "Conservative."

Senate Celebrates While Constitution Burns

(Edited and Revised)

It was announced by the AP today that Senate Democrats are ready to hand Barack Obama his "victorious" health care deform bill on Christmas Eve - the bill that was concocted mostly by consulting with the industry "stakeholders," such as the global insurers, AARP trade affiliated vendors marketing to senior citizens, and the AMA who now can potentially refuse treatment to any and all Americans that do not have some health care coverage, or use now this bogus measure to deny life saving treatments to many if their federally sanctioned plans do not so provide.

While, of course, providing free emergency treatment to illegal immigrants and foreigners under separate legislation that was enacted under the Reagan Administration after the first amnesty bill was passed, and through various trade agreements, especially with Mexico and Canada.

And, of course, even the government has its own escape clause in such instances. It is called the Federal Tort Claim Act, which only provides for compensation in such event for actual losses or damages, not punitive awards in any manner whatsoever for deaths or injuries which occur in which even those now "governmentally approved" plans provide.

So go try to get a lawyer in order to help you redress a federally sanctioned plan that has denied you coverage and watch the lawyers squirm, or quote you an hourly rate that would have you bankrupted within a week at their hourly rates which now at over $300 to $400 per hour (how many times is THAT over the minimum wage), and in some states throughout the nation, that rate won't even get you a few hours of legal research or status reports by their secretaries or paralegals, the profit margins on that profession are now so stratrospheric.

My main question has been, due to the length of this bill at over 2,000 pages of legalese which proves it was written by lawyers, for lawyers most of all, - just where has the ACLU, that organization dedicated to supposedly protecting American's civil rights and the Bill of Rights, been during this entire fiasco which has been ongoing since last summer?

The organization that was behind the "death by dehydration" of Teri Schiavo, as a "right to choose," whether or not medical treatment should be extended at all to the disabled if not responsive - even in the event where rehabilitation had been denied such individual even though covered by insurance provision, and who was clearly still breathing independently without any mechanical assistance whatsoever?

I mean, it would appear that in their silence now for six long months, their stances in the Teri Schiavo matter clearly were nothing more than empty rhetoric, and legal smoke and mirrors.

Where is the protection of the Constitutional rights for Americans to not be denied "life, liberty or property" without "due process" of law - since health care insurance is a product, and Congress really has no authority whatsoever to "mandate" that Americans must purchase a product or be "fined" and "sanctioned" by Uncle Sam if not in compliance.

Especially without a Constitutional Amendment granting such authority outside their enumerated powers and duties. If anything, this is a "state" matter and not a federal one in any manner whatsoever.

And one in which every single state in the nation already has existing plans in order to cover the very individuals that this bill presumes to include - the indigent, or those that are clearly denied coverage or cannot afford to provide it given their economic circumstances.

Although much has been made mention of the inclusion of the small regulatory function (their legal duty in such a matter, if any, over corporate concerns affecting the citizenry) of mandating that insurers cannot deny coverage for those with pre-existing medical conditions - in any the summaries I have read there is nowhere any federal regulatory agency charged with oversight, nor fines imposed on insurers that do not comply.

Nor is their language or any control over just how much it will cost, once again, for those that DO have pre-existing conditions.

The trick has been in the auto insurance mandatory laws due to states that have included such language for their state residents, simply to charge such an outrageous price for the coverage that only about 2% of the population could afford it.

Or the state's then collect more taxes from the general public in order to so provide those SR-22 policies that the state's then get a share in.

Yes, this is the bill that will "keep on giving" to the industries and financial sectors, at the cost once again of the American people resulting in lower and lower economic circumstances for most, and steadily continuing to wipe out the middle class in the process.

So it is clear that truthfully both parties have merged into the "global socialist party" and both work for their corporate benefactors.

With simply a small change in which major benefactor they are attempting to feed at the American public's ultimate expense.

And our Constitution be damned.

Tis the Season: Beware of Parking Lot Predators

With the holiday season upon us with everyone rushing to and fro from one retail outlet to another, and especially with the insurance focus of this latest disaster of a bill feeding the health care industry and lobbyists (mostly lawyers) once again due to the length of the bill, and actually no real accountability measures in it for those supposed "regulatory" measures included in it, maybe some reminders of what "mandatory" insurance has wrecked (pun intended) since it was enacted also over heavy objections of the public years ago in creating a "job stimulus" for lawyers.

Recently, someone related a story to me of an incident that happened to them regarding a rear end collusion, and I had a similar situation occur to me also.

Apparently, what is going on is that there are many "employees" of the scores of personal injury lawyers in this country who set up victims of parking lot mishaps (on private property), and then use the "hit and run" laws in order to then make claims on the "victims" of their scams through their employer lawyers for accident claims - especially during the holiday season when so many are pre-occupied.

As one who worked in the legal profession, I do know that most insurance companies will not litigate claims such as these due to the expense involved and time and staff constraints, and usually will offer a settlement on the accident as a "nuisance" claim, no matter how many prior accidents the claimed "victim" has been involved in even in one year with almost identical circumstances prior to that time.

Now this does happen to the best of drivers really a great deal due to our hurried lifestyles now, and also especially during the holidays (and especially due to the many distractions now of cell phones, kids, the shear number of errands most of us run now in the course of a week, etc).

These are a little different though as most occur in retail parking lots with an abundance of cars anyway, and the claim goes on the record of the stooge, and their insurance then goes up, creating additional profits then for the insurance company for the next three years. Times that times the amount of accidents, and that is quite a profit for both the disreputable personal injury lawyers, their "employees," and also the insurance company - all at the true victims expense.

Usually picking an older vehicle maybe with a few dings on it to begin with, in order to bulk up their "case,"

And since so many are distracted and in a hurry now, few or absolutely no witnesses to what actually occurred.

So as a safety and budgetary precaution from two such victims (and this occurs much more in large or midsize metro areas), look twice before you back out in this holiday rush these last two days.

Because the next "victim" of one of the "job stimuluses" created by the mandatory insurance laws could be you.

Most insurance industry experts will tell you that accidents such as these go up during the holidays. In fact, due to distraction and rushing, this week is by far the greatest job stimulus for the health care and insurance industries - which is maybe why those "economic" forecasts are up for this upcoming quarter also.

And have those laws truly reduced the amount of local expenditures needed for judges, juries and the like?

Absolutely not, because at least with jury trials on those property damage claims, even for minor damages, formerly in small claims courts the costs were low, and then appeals for the major accidents or bodily injury claims were also reduced since no judge can re-examine any fact matter placed before a jury.

Interestingly enough also, these same personal injury lawyers in quite a few states now are allowed and do also own several "corporate" chiropractic clinics then, where they send their "clients" and then inflate those bills also which are billed for those claims from their "employee" doctors.

Or use their employee doctors then as expert witnesses then on personal injury cases at lowered rates without that "fact matter" being placed before juries - that many of those experts are actually employees of the lawyers involved in some of these cases now and not "independent" medical witnesses at all as also had been the case year ago in selection of experts for personal injury civil trials.

And due to most court rules in most states throughout the country, those predatory lawyers and their employees also know (as does the insurance industry lawyer also) that in any court proceeding, serial fender bender histories over the course of even a year with paid out damage awards granted and determined by the insurers, not by juries, are not allowed to be used as an evidence against these individuals.

Of course, the "stooge's" lawyers then can bring in their witnesses for rebuttal, but of course then the costs of those claims go up for that stooge and his insurance company, while the costs of the employee client's doctors are really no skin off the noses of those disreputable personal injury lawyers at all, as also actual employees of the "corporate" lawyers due to their practices true "ownership."

I suffered an injury upon a move up north, and had a flare up of the injury and went to seek a chiropractor in order to treat it, and was denied treatment at one of such clinics since I hadn't been referred to it by one of their "partner" personal injury lawyers, and did not treat the public, but only upon those referrals.

So this is also why your auto insurance rates are off the charts, and the same obviously will occur with a 2,000 page bill full of legalese, with no "teeth" on the industries whatsoever in accountability - while the IRS is busy collecting those fines on the small business owners, those denied insurance and self-employed mainly for which this bill does absolutely nothing to address in any truly accountable fashion.

Of course, actually this is a mere drop in the bucket really for the insurers after all, although no less of a "crime" and why there are more insurance lawyers also now than all of the European nations combined - just look at how many and how expensive all those lobbyists were for this new health care deform, and the campaigning that went on - and all with your premium dollars.

Using your dollars then in order to lobby for legislation to get even more is what is occurring, and selling their policies now not through marketing but through legislation in addition to lobbying to also reduce their risks and losses at both the state and federal levels such as the now "criminal" victimless low level DUIs at the level they are at this point in time - cough medicine or a puff on an inhaler will brand you as "under the influence."

What a racket.

So when Obama uses the mandatory insurance laws (which actually are not at all similar in any respect to this travesty of health care legislation and its "mandatory" unconstitutional also focus on the citizens, rather than the industry), just think now at 2,000 pages how bogged up our courts will become once again - and how this will in the end raise, not lower, both the taxes, and personal expenses and budgets of all Americans.

And quite possibly, create another job stimulus for the criminal element.

Global Economy On Rebound: U.S. The Losers

In today's online editions of several mainstream news organizations and internet news sources, the top story was that economists are stating that the final quarter figures for 2009 shows that the economy is getting stronger, and that it does appear it is on the rebound.

And are predicting an even greater and brigher future for 2010.

Apparently, "accuracy in news" hasn't reached the AP yet, since the only economy which it appears is growing is on Wall Street, not Main Street America. In fact, there still is one foreclosure every 13 seconds still occurring, and the jobless rate has worsened with many more laid off or underemployed Americans.

The U.S. Department of Labor figures, remember, only count those that are collecting unemployment. Not those whose benefits have run out, the self-employed, or those now that are underemployed and waiting tables or behind retail counters after their jobs were outsourced under some of those great government bailouts.

And it appears all those vacant homes in the West and Southwest are being made ready for the Canadian retirees, possible "new" Americans due to another amnesty bill that is waiting in the wings, and 26,000 Iraqi refugees which will be resettled in this country. Of course, after clearly invading it rather unlawfully to begin with.

So the Wall Street financiers and banks can collect all those junk fees once again on those "new" loans and the fine print that many of these foreign immigrants won't be able to read.

Isn't "globalism" great, America? You homes and jobs are being outsourced and insourced in order that the global, mostly New York based economists can put a star next to their economic indicators.

Of course, the caveat is that this rebound will only continue so long as Americans continue to go into debt and spend. Sort of like Washington. Encouraging Americans to become indebted to the bankers, is like our debt now to China while still writing checks to every other foreign government that comes down the pike.

And interesting this "forecast" would come the month of Christmas, when of course spending is up due to the holiday itself - and Americans do have a hard time explaining to their kids that Santa just won't be able to make it this year, especially when they have that piece of plastic at 13-21% interest that just came in the mail as the bankers "stimulus."

The link:

http://enews.earthlink.net/article/top?guid=20091222/1ec14c40-fb65-459f-9524-ac6fca50d9b9

Health Care Deform: Another Stimulus For Financial Sector, High Wage Earners

While Barack Obama is enjoying his vacation in Copenhagen along with the other world leaders in the name of saving the planet from its eventual demise due to carbon emissions (and in which the carbon emissions from the private jets of those world leaders beats the average citizen of all those countries by about 100 to 1), a Christmas gift is being prepared for the financial sector and health care industry that will, as they say, "keep on giving."

Apparently this bogus health care reform legislation just will not die, no matter how much the American people have already spoken loud and clear regarding the focus of the legislation, which is actually nothing more than a job stimulus for the top wage earners and corporate health care industries bottom line profits, at the cost mostly of middle class Americans.

That middle class that is disappearing in leaps and bounds, which will live in infamy as having become extinct in the first half of the twenty first century.

While Washington keeps promising that this will enable those that cannot now afford insurance to do so, with all the new creative spins on different options that will be available, the bottom line is that at this point there are so many now jobless and homeless that the cost of any health insurance at all is out of reach for most - yet those people will be the ones fined and penalized if this plan comes to fruition.

Also, much has been publicized about the "accountability" measure that will be built in so that the health care industry will be held accountable, which is what actually has been long overdue in regulating this vital industry on which every single American depends. But with the bill at now over 2,000 pages, little has been said about just how these accountability measures are going to be enforced - since, of course, most of the health care insurance industries offices are actually incorporated at the state, not federal, level.

And there are no "licenses" per se needed or given for any of these corporate entities - even though at this point many of them are actually global concerns and operating in this country without any effective regulation whatsoever.

In fact, about a decade ago Congress pass another of their backroom "Acts" which actually precluded the states from regulating most of these entities at the state level in any manner whatsoever - in the name, of course, of "free enterprise."

Only the "enterprise" we are speaking of are Americans lives.

And also much publicized has been the fact that employers will be required to provide insurance for their employees. Of course, in the article recently published it noted that this only applies if the employee involved is eligible for any "federal subsidies" for his health care costs.

In other words, the only real requirement or enforcement which will be made against employers is actually nothing more than a bribe - you offer insurance to your employees, Uncle Sam and the taxpayers will then reimburse you for some of those costs.

Nor is their language that determines whether those requirements mean that the employer must pick up the full costs for that health care coverage. Most employers of large corporations do as a fringe benefit for other than part time or hourly workers, at least for the worker.

It is amazing that instead of providing federal subsidies for employers (not citizens, it appears), it is too difficult to actually simplify our out of control tax code and make, as with corporate entities at the present time, any and all sums paid by individual Americans for health care coverage fully tax deductible - in order to then equalize that unequal "privilege and immunity" that has been given to corporate entities over sole proprietors or self employed individuals for literally decades.

And I would like to know on what Constitutional authority Washington is basing its "mandatory" provisions in that Americans must purchase a "product," which health insurance coverage actually is, or face sanctions and fines from Uncle Sam if they do not feed their corporate benefactors?

I don't see that anywhere in the 23 page copy I have of the U.S. Constitution - in fact, it does state that no citizen shall be deprived of "property" in any manner by the government without "due process of law."

And there hasn't been any "due process" with respect to consulting the citizenry or listening to their cries for regulation, both of the costs and of the practices, of these industries.

In fact, the only ones consulted seem to be the "stakeholders."

And as "stakeholders," does that not now mean that every single health care company, and provider, now is nothing more than an "agent" of the government, at this point - and those health care and financial sector industries - "state actors" and part of the government now itself.

Those involved are calling this legislation "historic," reminescent of Social Security - the program that the federal government has bankrupted by both unlawfully dipping into those sums for extra-Constitutional functions, and by distributing it not simply for the original reason it was intended - for those that, in their older years, were unable to work or who had not, due to circumstances beyond their control (such as the Depression, as it was intended to be only temporary) had the means to save enough through their incomes (especially after the rather questionable "tax on labor" went into effect) for their basic provision and needs.

And just what is going to occur at the state level, since so many states are now collecting taxes hands over fist for many of the state run programs that provide health care for those that are uninsureable, or cannot afford insurance which the state citizens have been funding now for decades?

Oh, and insofar as the requirement that individuals cannot be denied coverage based on pre-existing conditions?

Watch what has occurred in other areas where the insurance industry is involved. No denials of coverage, just setting those premiums at rates only the top 10% of the population could afford to pay.

This will be historic legislation alright.

Legislation that is making old Ben spin right about now.

The High Cost Of Living In America: Privatizing Governmental Functions

With all that has been occurring in Washington recently with now added taxes upon taxes in order to bulk up the global economy at the cost of America's own, it has struck me also that more Americans are not aware that the high costs and inflation which has occurred which also has lead to this economic and national security crisis we are facing today also has its roots in our government, at all levels, failing to abide by the U.S. and their own states constitutions with respect to collected tax revenues.

Increases in costs have occurred and deficits in state budgets throughout the nation also as a result. Yet the origins of these deficits and just why so many states are facing "bankruptcy" such as California have not been given even a cursory review by most in our mainstream media and news sources:

Privatizing governmental functions, and instead using the bulk of most tax revenue to fund discretionary expenditures and special interest groups in corporate "welfare" that far exceeds the sums budgeted and given to provide for the needs of those individuals in this country that truly have been made destitute or are unable to find suitable employment in order to provide for their, or their families needs.

For every job that is outsourced or insourced, the job of an American is "taken," in the process.

For every nongovernmental function or duty that is provided for in the state or federal budget, needed funding for true governmental functions gets lost in the process.

Our military budget is and has been huge, even since the Reagan years and the very expensive "Star Wars" programs and initiatives. Which, of course, didn't prevent this country from being attacked from within by several individuals from a militant and fringe terrorist organization eight long years ago. The most massive loss of American lives since Pearl Harbor and World War II.

But even with those costs, the added costs for providing for the welfare of foreign governments far exceeds even America's military defense budget.

While we are borrowing from China, we are still writing legislation after legislation giving foreign countries and foreign governments more and more American dollars in order to "socialize" the world into one big economic package where the fruits of all the people then will be split accordingly by those G-20 leaders - nothing more really than global communism.

And it appears it is Americans, many of whom now are jobless and homeless, that are still providing also for the economies of many of those living in third world nations - while ours is slowly also dissolving into one matching their own in the process.

Right now, though, in America someting else is happening that is making this country nothing more than a two class system at the present time, due to a progressive agenda masked as "capitalism" but is really nothing more than the British style of "class system" government of the past.

The one in which there was and still is "lords of the realm" who are awarded titles and property that is provided by the masses in tax revenue on their incomes, property and land holdings. The ones that own most of the major U.S. corporations involved in now "science based" technology, and military contracts. Or are involved in the global tourism industry and commerce, health care and financial sector.

To the point where now even the true governmental functions that the collected tax revenue on Americans property that was levied in the founders day and for 100 years beyond, is now being dolled out to those sovereign lords and ladies in also privatizing some of those governmental functions under their rule with added profit margins then socked to the public in higher costs in the process.

Many jails throughout the country, paid for the the state tax payers, have been sold by those states to private entities in which the state leases back then the land and jail facilities, and pays monthly "rent" then according to the number of inmates - which is then also subsidized by the taxpayers twice in federal government monies given to those states or entities according to the number of inmates.

Which does explain now more and more why there have become so many now low level offenses that have been criminalized in this country, or now provide for jail sentences and terms. In order to feed those private jails and industries profit margins once again.

Even our nuclear reactors and public utilities have become privatized in more recent years and shares are now sold on the global stock market, in effect compromising America's national security more so then even our open borders post 9-11, and raising the costs of energy and energy provision then in order to not only provide for those services and needs, but also the profit margins of those global investors.

This is not "free trade," or "free markets," except in the global respect with Americans providing their bottom line profits using the U.S. government then as its "agent", but actually nothing more than transferring unlawfully governmental purposes to third parties without sufficient regulation or control, and who have become then nothing more than "agents" of the government itself at this point.

Such as the auto insurance industry which was handed the task of settling property damage claims outside of the civil court system in order to supposedly "save" taxpayer dollars - but instead actually has increased the costs for all Americans as those premiums have exploded since the mandatory insurance laws went into effect several decades ago.

Arizonans saw their public utility bills increase, not decrease, once Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station was built back in the late 1970's due to the fact that shortly after it was built it was privatized and oversight turned over to the federal government instead of locally or regionally, and now the ratepayers in Arizona and California for the most part are paying not only for the provision of electricity and electric services as they did under the local service provider that provided those services, but also the profit margins now of the global investors which own the facilitiy.

Energy costs there now have soared, with the Arizona Corporation Commission now nothing more than "yes men" for the federal government and the globally traded entity that now "owns" that reactor and public uiltity.

Kinda makes you sleep well at night in this post 9-11 America to know that foreigners now own the nuclear power plant that is 50 miles outside Phoenix, doesn't it?

And it is not the only one. Most of those nuclear reactors and generators are now owned through a corporate shell that is marketed on the global exchange.

So just why are the U.N. and our leaders in this country so concerned now about Iran developing nuclear capabilities, when some of the movers and shakers in Iran within their government could own controlling shares in the nuclear reactor that is providing the power within their own homes at this point?

And just where did our government leaders at both the state and federal level get the authority then to "sell" publicly owned land and resources without the consent of the governed - the taxpayers and ratepayers that actually "own" that state and federal land and property?

The state and federal government may be a "corporate" entity, but it is a corporate entity that is funded "of the people, by the people, for the people," after all and has no authority to go into joint venture partnerships with America's infrastructure, or transfer governmental powers and provision to third party contractors for usually provided governmental services such as public utilities, street and road repairs and maintenance, jails and courts.

Even functions of the courts, at this point, are also being privatized under court rules for private arbitrators which are, for the most part, really nothing more than an added step and cost in the civil courts throughout the land.

So America, the tax bite also now that is making more and more homeless also is the result of not simply inflation or our deficit due to this continuing undeclared ever expanding war, but also in the government collecting more and more, and providing less and less with that tax revenue but instead using it award to "sovereign" governmental subjects, such as the British style of government is and was, at the cost of the American people.

Troop Surge In Afghanistan: More War, More Debt, Less Accountability

It was announced by Barack Obama that in accordance with his campaign statements that he is deploying 30,000 additional U.S. troops to Iraq in order to seek out Osama bin Laden and the members of al Qaeda per the original Resolution passed by Congress in the wake of 9-11 (after, of course, at first promising to end the engagement in the Middle East altogether after so many lives, and so many American dollars have been lost in the over eight years since 9-11).

The question is, with the guarantee of support from the Afghan government with respect to this redress for the deaths and lives lost on that fateful September day, why the need for 30,000 troops rather than a limited deployment of intelligence and career military officers?

Not to second guess the commanders on the ground as a mere citizen, but is it really necessary to risk an additional 30,000 U.S. lives in order to capture one leader and those that were DIRECTLY responsible for giving those that participated "aid and comfort" in the planning of 9-11 which is the exact wording of the original Resolution?

The original pilots, after all, were Saudi citizens. It was only days after the attacks that it was revealed that bin Laden had claimed reponsibility for the attacks - and with the assistance of the Taliban, as I recall, not al Qaeda, although the two have been merged now in this loosely defined "War on Terror" which evolved under the Bush Administration.

So far, the body count in Iraq is minimal compared to prior full scale declared wars but still staggering for the U.S. given that these individuals are actually using rudimentary weapons most of all, including themselves.

And the amount of money now which has been poured into the rebuilding efforts actually has resulted in the U.S. deficit soaring to unprecedented levels even before all the other "funny money" was printed in order to then "salvage" the U.S. economy in the domestic loss of jobs and the foreclosure mess which occurred in large part due to the inflationary costs and those taxes for the war itself, actually in conjunction with some rather questionably legal loans sold throughout the West and Southwest based on the "global" London bank rates, and not U.S. rates at all and then repackaged and resold to foreign investors who were protected, not the U.S. homeowners even to date that were in essence defrauded or forced into some of those loans due to rising costs and refinances.

As funds were appropriated for the war, less funds were appropriated for domestic needs and costs and the budget for an entire new Department (DHS) and its expensive toys burst the "true" inflation (not the published spin) in rising costs for fuel, groceries and local taxes now for eight years - and then even with the stimulus, states are announcing college tuition cost increases, added taxes and a host of other new ways to bankrupt Americans, of course, after Washington then went so far as to tax the air Americans now breathe, for the "global good" at that, and bail out a London based global insurer on the backs of Americans.

It was interesting and outrageous to note that one of the Congressional members is proposing a new "tax" on Americans labeled the SOS tax (Congress and the media whom it appears they consult more and more for PR purposes love the acronyms for new legislation, unlike days gone by with bills less than 50 pages tops. The size of the average mortgage loan these days, which has also increased from less than five pages to 50 or more, with all the riders and caveats).

I wonder how much destruction we can now wreck in Afghanistan in order to bulk up the revenue, jobs and coffers of the U.S. military contractors once again in order to further plunge this country into a full out depression, since the global economy may be seeing signs of improving, but thus far the U.S. economy continues to tank in order to feed all those other nations and European investors.

By the time this war ends, it appears that what will truly have transpired is that there will eventually have been a leveraged buyout of most of America's infrastructure and assets by foreigner investors.

We will lose our country to foreigners while fighting a foreign enemy and without a shot fired on domestic soil.

In order to capture simply one man who has somehow alluded capture now for over eight years by the finest military in the entire world.

Just when are some of those other promises going to be kept, Mr. Obama, such as making Iraq start picking up the tab actually for this rebuilding effort in which it seems the U.S. funds and builds government buildings only to then have them blown up once again?

While Ms. Clinton then attempts to switch hats, as it were, as ambassador for Iraq and urge what is left of corporate America unrelated to those military contractors to invest in Iraq?

It appears maybe that it would be only the global insurance companies that would profit on businesses that wish to now outsource American production to that country post the rebuilding effort, in hiring then cheaper Iraqi labor in order to then pay those stratospheric insurance rates.

Just how, again, can Congress and the President justify risking 30,000 additional U.S. lives in order to supposedly redress the loss of 2,500 - after, of course, having lost at least three times that many to date?

Is this now the mentality of those on the Hill in defending America, while of course leaving our borders open and affording foreign investors in our nuclear reactors throughout the country for those global markets?

Isn't it the U.S. economy, security and safety and not the global one, that is supposed to be the focus of our elected representatives, since it would appear that fighting a foreign enemy on their own home turf gives us a one down no matter what the engagement, and we've got plenty of risk now due to continued negligence and promoting "foreign investment" in American assets on our own shores at this point?

Isn't the risk of attack by foreign terrorists much greater from within at this point, than without with such skewered logic?

Just how many more lives will be risked in order to secure the Middle East as a permanent source of income for War, Inc. in the name of "jobs and the economy" for the telecom, networks, media, and thousands of military contractors?

Are these again some of the "new jobs" created in addition to those which were primarily taxpayer paid additional government jobs under the non-stimulus (rather than the red-lining promised)?

Do you think after these past two administrations particularly, the American public trusts either the Republicans or Democratic Globalists in any manner whatsoever, except to keep the balls spinning and give public appearances that belie the collusion now involved between both parties in continuing this fiasco?

Is this a war in providing for the common defense of America? Or expansion of a global agenda and result of pemanent alliances with differing interests at the cost of America and Americans?

The proposed timeline and ending of this war really says it all. 2011. Coincidentally, just prior to the next presidential campaign election cycle in order to be rehashed for the consumption of America and spun and spun some more by the Global Socialist Party now residing on the Hill. It will, of course, end as "politically" as it appears that it began.

And an enemy for which this country would never, ever have if it had practiced the "defensive war" measures provided in America's founding documents per the "intent" of the founders.

These were trained terrorists, trained by the U.S. government in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, from all reports. So trying these individuals in America's federal courts once again also seems to be a political move in order to again rachet up the temperature in America for the continuing war when the details are rehashed on CNN and FOX of the "evidence" for the accused for all America.

Of course, since it will be a world audience involved the Middle Eastern countries will get the impression that the United States citizens are still out for revenge and blood after eight years since actual combat footage of what truly is occurring in Iraq has been suspiciously absent, unlike Viet Nam, so the blood lust will be reignited for the New York trial and the American people the convictors hearing the "evidence," from foreigners that speak little, if any, English at all.

A military target was involved, and these were "soldiers" trained in covert activities. And the mastermind still remains at large, so once captured what type of "plea bargain" will be available for any of these now to be tried, one of whom at least it is claimed was an active participant, in order to convict Mr. bin Laden?

And since our military did train them initially, would they also not be more familiar with their history and an "open" military trial, per the Nuremburg Trials, more along the lines of what is called for here?

The timing of these trials, and now announcement of the surge in conjunction, seems War, Inc. is not about to end before this country is brought to its knees both economically, and in the theft of thousands more of America's youth.