Deficit Debunked: An Independent's View

With much political staging and politicking occurring in the mainstream media over this debt "crisis" and call for raising America's debt ceiling, since there has been so many solutions put on the table by both mainstream political parties that calls for Americans to sacrifice for the "greater" good, or those two parties political agendas, I felt some real viable solutions to this crisis by an Independent also deserves a little consideration.

As one that is not affiliated with either of the mainstream political parties, here are some of my solutions to this reported "crisis," which is interesting in and of itself since it does appear we do need one of these "crises" just prior to each and every presidential election year.

The last one, of course, was the "big bank bailout" and also the continuing mortgage crisis, and joblessness.

Which has merely intensified under the Democrats and Republicans holding office in Congress.

Here are some of mine, that don't involve Americans undue sacrifice, are Constitutional, and at least have a degree of rationality to them, given that all those ideas of "cutting" the social programs that Americans are obligated by law to pay, and have paid for also literally decades (such as Social Security, and Medicaid) since those programs were created "by law," Congress is legally obligated to fund and continue for at least the living Americans at this point.

It does appear that at least Social Security has become nothing more than a federally sanctioned money laundering operation, since Congress continues to dip into all those sums contributed by the boomers, especially, for their own special interests.

Especially if they are going to continue to fund or appropriate monies to foreigners and foreign interests, and taxing Americans for them, again sacrificing Americans for the "global" good.

1. Call in those foreign aid loans which have remained unpaid for literally generation after generation, and extend no new loans to foreign countries or foreign governments. It is amazing that after all this "raising the debt ceiling" talk, no one has even once mentioned where it is eventually going to go. Much of it, as in the past, not even to Americans or for Americans benefit.

2. Renegotiate those interest rates and terms with the European bankers who control the world's economy, now that they are not even having to provide much of that expensive paper and ink in order to print our currency what with internet banking and such, another invention of America that the European bankers have since used in order to up their profits on the backs of Americans.

3. Recall all our troops based in foreign countries protecting Europe or Israel most of all, and shrink our defense budget now that even our defensive systems have been computerized due to those expensive space programs also all the years since Kennedy, and Reagan's "Star Wars" programs. We can use our standing army to protect our own country and its borders instead - what a concept!

4. Slash the salaries of all those in Congress, especially, to a salary that is commensurate with that of the "middle class" American, and not that of the upper third.

That's a start, and there is so much more that could be done to rewind and trim the fat from those budgets instead of making it the Americans, and not the politicians or foreign governments and countries, who are once again asked to sacrifice when Americans have already sacrificed their homes, jobs and even their children for literally decades in the name of the "global good."

And finally, hire some American economists to work with Congress, rather than those global ones.

Murdoch Mayhem: Who Scripted This PR Stunt?

It has been interesting reading the mainstream media coverage of the recent events in London with respect to the Rupert Murdoch affair, and once again just how much publicity and almot stage maneuvering has gone on since these "hacking" incidents were first being investigated by Britain's Parliament.

I've seen more British newscasters and commentators now on Fox carrying "live" coverage and also their spins on this "questioning" to last me for many, many months.

As with so many of these "public" and publicity seeking proceedings and distractions from the primarily British globalist agenda of once again conquering this country from within with its "divide and conquer" strategy with these Republican/Democratic Congressional staged catfights, I wonder if there has been a stage manager involved in this one.

Don't count on MSNBC (Bill Gates' station) for any truth in reporting also, since one of their anchors tried to make the distinction between Mr. Murdoch's U.S. holdings as being an "American" corporation, which of course Mr. Murdoch purchased after his "rushed" citizenship application in order to buy up a great deal of America's news reporting agencies and Hollowood studios.

With this anchor also leaving out that although Newscorp is technically an American corporation, it is clearly merely a global subsidiary of Mr. Murdoch's worldwide propaganda machine. As Microsoft NBC is merely an arm of Bill Gate's globalism and political beliefs, so is Fox and so very many others.

Once again, we have a "questioning" that simply seems an attempt to place Mr. Murdoch before the worldwide audience, and then cleverly craft his image for the average Joe in this country through all the huge publicity it entails.

I mean, there is already reporting in many of those mainstream media of Mr. Murdoch's memory difficulties, buck passing, and son who has been called upon to fill in so many of the details on this "hacking" story - including the highly publicized hacking of victims of 9-11.

With the media crediting his performance, and also attempts to gain sympathy due to both the extent of his media empire, and also his older age with those memory lapses.

I wonder if anyone at this point has attempted to trademark "9-11" as Disney did the Team 6 of the Navy Seals after the bin Laden "capture." I mean, it does come up in all these national security proceedings, and now it has spread to both sides of the Atlantic in even this one.

The attempted "pie in the face" farce also again made me wonder if there was a rehearsal before this televised event.

I mean, Mrs. Murdoch is really THAT quick on her feet? The media branded "tiger" wife of this mogul who fought for a share of his empire for her children as the "third" Mrs. Murdoch as was also widely reported?

And Chinese, who married her first husband after having an affair who then divorced him after obtaining her U.S. green card?

Who scripted this?

Stay tuned.

I would imagine with Mr. Murdoch's long history of "sensationalized" and exploitive journalism, it will keep getting better and better.

I just wonder when the bill will be introduced in Congress, citing this incident, calling for more "regulation" of the internet so that more and more Americans can be targeted for disagreeing with both Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Gates' political ideology.

Of course, in the name of "terrorism" and in order to "protect" the privacy of Americans so that such bold transgressions on our U.S. Constitution never, ever happen again?

Maybe this will be another one of those "issues" and distractions most of those globalists will run on in the 2012 elections, again twisting and turning that Constitution and it's intent so that it is even more unrecognizeable.

Maybe INS and our Congress's time would be better spent once again addressing just how many foreign opportunists are applying for citizenship, without having even a basic understanding of the system of government under which our country was founded.

It doesn't appear Mr. Murdoch, or Mr. Gates have.

And at least Mr. Gates SHOULD know better, and maybe spent just a little more time in history class rather than in developing all that software and those "firewall" programs that Murdoch and his cronies found so easy to breach and so irresistable?

I just wonder, did the hacker once work for Bill Gates over there in foggy London town?

The Casey Anthony Case: Disturbing Questions Remain

Since the mainstream media frenzy has continued almost a week after the jury rendered its verdict in the Casey Anthony trial and subsequent sentencing, with no fewer than a dozen prime time cable news programs dedicated to dissecting this case and its three year investigation, I thought I would also set forth my post mortem on this highly publicized Florida case (which seems to be one state that has had more than its share) and the questions I and many have remaining which have not been satisfactorly answered.

Before I pose my questions, it has been interesting in just how many people are now coming out of the woodwork in order to capitalize on this case to be "reimbursed" for their costs, in addition to most of the cable news networks with their massive profits on this case, for their investigative work during the time Casey Anthony was leading law enforcement officials down blind alleys while the search for CAYLEE was expanding but just never seemed to be concentrated by any of those private and public investigative units less than a quarter mile from her home where little Caylee's body was eventually found.

I mean three long years ago, weren't those private companies representing that their services were being donated?

And just who was paying for her defense costs other than the Florida taxpayers?

Be that as it may, I guess the most glaring and obvious error to me was simply in the charges which were filed against her, which were never amended after her "arrest."

Instead of first degree murder charges, for which there was little evidence to begin with, or aggravated manslaughter, doesn't Florida have a statute that deals with negligent homicide? Or, since Ms. Anthony clearly admitted to lying to investigators about Caylee's whereabouts and had no idea where her child was after a full month, what about child abandonment or accessory to murder given the eventual discovery of her body six months later?

Why were those charges never amended to reflect at least charges which the prosecutor had a better chance of even proving, given the evidence he was relying on for a conviction?

I am once again wondering about not only America's criminal justice system and court procedures in capital offenses such as this one, but also the education of our lawyers which also seems to have been missed.

And given that Ms. Anthony will be free on Sunday, from my understanding although she was charged and arrested, wasn't she also then placed in a protective custody situation given the media coverage of this investigation where there were concerns for her safety within the prison population while she was awaiting trial? So in actually, has she really ever spent any real time in "jail?"

And what about those recorded "jailhouse tapes" where the family was recorded while she was in custody, but had as yet to be charged with a felony even. Just why were those tapes allowed into evidence to begin with, given that I'm sure there was no permission sought to release those tapes to the public and were also highly publicized by most of those cable news stations while the investigation was ongoing?

There is so much troubling in this case and its prosecution and defense, and its media coverage, that if I was one of those conspiracy theorists it seemed as if this "trial" resembled more than anything some of those "mock" trials that are held during most law students' studies.

Who is going to profit from this case, other than Ms. Anthony, for any of those exclusive interviews that have also been bantered about when she is released on Sunday, within a week of this highly publicized trial, by those whose post mortems are geared more toward upping the ante for these cable news networks for the lucky "winner" of that all important first person interview?

I wonder, will Barbara Walters or Diane Sawyer get that coveted prize?

And now the media is focused on the legal challenges to the judge's ruling on sealing the names of the jurors in this case, with civil rights lawyers and "corporate" lawyers representing the media flooding the courts with requests to have those jurors names released, basing their arguments that "it has always been done" that such names are a matter of public record.

And that "Constitutionally" this is a "right" to have those names made available.

For what purpose, any reasonable person would ask?

To harass those jurors, whose task involved hearing the evidence and facts as presented to them in order to make their determinations on the only charges which they were given?

Jurors are not public officials, they are private citizens who are merely serving in a public capacity so long as the jury is needed.

From that point on, after rendering their verdicts, they are private citizens and it should be they, and they alone, who agree through the courts to having their names made public "after the fact," in this writer's opinion.

It seems to me that the coverage lately has been to now target those jurors with all the media attention given those unhappy Americans with this verdict, whose behavior seemed more of the "vigilante" style of justice.

I even read an article about one unidentified juror who has since moved out of the state, and whose husband has related that this juror would rather go to prison than serve on another jury in a capital murder case.

Maybe this is the agenda after all.

Malign our jury system, so that the jury then falls out of favor in this country through mass media propaganda and those privatized prisons can then get a steady stream of inmates for profit fed through judge determined verdicts, with the state then acting as both prosecutor and jury for the accused.

With the one barrier then removed against governmental abuse, what with all the progressive laws which have occurred at both the state and federal levels which have no Constitutional basis whatsoever in so many areas it is astounding.

I mean I once served on a jury whose sole purpose appeared to me to "convict" the accused so that my former home state could then receive its federal grant monies for targeted offenses to continue to balance then its court budgets, and during which time a judge instructed the jury that they were precluded from even visiting the scene of the "crime" involved and needed to make our determination without such information, and only based upon the provided statute involved, and testimony of the accused - the only witness, although another individual was present at the time the offense occurred.
Seemed quite strange to me also that on my jury of six there were not one, not two, but four city/county officials on the jury panel even with only two of us "civilians."

Maybe instead of the names of jurors being provided, their occupations might be more enlightening in seeing just how many of those selected are not "peers" at all, but government employees.

The progression of this trial, and its media coverage which has been the prime time focus of more than one cable news station consistently in analyzing every facet of the case, has left me with the uneasy feeling that what went on in that courtroom had nothing to do with discovering the truth of this young toddler's disappearance and then claimed "murder", but a whole lot more.

Several Florida legislators are now proposing new legislation, based simply on the outcome of this case, in order to make it a criminal matter to NOT report a child missing based on this one case in which, to me, the proper charges against this woman were not even filed under which the prosecution had at least a good chance for a conviction.

I can now see now all those parents of ten year old runaways who run away from home after a spat with their parents, and who are then picked up by police then get brought up on charges of "failure to report."

Do you really think someone such as Casey Anthony would comply if there was such a law, based upon what actually occurred in this case?

I think not.

And I guess what is really most disturbing about this case is that nothing whatsoever makes sense from the outset of the investigation, then through the mock trial.

But I'm sure either Barbara or Diane will fill us in.

At least, the mainstream media version.

As a postscript: Not that it matters much at this point, but since Casey Anthony did admit to having been employed by Universal Studios, I couldn't help noticing that she also resembled some of those Snow Whites or princess characters hired by Disney at their theme parks.

Casey Anthony Acquitted: Media Frenzy Lives On

With yesterday's reported "surprise" decision of the jury in the acquittal of Casey Anthony on the charges of first degree murder, manslaughter, and aggravated child abuse, it has come as no surprise to this reader that the media frenzy which has been the hallmark of this case, continues.

After all, the media and talking heads on cable news set this entire trial up for such reactions by the entire manner in which the reporting of this case, its investigation and prosecution, progressed over the past three years.

What has completely amazed and shocked me was not the outcome of the trial and the jury's determination, since there was no conclusive evidence or eyewitnesses to just what had occurred brought forth during the weeks long trial, merely spectulation and supposition, but the reactions of the press and those legal analysts, lawyers and judges which has not abated but has been fed and accelerated.

People, again, who should know better.

After all, our entire justice system is grounded in affording juries in the jurisdiction in which the alleged acts occurred to make the determination insofar as the fate of the accused (although this trial was moved , also) based on the FACTS AND EVIDENCE presented - not emotional appeals, nor fabricated testimony or suppositions.

And this trial was full of them, so much so that the trial itself mimicked Ms. Anthony's behavior during the initial stages and investigation of her daughter's disappearance.

Circumstantial evidence, contrary to those talking heads and legal analysts, is not a firm enough basis in which to convict someone of premeditated, first degree murder. It didn't take a CSI DNA investigation, but simply tying in all those loose ends on the evidence, such as the duct tape, or the chloroform searches, to the suspect.

That didn't occur in any fundamental way in which a jury could find for guilt "within a reasonable doubt."

Mark Furhrmann, and other "lawyers" who have also weighed in with their outrage, in this former legal professional's opinion, should be disbarred.

After all, a jury of one's peers is the hallmark of our American judicial system, and it is THEY, not the lawyers or even the judges, who have had their say and have submitted their verdict.

For those that continue to bash this decision, and Ms. Anthony's perceived guilt, let it be said that after all the publicity this trial has engendered, I seriously doubt she will have a carefree lifestyle, or reap tremendous wealth hereafter on some book or TV movie which might be made. And if so, I believe her 15 minutes of fame will be short-lived, and will not last past the next high profile crime or news story.

Maybe she should speak to O.J. Simpson for enlightenment on just how well his life has gone after his high profile acquittal, since this trial was so very similar in both the media attention involved, and post mortems.

I hope Ms. Anthony gets the help she needs, and goes on to live a life of anonymity and eventually realizes just how lucky and fortunate that it was a jury verdict that was rendered due to the really poor investigative work of detectives after her daughter was reported missing (over six months to find this child's body, found a short distance from her parent's home?), and the leads and work of the prosecution (no fingerprints AT ALL on that duct tape?).

The jury has spoken.

America, CNN, FOX, Nancy Grace, Mr. Fuhrmann get a life and recognize America's justice system has been wrong based on circumstantial evidence in the past on many, many occasions, and as those founders believed "better one guilty man to go free, than one spend a day behind bars (not to mention pay the highest price under our criminal justice system).

The ultimate judge will have his due eventually, and already knows the truth, and will render HIS verdict.

The Casey Anthony Trial: High Political Legal Drama?

This past six weeks and so very similar to the O.J. Simpson murder trial, America and Americans have been force fed almost daily the high political drama and details of the disappearance of Caylee Anthony, and subsequent farce of a trial of the woman charged with murdering her young daughter, Casey Anthony, in a Florida courtroom and broadcast nationwide day after day.

Even on the 4th of July, this trial has overshadowed America's Independence Day celebrations, with no less than five or six lawyers or judges on many of the cable news stations analyzing body language, trial testimony and offering up their opionions, legal or otherwise, as far as the guilt or innocense of Ms. Anthony.

A brother weeping on the stand testifying about how hurt he was at not being informed of his sister's pregnancy.

A father who has been alleged to have abused his daughter, and whose personal life also has been the subject of speculation.

A mother who was at work at the time, but who was highly involved apparently in the raising of her grandchild and at times appeared to be more mother to Caylee than Casey.

Another overblown murder trial for the benefit of an increasingly intrusive media into America's courtrooms, since this is a Florida state murder trial and crime against the state, although is being broadcast not simply in this country nationwide, but even abroad for other nefarious purposes.

I mean crime is money to these media types, and a great profit generator.

Much also has been said about the "standing room only" lines to get one of those coveted seats in the courtroom. And even one member of the public was charged with contempt of court for not following the judicially determine courtroom decorum during this public drama.

The jury is now out, after receiving their rather lengthy jury instructions.

And before the jury is in, I'd like to add my opinion since the opinions of so many have been publicized by those who should know better, those in the legal profession who have used also this trial to build their broadcast careers most of all.

Much of my opinion is also based on supposition, which is hardly a legal standard but mine just might have a little more credence than some of the outlandish scenarios set forth by both the prosecution and defense in this case.

Ms. Anthony is guilty of involuntary manslaughter, if anything, since no direct physical evidence was ever presented which would render a capital murder charge even remotely possible.

But that doesn't mean that this particular jury will not so find, as publicized as this trial has become.

No charge of malicious intent or "malice aforethought" was ever set forth, or proven. No eyewitnesses. No physical evidence other than a "smell" or some duct tape found "around" the site Caylee's body was found.

Perhaps Ms. Anthony, as immature as her behavior was both before and after the events surround this charge, should never have been a mother to begin with.

Perhaps she had both an overbearing mother and father herself, and has issues of her own which truly need addressing if she is ever to mature, or become a mother again.

It certainly appeared that way due to the center stage her own father and mother have played in this drama.

I wonder if she was raised a Catholic, and thus the option of an early abortion, or birth control were simply out of the question.

Maybe she felt having this child might bring her closer to a mother and father whom she could never please, no matter how hard she tried.

As has occurred in many homes across America both in the past and presently in the increase also of single mothers and parents not simply due to divorce, but also family pressures.

And where has the father of this child also been? Contrary to the sexual abuse charges, neither father nor brother fathered Ms. Anthony's child, so just who and where is he?

However, none of the above would justify or explain away a child's death.

Most likely from the little I followed the trial and case in its earlier stages before my time and interests lie elsewhere, my conclusion is as follows:

Ms. Anthony found single parenting not to be what she envisioned as an unmarried, young 25 year old. Her mother worked, and could not help with the day to day care of her grandchild, and Ms. Anthony hardly made enough to support her and this child after she moved out of her parent's home.

She was unemployed for the most part, yet hardly had the free time then to also date as most girls her age do, if she had no backup during the days or evenings during the week.

An overindulged child herself with a working mother, and policeman father, she decided she wanted to party and searched the internet in order to find a way to make chloroform, a sleeping agent, so that her young daughter would sleep while she was out in the evenings and early morning.

She used too much, nor was she around to check on her daughter then to even see if she was still breathing after she left for the night. Perhaps her parents did not approve of her life style while living in their home.

Arriving home, she found her daughter dead or in a coma, and panicked placing her in the trunk of her car until she could figure out what to do, concocting story after story when her parents inquired about her daughter's whereabouts.

Finally, she dumped the body when she had the time to think things through, until her car was then towed and her parents had to pick it up from the tow lot, with Cindy Anthony then hoping against hope that her daughter's continued lies were truth, not wishing to believe the worst of her own daughter, and flesh and blood - or maybe feeling somewhat responsible also, due to the state of their relationship at the time of Caylee's disappearance.

The rest the nation then was made privy too, unwillingly or not, as the hot story of the moment unfolded and due to the adorable pictures of this young toddler, and the high drama itself of this dysfunctional family - again, not unlike many in this country with the growing number of absentee parents for whatever reason, but mostly economic.

Will Casey beat a capital murder charge due to all the hype this past six weeks?

I wouldn't bet on it.

This story has been so juicy, and so profitable for so very many.

I expect that a capital murder conviction will be returned, if only to give the lawyers at least ten to twenty more years to go through the appeals process.

While Ms. Anthony is, of course, in jail where she would most likely be anyway under an involuntary manslaughter charge in order for the state to then also, in the end, get their due on the expense of this six week exercise in American "justice."

But I may be as wrong as all those political analysts, "judges" and "lawyers" who followed and put their spins on this story for six very long weeks.

Happy Independence Day, America, just in case you forgot.