Washington Taking Direction From Madison Avenue: "Super" Committees?

It appears that Washington must have a Madison Avenue mentality, more than a Constitutional one, with respect to its understanding of our American form of government.

In the wake of the "budget deficit" talks and moves to raise the U.S. debt ceiling, justifiably or not (given that there are no offset credits against that deficit for all the outsourcing, and foreign aid we continue to give foreign governments at the cost of the American public), now we have a Super Committee of legislators whose sole job is to study the problem and come up with a bi-partisan solution.

Rather than letting this old dog simply die its legitimate death.

Super sizing and the Super Bowl appears to be the marketing strategy in order to sell whatever comes out of this committee to the MacDonald's and football crowd.

New York and California are complaining through their state legislators about unfair representation on this committee, noting that due to their larger populations, they should even have more Senators than their Constitutional two.

Not mentioning that perhaps about 1/4 of their population might not even be "legal" Americans, simply tourists or transient workers on visa waivers. Or Mexicans. Or Canadians. Or maybe part time residents of Arizona, Florida or other SunBelt states, thus only "part time" non-residents residents.

Making the same mistakes and trouble in those states through their vacationer status at this point progressively as they created in their own "home" states.

When the Senators, after all, are merely there to represent the state governments, not the people actually at all since the House of Representatives, by that Constitution, is supposed to be the "people's house" representing ONLY those citizens living in their legislative district.

But, of course, campaign finance laws have also afforded "corporate" out of state special interest groups to totally undermine representation in the House, making the House of Representatives more the House of Misrepresentatives.

I wonder, just whose idea was this? And just where is it Constitutionally permissible?

Super egos, I'm sure, will insure that that information will be kept from the public, in the interests of "national insecurity" maybe?

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.

Social Security Fix: Give Me The Money

While the politicos in Washington begin grandstanding for the public and "votes" and campaign dollars, using the budget "crisis" and entitlement programs to foment their agendas in order to swing more dollars from that program instead to their campaign backers and PAC organizations through out state bundlers, high rollers, and corporate CEO's, much has been said about just how "broke" the Social Security program is in this country, and nebulous solutions proposed by many of the candidates selected by those who run the political system in this country.

Nothing much has been said about how to "legally" fix it.

Starting with: "Give me the money!"

Changing the rules in the middle of the game instead seems to be where most of these politicos stand.

In other words, I and many Americans, especially the boomers who have paid more into that program than any other generation before or since, would like our money back before any "fix" that defrauds middle Americans from their due upon retirement.

Returning those monies which have been withheld these many years, both those deductions made in those paychecks and also the sums contributed by those employers on behalf of those boomers in 2011 dollars, with interest, would be the "legal" remedy and cure for this claimed "broke" program.

Then the boomers could reinvest those dollars in any way they then chose.

And the program could be phased out for any and all that are born or hold their first "paid" jobs, not this random and illegal age of those under 55 which has been bantered about in the media by some. Where in the world did that figure (or age) come from, and just what is the "legal" basis for using 55 as the cutoff for those other Americans?

Interesting also that while Medicare was passed during the Johnson Administration due to the progressive higher and higher medical expenses when more and more hospitals were shifting from non-profit status, to for profit status, and during the height of the Viet Nam war when so much taxpayer money was being poured into that unconstitutional engagement, post 9-11 and our subsequent now even more unconstitutional engagement in the Middle East these "fixes" for these social programs are targeted at reducing those benefits in order to actually now shift more into EXPANDING our Middle Eastern engagements for those defense contractors and the military.

By unilaterally "changing" this program, is not this then an "ex post facto" law precluded by our Constitution for any and all that have paid ANYTHING at all into this program? Is this another of this Congress and Administration's ideas of "change" again at the American people and our Constitution's ultimate expense?

Or is this once again blowing smoke and diverting attention from all those receiving some of those monies using once again the federal government as nothing more than a money laundering operation for extra-Constitutional funding at the cost of this program?

The boomers were THE LARGEST generation ever, and if anything at this point there should be a surplus in that program, not deficit.

There is a true "legal" fix.

Too bad Congress simply would rather politicize this issue once again, Americans who will be receiving far more than the average American at their retirement through those federal and state civil service perks and benefits, at the cost of their fellow Americans and their "enforced" retirement, especially due to the amount of jobless in that particular age group at the present time.

Obama and Calderon Plan Meet and Greet While More Americans Die

It was announced by the White House press corps that Barack Obama plans to meet with Mexico's President Felipe Calderon in the near future with respect to the border situation. A meeting announced and purportedly planned prior to the recent events in both Arizona and Mexico which have once again cost several Arizonans and Americans their lives due to the escalating tensions over the border situation, and another recent death of a U.S. border patrol agent in Mexico this past week.

A death that then also was attributed to guns smuggled into Mexico from the U.S., which firearms just so happened to trace back to the State of Texas?

I mean, as a long term Arizona resident it doesn't appear that drug cartel members are "buying" guns from the U.S. but from those smuggled in from South America which are unregistered and thus for the most part untraceable as has been historically the case. Or those they appropriate from the many law enforcement personnel whose lives have also been taken during the escalating violence at the border.

I wonder, at this point in America's history with the decades long and increasing violence, and the number of American lives and property losses which have also increased ten to twenty fold since the mid 1950's in the border area, would the founding fathers still be holding discussions with the government of Mexico over the loss of American lives and property, rather than actually securing our porous southern borders and providing for the common defense of the citizenry as is their primary Constitutional duty and function?

The "discussions" are continuing, and one of the topics is "immigration reform" of those poorer citizens from Mexico who also have had to flee that country due to its poorer economy and also the violence which continues to occur there so that those cartels, and the auto thieves that operate cross borders can continue to market their products on both sides of the border.

A situation which has also fundamentally increased since the Reagan years, when the interstate also from Mexico through the State of Arizona was widened and also the first amnesty was passed thus affording those wealthy profiteers to then apply for American citizenship and thus facilitate also their "commerce" cross borders.

Just what WILL it take for the federal government to actually even begin to do their fundamental job and begin practicing true "human rights" and protecting the lives of the American people, their property, and also the lives of those Mexican nationals who are dying in the desert at the hands of their former countrymen from Mexico who are for the most part those Coyotes charging them thousands of dollars to only leave them in the desert to perish.

Happy 2011: A New Decade

Happy 2011, and the beginning of a new decade.

Ringing out the old and bringing in the new is becoming a tradition in the American political landscape and the numbers of Independents and those who are fed up with the two political party system which has merged into the Global Socialist Party seems to be increasing.

Let's hope that trend continues, and we see some real changes rather than merely a change of the face behind the podium.

With the true Americans' voices resonating across this great nation that "progress" isn't "progress" when it is merely global government regression under the leadership of the resurrected British Tory Party with global economic dominion and rulership once again the goal.

Constitution 101: Fourth Amendment Prevents Government From Asking

With all the recent publicity in the U.S. media with respect to the Pentagon's stances on the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, and domestic differences of opinion in the McCain household which also have recently made the mainstream broadcast media for their spins, it has amazed this Constitutional Conservative American just how far afield this "discussion" and polling has gone, and just whose opinions are being sought - rather than our framers and founders.

It seems pretty clear to me that the Fourth Amendment actually PREVENTS the government from asking, but not the gay community from telling if they so desire. It is there and was given to protect the privacy of Americans in such a matter clearly as their sexual preferences and orientations, and the government has no business knowing such information with the exception of those who may eventually be serving active duty in some foreign engagement where there might be housing concerns.

And I guess if we would get over our addiction to pre-emptive and aggressive wars instead of defensive wars only, this would be a non-issue really to begin with.

But such "news" doesn't make the headlines. Or the schoolrooms, it appears, on absolutely any level whatsoever anymore.

And if there wasn't already adequate proof that our grammar school, high school and college curriculums could use major adjustments in that area, rather than the "science and technology" fields and teaching kids how to use a computer, rather than to think, this issue makes it crystal clear just where our schools have deliberately "dumbed down" our kids, our Pentagon officials, those serving on Capitol Hill, our newscasters and print journalists.

Maybe all the McCains could get behind this one.

Or not.

The Wisdom Of Mr. Jefferson Remix

They are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. To consider the latter phrase not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as they sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please...Certainly no such universal power was meant to be given them. It was intended to lace them up straightly within the enumerated powers and those without which, as means, these powers could not be carried into effect.

Thomas Jefferson, Opinion on National Bank, 1791

The great object of my fear is the federal judiciary. That body, like gravity, ever acting, with noiseless foot, and unalarming advance, gaining ground step by step, and holding what it gains, is engulfing insidiously the special governments into the jaws of that which feeds them.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Judge Spencer Roane, Mar 9, 1821

The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working under ground to undermine the foundations of our confederated fabric. They are construing our constitution from a co-ordination of a general and special government to a general and supreme one alone.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thomas Ritchie, December 25, 1820

It has long, however, been my opinion, and I have never shrunk from its expression... that the germ of dissolution of our federal government is in the constitution of the federal Judiciary;... working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Charles Hammond, August 18, 1821

One single object... [will merit] the endless gratitude of the society: that of restraining the judges from usurping legislation.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Edward Livingston, March 25, 1825

The Constitution... is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary which they may twist and shape into any form they please.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Judge Spencer Roane, September 6, 1819


Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Wilson Nicholas, September 7, 1803

Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823

The construction applied...to those parts of the Constitution of the United States which delegate Congress a power...ought not to be construed as themselves to give unlimited powers, nor a part to be so taken as to destroy the whole residue of that instrument.

Thomas Jefferson, Draft Kentucky Resolutions, 1798

The Declaration of Independence... [is the] declaratory charter of our rights, and the rights of man.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Samuel Adams Wells, May 12, 1821


On every question of construction carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 182

It is an established rule of construction, where a phrase will bear either of two meanings to give it that which will allow some meaning to the other parts of the instrument, and not that which will render all the others useless. Certainly no such universal power was meant to be given to them. It was intended to lace them up straightly with in the enumerated powers, and those without which, as means, these powers could not be carried into effect.

Thomas Jefferson, Opinion on a National Bank, February 15, 1791

On every unauthoritative exercise of power by the legislature must the people rise in rebellion or their silence be construed into a surrender of that power to them? If so, how many rebellions should we have had already?

Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query 12, 1782


It is not honorable to take mere legal advantage, when it happens to be contrary to justice.

Thomas Jefferson, Opinion on Debts Due to Soldiers, 1790

Nothing then is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Cartwright, 1824

It is the duty of every good citizen to use all the opportunities which occur to him, for preserving documents relating to the history of our country.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Hugh P. Taylor, October 4, 1823

In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.

Thomas Jefferson, fair copy of the drafts of the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, 1798

For example. If the system be established on basis of Income, and his just proportion on that scale has been already drawn from every one, to step into the field of Consumption, and tax special articles in that, as broadcloth or homespun, wine or whiskey, a coach or a wagon, is doubly taxing the same article. For that portion of Income with which these articles are purchased, having already paid its tax as Income, to pay another tax on the thing it purchased, is paying twice for the same thing; it is an aggrievance on the citizens who use these articles in exoneration of those who do not, contrary to the most sacred of the duties of a government, to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens. (In other words, since there is now a federal "income" tax, then to Jefferson it was then "double jeapardy" to then tax "consumption" also such as court fees, patent and trademark fees, gasoline taxes, etc., etc., on top of the "income" tax - either one or the other) . The same would hold true in those states with an "income" tax also which are then taxing "consumption" with sales taxes, use taxes, gasoline taxes, etc., etc.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816

He who is permitted by law to have no property of his own, can with difficulty conceive that property is founded in anything but force.

Thomas Jefferson, January 26, 1788

It is the manners and spirit of a people which preserve a republic in vigor. A degeneracy in these is a canker which soon eats to the heart of its laws and constitution.

Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia Query 19, 1781

It must be observed that our revenues are raised almost wholly on imported goods. (NOT "free" as in "no cost" trade, but "free" as in unregulated as to our ports for commerce between all nations).

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Gouverneur Morris, 1793

Our properties within our own territories [should not] be taxed or regulated by any power on earth but our own. (No world government)

Thomas Jefferson, Rights of British America, 1774

Taxes should be proportioned to what may be annually spared by the individual.

Thomas Jefferson, 1784

The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to The Republican Citizens of Washington County, Maryland, March 31, 1809

The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere.

Thomas Jefferson, letter to Abigail Adams, February 22, 1787

Would it not be better to simplify the system of taxation rather than to spread it over such a variety of subjects and pass through so many new hands.

Thomas Jefferson, 1784

Job Hunting In The 21st Century

News from the front lines on the jobs situation and American economy in this 21st Century.

Things have really, really changed even absent the economic impact of what is occurring now throughout the U.S. in the job market.

As one who has held a job since she was a mere 15 years old in some form or another, even while raising three children, and as one who also has been attempting to rebuild after the mortgage and foreclosure mess in the Southwest, it doesn't seem there are a lack of jobs in certain industries, simply a lack of jobs for those either over-qualified, without "degrees," or ill suited for those which have been given the most "stimulus."

I began my working career as most teens do, working for a fast food chain in the Southwest.

I got the job through the business department of my local high school, and crunched sales reports daily for the various locations during the after school hours, and during the summers in addition worked in one of the restaurants during the busy lunch hours, and in the afternoons then made cold calls to businesses and homes in the areas offering tokens for discounts through their small local ad agency representatives.

It paid $1.60 per hour, and helped me save for my first car, a used Toyota.

I subsequently then went on to working for a "national" bank, a life insurance agent and agency, and then a credit card company before the age of 20. I was "playing the field" and also bulking up my resume in scope, or so I believed.

Today, that is "job hopping." Marketing yourself according to your experience and worth in different areas in order to expand your knowledge and experience is passé and not an attractive quality for those in the front offices of at least quite a few industries.

Although, now due to the exhaustive tests that are also given through employment agencies, it would appear that the costs for training new workers have even gone down due to the prescreening processes in many labor intensive and other industries. Fireman, for example, already go through exhaustive physical standards and training for their positions. Health care workers now are "graduates" of colleges of higher learning even in the nursing and support positions. I was a candy striper also in my youth, (serving meals, delivering flowers and running errands, making beds, and wheeling out patients as a volunteer, and that position no longer even exists in most hospitals today).

I married, and we moved in order for my spouse to pursue his degree with less than $1,000 and all our worldly possessions in a U-Haul, arriving in the Midwest just as Nixon gave his resignation speech on the White House lawn. We were lucky since it was August, and within the first two days found an apartment complex that catered to students without credit checks, and found a "reduced rent" apartment in a large complex run by the onsite owners. We even got a twelve month lease with free rent the last month, but as a one bedroom was $20 a month more than the apartment we had in the Southwest. At least utilities were paid.

I searched the want-ads daily then, and got an interview at a local law office.

Legal secretaries were actually the highest paid in the clerical field, and I had worked for an executive at American Express prior to the move being promoted from the typing pool (typing letters eight hours a day almost non-stop), and so was confident I was up to the job.

I was first interviewed by the Supervisor of the "section" seeking to fill the position, and then was asked to speak with the attorney for whom I would be working - one of the managing partners whose practice was in labor and employment law. At the ripe old age of 21.

We hit it off, as he also had family living in my former state (a son) and was impressed with my keyboarding most of all (typing tests were mandated for all new hires, the only test I was required to perform). He was a few years older than my own father, and was a mentor also and due to his busy, busy travel schedule, pretty much had the responsibility to be the "face" for our existing clients while he was traveling conducting seminars and advising local management personnel and owner/operators throughout the country.

The job lasted over six years, while my spouse obtained his undergraduate and graduate degree, and involved many, many extra hours over and above the call of duty and girl Friday duties in trips back and forth to the airport too, picking up mailed documents for filing and preparation also while he was on the road, but for which I was truly grateful as during that time I also became a new mother, and my "boss" was demanding, but fair and considerate, and even provided us with a car when ours was on the fritz one winter, and a month's bonus pay at Christmas every year.

In the corporate world then, the martini lunch was standard for most mid to upper level management, wining and dining potential new clients, and in office meetings of the lawyers on various client matters, and at one point during the start-up phase when my new "boss" left a 200 attorney practice to set out on his own with several others from our former firm, I even performed receptionist duties for those visiting the office, and prepared all the month billings and statements for our client load.

Flash forward to 2010.

I have been hitting the local unemployment offices and resource centers and they are packed to the gills.

Computers lined up in one full room for those seeking job listings and any assistance that might be needed with resume writing (I didn't even have a resume for my early positions, simply filled out the standard two page front and back application).

Computer literacy is not simply a plus, but a necessity even in seeking a job.

Online applications are now preferred for even minimum wage jobs, and take a good 45 minutes to an hour to complete with all the questions that are included, and waivers included as part of the application process for requested testing over and above those tests which might be needed for the particular position applied for, and "background checks."

Many involve lengthy questionnaires even.

One recent one I filled out for a large big box company included a question that asked: "How many politicians today do you feel are dishonest?" and another that asked "Have you ever had a 'bad day?'

Occasional grumpy people, apparently, need not apply. Or those who might have reservations about at least a few of our political leaders, and given those polls it would seem that just might knock out about 70% at this point that might believe at least a good percentage of them just might be in political office for all the wrong reasons.

And if you are an experienced, or "older" worker, don't include anything that isn't part of your employment history prior to 2000.

The last ten years is all that matters, not the experience you gained from the varied positions I myself have held throughout my lifetime at this point.

Traffic tickets or other missteps with the law, even if you have "paid the price and done your time," or pled "no contest" in order to either not lose work time, or incur even added expenses for bench trials, not jury trials, or cannot afford a lawyer for many of these lower level offenses with hefty fines and penalties on more and more civil and criminal offenses, also are requested to be disclosed, except in about three states.

Which does tend to favor a younger workforce and population, since the question is preceded with "ever" meaning throughout your life, and of course the odds would go up the longer you live that at some point you have had a run-in with the law over something or other, since even the number of laws which have been passed progressively have increased in leaps and bounds.

Some even contradicting previously passed legislation, or placing citizens in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" position with respect to especially those low level DUI laws and blockades nation-wide based again on "science based" fallable technology, and evidentiary standards that are now at the point where you need a degree in science in order to even argue a speeding ticket anymore, since those are becoming more and more based on evidence that is not "witnessed" but "recorded," like those sports playbacks, although only from a single "fixed" angle, and in which the worlds "reasonable and prudent" means at times even driving the maximum speed on a snowy day won't result in a "speeding" ticket, but driving 11 miles over the speed limit on an abandoned highway in favorable, mild weather can.

The job search itself is now almost a full time job for many, and few that can meet some of those benchmarks.

Credit reports are also used routinely for almost any position, and if you are seeking work in this economy due to having also been impacted in a big way in either losing a home, or prior job, or need to get back into the workforce after an absence due to rising costs of living and expenses, those scores can mean you are dead in the water without the money to hire a lawyer even to assist with getting those reports to reflect the circumstances behind the debt, other than that one line explanation that really doesn't affect those ballpark scores at all.

And even one such as myself, who actually paid off all my credit card debt five years ago after an identity theft and during a refinance on a home, the fact that you have no debt or haven't had any in a number of years due to satisfying all your creditors through those highly advertised "home equity" loan programs also counts against you when it comes to attempting to re-establish or obtain any credit after more than a five year "debt free." You haven't had credit, so there are now brownie points, is how it now works, and most of those larger businesses pay the lower price for the "score" rather than the full reports, since drawing the full reports has also affected applicants, since pulling the reports themselves can also count against you in the number of reports pulled.

I went to a local job fair recently. I was seeking work in prior fields in which I had experience in the private sector.

The tables that were manned consisted of mostly universities seeking students for their educational programs and their grants tied in to the number of students they could encourage to go back to school and get re-educated, banking and finance companies seeking BAs in business or finance for some of those credit companies, hospitals and health care clinics seeking medical staff and personnel due to the new healthcare legislation (which definitely was a boom for their industry at the cost of the public and even the older generation who have paid local and state property taxes for many of the community hospitals that were built in the 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's, and with now almost a hospital or health care clinic on every corner), a Mary Kay representative, a local television station "sponsor" with its fall lineup, and the local police force since there is a great deal of former military that are being recruited for local and state police forces throughout the nation (who are also demand for the government contractors for the infrastructure repair and jobs in the last federal jobs bill after working on rebuilding Iraq, in addition to many of the illegals in the West, Midwest and Southwest it seems).

It did appear that the job seekers were being mostly marketed to, in point of fact, by many there rather than those seriously seeking workers.

Keywords are stressed the most on those resumes and applications, and terms like those who "think outside the box" or are innovative, creative type individuals are now passé. Multi-tasking also seems to be out of vogue. The ability to "stay on task" is the 21st Century ideal. Some at the educational booths indicated that the largest hiring source now appears to be more and more "tech" jobs in the public sector, not private.

There are also new questions with respect to race, national origin, ethnicity, and disability, including whether or not you are collecting under any programs providing any benefits under state or federal programs, although some of those questions are merely asked to be provided voluntarily, although there isn't much room for explanations on some of those questions in order to further clarify anything other than the multiple choice answers.

Hiring definitely has also now become a "science," and it may be "science" once again that is preventing many of those workers who are truly qualified, and who need the work in all age brackets from finding it. Or a past due parking ticket, maybe. These "screenings" do seem to be geared toward also ferreting out those individuals whose dog may have eaten the parking ticket five years ago without "warrants," in these shared job resource pools from state to state in updating the movements of many now who are having to go from state to state at this point in order to get even interviewed or hired.

Migrant workers are not simply agricultural workers anymore.

And there are now even overlapping agencies that have taken up residence in many of the spaces at local malls formerly held by retailers that are not like to old jobs centers and boards with posted announcements and such, but provide resume writing classes, "test" interviews, and even clothing and fashion advice.

There seems to be a booming economy now, in another new industry.

Counseling and coaching the unemployed in order to recast them into "job material."

I wonder what Edison, Franklin, Grandma Moses, the Wright Brothers, or Albert Schweitzer would think?

Senate Approves 600 Million For Border: But Where's The Fence?

It was announced with great fanfare by the mainstream media that the Senate has approved on voice vote an additional 600 million dollars in order to reportedly secure the U.S. Mexico border.

Just in time for the upcoming November elections.

The funds provided are to be utilized in the hiring of an additional 1,500 government employees (whose salaries and benefits will escalate over time, and is once again expanding the costs of government rather than reducing it, and who also will be disempowered in effectively doing their jobs through internal regulatory backbiting) and more toys for the monitoring of the border with unmanned aircraft and the like for the defense contractors and Silicon Valley.

But where are the sums for the fence, the true security which is needed at least along the Arizona border which encompasses over 300 miles of open desert?

It would literally take agents arm in arm to secure that desert adequately against those new and improved all terrain vehicles those large scale hard drug dealers and auto theft rings have been able to purchase with their massive profits PROGRESSIVELY.

The pickup trucks crossing with the loads of Mexico Gold are a mere drop in the bucket, and don't have the speed or familiarity with those stretches of desert that those repeat large scale drug operations do, or homie domestic distributors and suppliers they have signed up on the U.S. side of the border after the last amnesty under Reagan who are now plying their wares to middle school students.

I'll bet the cost for four to five foot titanium spikes would be far less than the costs of this newest "solution" to the open border situation will actually be.

And far less likely to potentially add billions more to the bottom line deficit for those fees and costs for that other group of government contractors, the illegal immigrant "civil rights" lawyers and PAC organizations at the U.S. taxpayers expense who are now forced to literally pay for their own abuse in many of these illegal, in more ways than one, civil rights cases with the illegals getting free lawyers gratis the U.S. taxpayers including those U.S. citizens, municipal and state governments who are getting hit in double and triple whammies for those illegal cases since the Mexican government surely isn't providing the legal fees for these migrant workers and drug dealers through the American courts.

Mr. Obama heralded the bill and is expected to sign it on Friday, again using this ineffective and costly "solution," which has been tried numerous times before throughout the decades to push his "comprehensive immigration reform" agenda ala George Bush and that of the globalists serving on the Hill from both the mainstream political parties who dominate our elective and appointed offices across the board both at the federal and state levels.

A "high tech" physical fence is what is needed here, not a virtual fence that can be turned off and on at will at the flip of a few switches and monitored once again by government contractors (in the name of "jobs and the economy" in these ever increasing public/private partnerships for mostly Wall Street's eventual gains) that just might be tempted to look the other way for a cut of this profitable Mexican commerce in this underground trade agreement.

The sums for this Silicon Valley and defense contractor stimulus it was announced is going to be funded by an increase in the taxes levied on personnel agencies that provide foreign labor.

Say, what? The majority of those that legally wish entry into this country to my knowledge do not go through "personnel agencies" at all, but through immigration lawyers who solicit their clients overseas and who arrange for those green cards at huge fees for the average Eastern European or South American.

Which, of course, simply means that the profits for the mostly naturalized Mexican coyotes will increase, since those taxes for those foreign workers will be passed on to them as part of their "application fees", making it more than likely that the U.S. will be seeing an increase in Western European immigrants whose countries have higher currency rates for the legal Visas and green cards, than those from poorer countries who will simply again take their chances on the coyotes leading the across that desert.

Which just goes to show that the Democrats are not the party of the "common" people they claim to be, but also identical to that other branch of the Globalist Party, the NeoCon Republican wing, since this solution is really no solution at all and has been used numerous times in the past - even under Ms. Napolitano when she was Governor of Arizona but did not at all reduce the numbers in any significant manner of "new" crossers.

Or this will simply give some of those new internet "homeland security" graduates those 1,500 jobs along partisan lines according to which party is in power for their party members, the ones most likely that will flip the switches on those virtual fences, and then create eventually another agency or panel to investigate and monitor the monitoring of the virtual fencing after the next high profile rancher's death occurs.

So again I and literally tens of thousands of other present and former border state residents and victims, and others throughout the nation now feeling annually more and more the impact of this PROGRESSIVE negligence, ask this Congress and this Administration - WHERE'S THE FENCE?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/08/12/pol.senate.border.funding/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_politics

UPDATE: Obama, as reported, signed the bill with much mainstream media ballyhoo as was expected. Another political move, and not Constitutional one.

In former Goldwater Arizona, I can unequivocally state that given the level of victimization of the American people, and the fact that we are STILL engaged in a foreign war primarily due to an attack that was carried out from within the country by illegal immigrants who overstayed their visas and were not screened adequately prior to allowing entry, and the amount of homeless and jobless in a state which he truly loved as a native, that he would have had the marines, army and coast guard patrolling those borders - and during this war would have had any and all "visitors" expelled before one boot set on Afghan soil....

So, again, WHERE'S THE FENCE?

BP's Poster Child Hayward Moves On 18 Million Richer

It was announced by the British and American news sources that Tony Hayward has been "mutually" relieved of his position as BP's CEO by their Board of Directors, although reportedly 18 MILLION richer for his efforts.

Mr. Hayward has been the poster child for BP since the disaster which claimed 11 American lives, and the BP Board in another public relations attempt it appears, has chosen an American for the pilot position of this London based global giant who will be charged with managing all future efforts with respect to the ongoing oil containment (how many new caps will it take?) and cleanup off Louisiana's shores before the spill reaches Greenland by next spring.

Another ploy for the American public, apparently, since although Mr. Hayward definitely was missing a "sensitivity chip" with respect to his scripted appearance before a Congressional Board of Directors over the incident, and also his faux pas in released statements about the ongoing cleanup efforts, his ouster and replacement by an American does appear to be so much of a publicity move mainly for the consumption of the U.S. press most of all and their ongoing spins.

Who have continued and failed to ask the fundamental questions throughout this now three month disaster.

Just how and why did our Congress give mineral rights to a foreign global corporation to America's offshore oil reserves, when we are and have been fighting wars in the Persian Gulf and now Iraq and Afghanistan also to primarily secure "lease rights" for the British over those oil reserves (and, of course, minimize Israel's perceived threat, a country which has enough nuclear power to wipe out at least that half of the world many times over), much of which was lost when the Shah of Iran was removed from power back in the 1970's and the Ayatollah gained control of that country's government.

Just why is America buying not only foreign crude oil from the Middle East, but also now refined barrels from the British of its own oil, taxed at that, in this ongoing partnership with this global corporation that has now resulted in the loss of 11 American lives due to their negligence and a loosey goosey oversight policy by the U.S. regulatory agencies over this global giant whose is now responsible for two major accidents?

I mean, U.S. domiciled oil and gas corporations are better watched than apparently this foreign one was or has been.

It seems BOTH Washington and BP executives and managers were asleep at the wheel, and there are so many unanswered questions left which led to this disaster, and the initial containment efforts thereafter with Washington putting BP in charge of the cleanup once again without oversight, it is truly astounding.

Add to that this presidents arrogance then denying Constitutional due process rights to the American victims of this disaster through the establishment of that "reserve" fund and it appears more and more that Washington is more interested in protecting this foreign global corporation's bottom lines and future federal and state gas tax revenues than it is in actually actively getting this spill contained forthwith, and protecting both America's mineral reserves, and American lives and businesses in the Gulf region.

BP has a huge presence in Louisiana and New Orleans, with the Brits primarily owning many of those older homes in the French Quarter and the Garden District, especially post Katrina (over which the actual events surrounding the breaking of those levees flooding the poorer areas of New Orleans while that "release" instead protected the Quarter and those Brits properties, has caused much local buzz in Louisiana with lawsuits flying with now new building standards and ordinances causing even more of those Americans whose homes were affected to lose their properties now five years later who were left high and dry after those waters receded and with the expense then of these "ex post facto" laws which have majorly impacted those who owned those little bayou fishing shanties without central air).

I mean most of those people cannot get loans to rebuild those shanties, but the developers aren't having much trouble getting financing for redevelopment of many of those areas - and high density housing does bring in more revenue to the state and local coffers, after all, rather than those sleepy little fishing villages along the bayou did.

Just how many barrels of extra oil under those leases has BP sailed out of the Port of New Orleans at this point in order to refine, and then sell back to the American people while Washington and the Southeastern states collect all that extra tax revenue levied on those domestic barrels that have been outsourced for Britain's ultimate gain?

Or is BP also, as a foreign domiciled corporation, exempt from actually paying those gas corporate taxes unlike American based oil and gas corporate entities?

Outsourcing our oil and mineral rights?

Just where is that power enumerated in the U.S. Constitution, since it would appear that this is one "free trade" agreement that is nothing more than a "gimme" to the British at the cost of the American people, also controlling then the price all Americans pay at the pump under "global" market prices.

For their own oil?

Trade agreements were to be mutually beneficial under the common law upon which this country's government is based at least on a "need" basis, although "free trade" wasn't meant to be "free" at all insofar as duties and import taxes on those trade agreements with foreign entities, and it does appear that the British arrogance has not changed much since '76 with respect to the Colonials.

Or the Tories on the Hill who are letting the Brits continue to call the shots, including apparently the newest CEO tagged by the British to continue their publicity campaigns, and damage control while they scam some more of the Americans wealth and precious resources - both mineral, and wildlife (and businesses, homes and lives in this instance).

Washington appears content with the fines it is collecting over this disaster, while serving up its citizenry once again to the Brits who are, after all, hiring those adjusters in order to settle the claims without also any oversight.

Just why haven't those illegal leases been pulled at this point since from news reports, BP also has a big deal going on in Alaska too.

And I wonder how many of the MSM corporate owners own shares in BP due to continuing to carry the spins, without asking the right questions?

And is it just me, or doesn't Tony Hayward look almost like a twin of that actor who played Tony Blair in the movie, "The Queen?"

I hear his next gig is in Russia, after collecting his "golden parachute" payout approved by the BP Board, a better fit it would appear, so he can get his "life back" with a pension, exit bonus and renegotiable salary to boot.

And I'm waiting to see how American this new American BP CEO really is.

Or whether he, too, is just another wannabe Brit, and royal pain in the a** actor with a Yank accent whose faux pas will get wider media publication as a result, or worse than Hayward so that Hayward's yachting while the oil spread will seem ever so more civilized.

The replacement: Robert Dudley.

Now how much more of a Brit by lineage can you be, although expect the Southern drawl to kick in since he did, after all, reside in Mississippi for a time during his tenure with BP which is being played up in the media for all it's worth. Now it is even being reported by the Christian Science Monitor that he actually was "born in Mississippi."

I wonder, truth or desperation with this newest detail? The roots of the surname "Dudley" certainly do run deep in Britain, back to the 14th century, it appears.

It was also reported that BP is a source of national pride in Britain since they hold the wealth of a good percentage of the Brits with investments in their pension plans (the royal family did own it up through the 90's, after all, so may have been by Parliamentary decree and another of their "takings" apparently for Britain's dominion).

I wonder how many Brits write for the AP, another one of those "global" corporations?

Obama and Congress Throw Citizens A Bone

With the increasing joblessness and homelessness now increasing across the nation, and outrage of an increasingly dissatisfied electorate with both mainstream political parties and their agendas bypassing both Constitutional provision and restraint, Congress and the Obama Administration threw the American people another bone.

Unemployment benefits checks will be reinstituted.

And just how much is unemployment - about a third of most citizens former take-home pays, over another third less than their former paychecks even after withholding?

Although, of course, this does nothing for the small businesses that have gone under during this banker, Wall Street and political economic recession, or those homeowners who are still in danger of losing their homes due to the illegal loans which were sold in the West and Southwest primarily, since nothing has been done to address the causes of the foreclosure tsunami, just the symptoms.

Loans which have no fundamental basis in our Constitution, based on foreign currencies (the British LIBOR) which were sold to unsuspecting homeowners during the boom who were forced into refinances due to rising costs of ownership.

Especially in the border states which had also seen increases in insurance rates for both autos and homes go off the charts, and whose property taxes were tied into their home valuations.

The predatory lending practices of these banks have simply been promoted by this Administration, pushing Americans to refinance into these same "foreign" based loans, and now even kids for college tuition increases which also have gone off the charts.

Sallie Mae's funding is weighted toward also promoting these London banking index rate loans, and seems to be that this is why Mr. Obama has been on the "get re-educated" and "refinance" bandwagon - to trap the American people who thus far have not been affected and still have their homes, and now even our youth then also into these adjustable foreign based loans.

Seems the "change" which has occurred has been a "change" in the face behind the podium, but not at all the agenda.

Wall Street, the "global" economy and New York profits at the cost of the rest of the country and citzenry.

Since due to those excessive salaries of our "misrepresentatives," they seem to be the heaviest investors in this "global" economy which is being promoted at the cost of America's own.

Hail, Britannia: Britannia Rules The Gulf (And Its Ports)

It was reported that the big news today is that BP has finally once again capped the oil spill in the Louisiana Gulf, at least halting the flow for a few more days.

No promises, of course, that the continuing saga of Deepwater Horizon is truly over.

Meanwhile, it was reported that over 184,000,000 (yes, those were the commas) gallons of oil have spewed into the Gulf, with those Brits then solely in charge of both containing the spill, and the cleanup of the existing oil residue then in the Gulf.

As stated previously, oil and water do not mix, so I just wonder how many of those 184,000,000 gallons of crude went sailing out through the Port of New Orleans to be refined by those Brits at their home refineries, and then sold back to the American people at a profit - which means that the American people will be paying in a roundabout way for all those fines, fees and reimbursements to those in Louisiana affected - since Obama even took away unconstitutionally the rights of those victims to sue in U.S. District Court BP directly for their actual damages, and not simply damages that the BP claims adjusters deem worthy.

With the Prime Minister cautioning those BP executives about "excessive" claims. And apparently authorized and afforded by Washington and Congress under those leases or Obama dictates to use their own claims adjusters working for BP. Now I just wonder whose "bottom line" those claims adjusters are going to be charged to protect, and from all reports BP's "authorized" adjusters are few and already the backlog of claims increasing by the day.

Just how does the Obama Administration and Congress have any authority to circumvent the U.S. Constitution in this respect removing "due process" rights of those individuals and businesses so affected under this supposed reserve. This does seem to be a British mentality and Rule of Law once again. Making the process not public, but private and away from the American public's view also on just how those claims are being settled, and ultimately at the American public's expense since their profit margins are gained at the pumps throughout the South and who knows where else in this now "global" economy. But suffice it to say a good deal of their bottom line profits are gleened from their American service stations and "lease" agreements.

And just how much is "excessive" in light of the loss also of eleven American lives due to this huge global corporations' negligence, one of the largest global industries in the entire world that STILL holds lease rights to America's offshore oil in both Louisiana and in Alaska from all reports.

And since this is the second disaster which has involved bodily injury and loss of American manual laborers lives, which of course were deemed "the little people" by those Brits, just why isn't Congress and the Obama Administration rescinding their lease rights, lease rights that Congress actually had no business handing out to foreign global corporations, especially Britain, to America's offshore oil reserves anyway.

Especially since we are still in a War in the Middle East primarily for Britain and the loss of their holdings to those lease rights when the Shah of Iran was removed from power, and the Ayatollah and the religious leaders took over basically the area and country back in the 1970's.

I mean, Iraq's "new" government is another basically Constitutional monarchy, with a Prime Minister and Parliament and in no way mirrors the intended structure of the U.S.'s own, which simply goes to prove just who is in charge of the War in the Middle East on "terrorism."

While, of course, the two subsequent attacks which were circumvented since that time by the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber were actually British citizens, one of whom's father was a high ranking banking official in the Middle East that worked for the London bankers from British reprots.

Canadians are now in abundance in this country, and now even being trained under "free trade" agreements apparently at the U.S. public's expense at many of the U.S. military bases and installations. And more and more foreigners are gaining admittance even into U.S. military colleges and universities in both the West and East.

This "joint" security is costing the U.S. citizens most of all, it appears, rather than the Canadians or the British and placing more and more foreigners on U.S. soil by the year since 9-11.

And hasn't the U.S. learned about training foreign troops only to have those troops eventually turn on the American people eventually, and its civilian population now also per 9-11?

There was even a published report in a newspaper in Colorado that the city and state governments are looking into exercising eminent domain procedures against many Colorado ranchers in order to seize their land and property for the expansion of the military bases which are deemed needed due to the ever expanding "theatres" in the Middle East of Iraq and Afghanistan.

And this is ending a war as "reasonably and safely" as possible? While also expanding then the medical provisions for those suffering from PTSD after six or seven tours of duty at this point, this is working our way toward ending this "undeclared" war on a noun?

Gee, between those flashing signs on most major U.S. highways warming about the consequences of failiing to wear a seatbelt, or "Drink and Drive....Do Time (not even "drunk and drive" due to progressively lower and lower blood alcohol percentages not even Washington but "globally" determined, with "technology" also again being brought forth as "prima facie" evidence throughout the country), I would say that to most the "terrorist threat" in the Middle East is only a matter of degree from that found now at home.

Especially due to even "globalizing" our nuclear reactors and selling shares of them over the global stock exchange to foreigners, along with our mineral rights and infrastructure PROGRESSIVELY.

I just wonder, how long ago was it really that the British took over both the Rule of Law, and the Port of New Orleans in the good ol' U.S. of A?

Maybe that is truly why all these Canadian troops are now stationed on U.S. domestic shores.

And if Posse Commitatus was originally supposed to protect Americans from military overstep and is being used as the "excuse" for not militarizing America's southern borders most of all, just what is protecting the American people from the British, when even its military is now "globalized" and amalgamated with them to this degree? Certainly not Obama or this Congress who are, in fact, in bed with them also it appears in this "joint venture," being dictated quite obviously from London.

Who then speak of the "little people," and actually back in those founders time demeaned those "colonials, Yanks and savages," as somehow not gentlemen or worthy of note.

Seems much hasn't changed from '76 in that respect and so many, many others PROGRESSIVELY REGRESSIVELY by the day, week and month.

Hail, Britannia. Britannia rules the Gulf (and clearly its ports too).

Obama States Politics Blocking Immigration Deform?

In a recent widely published internet article, Barack Obama stated that it was "politics" which was delaying and derailing his much ballyhooed plan to legitimize and legalize the over 12 million estimated illegal immigrants in this country, a majority of which are Mexican nationals.

Since it was the American people primarily that derailed the 2006 illegal immigrant amnesty, I can only assume that Mr. Obama, as with his meeting with the Hispanic members of Congress, was more a political public relations stunt and another political farce in and of itself.

The American people quite clearly spoke about another Reagan era amnesty under Bush. Just what "reform" is actually needed, since there is an immigration and naturalization process already on the books, but rather it is the costs now that are preventing many of those poorer citizens from other countries from going through the established process. I mean, even the paperwork is now printed in Spanish for this particular segment, as opposed to those from other countries who wish to immigrate.

And since, after all, the U.S. is facing the largest recession since the Great Depression, just why would such an undertaking be again pushed at this time, further outraging those who are now homeless and jobless due to the influx of foreigners that have migrated here, legally or not, in the last two decades due to both wars, and those open borders post 9-11?

And just why are these Congressmen representing "special interests" rather than the voice of their constituency, by and large, I ask. Isn't their oath of office also to the Constitution, and recognizing the fact that there is an established naturalization process, and some of their former countrymen are in violation of it and should be forthwith deported?

"Anchor babies" do not create citizenship, according to the true law of the land. Since the Preamble does state, "We the People of the United States, FOR US AND OUR POSTERITY."

But I guess Mr. Obama, as so many on the Hill, hasn't read it lately.

The "Latino vote" should not be an overriding concern on this issue.

The Constitution should.

And until those borders are truly secured now nine years post 9-11, this political posturing appears to be from both sectors of the "global socialists," both Democrat and Republican.

And those taxpayer paid immigrant rights groups and lawyers that are also making their livelihoods on this issue, at the cost of all Americans, even the victims of the continued federal negligence and quite clearly treason in placing misconstrued "foreigners rights" above those of the naturalized and natural Americans.

PROGRESSIVELY.

Obamanation: BP Gets A Lecture, Americans Get The Shaft

Yesterday Barack Obama took to the air waves after almost six weeks in order to address the American people regarding the Deepwater Horizon explosion and incident which occurred off Louisiana's Gulf Coast, costing eleven American men their lives.

The "address" simply consisted of a verbal lecture and tongue lashing of British Petroleum, and announcement of an "escrow" account Mr. Obama has ordered be established in order to compensate any and all whose businesses were affected, of course rather than that global foreign based corporation having to face the American people and jurors of this disaster and having them make the decision, since the ramifications of this disaster will eventually impact ALL Americans in one way or another.

Seems that little escrow account is nothing more than a "get out of jail" free card for that British held corporation, and their executives. Wonder how this Constitutional lawyer can circumvent the Constitution and deny due process rights to some of those victims under a purported "escrow account," and wonder how much those victims will receive after the lawyers are done with the paperwork?

It appears PM Cameron is already "warning" BP about excessive claims. I wonder how many excessive barrels of oil have been transferred to those tankers in the Port of New Orleans, and have sailed off to Britain under cover of night in the six weeks now since this "cleanup" began? Several thousand barrels, maybe?

Since there hasn't been any solution to this problem and this spill is increasing (need more of those freebie barrels, apparently, for the British bankers, government and people's profit at the U.S.'s expense once again, just how do they plan to settle these claims, anyway? Just what is the timeline in how long this escrow fund is going to be in existence - simply until it is wiped out and the outrage and media attention dies down ala Katrina?

That 20 billion will be chump change after all those excess barrels are refined and redistributed throughout the world (and back to the U.S. at pure profit).

I mean, this is one of THE LARGEST global corporations in the world, counting all its various subsidiaries and formerly a "property" of the British royal family and government.

No mention was made of criminal manslaughter or negligence charges being filed against those executives, or any of the half dozen at least agencies who were asleep at the drill bit it seems.

No mention was made of rescinding this foreign based corporation's offshore leases and drilling rights to America's oil reserves, even after this was the second explosion and loss of American lives that can be directly attributed to BP - this one, and one in Texas several years ago.

No mention was made of even requiring that three times (treble) the amount of oil barrels under that lease which British Petroleum had been so illegally yet graciously granted by Congress and a former Administration be redirected to U.S. distributors rather than their British petrol gluttons, since it is clear that the U.S. Coast Guard and other agencies already have expended U.S. taxpayer dollars in assisting this global corporation with containment efforts.

I mean, that is the law for tort actions and damages, which at least in this area Britain and the U.S. common law agree, punitive damages are set at treble (three times) the damages.

And the Gulf coastline has been significantly damaged, at least for the next decade or two, even if that well was capped off tomorrow.

I'm sure there were also fines and penalties written into those leases, but I'm sure the penalties were a mere drop in the bucket compared to all the profit BP will now be making, and quite obviously gaining even more of America's precious oil reserves than was originally written into those leases, I'll bet.

I mean, no one is overseeing these containment efforts from the U.S. at this point, so whose to say that Britain isn't shucking off some of these barrels on their tankers in the Port of New Orleans in excess of their stated lease "nonrights" for a little extra profit?

But just how do you compensate eleven American men's families who were the ultimate victims of this disaster, at the hands of foreigners once again?

It appeared also that Mr. Obama attempted to use this disaster for his own "special interest" and that of primarily his political party - the Tories, whose members cross both mainstream American political parties.

After all, Mr. Obama AND John McCain received campaign contributions from British Petroleum, a British domiciled corporation according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Along with Mary Landrieu in addition.

I mean, just where in the Constitution does it afford our Senators or Congressmen to be sponsored by foreigners and foreign interests? Are they not supposed to be representing Americans, and not those foreigners - especially the Brits.

Just what was that Revolutionary War, or War of Independence actually about?

It doesn't appear a single one of those that are currently serving time in Congress has an inkling.

Is our educational system really that bad, or that corrupted?

Mr. Obama recently announced that there would be a new nuclear generator and reactor built in the State of Georgia, as part of his energy reform measures.

Let's just hope that BP or one of its subsidiaries doesn't get the lease rights to that reactor or that as so many others have been throughout the country, privatized after its construction and then placed under foreign ownership through that global exchange that those in Washington seem so hell bent on pumping up at the cost of both the livelihoods, and in greater and greater number, lives of the American people. Of course, with the Nuclear Regulatory Agency there then to simply pump up the stockholder dividends with those "emergency rate increases" and fines it inflicts as what has occurred with Palo Verde in Arizona - making nuclear energy more expensive, not less so, than the olden days of natural gas and those now marginalized other sources due to this massive global warming scam and "climate change."

A conundrum of terms in and of itself. The National Weather Service couldn't even predict the path of Gustav accurately before it hit landfall, but somehow these scientists can predict weather changes literally thousands of years from now?

What did P.T. Barnum say, and what was that expression that stated that the only thing that was "free" in this country any more was the air we breathe. But those global socialists have even found a way to propagandize and tax that for their corporate gain.

Oh, and Mr. Obama is meeting today for the first time with British Petroleum executives for a personal lecture, rather than a televised one.

Or simply another strategy meeting to further the U.S. branch of the Tory Party and its global British government cause.

Did I mention that all the homes that are being lost by the citizens of New Orleans post-Katrina due to increases particularly in insurance, are being bought up by the British - many of whom BP executives from Britain - and some for a song during this U.S. recession?

Mineral rights to the American oil reserves and Gulf oil, and prime real estate in a major U.S. port.

I wonder when the new Louisiana flag will be revealed?

The one with the Union Jack, instead of the pelican.

Rebalancing The Scales: The Constitutional Tax On Foreign Labor

With all the politicking over the immigration and border security issues, and the "rights" of migrant workers whether in this country legally or not (mostly not of those from Mexico progressively), what has been left out of the posturing and politicizing over this issue has been the Constitutional provisions with respect to foreign labor that the founders provided in order to protect American jobs and industry from undue foreign competition.

And that is simply codifying and reinstituting at both the state and federal levels the foreign labor tax that is already provided in that brilliantly crafted document.

Article I, Section 9 states in relevant part:

Section. 9.

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

This section, of course, gave Congress the power after the first generation of immigrants were gone, to prohibit and limit immigration and/or regulate it according to its impact on the existing populace, both natural and naturalized Americans, and also "tax" the states for any and all "outsourcing" which was done.

Of course, at that time the fee was simply $10.00 per head for imported labor, before this country's economy was enmeshed with that of the global economy, and before Congress in 1913 created the Federal Reserve without even the minimum of oversight taking the printing and regulation of our currency out from its direct control through the U.S. Treasury to a public/private entity which fundamentally is controlled by the European bankers and which has lead to where we as a nation are today progressively insfar as debt and involved in more and more nondefensive wars, in this writer's opinion.

Since Social Security and other related taxes are levied on American workers in order to provide for social services which may be needed now or in the future, why not reinstitute the tax on foreign labor requiring employer's to contribute, and withhold sums equal to Social Security, workmen's comp and the like for any and all foreign labor they hire in order to provide for their future needs if and when they do eventually naturalize (or if not, to provide for their "emergency" medical or costs to return to their home countries in the event of unemployment or disability during those periods in which they are employed here).

Reinstituting such provisions would also rebalance the scales making the hiring of domestic labor then competitive with those that are simply hiring those contract manual day laborers from Mexico, especially, primarily so that they can then escape paying their share of those costs and fees and who have progressively simply shifted the burden of their operating labor costs to the American people.

And, of course, those employers also in the construction, casino and travel industries primarily using those immigrants from poorer countries that simply want to undercut and depress the wages of those industries and shift those costs then onto the American public in the increases in the amounts that are and have been needed progressively for public welfare costs.

The solutions are there, but it appears the two mainstream political parties are not interested in true solutions, but using this issue for their corporate needs progressively, and in order to secure that cheap labor for the profits of their future campaign chests, or gain the ever growing "Latino" vote due to progressive federal negligence in carrying out their true functions.

Or else haven't a clue nor have read the document upon which they all swear their oath of office.

And then to truly stimulate the economy, remove the tax on domestic labor entirely as outside Constitutional intent and which has lead to the bankruptcies and homelessness that is the end result of taxing the "fruits of American labor" as the direct tax those founders warned against in so many of their writings, and just what that original war in order to break free from "foreign" control and excessive taxation of the British sovereign was all about.

Of course, then re-establishing the "legal" status of corporations as the property that they are, and not people in any manner whatsoever deserving of Bill of Rights protections per that bogus Supreme Court decision which was politically determined and not Constitutionally, and tax any corporate property at 10% or below the worth of their annual fixed assets - the common law provisions for "debt."

And nix the "free trade agreements" which have resulted in continued debt to foreign countries and our huge trade deficit also progressively. Taxes on iimports and exports to foreign countries were what were, after all, supposed to pay for the bulk of the costs of the federal government to begin with.

We are, after all, now worse off than those original founders were so long, long ago for this fundamental reason.

The British Rule of Law through the treason of those in high levels of government in the two party system that also was never intended, has returned PROGRESSIVELY and REGRESSIVELY.

O'Reilly & Company Continue The Spins On Arizona's "New" Illegal Immigrant Laws

Bill O'Reilly really, really needs a reality check regarding he and his "political commentators" remarks regarding Arizona's "new" illegal immigrant laws.

Tonight I briefly watched a segment where O'Reilly, the "no spin, spinner" again was addressing Arizona's "new" illegal immigrant law signed into law by Arizona's interim governor, Jan Brewer, this last legislative session.

On the program he had, of course, two different "political commentators" supposedly taking both sides of this issue, of course neither one of which was taking the Constitutional positions, nor Bill O'Reilly for that matter.

One of which pointed out that he had lived in Arizona "from 1997 to 1999" or thereabouts, so felt he was qualified to comment on the history of just what has occurred in that state to bring this matter to national attention.

The other, of course, was an illegal immigrant sympathizer again pushing for amnesty "since we have over 12 million illegals in this country," without, of course, pointing out that this would not be the case at all if the Reagan amnesty way back when had not created this situation to begin with, nor that the federal government through the U.S. Marshall's office has abdicated its responsibilities progressively in their duties in busing the illegals back which were picked up by the local Arizona law enforcement on stops as was done for decades, which kept those numbers down and those border hoppers at bay who are victimizing the Arizonans.

Nor was there then federal funding given to most of these lawyer led "immigrant rights" groups that have progressively also defended the rights of illegals, over those of the natural or naturalized citizenry due to an unconstitutional statute which was passed that granted these lawyer led groups their legal fees for civil rights matters, whether they were in defense or prosecution of American civil rights, or those of foreigners.

Bill, of course, reiterated that in the event this law is used by local law enforcement in any manner "racially profiling" those individuals picked up under this law, then they always have the recourse of suing.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 actually had to do with American Civil Rights, not foreigners, although this has been left out of the liberals posturing - whether O'Reilly's, or CNN's.

Since, of course, the Bill of Rights was originally meant to protect the American citizenry from both the government, corporate entities such as these groups, and foreigners.

Oh, the spins continue on both sides of the poltiical spectrum.

By both the American liberals, and those British Conservatives that are posturing ad nauseum on Fox.

I mean, as a 45 year former Arizona resident, I can tell you that there was always "national origin" profiling in Arizona pre-Reagan since Arizona does, after all, border a foreign country.

But political correctness and lawyer profit is the aim here, not the Constitution.

Since this segment appeared clearly aimed at a spin for the legal community that would make a jester proud.

I mean, just who does Bill think will pay for all those bogus lawsuits for the civil rights special interest "non-American" groups if not the Arizona citizenry, and really the American public since those sums for that "civil rights" statutes comes out of the federal coffers?

And if Bill is an example of our educators, America and Americans should be very, very worried since apparently he has no concept of just truly what has occurred, and just whose economy this "new" law was meant to insure.

This is a public/public partnership between the feds and the state at the cost of the Arizona citizenry, bottom line, since the solution is clear.

Fund the fence, and if the feds won't cough up the dough, they are in "breach of contract" and should be held accountable under both the Constitution, and the 2006 Secure Fence Act.

And then simplify the paperwork so that it isn't necessary to hire an immigration lawyer in this country to complete, and make the application fees not for profit so that those Mexicans that wish to immigrate can do so for less than it costs for those Coyotes to bring them across the border, and then abandon them to the desert.

And that's no spin from this former long term resident and victim.

Although what CAN you expect from a mainstream media organization that hires non-practicing lawyer/political commentators that haven't the slightest clue what they are talking about?

Other than continue the spins for their Bar affiliated brothers and sisters.

Or their American taxpayer funded special interest group - which in actuality means that the Arizona and American taxpayers are actually paying for their own abuse in a great many of these foreigner "civil rights" actions under an unlawful and illegal U.S. statute to begin with meant purely for lawyer, politician and special interest profit at the American public's ultimate expense.

Goldman Sachs Passion Play Misses The True Crime

While the entire even minimally politically aware citizenry of the United States is on overdrive due to the far-reaching events of this past week with respect to the war zone conditions that are more than apparent in the border states and particularly Arizona over the illegal immigration situation, with those on the East Coast per a Saturday Night Live News segment slamming the state, while being totally ignorant of what actually led to the actions taken by the state government to begin with, there has been more afoot on the Eastern Seaboard.

Such is the insulation in this country, and lack of a national identity at this point that those not directly affected by the porous southern borders and drug cartels doing business cross borders almost unimpeded for the past thirty years, have once again attempted to minimize the impact on those victims, rather than putting pressure on the federal government to actually do their jobs and get our southern borders secured FOR ALL.

This week, however, another drama is being played out in the media which also majorly impacted those living mostly in the West and Southwest and Sunbelt states (the states with the continuing foreclosures, which are increasing by the month) and that is the hearings being conducted over the Goldman Sachs securities fraud.

Little connection, however, or reporting has been forthcoming insofar as just who were the actual true victims in the Goldman Sachs fiasco.

And it was not primarily the investors of those CDOs which were pawned off on them by Goldman Sachs knowing full well that those collateralized loans were junk, and that one of their major clients was hedging their bets though derivatives in the process.

After all, Goldman Sachs is the Cadillac of investment houses and most of their clients are not neophytes but savy investors, or at least minimally aware of risk when making some of those investments.

I mean, these investors were playing the market, after all.

In fact, there are quite a number of Goldman Sachs investors who, I'm sure, invest for the tax writeoffs they receive for losses on some of those investments.

Although mere disclosures also of the risks for most of these investments is clearly inadequate for many, due to the legalese with which most prospectuses and other investment documents are written to begin with.

And selling your investors down the river for a favored investment client firm is not good business practice, nor is it legal in the sense the founders intended irrespective as to whether or not there are codified laws allowing mere disclosure as a protection for these huge Wall Street banking firms in order to mitigated their potential losses since Wall Street is pretty much left alone by the SEC and Congress more and more while the investment grades and risks are becoming greater and greater, for the average American individual investor, that is.

In fact, I would simply state that Goldman Sachs had a huge ethical problem, and conflict of interest actually, in order to win favor with one client at the cost of so many others and can not understand for the life of me just how that would not have been in violation of at least several SEC or United States Code provisions.

But the true victims actually are the American homeowners mostly in the West and Southwest who were sold most of those bad loans which Goldman Sachs has admitted full well knew were bad while they were unloading them.

People who were first time homebuyers, or who were forced into refinances in those states due to the rising costs of ownership during that very short boom cycle, many of whom also were owners of homes during a similar scenario involving Charles Keating in the 1980's - who was selling risky investments to elderly retirees in also the West and Southwest and who ended up losing their homes and everything they had when Lincoln Savings & Loan went bust.

Many of these risky and bad CDO's were also guaranteed by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

We all know what happened then since it is and has been the American people who are also bailing out those two entities, all for Goldman Sachs' investors, since the homeowners whose loans were involved and their interests are far down the list and in which at this point for many actually have no underlying debt, as it were, since they were resold.

AND the American people were billed for cash advanced literally in the millions directly to Goldman Sachs (a part owner of our own Federal Reserve actually, according to several reports), so actually it appears Goldman Sachs was using Congress to write themselves their own checks, while billing then those costs to the American public at large on their investors behalf.

And yet it is and was the American homeowners who are still being threatened by these banks and lenders in bed with thsoe Wall Street wheeler dealers and Washington, and few have been able to refinance under more favorable terms since Congress has yet to address the actual terms of those bogus contracts to begin with.

In fact, most of Congress and Obama's attentions have been in attempting to hawk refinances instead to get more and more Americans, it appears, into some of those bogus loans in order to use to pay back some of these investors, apparently.

Or for those "new" jobs created in the mortgage industry of now "mortgage counselors" to settle those debts with those investors by renegotiating the terms of those loans as the middle man with those homeowners, weighing the cost/benefit against foreclosing on the property and reselling it as to which would get those investors and those banks affiliated with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae more.

Many of those loans, of course, were sold through California lenders which were not even based on the U.S. currency, but on the British LIBOR rates.

In the banking industry, the connections between New York and Wall Street and California and those mortgage bankers is strong.

After this week's bust and play acting by the Senate with respect to any true financial sector/Wall Street reform, I'm wondering when those in Washington will get around to addressing the fallout to the true victims of this passion play.

The American people, and mostly those American homeowners in the West and Southwest which New York and its brash comedians maligned in a roundabout way once again last Saturday night.

Watch Washington give Goldman Sachs a lengthy tongue lashing, as what occurred today by selected Senators needing some face time with the media for the upcoming elections, and then purportedly levy a heavy fine.

While the true victims continue to lose their homes, jobs and even lives in the West and Southwest due to Washington's continued political maneuvering protecting the bankers and appeasing the foreigners while raping the citizenry.

Mr. Cantor: Financial Services Bill Misses The Regulatory Mark

According to the mainstream media (which is so reliable at this point as a news source, sort of like many of the purported "global" citizen journalism sites funded by government grants at the taxpayer's ultimate expense with their propaganda also), Eric Cantor, that "Republican" from Virginia, is in Chicago bad-mouthing the intent of Obama's weak-kneed aims to somewhat rein in the financial sector under a purported Financial Services Bill.

At this point, it does seem to this American sort of like attempting to close the barn doors after the horses have escaped, where so much federal negligence was involved which contributed to the loss of homes and jobs of the legal Americans, while all actions now of Congress have been to escalate, rather than reduce, the impact their negligence created with Washington's symbionic relationship with the global bankers and financial wheeler dealers on Wall Street.

Or at least those global socialists in the U.S. that believe it is America that is destined to remain and continue as the police force of the world, for Europe, Israel or a host of other nations whenever they receive any "terrorist" threat from an "unfriendly" nation in that country's definition, rather than as the protector of American lives, individual freedoms and domestic focused livelihoods.

Mr. Cantor's concerns, of course, as one of the Global Socialists also on the Hill now in power is that such a bill would tie the hands of those Wall Street financial services global conglomerates, forcing them to then go to China for their funding.

His concerns also are for the claimed "American" investors, rather than the global ones which it is apparent are his foremost concerns in most of his comments, and their then confidence in Wall Street, so again it is the financial sector's whose interests he is most concerned with and its viability under his nebulous concepts of capitalism, rather than Constitutional government.

Since, of course, China is hardly our primary benefactor but instead it is the world bankers who basically run the entire world's economy through their various governmental subsidiaries in all but about six nations of the world - the Fed and the U.S. included since the bogus Federal Reserve Act was "passed" in 1913 by a rogue president and Congress, along with the 16th and 17th amendments which were in essence, as with the recent Health Deform legislation, written and passed without even a quorum of Congress and "behind closed doors."

China is the U.S.'s greatest beneficiary, in fact, in the jobs that have been outsourced to that country also progressively under the Global Socialists and their bankers without any modicum of regulation or taxation for all that foreign bought labor at the American public's ultimate expense in propping up foreign economies once again at the cost of America's and Americans' own.

So it is once again the global investors that are the primary focus of the objections of the other branch of the Global Socialist Party, the Republicans, which is now getting media play.

Mr. Cantor, how about being concerned with the American citizens, you know those citizens now that are jobless and homeless due to Washington's progressively unconstitutional "hands off" attitudes with respect to foreigners and foreign investment in this country, which is undermining the entire fabric of this representative government that those founders created?

Such talk at this point by the Obama Administration does appear to be so much rhetoric, and definitely aimed at attempts to hold off the anticipated losses of those Global Socialst Democratic seats that are now on the line due to the continuing outrage of the American people with both the outsourcing and insourcing which has caused the American people loss of jobs in the literally millions at this point.

How about ripping those charters out from under those banks in the West and Southwest that the FBI is purportedly investigating, but at a snail's pace, of those lenders such as Indy Mac, Bank of America and Countrywide who were selling loans in this country to the American people during that short boom who were forced into refinances due to the escalating costs of ownership that were not even based on the U.S. currency, but on the British one?

How about mandating that any and all executive compensation packages and bonuses must be approved by the uninvolved stockholders and shareholders, especially for those companies whose expenditures for such sums have caused those major global corporations, some not even domiciled in the U.S. such as AIG, to be the recipients once again of the American people's largesse, who are progressively being bankrupted by Washington with such moves?

How about rescinding that former bogus Act of Congress of many years ago which also lead to this that also then attempted to preclude the state governments from actually doing their jobs, and regulating those banks and lenders engaging in intrastate commerce within their own state borders?

How about saving the taxpayer's some money for all those travel expenses that those in Washington also bill the American taxpayers for these road trips, and actually start doing your jobs?

Like maybe cutting the expenses also for the greatest expenditure now, the continuing War on Terrorism, while not seeing the true threat and looking the other way while Wall Street continues to sell shares on the global exchange of America's nuclear reactors and generators, and infrastructure compromising the safety of then the entire population of this country in the process in the guise of capitalism but which is nothing more than treason?

The next job stimulus in my opinion for all those new jobs created in the financial sector once again by the Bush/Obama Administration in the collection and foreclosure industry should mandate that these corporate collection vipers begin making some international calls, and calling in those markers for all that foreign aid which has been given progressively to Israel, France or any number of other nations to set up some repayment schedules for that debt, including the present costs with this continuation of this now clearly "Global War on Terror" for which is it merely Americans by and large risking their lives

I mean just where are those "matching sum" of troops from Israel, Great Britain and Franch in this escalating and ongoing nine year Global War primarily on their behalf at this point?

Hutaree Militia Group Christian?

Much has been published in the last few days on the mainstream media regarding the purportedly "Christian" military group, Hutaree, which was planning an anti-government attack on some Michigan police officers in order to facilitate a "revolution" in this country in the name of Christ.

As a Christian myself, I would hasten to disagree that this group is either Christian, nor acting in the name of Christ.

Christ was, after all, nonviolent with the exception of his attack on the moneylenders in the Jewish Temple who were desecrating the Temple grounds with their greed and avarice on holy days especially. His attack came this very week in the Christian calendar, and lead, of course, to his eventual cruxifiction.

He was attacking the unGodly principles of those within his own faith who were abusing the masses for their own profit most of all in overcharging on currency conversions for the required tithing sums toward support of the Temple and the Temple priests.

Roman coins had been deemed unacceptable by the Sanhedrin, and thus had to be converted to acceptable currency prior to making those donations from those whose other property sacrifices (such as crops or animal sacrifices) did not meet Jewish law in this respect during Passover.

It is also interesting that these arrests and this story came at a time, once again, when the general citizenry have become increasingly outraged with the goings on in Washington, particularly over the latest unconstitutional taxation on the masses, the Health Care Deform bill which was purportedly signed into law by Mr. Obama, along with other unrelated legislation which was included in that massive bill.

Most Americans are quite aware that fining the public for not purchasing one of the financial industries products, health care insurance, does smack of tyranny and also clearly a "taking" of the public's property without "due process" of law.

Since, of course, none of those now serving on the Hill were in any way duly elected, now that campaign contributions have been afforded them by their own legislation, and recent support of the Supreme Court "legalizing" funding outside their legislative districts - which is against the very fabric of a representative government as the founders created to begin with.

The market was speaking, and the costs of those policies and terms were not affordable or within the reach of many of the boomer generation especially due to the high profit margins those financial sector insurers require in order to feed their stockholders, and also their executives and lobbyists (and, of course, those unduly "elected" candidates).

Regulation was what was called for here of those global and national insurers of their products and rate increase models and structures, and some protection of those stockholders also in the compensation packages for those executives which also impacted their investment in some of those companies. And regulation of just what additional financial products or the degree of risks those insurers could spend those public monies and premiums on.

With Washington charged to regulate national and global commerce one of their delineated duties, not get into bed with them at the general citizenry's expense.

None of those Constitutional focuses were included, or any protection of the public over the costs and annual adjustments on those premiums and the impact which those insurers have over their very lives in fulfilling the terms of those policies when sick, ill or injured, merely a gesture in prohibiting refusals of coverage, but without even addressing the costs once again those higher risk individuals would be required to pay, or be fined by Washington for their disobedience with this "law."

And which practice is already prohibited by the laws of many of the several states to begin with, although many still afford those interstate and intrastate insurers to dictate waivers for much of the public for any and all "pre-existing conditions" which is defined as involving treatment within the five year period prior to application.

Affording outside "foreign" interests then to taint then the voices of their true constituency such as what occurred with this legislation, and giving then special interests, corporately or otherwise, domiciled or living outside legislative districts of those running for office an unequal voice in both the election process, and legislation now progressively.

Corporate personhood wasn't enough of an abridgement of the Constitution and Bill of Rights protections meant to protect the few (the citizens) from the masses (the corporate), what we have here is now a corporate takeover of America, and a global corporate takeover at that by even some non-U.S. domiciled corporations, such as AIG.

In other words, those that have the bucks (or claim corporate bankruptcy for campaign reinbursement expenses) are now calling the shots, as was apparent also from Mr. Obama's consultation with the "stakeholders" for this most recent travesty.

And why this group's site was a .com site if it was a politically focused organization and not a .org site is also beyond me. It appears the site was created in 2006, and then lapsed for a time, and was renewed once again then in 2009.

I have many questions about this purported planned "attack" also, since it does seem to me clearly that politically those in high places have a vested interest in publicizing for the masses stories such as these (although the charges actually can only be those of "intent" since no true "crime" was carried out or committed it would seem), since that bogus Homegrown Terrorist Act was passed by the House of Misrepresentatives back in 2006 (which has not, to my knowledge, even been passed by the Senate, and thus does not even have the force of law fundamentally to begin with).

Seems there could be some self-interest of the government going on here in highly publicizing these purported "crimes of intent" at this point, don't you think?

Now placing the local police and police forces on higher alert just perhaps may be the ultimate aim here, in facilitating a divisive citizenry for their own self-protection post this most recent legislation, or in order to once again justify some of the recent heinous legislation which continues to violate those "unalienable" rights those founders were attempting to protect from such violative acts as this past week once again.

And it would appear that those moneylenders of old, just may be recycling their selfish and unbiblical view of "the law" in reinstituting usury upon the masses in this country again for those bankers and moneylenders profits, which have no Godly precept to begin with.

The charging of usury is forbidden in all religions, however, the interpretation differs and therein lies the rub.

Christians and Muslims believe it is prohibited to charge urusy to anyone, whereas the Jewish faith believes it is a directive that onlhy applies to other Jews. Hence, that was why the Romans put the Jews in charge of moneylending to begin with within the Jewish subsociety, however, those charged with such duties and the Temple priests who were the beneficiaries turning a blind eye to what was occuring progressively in Biblical times as is happening today was what precipitated Christ's attack then on the Temple grounds.

The Jewish moneylenders were charging usury against other Jews against Mosaic law to his people.

And insofar as I have been able to research, those beliefs still remain which was why the British government way back when and the Church of England put the Jewish immigrants to that country in charge of lending and collection of taxes, transferring the Church's historic authority prior to the Middle Ages over moneylending once again back to the Jews.

And usury is any sum over the tithing rate of 10% with respect to banking and moneylending, or taxation.

It is the government and banks continuing in the practice of usury that is actually bankrupting now this country and its citizenry across the board. State and federal taxes now are over usury of most Americans tax home pay after deductions, and then on what they use their wages then on to buy with the state and federal taxes levied combined on purchases also in addition.

Americans are buying less, because they can't afford to buy since Big Daddy and their state governments have now become so greedy, and the bankers which are even holding those sums for future purchases with their fees and costs factored in just to have a bank account or use that little piece of plastic anymore.

Or to buy a home with all those up front junk fees and costs, and escalating terms - nothing more than usury again.

And the name for this group is more similar to "Hatari," that 1960's John Wayne movie, or "Atari" the video game company, than having any Aramaic or Christian basis, it appears.

I wonder if this is another job stimulus for the civil rights lawyers, in criminalizing intent now, since they are being represented by public defenders and a civil rights defense would be most likely the basis of the defense, and thus the state public defenders office eligible for federal monies for their local coffers for this case.

Call me a cynic, but much is rotten in Washington, that much is clear, and most of the state governments increasingly since that also unconstitutional 16th Amendment was passed changing the balance of power which made them more and more dependent on federal monies also due to their excesses, and increasing discretionary expenditures at the cost of funding those duties for which they truly are charged to provide under their state constitutions.

And Michigan is one of those states, thanks to Mr. Obama's layoff of a great many of those auto workers and plant closures, due to all the outsourcing which has also gone unrestrained of the U.S. industrial base, that has been impacted by these Obamanations and this Congress as with the Bush Administration, in its tax and spend philosophies this past year progressively.

There certainly seems to be a good many questions with respect to this incident that seems would bear further research of all Americans.