May 04, 2009
The Top Ten Reasons Obamanomics Won't Work
By Mikiel de Bary
A brute inflationary monetary policy of the kind we are experiencing today can hardly avoid leading to a growth in GDP that, after all, is largely a record of consumer spending. But we cannot judge an economic policy to be "working" simply by detecting such an increase in GDP. Nor may we say policy has "succeeded" just from increases in government jobs or government-subsidized jobs. An economy's success, properly speaking, is one that increases long-term levels of production with robust private sector employment. In short, inflation and public sector growth do not mean a policy has "worked." As the essence of Obamanomics is easy money and government aggrandizement, there are lots of reasons for pessimism. Here are ten of them
10. The Obama economic team really does not know how we got into this mess. For example, Christina Romer, chair of the Council of Economic Advisors, claims that the "fundamental cause" of the current economic downturn is the decline in asset prices from the levels reached in 2006 and 2007, i.e., from the peak of arguably the biggest and broadest asset bubble in history. In other words, she believes that the retreat from absurd valuations is giving us problems.
9. Obama himself follows the scapegoating line initiated by Bush. He blames both the general asset bubble and its collapse on insufficiently regulated companies, rather than on fiat money and central banking -- the sacred institutions of the failed macroeconomic establishment -- which financed every aspect of the Great Bubble.
8. Larry Summers and Ben Bernanke consider credit and liquidity to be the "lifeblood" of the economy. So they will supply untold quantities of it to somehow "restart" financial markets. They are unaware that economic freedom -- let's call it the "oxygen" of the economy -- makes possible credit, liquidity, and financial markets.
7. The Administration tries to meddle with private contracts -- see its attempts to pre-empt the bankruptcy courts and undercut the functions of mortgage foreclosure clauses. For a few cosmetic results, it chills confidence in all future investments.
6. The federal government burdens what is now left of free markets by raising its own spending and borrowing and, of course, by planning to increase taxes and regulation.
5. Government creates a new welfare system for union members when it preserves zombie auto companies in order to save "jobs." It creates a sham "financial system" when it bails out "systemically important" banks and insurance companies -- those that are too embarrassing to fail.
4. The Administration's efforts to manipulate prices upward (as in the markets for residences and "toxic" securities) are irrelevant, at best, and are more likely to delay a return to normal functioning in those markets.
3. President Obama apparently believes that increasing taxes on some of us and then redistributing the money to favored groups and promoters somehow "stimulates" the economy. Who besides macroeconomists (and their former students) believes this?
2. The Federal Reserve Board has transformed itself into an obedient appendage of the Executive Branch of government. Few seem aware that it is managing our monetary system more recklessly than ever in its history. The historic quattuordecupling of bank reserves in the last six months (that's a multiplication by 14) sets the stage for a doubling or more of the money supply. (The Fed has never before dared to promote annual money supply increases of more than around 10 percent.) When and if a bogus "recovery" does actually begin under these conditions, remnants of sanity will force the Administration to reverse its easy money policy. (Reluctantly, to be sure. Romer recently warned of the dangers of reversing too soon.) That reversal, of course, will bring on still another economic relapse. So, American entrepreneurs, are you feeling brave?
And the number one reason Obamanomics won't work:
1. You can't push off the costs to our descendants. Many Americans worry that their "children and grandchildren" will suffer the economic hardship of repaying the Bush-bama trillion dollar deficits. But they won't. (The little darlings will repudiate the debt one way -- monetary depreciation -- or the other. Explicit repudiation. They will, that is, if the present generation doesn't do it first.) The current follies of economic policy are not an extravagance for which we can charge someone else in the remote future. We are the ones who, passively allowing this conversion to a command economy, will experience the deprivations it supplies to all but the politically connected. The transition starts now, with the private sector mired in paralysis and Washington, D.C., beginning to flex its muscle in earnest.
Mikiel de Bary works in the financial services industry and is a freelance observer of macroeconomics in contemporary society.
Tuesday
I am going for a vacation
I'm heading out for awhile to recharge my mental batteries. For the next week or so I'll be somewhere in Jamaica, either on a beach or running the hills in a 4wd jeep. I'll post some pics when I return, but here are some pics from past trips to tide you over.
Mr & Mrs GunRights4US
Mr & Mrs GunRights4US
Monday
Head over to Sipsey St...
for one of the most moving things you'll ever read. We can all do well to be reminded of the stench of tyranny...regardless of what flag it's wrapped in.
It must be nice to have a "friendly press"
The things you don’t read about Barack Obama
Will Rogers famously pleaded that all he knew was what he read in the papers. If all a person knew of Barack Obama’s first 100 days as president was what they read of them in this newspaper, it would seem to be a very charmed young presidency.
The Chronicle Herald recently made space for an urgent Associated Press dispatch from Washington informing readers the Obamas had chosen a Portuguese water dog. Not original reporting, of course, but an AP rephrasing of a White House-arranged scoop in the Washington Post online.
That was followed by a crack Canadian Press report, drawn from such gumshoe news-gathering as reading the Huffington Post, on the "hillbilly" Republican governor of Alaska: her "family and political theatrics that would do Jerry Springer proud," like "the arrest and indictment of her sister-in-law on break-and-enter charges" and "the sordid revelations of her daughter’s ex-boyfriend."
The Portuguese water dog and Alaskan "hillbillies" news beats apparently leave little time for anything remotely skeptical of the president of the United States. And they wonder why folks aren’t buying the papers like they used to.
So here is a small selection of news on the most powerful man on Earth which has been deemed unfit to print:
•Obama’s first two major bills alone, the "stimulus" and "omnibus," cost nearly twice as much as was spent on Iraq over six years – $1.2 trillion vs. $650 billion.
•Obama abandoned his campaign promise of "a net spending cut," his first annual deficit – not counting bailouts – being three times the worst deficit under President George W. Bush.
•Obama’s objective in his first G20 summit – commitments to spend our way to prosperity with massive stimulus boondoggles across the G20 – was rejected out of hand.
•Obama’s objective in his first NATO summit – commitments to combat troops for Afghanistan from "our European allies," which Obama and his party imagined were ready and willing to fight if only someone "enlightened" like him were running things – was predictably refused, with some more European non-combat contingents offered as a token.
•Obama’s Defence Department announced cuts of $1.4 billion to missile defence, the day after North Korea test-fired its long-range, multi-stage ballistic missile.
•Obama’s economics were criticized by Warren Buffet, whose endorsement had been candidate Obama’s highest economic credential.
•Obama reversed the free trade Bush policy that had allowed about 100 Mexican tractor-trailers into the United States, which the Mexican government immediately used as an excuse to levy tariffs on 90 American goods amounting to $2.4 billion in U.S. exports.
•Obama’s "tax cuts for 95 per cent" turned out to mean $13 a week from June to December, to be clawed back to $8 a week in January – as compared with President Bush’s 2008 tax rebates of $600 to $1,200 plus $300 per child, which were notably scoffed at during the election campaign by Michelle Obama.
•Obama’s campaign promise of a $3,000-per-employee tax credit for businesses that hired new workers – repeated ad nauseam for weeks before the election – was discreetly retired even before inauguration day.
•Obama abandoned his campaign promise that "lobbyists won’t work in my White House," waiving his no-lobbyist executive order or conveniently re-
defining his appointees’ past lobbying work to allow 30 lobbyists into his administration.
•Obama abandoned his campaign promise to reform earmarks, signing the omnibus bill which contained 8,816 of them.
•Obama took more money from AIG than any other politician in 2008 – over $100,000 – and signed into law the provision guaranteeing the AIG bonuses which later had him in front of the cameras "shaking with outrage" and siccing the pitchfork crowd on law-abiding citizens who had fulfilled their end of a contract and had their payment upheld by Obama’s own legislation.
Why should these points, and many more like them, have to be made by some obscure contributor to The Chronicle Herald’s opinion pages?
Fox News Channel is the butt of jokes and the target of attacks like no other media outlet in the English-speaking world, not least by people who fancy themselves the guardians of a free press.
But Fox News is today the lone television news service in the English-speaking world capable of serious skepticism and scrutiny of the sitting president and the Congress of the United States.
Fox News is also the second most-watched channel in all American cable television. It long ago became by far the most-watched cable news channel; more Americans watched Fox News than CNN and MSNBC combined in every time slot from 6 a.m. to midnight in April. Now, while The New York Times is $1.3 billion in debt, Fox has expanded its operations with a business channel and a juggernaut Internet presence.
There’s a lesson there, though Fox News will be just as well pleased if the impeccably "mainstream" news business remains clueless about it.
The people need a Fourth Estate, not yet another adulator of Barack Obama, yet another smearer of Sarah Palin, yet another patrician editor to keep out anything disagreeable to progressive sensibilities, yet another laptop-and-latte journalism-schooler to spit on everything pre-dating 1968. And they wonder why the news business has come on hard times.
Andrew W. Smith, from Cape Sable Island, N.S., writes and resides in Tulsa, Okla.
Will Rogers famously pleaded that all he knew was what he read in the papers. If all a person knew of Barack Obama’s first 100 days as president was what they read of them in this newspaper, it would seem to be a very charmed young presidency.
The Chronicle Herald recently made space for an urgent Associated Press dispatch from Washington informing readers the Obamas had chosen a Portuguese water dog. Not original reporting, of course, but an AP rephrasing of a White House-arranged scoop in the Washington Post online.
That was followed by a crack Canadian Press report, drawn from such gumshoe news-gathering as reading the Huffington Post, on the "hillbilly" Republican governor of Alaska: her "family and political theatrics that would do Jerry Springer proud," like "the arrest and indictment of her sister-in-law on break-and-enter charges" and "the sordid revelations of her daughter’s ex-boyfriend."
The Portuguese water dog and Alaskan "hillbillies" news beats apparently leave little time for anything remotely skeptical of the president of the United States. And they wonder why folks aren’t buying the papers like they used to.
So here is a small selection of news on the most powerful man on Earth which has been deemed unfit to print:
•Obama’s first two major bills alone, the "stimulus" and "omnibus," cost nearly twice as much as was spent on Iraq over six years – $1.2 trillion vs. $650 billion.
•Obama abandoned his campaign promise of "a net spending cut," his first annual deficit – not counting bailouts – being three times the worst deficit under President George W. Bush.
•Obama’s objective in his first G20 summit – commitments to spend our way to prosperity with massive stimulus boondoggles across the G20 – was rejected out of hand.
•Obama’s objective in his first NATO summit – commitments to combat troops for Afghanistan from "our European allies," which Obama and his party imagined were ready and willing to fight if only someone "enlightened" like him were running things – was predictably refused, with some more European non-combat contingents offered as a token.
•Obama’s Defence Department announced cuts of $1.4 billion to missile defence, the day after North Korea test-fired its long-range, multi-stage ballistic missile.
•Obama’s economics were criticized by Warren Buffet, whose endorsement had been candidate Obama’s highest economic credential.
•Obama reversed the free trade Bush policy that had allowed about 100 Mexican tractor-trailers into the United States, which the Mexican government immediately used as an excuse to levy tariffs on 90 American goods amounting to $2.4 billion in U.S. exports.
•Obama’s "tax cuts for 95 per cent" turned out to mean $13 a week from June to December, to be clawed back to $8 a week in January – as compared with President Bush’s 2008 tax rebates of $600 to $1,200 plus $300 per child, which were notably scoffed at during the election campaign by Michelle Obama.
•Obama’s campaign promise of a $3,000-per-employee tax credit for businesses that hired new workers – repeated ad nauseam for weeks before the election – was discreetly retired even before inauguration day.
•Obama abandoned his campaign promise that "lobbyists won’t work in my White House," waiving his no-lobbyist executive order or conveniently re-
defining his appointees’ past lobbying work to allow 30 lobbyists into his administration.
•Obama abandoned his campaign promise to reform earmarks, signing the omnibus bill which contained 8,816 of them.
•Obama took more money from AIG than any other politician in 2008 – over $100,000 – and signed into law the provision guaranteeing the AIG bonuses which later had him in front of the cameras "shaking with outrage" and siccing the pitchfork crowd on law-abiding citizens who had fulfilled their end of a contract and had their payment upheld by Obama’s own legislation.
Why should these points, and many more like them, have to be made by some obscure contributor to The Chronicle Herald’s opinion pages?
Fox News Channel is the butt of jokes and the target of attacks like no other media outlet in the English-speaking world, not least by people who fancy themselves the guardians of a free press.
But Fox News is today the lone television news service in the English-speaking world capable of serious skepticism and scrutiny of the sitting president and the Congress of the United States.
Fox News is also the second most-watched channel in all American cable television. It long ago became by far the most-watched cable news channel; more Americans watched Fox News than CNN and MSNBC combined in every time slot from 6 a.m. to midnight in April. Now, while The New York Times is $1.3 billion in debt, Fox has expanded its operations with a business channel and a juggernaut Internet presence.
There’s a lesson there, though Fox News will be just as well pleased if the impeccably "mainstream" news business remains clueless about it.
The people need a Fourth Estate, not yet another adulator of Barack Obama, yet another smearer of Sarah Palin, yet another patrician editor to keep out anything disagreeable to progressive sensibilities, yet another laptop-and-latte journalism-schooler to spit on everything pre-dating 1968. And they wonder why the news business has come on hard times.
Andrew W. Smith, from Cape Sable Island, N.S., writes and resides in Tulsa, Okla.
Regarding investing in these tumultuous times
“In the absence of a gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation.
Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the hidden confiscation of wealth.
Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights.
If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists’ antagonism toward the gold standard”
Alan Greenspan 1968
Read this article - if you dare!
Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the hidden confiscation of wealth.
Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights.
If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists’ antagonism toward the gold standard”
Alan Greenspan 1968
Read this article - if you dare!
Saturday
When this guy speaks, regardless of the topic, I listen
Thomas Sowell: Health care myths
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Before you do anything else, make a note to read "The Top Ten Myths of American Health Care" by Sally C. Pipes. It might literally save your life by slowing the political stampede toward a government-controlled medical profession -- usually presented politically as "universal health care."
It is one of the painful signs of our times that millions of people are so easily swayed by rhetoric that they show virtually no interest at all in finding out the hard facts. Any number of other countries already have government-controlled medical professions. Yet few Americans show any interest in what actually happens to medical care in those countries.
Instead, we are being lured into a one-way process -- much like entering a Venus fly trap -- by the oldest of all confidence rackets, the promise of something for nothing.
Fortunately, Sally Pipes is one of the few who has explored the reality of government-controlled medical treatment in Canada and other countries. Among the things she discovered is that new life-saving medications that go immediately into the market in the United States take a much longer time to become available to Canadian patients -- if they ever get approved by the bureaucrats.
No doubt that lowers the cost of medications -- if you count costs solely in money terms, rather than in terms of how many people literally pay with their lives when the bureaucrats are reluctant to buy new pharmaceutical drugs.
Cancer survival rates are higher in the United States than in Europe. A recent report by the Fraser Institute in Vancouver estimates that annually tens of thousands of Canadians seek medical treatment outside of Canada, even though treatment is free inside Canada and they have to pay themselves for treatment elsewhere.
Other studies show that waiting times for surgery are months longer in Canada, Britain and Australia -- all countries with government-controlled medical care -- than in the United States.
Among the many issues explained in plain English in "The Top Ten Myths of American Health Care" are why pharmaceutical drugs cost so much, why it is misleading to talk about uninsured Americans as if they do not get medical care, and how politicians make existing insurance more expensive by blithely mandating coverage that people would not voluntarily pay for with their own money, if it was left up to them.
In various states, these mandated coverages include alcoholism, acupuncture, breast reduction and treatment for baldness, among other things. You may just want insurance to cover you in case you get hit with some big-time medical problem, but many state laws will not allow an insurance company to sell you "major medical" coverage without all the add-ons that politicians and special interests have come up with.
The net result is more expensive insurance, which in turn can mean more people being uninsured.
As with so many government programs, "the poor" are used as a political justification for imposing government-controlled medical care on everyone. But "The Top Ten Myths of American Medical Care" shows what a fraud that is. First of all, the average uninsured American has above-average income -- and people living in poverty are already eligible for Medicaid.
There are of course some serious problems with Medicaid, as there is with government medical treatment at Veterans Administration hospitals and with Medicare. But such things only highlight the dangers of having the government take over the rest of the medical sector, given its dangerous failures where it is already involved in medical matters.
The lure of something for nothing may be seductive when you are in good health. But it can become a bitter irony when you are waiting months for surgery to relieve your pain or when your life hangs in the balance while some bureaucrat decides whether you can get the best medication or something older and cheaper.
"The Top Ten Myths About American Medical Care" can literally be a lifesaver. What it reveals is unlikely to be told by the mainstream media or by other enthusiasts for the magic phrase "universal health care."
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. His Web site is http://www.tsowell.com/.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Before you do anything else, make a note to read "The Top Ten Myths of American Health Care" by Sally C. Pipes. It might literally save your life by slowing the political stampede toward a government-controlled medical profession -- usually presented politically as "universal health care."
It is one of the painful signs of our times that millions of people are so easily swayed by rhetoric that they show virtually no interest at all in finding out the hard facts. Any number of other countries already have government-controlled medical professions. Yet few Americans show any interest in what actually happens to medical care in those countries.
Instead, we are being lured into a one-way process -- much like entering a Venus fly trap -- by the oldest of all confidence rackets, the promise of something for nothing.
Fortunately, Sally Pipes is one of the few who has explored the reality of government-controlled medical treatment in Canada and other countries. Among the things she discovered is that new life-saving medications that go immediately into the market in the United States take a much longer time to become available to Canadian patients -- if they ever get approved by the bureaucrats.
No doubt that lowers the cost of medications -- if you count costs solely in money terms, rather than in terms of how many people literally pay with their lives when the bureaucrats are reluctant to buy new pharmaceutical drugs.
Cancer survival rates are higher in the United States than in Europe. A recent report by the Fraser Institute in Vancouver estimates that annually tens of thousands of Canadians seek medical treatment outside of Canada, even though treatment is free inside Canada and they have to pay themselves for treatment elsewhere.
Other studies show that waiting times for surgery are months longer in Canada, Britain and Australia -- all countries with government-controlled medical care -- than in the United States.
Among the many issues explained in plain English in "The Top Ten Myths of American Health Care" are why pharmaceutical drugs cost so much, why it is misleading to talk about uninsured Americans as if they do not get medical care, and how politicians make existing insurance more expensive by blithely mandating coverage that people would not voluntarily pay for with their own money, if it was left up to them.
In various states, these mandated coverages include alcoholism, acupuncture, breast reduction and treatment for baldness, among other things. You may just want insurance to cover you in case you get hit with some big-time medical problem, but many state laws will not allow an insurance company to sell you "major medical" coverage without all the add-ons that politicians and special interests have come up with.
The net result is more expensive insurance, which in turn can mean more people being uninsured.
As with so many government programs, "the poor" are used as a political justification for imposing government-controlled medical care on everyone. But "The Top Ten Myths of American Medical Care" shows what a fraud that is. First of all, the average uninsured American has above-average income -- and people living in poverty are already eligible for Medicaid.
There are of course some serious problems with Medicaid, as there is with government medical treatment at Veterans Administration hospitals and with Medicare. But such things only highlight the dangers of having the government take over the rest of the medical sector, given its dangerous failures where it is already involved in medical matters.
The lure of something for nothing may be seductive when you are in good health. But it can become a bitter irony when you are waiting months for surgery to relieve your pain or when your life hangs in the balance while some bureaucrat decides whether you can get the best medication or something older and cheaper.
"The Top Ten Myths About American Medical Care" can literally be a lifesaver. What it reveals is unlikely to be told by the mainstream media or by other enthusiasts for the magic phrase "universal health care."
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. His Web site is http://www.tsowell.com/.
A really good discussion of HF radio
The Hermit has a good post regarding high frequency radios for use during TEOTWAWKI. Be sure to look around while you're over there. He's got a great site with loads of useful tips on prepping.
Plus, he's a Marine and a hellofa nice guy!
Plus, he's a Marine and a hellofa nice guy!
Friday
Who they are...and what they believe
They are the Congressional Progressive Caucus. Here's a list of members from their own webpage:
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)
Vice Chairs
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)
Senate Members
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)
House Members
Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)
Well why is this so important GunRights4US?
Because most of these sitting congressmen and senators are ALSO members of the Democratic Socialists of America.
Now take a look here at what the DSA is all about by reading this and this. Be sure to just skim thru here and look where they want to take this country.
These people want to control your life from cradle to grave, because THEY know better than YOU do, what's good for you!
Caucus Member List (it includes most of the "usual suspects")
Friday February 20, 2009 Co-ChairsHon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)
Vice Chairs
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)
Senate Members
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)
House Members
Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)
Well why is this so important GunRights4US?
Because most of these sitting congressmen and senators are ALSO members of the Democratic Socialists of America.
Now take a look here at what the DSA is all about by reading this and this. Be sure to just skim thru here and look where they want to take this country.
These people want to control your life from cradle to grave, because THEY know better than YOU do, what's good for you!
Don't ask me no questions...I'll STILL tell you some lies!
Souter retiring from high court; Obama mum
By MARK SHERMAN and JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writers Mark Sherman And Jennifer Loven, Associated Press Writers – 1 hr 1 min ago
WASHINGTON – The news that Justice David Souter is planning to retire set off spirited speculation about a successor Friday, but the man who will appoint the new justice was staying out of it. "No Supreme Court questions," President Barack Obama told reporters.
At the end of a Cabinet meeting about swine flu, reporters tried to shout questions about Souter, bringing Obama's four-word rejection.
===================================
GR4U - I can just imagine for a moment if Bush took such an approach. Don't you just love it that we're practically being told to sit down...shut up...and hang on?
By MARK SHERMAN and JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writers Mark Sherman And Jennifer Loven, Associated Press Writers – 1 hr 1 min ago
WASHINGTON – The news that Justice David Souter is planning to retire set off spirited speculation about a successor Friday, but the man who will appoint the new justice was staying out of it. "No Supreme Court questions," President Barack Obama told reporters.
At the end of a Cabinet meeting about swine flu, reporters tried to shout questions about Souter, bringing Obama's four-word rejection.
===================================
GR4U - I can just imagine for a moment if Bush took such an approach. Don't you just love it that we're practically being told to sit down...shut up...and hang on?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/t24_au_en_usoz_2.gif)
