One of my students, Jason (who happens to be George Herman "Babe" Ruth's grand nephew), gave me an interesting 1993 article by Vernor Vinge entitled "The Coming Technological Singularity". Vinge believes with Ray Kurzweil and others that computer technology will become self-aware and will supplant human intelligence, so that all heck will break loose. They call this the singularity. Vinge writes:
"...we are on the edge of change comparable to the rise of human life on Earth. The precise cause of this change is the imminent creation by technology of entities with greater than human intelligence...The development of computers that are 'awake' and superhumanly intelligent...Large computer networks may 'wake up'...Computer/human interface may become so intimate that users may reasonably be considered superhumanly intelligent..."
Vinge calls this occurrence "the singularity" because "a new reality rules". The outcome of this singularity would be the transcendence of the human race by a new conscious entity, what I may call computerkind, that would view humankind as a lower order life form.
This is very theoretical. I do not believe it will happen. I am skeptical of Vinge's assumption (that is characteristic of this literature, including Ray Kurzweil) to assume that intelligence is pure rationality. Vinge is a mathematician and so overrates that kind of intelligence. Rather, I would argue that intelligence is adaptation to environment, and mathematics is a reflection of adaptive evolution, important but incapable of independent existence. Pure rationality is not capable of grasping real world problems because parameters change too frequently and therefore assumptions about the world are anemic. Information specific to time and place is far more important to creative processes than deductive logic. That is why most mathematicians are poor.
Here's a test: If this signularity doesn't occur by 2030 (which Vinge predicts) will Vinge (a) push the year to 2050 or (b) admit that he was mistaken? If (a), might his ideas be more theoretical real world?
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Is this Why There's $37 Oil?
My neighbor, Clayton, has forwarded this email about the discovery of 3 to 4.3 billion of barrels of oil in North Dakota, 25 times a 1999 estimate. Note that the USGS says 3 to 4.3 billion barrels but the e-mail says 500 billion barrels. If someone called me an oil man, I would have to disagree, but 3 billion is a long way from 500 billion. The e-mail goes on to cite the Stansberry report that claims a 2 trillion barrel discovery in the Rocky Mountains:
"Hidden 1,000 feet beneath the surface of the Rocky Mountains lies the largest untapped oil reserve in the world — more than 2 TRILLION barrels. On August 8, 2005 President Bush mandated its extraction. Three companies have been chosen to lead the way. Test drilling has already begun..."
This claim is based on the region's deposits of large amounts of oil shale, the extraction of which is still experimental. Stansberry states:
"Companies are coming up with ways to extract oil from the Green River Formation very cheaply."
However, the run-up in oil prices to $147/barrel occurred after this was known. Therefore, the markets don't seem to be taking it seriously. Or are they?
According to the USGS:
"The Bakken Formation estimate is larger than all other current USGS oil assessments of the lower 48 states and is the largest "continuous" oil accumulation ever assessed by the USGS. A "continuous" oil accumulation means that the oil resource is dispersed throughout a geologic formation rather than existing as discrete, localized occurrences. The next largest "continuous" oil accumulation in the U.S. is in the Austin Chalk of Texas and Louisiana, with an undiscovered estimate of 1.0 billions of barrels of technically recoverable oil."
Clayton's e-mail suggests that the Democrats have been blocking recovery of the shale oil, forcing up gasoline prices.
THINK ABOUT THIS THE NEXT TIME YOU FILL UP AT THE GAS STATION.
>You don't & won't see this on any of your nightly news casts. This IS news! Why do you think they won't report it?
>http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911
>The U.S. Geological Service issued a report in April ('08) that only scientists and oilmen knew was coming, but man was it big. It was a revised report (hadn't been updated since '95) on how much oil was in this area of the western 2/3 of North Dakota; western South Dakota; and extreme eastern Montana ... check THIS out:
>The Bakken is the largest domestic oil discovery since Alaska's Prudhoe Bay, and has the potential to eliminate all America an dependence on foreign oil. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates it at 503 billion barrels. Even if just 10% of the oil is recoverable... at only $50 a barrel, we're looking at a resource base worth more than $2.5 trillion. Gasoline would be less than $2.00 a gallon for the rest of yur life.
>'When I first briefed legislators on this, you could practically see their jaws hit the floor. They had no idea.' says Terry Johnson, the Montana Legislature's financial analyst.
>'This sizable find is now the highest-producing onshore oil field found in the past 56 years,' reports The Pittsburgh Post Gazette. It's a formation known as the Williston Basin, but is more commonly referred to as the 'Bakken.' And it stretches from Northern Montana, through North Dakota and into Canada. For years, U.S.oil exploration has been considered a dead end. Even the 'Big Oil' companies gave up searching for major oil wells decades ago. However, a recent technological breakthrough has opened up the Bakken's massive reserves... and we now have access of
up to 500 billion barrels. And because this is light, sweet oil, those billions of barrels will cost Americans just $16 PER BARREL!
That's enough crude to fully fuel the American economy for 41 years straight.
2. And if THAT didn't throw you on the floor, then this next one should because it's from TWO YEARS AGO, people!
U.S.Oil Discovery- Largest Reserve in the World! Stansberry Report Online - 4/20/2006Hidden 1,000 feet beneath the surface of the Rocky Mountains lies the largest untapped oil reserve in the world is more than 2 TRILLION barrels. On August 8, 2005President Bush mandated its extraction.
They reported this stunning news: We have more oil inside our borders, than all the other proven reserves on earth. Here are the official estimates:
-8-times as much oil as Saudi Arabia
-18-times as much oil a s Iraq
-21-times as much oil as Kuwait
-22-times as much oil as Iran
-500-times as much oil as Yemen - and it's all right here in the Western United States.
HOW can this BE? HOW can we NOT BE extracting this!? Because thedemocrats, environmentalists and left wing republicans have blocked all efforts to help America become independent of foreign oil.
James Bartis, lead researcher with the study says we've got more oil in this very compact area than the entire Middle East -more than 2 TRILLION barrels. Untapped. That's more than all the proven oil reserves of crude oil in the world today, reports The Denver Post.
Don't think 'OPEC' will drop its price - even with this find? Think again! It's all about the competitive marketplace, - it has to.
Got your attention/ire up yet? Hope so! Now, while you're thinking about it ... and hopefully P.O'd, do this:
Pass this along.. If you don't take a little time to do this, then you should stifle yourself the next time you want to complain about gas prices .. because by doing NOTHING, you've forfeited your right to complain.
And, which politicians were saying "...drilling for oil in the U.S. would just be a waste of time... "and "...why don't the oil companies start drilling on the land they already have under lease options..??"
Now I just wonder what would happen in this country if every one sent this to every one in your address book.
"Hidden 1,000 feet beneath the surface of the Rocky Mountains lies the largest untapped oil reserve in the world — more than 2 TRILLION barrels. On August 8, 2005 President Bush mandated its extraction. Three companies have been chosen to lead the way. Test drilling has already begun..."
This claim is based on the region's deposits of large amounts of oil shale, the extraction of which is still experimental. Stansberry states:
"Companies are coming up with ways to extract oil from the Green River Formation very cheaply."
However, the run-up in oil prices to $147/barrel occurred after this was known. Therefore, the markets don't seem to be taking it seriously. Or are they?
According to the USGS:
"The Bakken Formation estimate is larger than all other current USGS oil assessments of the lower 48 states and is the largest "continuous" oil accumulation ever assessed by the USGS. A "continuous" oil accumulation means that the oil resource is dispersed throughout a geologic formation rather than existing as discrete, localized occurrences. The next largest "continuous" oil accumulation in the U.S. is in the Austin Chalk of Texas and Louisiana, with an undiscovered estimate of 1.0 billions of barrels of technically recoverable oil."
Clayton's e-mail suggests that the Democrats have been blocking recovery of the shale oil, forcing up gasoline prices.
THINK ABOUT THIS THE NEXT TIME YOU FILL UP AT THE GAS STATION.
>You don't & won't see this on any of your nightly news casts. This IS news! Why do you think they won't report it?
>http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911
>The U.S. Geological Service issued a report in April ('08) that only scientists and oilmen knew was coming, but man was it big. It was a revised report (hadn't been updated since '95) on how much oil was in this area of the western 2/3 of North Dakota; western South Dakota; and extreme eastern Montana ... check THIS out:
>The Bakken is the largest domestic oil discovery since Alaska's Prudhoe Bay, and has the potential to eliminate all America an dependence on foreign oil. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates it at 503 billion barrels. Even if just 10% of the oil is recoverable... at only $50 a barrel, we're looking at a resource base worth more than $2.5 trillion. Gasoline would be less than $2.00 a gallon for the rest of yur life.
>'When I first briefed legislators on this, you could practically see their jaws hit the floor. They had no idea.' says Terry Johnson, the Montana Legislature's financial analyst.
>'This sizable find is now the highest-producing onshore oil field found in the past 56 years,' reports The Pittsburgh Post Gazette. It's a formation known as the Williston Basin, but is more commonly referred to as the 'Bakken.' And it stretches from Northern Montana, through North Dakota and into Canada. For years, U.S.oil exploration has been considered a dead end. Even the 'Big Oil' companies gave up searching for major oil wells decades ago. However, a recent technological breakthrough has opened up the Bakken's massive reserves... and we now have access of
up to 500 billion barrels. And because this is light, sweet oil, those billions of barrels will cost Americans just $16 PER BARREL!
That's enough crude to fully fuel the American economy for 41 years straight.
2. And if THAT didn't throw you on the floor, then this next one should because it's from TWO YEARS AGO, people!
U.S.Oil Discovery- Largest Reserve in the World! Stansberry Report Online - 4/20/2006Hidden 1,000 feet beneath the surface of the Rocky Mountains lies the largest untapped oil reserve in the world is more than 2 TRILLION barrels. On August 8, 2005President Bush mandated its extraction.
They reported this stunning news: We have more oil inside our borders, than all the other proven reserves on earth. Here are the official estimates:
-8-times as much oil as Saudi Arabia
-18-times as much oil a s Iraq
-21-times as much oil as Kuwait
-22-times as much oil as Iran
-500-times as much oil as Yemen - and it's all right here in the Western United States.
HOW can this BE? HOW can we NOT BE extracting this!? Because thedemocrats, environmentalists and left wing republicans have blocked all efforts to help America become independent of foreign oil.
James Bartis, lead researcher with the study says we've got more oil in this very compact area than the entire Middle East -more than 2 TRILLION barrels. Untapped. That's more than all the proven oil reserves of crude oil in the world today, reports The Denver Post.
Don't think 'OPEC' will drop its price - even with this find? Think again! It's all about the competitive marketplace, - it has to.
Got your attention/ire up yet? Hope so! Now, while you're thinking about it ... and hopefully P.O'd, do this:
Pass this along.. If you don't take a little time to do this, then you should stifle yourself the next time you want to complain about gas prices .. because by doing NOTHING, you've forfeited your right to complain.
And, which politicians were saying "...drilling for oil in the U.S. would just be a waste of time... "and "...why don't the oil companies start drilling on the land they already have under lease options..??"
Now I just wonder what would happen in this country if every one sent this to every one in your address book.
Peter Paul and the Langbert Modus Ponens
Contrairimairi sent me this video about Hillary Clinton's connection to Marvel comic book writer Stan Lee and entrepreneur Peter Paul. Paul had recruited Bill Clinton to raise capital for his start-up comic book company that employed Marvel's legendary Stan Lee.
Peter Paul says that "my interest in supporting Hillary Clinton was specifically to hire Bill Clinton" to help him raise money for his start up. But Peter Paul had a felony record. Upon learning of Paul's felony conviction, the Clinton's washed their hands of him and denied that they knew him. Peter Paul's representative claims that the Clintons aimed to steal Peter Paul's Japanese business partner. The Paul company collapsed as a result, and the Clintons then attempted to start an identical company sans Paul. Paul's representatives claim that the Clintons took $2 million from Paul and then denied that they took the money from him, the largest election fraud in American history. In turn, states Paul, Interpol imprisoned him in a dangerous Brazilian prison, claiming SEC violations. Paul claims that the Clintons then threw out Paul's civil suit on the basis that he was a fugitive. David Rosen, Hillary Clinton's chief fundraiser, was arrested as part of the case. A Clinton-appointed judge instructed the jury not to tie in the Clintons to Paul's case. If true, this is corruption at the highest level, calling into question the integrity of the American judicial system. Paul claims that what he calls "the media" (what a laugh) have abrogated their responsibilities with respect to the Clintons in this case, and more generally with respect to political reporting.
Please recall the Langbert modus:
If a nation lacks a fair and competent media, it cannot function as a republic.
America lacks a fair and competent media.
Therefore, America is no longer a republic.
Peter Paul says that "my interest in supporting Hillary Clinton was specifically to hire Bill Clinton" to help him raise money for his start up. But Peter Paul had a felony record. Upon learning of Paul's felony conviction, the Clinton's washed their hands of him and denied that they knew him. Peter Paul's representative claims that the Clintons aimed to steal Peter Paul's Japanese business partner. The Paul company collapsed as a result, and the Clintons then attempted to start an identical company sans Paul. Paul's representatives claim that the Clintons took $2 million from Paul and then denied that they took the money from him, the largest election fraud in American history. In turn, states Paul, Interpol imprisoned him in a dangerous Brazilian prison, claiming SEC violations. Paul claims that the Clintons then threw out Paul's civil suit on the basis that he was a fugitive. David Rosen, Hillary Clinton's chief fundraiser, was arrested as part of the case. A Clinton-appointed judge instructed the jury not to tie in the Clintons to Paul's case. If true, this is corruption at the highest level, calling into question the integrity of the American judicial system. Paul claims that what he calls "the media" (what a laugh) have abrogated their responsibilities with respect to the Clintons in this case, and more generally with respect to political reporting.
Please recall the Langbert modus:
If a nation lacks a fair and competent media, it cannot function as a republic.
America lacks a fair and competent media.
Therefore, America is no longer a republic.
Propagandists Duck Emanuel Resignation--and the Langbert Modus Ponens
The Patriot Room (h/t Larwyn) asks why the New York Times and LA times have not covered pressure put on Rahm Emanuel to resign:
>"Have we seen anything in the MSM about pressure on Rahm Emanuel to resign? Nothing from the L.A. Times. Or the New York Times.
"But the U.K. and Australian papers often print stories their liberal American cousins will not. And they think something is afoot."
Patriot Room quotes the Australian Herald Sun and UK Times, which are willing to print news, even if it doesn't fit.
Patriot Room concludes:
"Obama’s team was dredged from the same swamp from which Blagojevich was pulled. Is it any surprise that Emanuel was on the phone wheeling and dealing with Blago to fill the Senate seat?"
Back on September 25 I posted this comment about Obama's corruption from one of my correspondents in Chicago, Contrairimairi:
"What is it going to take to prove that Obama does not now, did not then, and NEVER will have America or Americans best interests at heart? This apparent liar and 'rip-off artist extraordinaire' has ALWAYS put himself first in EVERYTHING he has undertaken. It appears he was lining his pockets within MOMENTS of landing in Washington as the junior Senator from Illinois from the very companies he now 'pretends' to be so 'outraged' about. Not too surprising considering his contacts with Tony Rezko...
"One HAS to wonder WHERE all the money from the millions 'earmarked' to improve public housing in Chicago ended up...where the millions 'earmarked' to improve education in Chicago's poorest schools ended up...WHY, despite his continuing 'efforts' as a 'community organizer' on Chicago's south side, NOTHING in those neighborhoods seems to have significantly improved. Probably, it would be safer to say that things have probably grown WORSE! More young people die in those neighborhoods than have been lost in similar time frames in the war. Housing in those areas remains sub-standard and dangerous. The peoples' quality of life in those areas NEVER seems to improve. I think we can tell from the trail we ARE able to pick up on, despite Obama's efforts to 'hide everything from his past', that he never does ANYTHING without major benefit to himself."
Back in August I called President-elect Obama a sociopath (also see here) and back on September 2 quoted Andy Martin's characterizations of Obama's dirty operation as being "more sophisticated than that of President Richard M. Nixon's."
Perhaps we should argue, as the esteemed David Horowitz recently has, that we are better off with a corrupt Obama than an ideologically-driven one.
But the deeper problem to which Patriot Room alludes is the absence of a competent press or media. This is the Langbert Modus Ponens:
If a nation lacks a fair and competent press and media, it cannot function as a republic.
America lacks a fair and competent press and media.
Therefore, America is no longer a republic.
>"Have we seen anything in the MSM about pressure on Rahm Emanuel to resign? Nothing from the L.A. Times. Or the New York Times.
"But the U.K. and Australian papers often print stories their liberal American cousins will not. And they think something is afoot."
Patriot Room quotes the Australian Herald Sun and UK Times, which are willing to print news, even if it doesn't fit.
Patriot Room concludes:
"Obama’s team was dredged from the same swamp from which Blagojevich was pulled. Is it any surprise that Emanuel was on the phone wheeling and dealing with Blago to fill the Senate seat?"
Back on September 25 I posted this comment about Obama's corruption from one of my correspondents in Chicago, Contrairimairi:
"What is it going to take to prove that Obama does not now, did not then, and NEVER will have America or Americans best interests at heart? This apparent liar and 'rip-off artist extraordinaire' has ALWAYS put himself first in EVERYTHING he has undertaken. It appears he was lining his pockets within MOMENTS of landing in Washington as the junior Senator from Illinois from the very companies he now 'pretends' to be so 'outraged' about. Not too surprising considering his contacts with Tony Rezko...
"One HAS to wonder WHERE all the money from the millions 'earmarked' to improve public housing in Chicago ended up...where the millions 'earmarked' to improve education in Chicago's poorest schools ended up...WHY, despite his continuing 'efforts' as a 'community organizer' on Chicago's south side, NOTHING in those neighborhoods seems to have significantly improved. Probably, it would be safer to say that things have probably grown WORSE! More young people die in those neighborhoods than have been lost in similar time frames in the war. Housing in those areas remains sub-standard and dangerous. The peoples' quality of life in those areas NEVER seems to improve. I think we can tell from the trail we ARE able to pick up on, despite Obama's efforts to 'hide everything from his past', that he never does ANYTHING without major benefit to himself."
Back in August I called President-elect Obama a sociopath (also see here) and back on September 2 quoted Andy Martin's characterizations of Obama's dirty operation as being "more sophisticated than that of President Richard M. Nixon's."
Perhaps we should argue, as the esteemed David Horowitz recently has, that we are better off with a corrupt Obama than an ideologically-driven one.
But the deeper problem to which Patriot Room alludes is the absence of a competent press or media. This is the Langbert Modus Ponens:
If a nation lacks a fair and competent press and media, it cannot function as a republic.
America lacks a fair and competent press and media.
Therefore, America is no longer a republic.
Fred on the Certificate
I just received this e-mail from Fred:
>I was reading your blog, "Why Was Sarah Herilihy Worrying About Article II?" and I would like to add a dot that you might find interesting.
I think it might shed some light on what we see going on with the court cases that have reached the SC.
Justice Scalia made a talk followed by a Q&A session to The Federalist Society on November 20, 2008 so it is very current.
Here is the link:
http://www.fed-soc.org/publications/pubid.1193/pub_detail.asp
The talk is available at that site in video or audio only. I have a fast server, but the video kept stopping to catch up so I recommend listening to the audio as it is continuous.
I think that Justice Scalia defines himself as an "originalist".
During the Q&A time, Justice Scalia commented on what to do about laws that were on the books at the time the Constitution was written but would not be acceptable today. He referenced "notching the ears" of felons as a means to identify them (I never knew we did that). He spent time discussing that "good" Judges would uphold laws that were constitutional even though they did not agree with them.
He specifically stated that "good Judges" should have a rubber stamp to handle those cases.
The stamp would read, "STUPID, BUT CONSTITUTIONAL".
When he made that statement, I believe he was thinking of Article II, Section I, Clause 5. Perhaps he doesn't agree with it , but it is not open to interpretation. Justice Alito had a conversation with Schumer during his confirmation hearing and said that an Amendment was required, but would not discuss whether a child born on U.S. soil of parents that were illegals was entitled to citizenship.
Of the cases that have reached the SC, Berg's was denied based on "Standing", Donofrio's on Jurisdiction, and Cort's was denied without comment.
Is it possible that the SCOTUS is dodging the issue?
I believe that they all, if they are "good" Justices would, since the wording is not ambiguous and the nature and reason for the clause is clearly defined by Justice John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, have to rule that the only thing that could alter the "natural born" statement in the Constitution is an Amendment to the Constitution.
The significant problem with Obama's eligibility is that most Senators and Representatives, the voters on January 8 to certify him to be President of the United States, believe that being born on U.S. soil entitles Obama to be proclaimed "Natural Born". It does not! And Obama does not qualify since his father was a British subject "at birth" of Obama (it is on his website) and the very thing that John Jay worried about that motivated him to suggest the wording in Article II, Section I has come upon us! And for good reason!
Fred
>I was reading your blog, "Why Was Sarah Herilihy Worrying About Article II?" and I would like to add a dot that you might find interesting.
I think it might shed some light on what we see going on with the court cases that have reached the SC.
Justice Scalia made a talk followed by a Q&A session to The Federalist Society on November 20, 2008 so it is very current.
Here is the link:
http://www.fed-soc.org/publications/pubid.1193/pub_detail.asp
The talk is available at that site in video or audio only. I have a fast server, but the video kept stopping to catch up so I recommend listening to the audio as it is continuous.
I think that Justice Scalia defines himself as an "originalist".
During the Q&A time, Justice Scalia commented on what to do about laws that were on the books at the time the Constitution was written but would not be acceptable today. He referenced "notching the ears" of felons as a means to identify them (I never knew we did that). He spent time discussing that "good" Judges would uphold laws that were constitutional even though they did not agree with them.
He specifically stated that "good Judges" should have a rubber stamp to handle those cases.
The stamp would read, "STUPID, BUT CONSTITUTIONAL".
When he made that statement, I believe he was thinking of Article II, Section I, Clause 5. Perhaps he doesn't agree with it , but it is not open to interpretation. Justice Alito had a conversation with Schumer during his confirmation hearing and said that an Amendment was required, but would not discuss whether a child born on U.S. soil of parents that were illegals was entitled to citizenship.
Of the cases that have reached the SC, Berg's was denied based on "Standing", Donofrio's on Jurisdiction, and Cort's was denied without comment.
Is it possible that the SCOTUS is dodging the issue?
I believe that they all, if they are "good" Justices would, since the wording is not ambiguous and the nature and reason for the clause is clearly defined by Justice John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, have to rule that the only thing that could alter the "natural born" statement in the Constitution is an Amendment to the Constitution.
The significant problem with Obama's eligibility is that most Senators and Representatives, the voters on January 8 to certify him to be President of the United States, believe that being born on U.S. soil entitles Obama to be proclaimed "Natural Born". It does not! And Obama does not qualify since his father was a British subject "at birth" of Obama (it is on his website) and the very thing that John Jay worried about that motivated him to suggest the wording in Article II, Section I has come upon us! And for good reason!
Fred
Barack Obama's Socialist Safe House
Jim Robbins forwarded a link to this Texas Darlin which raises some curious questions. For instance, why does the Party for Socialism and Liberation list the phone number associated with Obama’s mansion in Chicago as its phone number? TD asks: "Why on Earth is the phone number for the Party for Socialism and Liberation linked to the Obamas’ private residence in Chicago? Theories?"
Read the whole baffling conundrum here. (Actually it's not so baffling. Obama is a leftwing extremist, a possibility his fellow travelers at the networks never wished to explore.)
Read the whole baffling conundrum here. (Actually it's not so baffling. Obama is a leftwing extremist, a possibility his fellow travelers at the networks never wished to explore.)
Howie Rich on the Blagojevich Scandal
I received an e-mail from Bill Wilson that carried the "Daily Grind", which is produced by GetLiberty.org "in affiliation with Americans for limited government". Rich's article is available on GetLiberty.org. Rich notes that:
"Coverage of the coronation of President-elect Barack Obama has practically ground to a halt, as have media reports on the steadily deteriorating state of our nation's economy. A multi-billion bailout for Detroit? Another Kennedy seeking elected office in New York? A pair of shoes thrown at President George W. Bush?
"It seems all of these stories are playing second fiddle to Chicagoland's scheming, foul-mouthed governor, his screaming 'Lady MacBeth' and the growing list of politicians caught up in their insidious web."
But, Rich points out, legalized corruption, the ultimate fruit of Progressivism, is widespread in Washington:
"The truth is that government entities dole out multi-million dollar contracts, make major regulatory decisions and pass new laws every day in America based on nothing more than who cut the biggest check to the politicians' campaign coffers. In fact, many of these deals come in the form of secretive "no-bid" contracts that often directly benefit politicians' friends and family members.Sadly, the vast majority of these "pay-to-play" scams are perfectly legal..."
But Rich points out that there is hope:
"In Colorado last month, voters took a stand against this pervasive culture of political corruption in America. Over the objection of virtually every elected official (and every public and private sector labor union in the state), citizens passed a comprehensive clean and open government measure that dramatically alters the status quo conditions responsible for politicians' egregious behavior.
"In addition to severely restricting political contribution's from no-bid government contractors including public sector unions, Colorado's new law also creates an online database where taxpayers will be able to follow how every cent of their money is being spent."
Let us applaud GetLiberty.org and its struggle for reform!
"Coverage of the coronation of President-elect Barack Obama has practically ground to a halt, as have media reports on the steadily deteriorating state of our nation's economy. A multi-billion bailout for Detroit? Another Kennedy seeking elected office in New York? A pair of shoes thrown at President George W. Bush?
"It seems all of these stories are playing second fiddle to Chicagoland's scheming, foul-mouthed governor, his screaming 'Lady MacBeth' and the growing list of politicians caught up in their insidious web."
But, Rich points out, legalized corruption, the ultimate fruit of Progressivism, is widespread in Washington:
"The truth is that government entities dole out multi-million dollar contracts, make major regulatory decisions and pass new laws every day in America based on nothing more than who cut the biggest check to the politicians' campaign coffers. In fact, many of these deals come in the form of secretive "no-bid" contracts that often directly benefit politicians' friends and family members.Sadly, the vast majority of these "pay-to-play" scams are perfectly legal..."
But Rich points out that there is hope:
"In Colorado last month, voters took a stand against this pervasive culture of political corruption in America. Over the objection of virtually every elected official (and every public and private sector labor union in the state), citizens passed a comprehensive clean and open government measure that dramatically alters the status quo conditions responsible for politicians' egregious behavior.
"In addition to severely restricting political contribution's from no-bid government contractors including public sector unions, Colorado's new law also creates an online database where taxpayers will be able to follow how every cent of their money is being spent."
Let us applaud GetLiberty.org and its struggle for reform!
"I Lost My Country"
Herb London has an excellent post on Powerline Blog in which he argues that America has fundamentally changed direction:
"The America of now is one where Orwellian logic rules. Redistribution of wealth is fairness. Taxes are patriotic. The free market should be a regulated market. Big government is good for you. Politicians know what kind of health care is best for you. Choice should be limited, except when it comes to abortion. Power comes from being powerless. Progressive education is designed to promote progress toward socialism. Race doesn't count unless a person of color tells you it counts. Higher education gets lower each year. Those who create our problems should be asked to solve them. Religion should be a private matter that does not inform public morality. Liberal is radical. Free speech is selective speech. Courage is impetuousness."
Read the whole thing here.
"The America of now is one where Orwellian logic rules. Redistribution of wealth is fairness. Taxes are patriotic. The free market should be a regulated market. Big government is good for you. Politicians know what kind of health care is best for you. Choice should be limited, except when it comes to abortion. Power comes from being powerless. Progressive education is designed to promote progress toward socialism. Race doesn't count unless a person of color tells you it counts. Higher education gets lower each year. Those who create our problems should be asked to solve them. Religion should be a private matter that does not inform public morality. Liberal is radical. Free speech is selective speech. Courage is impetuousness."
Read the whole thing here.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Sex and the Oil Barrel
The Wall Street Journal reports that depression fears and continued OPEC production have driven oil prices to four year lows. The pro shares ultra oil and gas etf (DIG) which holds oil company stocks (Exxon is 23% of its holdings) and is 50% leveraged (in other words "The fund seeks daily investment results, before fees and expenses, that correspond to twice (200%) the daily performance of the Dow Jones U.S. Oil & Gas Index") was down 11.7% yesterday.
Few can disagree that buying at a bottom is better than sex. But how far does the oil barrel need to "go down" before we conclude there is a market bottom? The Journal says that this a four-year oil low. Despite the drop from $145.29 to $38, a 74% drop that rivals the tech stocks' fall seven years ago, I would rather be holding oil barrels than dollars, given the hyperinflationary policies of the Reinflateocrat Party!
Back in April '01 I put in a buy for the then QQQ (now QQQQ) for $35. My student, a professional trader who specialized in the Q's, argued that it would never fall that low. In fact, it did, right after 9/11. It ended up falling to something like $17, but then came back to the '40s. Now, in memory of the Q's, should I put in a buy on an oil fund at $35/barrel???
Few can disagree that buying at a bottom is better than sex. But how far does the oil barrel need to "go down" before we conclude there is a market bottom? The Journal says that this a four-year oil low. Despite the drop from $145.29 to $38, a 74% drop that rivals the tech stocks' fall seven years ago, I would rather be holding oil barrels than dollars, given the hyperinflationary policies of the Reinflateocrat Party!
Back in April '01 I put in a buy for the then QQQ (now QQQQ) for $35. My student, a professional trader who specialized in the Q's, argued that it would never fall that low. In fact, it did, right after 9/11. It ended up falling to something like $17, but then came back to the '40s. Now, in memory of the Q's, should I put in a buy on an oil fund at $35/barrel???
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Orly Tatz Discusses Keyes and Lightfoot v. Bowen Cases
Orly Tatz, who is representing Keyes and Lightfoot, says: (1) No record of Obama's birth has been found in any hospital; (2) Hawaii permitted residents who gave birth overseas to file a certificate; (3) vault copy will reveal absence of needed signatures; (4) pissant progandists ("mainstream media") are manipulated by corrupt interests whom Obama represents and is little different from the communist propagandists whom Tatz observed in eastern Europe; (5) the recent election was a fraud and was corrupt; (6) Barack Obama should be indicted; and (7) Barack Obama is a usurper.
Tatz calls for Obama's resignation and urges that you write to Supreme Court Justices .
>There are a number of things you can do:
1. write to all 9 US Supreme Court justices in support of Lightfoot v Bowen, docket number 08A524
2. become a correspondent on my blog drorly.blogspot.com After you write an article call Bob Stevens (641--715-3900, ext 50926) or e-mail him at hound9_9@yahoo.com He can put your articles on the blog.
3. Very important!!! write an open letter to US att in Illinois Patrick Fitzgerald, cc US att in DC Mike McCuskey, cc General Director of FBI, cc FBI in all the states and demand immediate indictments of Obama on massive fraud for following reasons:
a. he is not a natural born citizen (his father was a foreign subject, he doesn't qualify as a natural born, since both parents have to be citizens at the time of the child's birth in order to qualify as a natural born citizen, see Law of Nations ), he became a candidate on the ballot by fraud
b. fraud committed in collecting $650 million under false pretenses
c. lying under oath while being sworn as an attorney in Illinois (stated that he had no other names, concealed his identities, since he went by Barry Obama and Barry Soetoro)
d. Contact the FBI and US attorney's office, and assert that they need to investigate immediately expert reports showing that his selective service certificate is forged
e. Instruct the FBI and US Attorney's office that they need to subpoena his original birth certificate and investigate reports that the short form "certification of live birth" that Obama presented to the public appears to have been altered, fake or "forged".
f. The FBI and the US Attorney's office needs to subpoena medical records, coroners reports and death certificates for his grandmother Madelyn Dunham and has mother Stanley Ann Dunham (aka Obama, aka Soetoro, aka Sutoro aka Anna Toot) and investigate why the mother's deceased social security number 535-40-8522 shows as active as late as 2006, when she allegedly died in 1995. It shows 2 addresses in HI and 2 addresses in NY.
Please call FBI and US attorney's office and demand daily updates, as to when the indictments will be forthcoming. Those have to be issued ASAP, before Jan 20, 2009. You should also contact your state attorney general's office.
4. you can forward my pleadings in Lightfoot v Bowen and footage of 12.08.08. press conference at the National Press club to all the congressmen, senators, media and your friends and family. Thank you for willingness to help.
Contact Information
United States Attorney's Office
Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division
219 S. Dearborn St., 5th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 353-5300
United States Attorney's Office
Northern District of Illinois, Western Division
308 W. State St., Ste 300
Rockford, IL 61101
Phone: (815) 987-4444
Correspondence to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to:
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
BY E-MAIL:
E-mails to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to AskDOJ@usdoj.gov.
For the Illinois Attorney General, addresses and phone numbers are here. You can email the Illinois Attorney General's office by using this contact form.
Contact the FBI.
Dr. Orly Taitz, DDS Esq
Tatz calls for Obama's resignation and urges that you write to Supreme Court Justices .
>There are a number of things you can do:
1. write to all 9 US Supreme Court justices in support of Lightfoot v Bowen, docket number 08A524
2. become a correspondent on my blog drorly.blogspot.com After you write an article call Bob Stevens (641--715-3900, ext 50926) or e-mail him at hound9_9@yahoo.com He can put your articles on the blog.
3. Very important!!! write an open letter to US att in Illinois Patrick Fitzgerald, cc US att in DC Mike McCuskey, cc General Director of FBI, cc FBI in all the states and demand immediate indictments of Obama on massive fraud for following reasons:
a. he is not a natural born citizen (his father was a foreign subject, he doesn't qualify as a natural born, since both parents have to be citizens at the time of the child's birth in order to qualify as a natural born citizen, see Law of Nations ), he became a candidate on the ballot by fraud
b. fraud committed in collecting $650 million under false pretenses
c. lying under oath while being sworn as an attorney in Illinois (stated that he had no other names, concealed his identities, since he went by Barry Obama and Barry Soetoro)
d. Contact the FBI and US attorney's office, and assert that they need to investigate immediately expert reports showing that his selective service certificate is forged
e. Instruct the FBI and US Attorney's office that they need to subpoena his original birth certificate and investigate reports that the short form "certification of live birth" that Obama presented to the public appears to have been altered, fake or "forged".
f. The FBI and the US Attorney's office needs to subpoena medical records, coroners reports and death certificates for his grandmother Madelyn Dunham and has mother Stanley Ann Dunham (aka Obama, aka Soetoro, aka Sutoro aka Anna Toot) and investigate why the mother's deceased social security number 535-40-8522 shows as active as late as 2006, when she allegedly died in 1995. It shows 2 addresses in HI and 2 addresses in NY.
Please call FBI and US attorney's office and demand daily updates, as to when the indictments will be forthcoming. Those have to be issued ASAP, before Jan 20, 2009. You should also contact your state attorney general's office.
4. you can forward my pleadings in Lightfoot v Bowen and footage of 12.08.08. press conference at the National Press club to all the congressmen, senators, media and your friends and family. Thank you for willingness to help.
Contact Information
United States Attorney's Office
Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division
219 S. Dearborn St., 5th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 353-5300
United States Attorney's Office
Northern District of Illinois, Western Division
308 W. State St., Ste 300
Rockford, IL 61101
Phone: (815) 987-4444
Correspondence to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to:
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
BY E-MAIL:
E-mails to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to AskDOJ@usdoj.gov.
For the Illinois Attorney General, addresses and phone numbers are here. You can email the Illinois Attorney General's office by using this contact form.
Contact the FBI.
Dr. Orly Taitz, DDS Esq
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Kennedy Rates New York and New York Rates Her
Governor David A. Paterson has not yet appointed Caroline Kennedy to fill Hillary Clinton's Senate seat but the proposition seems to have an air of inevitability. Hopefully it won't occur. New York has a different style of corruption from Chicago. In Chicago the governor sells Senate seats for cash. In New York, cronyism, incompetence and legislated theft are the rule.
With respect to Sarah Palin, who does not come from a wealthy background and did not attend an Ivy League university, the Democrats and their television propagandists were eager to criticize her inexperience and make fun of her abilities, despite her having been elected to governor and having held an executive position. Let's see what kind of experience Caroline Kennedy has.
Besides being the scion of a wealthy family, Kennedy attended Harvard and Columbia, and so is acceptable to Progressives and their propagandists. She worked at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. After marrying, Kennedy lived on Park Avenue for about 20 years, unlike Wasilla an address acceptable to Progressives, and had two children. Kennedy holds a legal degree and has co-authored several books. She worked for two years in a $1 per year, part-time staff job for New York City's Department of Education. She was a successful fundraiser, raising over $65 million for New York's schools. She is also on the board of the American Ballet Theatre.
This is impressive experience indeed. Impressive, that is, for a rich housewife. The most impressive thing about Caroline Kennedy's resume is that it is probably the lightest weight resume of any serious contender for Senate in New York's history. It is impressive that someone with a resume this thin would be taken seriously for a City Council, much less a Senate seat.
What would make a lightweight like Kennedy think that she ought to be Senator? Her politically correct, socially acceptable ideology? Her rich family? Her attendance at expensive private schools? All of the above?
America has been in the process of devolving from a republic into an aristocracy. Kennedy represents not the natural aristocracy that Jefferson anticipated, but a throwback to the Federalist belief in an aristocracy based on family connections and inherited wealth. Caroline Kennedy's application for New York's Senate seat represents a deeper and more profound corruption than the Blagojevich scandal.
A second-rate mayor who bought his way into City Hall has recently been able to repeal the term limits law, undoubtedly through intelligently placed contributions and pressure. A city that has banished its middle class, destroyed tens of thousands of jobs and presented unlimited eminent domain and real estate development opportunities to developers who have failed to produce value but have managed to suck the state and city dry. A state that has seen more hard working people exit than any other state and has become a two-tiered society devoid of economic opportunity. A state that has banished freedom in favor of corrupt wealth and aristocracy, all in the hypocritical name of helping the poor.
Caroline Kennedy rates New York, and New York rates her.
With respect to Sarah Palin, who does not come from a wealthy background and did not attend an Ivy League university, the Democrats and their television propagandists were eager to criticize her inexperience and make fun of her abilities, despite her having been elected to governor and having held an executive position. Let's see what kind of experience Caroline Kennedy has.
Besides being the scion of a wealthy family, Kennedy attended Harvard and Columbia, and so is acceptable to Progressives and their propagandists. She worked at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. After marrying, Kennedy lived on Park Avenue for about 20 years, unlike Wasilla an address acceptable to Progressives, and had two children. Kennedy holds a legal degree and has co-authored several books. She worked for two years in a $1 per year, part-time staff job for New York City's Department of Education. She was a successful fundraiser, raising over $65 million for New York's schools. She is also on the board of the American Ballet Theatre.
This is impressive experience indeed. Impressive, that is, for a rich housewife. The most impressive thing about Caroline Kennedy's resume is that it is probably the lightest weight resume of any serious contender for Senate in New York's history. It is impressive that someone with a resume this thin would be taken seriously for a City Council, much less a Senate seat.
What would make a lightweight like Kennedy think that she ought to be Senator? Her politically correct, socially acceptable ideology? Her rich family? Her attendance at expensive private schools? All of the above?
America has been in the process of devolving from a republic into an aristocracy. Kennedy represents not the natural aristocracy that Jefferson anticipated, but a throwback to the Federalist belief in an aristocracy based on family connections and inherited wealth. Caroline Kennedy's application for New York's Senate seat represents a deeper and more profound corruption than the Blagojevich scandal.
A second-rate mayor who bought his way into City Hall has recently been able to repeal the term limits law, undoubtedly through intelligently placed contributions and pressure. A city that has banished its middle class, destroyed tens of thousands of jobs and presented unlimited eminent domain and real estate development opportunities to developers who have failed to produce value but have managed to suck the state and city dry. A state that has seen more hard working people exit than any other state and has become a two-tiered society devoid of economic opportunity. A state that has banished freedom in favor of corrupt wealth and aristocracy, all in the hypocritical name of helping the poor.
Caroline Kennedy rates New York, and New York rates her.
Andy Martin's Game Plan
>1. Blagogate/Obamagate I
We are again on the cutting edge of pursuing Obama's role in crooked Illinois politics. If you have been reading our columns on the developing scandal you will see we lead the national media by several days. Obama is on the defensive. If you ask, "How do you do it," the answer is "we do it" with lots of hard work and Chicago shoe leather.
2. Blagogate/Obamagate II
We have sent the Illinois Supreme Court our pleadings seeking to block Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan from rigging the selection of a new U. S. Senator to favor the Daley Machine. If you read our paperwork, you will see that we were on the cutting edge, again, of presenting to the Supreme Court the apparent links between Obama and Blagojevich, and providing a motive: Obama wants to control his former seat in the senate. Our pleadings are up on our blogs so you can read them. We put our information out in the open where it is available to everyone.
3. Hawai'i litigation
Later this week we need to cut checks to the State of Hawai'i for freedom-of-information payments to pay for the cost of receiving documents related to the state's role in blocking release of Obama's birth certificate. We keep plugging away in Hawai'i: consistently, quietly, but relentlessly, to obtain access to Obama's original birth certificate. The progress is slow, but we will not stop until we succeed. You need to understand that lawsuits move slowly. They take time. They are not an instant solution or resolution. That is the nature of the judicial process.
4. California National Conversation Tour
Last month in Hawai'i we launched our "National Conversation" tour. We hope to sponsor a nationwide series of meetings to keep the anti-Obama movement alive. So far as I know, we are the only organization sponsoring a nationwide series of events to maintain both legal and political action efforts against Barry Obama. These trips are very costly and they especially need your help.
If you would also like to sponsor an event-a meeting, reading, conversation or something else (be creative)-please let us know. We still have a little time available to book. Here are the dates that we will be available in the central cities and when there is open time on my schedule:
San Francisco: December 26, 27, 28
San Diego: December 29, 30
Let us know if you would like to sponsor an additional event.
5. Your financial support is needed
We need your financial support to continue our broadly based efforts. As you can see, we try to cover as much territory as possible: from Obama's role in trying to rig the selection of his successor, so he could control his former senate seat, to keeping a nationwide campaign against Obama alive, to legal action in Hawai'i and Illinois courts. But all of these efforts take money, and generate a constant stream of expenses that need to be paid.
We are now tentatively planning a South Florida National Conversation for January if there is sufficient interest and support. You may also want to suggest other locations across the U.S.
Please be generous. You can donate online at our web site, or mail a check to our headquarters address. The check is payable to "Committee of One Million" and can be mailed to my personal attention.
This is a difficult time for the American people. But we will survive and succeed if we stick together. Those of us who recognize the threat that Barack Obama poses to America must stand united against his usurpation.
To all of you, Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas.
We are again on the cutting edge of pursuing Obama's role in crooked Illinois politics. If you have been reading our columns on the developing scandal you will see we lead the national media by several days. Obama is on the defensive. If you ask, "How do you do it," the answer is "we do it" with lots of hard work and Chicago shoe leather.
2. Blagogate/Obamagate II
We have sent the Illinois Supreme Court our pleadings seeking to block Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan from rigging the selection of a new U. S. Senator to favor the Daley Machine. If you read our paperwork, you will see that we were on the cutting edge, again, of presenting to the Supreme Court the apparent links between Obama and Blagojevich, and providing a motive: Obama wants to control his former seat in the senate. Our pleadings are up on our blogs so you can read them. We put our information out in the open where it is available to everyone.
3. Hawai'i litigation
Later this week we need to cut checks to the State of Hawai'i for freedom-of-information payments to pay for the cost of receiving documents related to the state's role in blocking release of Obama's birth certificate. We keep plugging away in Hawai'i: consistently, quietly, but relentlessly, to obtain access to Obama's original birth certificate. The progress is slow, but we will not stop until we succeed. You need to understand that lawsuits move slowly. They take time. They are not an instant solution or resolution. That is the nature of the judicial process.
4. California National Conversation Tour
Last month in Hawai'i we launched our "National Conversation" tour. We hope to sponsor a nationwide series of meetings to keep the anti-Obama movement alive. So far as I know, we are the only organization sponsoring a nationwide series of events to maintain both legal and political action efforts against Barry Obama. These trips are very costly and they especially need your help.
If you would also like to sponsor an event-a meeting, reading, conversation or something else (be creative)-please let us know. We still have a little time available to book. Here are the dates that we will be available in the central cities and when there is open time on my schedule:
San Francisco: December 26, 27, 28
San Diego: December 29, 30
Let us know if you would like to sponsor an additional event.
5. Your financial support is needed
We need your financial support to continue our broadly based efforts. As you can see, we try to cover as much territory as possible: from Obama's role in trying to rig the selection of his successor, so he could control his former senate seat, to keeping a nationwide campaign against Obama alive, to legal action in Hawai'i and Illinois courts. But all of these efforts take money, and generate a constant stream of expenses that need to be paid.
We are now tentatively planning a South Florida National Conversation for January if there is sufficient interest and support. You may also want to suggest other locations across the U.S.
Please be generous. You can donate online at our web site, or mail a check to our headquarters address. The check is payable to "Committee of One Million" and can be mailed to my personal attention.
This is a difficult time for the American people. But we will survive and succeed if we stick together. Those of us who recognize the threat that Barack Obama poses to America must stand united against his usurpation.
To all of you, Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Thoughts on The Certificate
I had previously written about David Horowitz's important Frontpagemag editorial concerning the birth certificate. Unlike most conservatives, I admire Saul Alinsky, and one of Alinsky's "rules for radicals" is that tactics that drag on too long become a drag. At the same time, variations on the birth certificate theme might be useful, but not everyone agrees. I solicited comments from some brilliant and insightful friends, and here they are:
Raquel Okyay writes:
The facts so far are "foggy", but what if the fog was lifted, and indeed Obama is shown not to be a natural born citizen, does he receive immunity from the constitution's requirement simply because he is a black man, and his election is historic? What you are proposing is to ignore facts and possibly permit a person to lie to the American people, and violate what is clearly enumerated in the U.S. Constitution (whether outdated or minor).
If you have an argument to change the Constitution to remove this requirement going forward, fine. But, for me changing the rules after the game is unfair and undemocratic. I do not think it is wrong for the electorate to question Obama's eligibility after the fact. Obama can simply produce the proper documentation and this controversy is over.
The very fact that the pissant media are completely ignoring this story is the most disturbing aspect and I think that in itself is a major point. And this is the essence of the argument -- liberty has to do with freedom from oppressive governments. When the government and their pissant media friends are hiding or confusing the truth, it is in fact, our liberty that is being ignored. True democracy only exists in truth of liberty!
Notwithstanding, David, you are still one of my favorite authors!
Cortes de Russy writes:
As Mitchell and I have discussed, I fall down on David's side of this argument for the primary reason that he states.
Where there are wrinkles to be ironed out in process, these can be readily managed through the tools at hand. Oklahoma's legislature, for example, has already proposed legislation that would require adequate proof of a candidate's legal and constitutional eligibility prior to a candidate being included on the ballot in that state. If only one state passes such a requirement, I believe, this issue will be put to bed forever.
Regarding the development of a political system and electorate that is more respectful of the original intent of the Framers regarding devolution of powers among the states, etc., the solution is not any "quick fixes" but rather a serious education effort that will convince and reinforce the principles which uphold individual liberty. For example, there was no discussion in the recent campaign regarding the appropriate role of government in the lives of its citizens. McCain had a perfect opening to ask the question when Joe the Plumber inadvertently prompted Obama's "spread the wealth" comment but he either missed it or he doesn't contemplate the question at any level.
Keeping this issue alive will only harden positions and make it all the more difficult to convince the majority of citizens that conservatives are not "kooks" but rather thoughtful and concerned actors on the American political stage.
David Horowtiz replies to Raquel:
What I am proposing is not to make further inquiries into the facts in this case. It's too late and the consequences of this debate are destructive to our nation and our constitution when we are fighting two wars and in the midst of the greatest financial crisis in our history. You say I am proposing to "possibly permit a person to lie to the American people." What president, legislator, political leader etc has not lied to the American people? This is a question that the 64 million Americans who voted for Obama will be asking if 5 unelected political appointees on the Supreme Court decide to disqualify him.
Second, when you say that "changing the rules after the game is unfair" you need to think about the fact that more than half the nation which still believes in Obama will be asking the same question.
Third, concerning your distress at the bias of the media. What else is new and why should its support for Obama on this minor issue be the point of your distress?
I apologize for speaking so bluntly -- and I do appreciate your graciousness in allowing me the latitude to be wrong -- but I really think this whole issue is an emotional one that boils down to conceding that we lost the election and now have to live with Obama as president. But I think the beginning of a conservative political revival lies precisely in accepting this fact.
Raquel adds:
Ok, David, I have tried to persuade you to the far side of the moon, and I have failed. :(
You are proposing that concerned citizens do not make further inquiries and I am proposing we inquire, inquire, and keep inquiring!
I concede to the fact that we lost the election, and whatever the outcome of this controversy, I agree that a new conservative revolution is in the workings. I have little doubt that Democrats will ultimately hang themselves, they don't need me and my silly questions.
A quick observation: both the mayor of Honolulu and the Chief Clerk (or whatever her title is) have stated that they have seen Obama's birth certificate and that it is valid. Unless they are criminals, that should suffice to settle the matter.
I, frankly, understand why the Obama people ignored this issue for, had they rushed to respond his interlocutors would have been encouraged to come up with other issues forcing him to respond further, etc. It would never have ended and would have done just what was desired: create an aura of doubt surrounding his candidacy.
I, too, am distressed at his victory but do not want to win by such means.
Phil Orenstein writes:
My comments are two words: cognitive dissonance. I've been avoiding this for the past week or so, but now I have to cough it up. When I first read David's 3 blogs arguing that the birth certificate issue was nonsense and conservatives should move on, and the hundreds of emotional responses that followed, I decided to put it on the back burner and not deal with it. To me and to those who had done their homework regarding the facts of the issue, we found it a straightforward issue of Obama's obfuscation and lying to the American people about his birth certificate as well as numerous other documents (college records, medical records, etc.) and by implication everything that he stands for including change, hope and transparency. Due to the legal hieroglyphics and intellectual gymnastics one had to go through to sort out the wheat from the chaff, even many conservatives just avoided it and admonished us to move on to the real issues. Mitch has done a yeoman's job in simplifying the issues. To put it simply, no document the Obama camp has so far revealed to the public is proof of his legitimate "natural born" status as required by the Constitution, including his COLB (Certification of Live Birth) which is not proof he was born in Hawaii. It is a stunning admission of guilt that Barack Obama would not, simply out of respect for the people he was elected to preside over, disclose the sealed "vault copy" of his birth certificate, which would have ended the debate for me, Mitch and others.
FrontPage is my computer's homepage, and I read David's blog every day. I respect him as my major intellectual hero, for having advanced the Academic Bill of Rights, taken the fight for our country's values and self defense directly into the schools with the IslamoFascism Awareness projects, wrote "the Party of Defeat", the only author I am aware of who unmasked the treasonous actions of the Democratic Party to sabotage our now victorious war in Iraq, and many more. To me David, having been on both sides of the political divide is a true visionary and great conservative voice for Americas future.
But when I read David's arguments for dropping the whole ball of wax, I was stunned...Or on the other hand am I missing something? Am I just obsessing over a silly issue that has no relevance to reality. If a terrorist struck on our soil tomorrow, would we still carry on over the vault copy? So I thought about David's main point that Obama had already won and that the continued frenzy of a fringe of us trying to point out the obvious truth to a majority of American's who don't do their homework and are seduced by ephemeral images, via the pissant media and academic indoctrination, is tantamount to banging our heads against the wall. So David's point, truth be dammed, is that we'll only be hurting ourselves by continuing along this road.
Now I am busy planning and promoting a great conservative event event in NY for Feb 2009 to rebrand the GOP as the true "Party of Lincoln." The key is to re-establish the image of our greatest leader, Lincoln in the American memory which has declined in the past few decades, since the guiding premise of teacher education is that members of minority communities are marginalized when national heroes are recognized. So Lincoln and our great heritage has been stripped from the curriculum. This is the travesty that is poisoning the Obama generation to be disconnected with our great past heritage and only find relevance is the messianic images Obama projects. Also, postmodernism has already made a mockery of everything sacred in the world including religion, our American heroes and the Constitution. So truth, history and facts to these majority of our fellow Americans schooled in progressive indoctrination, has little or no relevance. So in the end, while I agree with Mitch that Statism and lies have taken over both political parties, the addiction is so complete, that cold-turkey prescriptions for truth will be rejected by the body politic. Basically what I am saying is to move on. Obama will be haunted by the entire foul Chicago political machinery of Emanuel, Rezko and now Blagojevich following him into the White House to claim a piece of the filthy pie that Obama was groomed in. Let's put our heads together now and save our country!
David, I wrote this to get a load off my chest. However, I cannot in good conscience tell others to "move on" although I myself am too tied up to pursue the case further. I have to agree with my friends Raquel and Mitchell, that as long as their conscience compels them to pursue the truth, they should do so. Whether it gets to the justices or not, either the sealed vault copy shows he is natural born or not and the American people have a right to know. Take the Duke Lacrosse rape case. Now it's Blagojevich's and his connections to Emanuel and possibly both their resignations rather than staining Obama's record. So I applaud those who are still fighting since the same process of lies and cover-ups will continue for the next 4 years. Sorry, I can't honestly concede on this.
David Horowitz replies:
That last line is exactly right, and we need to be positioning ourselves to take maximum advantage of their mistakes...Well, the search for information is one thing, and I certainly am all for finding out the truth in these matters. The political act of seeking to void an election is quite another on a matter as de minimus as this, and that's what I object to...My point is not truth be damned, but with the election over there's no feasible way to establish the truth in a way that will persuade a majority of Americans, let alone a majority of the Obama voters that this is indeed the truth and Joe Biden should be president. Joe Biden???!!!! Are you sure you would want to go through with this even if you could which (I am convinced) you can't?
Vasos Panagiotopoulos writes:
David, I agree. As president of Columbia GOP 1982-83, Obama and I often debated at Ferris Booth Cafe, and I found him to be fair, decent and intelligent, even if he was persistently wrong and unable to stop talking. This issue makes conservatives look nasty and small. I think Dole, Giuliani and McCain are nasty and small and the big reason we were so badly defeated. Bush Jr, for all his failings, would have been an even match for Obama. Romney would have defeated him. Don't forget Bush was elected twice. McCain made the same mistake as Faso '06, Gore'08 and Nixon'60 and precisely the mistake Bush'88 avoided. Americans voted for Obama the decent chap, not the black, not the liberal. As a son of immigrants (and a grandson of illegals) and a Columbia alum (and a fellow student of Brzezinski) I am darned proud of Obama. I don't think it is a coincidence that those here in Queens who hate CPAC board member and national conservative icon Serf Maltese with a passion also hate Obama. They only betray their own nastiness and help Obama.
In 1996 my assemblyman, Jim Buckley's former driver, Doug Prescott, was defeated by a pretty young attorney who happened to be the niece of a powerful judge. No one took her seriously because she was a "little girl." So our older volunteers didn't work much. A week before elections, the campaign office was closed for lack of staff. (In fact when our state senator correctly sued the feds for the local cost of illegals, our district's influx of Italians saw this, in combination with Andy Beveridge's study of Italians being NYC's top illegals, as an assault on them and voted for the Italian-surname "little girl" as the senator was running unopposed.)
I kept arguing all along, if you make Obama to be Jimmy Carter (thanks to Brzezinski) you can defeat him. If you play the race card, we will be totally defeated. I know pleny of conseratives from Columbia wo helped Obama because they genuinely liked him as a person. I can tell you I have reason to believe some prominent former Reagan youth members also helped him because they found McCain and his Nixonian coterie to be a nasty, noxious piece of garbage. Because of these small minded people, we have given Richard Dailey and Zbigniew Brzezinski control of the White House and the world for at least then next two years, if not for two decades.
Mitchell Langbert replies:
Dear Cortes, Phil, Raquel, Vasos and of course David--Thanks so much for your thoughtful correspondence about David's blog. I hope you don't mind that I posted everyone's comments on my blog. David is likely right, although the law suits may be creating a useful tactical or psychological imbalance. The recent Blagojevich news seems to confirm my early conclusion that Obama is not a nice guy. I don't think the people he's associated himself with (Vasos, you're obviously the exception) have been nice people. Not just Wright and Pfleger but the likes of Blagojevich, Daley and the entire Chicago sludge machine. Since the media wasn't interested in asking questions, it's easy for him to look great. Also, the Republicans are in worse trouble than Vasos and Phil are saying. I don't think that today they have the necessary ideological grounding to win, and in order to gain it they would need to reject a large portion of their likely financial support. I think the country is in trouble and more than just tactical and strategic planning is necessary. The Republican Party has lost its vision. Phil's idea about the party of Lincoln sounds great, but where are Milton Friedman and Ludwig von Mises now that we really need them?
Raquel Okyay writes:
The facts so far are "foggy", but what if the fog was lifted, and indeed Obama is shown not to be a natural born citizen, does he receive immunity from the constitution's requirement simply because he is a black man, and his election is historic? What you are proposing is to ignore facts and possibly permit a person to lie to the American people, and violate what is clearly enumerated in the U.S. Constitution (whether outdated or minor).
If you have an argument to change the Constitution to remove this requirement going forward, fine. But, for me changing the rules after the game is unfair and undemocratic. I do not think it is wrong for the electorate to question Obama's eligibility after the fact. Obama can simply produce the proper documentation and this controversy is over.
The very fact that the pissant media are completely ignoring this story is the most disturbing aspect and I think that in itself is a major point. And this is the essence of the argument -- liberty has to do with freedom from oppressive governments. When the government and their pissant media friends are hiding or confusing the truth, it is in fact, our liberty that is being ignored. True democracy only exists in truth of liberty!
Notwithstanding, David, you are still one of my favorite authors!
Cortes de Russy writes:
As Mitchell and I have discussed, I fall down on David's side of this argument for the primary reason that he states.
Where there are wrinkles to be ironed out in process, these can be readily managed through the tools at hand. Oklahoma's legislature, for example, has already proposed legislation that would require adequate proof of a candidate's legal and constitutional eligibility prior to a candidate being included on the ballot in that state. If only one state passes such a requirement, I believe, this issue will be put to bed forever.
Regarding the development of a political system and electorate that is more respectful of the original intent of the Framers regarding devolution of powers among the states, etc., the solution is not any "quick fixes" but rather a serious education effort that will convince and reinforce the principles which uphold individual liberty. For example, there was no discussion in the recent campaign regarding the appropriate role of government in the lives of its citizens. McCain had a perfect opening to ask the question when Joe the Plumber inadvertently prompted Obama's "spread the wealth" comment but he either missed it or he doesn't contemplate the question at any level.
Keeping this issue alive will only harden positions and make it all the more difficult to convince the majority of citizens that conservatives are not "kooks" but rather thoughtful and concerned actors on the American political stage.
David Horowtiz replies to Raquel:
What I am proposing is not to make further inquiries into the facts in this case. It's too late and the consequences of this debate are destructive to our nation and our constitution when we are fighting two wars and in the midst of the greatest financial crisis in our history. You say I am proposing to "possibly permit a person to lie to the American people." What president, legislator, political leader etc has not lied to the American people? This is a question that the 64 million Americans who voted for Obama will be asking if 5 unelected political appointees on the Supreme Court decide to disqualify him.
Second, when you say that "changing the rules after the game is unfair" you need to think about the fact that more than half the nation which still believes in Obama will be asking the same question.
Third, concerning your distress at the bias of the media. What else is new and why should its support for Obama on this minor issue be the point of your distress?
I apologize for speaking so bluntly -- and I do appreciate your graciousness in allowing me the latitude to be wrong -- but I really think this whole issue is an emotional one that boils down to conceding that we lost the election and now have to live with Obama as president. But I think the beginning of a conservative political revival lies precisely in accepting this fact.
Raquel adds:
Ok, David, I have tried to persuade you to the far side of the moon, and I have failed. :(
You are proposing that concerned citizens do not make further inquiries and I am proposing we inquire, inquire, and keep inquiring!
I concede to the fact that we lost the election, and whatever the outcome of this controversy, I agree that a new conservative revolution is in the workings. I have little doubt that Democrats will ultimately hang themselves, they don't need me and my silly questions.
A quick observation: both the mayor of Honolulu and the Chief Clerk (or whatever her title is) have stated that they have seen Obama's birth certificate and that it is valid. Unless they are criminals, that should suffice to settle the matter.
I, frankly, understand why the Obama people ignored this issue for, had they rushed to respond his interlocutors would have been encouraged to come up with other issues forcing him to respond further, etc. It would never have ended and would have done just what was desired: create an aura of doubt surrounding his candidacy.
I, too, am distressed at his victory but do not want to win by such means.
Phil Orenstein writes:
My comments are two words: cognitive dissonance. I've been avoiding this for the past week or so, but now I have to cough it up. When I first read David's 3 blogs arguing that the birth certificate issue was nonsense and conservatives should move on, and the hundreds of emotional responses that followed, I decided to put it on the back burner and not deal with it. To me and to those who had done their homework regarding the facts of the issue, we found it a straightforward issue of Obama's obfuscation and lying to the American people about his birth certificate as well as numerous other documents (college records, medical records, etc.) and by implication everything that he stands for including change, hope and transparency. Due to the legal hieroglyphics and intellectual gymnastics one had to go through to sort out the wheat from the chaff, even many conservatives just avoided it and admonished us to move on to the real issues. Mitch has done a yeoman's job in simplifying the issues. To put it simply, no document the Obama camp has so far revealed to the public is proof of his legitimate "natural born" status as required by the Constitution, including his COLB (Certification of Live Birth) which is not proof he was born in Hawaii. It is a stunning admission of guilt that Barack Obama would not, simply out of respect for the people he was elected to preside over, disclose the sealed "vault copy" of his birth certificate, which would have ended the debate for me, Mitch and others.
FrontPage is my computer's homepage, and I read David's blog every day. I respect him as my major intellectual hero, for having advanced the Academic Bill of Rights, taken the fight for our country's values and self defense directly into the schools with the IslamoFascism Awareness projects, wrote "the Party of Defeat", the only author I am aware of who unmasked the treasonous actions of the Democratic Party to sabotage our now victorious war in Iraq, and many more. To me David, having been on both sides of the political divide is a true visionary and great conservative voice for Americas future.
But when I read David's arguments for dropping the whole ball of wax, I was stunned...Or on the other hand am I missing something? Am I just obsessing over a silly issue that has no relevance to reality. If a terrorist struck on our soil tomorrow, would we still carry on over the vault copy? So I thought about David's main point that Obama had already won and that the continued frenzy of a fringe of us trying to point out the obvious truth to a majority of American's who don't do their homework and are seduced by ephemeral images, via the pissant media and academic indoctrination, is tantamount to banging our heads against the wall. So David's point, truth be dammed, is that we'll only be hurting ourselves by continuing along this road.
Now I am busy planning and promoting a great conservative event event in NY for Feb 2009 to rebrand the GOP as the true "Party of Lincoln." The key is to re-establish the image of our greatest leader, Lincoln in the American memory which has declined in the past few decades, since the guiding premise of teacher education is that members of minority communities are marginalized when national heroes are recognized. So Lincoln and our great heritage has been stripped from the curriculum. This is the travesty that is poisoning the Obama generation to be disconnected with our great past heritage and only find relevance is the messianic images Obama projects. Also, postmodernism has already made a mockery of everything sacred in the world including religion, our American heroes and the Constitution. So truth, history and facts to these majority of our fellow Americans schooled in progressive indoctrination, has little or no relevance. So in the end, while I agree with Mitch that Statism and lies have taken over both political parties, the addiction is so complete, that cold-turkey prescriptions for truth will be rejected by the body politic. Basically what I am saying is to move on. Obama will be haunted by the entire foul Chicago political machinery of Emanuel, Rezko and now Blagojevich following him into the White House to claim a piece of the filthy pie that Obama was groomed in. Let's put our heads together now and save our country!
David, I wrote this to get a load off my chest. However, I cannot in good conscience tell others to "move on" although I myself am too tied up to pursue the case further. I have to agree with my friends Raquel and Mitchell, that as long as their conscience compels them to pursue the truth, they should do so. Whether it gets to the justices or not, either the sealed vault copy shows he is natural born or not and the American people have a right to know. Take the Duke Lacrosse rape case. Now it's Blagojevich's and his connections to Emanuel and possibly both their resignations rather than staining Obama's record. So I applaud those who are still fighting since the same process of lies and cover-ups will continue for the next 4 years. Sorry, I can't honestly concede on this.
David Horowitz replies:
That last line is exactly right, and we need to be positioning ourselves to take maximum advantage of their mistakes...Well, the search for information is one thing, and I certainly am all for finding out the truth in these matters. The political act of seeking to void an election is quite another on a matter as de minimus as this, and that's what I object to...My point is not truth be damned, but with the election over there's no feasible way to establish the truth in a way that will persuade a majority of Americans, let alone a majority of the Obama voters that this is indeed the truth and Joe Biden should be president. Joe Biden???!!!! Are you sure you would want to go through with this even if you could which (I am convinced) you can't?
Vasos Panagiotopoulos writes:
David, I agree. As president of Columbia GOP 1982-83, Obama and I often debated at Ferris Booth Cafe, and I found him to be fair, decent and intelligent, even if he was persistently wrong and unable to stop talking. This issue makes conservatives look nasty and small. I think Dole, Giuliani and McCain are nasty and small and the big reason we were so badly defeated. Bush Jr, for all his failings, would have been an even match for Obama. Romney would have defeated him. Don't forget Bush was elected twice. McCain made the same mistake as Faso '06, Gore'08 and Nixon'60 and precisely the mistake Bush'88 avoided. Americans voted for Obama the decent chap, not the black, not the liberal. As a son of immigrants (and a grandson of illegals) and a Columbia alum (and a fellow student of Brzezinski) I am darned proud of Obama. I don't think it is a coincidence that those here in Queens who hate CPAC board member and national conservative icon Serf Maltese with a passion also hate Obama. They only betray their own nastiness and help Obama.
In 1996 my assemblyman, Jim Buckley's former driver, Doug Prescott, was defeated by a pretty young attorney who happened to be the niece of a powerful judge. No one took her seriously because she was a "little girl." So our older volunteers didn't work much. A week before elections, the campaign office was closed for lack of staff. (In fact when our state senator correctly sued the feds for the local cost of illegals, our district's influx of Italians saw this, in combination with Andy Beveridge's study of Italians being NYC's top illegals, as an assault on them and voted for the Italian-surname "little girl" as the senator was running unopposed.)
I kept arguing all along, if you make Obama to be Jimmy Carter (thanks to Brzezinski) you can defeat him. If you play the race card, we will be totally defeated. I know pleny of conseratives from Columbia wo helped Obama because they genuinely liked him as a person. I can tell you I have reason to believe some prominent former Reagan youth members also helped him because they found McCain and his Nixonian coterie to be a nasty, noxious piece of garbage. Because of these small minded people, we have given Richard Dailey and Zbigniew Brzezinski control of the White House and the world for at least then next two years, if not for two decades.
Mitchell Langbert replies:
Dear Cortes, Phil, Raquel, Vasos and of course David--Thanks so much for your thoughtful correspondence about David's blog. I hope you don't mind that I posted everyone's comments on my blog. David is likely right, although the law suits may be creating a useful tactical or psychological imbalance. The recent Blagojevich news seems to confirm my early conclusion that Obama is not a nice guy. I don't think the people he's associated himself with (Vasos, you're obviously the exception) have been nice people. Not just Wright and Pfleger but the likes of Blagojevich, Daley and the entire Chicago sludge machine. Since the media wasn't interested in asking questions, it's easy for him to look great. Also, the Republicans are in worse trouble than Vasos and Phil are saying. I don't think that today they have the necessary ideological grounding to win, and in order to gain it they would need to reject a large portion of their likely financial support. I think the country is in trouble and more than just tactical and strategic planning is necessary. The Republican Party has lost its vision. Phil's idea about the party of Lincoln sounds great, but where are Milton Friedman and Ludwig von Mises now that we really need them?
Stock Market Volatility
Recently Warren Buffett said that if you wait until you hear the birds sing, it will already be spring. In other words, if the S&P 500 is forming a V formation, there will be a quick move back to the last ten years' usual price range. If the S&P falls back to 720 as it did a few weeks ago (actually 750), there's a good buy. Many people are saying that the Dow might fall to 5,000 which would correspond to an S&P of 500 (the Dow is currently 8924 and the S&P about 900 and at their heights the Dow was slightly over 14,000 and the S&P about 1480.) A number of my students are bearish. In contrast, in 2000 they were all buying Internet stocks. This is true at both Stern School of Business and Brooklyn College. Both student bodies were buying Internet stocks in 2000 and are many are talking bearish now. When I said that I bought some GE shares a number of my Stern students scoffed, saying the financial risk was too great. However, a Forbes writer, Ken Fisher, is bullish. Nevertheless, the majority of media hype has been very pessimistic. My mother, who does not invest in stocks, is extremely pessimistic. She believes that unemployment is at an all time high, forgetting that for most of my early professional life (from the time I graduated college in 1975 until the time entered the doctoral program in 1986) the current 6-7%unemployment rate was viewed as low. Howard S. Katz believes that this has been a rare, media-driven bear market. The vast monetary expansion of the past four months would seem to be a fundamentally bullish short-to-medium term phenomenon.
There is a certain illogic to the media's coverage of credit swaps. According to the media, the banks could not value the derivatives properly but invested in them anyway and now are losing their shirts. Now, they are experiencing unanticipated defaults and risk. But if they could not value the derivatives intelligently three years ago, why can they value them intelligently now?
I recently obtained a car loan for 6%. For much of my life car loans were above 10%. In 1991 I paid 11% to buy a Ford Probe. Now, I pay 6%. Does that suggest a massive catastrophe in the circulation of money?
It is difficult to grasp the current market downturn--is it purely a psychological panic, or is there something to the derivatives devaluing? Bears believe there is something, bulls (and they seem to be few right now) are skeptical. If the market decline is psychological as Howard S. Katz suggests, then spring may come in late winter.
I hold a fair amount of mining and gold stocks that have been hurt in this downturn but they went up very strongly today, about 10%. Overall, my portfolio is down about 11%, almost all of it due to the gold stocks and some commodities etfs. I have been buying stock during this downturn, though. It is possible that the Dow will fall to 5,000. In case, I am keeping some powder dry.
There is a certain illogic to the media's coverage of credit swaps. According to the media, the banks could not value the derivatives properly but invested in them anyway and now are losing their shirts. Now, they are experiencing unanticipated defaults and risk. But if they could not value the derivatives intelligently three years ago, why can they value them intelligently now?
I recently obtained a car loan for 6%. For much of my life car loans were above 10%. In 1991 I paid 11% to buy a Ford Probe. Now, I pay 6%. Does that suggest a massive catastrophe in the circulation of money?
It is difficult to grasp the current market downturn--is it purely a psychological panic, or is there something to the derivatives devaluing? Bears believe there is something, bulls (and they seem to be few right now) are skeptical. If the market decline is psychological as Howard S. Katz suggests, then spring may come in late winter.
I hold a fair amount of mining and gold stocks that have been hurt in this downturn but they went up very strongly today, about 10%. Overall, my portfolio is down about 11%, almost all of it due to the gold stocks and some commodities etfs. I have been buying stock during this downturn, though. It is possible that the Dow will fall to 5,000. In case, I am keeping some powder dry.
Orly Tatz Action Plan Re BO BC
Dear Mr. Langbert,
my name is Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ. I represent 7 plaintiffs, seeking staying certification of elections, due to the fact that Barack Hussein Obama is ineligible. The case is in front of the Supreme Court of the US, Judge Anthony Kennedy. I would greatly appreciate support of all your readers. they caN GET MORE INFO ON DRORLY.BLOGSPOT.COM
Orly Taitz DDS Esq
According to the D Orly Tatz website :
>Urgent! What needs to be done now
There are a number of things you can do:
1. write to all 9 US Supreme Court justices in support of Lightfoot v Bowen, docket number 08A524
2. become a correspondent on my blog drorly.blogspot.com After you write an article call Bob Stevens (641--715-3900, ext 50926) or e-mail him at hound9_9@yahoo.com He can put your articles on the blog.
3. Very important!!! write an open letter to US att in Illinois Patrick Fitzgerald, cc US att in DC Mike McCuskey, cc General Director of FBI, cc FBI in all the states and demand immediate indictments of Obama on massive fraud for following reasons:
a. he is not a natural born citizen (his father was a foreign subject, he doesn't qualify as a natural born, since both parents have to be citizens at the time of the child's birth in order to qualify as a natural born citizen, see Law of Nations ), he became a candidate on the ballot by fraud
b. fraud committed in collecting $650 million under false pretenses
c. lying under oath while being sworn as an attorney in Illinois (stated that he had no other names, concealed his identities, since he went by Barry Obama and Barry Soetoro)
d. Contact the FBI and US attorney's office, and assert that they need to investigate immediately expert reports showing that his selective service certificate is forged
e. Instruct the FBI and US Attorney's office that they need to subpoena his original birth certificate and investigate reports that the short form "certification of live birth" that Obama presented to the public appears to have been altered, fake or "forged".
f. The FBI and the US Attorney's office needs to subpoena medical records, coroners reports and death certificates for his grandmother Madelyn Dunham and has mother Stanley Ann Dunham (aka Obama, aka Soetoro, aka Sutoro aka Anna Toot) and investigate why the mother's deceased social security number 535-40-8522 shows as active as late as 2006, when she allegedly died in 1995. It shows 2 addresses in HI and 2 addresses in NY.
Please call FBI and US attorney's office and demand daily updates, as to when the indictments will be forthcoming. Those have to be issued ASAP, before Jan 20, 2009. You should also contact your state attorney general's office.
4. you can forward my pleadings in Lightfoot v Bowen and footage of 12.08.08. press conference at the National Press club to all the congressmen, senators, media and your friends and family. Thank you for willingness to help.
Contact Information
United States Attorney's Office
Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division
219 S. Dearborn St., 5th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 353-5300
United States Attorney's Office
Northern District of Illinois, Western Division
308 W. State St., Ste 300
Rockford, IL 61101
Phone: (815) 987-4444
Correspondence to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to:
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
BY E-MAIL:
E-mails to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to AskDOJ@usdoj.gov.
For the Illinois Attorney General, addresses and phone numbers are here. You can email the Illinois Attorney General's office by using this contact form.
Contact the FBI.
Dr. Orly Taitz, DDS Esq
my name is Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ. I represent 7 plaintiffs, seeking staying certification of elections, due to the fact that Barack Hussein Obama is ineligible. The case is in front of the Supreme Court of the US, Judge Anthony Kennedy. I would greatly appreciate support of all your readers. they caN GET MORE INFO ON DRORLY.BLOGSPOT.COM
Orly Taitz DDS Esq
According to the D Orly Tatz website :
>Urgent! What needs to be done now
There are a number of things you can do:
1. write to all 9 US Supreme Court justices in support of Lightfoot v Bowen, docket number 08A524
2. become a correspondent on my blog drorly.blogspot.com After you write an article call Bob Stevens (641--715-3900, ext 50926) or e-mail him at hound9_9@yahoo.com He can put your articles on the blog.
3. Very important!!! write an open letter to US att in Illinois Patrick Fitzgerald, cc US att in DC Mike McCuskey, cc General Director of FBI, cc FBI in all the states and demand immediate indictments of Obama on massive fraud for following reasons:
a. he is not a natural born citizen (his father was a foreign subject, he doesn't qualify as a natural born, since both parents have to be citizens at the time of the child's birth in order to qualify as a natural born citizen, see Law of Nations ), he became a candidate on the ballot by fraud
b. fraud committed in collecting $650 million under false pretenses
c. lying under oath while being sworn as an attorney in Illinois (stated that he had no other names, concealed his identities, since he went by Barry Obama and Barry Soetoro)
d. Contact the FBI and US attorney's office, and assert that they need to investigate immediately expert reports showing that his selective service certificate is forged
e. Instruct the FBI and US Attorney's office that they need to subpoena his original birth certificate and investigate reports that the short form "certification of live birth" that Obama presented to the public appears to have been altered, fake or "forged".
f. The FBI and the US Attorney's office needs to subpoena medical records, coroners reports and death certificates for his grandmother Madelyn Dunham and has mother Stanley Ann Dunham (aka Obama, aka Soetoro, aka Sutoro aka Anna Toot) and investigate why the mother's deceased social security number 535-40-8522 shows as active as late as 2006, when she allegedly died in 1995. It shows 2 addresses in HI and 2 addresses in NY.
Please call FBI and US attorney's office and demand daily updates, as to when the indictments will be forthcoming. Those have to be issued ASAP, before Jan 20, 2009. You should also contact your state attorney general's office.
4. you can forward my pleadings in Lightfoot v Bowen and footage of 12.08.08. press conference at the National Press club to all the congressmen, senators, media and your friends and family. Thank you for willingness to help.
Contact Information
United States Attorney's Office
Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division
219 S. Dearborn St., 5th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 353-5300
United States Attorney's Office
Northern District of Illinois, Western Division
308 W. State St., Ste 300
Rockford, IL 61101
Phone: (815) 987-4444
Correspondence to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to:
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
BY E-MAIL:
E-mails to the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, may be sent to AskDOJ@usdoj.gov.
For the Illinois Attorney General, addresses and phone numbers are here. You can email the Illinois Attorney General's office by using this contact form.
Contact the FBI.
Dr. Orly Taitz, DDS Esq
Arson You Can Believe In
The following appeared in Newsmax:
>Gov. Sarah Palin's home church was badly damaged by arson, leading the governor to apologize if the fire was connected to "undeserved negative attention" from her failed campaign as the Republican vice presidential nominee.
Damage to the Wasilla Bible Church was estimated at $1 million, authorities said Saturday. No one was injured in the fire, which was set Friday night while a handful of people, including two children, were inside, according to Central Mat-Su Fire Chief James Steele.
>Gov. Sarah Palin's home church was badly damaged by arson, leading the governor to apologize if the fire was connected to "undeserved negative attention" from her failed campaign as the Republican vice presidential nominee.
Damage to the Wasilla Bible Church was estimated at $1 million, authorities said Saturday. No one was injured in the fire, which was set Friday night while a handful of people, including two children, were inside, according to Central Mat-Su Fire Chief James Steele.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
The Greatest Compliment Is When a Progressive Says You Wear a "Tin Foil Hat"
A poster on my blog who uses the misnomer Diogenes aims to insult me. I do not publish all of his posts, many of which are ad hominem attacks on, for instance, my teaching. Progressives, going back to the days of Theodore Roosevelt, have used insult rather than coherent argument because their arguments are weak. But it is revealing that Diogenes, more appropriately called Meletus after Socrates's accuser, uses one insult over and over, one that he or she considers to be most devastating, and that insult is that I wear a "tin foil hat". I do not travel in left wing circles and so I had never heard of that expression before reading it in Meletus's posts on my blog. Apparently, it refers to certain schizophrenics who delusionally believe that tin foil hats capture radio waves.
The phrase is distasteful because it expresses disrespect toward sufferers of mental illness, but beyond that it reveals a deep fear of the wielder of the insult: the fear of not conforming to received doctrine. Nothing is more frightening to a Progressive than nonconformity, for Progressives lack the ability to think creatively, but rather have been indoctrinated to conform to the authority of university professors and the mass media. Progressivism is very much derivative of early Puritanism as it is an attempt to insist on a community of ideology, and it displaces religion and replaces it with fanatical devotion to a "social gospel" of reactionary ignorance on which Progressives religiously insist even as empirical evidence suggests that their ideas have failed. Some examples are urban renewal, welfare, the Federal Reserve System and the income tax.
In other words, Meletus believes that the worst insult he can use toward Americans is that they are "crazy" or that their ideas do not fit a predetermined mold established by academics and the failed media. This was the complaint about Sarah Palin. She did not fit the Progressive mold, she did not conform. But most Progressives have never read Locke, Montesquieu, Smith, Crevecoeur or de Tocqueville, but feel themselves better qualified than others to evaluate what is important, authentic, legitimate or open to discussion.
Note that Meletus does not say that he has read Locke, but only that people who have but are not "academic specialists" lack the authority to discuss Locke's ideas because they are not "experts" who have filled out a multiple choice test at a college.
Progressives are not Americans in the sense of agreeing with the fundamental principles on which the nation is based and do not share in its history or values. This is so in a fundamental way. American culture is based on conscience, on virtue and understanding of the difference between right and wrong. It prizes common sense and practical wisdom. It is in part classically rooted and in part rooted in the Christian values that informed even the founders, such as Jefferson, who rejected traditional religion.
Unlike Americans, Progressives base their value system on shame, on conformity. They believe in authority and experts. They believe that the law ought to enforce professionalization. They devalue common sense and practical wisdom. Their value system is other-directed, not inner-directed, as David Riesman put it in his book Lonely Crowd in the 1950s. With the phrase "other-directed" Riesman was not writing about rural Americans but rather about urban, college educated, blue state professionals, that is, Progressives.
Progressives lack conscience because universities have brainwashed them into obsequious acquiescence to the progressive value system and to the authority of the Progressive priesthood, that is, the professoriate and the editors of several newspapers. Conformity to the Progressive priesthood and its religious dogma, political correctness, are valued over truth. Progressives are willing to accept silly lies, such as that Egyptians flew airplanes, because they make some students feel good. And, of course, like a political Borg, the silliest of issues gain status as IMPORTANT because the New York Times says so, and Meletuses scurry to believe, for they know that if they do not they might be said to be wearing "tin foil hats". A fringe subculture in which conformity is prized above all else, Progressives spend their time accusing others of nonconformity as though something were wrong with not conforming to their cult.
So thank you, Meletus, for the compliment when you say that I wear a "tin foil hat". Coming from a shame- and other-directed Progressive whose ideas glorify mass murder, your saying so makes me proud.
The phrase is distasteful because it expresses disrespect toward sufferers of mental illness, but beyond that it reveals a deep fear of the wielder of the insult: the fear of not conforming to received doctrine. Nothing is more frightening to a Progressive than nonconformity, for Progressives lack the ability to think creatively, but rather have been indoctrinated to conform to the authority of university professors and the mass media. Progressivism is very much derivative of early Puritanism as it is an attempt to insist on a community of ideology, and it displaces religion and replaces it with fanatical devotion to a "social gospel" of reactionary ignorance on which Progressives religiously insist even as empirical evidence suggests that their ideas have failed. Some examples are urban renewal, welfare, the Federal Reserve System and the income tax.
In other words, Meletus believes that the worst insult he can use toward Americans is that they are "crazy" or that their ideas do not fit a predetermined mold established by academics and the failed media. This was the complaint about Sarah Palin. She did not fit the Progressive mold, she did not conform. But most Progressives have never read Locke, Montesquieu, Smith, Crevecoeur or de Tocqueville, but feel themselves better qualified than others to evaluate what is important, authentic, legitimate or open to discussion.
Note that Meletus does not say that he has read Locke, but only that people who have but are not "academic specialists" lack the authority to discuss Locke's ideas because they are not "experts" who have filled out a multiple choice test at a college.
Progressives are not Americans in the sense of agreeing with the fundamental principles on which the nation is based and do not share in its history or values. This is so in a fundamental way. American culture is based on conscience, on virtue and understanding of the difference between right and wrong. It prizes common sense and practical wisdom. It is in part classically rooted and in part rooted in the Christian values that informed even the founders, such as Jefferson, who rejected traditional religion.
Unlike Americans, Progressives base their value system on shame, on conformity. They believe in authority and experts. They believe that the law ought to enforce professionalization. They devalue common sense and practical wisdom. Their value system is other-directed, not inner-directed, as David Riesman put it in his book Lonely Crowd in the 1950s. With the phrase "other-directed" Riesman was not writing about rural Americans but rather about urban, college educated, blue state professionals, that is, Progressives.
Progressives lack conscience because universities have brainwashed them into obsequious acquiescence to the progressive value system and to the authority of the Progressive priesthood, that is, the professoriate and the editors of several newspapers. Conformity to the Progressive priesthood and its religious dogma, political correctness, are valued over truth. Progressives are willing to accept silly lies, such as that Egyptians flew airplanes, because they make some students feel good. And, of course, like a political Borg, the silliest of issues gain status as IMPORTANT because the New York Times says so, and Meletuses scurry to believe, for they know that if they do not they might be said to be wearing "tin foil hats". A fringe subculture in which conformity is prized above all else, Progressives spend their time accusing others of nonconformity as though something were wrong with not conforming to their cult.
So thank you, Meletus, for the compliment when you say that I wear a "tin foil hat". Coming from a shame- and other-directed Progressive whose ideas glorify mass murder, your saying so makes me proud.
Thank You from MBA Student
I just received this e-mail from one of my MBA students at NYU.
> Professor Langbert -
>
> Thank you for a fantastic first semester. I have very much enjoyed your class and look forward to taking more classes with you in the future.
>
> Happy holidays and a prosperous and healthy 2009!
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Anjali
> Professor Langbert -
>
> Thank you for a fantastic first semester. I have very much enjoyed your class and look forward to taking more classes with you in the future.
>
> Happy holidays and a prosperous and healthy 2009!
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Anjali
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
