Sent this to Max on December 5, 2006. Not printed yet perhaps because it is anti-corporate or uses the word Nigger. I think Max may believe we will leave in the next two or three years.
Most Americans say leave Iraq. Most Iraqis say the U.S. should leave. But the U.S. will stay for quite a while.
This paragraph will seem as out of place as the arguments from the left and the right, but wait for the connection. When young folks blame the poor for not working as hard as they should, I point out that we should look at the name on the food stamp card and admit that that is who benefits from the program.
Here is the connection. The name on the back of the food stamp card is the same one in charge of the eight largest banks in Iraq. This name was also involved with the set up of the Federal Reserve.
Let the rich steal our money to steal the Iraqi oil. We have important things to debate; like banning the word Nigger, gay marriage, and flag burning.
Didn't Jefferson warn of something more dangerous than standing armies? Didn't Jackson say there will be Jackson and no National Bank or a National Bank and no Jackson?
Americans need to do more than watch the news the week before an election.
In Liberty,
Ed Gluck
P.S.: Morgan Bank is the name.
Perhaps Morgan-Stanley would be more correct or more current.
Friday, December 29, 2006
Saturday, December 23, 2006
Lilly, wasn't Gov. Daniels a CEO there?
Sent this to Maxx and Tavel:
Taxing smokers. Next the obese. But where does it come from? Read this.
Ed Gluck, Terre Haute
http://countercurre nts.org/pringle2 31206.htm
Court Allows Eli Lilly To Bury Zyprexa Documents
By Evelyn Pringle
23 December, 2006Countercurrents. org
Alaskan attorney, Jim Gottstein, says that after being served with a mandatory injunction, he has returned the internal Eli Lilly documents that he obtained in litigation and provided to the New York Times to the court.
Information from the documents related to Lilly's antipsychotic drug, Zypexa, was highlighted two days in a row in front-page articles in the Times
The documents reveal the illegal marketing schemes used by Lilly to make Zyprexa its best-seller, which the company has managed to keep hidden for years by entering into out of court settlements in civil lawsuits which included confidentiality clauses and by getting judges to place the documents under protective orders to shield them from public view.
For instance, the documents under seal here are from a case where Lilly entered into an out-of-court settlement in June 2005, and agreed to pay $690 million to cover claims by about 8000 Zyprexa victims. But in order to get paid, the plaintiffs were required to sign a confidentiality clause and basically keep their mouths shut about Zyprexa from then on.
Its really comical the way Lilly keeps acting all indignant over the disclosure of these documents as if they contain brand new charges, when the company has been under federal and state investigations related to its off-label marketing of Zyprexa for several years already. The company is also facing Medicaid fraud charges in lawsuits all over the county.
In 1996, Zyprexa was approved for the treatment of adults with schizophrenia, and a few years later, it was approved for short-term treatment of adults with manic episodes associated with bipolar disorder.
Yet despite these extremely limited approved uses, Zyprexa went on to become the top selling antipsychotic worldwide with an estimated 20 million people having used the drug and Lilly’s best-selling product, with $4.2 billion in sales in 2005, which translates into 30% of its total revenues.
The documents provided to Times, span a decade and clearly show that the company promoted off-label the sale of Zyprexa for uses not approved by the FDA as being safe and effective. They also reveal that Lilly knew about Zyprexa's link to drastic weight gain and diabetes for years but failed to inform prescribing doctors and consumers.
In fact according to the Times, Lilly knowingly distributed false information to doctors about the risks as late as 2001. On December 21, 2006, the Times reported that the information provided to doctors about the blood-sugar risks of Zyprexa did not match data circulated inside the company after a review of Lilly's clinical trials.
The Times quotes a Lilly report from November, 1999, that shows that after examining 70 clinical trials, Lilly found that 16% of patients taking Zyprexa for a year had gained over 66 pounds. But instead of making these findings public, the company used data from a smaller group of trials that showed roughly 30% of Zypexa patients gained 22 pounds. Mr Gottstein is not involved in the case in which the judge issued a protective order In re: Zyprexa Products Liability litigation, MDL No. 1596, United States District Court, Eastern District of New York (MDL 1596), "in any manner whatsoever," he says.
He is the leader of, "The Law Project for Psychiatric Rights (PsychRights) , a public interest law firm devoted to the defense of people facing forced psychiatric drugging against their will.
Currently, Mr Gottstein represents an Alaskan patient and says the injunction will prevent him from using the Lilly documents to show that the side effects of Zyprexa are well-established by the company's own clinical trials and therefore, his client should not be forced to take such drugs against his will.
In Myers v Alaska Psychiatric Institute, 138 P.3d 238 (Alaska 2006), a case argued by Mr Gottstein last summer, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that Alaska's forced drugging procedures were unconstitutional because they did not require the court to find such drugging to be in the person's best interests, and that there were no less restrictivealternatives.
In order to present the evidence in the case he is handling now, Mr Gottstein is looking to the Alaskan courts to issue a ruling that says his client's right to avoid forced drugging outweighs Lilly's right to keep the information about risks hidden.
He says the documents are highly relevant to a court inquiry, now required in Alaska, before a court can make an informed decision about whether to order forced drugging for his client.
In a December 17, 2006, letter to the court in the New York case, Mr Gottstein stated: "In large part, this state of affairs has been created by the lies told by the manufacturers of psychiatric drugs."
"My impression is," he wrote, "that Eli Lilly's lies about Zyprexa form the basis of the plaintiffs' claims in MDL 1596, but that is not PsychRights' focus."
"PsychRights' focus," he explained, "is helping people avoid being forcibly drugged pursuant to court orders, where the courts have been, in my view, duped by Eli Lilly and other pharmaceutical company prevarications. "
"In my view," Mr Gottstein concluded, "the proper disposition of the question would be in favor of my client's right to inform the court of the extreme harm caused by Zyprexa, which Eli Lilly has successfully hidden for so long, while making its billions off the pill."
A court hearing was held in Brooklyn, New York, on a December 18, 2006, on a motion by Lilly, asking the court to order Mr Gottstein to the return the documents to the court, and to bar him from disseminating them any further.
According to the transcript, Lilly also asked the court to require Mr Gottstein to "preserve all emails and all correspondence of any kind, whether it's voice mail, written letters, emails, so that we can pursue a contempt proceeding against both he and Dr Egilman."
Even though the Lilly documents prove that the company knew that Zyprexa was causing diabetes, and kept pushing the drug anyways, potentially harming millions more patients, the judges gave Mr Gottstein hell and threatened to find him in contempt for doing nothing more than warning the public about the side effects of Zyprexa after Lilly concealed the information for a decade.
There is not one single word in the transcripts about Lilly knowingly injuring and killing people with Zyprexa or illegally pushing the drug to unwitting victims for off-label use.
Instead, Judge Brian Cogan, granted Lilly's motion, and told Mr Gottstein's attorney that his client, "deliberately aided and abetted Dr Egilman in getting these documents released from the restriction that they were under, under the protective order. He knew what he was doing, and he did it deliberately. "
Judge Cogan went on to tell the attorney, "your client should be on notice that of this moment, he is under a mandatory injunction to return those documents ... to take them down from any websites that he may have posted them on, and to take any reasonable effort to recover them from any sites or persons to which he has delivered them."
On December 18, 2006, at an earlier telephone conference in Brooklyn, Judge Roane Mann also did not utter one word about Lilly's illegal conduct, but instead admonished Mr Gottstein for not playing fair with poor Eli Lilly in making the information about Zyprexa public, stating:
"I personally am not in a position to order you to return the documents. I can't make you return them but I can make you wish you had because I think this is highly improper not only to have obtained the documents on short notice without Lilly being advised of the amendment but then to disseminate them publicly before it could be litigated. It certainly smacks as bad faith."
These judges apparently believe that an expert, such as Dr David Egilman, who is hired to review documents in a case and subsequently learns that people are being seriously injured and killed, should be forced to keep that knowledge a secret if a judge issues a protective order.
There is something very wrong with this picture. It begs the question of how can an ethical doctor not speak if he knows that patients are being harmed
The reason always cited for the need to keep documents under seal is the claim that the information contains trade secrets. However, just as Lilly has done here, drug companies have for too long been abusing the process by using protective orders to hide illegal conduct by concealing documents that show the company is illegally promoting the off-label use of a drug or that a drug can cause serious injuries or that a drug does not work.
In a case like this, if a court truly does not have a choice and is required to seal documents even when they show blatant illegal conduct on the part of a drug company, then Congress had better get busy and pass a law to stop the use the US court system to protect what could very easily be described as corporate murder.
In response to an earlier article on this issue, reader Larry Bone wrote and asked this author, "Is the corruption on this so widespread that no one would dare prosecute?"
"It is criminal behavior," he points out, "on a huge scale that is being virtually totally ignored by the authorities responsible for the public safety."
"I just feel," Mr Bone wrote, "that there has to be an attorney or someone in a judicial or ethical capacity who would have the guts, and persistence to prosecute Lilly."
"It seems incredibly ridiculous," he states, "let alone obscene, that such blatant wrongdoing seemingly continues to be ignored by the legal authorities with jurisdiction over these sorts of cases."
"If these companies believe they have done nothing wrong," he says, "then let them prove their innocence in court."
Ellen Liversridge also wants a criminal investigation of Lilly. She lost her 30-year-old son, Rob, to the adverse effects of the drug. "He gained almost 100 pounds while taking Zyprexa," Ellen says.
"Rob lapsed into a coma," she recalls, "and died of profound hyperglycemia four days later on October 5, 2002."
"I believe that the people who did this should have a criminal trial," Ellen says. "Enron executives went to prison for wiping out people's life savings," she points out.
"Lilly executives should go to prison," she says, "for knowingly being responsible for people's deaths, shattered families; ruined and grieving families."
Ellen has nothing but praise for the New York Times and its source. "I am grateful to Jim Gottstein for making available this awful truth and hope it results in justice being done."
"If there can ever be justice for a crime as heinous as this," she adds.
Daniel Haszard, of Bangor Maine, feels the same way. In 1996, he was prescribed Zyprexa off-label to supposedly treat Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and he remained on the drug for 4 years.
Although he paid $250 a month for the drug, Mr Haszard says the drug did not relieve his symptoms of PTSD at all and in early 2000, he was diagnosed with diabetes.
He was shocked to hear the diagnosis, he said, because there was no history of diabetes in his family. Just as thousands of other Zyprexa victims, Mr Haszard did not make the connection between his diabetes and the drug until he saw a commercial for a law firm in December 2005.
Zyprexa causes diabetes, he says, and public health programs are left to pick up the tab for the medial expenses. According to Mr Haszard, "there are now 7 states going after Lilly for fraud and restitution, " related to the promotion of Zyprexa for off-label use and the concealment of its risks.
Dr Stefan Kruszewski, MD, a Harvard trained, certified psychiatrist in adult, adolescent, and geriatric psychiatry, from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, also finds Lilly's conduct appalling.
"Neither health professionals nor consumers," he states, "can accurately provide information about the risk and benefits of a drug like Zyprexa - or any drug for any condition - without a comprehensive awareness of the risks and benefits."
"If the clinical research data regarding effectiveness, efficacy or safety is sequestered or misrepresented from observation studies, randomized drug trials or meta-analyses, " he says, "then it is not possible for any provider to give any patient what he or she needs to make an informed consent."
"At that point," Dr Kruszewski says, "individuals receive drugs that may or may not help them, but always at their own peril."
"Zyprexa causes both a severe metabolic syndrome consisting of obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular problems," Dr Kruszewski advises, "at the same time that it continues to cause neurological side-effects like the older antipsychotics. "
"Zyprexa and its antipsychotics cousins," he explains, "were marketed to be safer and easier to tolerate because the pharmaceutical companies said that the newer drugs caused fewer neurological injuries, like restlessness or ‘akathesia,’ and tardive dyskinesia."
Those assertions are false he says, and "what we have now is a drug whose massive revenues and promotion are based upon faulty disclosures by Eli Lilly."
(Evelyn Pringle evelyn-pringle@ sbcglobal. net is a columnist for OpEd News and an investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in government and corporate America)
"When the government fears the people, there is liberty.
When the people fear the government, there is tyranny...."
Thomas Jefferson
visit: www.lpvc.blogspot. com
____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail. yahoo.com
Taxing smokers. Next the obese. But where does it come from? Read this.
Ed Gluck, Terre Haute
http://countercurre nts.org/pringle2 31206.htm
Court Allows Eli Lilly To Bury Zyprexa Documents
By Evelyn Pringle
23 December, 2006Countercurrents. org
Alaskan attorney, Jim Gottstein, says that after being served with a mandatory injunction, he has returned the internal Eli Lilly documents that he obtained in litigation and provided to the New York Times to the court.
Information from the documents related to Lilly's antipsychotic drug, Zypexa, was highlighted two days in a row in front-page articles in the Times
The documents reveal the illegal marketing schemes used by Lilly to make Zyprexa its best-seller, which the company has managed to keep hidden for years by entering into out of court settlements in civil lawsuits which included confidentiality clauses and by getting judges to place the documents under protective orders to shield them from public view.
For instance, the documents under seal here are from a case where Lilly entered into an out-of-court settlement in June 2005, and agreed to pay $690 million to cover claims by about 8000 Zyprexa victims. But in order to get paid, the plaintiffs were required to sign a confidentiality clause and basically keep their mouths shut about Zyprexa from then on.
Its really comical the way Lilly keeps acting all indignant over the disclosure of these documents as if they contain brand new charges, when the company has been under federal and state investigations related to its off-label marketing of Zyprexa for several years already. The company is also facing Medicaid fraud charges in lawsuits all over the county.
In 1996, Zyprexa was approved for the treatment of adults with schizophrenia, and a few years later, it was approved for short-term treatment of adults with manic episodes associated with bipolar disorder.
Yet despite these extremely limited approved uses, Zyprexa went on to become the top selling antipsychotic worldwide with an estimated 20 million people having used the drug and Lilly’s best-selling product, with $4.2 billion in sales in 2005, which translates into 30% of its total revenues.
The documents provided to Times, span a decade and clearly show that the company promoted off-label the sale of Zyprexa for uses not approved by the FDA as being safe and effective. They also reveal that Lilly knew about Zyprexa's link to drastic weight gain and diabetes for years but failed to inform prescribing doctors and consumers.
In fact according to the Times, Lilly knowingly distributed false information to doctors about the risks as late as 2001. On December 21, 2006, the Times reported that the information provided to doctors about the blood-sugar risks of Zyprexa did not match data circulated inside the company after a review of Lilly's clinical trials.
The Times quotes a Lilly report from November, 1999, that shows that after examining 70 clinical trials, Lilly found that 16% of patients taking Zyprexa for a year had gained over 66 pounds. But instead of making these findings public, the company used data from a smaller group of trials that showed roughly 30% of Zypexa patients gained 22 pounds. Mr Gottstein is not involved in the case in which the judge issued a protective order In re: Zyprexa Products Liability litigation, MDL No. 1596, United States District Court, Eastern District of New York (MDL 1596), "in any manner whatsoever," he says.
He is the leader of, "The Law Project for Psychiatric Rights (PsychRights) , a public interest law firm devoted to the defense of people facing forced psychiatric drugging against their will.
Currently, Mr Gottstein represents an Alaskan patient and says the injunction will prevent him from using the Lilly documents to show that the side effects of Zyprexa are well-established by the company's own clinical trials and therefore, his client should not be forced to take such drugs against his will.
In Myers v Alaska Psychiatric Institute, 138 P.3d 238 (Alaska 2006), a case argued by Mr Gottstein last summer, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that Alaska's forced drugging procedures were unconstitutional because they did not require the court to find such drugging to be in the person's best interests, and that there were no less restrictivealternatives.
In order to present the evidence in the case he is handling now, Mr Gottstein is looking to the Alaskan courts to issue a ruling that says his client's right to avoid forced drugging outweighs Lilly's right to keep the information about risks hidden.
He says the documents are highly relevant to a court inquiry, now required in Alaska, before a court can make an informed decision about whether to order forced drugging for his client.
In a December 17, 2006, letter to the court in the New York case, Mr Gottstein stated: "In large part, this state of affairs has been created by the lies told by the manufacturers of psychiatric drugs."
"My impression is," he wrote, "that Eli Lilly's lies about Zyprexa form the basis of the plaintiffs' claims in MDL 1596, but that is not PsychRights' focus."
"PsychRights' focus," he explained, "is helping people avoid being forcibly drugged pursuant to court orders, where the courts have been, in my view, duped by Eli Lilly and other pharmaceutical company prevarications. "
"In my view," Mr Gottstein concluded, "the proper disposition of the question would be in favor of my client's right to inform the court of the extreme harm caused by Zyprexa, which Eli Lilly has successfully hidden for so long, while making its billions off the pill."
A court hearing was held in Brooklyn, New York, on a December 18, 2006, on a motion by Lilly, asking the court to order Mr Gottstein to the return the documents to the court, and to bar him from disseminating them any further.
According to the transcript, Lilly also asked the court to require Mr Gottstein to "preserve all emails and all correspondence of any kind, whether it's voice mail, written letters, emails, so that we can pursue a contempt proceeding against both he and Dr Egilman."
Even though the Lilly documents prove that the company knew that Zyprexa was causing diabetes, and kept pushing the drug anyways, potentially harming millions more patients, the judges gave Mr Gottstein hell and threatened to find him in contempt for doing nothing more than warning the public about the side effects of Zyprexa after Lilly concealed the information for a decade.
There is not one single word in the transcripts about Lilly knowingly injuring and killing people with Zyprexa or illegally pushing the drug to unwitting victims for off-label use.
Instead, Judge Brian Cogan, granted Lilly's motion, and told Mr Gottstein's attorney that his client, "deliberately aided and abetted Dr Egilman in getting these documents released from the restriction that they were under, under the protective order. He knew what he was doing, and he did it deliberately. "
Judge Cogan went on to tell the attorney, "your client should be on notice that of this moment, he is under a mandatory injunction to return those documents ... to take them down from any websites that he may have posted them on, and to take any reasonable effort to recover them from any sites or persons to which he has delivered them."
On December 18, 2006, at an earlier telephone conference in Brooklyn, Judge Roane Mann also did not utter one word about Lilly's illegal conduct, but instead admonished Mr Gottstein for not playing fair with poor Eli Lilly in making the information about Zyprexa public, stating:
"I personally am not in a position to order you to return the documents. I can't make you return them but I can make you wish you had because I think this is highly improper not only to have obtained the documents on short notice without Lilly being advised of the amendment but then to disseminate them publicly before it could be litigated. It certainly smacks as bad faith."
These judges apparently believe that an expert, such as Dr David Egilman, who is hired to review documents in a case and subsequently learns that people are being seriously injured and killed, should be forced to keep that knowledge a secret if a judge issues a protective order.
There is something very wrong with this picture. It begs the question of how can an ethical doctor not speak if he knows that patients are being harmed
The reason always cited for the need to keep documents under seal is the claim that the information contains trade secrets. However, just as Lilly has done here, drug companies have for too long been abusing the process by using protective orders to hide illegal conduct by concealing documents that show the company is illegally promoting the off-label use of a drug or that a drug can cause serious injuries or that a drug does not work.
In a case like this, if a court truly does not have a choice and is required to seal documents even when they show blatant illegal conduct on the part of a drug company, then Congress had better get busy and pass a law to stop the use the US court system to protect what could very easily be described as corporate murder.
In response to an earlier article on this issue, reader Larry Bone wrote and asked this author, "Is the corruption on this so widespread that no one would dare prosecute?"
"It is criminal behavior," he points out, "on a huge scale that is being virtually totally ignored by the authorities responsible for the public safety."
"I just feel," Mr Bone wrote, "that there has to be an attorney or someone in a judicial or ethical capacity who would have the guts, and persistence to prosecute Lilly."
"It seems incredibly ridiculous," he states, "let alone obscene, that such blatant wrongdoing seemingly continues to be ignored by the legal authorities with jurisdiction over these sorts of cases."
"If these companies believe they have done nothing wrong," he says, "then let them prove their innocence in court."
Ellen Liversridge also wants a criminal investigation of Lilly. She lost her 30-year-old son, Rob, to the adverse effects of the drug. "He gained almost 100 pounds while taking Zyprexa," Ellen says.
"Rob lapsed into a coma," she recalls, "and died of profound hyperglycemia four days later on October 5, 2002."
"I believe that the people who did this should have a criminal trial," Ellen says. "Enron executives went to prison for wiping out people's life savings," she points out.
"Lilly executives should go to prison," she says, "for knowingly being responsible for people's deaths, shattered families; ruined and grieving families."
Ellen has nothing but praise for the New York Times and its source. "I am grateful to Jim Gottstein for making available this awful truth and hope it results in justice being done."
"If there can ever be justice for a crime as heinous as this," she adds.
Daniel Haszard, of Bangor Maine, feels the same way. In 1996, he was prescribed Zyprexa off-label to supposedly treat Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and he remained on the drug for 4 years.
Although he paid $250 a month for the drug, Mr Haszard says the drug did not relieve his symptoms of PTSD at all and in early 2000, he was diagnosed with diabetes.
He was shocked to hear the diagnosis, he said, because there was no history of diabetes in his family. Just as thousands of other Zyprexa victims, Mr Haszard did not make the connection between his diabetes and the drug until he saw a commercial for a law firm in December 2005.
Zyprexa causes diabetes, he says, and public health programs are left to pick up the tab for the medial expenses. According to Mr Haszard, "there are now 7 states going after Lilly for fraud and restitution, " related to the promotion of Zyprexa for off-label use and the concealment of its risks.
Dr Stefan Kruszewski, MD, a Harvard trained, certified psychiatrist in adult, adolescent, and geriatric psychiatry, from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, also finds Lilly's conduct appalling.
"Neither health professionals nor consumers," he states, "can accurately provide information about the risk and benefits of a drug like Zyprexa - or any drug for any condition - without a comprehensive awareness of the risks and benefits."
"If the clinical research data regarding effectiveness, efficacy or safety is sequestered or misrepresented from observation studies, randomized drug trials or meta-analyses, " he says, "then it is not possible for any provider to give any patient what he or she needs to make an informed consent."
"At that point," Dr Kruszewski says, "individuals receive drugs that may or may not help them, but always at their own peril."
"Zyprexa causes both a severe metabolic syndrome consisting of obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular problems," Dr Kruszewski advises, "at the same time that it continues to cause neurological side-effects like the older antipsychotics. "
"Zyprexa and its antipsychotics cousins," he explains, "were marketed to be safer and easier to tolerate because the pharmaceutical companies said that the newer drugs caused fewer neurological injuries, like restlessness or ‘akathesia,’ and tardive dyskinesia."
Those assertions are false he says, and "what we have now is a drug whose massive revenues and promotion are based upon faulty disclosures by Eli Lilly."
(Evelyn Pringle evelyn-pringle@ sbcglobal. net is a columnist for OpEd News and an investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in government and corporate America)
"When the government fears the people, there is liberty.
When the people fear the government, there is tyranny...."
Thomas Jefferson
visit: www.lpvc.blogspot. com
____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail. yahoo.com
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Thomas Paine
I usually refer to reviews by Amazon.com for books but for "Thomas Paine" by Craig Nelson I refer to a review by Edward J. Dodson. It may just be too early for good reviews at other places. I am not familiar with the www.cooperativeindividualism.org/ but it does look interesting. Like the review by Dodson, it looks a little to Anglo for me. (Therefore I do not now recommend his course.)
I do agree with Dodson that Nelson may miss at his interpertation of background. What is good about this book is that it comes close to placing Paine in the "good" camp. Madison, Jefferson, Mason and Paine are the "good" guys. Hamilton, Adams, and Washington are the "bad" guys.
This book has valuable information that can also be found in American Aurora. To understand American beginnings these books should be along side Hogeland's The Whiskey Rebellion and Leonard L. Richards' book, Shays's Rebellion. They represent a change in writers from slamming the "slave holders" to seeing big government mercantilists for the thieves they were. We can only hope freedom loving founders will continue to be portrayed honestly.
Here is an excellent paragraph from page 334. These authors lean left and worship "progressives" at times. But their history beats the lies of the "interested" mercantilists.:
"In at least the United States today, however, that coalition seems to have come to an end, with the Adams-Hamilton style of government triumphant, as even American news anchor Walter Cronkite admitted in 2005: 'the ruling class is the rich, who really command our industry, our commerce, and our finance. And those people are so able to manipulate our democracy that they really control the democracy.' While Franklin, Paine, and Jefferson would be crestfallen that the modern-day American federal government is the reserve of a new aristocracy -- multimillionaire plutocrats and their corporate sponsors -- Adams and Hamilton would be just as shocked to learn that their admired ruling elite no longer even pretends to lives of virtue."
I would call those with a lack of virtue not plutocrats (rule by the rich) but oligarchs (rule by oppressors in favor of a class system).
I do agree with Dodson that Nelson may miss at his interpertation of background. What is good about this book is that it comes close to placing Paine in the "good" camp. Madison, Jefferson, Mason and Paine are the "good" guys. Hamilton, Adams, and Washington are the "bad" guys.
This book has valuable information that can also be found in American Aurora. To understand American beginnings these books should be along side Hogeland's The Whiskey Rebellion and Leonard L. Richards' book, Shays's Rebellion. They represent a change in writers from slamming the "slave holders" to seeing big government mercantilists for the thieves they were. We can only hope freedom loving founders will continue to be portrayed honestly.
Here is an excellent paragraph from page 334. These authors lean left and worship "progressives" at times. But their history beats the lies of the "interested" mercantilists.:
"In at least the United States today, however, that coalition seems to have come to an end, with the Adams-Hamilton style of government triumphant, as even American news anchor Walter Cronkite admitted in 2005: 'the ruling class is the rich, who really command our industry, our commerce, and our finance. And those people are so able to manipulate our democracy that they really control the democracy.' While Franklin, Paine, and Jefferson would be crestfallen that the modern-day American federal government is the reserve of a new aristocracy -- multimillionaire plutocrats and their corporate sponsors -- Adams and Hamilton would be just as shocked to learn that their admired ruling elite no longer even pretends to lives of virtue."
I would call those with a lack of virtue not plutocrats (rule by the rich) but oligarchs (rule by oppressors in favor of a class system).
Monday, November 13, 2006
Lincoln Unmasked
LINCOLN UNMASKED by Thomas J. Di Lorenzo is a scholarly work written at a level for college graduates. Teachers need to read this book and put it into language children can understand.
What makes this a great book is that Di Lorenzo links the damage Lincoln did, with the damage happening today. He correctly links the neocon's references to Lincoln with strange beliefs that his (Lincoln's) misdeeds make today's atrocities forgivable.
An excellent link is his case that Lincoln ended the Independent Treasury System in 1862 with his greenbacks thus bringing back the National Bank in 1863. (in essence) The nonbacked greenbacks caused fantastic inflation. It should not be a surprise that in 1863 coins were issued with "In God We Trust" on them. We certainly could not trust the government to make real money. So much for our pious "conservatives" and their "God is on money."
This book is highly recommended.
What makes this a great book is that Di Lorenzo links the damage Lincoln did, with the damage happening today. He correctly links the neocon's references to Lincoln with strange beliefs that his (Lincoln's) misdeeds make today's atrocities forgivable.
An excellent link is his case that Lincoln ended the Independent Treasury System in 1862 with his greenbacks thus bringing back the National Bank in 1863. (in essence) The nonbacked greenbacks caused fantastic inflation. It should not be a surprise that in 1863 coins were issued with "In God We Trust" on them. We certainly could not trust the government to make real money. So much for our pious "conservatives" and their "God is on money."
This book is highly recommended.
Monday, October 16, 2006
Back to School
Heard from the School board candidates - Alpa Patel and Rosemarie Scott.
Ms. Patel is a lawyer and looks like a good candidate.
I talked with Mrs. Scott and will vote for her.
Perhaps of some interest to voters - registered for candidacy:
Patel 8-24
Scott 8-22
(Information thanks to Sandy at the Clerk's office.)
Ms. Patel is a lawyer and looks like a good candidate.
I talked with Mrs. Scott and will vote for her.
Perhaps of some interest to voters - registered for candidacy:
Patel 8-24
Scott 8-22
(Information thanks to Sandy at the Clerk's office.)
Friday, October 13, 2006
IN Senate Race
Here's some info:
Vote for Lugar if you like this:
On illegal tuition:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/677109/posts
On the 2nd Amendment:
http://www.bendomenech.com/blog/archives/000294.html
On Teacher money:
http://www.lugar2006.com/egov/docs/1147900514362.htm
If you can think, vote for Steve Osborn.
Vote for Lugar if you like this:
On illegal tuition:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/677109/posts
On the 2nd Amendment:
http://www.bendomenech.com/blog/archives/000294.html
On Teacher money:
http://www.lugar2006.com/egov/docs/1147900514362.htm
If you can think, vote for Steve Osborn.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
John Birch Society Members' books not bad
G. Edward Griffin's book, "The Creature From Jekyll Island" and James Perloff's book, "The Shadows of Power" are very informative. Written by John Birchers they tell a story of the take over of the U.S. government by the wealthy insiders.
The Birchers seem a little obsessed with the Commies. The real enemies are the people in control. This may seem more obvious in today's world. The New York Times and major news outlets refuse to acknowledge Libertarian candidates and mention a Republican who is a write-in candidate. Notice that they will mention "Establishment" candidates like the "Independent" from CONnecticut. (LIEberman the socialist-warmonger) (Many journalists are listed as part of the 'organization' - Council on Foreign Relations -CFR - and this is seen today.)
Birchers seem to love God a little too much. Makes us wonder if the Pope mates with the new Establishment - and popes have been the Establishment - will the Birchers follow that leader.
Still, these are good books for listing the enemies of "The People" and the Constitution. They list the enemy as Globalists. This may be the most correct term for the enemy. George Soros is rich and hasn't figured out exactly who the enemy is, but seems less of a Globalist. This may be an illusion as the Neocons are so big government Hitler and Stalin look like good alternatives. So the liberals don't look so bad, . . . today. And of course the Birchers were ahead of their time and may continue to be ahead of the curve. This they have also found out can be dangerous. (My counter to this is to always be on the front page if you can.)
A good quote from Perloff, "James Madison said: 'The accumulation of all power - legislative, executive, and judiciary - in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.'"
A change in the U.S. House (at the least) is welcome from most of us who cherish liberty.
For full disclosure G. Edward Griffin has worked with Aaron Russo on his latest release - "From Freedom to Fascism" and I support Aaron. Still this book "Creature" should be read by every American.
The Birchers seem a little obsessed with the Commies. The real enemies are the people in control. This may seem more obvious in today's world. The New York Times and major news outlets refuse to acknowledge Libertarian candidates and mention a Republican who is a write-in candidate. Notice that they will mention "Establishment" candidates like the "Independent" from CONnecticut. (LIEberman the socialist-warmonger) (Many journalists are listed as part of the 'organization' - Council on Foreign Relations -CFR - and this is seen today.)
Birchers seem to love God a little too much. Makes us wonder if the Pope mates with the new Establishment - and popes have been the Establishment - will the Birchers follow that leader.
Still, these are good books for listing the enemies of "The People" and the Constitution. They list the enemy as Globalists. This may be the most correct term for the enemy. George Soros is rich and hasn't figured out exactly who the enemy is, but seems less of a Globalist. This may be an illusion as the Neocons are so big government Hitler and Stalin look like good alternatives. So the liberals don't look so bad, . . . today. And of course the Birchers were ahead of their time and may continue to be ahead of the curve. This they have also found out can be dangerous. (My counter to this is to always be on the front page if you can.)
A good quote from Perloff, "James Madison said: 'The accumulation of all power - legislative, executive, and judiciary - in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.'"
A change in the U.S. House (at the least) is welcome from most of us who cherish liberty.
For full disclosure G. Edward Griffin has worked with Aaron Russo on his latest release - "From Freedom to Fascism" and I support Aaron. Still this book "Creature" should be read by every American.
Monday, October 09, 2006
25 considered worst than Lugar
At http://www.beyonddelay.org/ we can see some of the dirtiest U.S. reps.
I asked about our filthy Lugar and eagerly await a reply.
I don't believe there are 25 worst than Lugar. He hasn't been caught. Give me a Constitutionalist who steals, beats his wife, and sometimes kills, and he may get my vote. These globalists should find another country.
I asked about our filthy Lugar and eagerly await a reply.
I don't believe there are 25 worst than Lugar. He hasn't been caught. Give me a Constitutionalist who steals, beats his wife, and sometimes kills, and he may get my vote. These globalists should find another country.
Friday, October 06, 2006
Wake up c-span!
Due to a pathetic lack of coverage of one Libertarian candidate, I Posted this at Hammer of Truth:
Sent this letter to journal@c-span.org. Perhaps others can add their opinions.
Ed
Dear producers,
I’ve seen on Washington Journal and in a Cheney rally for a write-in candidate coverage of Delay’s old Congressional seat. Yet no mention of the Libertarian candidate Bob Smither. What’s the problem? I do not see this same noncoverage of all candidates polling second in U.S. Congressional Districts.
I hope you have Mr. Smither as a guest to make up for this terrible mistake.
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/state/15313886.htm
Thanks for your prompt attention.
Ed Gluck, Terre Haute, IN
I'll post any reply from C-span.
Sent this letter to journal@c-span.org. Perhaps others can add their opinions.
Ed
Dear producers,
I’ve seen on Washington Journal and in a Cheney rally for a write-in candidate coverage of Delay’s old Congressional seat. Yet no mention of the Libertarian candidate Bob Smither. What’s the problem? I do not see this same noncoverage of all candidates polling second in U.S. Congressional Districts.
I hope you have Mr. Smither as a guest to make up for this terrible mistake.
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/state/15313886.htm
Thanks for your prompt attention.
Ed Gluck, Terre Haute, IN
I'll post any reply from C-span.
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Vigo School Board Elections
It looks like two good candidates have challenged Tom in the race for school board. The other incumbents are unchallenged.
One challenger worked as a civil rights attorney and the other mentioned she was for the individual.
I would like to question these candidates before I choose between them.
Read more here: http://www.tribstar.com/local/local_story_240233835.html
One challenger worked as a civil rights attorney and the other mentioned she was for the individual.
I would like to question these candidates before I choose between them.
Read more here: http://www.tribstar.com/local/local_story_240233835.html
Thursday, August 24, 2006
BOOK REPORTS
Constitution in Exile: By Judge Andrew Napolitano
This book, by a Fox News guy was surprisingly Libertarian. His first book leaned a little Republican, although I must say I enjoyed his attacks on Reno.
This book must be read by all because he gives an excellent explanation of the difference between Legal Positivism and Natural Law. If nailed down, I would say that all laws are agreements between men which sounds positivist, but I believe that agreement must be on laws that do not disturb individual freedom that does no harm to others. Napolitano captures this thought of our founders. (For Libertarians, Jury Rights Day - September 5, reminds us that the jury rules on not only the facts of a case but also the law itself. If clarification is needed visit Fully Informed Jury Association - FIJA.)
My rating would be similar to the ones you can read at Amazon.com. The weakness I saw was, as in his first book, a belief that the government can demand a license for my traveling. (unless he is parsing words like the bad guys) He also seems to have missed the part in history about the founders having conventions so that the Constitution was approved not by the states but by We the People. It was the People who demanded a Bill of Rights be placed in the Constitution.
Size Matters: By Joel Miller
This book brings up all the Republican "ideas" on what is wrong with the U.S. and goes half-way in giving solutions. I will sound here like the Green guy (reviewer at amazon.com) who gave it one star when I say it points at a Social Security "problem" and the Republican solution of retirement savings accounts. Mr. Miller is young and perhaps influenced by his father Dennis Miller, who may be the "funny" guy/football commentator.
In a chapter on licensing and regulation, he writes this very true paragraph:
"By killing competition in a trade, we also remove a crucial incentive to improve quality. Once your job is safe from competitors who would happily filch your customers, it is easier to let stuff slip now and then, take it easy, stop pushing to improve and please, innovate and anticipate new customer demand. Such a lowering of quality is not inevitable, but the possibility goes up the moment competition goes down."
Four pages before that paragraph Mr. Miller ends a paragraph with this nonsense: "Given the highly specialized and technical knowledge needed to perform in some of these trades, licensing seems reasonable, even smart. License physicians? Of course!"
Mr. Miller does us one favor although by accident. He quotes Jefferson from his first inaugural:
"...[W]hat more is necessary to make us a happy and prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens - a wise and frugal government, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities...."
This part: "and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned" means no tax on labor. As income taxes are being raised on labor in cities, counties, and states, we see a transfer from slave labor to giant international corporations. Who pays for tax abatements and incentives to land new business? The workers and small business.
Since I did not see any call for banning homosexual marriages I admit this book could have been worse. Compared to his writing on Lew against the "Drug War" I found this book a let down. It gives a snapshot in time. I have thought about regulating engineers as their calculations have life and death consequences, but now they make less than teachers. (according to Paul Harvey - summer "moonlighting" not included) I give this book two stars out of five for giving Republicans something to hope for. Though we all know Republicans say one thing and do something very different.
My obvious comment: It is time the voters demanded real action. Don't vote for anyone who approved the Patriot Act or Iraq War. Congressional and Presidential candidates must favor Roberts Rules - NO LOG ROLLING! - vote one issue at a time.
This book, by a Fox News guy was surprisingly Libertarian. His first book leaned a little Republican, although I must say I enjoyed his attacks on Reno.
This book must be read by all because he gives an excellent explanation of the difference between Legal Positivism and Natural Law. If nailed down, I would say that all laws are agreements between men which sounds positivist, but I believe that agreement must be on laws that do not disturb individual freedom that does no harm to others. Napolitano captures this thought of our founders. (For Libertarians, Jury Rights Day - September 5, reminds us that the jury rules on not only the facts of a case but also the law itself. If clarification is needed visit Fully Informed Jury Association - FIJA.)
My rating would be similar to the ones you can read at Amazon.com. The weakness I saw was, as in his first book, a belief that the government can demand a license for my traveling. (unless he is parsing words like the bad guys) He also seems to have missed the part in history about the founders having conventions so that the Constitution was approved not by the states but by We the People. It was the People who demanded a Bill of Rights be placed in the Constitution.
Size Matters: By Joel Miller
This book brings up all the Republican "ideas" on what is wrong with the U.S. and goes half-way in giving solutions. I will sound here like the Green guy (reviewer at amazon.com) who gave it one star when I say it points at a Social Security "problem" and the Republican solution of retirement savings accounts. Mr. Miller is young and perhaps influenced by his father Dennis Miller, who may be the "funny" guy/football commentator.
In a chapter on licensing and regulation, he writes this very true paragraph:
"By killing competition in a trade, we also remove a crucial incentive to improve quality. Once your job is safe from competitors who would happily filch your customers, it is easier to let stuff slip now and then, take it easy, stop pushing to improve and please, innovate and anticipate new customer demand. Such a lowering of quality is not inevitable, but the possibility goes up the moment competition goes down."
Four pages before that paragraph Mr. Miller ends a paragraph with this nonsense: "Given the highly specialized and technical knowledge needed to perform in some of these trades, licensing seems reasonable, even smart. License physicians? Of course!"
Mr. Miller does us one favor although by accident. He quotes Jefferson from his first inaugural:
"...[W]hat more is necessary to make us a happy and prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizens - a wise and frugal government, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities...."
This part: "and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned" means no tax on labor. As income taxes are being raised on labor in cities, counties, and states, we see a transfer from slave labor to giant international corporations. Who pays for tax abatements and incentives to land new business? The workers and small business.
Since I did not see any call for banning homosexual marriages I admit this book could have been worse. Compared to his writing on Lew against the "Drug War" I found this book a let down. It gives a snapshot in time. I have thought about regulating engineers as their calculations have life and death consequences, but now they make less than teachers. (according to Paul Harvey - summer "moonlighting" not included) I give this book two stars out of five for giving Republicans something to hope for. Though we all know Republicans say one thing and do something very different.
My obvious comment: It is time the voters demanded real action. Don't vote for anyone who approved the Patriot Act or Iraq War. Congressional and Presidential candidates must favor Roberts Rules - NO LOG ROLLING! - vote one issue at a time.
Friday, August 04, 2006
Nader makes another good point
Here is an article by Ralph about Dem. LIEberman and a connection with corporate theives.
http://www.countercurrents.org/us-nader040806.htm
Once again the facists have us looking to the socialists.
http://www.countercurrents.org/us-nader040806.htm
Once again the facists have us looking to the socialists.
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
Watch As Nuts Bolt Away From U.S. Constitution
After reading discourse on Global Warming here, I noticed a similar type of argument put forth by Greenies and Neocons.
Neocon: WMDs are so scary and destructive we must do something. Waiting for facts is deadly. We must act NOW!
Greenie: Global Warming is so scary and destructive we must do something. Waiting for facts is deadly. We must act NOW!
How about this Boogeyman and solution:
Drug Warrior: The "Scourge of Drug Abuse" is so scary and destructive we must do something. Waiting for facts is deadly. We must act NOW!
This last example brings the right (more prisons, more cops, more courts, stricter laws limiting rights) together with the left (more government programs for addicts, more government child welfare bureaucracy, more government workers to investigate spouse and child abuse).
Are we teaching our children to listen to emotionally crippled crackpots?
What do textbooks tell our children?
Are there any School Board candidates out there with a better plan?
Neocon: WMDs are so scary and destructive we must do something. Waiting for facts is deadly. We must act NOW!
Greenie: Global Warming is so scary and destructive we must do something. Waiting for facts is deadly. We must act NOW!
How about this Boogeyman and solution:
Drug Warrior: The "Scourge of Drug Abuse" is so scary and destructive we must do something. Waiting for facts is deadly. We must act NOW!
This last example brings the right (more prisons, more cops, more courts, stricter laws limiting rights) together with the left (more government programs for addicts, more government child welfare bureaucracy, more government workers to investigate spouse and child abuse).
Are we teaching our children to listen to emotionally crippled crackpots?
What do textbooks tell our children?
Are there any School Board candidates out there with a better plan?
Are Conservatives ruining the U.S. faster than Liberals?
Once again we see liberals and libertarians coming closer on more issues. As the Republicans and so-called moderate and conservative Democrats move away from fiscal responsibility and toward stripping Citizens of God given natural rights, maybe the liberals are just looking better.
Libertarians are against NAFTA in that it is not free trade. This "highway for corporations" paid with local and federal money is not something Libertarians support. (See Major Moves at: http://lpin.blogspot.com/)
This is from Count Us at: http://www.i69tour.org/
COUNT US! QUESTIONS: Was building the NAFTA free trade corridor interstate really a 'CORE GOAL' for hoosiers? That is what the tier 1 record of decision allowed INDOT to claim. Is the 'NAFTA Free Trade Interstate' really more important than preserving our farms, forests, drinking water, air parklands, Amish communities and listening to the comments of 94% of hoosiers who bothered to answer the call for our stated opinion? Is it more important than existing Hoosier roads everywhere in the state? Will Martinsville and Bloomington quality of life be improved with a larger than I-465 highway infrastructure dividing their east from west? Does anyone, even Evansville, want a Toll Road? One owned by foreign owners? Does Evansville want Bloomington and Martinville residents to pay a toll every day for the rest of their and their children's and their grand children's lives so that Evansville can get the Interstate that they deserve? Follow this link to learn a little more about our Mexican boarder crossing point at Nuevo Laredo that some in our state are so interested in connecting to our communities! It is now considered the illegal drug capital of the world.http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=nuevolaredo
Libertarians are against NAFTA in that it is not free trade. This "highway for corporations" paid with local and federal money is not something Libertarians support. (See Major Moves at: http://lpin.blogspot.com/)
This is from Count Us at: http://www.i69tour.org/
COUNT US! QUESTIONS: Was building the NAFTA free trade corridor interstate really a 'CORE GOAL' for hoosiers? That is what the tier 1 record of decision allowed INDOT to claim. Is the 'NAFTA Free Trade Interstate' really more important than preserving our farms, forests, drinking water, air parklands, Amish communities and listening to the comments of 94% of hoosiers who bothered to answer the call for our stated opinion? Is it more important than existing Hoosier roads everywhere in the state? Will Martinsville and Bloomington quality of life be improved with a larger than I-465 highway infrastructure dividing their east from west? Does anyone, even Evansville, want a Toll Road? One owned by foreign owners? Does Evansville want Bloomington and Martinville residents to pay a toll every day for the rest of their and their children's and their grand children's lives so that Evansville can get the Interstate that they deserve? Follow this link to learn a little more about our Mexican boarder crossing point at Nuevo Laredo that some in our state are so interested in connecting to our communities! It is now considered the illegal drug capital of the world.http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=nuevolaredo
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
JBS rates Congress
The John Birch Society came out again with ratings of the U.S. Congress.
Ron Paul of Texas scored 100.
Dems scored higher than Republicans.
Senator Lugar scored 0. If you don't understand that how about zero, zilch, nothing.
And this guy runs for President of the U.S.? Hey, if we change the Constitution to let Arnold run for Prez, how about Gorby or Putin.
Hostettler scored 60 or 67. Feingold scored 50 or thirty-something. I would tend to give more weight to the quesitons of Patriot Act and NSA and Feingold would actually score better. The difference between Hostettler and Ron Paul? Ron Paul represents Citizens under the U.S. Constitution. Hostettler thinks he can vote away our rights and Constitution. This blogger will not cast a vote for this sell out. (Sorry John but when your tyrant state comes about you may see me placing my flag in what you might consider an uncomfortable position.)
This is covered a bit more fully by Laurence M. Vance in this article.
My take: "Houston, we have problems." (Although Ron Paul represents Houston and he is not the problem.)
Ron Paul of Texas scored 100.
Dems scored higher than Republicans.
Senator Lugar scored 0. If you don't understand that how about zero, zilch, nothing.
And this guy runs for President of the U.S.? Hey, if we change the Constitution to let Arnold run for Prez, how about Gorby or Putin.
Hostettler scored 60 or 67. Feingold scored 50 or thirty-something. I would tend to give more weight to the quesitons of Patriot Act and NSA and Feingold would actually score better. The difference between Hostettler and Ron Paul? Ron Paul represents Citizens under the U.S. Constitution. Hostettler thinks he can vote away our rights and Constitution. This blogger will not cast a vote for this sell out. (Sorry John but when your tyrant state comes about you may see me placing my flag in what you might consider an uncomfortable position.)
This is covered a bit more fully by Laurence M. Vance in this article.
My take: "Houston, we have problems." (Although Ron Paul represents Houston and he is not the problem.)
Monday, July 31, 2006
School Board Elections
Filing deadline to run for School Board is August 25 at noon.
If no money is collected (or a low amount) you only have to file your candidate committee and no CFA-4. This pays only $3000 per year but you will see opponents spending thousands. This is a way to get your feet wet in running for office. School board candidates run as independents.
DISTRICT I
One of three seats from Harrison Township is up.
Held by Guille Cox 2002 - 2006
DISTRICT II
One seat from Fayette Township or Sugar Creek Township.
Held by Joseph Minnis, Jr. 2002 -2006
DISTRICT IV
One seat from Lost Creek, Riley, or Pierson Township.
Held by Gene Shike 2002 - 2006
DISTRICT V
One board member from Honey Creek, Linton, Prairieton, or Prairie Creek Township.
Michael H. Tom 2002 -2006
County Clerk can tell you who has filed and has the needed forms.
How about candidates for the voucher system?
Even one candidate wanting to do away with "text" books would seem revolutionary.
If no money is collected (or a low amount) you only have to file your candidate committee and no CFA-4. This pays only $3000 per year but you will see opponents spending thousands. This is a way to get your feet wet in running for office. School board candidates run as independents.
DISTRICT I
One of three seats from Harrison Township is up.
Held by Guille Cox 2002 - 2006
DISTRICT II
One seat from Fayette Township or Sugar Creek Township.
Held by Joseph Minnis, Jr. 2002 -2006
DISTRICT IV
One seat from Lost Creek, Riley, or Pierson Township.
Held by Gene Shike 2002 - 2006
DISTRICT V
One board member from Honey Creek, Linton, Prairieton, or Prairie Creek Township.
Michael H. Tom 2002 -2006
County Clerk can tell you who has filed and has the needed forms.
How about candidates for the voucher system?
Even one candidate wanting to do away with "text" books would seem revolutionary.
New Treasurer/Secretary for Vigo County LP
Latest news from lpvc:
Robert E. Hamiliton has been appointed Treasurer/Secretary of the Vigo County Libertarian Party. Robert is a past Chairman of the Vigo County LP, resurecting it in 1999. He was chairman until the lpvc was affiliated in March 2000.
Welcome back Robert!
Robert E. Hamiliton has been appointed Treasurer/Secretary of the Vigo County Libertarian Party. Robert is a past Chairman of the Vigo County LP, resurecting it in 1999. He was chairman until the lpvc was affiliated in March 2000.
Welcome back Robert!
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
Common Sense 2006
Here we see the "traditional" view of single line left/right orientation. Commentators and candidates believe moving to the center of this line will get the most votes. This may be correct to some extent, but this is a bad representation of where people stand. This misrepresentation is moving the United States into dangerous territory.
I suggest we take the left/right one-dimensional representation and curve the ends upward. Drag the people on the ends along with the line. Finally, connect the two ends to form a circle or oval.
The result is a two-dimensional representation. If you place a vertical line at the bottom center, you will have a separation of the totalitarian regimes we commonly refer to as communism and facism. Communism and facism, as Walter Williams says, is two sides of the same coin. At the top you have freedom.
I suggest we take the left/right one-dimensional representation and curve the ends upward. Drag the people on the ends along with the line. Finally, connect the two ends to form a circle or oval.
The result is a two-dimensional representation. If you place a vertical line at the bottom center, you will have a separation of the totalitarian regimes we commonly refer to as communism and facism. Communism and facism, as Walter Williams says, is two sides of the same coin. At the top you have freedom.
You'll notice that people considered on the left, like Feingold, would fall somewhere below Nader on the left side of this oval. The John Birch Society, sometimes called conservative, sometimes reactionary right, falls somewhere between Pat Buchanan and Thomas Jefferson.
Most "leftists" today do not rise above the halfway point because socialism has overtaken not only the U.S. but much of the world. The problem few notice is that corporate welfare and socialism are doing a one-two punch on the freedom of Americans. As a good friend once said about the Presidential candidates, "we are bottom feeding."
Changing attitudes from left/right to top/bottom is the challenge of the near future. A similar representation, as mentioned below, can be found at:
Randy Scheunemann: Office of The Secretary of Defense – Consultant on Iraq Policy, mentioned the blog below called the 1992 speech of Pat Buchanan facist. These Hitler-like attacks on freedom destroy this country. And the left/right thinking is to blame. Hillary Clinton is a bottom-feeder people consider left. Watch her sink into the totalitarian mud as 2008 approaches.
Think up/down and vote this way. Pat should shake hands with Russ. The voters need good examples, not the evil we see on TV every day.
GOOD
MADISON
JEFFERSON/GOLDWATER
BUCHANAN
NADER-BOB BARR
FEINGOLD
REAGAN
HOWARD DEAN
HILLARY-KERRY
WIDOWMAKER BUSH
STALIN-HITLER
EVIL
Sunday, May 21, 2006
PNAC to Government - but corruption stays the same
From this: http://www.reasoned.org/e_pnac.htm
religious site we have this information about PNACers (Project for a New American Century).
My comments on these globalists are in blue.
Known PNAC colleagues joining Dick Cheney were:
- Donald Rumsfeld: Secretary of Defense.
- Paul D. Wolfowitz: Deputy Secretary of Defense, and Assistant to the Vice President.
- John R. Bolton: Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security.
Isn't this the guy Bush put on as ambassador to U.N. during a recess so he didn't have to be confirmed by the Senate? Globalist or Imperialist? Same thing?
- I. Lewis Libby: Assistant to the President, and Chief of Staff to the Vice President.
C.I.A. Leaker?
- Zalmay Khalilzad: Senior Director – National Security Council; now Ambassador to Afghanistan, Special Presidential Envoy to Afghanistan, and Special Presidential Envoy to the Free Iraqis. Always on TV speaking on our relation with Afghanistan - We would do better watching "Rambo III.
- Peter W. Rodman: Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs.
- Christopher A. Williams: member of Pentagon’s Deterrence Concepts Advisory Panel, and member of Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board; now Department of Defense – Special Assistant to Donald Rumsfeld.
- Paula Dobriansky: Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs.
- Aaron Friedberg: Vice President’s Deputy National Security Advisor.
- Abram N. Shulsky: Director – Defence Department’s Office Of Special Plans.
- Barry D. Watts: Director of Program Analysis and Evaluation – Office of The Secretary of Defense.
- Stephen A. Cambone: Special Assistant to Donald Rumsfeld; now Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, Special Assistant to the Secretary and Director for Program Analysis and Evaluation – Department of Defense.
- William Howard Taft IV: Chief Legal Advisor to the Department of State.
I would have hoped for better from a Taft.
- Mark P. Lagon: Deputy Assistant Secretary of State.
- William Schneider Jr.: Chairman – Defense Science Board for the Department of Defense.
- Richard L. Armitage: Deputy Secretary of State. idiot
- Vin Weber: member – National Commission on Public Service. gets around
- Richard N. Perle: Pentagon Policy Advisor (resigned February 2004), member – Defense Policy Board. Guilty since Iran/Contra
- Randy Scheunemann: Office of The Secretary of Defense – Consultant on Iraq Policy.
- Gary Schmitt: Consultant to the Department of Defense.
- R. James Woolsey: member – Defense Policy Board, member – Deterrence Concepts Advisory Panel, member – National Commission on Energy Policy. Ex- CIA liar. Promoted war before it was fashionable.
- Elliot Abrams: National Security Council – top advisor on the Middle East.- Henry S. Rowen: member – Department of Defense Policy Board. February 12, 2004: Presidential appointment to the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction. Guilty since Iran/contra - and what about those WMDs? Ask Woolsey.
- Devon Gaffney-Cross: member – Defense Policy Board. Is this guy related to Frank Gaffney?
Frank Gaffney - Neocon Superhawk - against port deal though.
- David Epstein: employee at the Office of Secretary of Defense – Net Assessment.
- Richard V. Allen: member – National Security Advisory Board, member – Defense Policy Board.
- Penn Kemble: Department of State – Head, Eminent Persons Group, Sudan Slavery Commission.
- Jeffrey Bergner: study group member – Commission on National Security 21st Century.
- Francis Fukuyama: President’s Council on Bioethics. Now questions Iraq invasion.
- Nicholas Eberstadt: consultant for the State Department, consultant for the Bureau of the Census.
- Hillel Fradkin: member of the Advisory Committee on International Education – Department of Education.
- Seth Cropsey: Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau.
- Dov S. Zakheim: Under Secretary and Chief Financial Officer for the Department of Defense (resigned April 15, 2004).
- Rudy Boschwitz: Presidential appointee to the Holocaust Memorial Council.
- Robert B. Zoellick: U.S. Trade Representative – member of President’s Cabinet. Payola for a "conservative" reporter.
- Charles Krauthammer: member – President’s Council On Bioethics. Born Urugury raised in Montreal always on Fox News.
- Daniel Goure: consultant – Department of State, consultant – Department of Defense, consultant – Department of Energy.
- Victoria Nuland: (wife of Robert Kagan, co-founder and Project Director of the PNAC) Vice President’s Deputy National Security Advisor.
Also AEI has many PNAC members. These things are corrupt.
religious site we have this information about PNACers (Project for a New American Century).
My comments on these globalists are in blue.
Known PNAC colleagues joining Dick Cheney were:
- Donald Rumsfeld: Secretary of Defense.
- Paul D. Wolfowitz: Deputy Secretary of Defense, and Assistant to the Vice President.
- John R. Bolton: Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security.
Isn't this the guy Bush put on as ambassador to U.N. during a recess so he didn't have to be confirmed by the Senate? Globalist or Imperialist? Same thing?
- I. Lewis Libby: Assistant to the President, and Chief of Staff to the Vice President.
C.I.A. Leaker?
- Zalmay Khalilzad: Senior Director – National Security Council; now Ambassador to Afghanistan, Special Presidential Envoy to Afghanistan, and Special Presidential Envoy to the Free Iraqis. Always on TV speaking on our relation with Afghanistan - We would do better watching "Rambo III.
- Peter W. Rodman: Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs.
- Christopher A. Williams: member of Pentagon’s Deterrence Concepts Advisory Panel, and member of Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board; now Department of Defense – Special Assistant to Donald Rumsfeld.
- Paula Dobriansky: Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs.
- Aaron Friedberg: Vice President’s Deputy National Security Advisor.
- Abram N. Shulsky: Director – Defence Department’s Office Of Special Plans.
- Barry D. Watts: Director of Program Analysis and Evaluation – Office of The Secretary of Defense.
- Stephen A. Cambone: Special Assistant to Donald Rumsfeld; now Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, Special Assistant to the Secretary and Director for Program Analysis and Evaluation – Department of Defense.
- William Howard Taft IV: Chief Legal Advisor to the Department of State.
I would have hoped for better from a Taft.
- Mark P. Lagon: Deputy Assistant Secretary of State.
- William Schneider Jr.: Chairman – Defense Science Board for the Department of Defense.
- Richard L. Armitage: Deputy Secretary of State. idiot
- Vin Weber: member – National Commission on Public Service. gets around
- Richard N. Perle: Pentagon Policy Advisor (resigned February 2004), member – Defense Policy Board. Guilty since Iran/Contra
- Randy Scheunemann: Office of The Secretary of Defense – Consultant on Iraq Policy.
- Gary Schmitt: Consultant to the Department of Defense.
- R. James Woolsey: member – Defense Policy Board, member – Deterrence Concepts Advisory Panel, member – National Commission on Energy Policy. Ex- CIA liar. Promoted war before it was fashionable.
- Elliot Abrams: National Security Council – top advisor on the Middle East.- Henry S. Rowen: member – Department of Defense Policy Board. February 12, 2004: Presidential appointment to the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction. Guilty since Iran/contra - and what about those WMDs? Ask Woolsey.
- Devon Gaffney-Cross: member – Defense Policy Board. Is this guy related to Frank Gaffney?
Frank Gaffney - Neocon Superhawk - against port deal though.
- David Epstein: employee at the Office of Secretary of Defense – Net Assessment.
- Richard V. Allen: member – National Security Advisory Board, member – Defense Policy Board.
- Penn Kemble: Department of State – Head, Eminent Persons Group, Sudan Slavery Commission.
- Jeffrey Bergner: study group member – Commission on National Security 21st Century.
- Francis Fukuyama: President’s Council on Bioethics. Now questions Iraq invasion.
- Nicholas Eberstadt: consultant for the State Department, consultant for the Bureau of the Census.
- Hillel Fradkin: member of the Advisory Committee on International Education – Department of Education.
- Seth Cropsey: Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau.
- Dov S. Zakheim: Under Secretary and Chief Financial Officer for the Department of Defense (resigned April 15, 2004).
- Rudy Boschwitz: Presidential appointee to the Holocaust Memorial Council.
- Robert B. Zoellick: U.S. Trade Representative – member of President’s Cabinet. Payola for a "conservative" reporter.
- Charles Krauthammer: member – President’s Council On Bioethics. Born Urugury raised in Montreal always on Fox News.
- Daniel Goure: consultant – Department of State, consultant – Department of Defense, consultant – Department of Energy.
- Victoria Nuland: (wife of Robert Kagan, co-founder and Project Director of the PNAC) Vice President’s Deputy National Security Advisor.
Also AEI has many PNAC members. These things are corrupt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
