The American Ruling Class

[Joit]

Well, thats how the Internet Switch works allready in a smaller Scale.
the 2nd Video, what i cant watch, because the 2nd has a Sountrack from Sony Music in it.

This one from Ray Stevens i cant even watch when i go over a Link in another Forum or use an Anonym Proxy, to open the Page.
Allways the same Error. And i really wonder about, that even the Forum forwards my Ip to the Source of the Video.
Thats it, how it works, to prefend Peoples to get her 'wrong Informations'.

But apropo Propaganda, as WWII was over in Austria, there been 2 bigger Partys, what been to elect.
At the first Time it was forbidden for 500 000 Citizen to go to the Elections,
till this Parties been settled down.
After that they got not much other Choice anymore,
and the System was installed again.

[bugler]

Regarding the anthrax cases, the investigation was stopped when it was found that the guy behind it was jewish.

Same story about the pre-911 put investments on airlines investigation was stopped when the usual financial suspects were found (Goldman Sachs, etc).

If in doubt about this topic you can watch: 9/11 Missing Links

[aljhoa]

H.R. 4646: Debt Free America Act

After the Nov. elections:
2/23/2010--Introduced.
Debt Free America Act - States as purposes of this Act the raising of sufficient revenue from a fee on transactions to eliminate the national debt within seven years and the phasing out of the individual income tax. Amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose a 1% fee, offset by a corresponding nonrefundable income tax credit, on transactions that use a payment instrument, including any check, cash, credit card, transfer of stock, bonds, or other financial instrument. Defines "transaction" to include retail and wholesale sales, purchases of intermediate goods, and financial and intangible transactions. Establishes in the legislative branch the Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action to review the fiscal imbalance of the federal government and make recommendations to improve such imbalance. Provides for expedited consideration by Congress of Task Force recommendations. Repeals after 2017 the individual income tax, refundable and nonrefundable personal tax credits, and the alternative minimum tax (AMT) on individuals. Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to: (1) prioritize the repayment of the national debt to protect the fiscal stability of the United States; and (2) study and report to Congress on the implementation of this Act.
H.R. 4646 - Summary: Debt Free America Act (GovTrack.us)
Al

[aljhoa]

After the Nov. elections:
2/23/2010--Introduced.
Debt Free America Act - States as purposes of this Act the raising of sufficient revenue from a fee on transactions to eliminate the national debt within seven years and the phasing out of the individual income tax. Amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose a 1% fee, offset by a corresponding nonrefundable income tax credit, on transactions that use a payment instrument, including any check, cash, credit card, transfer of stock, bonds, or other financial instrument. Defines "transaction" to include retail and wholesale sales, purchases of intermediate goods, and financial and intangible transactions. Establishes in the legislative branch the Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action to review the fiscal imbalance of the federal government and make recommendations to improve such imbalance. Provides for expedited consideration by Congress of Task Force recommendations. Repeals after 2017 the individual income tax, refundable and nonrefundable personal tax credits, and the alternative minimum tax (AMT) on individuals. Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to: (1) prioritize the repayment of the national debt to protect the fiscal stability of the United States; and (2) study and report to Congress on the implementation of this Act.
H.R. 4646 - Summary: Debt Free America Act (GovTrack.us)
Al

Obama's biggest supporter. [VIDEO]

[Joit]

Regarding the anthrax cases, the investigation was stopped when it was found that the guy behind it was jewish.

Same story about the pre-911 put investments on airlines investigation was stopped when the usual financial suspects were found (Goldman Sachs, etc).

If in doubt about this topic you can watch: 9/11 Missing Links

Thanks for the Link, Bugler, there are undeniable Truths in it.
I hope i can sproad it further.

[rickoff]

The North American Union agenda is probably the #1 reason why our federal govt is sitting by [and doing nothing about the illegal immigration problem]. Too many Americans that think it is some conspiracy theory are contributing to the problem by being
complacent and choosing to be ignorant.

Obama is doing nothing but continuing what Bush instigated:

YouTube - NORTH AMERICAN UNION EXPOSED on Lou Dobbs w/ Marcy Kaptur & Bill Tucker

YouTube - CNN-Lou Dobbs- Obama Backing North American Union Agenda

You're quite right, Aaron. The Obama agenda is a continuation of the Bush agenda, and both are simply implementations of the CFR agenda. Take a good look at this morphed "ObamBush" photo. Without a single word, it says it all:



As the kickthemallout.org website (where I found this photo) states, "This morphed photo of ObamBush is the cold hard truth. There has been a total continuity of agenda passing from one administration to the next, from one Congress to the next and it's been like that for a very long time. Want more proof? Listen to this amazing speech given by Charles A. Lindberg back in 1941, in which he talks about the exact same lunatics doing the exact same things."

I saw one video of Obama lying by downplaying the North American Union and the NAFTA super highway. This video has it - Obama is a LIAR and not even a good one.
Dailymotion - Barack Obama talking about the North America Union - a News & Politics video

That's a good video, but would be a lot better if the ads were cut from it, as they are somewhat annoying and could cause people to exit the video without watching the important content. Too bad more people didn't watch it before the 2008 elections. Thing is, though, what other choice did people have? To vote for McCain? Both choices were phony ones presented to the public by the CFR, which actually chooses the candidates long before the elections. Some of the independent candidates were worthy, but CFR pulled out all stops to discredit them through media attacks and make them look "unelectable" in the public eye. As a result, peolple tend to believe that a vote for an independent is a wasted vote, so they cast their vote for the major party candidate they consider to be the lesser of two evils. Since people aren't likely to stray from this reasoning, it is doubtful that we will be seeing an independent candidate succeed in a Presidential election, but it is not impossible if enough people will wake up and band together in backing a non-establishment candidate. What we need to remember is that by the summer of 1992, polls show that Perot commanded a lead in the Presidential race against Clinton and Bush with thirty-nine percent of the vote vs 31% for Bush and 25% for Clinton. It is likely that Perot would have gone on to win the election had he not dropped out after being advised of a threat to publicly release digitally altered photos of his daughter before her wedding. And later, after the wedding, when Perot announced he was coming back into the race, the media continually bashed him in an effort to convince voters that Perot was a bigot, a betrayer of his supporters, and an idiot. Remember the Saturday Night Live segments that made Perot appear as a munchkin in a "debate" simulation, and the segment that showed Perot dropping off his running mate out in the countryside, and driving away quickly to abandon him? While absolute nonsense, I would wager that a great many viewers took the message to heart that Perot was a joke and therefore unelectable. It is obvious that the CFR saw Perot as a very dangerous threat to their agenda, and would do anything necessary to prevent United We Stand America and Perot from standing in their way. The media is very effective at manipulating public opinion, and the 2008 election that placed Obama in office certainly proves that.

They ARE working to make a North American Union, Bush is and was
behind it AND so is OBAMA!

With the N.A. Union, Euro Union, African Union, Asian Union all being in
place, the goal is to consolidate these unions into one single global
union under one world government. IT IS A CONSPIRACY. And it is NOT
a theory. It is dark and demonic and is evil beyond all imagination.

Mega dittos, Aaron. For decades now, the CFR, the Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderberg Group, have decided the course of US policy, the outcome of Federal and state elections, and the tactics they would employ to achieve their unsavory goals. A lot of people have awakened to, and are fully aware of what they have been doing to our country, but many more still choose to wear their blinders. That is why it is imperative that we continue to expose these corruptions through discussion threads like this one, and through all other possible peaceful means.

Rick

[rickoff]

A subject that we have touched upon more than once in this thread is voting fraud, and deserves further mention from time to time. Voting fraud can take many forms, with the ones shown below being the most prevalent:

1. Deceased voters voting. This seems impossible, but it happens in every major election, and in large numbers. Some individual, or group, writes down the names of persons who resided in the voting district during the past few years and who have died. The names remain on the list of registered voters that are used to verify voters who are casting ballots, and when someone appears and states their name as being one of the deceased, no one questions that. So a group of 20 people could cast votes in the name of 20 deceased individuals and no one is the wiser.
2. Multiple votes by individuals. As per the scenario in example #1, a single individual could have cast those 20 votes (or more) by repeadedly claiming to identify himself/herself as one of the deceased list names. During an election, when there are thousands of people streaming into the balloting area, it is quite easy for an individual to walk in and vote, then go outside for 10 to 15 minutes and modestly change their appearance by combing their hair differently, changing a wig, applying an artificial mustache, donning eyeglasses, changing an article of clothing, etc., and returning to cast further votes. After voting several times at one local precinct, they can then travel to one or more adjacent voting districts and repeat the procedure. And this doesn't simply apply to deceased voter fraud. Someone can walk in and claim to be any living registered voter who resides in the district. No one checks actual id's. This method is effective because a hefty percentage of registered voters never turn out to vote in elections. If you go in to vote, and find that your name has already been checked off as having voted, you would complain of course and demand that you be allowed to vote. The officials would demand to see your identification, but would then allow you to vote. Since the ballots do not contain the names of the voters, the fraudulent vote in your name would still stand and be counted. Nice, huh?
3. Absentee ballots. All elections allow absentee balloting, and this opens wide the door to fraudulent voting. A scammer obtains and fills out a ballot from the local town hall and drops it in a receptacle box there, or can mail it in. Using the names of deceased voters, live registered voters, or jailed voters who aren't allowed to vote in most states, the scammer casts their ballot, or multiple fraudulent ballots, without any risk of confrontation or detection.
4. Vote buying. Organizations such as ACORN have worked diligently at vote buying. They register people on the street who otherwise have no interest in voting, and instruct them in filling out an absentee ballot. In exchange, the street person is given some form of payoff in appreciation of their vote.
5. Fraudulent vote counting. If all other attempts to influence an election fail to make things go their way, the powerful elite can simply change the results to their liking as the votes are tallied, or even after they are tallied. This can either be accomplished during the balloting, by using software that alters votes as they are cast and read, or after the balloting, when information from the electronic ballot readers or scanners is uploaded from the various voting precincts to a central computer. It is reported that fully a third of all voting in the 2010 mid term election will be done by early balloting, and problems are already surfacing. In North Carolina's 7th Congressional District, where early voting began yesterday, many voters, at different polling locations across the district, are complaining that their vote was miscounted by the voting machine they used. An example of this type of miscount is where a voter casts his vote for one candidate, and the machine shows that a vote for a different candidate has been cast. Hackers using Diebold developed software demonstrated they were able to use that software to alter the results of an election without leaving any trace of that activity. Thus, electronic vote fraud is the elite's favorite tool in controlling the results of elections. The best documentary video I have seen, regarding this type of vote fraud, can be found here, and is a real eye opener:
Hacking Democracy

As the documentary points out, even when voters suspect fraud and demand a recount, recounts are just further scams. Election officials are only required to initially produce 3% of ballots for a recount test, and the officials get to handpick this "representative sampling." Further sampling is only required if this 3% is found to be distinctly out of line with the final vote tally, and of course the officials do their best to ensure that won't be the case. And if enough inconsistencies and problems occur with the 3% that is sampled to require a more thorough recount (as happened in the 2000 Presidential election in Florida, regarding punch card "chads" and some minus tallies), the elite simply get the Supreme Court to halt the recount and declare a victor. It really is not important that election results be determined quickly, since the current President will remain seated until January, two months after an election. There is plenty of time to perform a manual recount.

As the documentary also points out, intentional wrongdoing by election officials can also account for significant vote fraud. People investigating for possible misconduct raided dumpsters and trash receptacles at voting precincts and found vote tally sheets that had been thrown in the trash. What's worse is the fact that the officials had supposedly supplied them with "copies" of all tally sheets as requested under the Freedom of Information Act. When the investigators compared the "copies" with the originals that had been trashed, the numbers did not match up.

As you can see, or will certainly see after watching the documentary video, we need to return to manual voting and vote counting. Voters should place a marked X in a box next to the candidate of their choice, and when the ballots are gathered they should be scrutinized and counted by a group of persons representing each of the candidates on the ballot. This is the only way to ensure fair and proper vote counting. There is no need for votes to be tallied instantly, and although manual counting would delay the final voting results by several hours, at least we would know the count was true, and there would be no calls for, or time wasted upon, recounts. We The People need to demand manual voting and vote counting if we are ever going to see truth in elections.

Rick

[aljhoa]

Another Ring?

From a Maine House, a National Foreclosure Freeze By DAVID STREITFELD
Published: October 14, 2010

It should have been a routine foreclosure, with Mrs. Bradbury joining the anonymous millions quietly dispossessed since the recession began. But she was savvy enough to contact a nonprofit group, Pine Tree Legal Assistance, where for once in her 38 years, she caught a break.

The housing market, which runs on foreclosure sales, is in turmoil. Bank stocks fell on Thursday as analysts tried to gauge the impact on lenders’ bottom lines.

Mr. Cox eventually won the right to depose the employee, who casually acknowledged that he had prepared 400 foreclosures a day for GMAC and that contrary to his sworn statements, they had not been reviewed by him or anyone else.

GMAC, the country’s fourth-largest mortgage lender, called this omission a technicality but was forced last month to halt foreclosures in the 23 states, including Maine, where they must be approved by a court. Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and other lenders that used robo-signers — the term caught on instantly — have enacted their own freezes.

The court’s ruling on GMAC’s “bad faith” is already being taken up by foreclosure defense lawyers around the country. Mr. Cox “did a remarkable job of proving the lenders not only rubber-stamped these loans on the front end, but they rubber-stamped them on the back end,” said Mr. Saunders of the legal aid group.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/15/bu...aine.html?_r=2

DEUTSCHE BANK gets the BOOT (Broken Chain of Title)

Al

[rickoff]

Re: Mortgage Freeze

Good article, aljhoa. Living here in Maine, I was well aware of this story. Maine law offers some excellent protections for consumers, and this is also true in other states, however most consumers know nothing about these laws in spite of the fact that state laws can be found and researched free of charge over the Internet at state government Attorney General websites. Individuals face a tough battle when seeking justice from a bank or credit card company (which of course is owned and operated by a bank). Here's an example of my own regarding such a battle:

About a year ago I noticed that a charge had been improperly applied against my credit card, and I quickly contacted the card company, Elan Financial, in writing, as per my card holder agreement, to explain that the charge was fraudulent because the merchant had never attained a written and signed contract for the disputed transaction. Under Maine consumer law, any out of state merchant who telephones your residence to offer a sale of merchandise and/or services for an amount exceeding $50 must send the consumer a written contract, which must then be signed and returned to the merchant before the sale becomes final. So, with no contract, no sale actually transpired, and this was the basis of my protest to the credit card company. Along with my letter, I also submitted a copy of the Maine consumer law statutes that fully backed my claim. I had located these statutes on the Maine Attorney General's website, and downloaded the relevant pages as pdf documents. It all seemed quite straightforward and easy to understand, so I was quite surprised that the credit card company's representative, who followed up my letter with a telephone call, said that their procedures for handling fraud allegations "do not take state laws into consideration," and that they considered the transaction not to be fraudulent. Feeling more than a bit agitated, I responded by saying, "It sounds to me that you are saying that your credit card company and the merchant are both above the law. If a transaction is clearly illegal in my state then it is clearly fraudulent for the merchant to submit it to your company for payment, and also fraudulent for the credit card company to support and continue processing this charge when you know that the sale was indeed fraudulent." The card company representative ignored what I said, and insisted that there was no fraud involved in the transaction. She also said that, in my letter, I had failed to provide information regarding the date the transaction was canceled, the reason it was canceled, and proof that any merchandise that I received was returned to the merchant. I told her that I had already supplied all that information within my letter, and she then got huffy with me and said, "No you did not!" She then refused to talk about this any more until she received the information that she said was lacking, and ended the call. I immediately sat down and wrote a new letter, and enclosed a copy of my first letter on which I highlighted the text that proved I had already sent the information that she said was lacking. I also enclosed a copy of the Maine law statute that states the illegality of a credit card company pursuing a charge that they know to be fraudulent. I received no response. I knew they received everything I wrote to them because I had sent my letters by certified mail and had the receipts for delivery. I assumed,therefore, that the issue was closed, and that they would go after the merchant for repayment. Not so! A few weeks later I received a letter stating that I had failed to supply the information requested by them, and that the time period (3 months) for a claim follow-up had expired. Therefore, they said, they were unable to assist me any further, and that I would have to pay the charge and attempt to recover the money from the merchant myself. I immediately sat down and wrote another letter, but addressed it to the customer service supervisor, asking that he or she override the representative's decision, reopen the case, and investigate the truth of the matter. In my letter, I again provided proof of everything I stated. And guess what - no response! At this point I fully realized that I would get nowhere with the credit card company, and so I researched my next move. According to the Maine statutes, a consumer can file a case with the Maine Attorney General's office against a merchant who violates consumer protection law. I sent a letter to the merchant demanding that they refund the fraudulent charge directly to the credit card company, and they said in their response that they would do no such thing. They said that they were not obligated to follow Maine statutes, and that the Maine Attorney General could not compel them to refund the amount. In actuality, they were partially correct in that statement, in that the Attorney General's office (unless pursuing a class action case involving many wronged consumers) only acts as a mediation service to make suggestions for a settlement, with neither the merchant or consumer being obliged to agree to the proposed terms. I fould that if I filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau (BBB) in the merchant's state, it would also be handled in a similar arbitration manner, and would likely take several months to complete. I did find it interesting to note, however that the BBB gave the merchant their highest rating on their website, even though there had been 157 complaints filed by consumers during the year! So after receiving the merchant's response, I went to my local police station and filed criminal charges against the merchant, which I found to be an option under Maine law. I also sent another letter to the credit card company showing that I had filed these actions, and asking if they would join me in prosecuting the merchant. You guessed it - no response! In the meantime, I was receiving calls two and three times a day from the credit card company's collections department demanding that I make immediate payment or suffer the consequences of a bad credit report. I explained to the callers that the charge was illegal, that a criminal complaint had been filed against the merchant, and that under Maine law I had no obligation whatever to pay the charge. I also explained that the call center was conducting activity that was illegal under Maine law, and that I would file criminal charges against them if the calls continued. In each instance, I asked for the caller's name immediately upon realizing it was a call from the credit card company, and in each case they refused to tell me their name, even though they demanded to know who they were speaking to. Most of the callers immediately got huffy and demanded payment. One, however, upon my demand to speak to her supervisor, suggested that I fax the collections department head, and gave me his fax number. I did send him a fax, showing why their activity was illegal, but again - no response! The calls kept coming relentlessly, and finally they did issue a "bad credit report" against me. Upon learning this, I sent a letter to the US Comptroller Of The Currency, which is an office of the US Treasury Department that oversees banking activities and fields consumer complaints, protesting all of the bank's actions as both improper and illegal. I sent a copy of the criminal complaint that I had filed with police to the merchant, and also a copy of the Maine statutes regarding the stiff fine and jail time that they would face when convicted in court. A few days later, I received an offer from the merchant to refund the entire amount if I would sign a prepared document stating that I was fully satisfied with their handling of the matter, and that I would pursue no further action against them. Since the document did not specify a time frame for the refund, I rejected their offer and edited the document to include a statement that I would agree to these terms provided that they refund the amount directly to the credit card company within 10 days. I signed the document and faxed it to the merchant. They phoned me back and said they would accept the document, but that they had 30 days, under law, to process the refund. I reminded them that Maine law required that the refund be completed within 20 days of my original notice to them of transaction rejection, or "avoidance," and that they were already several months overdue. I actually hoped that they would send the refund after my 10 day stipulation so that I could still go ahead with the criminal complaint. They did, however, complete the refund within the time period I stated. And soon afterwards I received a letter from the credit card company, and a very apologetic follow-up phone call, stating that they had received a letter from the Comptroler Of The Currency regarding the case, and were very sorry for the mixup, and that they had sent notice to the credit reporting agency that their bad credit report had been in error. Furthermore, I was told that all finance and interest charges applied to my account because of the invalid transaction would be deleted as per my request, which then left the bank actually owing me a small refund due to another merchant refund. So, case closed. It just goes to show that an individual can in fact stand up against a powerful banking company, and a corporation, and demand the justice and respect that is deserved. And all of that without the assistance and fees of a lawyer.

Rick

[rickoff]

New movie trailer for you...

Here's a movie trailer promotion for the "I Want Your Money" movie that was set to begin playing at theaters nationwide this weekend. YouTube - "I Want Your Money" Official HD Movie Trailer

Some good points made, and I especially liked some of former President Reagan's quotes:
Referring to big governent - "Government is not the solution to our problem - government is the problem!"
Referring to government spending - "We could say they spend like drunken sailors, but that would be unfair to drunken sailors because the sailors are spending their own money!"

Regardless as to what anyone may think of former Preident Ronald Reagan, and I myself certainly did not agree with all that he did or said, he did leave us with many memorable quotes that are just as fitting today as when he stated them. Some of these are:

• "Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first [prostitution]."
• "There are some who've forgotten why we have a military. It's not to promote war; it's to be prepared for peace."
• "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same."
• "One way to make sure crime doesn't pay would be to let the government run it."
• "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
• "To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the crocodile, hoping he will eat you last - but eat you he will."
• "We should measure welfare's success by how many people leave welfare, not by how many are added."
• "Man is not free unless government is limited.... As government expands, liberty contracts."
• "Almost all the world's constitutions are documents in which governments tell the people what their privileges are. Our Constitution is a document in which 'We the people' tell the government what it is allowed to do."
• "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!"
• "The Constitution does not say Government shall decree the right to keep and bear arms. The Constitution says 'The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' "
• "Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."
• "Our federal tax system is, in short, utterly impossible, utterly unjust, and completely counterproductive, [it] reeks with injustice and is fundamentally un-American... it has earned a rebellion and it's time we rebelled."
• "Extreme taxation, excessive controls, oppressive government competition with business, frustrated minorities and forgotten Americans are not the products of free enterprise. They are the residue of centralized bureaucracy, of government by a self-anointed elite."
• "The truth is that outside of its legitimate function, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector."
• "Welfare's purpose should be to eliminate, as far as possible, the need for its own existence."
• "The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away."
• "Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other."

[aljhoa]

Some good points made, and I especially liked some of former President Reagan's quotes:
Referring to big governent - "Government is not the solution to our problem - government is the problem!"
Referring to government spending - "We could say they spend like drunken sailors, but that would be unfair to drunken sailors because the sailors are spending their own money!"

Regardless as to what anyone may think of former Preident Ronald Reagan, and I myself certainly did not agree with all that he did or said, he did leave us with many memorable quotes that are just as fitting today as when he stated them. Some of these are:

• "Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first [prostitution]."
• "There are some who've forgotten why we have a military. It's not to promote war; it's to be prepared for peace."
• "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same."
• "One way to make sure crime doesn't pay would be to let the government run it."
• "The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
• "To sit back hoping that someday, some way, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the crocodile, hoping he will eat you last - but eat you he will."
• "We should measure welfare's success by how many people leave welfare, not by how many are added."
• "Man is not free unless government is limited.... As government expands, liberty contracts."
• "Almost all the world's constitutions are documents in which governments tell the people what their privileges are. Our Constitution is a document in which 'We the people' tell the government what it is allowed to do."
• "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!"
• "The Constitution does not say Government shall decree the right to keep and bear arms. The Constitution says 'The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' "
• "Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."
• "Our federal tax system is, in short, utterly impossible, utterly unjust, and completely counterproductive, [it] reeks with injustice and is fundamentally un-American... it has earned a rebellion and it's time we rebelled."
• "Extreme taxation, excessive controls, oppressive government competition with business, frustrated minorities and forgotten Americans are not the products of free enterprise. They are the residue of centralized bureaucracy, of government by a self-anointed elite."
• "The truth is that outside of its legitimate function, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector."
• "Welfare's purpose should be to eliminate, as far as possible, the need for its own existence."
• "The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them away."
• "Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other."

Ms. Thomas. Do you think your life has changed?......

Ms. Thomas. I mean the impact itself, of everything that's happened in terms of the Presidency, yourself -- --

The President. Well, of course, you know, ...
Question-and-Answer Session With Reporters Helen Thomas and Jim Gerstenzang on the President's Recovery Period

Killtown's:* The Reagan Shooting Conspiracy

Al

[rickoff]

More on vote fraud

In post 877, I briefly outlined several types of election voting fraud, including vote buying fraud perpetrated by ACORN employees, in which people were paid by ACORN workers to fill out voter registration cards. As the United States Justice Foundation points out, an example of this is Ohio, where ACORN activists gave Ohio residents cash and cigarettes in exchange for filling out voter registration cards, according to the New York Post. Some voters claim to have registered dozens of times, and one man says he signed up on 72 voter registration cards.

You may wonder why this is voting fraud, since registering to vote is not the same as actually voting. The point is, ACORN's mission was to get as many new names as possible listed in precinct voter rolls as resgistered voters, and there was definitely a good reason for this. By targeting homeless and other street people, such as drunks and addicts, who were not likely to vote in an election, ACORN workers amassed a huge list of names that they could then utilize for voting fraud. Fortunately, some of the ACORN workers' registration cards were so obviously fraudulent that election officials (the honest ones, that is) spotted them and reported this abuse.

In addition to the fraud mentioned above, here are just a few of THOUSANDS of documented examples of ACORN VOTER FRAUD violations as reported by the United States Justice Foundation:

In Wisconsin, at least 33,000 ACORN-submitted registrations in Milwaukee were called into question after it was found that the organization had been using felons as registration workers, in violation of state election rules. (2008)

In Florida, 11 ACORN workers were accused of forging voter registration applications in Miami-Dade County during the last election. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement and the state attorney's office scoured hundreds of suspicious applications provided by ACORN and found 197 of 260 contained personal ID information that did not match any living person. (2009)

In Indiana, election officials threw out more than 4,000 ACORN-submitted voter registrations after finding they had identical handwriting and included the names of many DECEASED people, and even the name of a fast food restaurant. (2008)

In Texas, (Harris County—Houston), nearly 10,000 ACORN-submitted registrations were found to be invalid, including many with clearly fraudulent addresses or other personal information. (2008)

In Pennsylvania, state election officials threw out 57,435 voter registrations, the majority of which were submitted by ACORN. The registrations were thrown out after officials found "clearly fraudulent" signatures, vacant lots listed as addresses, and other signs of fraud. (2008)

While the above examples are those of detected fraud, I think we can reasonably assume that an even larger number of undetected vote fraud was perpetrated by ACORN and other groups in 2008. And although Congress voted to defund ACORN after several scandals became public knowledge, ACORN is back at it again. They have simply changed their name, and are actually using several new names now.

State election officials are required by law to purge their registered voter lists of all ineligible names (prisoners, deceased people, and false registrants) but have been very lax in doing so. It is not likely that they will clean up the voter rolls in the coming 2010 or 2012 elections unless We The People demand it and actually scrutinize the rolls, and of course that is a difficult, though not impossible, task. Fact is, though, if we don't tackle that task then no one will. We certainly cannot expect the federal authorities to enforce a voter roll cleanup. U. S. Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandes discussed the federal law that requires that local officials purge illegitimate names from their voter rolls. Fernandes told Voting Section prosecutors: "We have no interest in enforcing this provision of the law. It has nothing to do with increasing turnout, and we are just not going to do it."


I ask you - isn't that a slap in the face to every legitimate voter?

[rickoff]

Killtown's:* The Reagan Shooting Conspiracy
Al

Yes, a lot of strange stuff surrounding the attempted assassination of President Reagan. Another thing I find strange can be found in the following video from news reports made shortly after the shooting:
YouTube - President Reagan Shot Part 1

If you start watching at 1:20 elapsed time, you see Reagan walking to the limo and the gunfire can be heard. Shots 1, 2, and 3, can be heard to have distict separations, but shot #4 sounds like two shots made very close together, at nearly the same time. Perhaps the sound of another gun? It's too close for Hinckley to have pulled the triger that fast. The 6 shots from his gun were fired one after the other in fairly rapid sequence, and all seem audible, so what caused that extra gunshot sound at shot #4? A replay is done at 3:26 elapsed time, and the shots are made louder. The shots actually begin before the commentator stops speaking. Here again I hear what appears to be a double shot, but it seems to be at the 5th, and then you hear Hinckley's 6th shot. Later still, at 5:20 elapsed time, there is a slow motion view but no sound, as someone states, "we're not getting the [audio] feed." Is this a technical problem, or planned edit? In slow motion, of course, the gunshots would be separated further apart in time, so each one would be more easily distinguished, including the double shot, and of course that would have reeked of a conspiracy. In a different video sequence shown later in the day, shown at 5:26 elapsed time, the double shot is not noticeable among the 6 shots heard: YouTube - President Reagan Shot Part 2
Better audio, or skillful editing? You will notice in this video sequence that after the third shot is fired, the camera starts jerking around wildly, and so a split second of sound edited out at the precise double shot moment would not be a noticeable break in the video portion. Deliberately chosen for that reason? Hard to say, as I'm no expert on gunshot acoustics, but I don't think we can rule out the possibility that there is more to this shooting than we were led to believe.

Now, consider this third video documentary by National Geographic, and start watching at 1:30 elapsed time:
YouTube - Attempted Assassination of a President
Listen to the commentator. "His hand goes up, he looks this way, Brady was coming across, and then pow pow pow pow pow." Count 'em up - there are five pows. Then listen to the soundtrack - there are five loud gunshots. Sam Donaldson, the commentator speaking directly after this sequence, however, says that he was standing about 5 feet from Hinckley, and insists that Hinckley fired six shots. If you listen again, there are five shots that sound identical, as if from the same gun, but there is also another shot before these five, which sounds different, as if more distant. Perhaps from the "bushy knoll" area spoken of in the article that aljhoa linked to, which is shown above the canopy at 1:48 elapsed time in this video?

I'm sure we'll never know what actually happened that day, but the differences in these videos do pose some intriguing questions, especially if the official version is true and the first 5 shots from Hinckley's gun definitely did not hit Reagan. Reagan was shot in his left armpit, and it would seem that the only opportunity for this to happen was just as the shooting sequence began, while his left arm was still raised, and that is the shot that sounds audibly different from the rest.

[rickoff]

Obama's new YouTube video gets thumbs down vote

Currently, 60% of persons viewing Obama's latest YouTube video
YouTube - Get in the Game
gave it a "thumbs down" rating. That's a rather strong statement, and it is only outdone by the latest Rasmussen public opinion polls.

The negative ratings and comments on YouTube shouldn't be surprising to Obama. Consider the following Rasmussen poll results for this week:

Rasmussen polls show that only 30% of likely voters believe the US is heading in the right direction, and 65% prefer a government with fewer services and less taxes. Quite tellingly, Rasmussen's daily presidential approval index, which subtracts the percentage of people who strongly disapprove of the president (42%) from the percentage that strongly approve of his actions (28%), stands at -14. Rasmussen polls are by far the most accurate, with a 95% confidence level.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that most Likely Voters think their representative in Congress does not deserve reelection if he or she voted for the national health care law, the auto bailouts, or the $787 billion economic stimulus plan. This finding strongly supports the idea that incumbents should be kicked out in November. Let's kick them all out!

Rick

[rickoff]

Election Day is getting close!

Just a reminder that election day is drawing near, and that this may well be the most important election of our lives. If we fail to vote, vote to retain career politician incumbents, or fail to vote for Washington outsiders who will stand for the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and who will defend our freedoms and liberties, then neither we nor our children or grandchildren may ever see the chance again to reclaim our heritage.

This time, vote for change that we really CAN believe in. Vote for freedom from tyranny.

Rick