The American Ruling Class

[rickoff]

States will determine constitutionality of federal laws

Two states, Montana and Arizona, have already introduced legislative plans that would set up standing commissions whose members would be tasked with reviewing "all existing federal statutes, mandates, and executive orders" to determine their constitutionality, then recommending to lawmakers whether that state should "nullify" any federal law or regulation "that is outside the scope of the powers delegated to the federal government." See Arizona's legislative measure here. And 28 more states are presently considering following Arizona and Montana's lead.

The legislation to accomplish this was drafted by The Patriots Union, a Wyoming based organization that is taking in hand the battle against an overreaching federal government. According to Barbara Ketay, head of the organization's Constitutional Justice Division, "States have to realize they are sovereign. They have a compact with the federal government. The federal government was established to serve at the pleasure of the states. If passed, the bill reasserts the states' right to nullify any federal statute, executive order or judicial intrusion which the state legislature deems unconstitutional and abusive toward the states or the people of the states. With no legitimate venue available in which to demand redress of grievances in the legislative, executive or judicial branches of the federal government at present, we have determined that the people of each state, via their elected officials, must take broad but specific state measures to force the federal government to live within the confines of the U.S. Constitution and the enumerated powers."

The Montana proposal is "an act prohibiting infringement of the state of Montana's constitutional right to nullification of any federal statute, mandate or executive order considered unconstitutional." It specifically repudiates the federal belief that the "Commerce Clause," the "Necessary and Proper Clause" or the "General Welfare Clause" are foundations for a complete federal control over states. The act further states that, "Congress and the federal government are denied the power to establish laws within the state that are repugnant and obtrusive tostate law and to the people within the state," and that the act "serves as a notice and demand to the federal government to cease and desist all activities outside the scope of the federal government's constitutionally designated powers."

Well said, and the intentions couldn't be any clearer. This draws a veritable line in the sand, and informs the federal government that the states will no longer tolerate unconstitutional abuses of power that originate from the Executive, Legislative, or Judicial branches of the federal government. While this action is long overdue, it is good to see these positive actions taking place at the state level. If you live in Arizona or Montana, be sure to congratulate your legislators on moving this legislation forward. If you live elsewhere, don't hesitate to contact your legislators and tell them it is time to get behind Arizona and Montana's lead and assert your state's sovereignty.

Rick

[cody]

I never really looked at this thread before, there is some good stuff here, thanks everyone.

Good to hear about the states fighting back Rick. Also Id like to defend Ron Paul also with my take on his views of 9-11. It could be like you say that he has bought into the lie as everyone else. Personally, i think Ron is smarter than that though. But just imagine if he came out and said 9-11 was an inside job. That would immediately mark the end of his career in politics. I think he knows the truth but has to play into political games to maintain credibility until people are ready for the truth. No doubt he has to walk a fine line already with how much he is saying, unfortunately thats the nature of the beast at this point in time. If he makes it to president then maybe he can let the cat out of the bag.

[rickoff]

I think [Ron Paul] knows the truth but has to play into political games to maintain credibility until people are ready for the truth. No doubt he has to walk a fine line already with how much he is saying, unfortunately thats the nature of the beast at this point in time. If he makes it to president then maybe he can let the cat out of the bag.

That's quite right, Cody. Ron has been working throughout his Congressional career to end the Federal Reserve, and is definitely a thorn in their side. The criminal elite who control the Federal Reserve haven't been all that worried about Ron Paul because he is just one of very few in Congress who will publicly take a stand against them. That would drastically change, though, if Ron Paul became President, and we all know what happened to the pevious two Presidents (Lincoln and Kennedy) who were determined to end the bankers' control over our monetary system. I think that is why Ron favors fully auditing the Fed as a first step, as this would expose all of their dirty dealings and generate a massive public outcry to end the Fed, which Congress could not ignore. I believe that Ron may ultimately be successful in this endeavor, and that the truth about 911 will only be revealed through similar steps, if at all.

You have to remember that most Americans are, at this point in time, far more concerned about how they will make it through this economic crisis than they are over what happened on 9/11. People generally have a short attention span, and tend to focus much greater attention on current events than those of past years. The criminal elite of the Ruling Class understand this, and continually engineer new catastrophies to distance us from thoughts of 9/11. It has been a decade now since the events of 9/11, and the longer that a real investigation is put off, the less chance there is that such an investigation will ever occur. And even if one does occur at some point in time, there will be little remaining evidence to consider, other than that which was contrived and planted. While the 9/11 Truth movement has exposed many flaws in the "official" 9/11 story, there are still many people who assume that there must be some logical explanation for these flaws. An entire generation of young Americans has now been indoctrinated to believe the "official" story of 9/11. They saw it on TV, heard it on radio, read about it in newspapers, magazines, and in their high school and college text books. With all that consensus over 9/11 being pulled off by a handfull of Islamic terrorists, rather than being an inside job, how many do you suppose will question the "official" story? And these are the ones who will, someday in the near future, be in the seats of Congress. Therefore, I believe that a new official investigation of 9/11 is highly unlikely to occur, and that the best we can hope for is to continue the 9/11 Truth movement to expose the fallacies through public enlightenment. While forums such as this one are helpful in causing public awareness, much more can be accomplished through the release of professionally made and distributed documentary films. For example, Oliver Stone's movie JFK, which was largely based upon facts gathered by Jim Marrs, resulted in 2/3 of the American public believing that there definitely was a conspiracy and cover-up regarding the JFK's assassination. Still, though, even with that kind of public opinion, a new official investigation has not been launched and probably never will be. Jackie Kennedy-Onassis commissioned a private investigation which I am certain dug up some very dark secrets about the actual conspirators, but realizing that publicly exposing this evidence would probably bring about dire consequences to herself and her children, she chose to release this information only after the passing of her children, Caroline and John jr. John jr met his fate in a plane crash not long ago, but Caroline lives on and so many of us will not be alive when that report is finally made public. And even when it is, it probably won't have much effect because the people who were named as conspirators will have expired and cannot be brought to justice. The same will go for the 9/11 conspirators at some point.

Rick

[rickoff]

Q - Should job creation be government's objective?
A - No way! It simply costs too much when government does it.

CBO: Stimulus Jobs Cost at Least $228,055 Each

The jobs that were created and saved by the economic stimulus legislation that President Barack Obama signed in February 2009 cost at least $228,055 each, according to new data from the Congressional Budget Office.

In a report released on Wednesday, the CBO said it now estimates the stimulus bill costs $821 billion, up from its original estimate of $787 billion.
The CBO also estimated that in the fourth quarter of 2010, between 1.3 and 3.5 million people were employed who would not have a job if the stimulus had not been enacted.

The CBO also estimated that between 1.4 and 3.6 million were employed as a result of the stimulus bill during the third quarter of 2010.
The figures take into account not only the new jobs believed to have been created, but also the existing jobs that were saved that would otherwise have been lost.

So the $821 billion cost of the stimulus, divided by the maximum of 3.6 million jobs the CBO believes were saved or created, equals $228,055 for each job. Taking the 1.4 million figure for jobs created or saved means each job cost $586,428. Where is the logic in this? There is none, of course. The government solution to any problem is to borrow and spend. Spending somewhere between $200,00 and $600,000 to create a single temporary construction job for which a worker may be paid say $25 an hour is total absurdity.

[bugler]

Governments can't create wealth. Every job created by the government is an expense. It is negative for the economy.

Economic rule: What you subsidize you get more. What you tax you get less.

[Moe R]

Q - Should job creation be government's objective?
A - No way! It simply costs too much when government does it.

CBO: Stimulus Jobs Cost at Least $228,055 Each

The jobs that were created and saved by the economic stimulus legislation that President Barack Obama signed in February 2009 cost at least $228,055 each, according to new data from the Congressional Budget Office.

In a report released on Wednesday, the CBO said it now estimates the stimulus bill costs $821 billion, up from its original estimate of $787 billion.
The CBO also estimated that in the fourth quarter of 2010, between 1.3 and 3.5 million people were employed who would not have a job if the stimulus had not been enacted.

The CBO also estimated that between 1.4 and 3.6 million were employed as a result of the stimulus bill during the third quarter of 2010.
The figures take into account not only the new jobs believed to have been created, but also the existing jobs that were saved that would otherwise have been lost.

So the $821 billion cost of the stimulus, divided by the maximum of 3.6 million jobs the CBO believes were saved or created, equals $228,055 for each job. Taking the 1.4 million figure for jobs created or saved means each job cost $586,428. Where is the logic in this? There is none, of course. The government solution to any problem is to borrow and spend. Spending somewhere between $200,00 and $600,000 to create a single temporary construction job for which a worker may be paid say $25 an hour is total absurdity.

I'm sure you know this but I just have to get this off my chest. The powers that be already know this all too well. It's planed. It would have to be . No one could screw things up this much unless they were doing it purposly. They've got it down to a science and they're playing it for all it's worth.Rick, if you ran for pres I'd vote for you. Too bad they'd Kennedy you in a week if you won. The puppets are in place doing as they're told. What we see is only the begining. Best to be prepaired. For what? I have no idea.Dollar collapse,hyperinflation? I've ranted enough.

[cody]

Best to be prepaired. For what? I have no idea.Dollar collapse,hyperinflation? I've ranted enough.

Agreed,

Better get ready before its too late. I have months worth of long term food storage for my entire immediate family. Also all my money is in constitutional money Guns and ammo too, I really hope i dont have to use them though. I would rather be prepared and not need it than not have it when i really need it. These are cheap, common sense insurance policies as far as im concerned. Protect your family for road ahead.

[Moe R]

In less than 90 days, you will be "REQUIRED" by Federal Law to carry a "National ID" card., page 1

[cody]

Here is an interesting video from of all people, Bernie Madoff. Madoff as you may recall was responsible for what some consider the largest ponzi scheme in history. He say's that is incorrect however because the US government is an even bigger ponzi scheme. I would think this guy would know one when he sees one, considering his history. Have a look.

YouTube - Madoff Says Entire U.S. Government a `Ponzi Scheme'

Also wanted to introduce everyone to Peter Schiff. Dont know if he has come up in this thread, sorry havnt read the whole thing yet. Anyways, many have heard of Ron Paul and his views on free market economies and austrian economics. Peter is another such guy. Peter accurately predicted the dot com bubble in 2001 and the housing crash in 2008, while everyone else was laughing at him for saying they would crash. There are numerous videos of Peter, this is just one of his latest ones that i liked.

YouTube - Bernie Madoff Says the US Government is a Ponzi Scheme (Peter Schiff)
Those jokers on fast money always crack me up with their bologna.


Here is just some classic clips of him.

YouTube - Peter Schiff Analogies

[dutchdivco]

Arizona senate

The bill was voted on in the Az. Senate, not passed. However, senate rules a bill is not dead till the end of the session, and its common to have bill 'tweaked' and re-submitted.Dems against, repubs split 50-50. Those against saying "We have more important things to deal with, than taking on Fed. Gov., like budget shortfall."Supporters counter Fed. unfunded mandates are part of reason FOR budget shortfall.Many Rep. feel they were elected because of taking on fed. gov., so I suspect we will see this bill again, and I'm thinking it will pass. Just my take, based on seeing local coverage.(I'm in Az.);-)Jim

[rickoff]

How much will government spending be cut, and will it be enough?




If left to stand, the Obama budget would increase US national debt by 7 trillion over the next ten years. Clearly there is a dire need to cut government spending and borrowing. The Democrats aren't going to offer any meaningful cuts, and will not support the broader Republican suggested cuts, so at this point it is a stalemate situation. Meanwhile, the Tea Party caucus of newly elected representatives is saying that neither the Democrat nor Republican establishment representatives are facing the reality that massive cuts must be made at this time if we are ever to bring the US financial situation to order.

The Democrats and the mass media are using the standoff to attempt to convince the public that government will grind to a halt and be forced to default on payments unless the Republicans agree to continue spending at current deficit levels. The Republicans appear to be caving in to this pressure and ignoring their "Pledge to America," which promised they would roll back government spending to 2008 levels. So now they offer up a compromising 2-week extension to current spending levels, but what will that achieve? When the 2 weeks are up, and Democrats haven't agreed to go along with Republican proposed cuts, then what? Another 2 weeks? This could go on and on for months. Truth is, the Republicans really don't need Democrat permission to make the needed cuts, and a compromise is not necessary. A single NO vote by House Republicans on raising the national debt limit would be an effective means of defunding ObamaCare and other unconstitutional programs that we cannot afford, and would open the door for serious House debate about additional spending cuts which would then become necessary to mandate. What unfolds in the next few weeks will tell the story of whether or not Congress is ready and willing to trim the fat and make the cuts that the American public is demanding. I, for one, think that a truly positive outcome is unlikely since there are still far more than enough establishment politicians in place to effectively thwart the Tea Party objectives of smaller and fiscally responsible government. The Tea Party can make demands and loudly voice our concerns, but establishment politicians will have the final word - at least until the 2012 elections. By that time it may well be too late to turn the ship around, if it isn't already.

[petar113507]

Howdy Rick. In RE: To 1323 -- I was sitting in my ECON class, and the teacher was explaining the federal reserve. Now, I don't truly understand how that really works -- so I can't pass judgment on any of the information from either side I've seen so far, I've gotta read more first. Can you point me towards anyone who can clear up the federal reserve's jobs, duties, and workings in plain English?

I can additionally say that the people in my college class were not phased with the stories about 9/11, nor their decade since gone. In the econ book, they point fingers at "terrorists political reasons" for executing the "attacks". I noticed this quite keenly. Others did not seem to.

I beleive that in the name of "higher education" we are fed many lies. Another instance -- I noticed in my chemistry textbook -- in the first chapter, they call alchemy a "psuedoscience". I am aware that some people may/may not be able to replicate alchemists findings -- but after watching bedini's EFTV DVD 18, I am thoroughly convinced that it is a possibillity the alchemists may have known a thing or to. Some of this knowledge will be lost, because young, bright minds are not being unleashed on these ideas, because they have been dubbed a "psuedoscience". Of this, I've learned One must be selective with who they listen to -- most are not well informed, and some can be downright misleading..

But, I found it disturbing that nobody asked further questions in ECON when they did not understand how their own economic system works, especially during a recession. More so, when no one else questioned the "alchemists" from chemistry textbook. It was only my silent objection, as far as I could see.

So I guess while off topic from your post 1323 -- the whole reason I'm here, is to ask -- why are we being made more stupid? I am under the impression like my generation is becoming more docile, and less-capable of fighting for themselves, and more Dependant on things ike supermarkets, and gas stations.

Follow up -- Why do the powers that be want this? What ultimate purpose does it serve?

Im just Thinking out loud here,
==Romo

[bugler]

Can you point me towards anyone who can clear up the federal reserve's jobs, duties, and workings in plain English?

A very good introduction to the fed scam is this, rather lengthy video:

The Money Masters - How International Bankers Gained Control of America

Pay attention to the ethnicity of the 13 families who own the fed.

[everwiser]

Neither party is going to significantly cut the budget or reduce the deficit. This should be obvious to even the least attentive observer. The Republicans started off spouting off about cutting $100B+ and the Democrats saying they only wanted to cut $60B. The budget is estimated at $3500B ($3.5T) so even at $100B in cuts you're only talking about less than 3% of the entire budget. Whoop'd frakkin' do.

Of course, that was the beginning. When the Dems were talking $60B the Reps came down to $61B without even a fight. Then instead of a government shutdown the Reps blinked and pushed through a 2 week extension that only cuts $4B out of this years budget. In the meantime, the IMF and China are putting things in motion to replace the US dollar as the world's reserve currency. When that happens (notice I typed "when" not "if") the Forex is going to be flooded with US dollars that we have to eat. The U.S. will default and that loaf of bread that cost $1 two years ago and costs $2 now will cost $1M. Look up hyperinflation and Germany's economy after World War I. I sure hope you know how to grow your food because you won't be buying any with our worthless greenbacks.

The writing is on the wall. The train is a runaway. There is no stopping it now. The Fed and our Treasury are making sure that we keep borrowing into oblivion. The same way the very same families that owned the banks at the advent of World War II made sure that Hitler was in over his financial head. War and famine is coming to America. I hope we're all ready...

[rickoff]

Howdy Rick. In RE: To [post#]1323 -- I was sitting in my ECON class, and the teacher was explaining the federal reserve. Now, I don't truly understand how that really works -- so I can't pass judgment on any of the information from either side I've seen so far, I've gotta read more first. Can you point me towards anyone who can clear up the federal reserve's jobs, duties, and workings in plain English?

Hi Romo,

Actually, The Money Masters video which Bugler pointed to is excellent for gaining an understanding of what the Federal Reserve is all about, and who is behind it. There are also many other good videos available, and I would highly recommend the book titled The Creature From Jekyll Island. It sounds as though the school you are attending is simply teaching the "facts" as contained in the status quo textbooks. Long ago, teachers in schools of higher learning taught students how to think, and how to determine facts for themselves. Today students are taught what to think, and it is a big difference. Most will accept what they read as undisputed facts, and that really is shameful. A true edicational experience would expose students to as many viewpoints as possible, and in a manner that neither promotes any one idea as being the "correct" one, nor demeans any of the others as "nonsense." In other words, it should be left up to the student to take in all that they have studied about the subject and reach their own conclusions as to what the facts really are. Having said that, I think everyone here would be interested in knowing exactly how your teacher explained the Federal Reserve. Was he or she quick to point out that the Federal Reserve is neither federal nor a reserve, or were those points conveniently overlooked? The facts concerning the Federal Reserve are no secret, though relatively few will ever learn them.

I can additionally say that the people in my college class were not phased with the stories about 9/11, nor their decade since gone. In the econ book, they point fingers at "terrorists political reasons" for executing the "attacks". I noticed this quite keenly. Others did not seem to.

This doesn't surprise me. What would surprise me would be if the textbook exposed that there are other viewpoints regarding 9/11 without demeaning them as being tin-hat conspiracy theories. As you pointed out, now that you have been exposed to some well researched alternative views of 9/11, something doesn't quite jive when you hear or read the textbook explanation. I am wondering if you felt comfortable enough to politely confront the "official" explanation in class, or if you felt you would be humiliated if you had done so.

I beleive that in the name of "higher education" we are fed many lies. Another instance -- I noticed in my chemistry textbook -- in the first chapter, they call alchemy a "psuedoscience". I am aware that some people may/may not be able to replicate alchemists findings -- but after watching bedini's EFTV DVD 18, I am thoroughly convinced that it is a possibillity the alchemists may have known a thing or to. Some of this knowledge will be lost, because young, bright minds are not being unleashed on these ideas, because they have been dubbed a "psuedoscience". Of this, I've learned One must be selective with who they listen to -- most are not well informed, and some can be downright misleading..

Again, it is not widely known from reading school textbooks, but many of the most well known scientists and inventors, including Sir Isaac Newton and Ben Franklin, were ardent explorers and experimenters in alchemy. Many other well known scientists, philosophers, and scholars were deeply involved in alchemy, but few spoke openly about it for fear of being persecuted by the church of Rome. Today's textbooks seem to offer the opinion that alchemy is nothing more than voodoo science, and was nothing more than a foolish quest for the transmutation of base metals into gold. The truth is, however, that today's scientists would not know how to turn oil into plastics, or silicon into computer chips, without the pioneering efforts of the alchemists to have learned from.

So I guess while off topic from your post 1323 -- the whole reason I'm here, is to ask -- why are we being made more stupid? I am under the impression like my generation is becoming more docile, and less-capable of fighting for themselves, and more Dependant on things like supermarkets, and gas stations.

Your impression is correct. There is a worldwide effort to dumb down the population, and to keep us all so busy thinking about things that really don't matter that most people will never question what is really going on or who is behind it. In your great grandparents' time, people were largely self-reliant, but today people are almost totally reliant upon situations and circumstances that are completely beyond their control.

Follow up -- Why do the powers that be want this? What ultimate purpose does it serve?

It is quite simple, really. A dumbed down population is easily manipulated and controlled. Knowledge, when true, is power that liberates the mind, promotes self sufficiency, and gives us cause to ask questions and demand real answers when we observe that something is afoul. And the Ruling Class simply cannot allow that. If what you see on Yahoo is true, then the questions most Americans are concerned with are regarding who wore what at the Academy Awards, or what celebrity has gained the most notoriety this week for their latest bout of bad behavior. The mass media is an immensely poweful tool, and is controlled by the Ruling Class, so do not underestimate the power and influence that it wields in shaping public opinions and viewpoints. If you value truth, search for it in alternative media and converse with others who are like-minded. In your classroom, keep a step ahead of the teacher so that you can speak out when you hear something that isn't quite right. If the teacher is worth his salt then he will respect you for defending an idea you believe in if your points are valid ones, so be prepared to debate the merits of what you say. Each opportunity to speak out in this manner is an opportunity to open the minds of others to ideas they might never contemplate otherwise.

Best regards,

Rick