The American Ruling Class

[rickoff]

I hope that some people now realize that the true, and REAL problem with elections is Election Fraud... not the red herring of "voter fraud".

Yes, that's a point I have attempted to drive home more than once in this thread. While most people understand that vote fraud exists, they believe that it can be solved through actions such as purging names of recently deceased persons from voter lists, requiring that voters present a valid ID, and having poll watchers on the lookout for any suspicious activity. These are important steps that should be taken by all states, of course, but do absolutely nothing to prevent the most pervasive type of vote fraud, which is the rigging of elections that is done out of sight. We are seeing blatant examples of rigging in the caucuses and primaries which is being done by establishment party officials to ensure that one of their hand-picked candidates will win the nomination. And next November, when election day rolls around, the Ruling Class elite will control the outcome of the elections by rigging electronic voting and vote counting machines. Anyone who has not yet watched the video Hacking Democracy needs to view it in order to understand the many dirty tricks that go on behind the scenes, completely undetected in most instances. Until the things exposed in this video are prevented from happening again, our votes are meaningless and do not count. The only way to restore confidence is for all states to use paper ballots marked by voters, and to physically count each and every ballot in the presence of persons representing each of the candidates that appear on the ballot. With more than 10 weeks intervening between election day and innauguration day, there is no good reason why voters need to know the "official" election results on the night of the election.

[rickoff]

Is using a forged Social Security Number -- but your own name --
to obtain employment or buy a car an identity theft crime?

The answer to this question is no, and the reasons why are outlined below:

1. The Social Security Administration (SSA)makes it clear (if people take the time to read the documents used when applying for a SS#) that the SS# is not to be used for purposes of identification. As a matter of law it cannot be used, or be compelled to be used, as identification. I know that seems hard for people to understand, since nearly everything you do requires submitting your SS#. The real reason for that, though, is not for your identification. It is because the records of all such transactions are supplied to the IRS so that they can keep tabs of the income taxes, property taxes, and all other numerous and insane taxes that are associated with that card # and due for deposit in the account which the SSA created.

2. The SS card that was issued to you has a number, but it is not your number. US Code states that, "the card does not belong to the person." The number belongs to the SSA, and they can take it back at anytime if they so choose. When you apply for, and accept the card, you are simply accepting responsibility for acting as a trustee of a depository account created by the SSA. You are not the beneficiary of this trust fund. The beneficiary is the government's General Trust Fund.

So you see, it is impossible to commit identity theft by making use of an SS card number that was issued to someone else. In fact, if you were to do this, it is like walking into a bank and making a deposit into someone else's account using someone else's account number but using your actual name. And when you think about it, that is exactly what we too are doing when we use our issued SS card for business transactions.

For a more thorough understanding of this, go here.

[rickoff]

Breitbart says he has videos of Obama in college that nobody has seen. Considering he’s the man who took down ACORN and Anthony Weiner, this could be good.

The videos are said to show Barry's association with radicals during the 1980's, and especially his association with Weather Underground terror group members Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. Interestingly, Breitbart had dinner with Ayers and Dohrn three weeks ago at the couple’s Hyde Park residence on Chicago’s South Side, which is near Obama’s home. Breitbart was invited by Daily Caller Editor-in-Chief Tucker Carlson, who won an Internet auction for a dinner party with the couple. Could it be that Breitbart was either given the videos, or "lifted" them while at the residence?

According to Steve Bannon, a writer and documentary filmmaker (“The Undefeated”), who appeared on the Hannity show last night, Breitbart’s company will release the Obama Harvard tapes within seven to 10 days.

Radio host Michael Savage brought up the possibility that Breitbart might have been assassinated after publicly having threatened to release the videos. “I’ve got videos – this election we’re going to vet him,” Breitbart said at CPAC, promising that the videos would show how “racial division and class warfare are central” to the “hope and change” that Obama ”sold in 2008.” Savage said that if Breitbart’s colleagues have the videos, they should post them as quickly as possible and make them viral “or they’ll never see the light of day.” I would agree.

[rickoff]

Watch this and weep - it's your money! Land of the freebies - home of the enslaved. Fully 144 million of the US population (that's 47%) are living on entitlements that the rest of us pay for, and the current administration is doing everything possible to make that number a majority. At the rate this number has been increasing, that won't take very long, and I guess we know who these folks will vote for in November.

[Bizzy]

Savage said that if Breitbart’s colleagues have the videos, they should post them as quickly as possible and make them viral “or they’ll never see the light of day.” I would agree.

Hi Rick
I agree... If his colleagues want to live past the weekend they need to get those out right away!Otherwise there could be an epidemic of heart attaches. And the videos will never surface again.
Bizzy

[Bizzy]

Go To Hell Barack

I was not a huge fan of W nor his dad, but they were Republicans so I trusted them more than I would a Democrat/marxist. That being said as Republicans we had to listen to the endless ranting and threats the left hurled at W. Everything from Tee shirts that that had a picture with W and a caption that said "wanted dead or alive" to books that detailed how to assinate W.
So now some American put a poster up in a Metro DC subway detailing Komrad Obama's healthcare scam and at the end is clearly written
"Go to Hell Barack"
And suddenly the marxist left is upset becuase we hurt thier feeings and offended thier dear leader.
I say to them Get over it!
When warm weather hits I am having my wife paint the same on the rear bumper of my pickup.
So I can tell the whole world where Komrad Obama can go

"Go To Hell Barack"

Bizzy


Rep. Jim Moran Wants 'Go To Hell Barack' Ad Removed From Metro Station

[dutchdivco]

Rick

". Breitbart was invited by Daily Caller Editor-in-Chief Tucker Carlson, who won an Internet auction for a dinner party with the couple. Could it be that Breitbart was either given the videos, or "lifted" them while at the residence?"

I'm thinking a more likely scenario would be he already HAD the video's, and 'let something slip' in his conversations that night, letting them know he had the video's and whats on them. A short time later, and just before his promised release date; he turns up dead.

Have you seen the ads, (on TV) for the insulin syringe thats a 'pre-load'; doesn't need to be refrigerated, you set the dosage (dial-a-dosage), stick the needle in and push a little lever and it injects. Hmmmmmm,.....Know what happens if you give inulin to someone who's not diabetic, and doesn't need it?

Wonder how often they test for insulin, in an autopsie? Even if they test, insulin IS a 'natural substance' in the body, what they may need to test for is blood sugar levels, which would be nearly non-existent. Bet they don't test for that. Jim

[Shadesz]

Watch this and weep - it's your money! Land of the freebies - home of the enslaved. Fully 144 million of the US population (that's 47%) are living on entitlements that the rest of us pay for, and the current administration is doing everything possible to make that number a majority. At the rate this number has been increasing, that won't take very long, and I guess we know who these folks will vote for in November.

Rick, I understand your pain. However, I warn you not to jump to such quick assumptions about who these "people" are going to vote for. Many of the people that receive government aid are higher education students. Think.. Pell Grants, food stamps, medicaid (esp covering costs of labor/birth), etc.

The "college student" is probably the biggest demographic supporting Ron Paul. Kind of contrary to your assumption; considering Paul openly admits he plans to cut the federal education program.

So why would these students who leverage federal education assistance, myself included, vote for someone who commits to cut such programs? The answer is two fold. First, why do these students feel they currently need governmental support, second, how do such students not feel hypocritical voting against a program that they are currently using?

First: Why do students feel they need governmental support?

One day at the university I was talking to an older professor who takes pride in helping students "consider all angles" and think for themselves. He was complaining about the idea that federal student loans might be forgiven. Mr. "consider every angle" barked how it wouldn't be fair to his generation that had to work to pay for school.

Ironically when talking about what is "fair" Mr All Angels wasn't considering all angles. He was in school 30+ years ago. The costs of higher education was very different then than it is today. In fact, for 30 years, tuition costs have risen 3 times the inflation rate.

For those who don't understand compounding math I will show you where the real "unfairness" is. Suppose we pay $1,000 of our tuition of 30 years ago. Now adjust that money for 30 years of 4% inflation. This equates to $3,118.65. Cool, now our money is "worth" three times as much so paying for tuition should be just as easy, right?

Let's find out. The same $1,000 tuition cost increased at 3 times the economic inflation rate. At this rate the $1,000 cost of tuition 30 years ago equates to $26,749.93 today.

In other words, the $1,000 cash 30 years ago now equals $3,118.65; while the $1,000 tuition bill from 30 years ago is now $26,749.93. If Mr. All Angles were to be going through school now, his ENTIRE tuition from back then would only pay for 12% of his tuition today, and that includes inflation adjustments!!! In other words, he would have to "work" eight times harder today to pay for school than he did back then.

So what is "unfair": the possibility/fact that students are receiving help, or the fact that education costs eight times as much, after adjusting for inflation?

Warning (irony): The world today almost demands a college education if a young person is going to have any chance of completely providing for themselves and their family. Yet, it is eight times more difficult and burdensome for the same person to actually get the college education. For this reason, the majority of students must use every tool available to them, including relying on the government, if they hope to one day, not rely on the government.

Ok, question 2: how do students not feel hypocritical voting against a program that they are currently using?

There is some irony in this one as well. The irony is what made the cost of education so expensive in the first place: federal aid and student loans (both private and federal).

You see, it is like the housing market bubble. Many people believe that the toxic mortgages given out hurt only the person who received the loan and who was inevitably going to default on it. The fact is, these toxic loans hurt the person who normally wouldn't have needed to get such a loan.

Because house loans were suddenly so easy to get many people received them. Initially people were able to buy nicer and bigger homes. BUT quickly house prices exploded- because there was so much more "money" for housing.

Now, Mr Humble who, before the bubble, could afford a nice home for $70,000 has to pay $200,000 for the same home. His income didn't increase 3 fold so he is now forced to either
-1- Live beyond his means and get a loan for the super inflated 200k house, or
-2- Buy a home that was only worth $23,000 before the housing bubble.
Perhaps it isn't fair, but at least he has an option to buy less of a home.

Higher education is at the peak of a similar bubble. Government grants and government and private student loans has made so much more "college money" available. While initially this may have helped more people attend college, the truth is, it has only caused college costs to explode.

So now Mr. Wanna Provide has to pay $23k for what would have cost him $3K before the bubble. BUT...

Unlike the home buyer, Mr. Wanna Provide doesn't have an option to "buy less" of an education. You see, if he were to sacrifice his education he would be much less able to provide for his family, and thus would be left to relying on financial support the rest of his life.

Hence... college students CAN feel justified on using financial aid during this stage of their life because they understand that by so doing they will eventually be able to NOT need financial aid.

One last thing that will help them feel justified in using a system that they would vote against is the understanding that this bubble isn't their fault. It is the fault of all the people who used the "system" before them. Yes that includes the baby boomers. So, how do you use a system for your own survival without making that system penalize your children?

You destroy it! When the banks finally cut off new mortgages the housing bubble popped and housing prices fell (I believe they are still over-inflated though). The same will hold true for the education market. If people can vote in someone who will get the government to cut education spending, the tuition bubble will finally pop and tuition prices will return to a more "fair" state.

SUMMARY
It's simple really... students can't wait for the bubble pop and must use the tools they are provided. However... this does not mean that they can't work to change the broken system that they are currently being forced to use. Quit the contrary actually. Because they see the problems in the system as they use it, they are more qualified, and motivated, to destroy it.

Ok, enough reading for now. How about some Ron Paul logic...

Ron Paul Brilliantly Answers Student Loan Question - YouTube

[Shadesz]

A quote with the real numbers helping explain it...

What the encomiums to Pell failed to mention is that his grants have been, in all the ways that matter most, a failure. As any parent can tell you, colleges are increasingly unaffordable. Students are borrowing at record levels and loan default rates are rising. More and more low-income students are getting priced out of higher education altogether. The numbers are stark: When Pell grants were named for the senator in 1980, a typical public four-year university cost $2,551 annually. Pell Grants provided $1,750, almost 70 percent of the total. Even private colleges cost only about $5,600 back then. Low-income students could matriculate with little fear of financial hardship, as Pell intended. Over the next three decades, Congress poured vast sums into the program, increasing annual funding from $2 billion to nearly $20 billion. Yet today, Pell Grants cover only 33 percent of the cost of attending a public university. Why? Because prices have increased nearly 500 percent since 1980. Average private college costs, meanwhile, rose to over $34,000 per year.

Kevin Carey for Democracy Journal: That Old College Lie

[rickoff]

More from Arpaio's Cold Case Posse report

Quite interestingly, the Cold Case Posse report said, “To quell the popular idea that Obama was actually born outside the United States, we examined the records of Immigration and Naturalization Service cards routinely filled out by airplane passengers arriving on international flights that originated outside the United States in the month of August 1961 [Obama's birth month]. Those records are housed at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. Interestingly, records from the days surrounding Obama’s birth, August 1, 1961 to August 7, 1961 are missing. This is the only week in 1961 where these immigration cards cannot be found.”

You can safely bet that the missing records were stored at the National Archives prior to being removed by someone who could be likened to Sandy Berger. To me, the only plausible explanation for these records being removed is because they would have shown something that would have been devastating to some politician's career if discovered. I strongly suspect that "something" to be a return flight to the US by baby Barry and his mom.

[Aaron]

HI officials admit no Obama documents

Hawaii official now swears: No Obama birth certificate

I've seen that story go around. The scan of the notarized document only shows one part - would like to see the entire letter that is notarized.

[rickoff]

Hawaii official now swears: No Obama birth certificate

I've seen that story go around. The scan of the notarized document only shows one part - would like to see the entire letter that is notarized.

Hi Aaron,

I first reported on the Tim Adams story in June of 2010 in post # 740 of this thread, and again in post # 1249 when Adams signed the affidavit. As mentioned at the bottom of post 1249, "to read the contents of the affidavit, please see this two part pdf document series: Part 1 Part 2 "

[rickoff]

perhaps Anna has it right:

"You complicate it too much. I suggest a traditional American approach – give EVERYTHING TO THE RICH and … PRAY."

Name calling will not advance our society - stay focused on the 1% and their power. it is the title of this thread after all.

Hi Minoly,

Out of curiosity, who is Anna, and specifically what name-calling are you referring to?

[aljhoa]

Dr. Chiyome Fukino "a natural-born American citizen"
http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2009/09-063.pdf

i.e. not IVF Hawaiian
of US statutorily raped mother and Kenyan father
w/o protection of '60s US immigration laws.

Al

[rickoff]

As you can see in the affidavit, Adams' story changed in several ways over the seven months since he told it to the white supremacist radio hosts. By January 2011, it turns out that Adams was only a senior elections clerk, not the chief elections clerk. He adds that no Honolulu hospital has any record of President Obama's birth, and he says he worked "through September 2008," not that he left in August. Most important, he now makes clear that he is relating double hearsay:

to read more...
The Fogbow: Birthers Debunked :: Tim Adams, Senior Elections Clerk

I'm not at all feeling certain that Tim Adams' story is truthful, but I would give no more weight to websites that proclaim themselves to be "birther" debunkers. There is a lot of false information out there that I'm sure is purposely spoon fed to the birther community by the debunker community. The birthers, being eager to hear of any new stories and evidence regarding Barry's ineligibility, all too often jump on whatever they hear and pass it around. Then later, when it can be shown that the story is at least questionable, the debunkers use it to rip the birthers. The tactic being, of course, that if several stories embraced by birhers is shown to be either false or questionable then readers at the debunker sites will believe that all birther documentation of Barry's ineligibility is hogwash.

If one looks at the real evidence pointing to Barry's ineligibility, and his false documentation, I think any reasonable person would agree to the following:
1. Barry was never properly vetted for eligibility by anyone in the Democrat party, Congress, or state election officials.
2. Pelosi, as National Democrat Committee chairwoman, signed a document stating Barry was constitutionally eligible when she had no proof that he was.
3. The Hawaii Department of Health affirmed that no one of authority had requested Barry's birth records prior to the 2008 election.
4. Barry was born of a Kenyan father and is therefore not a natural born citizen, as is constitutionally required, even if he was born in Hawaii as claimed.
5. Barry was adopted by Lolo Soetoro and, according to Indonesian school records, became an Indonesian citizen. There is no evidence that Barry ever regained US citizenship, if he ever had it to begin with (which is still unproven).
6. Both Barry's short form and long form birth documents have been thoroughly shown to be fakes.
7. Barry refuses to release any of his original records for independent investigation.
8. No federal court has ever allowed evidence of Barry's ineligibility to be introduced in a case brought before the court.

Would you disagree with any of these points?