Sunday, September 27, 2009

The International Forecaster

BOB CHAPMAN's... "The International Forecaster"

Learn the ins-and-outs of what's really happening in the U.S. and world economy - it's not pretty - perilous actually. Get a FREE copy at the link above!

Saturday, September 26, 2009

The Obama Deception (Full Length Video: 1 hr. 53 min.)

Click on the title above to view the titled video in its entirety

A preponderance of empirically proven evidence of the ins-and-outs of the "New World Order" shadow conspiracy that cannot be denied or hidden anymore! Financed and orchestrated by the Illuminati, Bilderberger and partner cabal worldwide. Influenced and powered by spiritual, Anti-Christ wickedness in high places.

Monday, September 21, 2009

Buying Health Insurance? Only If He Likes It

OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
- HEALTH CARE LEGISLATION BOONDOGGLE & CONSTITUTIONAL POWER GRAB ATTEMPT

by Rowan Scarborough
09/21/2009


The House Democrats' huge health care bill bestows immense powers on one Washington bureaucrat who it authorizes to regulate every step of insurance buying and to collect any data on the American people the czar deems necessary to do the job.

The position is called the Health Choices Commissioner. The post will be filled by the president and confirmed by the Senate to oversee a brand new government agency whose health industry powers seem boundless under the bill. This person, and this person alone, will decide whether a health coverage plan is acceptable to Washington or not.

"He will rigidly and vigorously defined the choices that are available to you," said Robert E. Moffit, a health policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.

It is a massive shift in state's rights, moving decisions made by legislatures, governors and local insurance commissioners from the people to one desk in Washington.

"The big story in the House bill is that what you're looking at is a massive transfer of regulatory authority from the states to the federal government over health insurance," Moffit said. "This basically will undermine state independence, innovation in the provision of health insurance, the writing of health insurance and regulation. States vary from state to state on the kind of rules governing health insurance. What this does, it federalizes the entire process."

The choices commissioner will create a single, national insurance exchange -- a place to shop for private insurance or the federal government option favored by liberals -- and decide which companies can participate.

Because of the way the bill is written, almost certainly all private insurers will want to join the exchange and compete with the feds. Regardless of whether a company joins, the commissioner will rule on the acceptability of its plan, too. And by 2013, all individuals seeking insurance must apply through the exchange.

The commissioner will create the standards for all plans, meaning an insurer must meet his dictates on benefits or get out of the business. He can decide where companies can put their profits and tell them how to write brochures and other marketing tools.

The bill's section on Medicaid, a health care program for the poor, reads, "The commissioner shall establish effective methods for communicating in plain language and a culturally and linguistically appropriate manner."

In other words, languages other than English.

The commissioner also has free rein to audit any health plan and charge the company for costs. Moreover, Democrats have given the commissioner control over provider networks, meaning in theory he can decree the number of doctors or nurses or beds in a particular region.

"By concentrating so much authority into this one agency governed by a health choice commissioner and allowing the commissioner to have such vast discretion over what qualifies as health insurance, you're vesting an unelected bureaucracy with a tremendous amount of power," said Greg Conko, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. "Certainly unprecedented. And then he has the authority to punish plans for breaching what he decides is the right way to provide insurance."

Perhaps the most disturbing power is an blank check to collect data -- a power that in the past has rankled liberals and the mainstream press. But in this case, with a Democrat bill backed by liberals, the prospect of unchecked "data mining" has stirred no leftist protest.

Under section 142, which details the commissioner's authority, the bill states:

"The Commissioner shall collect data for purposes of carrying out the Commissioner’s duties, including for purposes of promoting quality and value, protecting consumers, and addressing disparities in health and health care and may share such data with the Secretary of Health and Human Services."

That's it. No qualifiers. No limits. Analysts told HUMAN EVENTS under such broad language the commissioner's bureaucrats can obtained people's tax records, credit reports, employment history. They could argue the data is needed to understand the region's demographics, patient requirements and income trends.

Another section specifically gives the commissioner authority to read tax returns.

"It gives him basically a blank check to go after all kinds of stuff," Moffit told HUMAN EVENTS. "Whatever he decides he needs. It's at his discretion. One of the things that is outstanding about the health choices commissioner is that as a public official he has enormous discretion in the exercise of his duties. Certainly I've never seen anything like this in my experience."

Then there is the section letting the commissioner oversee private insurance company finances.

"It's basically saying how much you can spend on benefits and how much you can retain for administrative costs or profits," Moffit said. "The health choices commissioner is an enforcer."

To Moffit and other conservatives, the ultimate purpose of the national health exchange is to put private insurers out of business. Afterall, when one government bureaucrat, the commissioner, is writing the rules for everyone, who is he going to favor: private industry or the government?

Afterall, one section allows the commissioner to automatically enroll individuals in a health care plan. "Such process may involve a random assignment," the bill says. To conservatives, "random" means the commissioner will shoe-horn them into the federal government plan.

Mr. Scarborough is a national security writer who has written books on Donald Rumsfeld and the CIA, including the New York Times bestseller Rumsfeld's War.

Hillary's Honduras Obsession

OPINION: THE AMERICAS - Wall Street Journal
SEPTEMBER 21, 2009

The U.S. is trying to force the country to violate its constitution.

"The Supreme Court of Honduras has constitutional and statutory authority to hear cases against the President of the Republic and many other high officers of the State, to adjudicate and enforce judgments, and to request the assistance of the public forces to enforce its rulings."

—Congressional Research Service, August 2009

Ever since Manuel Zelaya was removed from the Honduran presidency by that country's Supreme Court and Congress on June 28 for violations of the constitution, the Obama administration has insisted, without any legal basis, that the incident amounts to a "coup d'état" and must be reversed. President Obama has dealt harshly with Honduras, and Americans have been asked to trust their president's proclamations.

Now a report filed at the Library of Congress by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) provides what the administration has not offered, a serious legal review of the facts. "Available sources indicate that the judicial and legislative branches applied constitutional and statutory law in the case against President Zelaya in a manner that was judged by the Honduran authorities from both branches of the government to be in accordance with the Honduran legal system," writes CRS senior foreign law specialist Norma C. Gutierrez in her report.

Do the facts matter? Fat chance. The administration is standing by its "coup" charge and 10 days ago, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went so far as to sanction the country's independent judiciary. The U.S. won't say why, but its clear the court's sin is rejecting a U.S.-backed proposal to restore Mr. Zelaya to power.

The upshot is that the U.S. is trying to force Honduras to violate its own constitution and is also using its international political heft to try to interfere with the country's independent judiciary.

Hondurans are worried about what this pressure is doing to their country. Mr. Zelaya's violent supporters are emboldened by the U.S. position. They deface some homes and shops with graffiti and throw stones and home-made bombs into others, and whenever the police try to stop them, they howl about their "human rights."

But it may be that Americans should be even more concerned about the heavy-handedness, without legal justification, emanating from the executive branch in Washington. What does it say about Mr. Obama's respect for the separation of powers that he would instruct Mrs. Clinton to punish an independent court because it did not issue the ruling he wanted?
The Americas in the News

Since June 28, the U.S. has been pressuring Honduras to put Mr. Zelaya back in the presidency. But neither Mrs. Clinton's spurious "rule of law" claims or the tire iron handed her by Mr. Obama to use against this little country have been effective in convincing the Honduran judiciary that it ought to abandon its constitution.

It seems that Mrs. Clinton is peeved with the court because it ruled that restoring Mr. Zelaya to power under a proposal drafted by Costa Rican President Oscar Arias is unconstitutional. Thus, the State Department decided that in defense of the rule of law it would penalize the members of the Supreme Court for their interpretation of their constitution. Fourteen justices had their U.S. visas pulled.

Since the U.S. already had yanked the visa of the 15th member of the court, the one who signed the arrest warrant for Mr. Zelaya, this action completed Mrs. Clinton's assault on the independence of a foreign democracy's highest court. The lesson, presumably, is that judges in small foreign nations are required to accept America's interpretation of their own laws.

Thousands of readers have written to me asking how all this can happen in the U.S., where democratic principles have been recognized since the nation's founding. Many readers have written that they are "ashamed" of the U.S. and have asked, in effect, "How can I help Honduras?" A more pertinent question may turn out to be, how can they help their own country?

In its actions toward Honduras, the Obama administration is demonstrating contempt for the fundamentals of democracy. Legal scholars are clear on this. "Judicial independence is a central component of any democracy and is crucial to separation of powers, the rule of law and human rights," writes Ahron Barak, the former president of the Supreme Court of Israel and a prominent legal scholar, in his compelling 2006 book, "The Judge in a Democracy."

"The purpose of the separation of powers is to strengthen freedom and prevent the concentration of power in the hands of one government actor in a manner likely to harm the freedom of the individual," Mr. Barak explains—almost as if he is writing about Honduras.

He also warns prophetically about the Chávez style of democracy that has destroyed Venezuela and that Hondurans say they were trying to avoid in their own country. "Democracy is entitled to defend itself from those who seek to use it in order to destroy its very existence," he writes. Americans ought to ask themselves why the Obama administration doesn't seem to agree.

Write to O'Grady@wsj.com

Congress, Obama team up to kill marriage protections

WND Exclusive QUEERLY BELOVED

'Respect' proposal has nearly 100 members of Congress endorsing homosexualityR

By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Nearly 100 members of the U.S. House are working in lockstep with the Obama administration to try to eliminate protections for traditional marriage in the United States with the "Respect for Marriage Act" that has just been introduced in Congress.

H.R. 3567 was introduced just days ago by U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, and more than 90 co-sponsors.

"This legislation would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a 1996 law which discriminates against lawfully married same-sex couples," Nadler said in a statement on his website.The proposal has been assigned to committee.

"The 13-year-old DOMA singles out legally married same-sex couples for discriminatory treatment under federal law, selectively denying them critical federal responsibilities and rights, including programs like social security that are intended to ensure the stability and security of American families," his statement continued.

"The introduction of the Respect for Marriage Act responds directly to a call from President Obama for congressional action on the issue. As the president recently confirmed: 'I stand by my long-standing commitment to work
with Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act. It's discriminatory, it interferes with states' rights, and it's time we overturned it," the statement said.

Obama's opposition to traditional marriage was made clear recently when his Justice Department filed a legal brief seeking the repeal of DOMA.

The Defense of Marriage Act provides that federal laws must be interpreted in accord with the traditional definition of marriage as the union of husband and wife.

But Justice Department lawyer Scott Simpson filed a brief Aug 17 declaring: "With respects to the merits, this Administration does not support DOMA as a matter of policy, believes that it is discriminatory, and supports its repeal."

In a written statement, Obama declared:

[T]he Department of Justice has filed a response to a legal challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act, as it traditionally does when acts of Congress are challenged. This brief makes clear, however, that my Administration believes that the Act is discriminatory and should be repealed by Congress. I have long held that DOMA prevents LGBT couples from being granted equal rights and benefits. While we work with Congress to repeal DOMA, my Administration will continue to examine and implement measures that will help extend rights and benefits to LGBT couples under existing law.

The Justice Department said it "does not believe that DOMA is rationally related to any legitimate government interests in procreation and child-rearing" and evidence "that children raised by gay and lesbian parents are as likely to be well-adjusted as children raised by heterosexual parents."

According to an analysis by Alliance Defense Fund, a repeal of the primary federal law that protects marriage opens the door for litigation that would seek to force states to recognize "marriages" between same-sex duos.

"Marriage is not just any two people in a committed relationship. There's more to a marriage than that. A decisive majority of Americans believe this, and they are tired of being treated with contempt by politicians," said ADF Senior Counsel Brian Raum.

"Many of those in favor of this bill argue that the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act is not intended to force same-sex 'marriage' on all the states. If that is not the intent, its supporters wouldn't be seeking to repeal the section of DOMA that makes it clear that states have a right to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman," he continued.

The Defense of Marriage Act defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman for federal purposes. It was passed by Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton in 1996.

According to U.S. Census Bureau statistics, same-sex couples make up less than half of one percent of the total U.S. population. Repeatedly, polls have show general support in America for the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman. Gallup in May reported the lowest support for same-sex "marriage" in years, with nearly 60 percent opposed to the status.

The ADF also noted that in the 30 states where voters have been given the choice of defining marriage, 30 times they have defined marriage as being between one man and one woman only.

However, DOMA detractors say their new "Respect" law would embrace "the common law principle that marriages that are valid in the state where they were entered into will be recognized."

The supporters say marriages in states still would be decided by each state, but the point raises questions among traditional marriage supporters: How would one be "married" under federal law but not "married" under state law in those states where marriage already is constitutionally defined as involving a man and a woman.

Nadler's announcement about his proposal takes that issue headon. "It would merely restore the approach historically taken by states of determining, under principles of comity and Full Faith and Credit, whether to honor a couple's marriage for purposes of state law."

The Full Faith and Credit requirement essentially mandates that states recognize laws of other states.

Nadler said the plan has the support of those "harmed by DOMA," including the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, the National Center for Lesbian Rights and others.

"With a president who is committed to repaling DOMA and a broad, diverse coalition of Americans on our side, we now have a real opportunity to remove from the books this obnoxious and ugly law," Nadler said.

The proposed law states: "For the purposes of any Federal law in which marital status is a factor, an individual shall be considered married if that individual's marriage is valid in the State where the marriage was entered into or, in the case of a marriage entered into outside any State, if the marriage is valid in the place where entered into and the marriage could have been entered into in a State."

Mat Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, has said if DOMA is gone, the door is open to an all-out assault on states' rights.

"Then the individual states are sort of sitting ducks," Staver explained. "What would happen is same-sex marriage would rush over the dam of the various borders of the states, so to speak, like a floodwater rushing over the top of a dam, and flood all the other states."

Staver told WND's Greg Corombos he believes the issue will ultimately go before the U.S. Supreme Court, though he claims the court has no constitutional authority to redefine marriage.

"The Supreme Court should not be in the business of redefining or even defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman," he said. "That transcends the Constitution. It is something that is part of our natural existence. It is something that transcends political parties and geographies and time. The Supreme Court should not be in the business of actually redefining it. If in fact they do redefine to something other than what it is, it clearly shows we have an activist court. I think we need to make sure we have justices on the bench that understand the role as an umpire, not activist legislators."

As WND reported earlier, the White House after the election scrubbed President Obama's central pledge to the homosexual community to repeal DOMA from its website.

The president unveiled his pro-homosexual agenda on the White House website on Inauguration Day. Under the "Civil Rights" section, he called for the repeal of the act signed by President Bill Clinton in 1996 after an overwhelming bipartisan vote in Congress (342-67 and 85-14).

The following is the original language posted on the White House website as Obama took office:

Oppose a Constitutional Ban on Same-Sex Marriage: President Obama voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2006 which would have defined marriage as between a man and a woman and prevented judicial extension of marriage-like rights to same-sex or other unmarried couples.

Support Full Civil Unions and Federal Rights for LGBT Couples: President Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples legal rights and privileges equal to those of married couples. Obama also believes we need to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions. These rights and benefits include the right to assist a loved one in times of emergency, the right to equal health insurance and other employment benefits, and property rights. (emphasis added)

The White House later edited the statement, changing it to:

President Obama also continues to support the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and believes that our anti-discrimination employment laws should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity. He supports full civil unions and federal rights for LGBT couples and opposes a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. ... (emphasis added)

In December 2008, Obama told the Advocate, "I for a very long time have been interested in repeal of DOMA."

In a Feb. 8, 2008, letter posted on his website, Obama promised "LGBT equality in America." It stated:

Unlike Senator Clinton, I support the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) – a position I have held since before arriving in the U.S. Senate. While some say we should repeal only part of the law, I believe we should get rid of that statute altogether. Federal law should not discriminate in any way against gay and lesbian couples, which is precisely what DOMA does.

Sunday, September 20, 2009

Patriots' newest target: Obama 'Minion Media'

WND Exclusive SOMETHING IN THE AIR

Rush Limbaugh: 'Dare them to cover what is right under their noses!'


By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

In the wake of the massive 9/12 march on Washington, American citizens outraged by President Obama and the actions of Congress are now setting their sights on a new target – the so-called mainstream media.

On his Sept. 14 show, talk show host Rush Limbaugh urged citizens who are frustrated by a media blackout of the nation's growing movement against Obama administration policies to bring their protests to the front doors of major media outlets.

"The media [are] no longer reporters. They are repeaters," Limbaugh said. "There have been hundreds and thousands of protests by conservative groups that haven't been covered, and tiny turnouts by the left that are covered."

He continued, "What about this? We're looking for a force multiplier. Yeah, the protest in Washington on Saturday was great, two million people, but imagine what a force multiplier would be if the next one were held outside of local and national television networks and their headquarters where they can't miss it?"

Limbaugh suggested citizens host tea parties "on or next to the properties housing the TV networks."

"Dare them to cover what is right under their noses!" he said.

"Put the media in the spotlight and on the hot seat. Don't make them the protest. Continue to protest Obama. Protest health care. Protest the loss of liberty. Protest the coming tyranny. Just do it on their property or as close to it as you can get being law-abiding and all that. … Just show up where they can't miss it. Show up in numbers where they can't escape it."

Limbaugh suggested leaders of the media rallies present a list of grievances to each individual station.

"Make the challenges substantive and adult and challenge their journalistic ethics," he said. "… I want this all to happen spontaneously."

It's not just Obama who's lying. It's his minion media, too!

Now, one group has launched "Operation: Can You Hear Us Now?" The website declares, "Thanks to an American hero for the idea. We can take it from here."

The webmaster of the operation website asked to remain nameless.

"Who wants to be the target of national media attention?" he asked.

He told WND he longed to go to D.C. but couldn't make it since it's a 1,000 mile-plus trip.

"I surfed all channels Sunday looking for the big story on the D.C. march and found none – save Fox News," he said. "I was infuriated. How can anyone who calls themselves a journalist ignore this?"

The mainstream media didn't croak over night. Find out what led to their amazing demise!

As WND reported, the major news media also failed to cover the extremist background of "Green Jobs Czar" Van Jones – even after he was forced to resign as a result of that background.

WND was also first on the scene when major news media failed to report in the scandal involving tax-supported ACORN leaders who were videotaped encouraging undercover operatives on ways to subvert the law and exploit under-age girls they believed were being used in a prostitution ring.

WND was on the scene yet again when major news media failed to report and downplayed attendance on Sept. 12 after the capital was rocked by the taxpayer march and rally in protest of excessive spending, bailouts, growth of big government and soaring deficits.

The "Operation: Can You Hear Us Now?" webmaster said he launched his website Tuesday morning.

"Now I'm getting thousands of hits," he said. "I've sent a few e-mails. It's catching legs. I hope the idea catches fire!"

He said several people are already planning rallies at CNN in Atlanta, Ga., and another in the Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas, area.

"Imagine: There was a million plus person march on Washington, and no one reported it," the website states. "It did not happen."

The website asks citizens to rally outside "left-wing media outlets" on Oct. 17 and lists the following locations as suggestions on where to begin:

* CNN – One CNN Center, Atlanta, Ga.

* NBC's "Nightly News with Brian Williams" – 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, N.Y.

* ABC's "World News with Charles Gibson" – 7 West 66th St., New York, N.Y.

* ABC News' "Nightline" – 7 West 66th St., New York, N.Y.

* ABC News' "This Week" with George Stephanopoulos – 7 West 66th St., New York, N.Y.

* CBS' News' "Evening News" with Katie Couric – 524 West 57th St., New York, N.Y.

* CBS' "The Early Show" – 524 West 57th St., New York, N.Y.

* ABC News' "Good Morning America" – 7 West 66th St., New York, N.Y.

* MSNBC's "Today" Show – 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, N.Y.

* "Dateline NBC" – 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, N.Y.

* MSNBC's "Countdown with Keith Olbermann" – 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, N.Y.

* MSNBC's "Meet The Press" – 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, N.Y.

* New York Times – 620 Eighth Ave., New York, N.Y.

* Los Angeles Times – 202 W. 1st St., Los Angeles, Calif.

* Atlanta Journal Constitution – 72 Marietta St. NW, Atlanta, Ga.

* Seattle Times – 1120 John St, Seattle, Wash.

He said citizens should connect through tea party groups, Facebook, Twitter, blogs and message boards to spread the word. He also said organizers must pick the best times and local media locations for the Oct. 17 events.

"Some people messaged me and asked why not a more symbolic day," he said. "I say, why shouldn't we be the ones to make it a symbolic day, a day in history the press will never forget?"

He encourages attendees to bring signs, banners, flags and voices to the events. However, he warned tea partiers not to leave litter behind.

"We're not liberals," he said.

Make no mistake, he said, there is no "Astroturf" springing from his website – it's just another grassroots movement catching fire.

"I'm just one guy, not an activist," he told WND. "I have no sponsors, no bankroll, no agenda – except to help put a nail in the mainstream-media coffin."

Saturday, September 19, 2009

Unearthed! Obama's twisted ACORN roots

WND Exclusive JUST PLAIN NUTS

Track timeline of president's ties to group immersed in scandals


By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily


While ACORN remains riddled in scandal, lawmakers have voted to cut off federal funding to the group, the U.S. Census Bureau has severed ties to the organization – and the White House has blasted its behavior as "unacceptable."

But just how extensive are President Obama's personal ties to ACORN?

The following is a timeline outlining some of the purported connections between the president and ACORN through the years:

1990s: Obama meets ACORN

ACORN, or the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, first noticed Obama when he was organizing on the far south side of the city with the Developing Communities Project. A March 2, 2008, Los Angeles Times article by Letta Tayler and Keith Herbert, titled "Obama Forged Path As Chicago Community Organizer," explored Obama's pre-law school days as a community organizer in Chicago and his efforts to build a partnership with Chicago's "Friends of the Parks."

"Obama's task was to help far South Side residents press for improvement," the Times article explained.

National Review Online noted, "Part of Obama's work, it would appear, was to organize demonstrations, much in the mold of radical groups like ACORN."

The Times article reveals that Madeleine Talbot, who at the time was a leader at Chicago ACORN, was thoroughly impressed with Obama because "he got people to vote with their feet."

"At the time, Talbot worked at the social action group ACORN and initially considered Obama a competitor," the article stated. "But she became so impressed with his work that she invited him to help train her staff."

Talbott personally led Chicago ACORN's campaign to intimidate banks into making high-risk loans to low-credit customers, Stanley Kurtz reported.

"Long the director of Chicago ACORN, Talbott is a specialist in 'direct action' – organizers' term for their militant tactics of intimidation and disruption," Kurtz writes. "Perhaps her most famous stunt was leading a group of ACORN protesters breaking into a meeting of the Chicago City Council to push for a 'living wage' law, shouting in defiance as she was arrested for mob action and disorderly conduct. But her real legacy may be her drive to push banks into making risky mortgage loans."

1992: Project Vote! and training green ACORNs

As WND reported, in 1992, while he was working as a community organizer in Chicago, Obama headed the Chicago operations of Project Vote!, an ACORN effort to register voters nationally. In Chicago, Obama had his biggest impact registering African-American voters on the city's South Side. However, Obama's "Fight the Smears" website disputes this, saying Obama "never organized with ACORN."

After completing his legal education at Harvard in 1991, Obama returned to Chicago to work on the voting project that developed directly out of a radical revolutionary strategy developed by two Columbia University sociologists in the 1960s. In what became known as the Cloward-Piven strategy, the tactic advocated a revolutionary approach to mobilizing the poor in the form of class warfare against capitalist forces viewed as exploiting labor and oppressing the poor. The Cloward-Piven strategy sought to apply the tactics of the revolutionary civil rights movement, including urban riots, to the poor as a whole, transcending interest-group politics defined by race to involve interest-group politics defined by class.

Kurtz wrote, Obama also "conducted leadership-training seminars for ACORN's up-and-coming organizers. That is, Obama was training the army of ACORN organizers who participated in Madeline Talbott's drive against Chicago's banks."

1993: Woods Foundation

In 1993, Obama joined the board of the Woods Foundation, a non-profit foundation which declares its goal to "increase opportunities for less advantaged people and communities by giving money primarily to not-for-profit groups involved in housing, the arts and other areas." Obama served along with Bill Ayers and remained on the board until 2002.

Pajamas Media reports that during Obama's time there, ACORN received grants of $45,000 (2000), $30,000 (2001), $45,000 (2001), $30,000 (2002) and $40,000 (2002) from the Woods Fund.

1994: Buycks-Robinson v. Citibank

As WND reported, in 1994, Obama, a graduate of Harvard Law School then fresh from his Project Vote! experience, represented ACORN in the Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Federal Savings Bank case, in which ACORN pressed for Citibank to make more loans to marginally qualified African-American applicants "in a race neutral way."

After obtaining a settlement in the Citibank litigation, ACORN used its subsidiary organization ACORN Housing, a nationwide organization with offices in more than 30 U.S. cities, to push the group's radical agenda to get subprime home buyers mortgages under the most favorable terms possible.

1995: ACORN attorney in Illinois lawsuit

In 1995, Obama was hired as a lawyer for ACORN in a major lawsuit. As a lawyer with civil-rights law firm Davis Miner Barnhill & Galland, he sued the state of Illinois on behalf of ACORN to implement the federal "motor voter" law.

Also in 1995, as WND's Jerome Corsi reported, Bill Ayers co-founded the Chicago Annenberg Challenge with a $50 million grant program for the Chicago public schools. Ayers selected Obama to be the first chairman of the board of the Annenberg Challenge, a position Obama held for eight years, until 2003, a period during which Ayers remained active with the Challenge.

In his Wall Street Journal article, Stanley Kurtz wrote that the Annenberg project funneled money to through various far-left community organizers, including ACORN.

1996: New Party ties

As WND reported, newspaper evidence shows Obama was a member of the New Party, which sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda. While running for the Illinois state Senate in 1996 as a Democrat, Obama actively sought and received the endorsement of the New Party, according to confirmed reports during last year's presidential campaign.

According to Democratic Socialists of America documents, the New Party worked with ACORN to promote its candidates.

In 1995, the DSA's New Ground newsletter stated, "In Chicago, the New Party's biggest asset and biggest liability is ACORN.

"Like most organizations, ACORN is a mixed bag," the newsletter said. "One one hand, in Chicago, ACORN is a group that attempts to organize some of the most depressed communities in the city. Chicago organizers for ACORN and organizers for SEIU Local 880 have been given modest monthly recruitment quotas for new New Party members. On the other hand, like most groups that depend on canvassing for fundraising, it's easy enough to find burned out and disgruntled former employees. And ACORN has not had the reputation for being interested in coalition politics – until recently and, happily, not just within the New Party."

1997-2004: Illinois state senator

In 1997, Obama became an Illinois state senator. ACORN national board member Toni Foulkes bragged of ACORN's long-standing relationship with Obama prior to his election in the 2003-2004 issue of Social Policy.

Foulkes wrote in "Case Study: Chicago – The Barack Obama Campaign":

ACORN noticed [Obama] when he was organizing on the far south side of the city with the Developing Communities Project. He was a very good organizer. When he returned from law school, we asked him to help us with a lawsuit to challenge the state of Illinois' refusal to abide by the National Voting Rights Act, also known as motor voter. .. Obama took the case, known as ACORN vs. Edgar (the name of the Republican governor at the time) and we won. Obama then went on to run a voter registration project with Project VOTE in 1992 that made it possible for Carol Moseley Braun to win the Senate that year. Project VOTE delivered 50,000 newly registered voters in that campaign (ACORN delivered about 5,000 of them).

Since then, we have invited Obama to our leadership training sessions to run the session on power every year, and, as a result, many of our newly developing leaders got to know him before he ever ran for office. Thus, it was natural for many of us to be active volunteers in his first campaign for State Senate and then his failed bid for Congress in 1996. By the time he ran for Senate, we were old friends.

In 2005, Obama became a U.S. senator.

2007: From Obama's own mouth ...

On Obama's Organizing for America blog, Sam Graham-Felsen, a paid blogger, wrote about Obama's November 2007 speech to ACORN leaders:

When Obama met with ACORN leaders in November, he reminded them of his history with ACORN and his beginnings in Illinois as a Project Vote organizer, a nonprofit focused on voter rights and education. Senator Obama said, "I come out of a grassroots organizing background. That's what I did for three and half years before I went to law school. That's the reason I moved to Chicago was to organize. So this is something that I know personally, the work you do, the importance of it. I've been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work."

Again, on Dec. 1, 2007, Obama spoke at the Heartland Democratic Presidential Forum, a meeting for community organizing groups including ACORN. Obama received wild applause from the crowd as he promised that community organizing groups such as ACORN would help shape the agenda for his presidency.

Naked Emperor News posted the following video of his pledge:

He was asked, "If elected president of the Unites States, would you agree, in your first 100 days, to meet with the delegation of representatives from these various community organizations that campaigned for community values? Could they count on you in your first 100 days to sit down with them?"

Obama responded, "Yes. But let me even say before I even get inaugurated, during the transition, we're going to be calling all of you in to help us shape the agenda. We're going to be having meetings all across the country with community organizations so that you have input into the agenda for the next presidency of the United States of America."

2008: ACORN endorses Obama

On Feb. 21, 2008, the Acorn Political Action Committee endorsed Obama over Hillary Clinton during the 2008 primaries.

During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama and his running mate, Joe Biden, insisted they had nothing to do with ACORN after the inner-city advocacy group became engulfed in controversy over voter-registration fraud.

But in August 2008, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported that the Obama campaign paid $832,598.29 to ACORN "offshoot" Citizens Services Inc. for "get out the vote" projects from Feb. 25 to May 17.

The newspaper revealed that Obama's payments to CSI for services were unusual: "For example, CSI received payments of $63,000 and $75,000 for advance work. Excluding the large payments to CSI, the average amount the Obama campaign spent with other organizations was $558.82 per check on more than 1,200 entries classified as advance work."

Anita Moncrief, former ACORN insider

According to the report, Citizens Services Inc. is headquartered at the same address as ACORN's national headquarters in New Orleans. A 2006 ACORN publication describes Citizen Services Inc. as "ACORN's campaign services entity."

In 2008, Anita MonCrief, a woman who worked in the Strategic Writing and Research Department of ACORN Political Operations and its affiliate Project Vote from 2005 through January 2008, said ACORN acted as an unofficial arm of the Democratic Party during the election and used cash operations to keep some financial transactions under wraps.

"It has always been a Democrat operation," she recently told WND. "They've never made any secrets about who they support. Their political action committees are usually set up to support these Democratic candidates."

She said political action committees support Democrat candidates, and the at the same time voter registration drives were being conducted, the group was putting out propaganda in communities telling people not to vote for Republicans.

According to a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review report, she further told a Pennsylvania court before the election that the Obama camp provided ACORN with a "donor list" that enabled Project Vote to solicit contributions from Obama supporters who had "maxed out" under federal contribution limits but who could surreptitiously give more to Obama's cause by donating to ACORN and its affiliates.

As WND reported, Project Vote, an affiliate of ACORN, is now suing MonCrief to the tune of $5 million.

2009: Criminal case against ACORN

According to the results of a congressional investigation done in July, ACORN was found to be rife with criminal activity.

A report from the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform states that ACORN "has repeatedly and deliberately engaged in systemic fraud. Both structurally and operationally, ACORN hides behind a paper wall of nonprofit corporate protections to conceal a criminal conspiracy on the part of its directors, to launder federal money in order to pursue a partisan political agenda and to manipulate the American electorate."

Since 1994, ACORN has received more than $53 million in federal funds, according to the report.

"Under the Obama administration, ACORN stands to receive a whopping $8.5 billion in available stimulus funds. Operationally, ACORN is a shell game played in 120 cities, 43 states and the District of Columbia through a complex structure designed to conceal illegal activities, to use taxpayer and tax-exempt dollars for partisan political purposes, and to distract investigators. Structurally, ACORN is a chess game in which senior management is shielded from accountability by multiple layers of volunteers and compensated employees who serve as pawns to take the fall for every bad act," the report said.

The report continued, "Lobbying is a substantial part of what ACORN does. It has endorsed Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Representative Albert Wynn (D-MD), and Representative Donna Edwards (D-MD). ACORN keeps donor records from the Clinton, Kerry and Obama campaigns with the intent to engage in prohibited communications. ACORN receives federal funding yet engages in improper lobbying. ACORN and its nonprofit affiliates do not have separate accounts. Neither ACORN nor any of its affiliates have properly reported their political activities to the IRS. These harms fly under the legal radar because the IRS rarely checks for compliance. The 'no substantial part' test is rarely enforced and the accounts of ACORN and its affiliates are illegally commingled."

ACORN became a hot topic during the 2008 presidential race because of Obama's ties to the group as well as its own admission that more than 400,000 of the 1.3 million voter registrations it claimed to have collected were not valid. ACORN registered 1.3 million new voters last year, and it is now under investigation in numerous states and faces voter fraud charges in nearly two dozen states.

The Obama administration selected ACORN to recruit counters for the 2010 Census, but the Census Bureau severed its ties with ACORN on Sept. 11.The Internal Revenue Service has also indicated that it is conducting a "thorough review" of its agreements with ACORN. According to Bloomberg, ACORN has has helped prepare about 150,000 free tax returns since 2004 for low-income families. Those returns have generated $190 million in tax refunds.

Cutting ties with ACORN?

Obama has tried to publicly disassociate himself from the group.

"The only involvement I've had with ACORN was I represented them alongside the U.S. Justice Department in making Illinois implement a motor voter law that helped people get registered at DMVs," Obama declared in one of the presidential debates.

"Now, with respect to ACORN, ACORN is a community organization. Apparently what they've done is they were paying people to go out and register folks, and apparently some of the people who were out there didn't really register people, they just filled out a bunch of names," Obama said.

"It had nothing to do with us. We were not involved," he declared.

Today, the House voted 345-75 to eliminate federal funding of ACORN after undercover videos showed counselors giving advice on tax evasion to a undercover reporters posing as a pimp and prostitute.

According to Fox News, the Defund ACORN Act prohibits any "federal contract grant, cooperative agreement or any other form of agreement (including a memorandum of understanding)" from being awarded to or entered into with ACORN. It also prohibits federal funds "in any other form" from being granted to ACORN.

The decision followed a Sept. 14 Senate vote to strip millions of dollars in federal housing funds for ACORN.

House Minority Leader John Boehner has called on President Obama to indicate whether he would sign a bill forbidding ACORN from receiving federal funding, the New York Times reported. The White House is now distancing itself from ACORN and its scandals.

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs referenced the video that revealed ACORN employees giving illegal tax advice to a man and woman disguised as a pimp and prostitute.

"Obviously, the conduct that you see on those tapes is completely unacceptable. I think everyone would agree to that," Gibbs said. "The administration takes accountability extremely seriously."

However, Gibbs said he's unsure of whether Obama will ask Democrats to sever ties with ACORN.

"I don't know that I've had any discussion with him about that," he said.

Monday, September 14, 2009

As America Has Done to Israel - Book Review

By John P. McTernan

People of God...

Do you want to know if our public policy must continue to be Pro-Israel, as we have been from the beginning of our Republic - then you must read this book.

It is prophetic in nature - and woe to those in Washington D.C., who would go against Israel. See: Genesis 12:1-3, Obadiah 1:15

Sunday, September 13, 2009

A million or more rock Washington

WND Exclusive A REVOLUTIONARY IDEA

Taxpayer march could be biggest rally ever in capital



Chelsea Schilling and Alyssa Farah
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Hundreds of thousands descend on Capitol

WASHINGTON – The capital was rocked today by a taxpayer march and rally that could be the biggest protest ever – potentially dwarfing the Million Man March and the Promise Keepers Rally.

Though crowd estimates vary from as low as 60,000 to 70,000 according to ABC News to a high of 2 million by London Daily Mail, photographs and videos of the march and rally demonstrate its enormity.

The taxpayers stormed Washington, D.C., today, taking their fight against excessive spending, bailouts, growth of big government and soaring deficits to the front door of the U.S. Capitol.

All week citizens have been heading to the Hill by the busloads for the showdown today. The Tea Party Patriots' "Tea Party Express" national bus tour has been hosting a series of tea party rallies all across the nation. A caravan of buses, speakers and entertainers arrived in Washington, D.C., just in time for the march. The taxpayers have paid their own way to the event.

The White House said Friday it was unaware of the rally. President Obama has traveled to Minneapolis, Minn., to promote his health-care plans at a rally there.

But so many taxpayers showed up on Pennsylvania Avenue that the crowd ran out of room and the march was forced to begin early.

WND was at the scene to get crowd reaction and take photos of the protest.

Citizens carried hand-made signs that read:

* 2010: Vote all incumbents out!

* Our Constitution has termites!

* We are under attack by our own government

* Stop the march of socialism

* You can put lipstick on communism, but it's still communism

* My family, my doctor

* Obamacare makes me sick

* Go green: Recycle
Congress

* I'm not your ATM

* We had a dream
. We got a nightmare

* Is this Russia?

* You Lie!

Some people donned colonial costumes while the crowd was sprinkled with U.S. and yellow "Don't tread on me" flags.
e their message. Slough wore a prison costume and carried a sign that read, "Crimin
Others, like Laurie Slough of Orlando, Fla., also dressed in costume to demonstratals in Congress, your judgment day is coming."

WND also noticed many anti-ACORN signs, following the recent controversy in which one of the organization's offices was exposed supporting prostitution and human trafficking.

Politico reported among the signs seen were those asking "Where's the Birth Certificate?" – reflections of WND's extensive coverage of the yet-unanswered questions surrounding Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility to serve as president.

Fox News reported lines of citizens completely filled Pennsylvania Avenue for blocks.

"It was wall-to-wall people. I felt like I was in line for Obama health care," said participant Robert Barney of Chesapeake, Va.

Organizers have told the media they expect the event to be the largest group of fiscal conservatives to ever gather in Washington.

Richard Brigle, 57, a Vietnam War veteran and former Teamster, came from Paw Paw, Mich. He told Fox News that he believes the nation needs health-care reform – but not President Obama's plan.

"My grandkids are going to be paying for this. It's going to cost too much money that we don't have," he said while marching with a wooden cane.

According to the Washington Times, the "Tea Party Express" tour was the fourth most popular topic searched on Yahoo last week. Joe Wierzbicki, national coordinator of the Tea Party Express, told the Times he expected a large turnout.

"We were expecting 25,000 a few weeks ago, but now we are hoping for over 50,000," Wierzbicki said.

Get your copy of "Joe the Plumber: Fighting for the American Dream" now!

Several organizations united to help organize the National Taxpayer Protest's descent on the Capitol, including: Freedom Works, Grassfire/ResistNet, Tea Party Patriots, National Taxpayers Union, Club for Growth, Americans for Tax Reform, Young Americans for Liberty, Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights, Our Country Deserves Better, Campaign for Liberty, Leadership Institute, Free Republic, Young America's Foundation, the National Association of Rural Land Owners and Smart Girl Politics.

Brendan Steinhauser of FreedomWorks, one of the groups that organized the event, told WND, "People want to do this. The people who have been protesting around the country want to come to Washington and do this in D.C. In a lot of ways, they are being ignored and the media is underrepresenting them and their numbers. They want to come together for one big event and send a very clear message."

Saturday, September 12, 2009

What does Pelosi know about Obama's eligibility?

WND Exclusive BORN IN THE USA?

Online images for certification of nomination raise questions


By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

A commentator at Canada Free Press says he has obtained copies of two documents apparently prepared by Democrats to certify Barack Obama as their nominee for president in 2008 that suggest House Speaker Nancy Pelosi knew there was an unresolved issue with his eligibility under the U.S. Constitution.

Writer JB Williams describes himself as a "no nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy." And he say's he's gotten possession of copies of the documents in question.

The first includes a verification that Obama and Joe Biden, then-candidate for vice president, "are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution."

One image of the certification for Barack Obama's nomination, including includes the affirmation Obama and Joe Biden "are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution"

The second form obtained by Williams appears identical, although the signatures are different, including the same strategic typographical error. But in this one, the verification of eligibility under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution is gone.

Another image of a certification, on which the certification of eligibility has been removed

"Now this is the stuff real conspiracies are made of!" Williams, who also maintains his own website, wrote. "Please allow me to connect the dots here…"

"The DNC drafted, signed and notarized TWO slightly different versions of their Official Certification of Nomination documents, not one," he wrote. "One of those documents had complete legal language, and one of them was missing the text concerning the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama.

"The version which is absent any certification of constitutional standing for the office of president is the version that was filed with every state in the country, and the one used by the DNC to elect Barack Obama president," he wrote.

WND contacted the Democratic National Committee multiple times over three days to request an explanation of the two images, including whether one might be a forgery. A spokeswoman in the press office confirmed, "We are aware of it," but declined to elaborate.

Likewise, WND contacted the office of Pelosi, but got no response over several days. And the White House declined to respond to multiple e-mails asking for a comment.

Want to turn up the pressure to learn the facts? Get your signs and postcards asking for the president's birth certificate documentation here.

"The fact that TWO DNC Certifications exist, both signed, dated and notarized by the same individuals on the same day, means that a very real conspiracy to commit election fraud was under way, and since it took until six months after the election to uncover it, the conspiracy was indeed successful," Williams wrote.

"Are you still wondering why Barack Obama has spent nearly $1.5 million in taxpayer's funds to race Department of Justice lawyers around the country to stop all cases questioning Obama's eligibility before discovery can force Obama to open up his top secret life?"

He described the discoveries as "actually very serious business."

"We are talking about the top-down leadership of the ruling political party knowingly and wantonly defrauding voters by way of playing monkey business with fraudulent election documents."

The documents show the "Official Certification of Nomination" of Obama, of "5046 South Greenwood Avenue" in Chicago and Joe Biden, of "1209 Barley Mill Road" in Wilmington, Del., as the party's candidates.

They were signed by Pelosi as chair of the Democratic National Convention as well as Alice Travis Germond, the secretary of the Democratic National Convention at its nominating meetings in Denver a year ago.

They were notarized by Shalifa A. Williamson of Denver.

Other bloggers also speculated that a document was signed with the verification of constitutional eligibility, and Democratic officials then decided to generate another without, suggesting at least an awareness of the issue involved.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the lawsuits over the dispute question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated over $1 million to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest the questions.

WND has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.

See the movie Obama does not want you to see: Own the DVD that probes this unprecedented presidential eligibility mystery.

WND reported this week on a decision by a California judge to schedule a trial early next year on the arguments over Obama's eligibility.

U.S. District Judge David Carter tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan. 26, 2010, for the case. If the case actually goes to arguments, it will be the first time the merits of the dispute have been argued in open court, according to one of the attorneys working on the issue.

Arguments over other online Obama images also have raged. His campaign and now his administration repeatedly has pointed to an online image of a "Certification of Live Birth" from Hawaii has documenting his status, even though such documents are not, in fact, proof. Critics have suggested the image itself is fraudulent.

And in just recent days, WND reported Lucas Smith, the man who tried to sell an alleged Barack Obama Kenyan birth certificate on eBay, filed court papers insisting – under threat of perjury – that the Obama birth certificate in his possession is the genuine article.

The document above is alleged by Lucas Smith to be Barack Obama's original, authentic birth certificate from Kenya.

California attorney Orly Taitz, who is working on the California challenge now scheduled for trial, posted on her blog Smith's declaration, which claims he obtained the alleged birth certificate from Coast General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya, and insists it's real.

"The true and correct photocopy of the birth certificate obtained is attached to this affidavit as Exhibit A," the declaration reads. "I declare, certify, verify, state and affirm under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing statements of fact and descriptions of circumstances and events are true and correct."

Smith's affidavit, which includes a copy of the certificate, has been filed with Carter, whose works in the Central District of California.

In his filing, Smith declares that he traveled to Kenya in February and paid off a military officer in order to obtain a copy of the birth certificate from Coast General Hospital in Mombasa. The declaration also states that the hospital administrator signed and sealed the copy, which indicates Obama's birth in Africa on Aug. 4, 1961, at 7:24 p.m.

However, WND has reported on an authentic 1961-era Kenyan birth certificate, which looks distinctly different from the document Smith released in the video.

Authentic 1961-era Kenyan birth certificate obtained by WND

Williams explained political parties in the U.S. are responsible for vetting their own candidates.

The nomination form, however, including the certificate of eligibility under the Constitution, wasn't actually used.

"Instead, a very similar document was delivered to 50 state DNC offices, which those offices certified to each of 50 state Election Commissions, who then date-stamped the document and stuck it in a file cabinet, and proceeded to place these 'certified' candidates on the ballot,'" Williams wrote.

"And yes, I have a copy of this version of the DNC Official Certification of Nomination letter too!" he wrote.

"There is no honest debate on the matter anymore. Obama is NOT a constitutional president, which is to say, we do NOT have a constitutional federal administration at present and every anti-American policy of the last six months is also, BINGO! – Unconstitutional!" he wrote.

"What is still in question however – does any court in America have the backbone to do what must be done? – And what do the American people do, if not one court in the nation has that kind of constitutional backbone today?" he continued.

Because of the dearth of information about Obama's eligibility, WND founder Joseph Farah has launched a campaign to raise contributions to post billboards asking a simple question: "Where's the birth certificate?"

"Where's The Birth Certificate?" billboard at the Mandalay Bay resort on the Las Vegas Strip

The campaign followed a petition that has collected more than 450,000 signatures demanding proof of his eligibility, the availability of yard signs raising the question and the production of permanent, detachable magnetic bumper stickers asking the question.

The "certification of live birth" posted online and widely touted as "Obama's birth certificate" does not in any way prove he was born in Hawaii, since the same "short-form" document is easily obtainable for children not born in Hawaii. The true "long-form" birth certificate – which includes information such as the name of the birth hospital and attending physician – is the only document that can prove Obama was born in Hawaii, but to date he has not permitted its release for public or press scrutiny.

Oddly, though congressional hearings were held to determine whether Sen. John McCain was constitutionally eligible to be president as a "natural born citizen," no controlling legal authority ever sought to verify Obama's claim to a Hawaiian birth.

Friday, September 11, 2009

The End of Cheap Water?

AGORA Financial: Rude Awakening

The End of Cheap Water?

Baltimore, Maryland

* Markets’ meteoric rise flattens, could this be the edge of the next cliff?
* When it comes to investing in China, there’s something in the water,
* Avoiding the dubious art of “falling with style” and plenty more…

Eric Fry
, reporting from Laguna Beach, California…

Fans of the 1995 animated movie, “Toy Story,” will remember when Buzz Lightyear conducts a series of acrobatic maneuvers that persuades most of the other toys he can fly. But, Woody, the toy cowboy, angrily objects, “That wasn’t flying! That was…falling with style!”

Fans of the 2009 rally on Wall Street also seem to believe that the U.S. economy can fly. But that’s not flying, dear investor, that’s falling with style.

“Airborne” and “aerodynamic” are not synonyms.

If the nation’s leading economists are to be believed, the U.S. economy has lifted off from the long, bumpy runway of recession. But your editor suspects that this liftoff might last only slightly longer than the Wright Brothers’ 12-second flight at Kittyhawk.

The problem is that government credit is lousy jet fuel. Only private capital can power long-distance flights. For a short time, governmental efforts can send an economy airborne. But these flights of fancy almost always end quickly…and badly…unless private capital returns to the venue.

So far, private capital has shown little inclination to resume investing in anything riskier than T-bills. Financing remains scarce for most of the small and mid-sized businesses that comprise the heart and soul of the American economy. [Every single small- to mid-size businessperson with whom your editor has spoken during the last few months has reported that lack of credit is hobbling business. If any Rude readers would like to corroborate or refute this anecdotal impression, please email your firsthand accounts to Joel]. In the meantime, many of the most visible indicators of economy vitality remain unmistakably downbeat.

Given the related facts that private capital is conspicuously absent from the economy and that government stimulus programs are notoriously ineffective, the U.S. economy might struggle to remain aloft.

The nearby chart shows that the Institute for Supply management’s Index of U.S. service sector industries has improved a bit of late. Apparently, this segment of the economy has gained a little altitude. But remember, airborne is not aerodynamic.

“If we have a recovery at all, it isn’t sustainable,” predicts Kevin Harrington, managing director at the hedge fund group, Clarium Capital Management LLC. “This is more likely a ski-jump recession, with short-term stimulus creating a bump that will ultimately lead to a more precipitous decline later.”

Paul Tudor Jones, one of the most successful hedge fund managers in America, holds a similarly dour outlook. Accordingly, he distrusts this year’s big rally on Wall Street that has lifted all the major averages 50% or more. This was merely a “bear market rally,” Tudor declared in an August 4th letter to his firm’s clients. Interestingly, all the major U.S. stock market indices are flat since August 4th.

This recent lackluster performance does not prove Tudor is correct, but it does prove that he isn’t wrong…at least not yet. In other words, his bearish outlook may not be right, but it is probably justified.

The very same stock market that has been going up for most of the last six months – and that Abby Joseph Cohen, the robotically bullish strategist at Goldman Sachs, predicts will continue to go up – is the same stock market that may begin going down…simply because the underlying economic realities fail to support rising stock prices.

Not all stocks deserve to be sold, of course. In fact, some types of stocks are probably worth buying right now…

In the column below, Chris Mayer, editor of Mayer’s Special Situations, revisits one of his favorite long-term investment opportunities…

— Mayer’s Special Situations Breaking Report —

Introducing…The Primeval Portfolio

Ancient man needed three essential elements to survive… Water, Earth, and Fire

Modern investors need them to thrive in uncertain times

And now, we stand at a crossroads in history — a unique moment when people who invest in this timeless truth can build huge fortunes.

Let me send you my special report with three low-risk “Caveman Plays” primed to deliver gains of 245%… 297%… even 498%.

——————————————

The End of Cheap Water?
By Chris Mayer

The price of water is starting to rise in a big way, at least in China. I’ve expected this for a few years.

Water rates in China have been so far below the global average it’s ridiculous. Especially when you consider the severe water problems in China. The Chinese are water-poor. They are sucking their aquifers dry. It is particularly bad in the north of China. The groundwater under the North China Plains is draining away quickly. By some estimates, China will exhaust this water supply in the next ten years.

You probably know that the city of Venice is sinking a fraction of an inch per year. But that’s nothing compared to what is going on in Beijing. Parts of Beijing are sinking 8 inches a year! According to Andrew Lees (The Right Game), it is the world’s largest cone of depression (an underground hole created by a depleted water table) at over 15,000 square miles. The second largest cone of depression is around Shanghai.

So finally, many cities are raising the price of water. The WSJ points out several places where water prices could rise 25-48%. Shanghai, for instance, raised water rates 25% in June and plans another 22% increase next year.

The second event that caught my eye was the collaboration between China and India to monitor the health of Himalayan glaciers. This area is very important to both countries. They fought a war over it in 1962. So, the fact that they are getting together on the Himalayan glaciers is meaningful.

Here is why it is so important: Seven of the world’s largest rivers, including the Ganges and the Yangtze, are fed by the glaciers of the Himalayas. They supply water to about 40 per cent of the world’s population.

Well, those glaciers are shrinking. The Indian Space Research Organization, using satellite images, has studied the changes in 466 glaciers. It found they had lost more than 20% of their size between 1962 and 2001.

This melting increases the water flow at first, but eventually slows dramatically as the glaciers either melt completely or reform. These observations have given rise to a kind of “Peak Himalaya” theory where people wonder if we have not seen the maximum water flow from the mountains.

We know the current run rate on demand is already well above what is sustainable given annual rainfall and river flows. That’s why you have those depressions under Beijing and Shanghai. That explains the depleted aquifers and the rivers that don’t reach the sea. Now throw into that ugly brew a decline in water supply from the Himalayas. The situation is worse than it seems, if that is possible, because much of the existing fresh water in both countries is so polluted it is unfit for human consumption.

As if all of that weren’t bad enough, the demand for water is still rising rapidly in China and India. The water use per capita in China and India are still well below global averages. As these countries industrialize, they’ll consume exponentially more water. It takes water to make just about everything. For example, to make a 1 tonne passenger car takes more than 100,000 gallons of water. Just to make a cotton shirt takes over 1,000 gallons of water. And most of our water goes into making our food.

So, population growth by itself guarantees increased water demand. (Globally, water consumption increases at more than twice the rate of population growth.) These two countries already have big populations and both will get bigger. When you look at demographic trends, China and India alone will add close to 600 million people over the next 30 years. That’s two present-day United States.

Fresh water, like oil, is getting a lot harder to find for 40% of the world’s population. It will get worse before it gets better. The days when we think of water as a cheap resource are coming to a close. That’s especially true for China and India.

Bottom line: We need to create more fresh water. You do that by finding new sources either through new supplies (drilling deeper, desalination, etc.) or by using existing supplies more efficiently (irrigation and other efficiency gains).

All of that takes time and energy. Desalination is energy intensive. Drilling deeper for water or going to more distant source requires energy to pump and move the water. Replacing older, less efficient plants and equipment takes time and energy again. (Detect a theme here?)

Countries, companies and people will find ways to make this transition. The companies that can solve these problems will do well.

Joel’s Note: … and, odds are, those companies will – if they haven’t already – find their way into the Mayer’s Special Situations portfolio. For a complete rundown on this excellent research service and access to his favorite resource plays, continue reading here.

— Special For Agora Financial Readers —

Get a FREE Copy of the Award Winning I.0.U.S.A. DVD…

It’s my gift to you, and it’s also just the beginning of what you’ll get in our new “Emergency ‘Personal Bailout’ Bundle” — also FREE — which shows you…

* What a sham these bailouts are, how we got here, and what happened to the America we used to know.
* How to rescue your retirement with up to 78 personal “bailout” checks instead, paid direct to your account over the next 24 months.
* And how to salvage the financial security of your children, your grandchildren and America itself.

Again, it’s all free — as long as you claim everything before I give away all the free materials I have on hand. Learn How Here.

—————————————–

[Rude Endnote: Whatever happens in the future, if it happens for long enough, will come to be known as “normal.” As we all know, normal can differ vastly from country to country, generation to generation. What is normal for a child in the Sudan is not likely to resemble any kind of normal for a Goldman Sachs executive, for instance.

Still, everyone we talk to seems contended with the assumption that things, economically speaking, seem to be “returning to normal.” We wonder what that actually means? Yesterday we asked readers what they thought the “New Normal” might look like.

“I don't like what I perceive as the coming ‘new normal,’” writes reader, Jim. “It consists of higher unemployment, tighter credit, belt-tightening everywhere, increased homelessness, agitated, fearful, and frustrated citizens, combined with a squirrely set of politicians making things worse as they muck around pretending that they know how to fix a broken system.”

Reader Thomas B opines, “The abnormal 'new normal' is happening as it is because the Government Market Controllers have achieved some sort of control over the whole system....enough so that the market moves the way they want it to, when they want it to, for as long as they want it to....and I expect it to continue this way...in [an] irrational, abnormal way that [will] define the ‘new normal’.”

We’ll have more thoughts from the irrepressible Rude readership throughout the week. If you want to comment what you think the “New Normal” might look like, simply drop us a line below.

Until next time…

Cheers,

Joel Bowman

The Rude Awakening
aussiejoel@the-rude-awakening.com

The Real State of American Wealth,

Agora Financial: The 5 Minute Forecast

Gold Still a Buy?, Insiders Selling Stocks, North Dakota and More!

by Addison Wiggin & Ian Mathias

* Are you wealthier now than in 1998? The government quietly announces the average answer
* Gold hits $1,000 again… Bill Bonner on whether to buy, sell or hold
* Stock insiders selling at frightening rate… sell signal or contrarian indicator?
* Doug Casey on “an excellent place to be” as the crisis continues
* Plus, readers chime in on how North Dakota has managed to dodge the global downturn

Over the last 10 years, have you really become more wealthy? We hope the answer is yes… one of our many credos is to protect and enhance your wealth, as small or large as it may be.

But for the average family, the answer is no, says a Census Bureau study released this week.

From 2007-2008, the most up-to-date data the government has, the median family income fell almost $2,000, to $50,300. That wipes out all gains made over the last three years. Factor in inflation, and the typical family is actually making less now than they were in 1998.

So let us gripe for bit: We all spend so much time poking at things like our GDP -- reporting changes every quarter and spending millions upon millions guessing where it will be next month, next year, etc. Yet there’s only one gauge of how wealthily we as a nation are actually growing… and we leave it to the Census Bureau to report once a year, with a nine-month lag time. Which matters to you more: If you are more financially sound now than you were last quarter or if the U.S. gross domestic product shrank 2.1% or 2.3%?

Poverty in the U.S. has risen to its highest level in 11 years -- that’s the more popular headline from the Census report. They released the annual poverty study this week, which was oddly delayed, as we mentioned back in August, because the data were “not optimal.”

At any rate, 13.2% of Americas lived in poverty in 2008, up almost a full percentage point from 2007. That’s the highest rate since 1997. And even though you’re likely shaking in suspense over next year’s number -- SPOILER ALERT -- we ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

What exactly is “poverty” to the U.S. government? The equivalent of a family of four living on an annual budget of $22,025 or less. Rest assured that if you’re stuck raising a family on 30k a year, you’ll be just fine.

We hate to rub it in, but gold went for less than $300 an ounce 10 years ago today. Take that, inflation.

The spot price today has once again broken through the $1,000 mark. Traders have bumped gold up to $1,010 as we write, thanks mostly to a weakening dollar.

“Is this still in a bull market in gold... or at the end of one?” asks Bill Bonner. “Are we idiots for holding it now... or idiots for not buying more?

“The feds are desperate to restart the economy. The only way they can imagine is by increasing the money supply... and inducing people to spend money. They want inflation, no doubt about it. And they'll get it -- no doubt about that, either.

“The question is when. Our view is that they'll get more than they expect, but later than they want it. We're looking for another crack in stocks...followed by more fear and loathing in the economy. This will have two major effects. First, investors will turn to the familiar dollar for safety. Second, everyone will hoard money... speculation will cease... and prices will fall -- including the price of gold.

“Market events -- such as another big break in the banking sector -- could bring a deflationary collapse. If not, the Fed itself may have to step in to protect the dollar. In either case, gold is not likely to reach its final, bubble phase until this contraction is over.

“In the meantime, our advice remains unchanged: Buy gold on dips.”

The dollar has found a new 2009 low. At 76.5, the dollar index is at its lowest level since this time last year… right before Lehman died and the market started to tank. What a coincidence!

Stocks look set to end the week quietly. As we write, the S&P is hovering around break-even. Still, at around 1,045, the S&P 500 is at a year to date high.

If you seek the market’s next move, why not ask the CEOs of publicly traded companies? For every $1 of insider stock purchases in August, there was $31 worth of sales, says a report from market researchers TrimTabs. According to the firm, execs at U.S. public companies have been net sellers of $105 billion worth of stock over the last four months. That’s the most aggressive insider selling since the summer of 2007… heh, you know… when most papers were rejoicing “Dow 14,000!”

What’s more, insiders have been spot on so far in 2009. Check out this track record:

We admit there’s a lot more going on here than simple market timing. And of course, many CEOs are no better at managing their own money than they are at running their companies (Greenberg, Fuld, Cayne, etc.). Tracking insider buying and selling sometimes does little more than confirm predispositions.

Disclaimers be damned, the numbers don’t lie… insiders have had a stellar track record so far this year, and right now, they are crowding around the exits. Caveat emptor.

(By the way, as buyers and sellers argue which way the market should head next, options traders are quietly getting rich. One of our options analysts is boasting an incredible track record so far this year… get details -- and his strategy -- right here.)

“I think that cattle is an excellent place to be,” says the always interesting Doug Casey.

“There is such a thing as a cattle cycle, and right now, all over the world, cattle are in liquidation. Farmers and ranchers just can’t make any money on cattle. Nobody has made any money on cattle in North America or Europe for years, and it’s especially serious now. So worldwide, cattle herds are being slaughtered, and that’s depressing the prices.

“The interesting thing is that even as prices are being depressed by all the selling, counterintuitively, cattle herds are collapsing. That means the number of cattle and the price of cattle are going down at the same time. That, obviously, can’t go on forever; at some point, the relative number of cattle is going to be quite small and prices are going to explode upward. Why? Because people in China, the rest of the Orient and across the developing world are going to want more beef -- in addition to the traditional consumers. And the numbers of cattle are going to be very low…

“Why, if I believe we’re sliding into the Greater Depression, am I long cattle? Because you’ve got to be a buyer when everybody else is a seller, and everyone else is a seller right now, because no one can make any money on cattle. That’s No 1. No. 2 is that despite the fact the world is going into a depression, the world population will continue growing, and the countries in the Orient are going to do relatively much better than countries in the West, so I’m willing to bet on rising beef consumption. No. 3, real cattle prices are at generational lows.

“But I’m not speculating in cattle; I’m investing in cattle. I’m not doing anything with them in the futures market.”

(Doug means that in the most literal sense… he has a crew of gauchos herding ’em in Argentina.)

Last, here’s one to keep on file, from a town hall meeting last night on CNBC:

Steve Liesman: [This time] next year… will more Americans have jobs than today?

Tim Geithner: Absolutely.

Heh, we know it’s not politically legit for the Treasury Secretary to give an honest or realistic answer like “Maybe” or “How the hell should I know?” But to be “absolutely” sure… c’mon.

“I believe one of the reasons North Dakota is doing so well is they have their own State bank,” a reader writes in response to our coverage of this recession-free state. “They can loan to themselves at low or no interest rates. Just shows how much better off they are without the Fed banks -- exactly how things are supposed to be set up.”

The 5: The Bank of North Dakota is actually the only state-owned bank in all 50 states. There’s no office of the Fed and BND’s deposits are NOT insured by the FDIC… yet (gasp!) the bank is stable and capable of self-governance.

“I live in North Dakota and have interests in the Bakken,” another reader writes, “and was surprised to see both mentioned in your e-mail letter yesterday. North Dakota is an interesting place to live and work. The total population is something like 630,000, and about 30% of those live within a few miles of the Red River, which makes up the eastern border. The state is about 340 miles by 210 miles, so you can guess that there are large areas that are sparsely populated. Most of the state is agricultural, and a lot of that is marginally productive. Fortunately, much of the marginal areas have oil below, including the land above the Bakken Formation. I would say the politics are conservative relative to the rest of the country, although the congressional delegation are all Democrats. However, there was very little of the mortgage and property value silliness that some other places experienced.

“The last few years have been good for the state's coffers. When the price of oil peaked last year, there was an enormous amount of money generated for the state. There are a lot of very productive gas wells in the same areas where oil has been found, and even though the price of natural gas is a little depressed right now, it generates a lot of money for the state. Large parts of the state also have thick seams of low-grade lignite coal under them, which is used locally for power generation and some of that power might be exported, but I don't know that for a fact. Coal trains leave the state at a rate of one every few minutes 24 hours a day, and because it is such low-grade, high-sulfur coal, I can only imagine that a lot of it is going overseas. In addition to conventional energy, the last few years has seen a big boom in agriculture related to ethanol and biodiesel generation.

“So with such a small population and all of these energy-related opportunities, in addition to all the regular business that you might find in a state, we would have been pretty irresponsible to not have a budget surplus.”

The 5: Heh, you could say the same thing about the U.S. in general, but that hasn’t stopped anyone for a long time.

“Thanks for the heads-up on DXO last week,” writes the last reader today. “I got out in time, and had a profit to boot! You guys are great. Thanks.”

The 5: Good to hear. We wouldn’t be at all surprised to see other securities follow suit, especially leveraged ones that take up politically unpopular positions. But if DXO is any example, it seems like they are still safe to play with for now… it’s wind down was pretty civil.

Have a nice weekend,

Ian Mathias
The 5 Min. Forecast

P.S. By the time you read this, we’ll be on our way to Dewey Beach, Del., for a quick weekend of relaxation. Summer changed to fall like the flick of a light switch here in the Mid-Atlantic, but we’re dashing over to the shore anyway… we’re more there for peace and quiet than sun and surf. We’d love to list all the provocative and fascinating books we plan on reading on our long weekend… but honestly, little more than eating and napping is on the agenda. It’s one of those vacations.

You’ll be left in the extraordinarily capable hands of Addison Wiggin and Dave Gonigam for a few days. Both mercilessly edit and critique The 5 day in and day out, so by all means… don’t go easy on ’em. Catch you next week.

P.P.S. Would you care for some weekend reading? We recommend Byron King’s latest report on investing in silver. Check it out right here.

The Destruction of the US Empire

By Bill Bonner
London, England

Edward Gibbon described the happiest age of mankind as the period of the “five good emperors” between AD98 and AD180, when Marcus Aurelius died.

What was America’s Golden Age?

It is much too soon to write the history of America’s decline and fall. Still, that doesn’t stop us from guessing.

We would name the period between the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of Lehman Bros – a period of only 19 years – as the peak of US power and wealth. Of course, Americans were dreaming during those years. The dreams were the usual imperial sort – that the US Empire was such a benefit to the rest of the world that the foreigners would support it indefinitely. Rome didn’t take any chances; it forced its conquered nations to render tribute…slaves…gold…and wheat. The American empire depended on trade…and the dollar. As long as the United States had a commercial advantage, the empire was profitable. But as the 20th century aged, so did the US economy. Its competitors – notably Germany and Japan – had a big advantage. They had been bombed out in the ’40s. They could build anew. America’s trade advantage slipped away…and then its trade balance went negative in the mid-’80s. It has been getting more negative almost every year.

The trade losses shrank after the fall of the House of Lehman. Americans cut back. But today we get news that the trade deficit has just grown more than in any month in the last 10 years. Have Americans suddenly become big spenders again? Probably not. But we’ll have to wait for another explanation; we don’t have one.

No account of America’s glory years – roughly the period between the reign of George Bush I and that of his son, George Bush II – would be complete without mention of the events that happened on this day eight years ago. A small group of terrorists pulled off an amazing coup – bringing down two of America’s iconic buildings, right in the heart of New York City…and on primetime TV! Historians might be tempted to use this event as a milestone, marking the end of the period of maximum happiness in the United States of America. We caution against it. It was only later that it became apparent that the US reaction to the terrorist incident was suicidal. The nation desperately needed to bring its ambitions back in line with its means. It needed to save and invest in new factories and new infrastructure. Instead, it wasted trillions fighting phantoms and nobodies. But as far as anyone knew, US influence, prestige and power remained near its zenith throughout the wars on terror and Iraq.

The fall of Lehman changed things. Then it was obvious that not only was America vulnerable, she was an enemy to herself. She had diddle-daddled during the glory years, dawdling with the lion cubs that would grow up and maul her. Now, in the period we are living through, she attempts to go back to sleep and rerun her balmy dreams. That is what “recovery” is all about – a return to the land of nod and nonsense…in which people think they can actually become wealthier by squandering money they don’t have on things they don’t need.

Fortunately, as near as we can tell, most private citizens are now awake. A report at the beginning of this week showed that they repaid debt at a rate four times faster than economists projected. Savings rates are rising. Spending is falling. People are doing what they should do – they’re cutting back.

But the feds continue their efforts to sabotage the correction and destroy the empire. They have already blown-up the budget – with $9 trillion in deficits expected over the next 10 years. Now, they’re working on the dollar.

Yesterday, the dollar fell to $1.45 per euro. Gold remained just below the $1,000 an ounce mark. And the Dow rose 80 points.

Stock market investors seem to be looking forward to another big bull market. But with the economy deteriorating, they are probably just dreaming, too. Median household income fell 3.6% over the last 12 months. Of course, that’s just what you’d expect in a correction. But it’s not what the feds were hoping for. So, they’re pulling out all the stops to try to turn it around. Most important, they’re pulling out the stop that keeps the dollar from rolling down the hill.

The empire sinks into the mud. Yes, this is the downhill period…the slide into corruption…the period in which Juvenal complained that Romans were only interested in ‘bread and circuses.’

When you are on the board of a decent corporation, for example, if you have a direct financial interest in a matter under consideration you’re expected to ‘declare an interest’ and absent yourself from the vote. But in a mature democracy, the most self-interested citizens are those most likely to vote. Currently, about 20 million people work for government. About 45 million receive Social Security benefits. About 34 million depend on food stamps.

(People who count on the government to feed them, warned Jefferson, “will soon want bread.” That doesn’t seem to worry many people. But at least the state of Maryland has an Orwellian sense of humor about it. People who depend on government for food are given “Independence” cards.)

That’s 99 million people who have a direct interest in expanding government outlays…with some overlap, of course. And it doesn’t mean that every person receiving a Social Security check is going to back the feds. But it doesn’t count all the millions more who get subsidies, bailouts, welfare payments (often masquerading as tax credits), government contracts, and so forth, either.

Well, how many people does it take to win a national election? Obama won with 63 million votes.

The dollar’s weakness hasn’t been missed by it biggest foreign holder – China.

Reported earlier this week in the Telegraph:

“‘We hope there will be a change in monetary policy as soon as they have positive growth again,’ said Cheng Siwei…talking about America.

“‘If they keep printing money to buy bonds it will lead to inflation, and after a year or two the dollar will fall hard. Most of our foreign reserves are in US bonds and this is very difficult to change, so we will diversify incremental reserves into euros, yen, and other currencies,’ he said.

“China’s reserves are more than – $2 trillion, the world’s largest.

“Mr. Siwei continued: ‘Gold is definitely an alternative, but when we buy, the price goes up. We have to do it carefully so as not to stimulate the markets,’ he added.”

Then, two days ago, in came a report that China is going to issue bonds of its own – in yuan.

This news is a shot across the bow of America’s imperial currency. It signals that China is moving into position to eventually challenge the greenback. Investors will have another alternative to the dollar…another bond issued by another government and backed by another economy…maybe one that is on the way up, rather than on the way down.

Meanwhile, Americans grow poorer. Bloomberg reports:

“‘The decline in incomes we’re seeing certainly has implications for consumer spending, particularly post-housing bubble when families can’t tap into home equity through loans,’ said Heather Boushey, a senior economist at the Center for American Progress, a research organization headed by John Podesta, a leader of the Obama administration transition team.

“The poverty rate is likely to keep rising through 2012, even after the recession ends, adding to pressure on the Obama administration to enact a second economic stimulus package, said Isabel Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, a policy research group.

“‘We will likely have not only a jobless recovery but also a poverty-ridden recovery,’ Sawhill said. ‘The stimulus money is going to go away long before the poverty rate peaks.’”

Since founding Agora Inc. in 1979, Bill Bonner has found success and garnered camaraderie in numerous communities and industries. A man of many talents, his entrepreneurial savvy, unique writings, philanthropic undertakings, and preservationist activities have all been recognized and awarded by some of America’s most respected authorities. Along with Addison Wiggin, his friend and colleague, Bill has written two New York Times best-selling books, Financial Reckoning Day and Empire of Debt. Both works have been critically acclaimed and internationally. With political journalist Lila Rajiva, he wrote his third New York Times best-selling book, Mobs, Messiahs and Markets, which offers concrete advice on how to avoid the public spectacle of modern finance. Since 1999, Bill has been a daily contributor and the driving force behind The Daily Reckoning .

Special Report:The Endless PAYCHECK PORTFOLIO: In three simple steps, unleash a steady flow of work-free income… starting with up to 75 automatic “paychecks” deposited directly into your account.

View articles by Bill Bonner

The articles and commentary featured on the Daily Reckoning are presented by Agora Financial. Additional market commentary is available through The 5Min Forecast and The Rude Awakening. Follow the Daily Reckoning on Twitter and Facebook .
Related Articles:

* June 29, 2009 -- Ruined by Good Luck
* April 1, 2009 -- A Talk With Tim Geithner
* September 8, 2009 -- The Boomers are Out of Time – And Out of Money
* September 7, 2009 -- This Recovery is an Imposter
* September 4, 2009 -- The Capitalists Have No Capital

Obama's regulatory chief; Cass Sunstein pushes new 'bill of rights'

Obama Watch Central

WND Exclusive CZAR WARS

Cass Sunstein part of effort to change interpretation of Constitution by 2020



By Aaron Klein

NEW YORK – A government that is constitutionally required to offer each citizen a "useful" job in the farms or industries of the nation.

A country whose leadership intercedes to ensure every farmer can sell his product for a good return.

A nation that has the power to act against "unfair competition" and monopolies in business.

This is not a description of Cuba, communist China or the old USSR. It's the vision of the future of the U.S, as mandated by a radical new "bill of rights" drawn up and pushed by President Obama's newly confirmed regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein. Until now, Sunstein's proposal has received little scrutiny.

In 2004, Sunstein penned a book, "The Second Bill of Rights: FDR'S Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever," in which he advanced the radical notion that welfare rights, including some controversial inceptions, be granted by the state. His inspiration for a new bill of rights came from President Roosevelt's 1944 proposal of a different, new set of bill of rights.

WND has learned that in April 2005, Sunstein opened up a conference at Yale Law School entitled "The Constitution in 2020," which sought to change the nature and interpretation of the Constitution by that year.

Get Glenn Beck's 'Common Sense' ... The case against an out-of-control government: Inspired by Thomas Paine

Sunstein has been a main participant in the movement, which openly seeks to create a "progressive" consensus as to what the U.S. Constitution should provide for by the year 2020. It also suggests strategy for how liberal lawyers and judges might bring such a constitutional regime into being.

Just before his appearance at the conference, Sunstein wrote a blog entry in which he explained he "will be urging that it is important to resist, on democratic grounds, the idea that the document should be interpreted to reflect the view of the extreme right-wing of the Republican Party."

In his book, Sunstein laid out what he wants to become the new bill of rights, which he calls the Second Bill of Rights:

Among his mandates are:

* The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

* The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

* The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

* The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

* The right of every family to a decent home;

* The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

* The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

* The right to a good education.

On one page in his book, Sunstein claims he is "not seriously arguing" his bill of rights be "encompassed by anything in the Constitution," but on the next page he states that "if the nation becomes committed to certain rights, they may migrate into the Constitution itself."

Later in the book, Sunstein argues that "at a minimum, the second bill should be seen as part and parcel of America's constitutive commitments."