Monday, November 23, 2009
GOVERNMENT ... OUT OF CONTROL SPENDING
For far too long we have relied on, to quote from the Tennessee Williams
play. "A Streetcar Named Desire", "the kindness of strangers" when those
"strangers" were and are not responsible with the faith and trust we placed
in them.
That Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana could, without hesitation, correct a
reporter when asked about what the reporter thought was $100 Million that
was written into the "Health Care Reform" legislation by Majority Leader
Reed for Louisiana in return for her support of bringing the Health Care
Reform Bill to the floor for debate by stating that it was in fact, $300
Million, and not be immediately placed in hand-cuffs for accepting a bribe
with public money, only shows how little concern this "elected elite" has
for public opinion or the use of the public treasury. That Senator Reed did
not immediately join her in the back of the squad car shows how accepting of
this corrupt behavior we have become, after all, "they all do it", and how
ignorant the senator, the reporter and the general public are of the
Constitutional responsibilities of our elected "representatives" and the
citizenry.
It is our government if only we would take it back.
WHEN WILL BE ALL SAY, "ENOUGH"?
play. "A Streetcar Named Desire", "the kindness of strangers" when those
"strangers" were and are not responsible with the faith and trust we placed
in them.
That Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana could, without hesitation, correct a
reporter when asked about what the reporter thought was $100 Million that
was written into the "Health Care Reform" legislation by Majority Leader
Reed for Louisiana in return for her support of bringing the Health Care
Reform Bill to the floor for debate by stating that it was in fact, $300
Million, and not be immediately placed in hand-cuffs for accepting a bribe
with public money, only shows how little concern this "elected elite" has
for public opinion or the use of the public treasury. That Senator Reed did
not immediately join her in the back of the squad car shows how accepting of
this corrupt behavior we have become, after all, "they all do it", and how
ignorant the senator, the reporter and the general public are of the
Constitutional responsibilities of our elected "representatives" and the
citizenry.
It is our government if only we would take it back.
WHEN WILL BE ALL SAY, "ENOUGH"?
Some of us aren't that political, although it has been a large protionof my life since my early teens. Even less are interested in economics with most finding the subject as stimulating as Somenix. However, I do think that most American's love their country and want the best for the future generations of Americans.
This posting is not anti any particular politician or political party for politicians of both major political parties are guilty of contributing to this very serious problem. It is regarding what is slowly being recognized as a serious national disaster that has been in the making for the last 100 years.
Over the past few years, some Conservative politicians, Conservative pundits and many Conservative radio talk show "personalities", as the Progressive politicians and "mainstream media" types like to call them, have been warning about the out of control spending by our government over at least the last decade and by a few, over the last 100 years. They have told us that we are enslaving the future generations with un-thinkable debt while growing an unsustainable federal government that has been and will continue to take more and more of our God given liberty and freedom. They have been called crazy, fear-mongers, anti-government wackos and far worse, all for speaking the truth.
Maybe now that the clarion horn is being of immanent danger is being blown by the Progressive's favorite newspaper, The New York Times, the simple fact that our country is BROKE, that we have no money in the bank, will strike a nerve of truth with those who dismissed such previous warnings.
The following article may make your eyes gloss-over but please, take a few minutes and read it.
We must demand of all our politicians that they stop spending money we do not have. It does not matter the party or what "good reason" they have, we must stop the insanity NOW! We must stop the spending NOW!
Contact your congressman and senators.
link to the article in the New York Times ....
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/business/23rates.html?_r=1
Wave of Debt Payments Facing U.S. Government
by EDMUND L. ANDREWS
Published: November 22, 2009
WASHINGTON — The United States government is financing its more than trillion-dollar-a-year borrowing with i.o.u.’s on terms that seem too good to be true.
“What a good country or a good squirrel should be doing is stashing away nuts for the winter. The United States is not only not saving nuts, it’s eating the ones left over from the last winter.” WILLIAM H. GROSS
Articles in this series will examine the consequences of, and attempts to deal with, growing public and private debts.
But that happy situation, aided by ultralow interest rates, may not last much longer.
Treasury officials now face a trifecta of headaches: a mountain of new debt, a balloon of short-term borrowings that come due in the months ahead, and interest rates that are sure to climb back to normal as soon as the Federal Reserve decides that the emergency has passed.
Even as Treasury officials are racing to lock in today’s low rates by exchanging short-term borrowings for long-term bonds, the government faces a payment shock similar to those that sent legions of overstretched homeowners into default on their mortgages.
With the national debt now topping $12 trillion, the White House estimates that the government’s tab for servicing the debt will exceed $700 billion a year in 2019, up from $202 billion this year, even if annual budget deficits shrink drastically. Other forecasters say the figure could be much higher.
In concrete terms, an additional $500 billion a year in interest expense would total more than the combined federal budgets this year for education, energy, homeland security and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The potential for rapidly escalating interest payouts is just one of the wrenching challenges facing the United States after decades of living beyond its means.
The surge in borrowing over the last year or two is widely judged to have been a necessary response to the financial crisis and the deep recession, and there is still a raging debate over how aggressively to bring down deficits over the next few years. But there is little doubt that the United States’ long-term budget crisis is becoming too big to postpone.
Americans now have to climb out of two deep holes: as debt-loaded consumers, whose personal wealth sank along with housing and stock prices; and as taxpayers, whose government debt has almost doubled in the last two years alone, just as costs tied to benefits for retiring baby boomers are set to explode.
The competing demands could deepen political battles over the size and role of the government, the trade-offs between taxes and spending, the choices between helping older generations versus younger ones, and the bottom-line questions about who should ultimately shoulder the burden.
“The government is on teaser rates,” said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan group that advocates lower deficits. “We’re taking out a huge mortgage right now, but we won’t feel the pain until later.”
So far, the demand for Treasury securities from investors and other governments around the world has remained strong enough to hold down the interest rates that the United States must offer to sell them. Indeed, the government paid less interest on its debt this year than in 2008, even though it added almost $2 trillion in debt.
The government’s average interest rate on new borrowing last year fell below 1 percent. For short-term i.o.u.’s like one-month Treasury bills, its average rate was only sixteen-hundredths of a percent.
“All of the auction results have been solid,” said Matthew Rutherford, the Treasury’s deputy assistant secretary in charge of finance operations. “Investor demand has been very broad, and it’s been increasing in the last couple of years.”
The problem, many analysts say, is that record government deficits have arrived just as the long-feared explosion begins in spending on benefits under Medicare and Social Security. The nation’s oldest baby boomers are approaching 65, setting off what experts have warned for years will be a fiscal nightmare for the government.
“What a good country or a good squirrel should be doing is stashing away nuts for the winter,” said William H. Gross, managing director of the Pimco Group, the giant bond-management firm. “The United States is not only not saving nuts, it’s eating the ones left over from the last winter.”
The current low rates on the country’s debt were caused by temporary factors that are already beginning to fade. One factor was the economic crisis itself, which caused panicked investors around the world to plow their money into the comparative safety of Treasury bills and notes. Even though the United States was the epicenter of the global crisis, investors viewed Treasury securities as the least dangerous place to park their money.
On top of that, the Fed used almost every tool in its arsenal to push interest rates down even further. It cut the overnight federal funds rate, the rate at which banks lend reserves to one another, to almost zero. And to reduce longer-term rates, it bought more than $1.5 trillion worth of Treasury bonds and government-guaranteed securities linked to mortgages.
Those conditions are already beginning to change. Global investors are shifting money into riskier investments like stocks and corporate bonds, and they have been pouring money into fast-growing countries like Brazil and China.
Articles in this series will examine the consequences of, and attempts to deal with, growing public and private debts.
The Fed, meanwhile, is already halting its efforts at tamping down long-term interest rates. Fed officials ended their $300 billion program to buy up Treasury bonds last month, and they have announced plans to stop buying mortgage-backed securities by the end of next March.
Eventually, though probably not until at least mid-2010, the Fed will also start raising its benchmark interest rate back to more historically normal levels.
The United States will not be the only government competing to refinance huge debt. Japan, Germany, Britain and other industrialized countries have even higher government debt loads, measured as a share of their gross domestic product, and they too borrowed heavily to combat the financial crisis and economic downturn. As the global economy recovers and businesses raise capital to finance their growth, all that new government debt is likely to put more upward pressure on interest rates.
Even a small increase in interest rates has a big impact. An increase of one percentage point in the Treasury’s average cost of borrowing would cost American taxpayers an extra $80 billion this year — about equal to the combined budgets of the Department of Energy and the Department of Education.
But that could seem like a relatively modest pinch. Alan Levenson, chief economist at T. Rowe Price, estimated that the Treasury’s tab for debt service this year would have been $221 billion higher if it had faced the same interest rates as it did last year.
The White House estimates that the government will have to borrow about $3.5 trillion more over the next three years. On top of that, the Treasury has to refinance, or roll over, a huge amount of short-term debt that was issued during the financial crisis. Treasury officials estimate that about 36 percent of the government’s marketable debt — about $1.6 trillion — is coming due in the months ahead.
To lock in low interest rates in the years ahead, Treasury officials are trying to replace one-month and three-month bills with 10-year and 30-year Treasury securities. That strategy will save taxpayers money in the long run. But it pushes up costs drastically in the short run, because interest rates are higher for long-term debt.
Adding to the pressure, the Fed is set to begin reversing some of the policies it has been using to prop up the economy. Wall Street firms advising the Treasury recently estimated that the Fed’s purchases of Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities pushed down long-term interest rates by about one-half of a percentage point. Removing that support could in itself add $40 billion to the government’s annual tab for debt service.
This month, the Treasury Department’s private-sector advisory committee on debt management warned of the risks ahead.
“Inflation, higher interest rate and rollover risk should be the primary concerns,” declared the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee, a group of market experts that provide guidance to the government, on Nov. 4.
“Clever debt management strategy,” the group said, “can’t completely substitute for prudent fiscal policy.”
This posting is not anti any particular politician or political party for politicians of both major political parties are guilty of contributing to this very serious problem. It is regarding what is slowly being recognized as a serious national disaster that has been in the making for the last 100 years.
Over the past few years, some Conservative politicians, Conservative pundits and many Conservative radio talk show "personalities", as the Progressive politicians and "mainstream media" types like to call them, have been warning about the out of control spending by our government over at least the last decade and by a few, over the last 100 years. They have told us that we are enslaving the future generations with un-thinkable debt while growing an unsustainable federal government that has been and will continue to take more and more of our God given liberty and freedom. They have been called crazy, fear-mongers, anti-government wackos and far worse, all for speaking the truth.
Maybe now that the clarion horn is being of immanent danger is being blown by the Progressive's favorite newspaper, The New York Times, the simple fact that our country is BROKE, that we have no money in the bank, will strike a nerve of truth with those who dismissed such previous warnings.
The following article may make your eyes gloss-over but please, take a few minutes and read it.
We must demand of all our politicians that they stop spending money we do not have. It does not matter the party or what "good reason" they have, we must stop the insanity NOW! We must stop the spending NOW!
Contact your congressman and senators.
link to the article in the New York Times ....
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/business/23rates.html?_r=1
Wave of Debt Payments Facing U.S. Government
by EDMUND L. ANDREWS
Published: November 22, 2009
WASHINGTON — The United States government is financing its more than trillion-dollar-a-year borrowing with i.o.u.’s on terms that seem too good to be true.
“What a good country or a good squirrel should be doing is stashing away nuts for the winter. The United States is not only not saving nuts, it’s eating the ones left over from the last winter.” WILLIAM H. GROSS
Articles in this series will examine the consequences of, and attempts to deal with, growing public and private debts.
But that happy situation, aided by ultralow interest rates, may not last much longer.
Treasury officials now face a trifecta of headaches: a mountain of new debt, a balloon of short-term borrowings that come due in the months ahead, and interest rates that are sure to climb back to normal as soon as the Federal Reserve decides that the emergency has passed.
Even as Treasury officials are racing to lock in today’s low rates by exchanging short-term borrowings for long-term bonds, the government faces a payment shock similar to those that sent legions of overstretched homeowners into default on their mortgages.
With the national debt now topping $12 trillion, the White House estimates that the government’s tab for servicing the debt will exceed $700 billion a year in 2019, up from $202 billion this year, even if annual budget deficits shrink drastically. Other forecasters say the figure could be much higher.
In concrete terms, an additional $500 billion a year in interest expense would total more than the combined federal budgets this year for education, energy, homeland security and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The potential for rapidly escalating interest payouts is just one of the wrenching challenges facing the United States after decades of living beyond its means.
The surge in borrowing over the last year or two is widely judged to have been a necessary response to the financial crisis and the deep recession, and there is still a raging debate over how aggressively to bring down deficits over the next few years. But there is little doubt that the United States’ long-term budget crisis is becoming too big to postpone.
Americans now have to climb out of two deep holes: as debt-loaded consumers, whose personal wealth sank along with housing and stock prices; and as taxpayers, whose government debt has almost doubled in the last two years alone, just as costs tied to benefits for retiring baby boomers are set to explode.
The competing demands could deepen political battles over the size and role of the government, the trade-offs between taxes and spending, the choices between helping older generations versus younger ones, and the bottom-line questions about who should ultimately shoulder the burden.
“The government is on teaser rates,” said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan group that advocates lower deficits. “We’re taking out a huge mortgage right now, but we won’t feel the pain until later.”
So far, the demand for Treasury securities from investors and other governments around the world has remained strong enough to hold down the interest rates that the United States must offer to sell them. Indeed, the government paid less interest on its debt this year than in 2008, even though it added almost $2 trillion in debt.
The government’s average interest rate on new borrowing last year fell below 1 percent. For short-term i.o.u.’s like one-month Treasury bills, its average rate was only sixteen-hundredths of a percent.
“All of the auction results have been solid,” said Matthew Rutherford, the Treasury’s deputy assistant secretary in charge of finance operations. “Investor demand has been very broad, and it’s been increasing in the last couple of years.”
The problem, many analysts say, is that record government deficits have arrived just as the long-feared explosion begins in spending on benefits under Medicare and Social Security. The nation’s oldest baby boomers are approaching 65, setting off what experts have warned for years will be a fiscal nightmare for the government.
“What a good country or a good squirrel should be doing is stashing away nuts for the winter,” said William H. Gross, managing director of the Pimco Group, the giant bond-management firm. “The United States is not only not saving nuts, it’s eating the ones left over from the last winter.”
The current low rates on the country’s debt were caused by temporary factors that are already beginning to fade. One factor was the economic crisis itself, which caused panicked investors around the world to plow their money into the comparative safety of Treasury bills and notes. Even though the United States was the epicenter of the global crisis, investors viewed Treasury securities as the least dangerous place to park their money.
On top of that, the Fed used almost every tool in its arsenal to push interest rates down even further. It cut the overnight federal funds rate, the rate at which banks lend reserves to one another, to almost zero. And to reduce longer-term rates, it bought more than $1.5 trillion worth of Treasury bonds and government-guaranteed securities linked to mortgages.
Those conditions are already beginning to change. Global investors are shifting money into riskier investments like stocks and corporate bonds, and they have been pouring money into fast-growing countries like Brazil and China.
Articles in this series will examine the consequences of, and attempts to deal with, growing public and private debts.
The Fed, meanwhile, is already halting its efforts at tamping down long-term interest rates. Fed officials ended their $300 billion program to buy up Treasury bonds last month, and they have announced plans to stop buying mortgage-backed securities by the end of next March.
Eventually, though probably not until at least mid-2010, the Fed will also start raising its benchmark interest rate back to more historically normal levels.
The United States will not be the only government competing to refinance huge debt. Japan, Germany, Britain and other industrialized countries have even higher government debt loads, measured as a share of their gross domestic product, and they too borrowed heavily to combat the financial crisis and economic downturn. As the global economy recovers and businesses raise capital to finance their growth, all that new government debt is likely to put more upward pressure on interest rates.
Even a small increase in interest rates has a big impact. An increase of one percentage point in the Treasury’s average cost of borrowing would cost American taxpayers an extra $80 billion this year — about equal to the combined budgets of the Department of Energy and the Department of Education.
But that could seem like a relatively modest pinch. Alan Levenson, chief economist at T. Rowe Price, estimated that the Treasury’s tab for debt service this year would have been $221 billion higher if it had faced the same interest rates as it did last year.
The White House estimates that the government will have to borrow about $3.5 trillion more over the next three years. On top of that, the Treasury has to refinance, or roll over, a huge amount of short-term debt that was issued during the financial crisis. Treasury officials estimate that about 36 percent of the government’s marketable debt — about $1.6 trillion — is coming due in the months ahead.
To lock in low interest rates in the years ahead, Treasury officials are trying to replace one-month and three-month bills with 10-year and 30-year Treasury securities. That strategy will save taxpayers money in the long run. But it pushes up costs drastically in the short run, because interest rates are higher for long-term debt.
Adding to the pressure, the Fed is set to begin reversing some of the policies it has been using to prop up the economy. Wall Street firms advising the Treasury recently estimated that the Fed’s purchases of Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities pushed down long-term interest rates by about one-half of a percentage point. Removing that support could in itself add $40 billion to the government’s annual tab for debt service.
This month, the Treasury Department’s private-sector advisory committee on debt management warned of the risks ahead.
“Inflation, higher interest rate and rollover risk should be the primary concerns,” declared the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee, a group of market experts that provide guidance to the government, on Nov. 4.
“Clever debt management strategy,” the group said, “can’t completely substitute for prudent fiscal policy.”
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Van Jones, John Podesta & The President
John Podesta, former Chief of Staff for President Clinton and most recently served as co-chair for President Obama's transition team, has posted the following on his organization's web-site, Center For American Progress. This man is an integral part of the American Progressive movement who's organization is funded primarily by billionaire anti-American / anti-Capitalist, George Soros. Once again, a man like George Soros who manipulated the Capitalist system for his own profit is dead-set on destroying your access to the same system. This man would be among the "ruling elite" and not, like many of our elected representatives, subject to the same limitations they want to place on the average citizens of the United States of America, the citizens who make this the greatest country in the world.
Podesta: ‘Van Has Set A Standard That Beck Would Never Impose Upon Himself’
John Podesta, the President and CEO of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, released this statement following the resignation of Van Jones:
Van Jones is an exceptional and inspired leader who has fought to bring economic and environmental justice to communities across our country.
He has chosen to resign because he believed he was serving as a distraction to the president’s agenda. I respect that decision.
Van was working to build a common ground agenda for all Americans, and I am confident he will continue that work. Unfortunately, his critics on the right could find no common ground with him.
Clearly, Van was the subject of a right-wing smear campaign shrouded in hypocrisy. Van’s chief tormentor Glenn Beck, who spent weeks engaged in vicious name-calling, retains his perch at Fox News after calling the president a racist who has “a deep-seated hatred for white people.” Van has set a standard that Beck would never impose upon himself.
I look forward to working with Van to move our country towards a clean energy economy that empowers and lifts up all Americans.
Podesta: ‘Van Has Set A Standard That Beck Would Never Impose Upon Himself’
John Podesta, the President and CEO of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, released this statement following the resignation of Van Jones:
Van Jones is an exceptional and inspired leader who has fought to bring economic and environmental justice to communities across our country.
He has chosen to resign because he believed he was serving as a distraction to the president’s agenda. I respect that decision.
Van was working to build a common ground agenda for all Americans, and I am confident he will continue that work. Unfortunately, his critics on the right could find no common ground with him.
Clearly, Van was the subject of a right-wing smear campaign shrouded in hypocrisy. Van’s chief tormentor Glenn Beck, who spent weeks engaged in vicious name-calling, retains his perch at Fox News after calling the president a racist who has “a deep-seated hatred for white people.” Van has set a standard that Beck would never impose upon himself.
I look forward to working with Van to move our country towards a clean energy economy that empowers and lifts up all Americans.
Monday, September 7, 2009
"Capitalism is evil," says new Michael Moore filmSun Sep 6, 2009 11:59am EDT
By Mike Collett-White
VENICE (Reuters) - Capitalism is evil. That is the conclusion U.S. documentary maker Michael Moore comes to in his latest movie "Capitalism: A Love Story," which premieres at the Venice film festival Sunday.
Blending his trademark humor with tragic individual stories, archive footage and publicity stunts, the 55-year-old launches an all out attack on the capitalist system, arguing that it benefits the rich and condemns millions to poverty.
"Capitalism is an evil, and you cannot regulate evil," the two-hour movie concludes.
"You have to eliminate it and replace it with something that is good for all people and that something is democracy."
The bad guys in Moore's mind are big banks and hedge funds which "gambled" investors' money in complex derivatives that few, if any, really understood and which belonged in the casino.
Meanwhile, large companies have been prepared to lay off thousands of staff despite boasting record profits.
The filmmaker also sees an uncomfortably close relationship between banks, politicians and U.S. Treasury officials, meaning that regulation has been changed to favor the few on Wall Street rather than the many on Main Street.
He says that by encouraging Americans to borrow against the value of their homes, businesses created the conditions that led to the crisis, and with it homelessness and unemployment.
Moore even features priests who say capitalism is anti-Christian by failing to protect the poor.
"Essentially we have a law which says gambling is illegal but we've allowed Wall Street to do this and they've played with people's money and taken it into these crazy areas of derivatives," Moore told an audience in Venice.
"They need more than just regulation. We need to structure ourselves differently in order to create finance and money, support for jobs, businesses, etc."
GREEN SHOOTS?
Amid the gloom, Moore detects the beginnings of a popular movement against unbridled capitalism, and believes President Barack Obama's rise to power may bolster it.
"Democracy is not a spectator sport, it's a participatory event," he told a news conference. "If we don't participate in it, it ceases to be a democracy. So Obama will rise or fall based not so much on what he does but on what we do to support him."
Moore also warned other countries around the world against following the recent U.S. economic and political model.
The film follows factory workers who stage a sit-in at a Chicago glass factory when they are sacked with little warning and no pay and who eventually prevail over the bank.
And a group of citizens occupies a home that has been repossessed and boarded up by the lending company, forcing the police who come to evict them to back down.
The film re-visits some of Moore's earlier movies, including a trip to his native Flint where his father was a car assembly line worker and was able to buy a home, a car, educate his children and look forward to a decent pension.
But he brings it up to date with an examination of the financial crisis, demanding to speak to the bosses of companies at the center of the collapse and demanding that banks give back the hundreds of billions of bailout dollars to the country.
And he interviews an employee of a firm which buys up re-possessed, or "distressed" properties at a fraction of their original value and which is called Condo Vultures.
Michael Moore, that paragon of honesty and integrity is about to do it once again ... why do people listen to this ignorant man?
Does anyone wonder why this ball of human waste charges people to see his propaganda?
Does anyone wonder why he doesn't give away to the poor of the world, all of his profits? One of his homes?
Does anyone wonder why he chooses to live in a country that he so obviously hates and wants to completely change?
Does anyone think he travel's to Cuba to get the health-care he needs given his endless praise for their Communist health-care system in his "film", SiCKO?
Does anyone care that no one in the main-stream, dino-media ever questions his methods, conclusions or praise for all systems that would crush his form of idiocy?
The answers to all of these questions are very simple and easy. Mr. Moore and his other leftist-elitists in Hollywood would not be able to live in the life-style they have grown accustomed to if they did not work and take advantage of the benefits of the very economic and political system they trash. After all, as ignorant as they are, they are not stupid. If they lived in Castro's Cuba or Chavez's Venezuela, would they be able to generate the income that affords them the private jets, the chauffeur driven limos and the mansions? Only if they were held in favor by the current dictator and part of the ruling-class.
If they were not, would they be able to soak the very Capitalist system they hate for the wealth it generates? Would they be able to market themselves to the hard-working Capitalists who would be necessary in order to sell the tickets needed to generate the cash? Would they amass their fortunes in a state controlled film industry? I could be wrong, but I'd say it's doubtful.
To borrow a phrase, these "useful idiots", by peddling their wares in a system of marketing that exists only in the United States, are able to generate wealth far beyond anything a state run system would. The very Capitalist system those such as Sean Penn, Barbara Streisand, Rosie O'Donnell, Oliver Stone, Martin Sheen, Susan Sarandon, Mike Ferrell, Jeneane Garofelo, Cher, Julia Roberts, et al trash and want changed to be "more fair", is the very system that allows them to spout anything they choose, regardless of how insane or without merit it may be. It is the very system that provides them with the ability to live the lifestyle they do.
Why do they not all leave this hate-filled, racist country that breads inequality and unfairness? It is a good question for I know that they all think that they would all have the priveliges of power and wealth for they would all be among the "ruling-elite" ... or would they? Once again, they are ignorant, not stupid.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Liberal Talk Show host claims that JFK & RFK were "murdered by the right-wing in this country" ...
Once again, the Leftist Progressives attempt to re-write history ... Lee Harvey Oswald was a Communist and Sirhan Sirhan wa a middle eastern wack-job who opposed Bobby Kenney's pro-Israel positions. NEITHER WERE RIGHT-WINGERS! The outright lies of the Leftist never ends.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)