| Author | Message | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:49 pm Post subject: Kucinich’s New Hampshire recount doesn’t change results |
| Kucinich’s New Hampshire recount doesn’t change results
http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=3213 | |  | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:34 pm Post subject: |
| Subject: Fwd: RE: Peter Schiff Named Economic Advisor To Ron Paul Campaign
Donald Jones has mentioned that he was a consultant for the CIA and Janes:
Note: forwarded message attached.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Donald Jones"
Subject: RE: Peter Schiff Named Economic Advisor To Ron Paul Campaign Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:56:48 -0500
Bush has made a $30 Billion gift to Israel (guns and ammo), committed the US to spend $30 billion on African AIDS, spends another $30 billion each year on foreign aid, is spending some $600 billion a year on DOD and DHS, is spending billions a week in Iraq, and can’t find the money to help Minnesota fix its bridge. This is insanity. Ron Paul may be the only man who can save the US from catastrophe. His opponents are all warmongers and two are gun-grabbers who think self-defense is barbaric.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Peter Schiff Named Economic Advisor To Ron Paul Campaign
Peter Schiff Named Economic Advisor To Ron Paul Campaign
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/the-americas/2008/01/26/ron-paul-my-guy-page-125.php | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 12:01 am Post subject: |
| The following is why Ron Paul is the only viable candidate:
The great fiscal stimulus package ... of 1929
By Michael Kitchen, MarketWatch Jan. 26, 2008
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Lately, whenever the market has a bad day, the reflex among financial-news editors is to compare our current situation with 1987 and wonder if a "Black Monday"-style crash is on the horizon.
But some observers draw a darker metaphor, noting that much of what we are seeing now also took place in 1929. As we know, that meltdown -- unlike the 1987 crash -- was not followed by a happy ending, but rather by a decade of poverty, shantytowns and sporadic famine.
Popular imagination has the Great Depression opening with a bang in October 1929. We forget that even by December of that year, the market had no idea what was really in store. After a period of wild, bipolar volatility, stocks had taken two big tumbles (a 12.8% drop on Oct. 28 and an 11.7% fall the next day) while the top bankers and "captains of industry" rushed to shore up the market. By November, the Dow had hit its low for the year at 198, down from the giddy September high of 381.
But, the financial pundits and government leaders of the day insisted, the economy's fundamentals were still strong. Mass unemployment was, some months after the crash, still just something that went on in Germany and Britain. America was strong and merely needed a push to keep the financial markets from harming the broader economy.
With that in mind, Herbert Hoover -- only nine months into his presidency -- assembled leaders from the public and private sectors to create an economic-stimulus package. Among the measures, Time magazine reported at the time, was a promise from Congress to offer bipartisan support for a tax-cut package. The proposal called for $160 million in tax relief -- only about $22 billion if adjusted against the gross domestic product at the time, and therefore much smaller than the plan under consideration here in 2008. Read Time's original coverage of the plan.
Also on the table was an assurance from the Federal Reserve that it would provide cheaper credit. Granted, the Fed had much less power over the money supply in those days, mainly because the amount of liquidity it could create was limited by the supply of gold it held to back the dollar.
Of course, there were a litany of public-works projects, plans for new corporate investments, and even a promise by Henry Ford to raise wages at his auto plants.
None of this worked. What was first seen as speed bump to the expansion of American finance became something much larger. The Dow continued falling, hitting 157 in 1930, 73 in 1931 and finally a mere 41 points in 1932. It did not reach its 1929 high again until 1954, a generation later.
Certainly, our economy now has far more differences than similarities with the economy of 1929, and few expect a new depression for the decade ahead. But it's also worth remembering that the best laid plans of presidents, chief executives and senators can sometimes come to nothing. End of Story
Michael Kitchen is a copy editor for MarketWatch and is based in New York.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/great-fiscal-stimulus-package-/story.aspx?guid={D3B850E5-E05D-40DA-A630-42B3CB838AE9} | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 1:09 am Post subject: Take down one Israel first hack at a time for Ron Paul! |
| Obama runs away with SC primary
By DAVID ESPO and CHARLES BABINGTON, Associated Press Writers 10 minutes ago
Barack Obama routed Hillary Rodham Clinton in the racially charged South Carolina primary Saturday night, regaining campaign momentum in the prelude to a Feb. 5 coast-to-coast competition for more than 1,600 Democratic National Convention delegates.
Former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina was running third, a sharp setback in the state where he was born and scored a primary victory in his first presidential campaign four years ago.
About half the voters were black, according to polling place interviews, and four out of five of them supported Obama. Black women turned out in particularly large numbers. Obama, the first-term Illinois senator, got a quarter of the white vote while Clinton and Edwards split the rest.
The victory was Obama's first since he won the kickoff Iowa caucuses on Jan. 3. Clinton, a New York senator and former first lady, scored an upset in the New Hampshire primary a few days later. They split the Nevada caucuses, she winning the turnout race, he gaining a one-delegate margin. In an historic race, she hopes to become the first woman to occupy the White House, and Obama is the strongest black contender in history.
The South Carolina primary marked the end of the first phase of the campaign for the Democratic nomination, a series of single-state contests that winnowed the field, conferred co-front-runner status on Clinton and Obama but had relatively few delegates at stake.
That all changes in 10 days' time, when New York, Illinois and California are among the 15 states holding primaries in a virtual nationwide primary. Another seven states and American Samoa will hold Democratic caucuses on the same day.
"South Carolina voters rejected the politics of the past and they wanted something different," said Robert Gibbs, a spokesman for Obama.
Howard Wolfson, a top aide to Clinton, issued a written statement that said, "This remains a delegate fight, with 1,681 delegates at stake on Feb. 5 ... we are ahead in that fight."
Early returns from the state's precincts showed Obama with 51 percent of the vote, Clinton gaining 30 percent and Edwards at 19 percent.
All three contenders campaigned in South Carolina on primary day, but only Obama and Edwards arranged to speak to supporters after the polls closed. Clinton decided to fly to Tennessee, one of the Feb. 5 states, leaving as the polls were closing.
After playing a muted role in the earlier contests, the issue of race dominated an incendiary week that included a shift in strategy for Obama, a remarkably bitter debate and fresh scrutiny of former President Clinton's role in his wife's campaign.
Each side accused the other of playing the race card, sparking a controversy that frequently involved Bill Clinton.
"They are getting votes, to be sure, because of their race or gender. That's why people tell me Hillary doesn't have a chance of winning here," the former president said at one stop as he campaigned for his wife, strongly suggesting that blacks would not support a white alternative to Obama.
Clinton campaign strategists denied any intentional effort to stir the racial debate. But they said they believe the fallout has had the effect of branding Obama as "the black candidate," a tag that could hurt him outside the South.
Nearly six in 10 voters said the former president's efforts for his wife was important to their choice, and among them, slightly more favored Obama than the former first lady.
Overall, Obama defeated Clinton among both men and women.
The exit polls showed the economy was the most important issue in the race. About one quarter picked health care. And only one in five said it was the war in Iraq, underscoring the extent to which the once-dominant issue has faded in the face of financial concerns.
The exit poll was conducted by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International for The Associated Press and the networks.
Clinton and Obama swapped accusatory radio commercials earlier in the week.
The former first lady aired an ad saying Obama had once approved of Republican ideas. His camp responded quickly that Clinton "will say anything." First she, then he, pulled the commercials after a short run on the air.
Given the bickering, Edwards looked for an opening to reinvigorate a candidacy all but eclipsed by the historic campaign between Obama and Clinton. He went on the "Late Show with David Letterman" at midweek to say he wanted to represent the "grown-up wing of the Democratic party."
That was one night after a finger-wagging debate in which Obama told Clinton he was helping unemployed workers on the streets of Chicago when "you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart."
Moments later, the former first lady said she was fighting against misguided Republican policies "when you were practicing law and representing your contributor ... in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago."
___
Associated Press writers Beth Fouhy, Seanna Adcox and Mike Baker in Columbia, S.C., contributed to this report. | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 5:16 am Post subject: How Bush Destroyed the Dollar |
| Paul Craig Roberts is no doubt a Ron Paul supporter as well:
The Profile of a Third World Country
How Bush Destroyed the Dollar
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
It is difficult to know where Bush has accomplished the most destruction, the Iraqi economy or the US economy.
In the current issue of Manufacturing & Technology News, Washington economist Charles McMillion observes that seven years of Bush has seen the federal debt increase by two-thirds while US household debt doubled.
This massive Keynesian stimulus produced pitiful economic results. Median real income has declined. The labor force participation rate has declined. Job growth has been pathetic, with 28% of the new jobs being in the government sector. All the new private sector jobs are accounted for by private education and health care bureaucracies, bars and restaurants. Three and a quarter million manufacturing jobs and a half million supervisory jobs were lost. The number of manufacturing jobs has fallen to the level of 65 years ago.
This is the profile of a third world economy.
The "new economy" has been running a trade deficit in advanced technology products since 2002. The US trade deficit in manufactured goods dwarfs the US trade deficit in oil. The US does not earn enough to pay its import bill, and it doesn't save enough to finance the government's budget deficit.
To finance its deficits, America looks to the kindness of foreigners to continue to accept the outpouring of dollars and dollar-denominated debt.
The dollars are accepted, because the dollar is the world's reserve currency.
At the meeting of the World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland, this week, billionaire currency trader George Soros warned that the dollar's reserve currency role was drawing to an end: "The current crisis is not only the bust that follows the housing boom, it's basically the end of a 60-year period of continuing credit expansion based on the dollar as the reserve currency. Now the rest of the world is increasingly unwilling to accumulate dollars."
If the world is unwilling to continue to accumulate dollars, the US will not be able to finance its trade deficit or its budget deficit. As both are seriously out of balance, the implication is for yet more decline in the dollar's exchange value and a sharp rise in prices.
Economists have romanticized globalism, taking delight in the myriad of foreign components in US brand name products. This is fine for a country whose trade is in balance or whose currency has the reserve currency role. It is a terrible dependency for a country such as the US that has been busy at work offshoring its economy while destroying the exchange value of its currency.
As the dollar sheds value and loses its privileged position as reserve currency, US living standards will take a serious knock.
If the US government cannot balance its budget by cutting its spending or by raising taxes, the day when it can no longer borrow will see the government paying its bills by printing money like a third world banana republic. Inflation and more exchange rate depreciation will be the order of the day.
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 10:56 am Post subject: PJB: Why McCain Would be Worse Than Bush |
| http://buchanan.org/blog/?p=925
PJB: Why McCain Would be Worse Than Bush
posted by Linda
by Patrick J. Buchanan
In 2004, the voters of Arizona, by 56 percent to 44 percent, enacted Proposition 200, requiring proof of citizenship before an individual may vote or receive state benefits. Forty-six percent of Hispanics voted for Prop. 200, giving the lie to those who say Hispanics support the illegal invasion of their country.
Over 190,000 Arizonans petitioned to put Prop. 200 on the ballot. As it simply required proof of citizenship before receiving the benefits and privileges of citizenship, who could oppose it? Answer: the entire GOP congressional delegation, led by Sen. John McCain.
This is the same John McCain who battled the border fence and colluded with Teddy Kennedy on the amnesty bill rejected by Congress last year after a national uproar.
Bottom line: If the presidential race is between Hillary and Amnesty John, the border security battle is over and lost. As Laura Ingraham asks, “If Congress passes McCain-Kennedy in 2009, would President McCain sign it?”
For conservatives, the stakes could not be higher.
For on the great controversies, McCain has sided as often with the Democrats and the Big Media that pay him court as with conservatives.
Where President Bush has been bravest, on taxes and judges, McCain has been his nemesis. Not only did McCain vote against the Bush tax cuts twice, he colluded to sell out the most conservative of the Bush nominees to the courts.
In 1993, McCain voted to confirm ACLU liberal and pro-abortion Ruth Bader Ginsburg. But when Bush set out to restore constitutionalism, McCain colluded with Democrats who wanted to retain power to kill Bush’s most conservative nominees.
McCain helped form the Gang of 14, including seven Democrats, who agreed to block a GOP Senate from using the “nuclear option” – allowing a simple GOP majority to break a Democrat filibuster of judicial nominees – unless the seven Democrats approved. McCain thus conspired with liberals to put at risk the most courageous conservatives nominees of President Bush.
With his record of voting for liberal justices Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, and of colluding with Democrats in their campaign to kill the most conservative Bush nominees, what guarantee is there a President McCain will nominate and fight for the fifth jurist who would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade?
In the battle over campaign finance reform, McCain colluded again. The McCain-Feingold law denies to gun folks and right-to-lifers their basic First Amendment right to name friends and foes in ads run before elections.
As for the policies that have transparently failed Bush and the nation, McCain remains an obdurate advocate.
After America has run five straight record trade deficits that have denuded the nation of thousands of factories and 3 million manufacturing jobs, McCain is still babbling on about Smoot-Hawley.
“When you study history, every time we’ve adopted protectionism, we’ve paid a very heavy price,” McCain told a Detroit paper after informing Michiganders their auto jobs are never coming back.
But what history is John McCain talking about?
Was the Tariff of 1816, which saved infant U.S. industries from the malicious dumping by British merchants after the War of 1812, a failure? Were Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, John Calhoun and Henry Clay fools to support President Madison’s tariff?
From Abraham Lincoln through Calvin Coolidge, the Republican Party – the Party of Protection – put 12 presidents in the White House to two for the Democrats, and the United States became the mightiest industrial power in history, producing 42 percent of the world’s manufactured goods.
This is failure – while Bush free trade is a success? Tell it to Ohio.
Even Hillary Clinton, whose husband enacted NAFTA with McCain’s support, has begun to question the NAFTA paradigm. Not McCain.
Where Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon came to office determined to extricate the nation with honor from a war whose costs had begun to outweigh any benefit, McCain is talking about spending 50 or 100 years in Iraq.
Where Bush, by moving NATO onto Russia’s doorstep, planting bases in Central Asia and intervening in the affairs of Russia’s neighbors, has undone the work of Reagan in making Russia a friend, he sounds like George McGovern alongside the braying McCain, who can’t wait to get into Vladimir Putin’s face.
Where Bush finally cleansed his administration of neocons, if not of their legacy, a McCain candidacy is the last, best hope of a neocon restoration and new military adventures in the Middle East.
If Rudy Giuliani founders in Florida, neocons will be chanting, “Mac is back!”
The three issues that ruined the Bush presidency are this misbegotten war in Iraq, the failure to secure America’s borders from invasion and a mindless trade policy that has destroyed the dollar and left foreigners with $5 trillion to buy up America at fire-sale prices.
McCain remains an unthinking advocate of all three.
But where Bush was at his best, on taxes and judges, McCain was collaborating with Hillary. The question conservatives may face if McCain is nominated is not whom should I vote for, but should I vote.
Spread the Word! | | | | Alpha | | Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 11:02 am Post subject: |
| McCain and his admiral Father sold out the USS Liberty crew (www.ussliberty.com) for Israel as well, and America firsters like myself will never let him forget it:
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/July2004/Hughes0712.htm | | | | Alpha | | | | Alpha | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
