Republic Wireless-$10 a month

Well you can't beat $10 a month for all the calls and texts you like, no contract but that is exactly what Republic Wireless does. If you want ALL the bells and whistles it will cost you $25 a month! The only drawback is you MUST buy one of THEIR phones. The new Moto G phones are out and are on sale for $149 for a short time only. These phones run on WiFi and Sprint's cellular backbone when there isn't any WiFi available and will transfer from 1 to the other seamlessly.  We just bought 2 and will let you know how they work! Using MY banner-link below, we both save a bit. 

Texas-The newest Country

The Country of Texas ~ being that Texas is the only state with a legal right to secede from the Union . (Reference the Texas-American Annexation Treaty of 1848.)

We Texans love y'all, but we'll probably have to take action if Barack Obama wins the election. We'll miss you too.

Here is what can happen:

1: Barack Hussein Obama is President of the United States, and Texas secedes from the Union in summer of 2013.

2: George W. Bush will become the President of the Republic of Texas . You might not think that he talks too pretty, but we hadn't had another terrorist attack, and the economy was fine until the effects of the Democrats lowering the qualifications for home loans came to roost.
So what does Texas have to do to survive as a Republic?

1. NASA is just south of Houston , Texas . We will control the space industry.

2. We refine over 85% of the gasoline in the United States .

3. Defense Industry--we have over 65% of it. The term "Don't mess with Texas," will take on a whole new meaning.

4. Oil - we can supply all the oil that the Republic of Texas will need for the next 300 years. What will the other states do? Gee, we don't know. Why not ask Obama?

5. Natural Gas - again we have all we need, and it's too bad about those Northern States. John Kerry and Al Gore will have to figure out a way to keep them warm....

6. Computer Industry - we lead the nation in producing computer chips and communications equipment -small companies like Texas Instruments, Dell Computer, EDS, Raytheon, National Semiconductor,Motorola, Intel, AMD, Atmel, Applied Materials, Ball Microconductor, Dallas Semiconductor, Nortel, Alcatel, etc, etc. The list goes on and on.

7. Medical Care - We have the research centers for cancer research, the best burn centers and the top trauma units in the world, as well as other large health centers. The Houston Medical Center alone employees over 65,000 people.

8. We have enough colleges to keep us getting smarter: University of
Texas , Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Texas Christian, Rice, SMU, University
of Dallas , University of Houston , Baylor, UNT ( University of North
Texas ), Texas Women's University, etc. Ivy grows better in the South anyway. 
9. We have an intelligent and energetic work force, and it isn't restricted by a bunch of unions. Here in Texas , it's a Right toWork State and, therefore, it's every man and women for themselves. We just go out and get the job done. And if we don't like the way one company operates, we get a job somewhere else.

10. We have essential control of the paper, plastics, and insurance industries, etc.

11. In case of a foreign invasion, we have the Texas National Guard, the Texas Air National Guard, and several military bases. We don't have an Army, but since everybody down here has at least six rifles and a pile of ammo, we can raise an Army in 24 hours if we need one. If the situation really gets bad, we can always call the Department of Public Safety and ask them to send over the Texas Rangers. 
12. We are totally self-sufficient in beef, poultry, hogs, and several types of grain, fruit and vegetables, and let's not forget seafood from the Gulf. Also, everybody down here knows how to cook them so that they taste good. Don't need any food.

13. Three of the ten largest cities in the United States , and twenty- three of the 100 largest cities in the United States , are located inTexas. And Texas also has more land than California , New York , New Jersey , Connecticut , Delaware , Hawaii , Massachusetts , Maryland , Rhode Island and Vermont combined.

14. Trade: Three of the ten largest ports in the United States are located in Texas .

15. We also manufacture cars down here, but we don't need to. You see, nothing rusts in 
Texas, so our vehicles stay beautiful and run well for decades.

This just names a few of the items that will keep the Republic of Texas in good shape. There isn't a thing out there that we need and don't have.

Now to the rest of the United States under President Obama: Since you won't have the refineries to get gas for your cars, only President Obama will be able to drive around in his big 5 mpg SUV.The rest of the United States will have to walk or ride bikes.

You won't have any TV as the Space Center in Houston will cut off satellite communications. You won't have any natural gas to heat your homes, but since Mr. Obama has predicted global warming, you will not need the gas as long as you survive the 2000 years it will take to get enough heat from Global Warming. 

Signed,
The People of Texas

P.S. This is not a threatening letter - just a note to give you something to think about!

SLEEP WELL TONIGHT - THE EYES OF TEXAS ARE UPON YOU!!

JW Sues Fed for Records Detailing U.S. Taxpayer Bailout of European Banks

Why on Earth is our government sending billions upon billions of dollars overseas to bail out European banks? That question is at the center of a new Judicial Watch investigation as we continue our effortto force the Obama administration to come clean on all aspects of the ongoing bailouts - which began five years ago and, despite what some politicians may tell you, never really ended.  On Tuesday we sued the Board of Governors for the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), a committee within the Federal Reserve, for records detailing the Fed's December 2011 taxpayer-funded bailouts of European Banks.

 

But wait a moment... Didn't Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke sayin a December 14, 2011, meeting with Senate Republicans that he lacked the authority to use taxpayer dollars to bail out troubled European banks? Yes, he reportedly did just that. However, a "currency swap" program extended by the Fed on November 30, 2011, led to nearly $95 billion in loans to the European Central Bank in December 2011 alone. Let's take a look at how this "swap" works. Under what is known as a "temporary U.S. dollar liquidity swap arrangement," the Fed lends U.S. dollars to foreign central banks which then auction these dollars off to their local banks. The Fed's stated intent for initiating the program was to ease lending for European banks during the financial crisis. The Fed initiated the program in December 2007 and allowed it to expire in February 2010. In May 2010, the Fed rebooted the program and on November 30, 2011, extended it through February 1, 2013. This extension prompted a sharp increase from $400 million to $95 billion in loans in December 2011. How is this different from any other run-of-the-mill bailout? It isn't. And that's why we want to uncover as many details as possible about why these swaps are taking place and under what circumstances. On January 3, 2012, we submitted Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests seeking communications between the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, the FOMC, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the European Central Bank related to the November 30, 2011, currency swap extension. We also want access to records describing the justification for extending the currency swap program, as well as individual details regarding each swap transaction. Moreover, given that little information is available to the public regarding the identities of the recipients of currency swap funds, Judicial Watch also seeks, "any and all records identifying, describing, or setting forth the identity of any bank or financial institution and the collateral offered by the bank or financial institution," between December 5, 2011, through December 31, 2011. Here's why this last request is important, per Bloomberg: For all the transparency forced on the Federal Reserve by Congress and the courts, one of the central bank's emergency-lending programs remains so secretive that names of borrowers may be hidden from the Fed itself. As part of a currency-swap plan active from 2007 to 2010 and revived to fight the European debt crisis, the Fed lends dollars to other central banks, which auction them to local commercial banks...While the transactions with other central banks are all disclosed, the Fed doesn't track where the dollars ultimately end up, and European officials don't share borrowers' identities outside the continent. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York reports that, as of March 31, the European Central Bank had $33 billion in outstanding swaps. The secrecy of these arrangements has beencriticized by Gerald O'Driscoll, a former Vice President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, as "bailing out European banks and, indirectly, spendthrift European governments. It is difficult to count the number of things wrong with this arrangement." Regarding our basic FOIA request, the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the FOMC can't say it was "lost in the mail." The stonewalling is intentional. Both entities acknowledged receipt of our records request on January 3, 2012, and were required by law to respond by February 1, 2012. However, as of the date of Judicial Watch's lawsuit, neither defendant has submitted a lawful response to Judicial Watch's original FOIA request. Chairman Bernanke can dress it up in whatever language he chooses, but these "currency swaps" are nothing more than massive bailouts of European banks. That we have to sue to get basic information about this massive bailout speaks volumes about the dubious nature of this under-the-radar program. But this secrecy is not altogether surprising considering that we have had to sue the "super transparent" Obama administration for records related to the bailout/government takeover of U.S. companies. At this point, with trillions of dollars now committed to this Big Government takeover of the private sector, we still do not have any answers regarding the legal justification used to authorize the bailouts. No Congress voted to bail out Europe. And no president, let alone this one, signed a law authorizing such a bailout. From the beginning, the bailouts have been marked by contempt for the rule of law.  And, now, with a massive secret bailout of "Europe" underway, there seems to be no controlling legal authority for our nation's central bank and the politicians who refuse to seriously police the Fed's activities. Judicial Watch aims to change that and bring sunlight and the rule of law to this out-of-control government operation. From Judicial Watch, which we fully support here.

Will Government Motors go bankrupt again?

The Story No One Tells About One of America's Biggest Bankruptcies

The GM situation is a microcosm of what's gone wrong in our country. In the June issue of my Investment Advisory, I argued that the bankruptcy process resolved none of GM's core problems. The process was subverted by the political establishment, which sought to protect one class of citizen at the expense of the regional economy, GM's bondholders, and its customers. If we can't apply the rule of law and sound economics to fixing one of the world's most important manufacturing concerns… it doesn't bode well for anyone else being afforded these privileges, either. That's why it's so important for you to understand what happened. Most people simply don't realize that the bailout of GM wasn't a bailout of the company. It wasn't a bailout of its shareholders, who lost everything… or its bondholders, who lost almost everything. Where did the money go? To the union. The United Auto Workers (UAW) ended up with all the money. Let me show you how… GM slid into bankruptcy primarily because it couldn't profitably manufacture cars. (Yes, there were plenty of other issues, like too much debt, investments in subprime mortgages, etc. But the primary reason it couldn't solve these other problems was that it hadn't been making routine profits from manufacturing cars in about 20 years.) And the biggest single reason it couldn't profitably make cars was because its labor costs had soared. Well, guess what? At $56 per hour, GM still has the highest labor costs in the industry. The bankruptcy process didn't deal with the biggest financial hurdle GM faces, which is an enormous (and growing) unfunded pension liability. When the company entered bankruptcy, it owed $20 billion to the trust that was established to pay for the health care of its retired workers. Its pension program, with $100 billion in obligations, was also underfunded by roughly $10 billion. That's $30 billion in legitimate claims, which the union had to present to the bankruptcy court on behalf of GM's employees. It could have received a mixture of cash and equity in the new GM – just like any other unsecured creditor. But there wasn't really a bankruptcy court. Instead, there was Steve Rattner – "the Rat," as we call him – the crooked Democratic political operative under investigation for bribing New York State pension officials. Obama made him the "car czar." His job wasn't to fix GM. It was to deliver billions to the union and, thus, deliver Michigan for Obama in the next election. Bondholders at GM were owed $30 billion, too. A legitimate bankruptcy would have sold or liquidated the company's assets and split the proceeds between the two major claimants, the bondholders and the unions. GM had roughly $20 billion in tangible assets, plus probably another $10 billion in intellectual property. These sums could have either been liquidated or put into a new company, with the equity split between bondholders and unions. Not surprisingly, the current market cap of the new GM is $34 billion, right around the same number that could have been raised in a liquidation. The bankruptcy court should have given the unions roughly $15 billion worth of cash or new equity and the same thing to bondholders. Everyone would be square. And the company (or at least the company's assets) would have been freed from the stranglehold of huge debts and pension obligations. Taxpayers shouldn't have paid a dime in this process because, frankly, it's none of our business. Remember… the purpose of bankruptcy isn't to repay creditors. They're screwed. They're not getting all their money back because they bet on the wrong horse. That's how capitalism works. That's the price of liberty – you're free to make bad choices. The purpose of bankruptcy is to free productive assets from the burden of debts that can't be repaid or refinanced. We do this because it's good for society, not because it's good for creditors. Had the bankruptcy been handled legitimately, GM's assets would have ended up in the hands of better entrepreneurs. Its workers could have found new, productive jobs at a rate the market would bear. (Other carmakers are paying $47 per hour – these aren't bad jobs.) Yes, GM's retirees, its pension program, and its bondholders would have taken a hit. But they wouldn't have walked away empty-handed. They would have been the owners of a profitable company, operating debt-free and without the burden of almost endless obligations to a pension fund. But that's not what happened. Instead, the government injected an amazing $50 billion into the company and, at last count, has lost roughly half of it. How did taxpayers lose $25 billion on a company whose total tangible assets were only worth $20 billion? How did bondholders lose almost all of their $30 billion, too? And most importantly, how did our country end up with a GM that can't earn a genuine profit because of never-ending obligations to its pension fund? I think you probably know, dear subscriber. The Rat did what he was being paid to do. He delivered billions and billions of dollars to the union… amounts that will never be recovered… billions that will never be found. Here's what we do know about where the money went… Bondholders got 10% of the new GM – about $4 billion worth of stock at the time of the IPO. However, they weren't allowed to sell until much later, so that value dropped about one-third by the time they could have actually liquidated. Thus, bondholders ended up getting about 10 cents on the dollar. The unions, on the other hand, got paid 100% of the pension liability – about $10 billion, which was simply passed onto the new GM and has now grown to $13 billion. In addition, the union's health care trust got 17.5% of the new equity (worth about $6 billion), plus $9 billion in preferred stock and notes. These securities are not only worth more, but they will also likely end up with essentially all the company's cash flows for the next decade.  In total, the unions walked away with about $28 billion in cash and stock (out of $30 billion owed). Not surprisingly, that's almost exactly the amount of money that's gone missing from the government's accounts. The union also retained a position of absolute control over the company's earnings. In short, the unions got paid 93% of what they were owed and will likely continue to have a legal claim to virtually all of GM's cash flow. The bondholders got a few pennies. The taxpayers lost $25 billion. And GM still can't make a real profit. Bravo! I'm sure folks as virtuous, thrifty, and honest as the good people of the UAW will prove to be excellent stewards of GM's assets and reputation. Surely, GM's future has never been brighter. And Obama's legacy as the savior of Detroit is assured… By the way… the numbers above are all real. Most of the stuff you see reported about GM is not. There's a good reason for this, of course… The government continues to own a large portion of GM's stock, and GM is one of the largest advertisers in the U.S. Nobody wants to take on those two powerful interests. Take, for example, what Morgan Stanley's GM analyst, Adam Jonas, told the Wall Street Journal earlier this month… He claimed GM had gotten rid of 20% of its roughly $100 billion total pension obligation by spending only "$3 billion." Imagine if that were true! If the company was able to resolve $20 billion in obligations by spending $3 billion now, well… that would dramatically improve the financial standing of the business and probably double or triple its stock price. Strangely, that's not what happened. Instead, the credit ratings agencies warned they "might" have to downgrade GM's debt. And the share price continued to fall… I don't know Adam Jonas. And I don't know that the paper is quoting him fairly. But whatever the case, nothing could be further from the truth. GM unloaded $26 billion in future pension liabilities by contributing $25 billion in pension fund assets, $1 billion in cash, and paying $3 billion in an insurance premium. So what actually happened is that the company put virtually all of its earnings – $4 billion – toward its pension (again) and saw the total unfunded liability drop by a mere $1 billion, from $14 billion to $13 billion. Assuming the rest of these liabilities could be extinguished at the same rate, it would cost GM roughly $50 billion to wipe out all its remaining pension liabilities. Strangely, neither Jonas nor the Wall Street Journalsaw fit to mention that part… I'll leave you with these two simple questions… If we can't count on the media to keep us informed about the major problems of our country's most important companies… and if we can't count on the government (which still owns 26% of GM's equity) to deal with its pension obligations honestly and fairly… what does this say about the likely future prospects of GM? What does it say about our country? By Porter Stansberry

Does obama take responsibility for ANYTHING??

 Am I the only one that has noticed that this president needs a lesson in responsibility? Has anyone EVER heard him take responsibility for anything? Ok he has taken kudo's for things that were NOT of his doing, like the southern leg of the XL Pipeline and the fact that there are more oil rigs running now than ever before. Lets look at those 2 for a second:

• That leg of the pipeline has NOTHING to do with the federal gov. only the states. So even if he said no, it would go thru anyway!

• More oil rigs than ever-by his own words it takes 4-5 yrs. to come on line. Thank-you Mr. Bush. 

• Oil coming out of FEDERAL land has declined 20+% under his watch

• All those oil rigs are on PRIVATE and STATE lands, in which he has NO say period!

Those are just 2 and I could go on for hrs. Lately he has decided it is speculators that are to blame for the high price of gas. Are you seeing the pattern here? He blames everyone and everything on others. Now thats my kind of leader...leading from the rear! That is exactly what the office of President of the US is and has ever been! Read this from my fellow blogger, Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh:

Are Speculators to Blame?

Economic fear, intimidation, threats, empty promises, and glaring misinformation are some of the tools used to rally support for this administration’s failing policies and to pander to its voting base

The Obama administration masterfully manipulates the politics of fear and obvious misinformation through speeches and a compliant media to rally its voting base and to justify its destructive policies that have brought this economy and our country to its knees.

Are Republicans the reason why students cannot get affordable student loans? Is the federal government not in charge of the student loan program? Why is college tuition so high, textbooks and tiny dorm rooms so expensive? Why do college graduates have 25 percent unemployment under President Obama’s administration? What good is the ability to get a low interest college loan if you cannot find a job when you complete your degree?
Are oil speculators the reason why we pay high gas prices at the pump? Has President Obama not promised that under his watch energy prices will necessarily skyrocket, coal plants go bankrupt, and gasoline will rise to $10 a gallon, following the European model? Has Secretary of Energy Chu not stated, they must find ways to push gas prices even higher than the current price?
Supply and demand are crucial determinants of the price of oil. Other variables such as a crisis and turmoil in the Middle East can cause real oil shortages or increase the fear of shortages. That is why oil futures contracts were invented, bought and sold by speculators.
Speculators can estimate the demand for oil and plan accordingly. They can lose or gain money based on too much demand and little supply or too much supply and little demand. They buy futures contracts to smooth out unexpected price changes. They never take delivery of gasoline; they hold contracts worth 42,000 gallons each.
Keynesian economists agree that speculators sell protection from risk to other people and smooth out price fluctuations by purchasing oil when it is abundant and cheap, holding the contracts and reselling them when oil is scarce and expensive. Speculators, in this economic view, “play an important role in alleviating and even preventing shortages of oil.”
Independent oil producers and OPEC, the best-organized cartel in the world, can increase or decrease output. A cartel’s decision is always collusive and often counterproductive to the goals of our economy. U.S. makes cartels illegal within our borders, in the interest of the free market, but they are legal elsewhere.
Speculators make money by betting on price moves, some willing to take the risk and some willing to avoid it. The price of future contracts is influenced by political events, economic news released by the government, and natural disasters.
The government releases economic data, sells Treasury bills, or creates new policies that influence the price of futures contracts for both natural (oil) and financial commodities (derivatives).
Speculators themselves can have a temporary influence on commodity prices by a sudden demand for a contract either sparked by rumors, inside information, or other factors that drive the price up or down. (Kenneth M. Morris and Virginia B. Morris)
Speculators operate in a “zero sum market.” For every person who makes a dollar, another person loses a dollar. Speculators trade in order to make money, they are not interested in acquiring oil or holding it, they purchase contracts. Speculators gamble on price changes, they buy contracts when they think prices are low and sell when they think prices are high.
According to Kevin Freeman, oil-price manipulation by speculators on the futures market in 2007 when oil was $50 per barrel to $150 per barrel in 2008 occurred without a disruption in supply. Supply actually increased slightly. “Daily paper trades at the New York Mercantile Exchange were seven times higher than the actual oil used.” If you accounted for all other exchanges, Chicago, London, Dubai, other markets, trades of oil speculators may have been 50 to 100 times that of oil used. Producers and consumers had no change in production levels or consumption patterns.
Dr. Mark J. Perry, Professor of Economics and Finance at the University of Michigan, said, “Market forces, not speculators, are the main determinants of oil prices and all other commodity prices. “A large number of scientific studies have failed to produce any credible evidence that high oil and gas prices were caused by the presence of financial investors in oil futures markets.” 
“The Obama administration is mistaken in attributing high oil and gas prices to the presence of financial investors in oil futures markets.” (CNN editorial, Professor Lutz Kilian)
Joseph Kennedy (D-MA) argued that, because of speculators, “today’s oil prices of about $100 a barrel have become disconnected from the costs of extraction, which average $11 a barrel worldwide.” The fact that it is physically and economically impossible to extract oil for $11 a barrel is lost on Representative Kennedy. (John Hinderaker, Energy Policy)
Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) criticized the EPA’s “philosophy of enforcement” to “crucify” and “make examples” of oil and gas companies like the “Romans crucified random citizens in areas they conquered to ensure obedience.” EPA engaged in smear campaigns against natural gas producers in Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wyoming, claiming that the use of hydraulic fracturing caused water contamination, without providing scientific proof. After threats of steep fines and overt intimidation, the EPA backtracked, but the public’s perception of danger and fear was already entrenched. (Craig Bannister)
Economic fear, intimidation, threats, empty promises, and glaring misinformation are some of the tools used to rally support for this administration’s failing policies and to pander to its voting base. Are progressive Americans so dim, chanting gleefully in a propaganda style reminiscent of communism, eager to vote for the demise of their own freedom and economic independence? Are the taxpaying residents of Realityville, America hoping against all odds that they will out-vote the mesmerized and satisfied welfare recipients who want more communism?

The EPA is KILLING this country

The unelected, overpaid, self-proclaimed, law enforcing treehugger crew, the EPA [Employment Prevention Administration] and their red-tape, over-regulating, business strangling ways are killing this country and any hope of a recovery anytime soon! Read this from fellow Blogger, Alan Caruba:

We are witnessing the destruction of the nation by the environmental movement and the EPA has just provided you with the most dramatic example of that plan

The EPA Wrecking Ball

The Environmental Protection Agency is using its power to advance the objective of the environmental movement to deny Americans access to the energy that sustains the nation’s economy and is using the greatest hoax ever perpetrated, global warming—now called “climate change”—to achieve that goal.

“This standard isn’t the once-and-for-all solution to our environmental challenge,” said Lisa Jackson, the EPA administrator, “but it is an important commonsense step toward tackling the ongoing and very real threat of climate change and protecting the future for generations to come. It will enhance the lives of our children and our children’s children.”

This is a boldfaced lie. Its newest rule is based on the debasement of science that is characterized and embodied in the global warming hoax. It will deprive America of the energy it requires to function.
Since the 1980s the Greens have been telling everyone that carbon dioxide was causing global warming—now called climate change—and warning that CO2 emissions were going to kill everyone in the world if they weren’t dramatically reduced. The ball was put in motion with the United Nations 1997 Kyoto Protocols when many nations agreed to this absurd idea and carried forward by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ever since.
The Environmental Protection Agency was created to clean the nation’s air and water where it was deemed that a hazard existed. Like most noble ideas and most Congressional mandates, the initial language was vague enough to be interpreted to mean anything those in charge wanted it to mean. Add in the global warming hoax and you have the means to destroy the nation.
Now it means that the source of fifty percent of all the electricity generated in the United States is being systematically put out of business and please do not act surprised; that’s exactly what Barack Obama said he intended to do if elected President.
This is evil writ large.
Shutting down utilities that use coal, an energy source the U.S. has in such abundance that it could provide electricity for the next hundreds of years, and ensuring that no new ones are built fits in perfectly with all the Green pipedreams about “renewable” energy. Solar and wind presently provide about two percent of the nation’s electricity and, without government subsidies and mandates requiring their use, they would not exist at all.

• How stupid is it to not build more nuclear power plants when this form of power doesn’t emit anything but energy?
• How stupid is it not to use coal when the U.S. is the Saudi Arabia of coal?
• How stupid is it to begin to find reasons to regulate and thwart fracking, the technology to access trillions of cubic feet of natural gas that has been in use for decades?
• How stupid is it to cover miles of land, far from any urban center, with hundreds of solar panels or huge, ugly wind turbines that kill thousands of birds every year?

The sun does not shine all the time, nor does the wind blow all the time. In the event of overcast skies or a day without wind, traditional plants—those using coal, gas, nuclear or generating hydroelectric power—have to be maintained as a backup. Take away the coal-fired plants and there were be huge gap in the national grid.
Darkness will descend and Americans will begin to live with blackouts and brownouts that will undermine every aspect of our lives. It’s bad enough when a town or even a city briefly loses power because of a storm, but imagine that occurring on a regular basis because there just aren’t enough utilities generating power!
What kind of people stand by idly while its own government conspires to take away the primary source of energy that everything else depends upon? The answer? You. The answer is the many elected politicians that have done little to rein in a rogue government agency intent on undermining the nation by denying it the ability to generate power with the least expensive source of electricity, coal.
The EPA, an unelected bureaucracy, has just ensured that all Americans, industries, small businesses, and individuals will begin pay far more for electrical power.
Richard J. Trzupek, the author of “Regulators Run Wild” and an environment policy advisor for The Heartland Institute, said of the new rule, “With around 50,000 megawatts of coal-fired power set to be forcibly retired in the next few years—thanks to the draconian policies of Obama’s EPA—this rule ensures that no new modern, efficient coal fired power plants will be built to fill the gap.”
In a triumph of crony capitalism, Trzupek notes that “The big winner will be Obama’s good friend, GE Chairman Jeff Immelt. Since solar and wind cannot fill a 50,000 megawatt baseload gap, the only way to ensure continued reliability of the grid is to build a lot of natural gas-fired plants quickly. And who is the biggest supplier of natural gas-fired combustion engines? GE of course.”
If you think that environmental organizations like the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth, among many others, are seeking to “protect” the Earth, you are seriously mistaken. They have been among the leading opponents of coal and they have had allies in Congress such as the Majority Leader of the Senate, Harry Reid, (D-NV) who has said “Coal makes us sick. Oil makes us sick.”
NO! Coal provides the engine of our nation’s electrical power and oil provides the energy that fuels our transportation and is the basis for countless products that enhance and improve our lives every day.
We are witnessing the destruction of the nation by the environmental movement and the EPA has just provided you with the most dramatic example of that plan

Is the Government Going to Crash the Stock Market?

Trying to figure out where this president, a communist posing as a socialist is taking this country is becoming more clear after every campaign speech! He is following the direction of a scumbag called Saul Alinsky, page by page! 

• First- command the mainstream media, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, PBS and Bloomberg are already his left wing campaign broadcasters!
• Second- cause civil unrest across the country, obama, reid and princess pelosi have made it very clear they are behind the "occupy Wall St." anarchists!
• Third- make people dependent on government, we now have almost 50% of the population on some form of government subsidy in which they feel entitled. Try taking that away! 
• Fourth- crash the economy, well actions speak louder than words in this very ANTI-business, high taxing, regulation strangling administration!

We are now in the fourth and final part of this 100 year progressive campaign. It all started with the creation of the Fed, something our founders fought long and hard, tooth and nail to NOT allow to happen! Read this so you will know what is happening before most others:

Is the Government Going to Crash the Stock Market?

OK all you conspiracy theorists… dust off your aluminum foil hats and get out your J.D. Salinger novels. The government is going to push stock prices lower. The U.S. Treasury is going to be auctioning off another series of 30-year bonds on February 9. If this auction goes off like the last three have, stock prices are in for a rough time. Stocks sold off ahead of each of the three previous 30-year U.S. Treasury bond auctions. Now normally, I'm not a big believer in the government manipulation of stock prices. It probably does happen – just not to the extent that most of the folks in the "ham-radio" community think it does. But let's face it… The government needs investors to buy its bonds to help keep interest rates low. And what better way to encourage demand in bonds than to orchestrate a stock market selloff just ahead of a bond auction? Think about this… The government auctioned off $13 billion in 30-year bonds on November 10. The S&P 500 peaked above 1,280 just 10 days prior… and then bottomed at 1,230 the day before the auction. In December, the S&P 500 hit 1,260 early in the month. Then it declined 4% in five trading days… bottoming at 1,210 on December 14 – the day the U.S. Treasury auctioned $16 billion in 30-year bonds. January's action was less obvious. As all conspiracy advocates know, it's just like the government to try to be less obvious. Stocks didn't decline much ahead of the January 12 auction of $13 billion in 30-year bonds. But the market did fall hard the morning of the auction. So there you have it… Three auctions… three stock market drops. Interest rates have been rising recently as folks have taken money out of Treasurys in favor of better returns in the stock market. But the Treasury needs to somehow motivate investors to bid for at least $13 billion in 30-year bonds on February 9. I can't think of a better way to coax investors back into the Treasury market than to have stocks fall hard in the early days of February. Normally, it would seem absurd to think the government is actively manipulating stock prices. But given all the shenanigans the Fed has pulled over the past three years – and given the stock market action just before the past three bond auctions – it's almost absurd not to consider the possibility. The market is already poised for at least a short-term pullback. Investor sentiment (a contrary indicator) is overwhelmingly bullish. Stocks are extended to the upside after rallying 5% already this month. And the Volatility Index (or "VIX") is on the verge of reversing higher. The upcoming Treasury bond auction is just one more reason – albeit a bit of a conspiracy theory – to be a little cautious with stocks here. Of course, once we get the February 9 auction out of the way, the stock market rally can continue. And we can get back to more important things… like looking for President Kennedy's real assassin.

obama and the price YOU pay for gas

If you can remember when Senator obama was running for President, one of his major campaign promises was on the price at the pumps! He said that gasoline at $3+ a gallon was seriously hurting American business and how he would change that. The fact that this, along with almost every other promise he made is and was a LIE, should come as NO surprise after seeing how low he has brought this country in 3 very long, financially draining years. 

Under Bush the average price of a barrel of oil was $35 a barrel and gas averaged $2.10  a gallon, under obama it is $96 a barrel and $3.52 a gallon! Now I know that the POTUS has minimal power over the price of oil [this didn't stop the dems calling for the head of Bush on a platter when it briefly went to $144 a barrel, nor did they give him credit when he brought back down to $33 a barrel BEFORE he left office] but he has gone out of his way to keep gas ABOVE $3 a gallon. 

His EPA and tree-hugger supporters have gone out of their way to shut down every refinery expansion, nuclear expansion, pipeline expansion and are now moving against natural gas, fracking, and shale gas/oil development. He and his cronies have lost hundreds of billions of YOUR tax dollars on subsidies for windmills and solar panels and bio fuels. If you took away the bio-fuel subsidies alone the price of corn [which is in 1/2 the food products in this country] would fall by half and the money he is taking from big oil to help pay for this would take a $1.50 of the price of a gallon of regular gas alone.

Not only did he say we have to stop relying on hostile foreign countries for our energy needs [another lie] by turning down CANADA, our biggest trading partner proves this, he is keeping the price of fossil fuels deliberately high by making our new #1 export, .....you guessed it [or maybe not] FUEL! Here is the latest from Yahoo News:

In a first, gas and other fuels are top US export

For the first time, the top export of the United States, the world's biggest gas guzzler, is — wait for it — fuel.

Measured in dollars, the nation is on pace this year to ship more gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel than any other single export, according to U.S. Census data going back to 1990. It will also be the first year in more than 60 that America has been a net exporter of these fuels.

Just how big of a shift is this? A decade ago, fuel wasn't even among the top 25 exports. And for the last five years, America's top export was aircraft.

The trend is significant because for decades the U.S. has relied on huge imports of fuel from Europe in order to meet demand. It only reinforced the image of America as an energy hog. And up until a few years ago, whenever gasoline prices climbed, there were complaints in Congress that U.S. refiners were not growing quickly enough to satisfy domestic demand; that controversy would appear to be over.

Still, the U.S. is nowhere close to energy independence. America is still the world's largest importer of crude oil. From January to October, the country imported 2.7 billion barrels of oil worth roughly $280 billion.

Fuel exports, worth an estimated $88 billion in 2011, have surged for two reasons:

— Crude oil, the raw material from which gasoline and other refined products are made, is a lot more expensive. Oil prices averaged $95 a barrel in 2011, while gasoline averaged $3.52 a gallon — a record. A decade ago oil averaged $26 a barrel, while gasoline averaged $1.44 a gallon.

— The volume of fuel exports is rising. The U.S. is using less fuel because of a weak economy and more efficient cars and trucks. That allows refiners to sell more fuel to rapidly growing economies in Latin America, for example. In 2011, U.S. refiners exported 117 million gallons per day of gasoline, diesel, jet fuel and other petroleum products, up from 40 million gallons per day a decade earlier.

There's at least one domestic downside to America's growing role as a fuel exporter. Experts say the trend helps explain why U.S. motorists are paying more for gasoline. The more fuel that's sent overseas, the less of a supply cushion there is at home.

Gasoline supplies are being exported to the highest bidder, says Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst at Oil Price Information Service. "It's a world market," he says.

Refining companies won't say how much they make by selling fuel overseas. But analysts say those sales are likely generating higher profits per gallon than they would have generated in the U.S. Otherwise, they wouldn't occur.

The value of U.S. fuel exports has grown steadily over the past decade, coinciding with rising oil prices and increased demand around the globe.

Developing countries in Latin America and Asia have been burning more gasoline and diesel as their people buy more cars and build more roads and factories. Europe also has been buying more U.S. fuel to make up for its lack of refineries.

And there's a simple reason why America's refiners have been eager to export to these markets: gasoline demand in the U.S. has been falling every year since 2007. It dropped by another 2.5 percent in 2011. With the economy struggling, motorists cut back. Also, cars and trucks have become more fuel-efficient and the government mandates the use of more corn-based ethanol fuel.

The last time the U.S. was a net exporter of fuels was 1949, when Harry Truman was president. That year, the U.S. exported 86 million barrels and imported 82 million barrels. In the first ten months of 2011, the nation exported 848 million barrels (worth $73.4 billion) and imported 750 million barrels.

Why the Greatest Wealth Migration in U.S. History Has Begun

Democrats, unions and wall st. occupiers all have one thing in common: NONE OF THEM CAN SEE THE WRITING ON THE WALL! They treat the hard working, American dream following, so called rich like criminals! All I hear is how the rich need to pay their fair share. The so called rich are ALREADY pay ALL the tax. Dems want them to pay more! 

What is "fair" about that? With 50% of Americans paying NO Fed tax and collecting some form of government assistance, maybe THEY should pay something or shut up. You shouldn't be allowed to say anything or even vote Federally without some skin in the game! 

Closing tax loopholes will effect YOU much more than the wealthy and without corporate welfare, companies will leave...and they are. After all, these tax loopholes are just giving you back SOME of the money you have already paid. If you write off your mortgage, that is a loophole, if you get an Income tax return, that is a loophole! This is why a FLAT TAX will never pass, like Cain's 9-9-9 tax. When the 50% of people screaming at the rich to pay more, they want to be EXCLUDED from those very same loopholes. 

I think ALL tax shelters and loopholes should be closed. I think that welfare checks should be taxed just like unemployment and social security checks are. As for the latter two, you have ALREADY paid tax on that money! How fair is that? With that said, rich people, companies and employees that pay the bulk of all taxes have had enough and are leaving. The government is now facing bigger bills on a shrinking tax base, meaning they are bringing in much less money. The result is higher taxes on EVERYONE left combined with massive cuts in social programs. Also known as "austerity" it is the end of socialism. If we don't do something drastic quickly, we will become the biggest 3rd world country on the planet! WE will be the topics of future National Geographics and on the History Channel under "How was this allowed to happen"? 

Leaving has become so commonplace that there are now many books available on just how to do it LEGALLY! Read this report folks:

Five Strategies to Maximize
the Best Offshore Has to Offer

More than two decades ago, an interesting character with the nom de plume, “Bill Hill” wrote a popular escape manual for freedom advocates titled “PT—The Perpetual Traveler.”

Hill outlined his PT ideas with a five point plan “...for those,” he said, “with courage enough to pursue freedom.” He memorably illustrated his plan with something he called The Five Flags of Freedom.

Hill wrote: “People of intelligence and wealth owe it to themselves and their descendants to have more than one flag. No one with common sense should give all their assets or allegiance to just one.”

Confiscatory income taxes and suffocating government regulations have caused many independent-minded Americans and their European counterparts to seek new flags.

They are discovering that, as business owners, expatriates or tax exiles abroad, they need not belong to any particular country nor participate in its senseless policies and politics.

An individual’s relationship with government should be a matter of choice, an option. The passport you hold and the country where you live or were born need not determine your fate forever...

Why the Greatest Wealth Migration
in U.S. History Has Begun

Today, millions of the wealthiest and most productive Americans are leaving home to relocate various aspects of their lives in the best possible places.

They view governments as providers of facilities and services, like hotel keepers. If they offer good accommodation and make you feel comfortable and prosperous, you stay. If your government becomes too demanding or too nosey, or if a competitor offers a better deal, you can move on.

A few years ago, U.S. News & World Report confirmed, “A wave of native born citizens are going abroad in search of new challenges, opportunities, and more congenial ways of life.”

Some are seeking full-time residences... others find part-time tropical vacation homes where they can live like kings for $20,000 a year... while some move their businesses to slash their taxes.

No one government can or even should be trusted to control all your money. Experience shows us that government does not have your best interests at heart. Americans have learned with a vengeance how much politicians love to redistribute other’s wealth. In the end, they also will succeed in redistributing taxpayers. The major portion of all liquid private wealth, the smart money, already should have been moved offshore. As Bill Hill would say, it has been “re flagged.”

And these days, it’s not just the wealthy jumping ship. Every day, middle-class folks are re-flagging themselves to get the government they want and to gain access to economic opportunities that no longer exist in America.

Individuals can remove themselves from the control and jurisdiction of any government by acquiring dual citizenship, investing internationally and becoming human multinationals.

In order to accomplish this you have to arrange your assets according to the following simple outline:

Your Five Flags: A Strategy to Live as
Close to Government-Free as Possible

Flag 1: Second Passport and Citizenship: You should obtain citizenship and a second passport from a country that does not tax non-residents on their worldwide income. The U.S. taxes its citizens without regard to where they live in the world. Your second passport should be issued by a country that is unconcerned about its offshore citizens and their outside activities. It can act as the ultimate insurance policy during times of war, persecution and political upheaval.

Flag 2: Business Base: You need a place in which you can form a corporation or limited liability company and invest and earn money with minimal restrictions. This should not be where you legally reside, thus it excludes your personal fiscal domicile. Some countries grant free land, interest free loans or tax holidays to promote new local business and jobs with minimal regulation. Such places include the Cook Islands, St. Kitts & Nevis, Uruguay and Panama. 

Flag 3: Residence and Domicile: Obviously, the best place to live is where you’re happy. But as a practical matter it also should be a place with a territorial tax system that does not tax outside income. You should live in a tax haven with good infrastructure and communication systems where wealthy, productive people can be creative, live, relax, prosper and enjoy themselves, preferably with maximum bank privacy and a stable government. Panama, Monaco, Andorra, Singapore, Hong Kong, Liechtenstein, Austria and Switzerland should be considered.

Flag 4: Asset Management: In spite of all the negative publicity, Switzerland remains the world’s best place from which assets, securities and business affairs can be managed by proxy. It is one of the best for an offshore bank account, life insurance and annuities. The Swiss have highly competent independent financial managers, and there is little or no taxation of non residents or non citizens. Other possibilities include Austria, Luxembourg, Denmark, Liechtenstein and Hong Kong.

Flag 5: Playgrounds: These are places where you physically spend time, where quality of life is a top priority. Normally, because of legal restrictions on how long one can stay without being considered a resident for tax purposes, it is necessary to have several such places, although, depending on the place, legal and political deals usually can be made if you want to stay in one place. But for tax purposes, one should avoid spending more than 90 days per year in any one country. Factors here are matters of personal choice: climate, seasons, geography, leisure activities, culture, history, security and prices.

Stay Away from “Home”
To Maximize the Benefits

One point to remember: governments only have power and jurisdiction over their citizens when they are within their home territory or colonies. For this reason, one generally should stay out of the country on whose passport one travels. Your major financial assets should be invisible and far away from the country in which you actually make your home. And keep your lifestyle as unremarkable and humble as possible, never flamboyant and attention-getting.

By using the Five Flag strategy, you too can get the most out of life. Once you have your new second passport and money enough to survive comfortably at your chosen destination, security is yours.

American Exodus as Freedom Dies

If you think obama and his cronies aren't chasing millionaires offshore, think again! Not are they going offshore, they are giving up their citizenship in droves to avoid US draconian tax laws implemented by your beloved democrats! Their motto is lets spend $80 BILLION over 10 years to bring in $8 BILLION! Is this how you want your tax dollars spent?

American Exodus as
Freedom Dies

Growing numbers of Americans living abroad are renouncing their U.S. citizenship because of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) - not to mention the ever more burdensome and complex IRS reporting obligations that now come with the treat of financial and even criminal penalties.

The United States is one the few major nations that requires their citizens living abroad to pay income taxes. The only way to end that U.S. tax obligation is to terminate U.S. citizenship.

The latest statistics reveal that more than 1,500 Americans living offshore did just that. According to the Federal Register, that’s up from 743 people in 2009 and 235 in 2008.

Jackie Bugnion, director of American Citizens Abroad, a Geneva, Switzerland-based group, says the exodus is a backlash on the part of U.S. expatriates and the offshore financial sector to the radical IRS claim that its jurisdiction extends to every bank and financial institution in the entire world.

That extraordinary IRS claim is embodied in FATCA, and was adopted in 2010 by the then Democrat-dominated Congress as part of the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act and signed with approval by President Obama.

This law threatens foreign financial banks and financial institutions of all kinds with a 30% withholding tax if they fail to comply with an onerous reporting regime on their U.S. clients.

Dangerous to the U.S. Economy

No hearings were held on this radical proposal and few knew it was even contained within the pending bill - just as its sponsors wanted it.

This summer, American Citizens Abroad launched an international campaign to repeal FATCA, which they describe as “misconceived” and “dangerous for the U.S. economy.”

This complements a U.S. drive to repeal FATCA led by the Coalition for Tax Competition, of which The Sovereign Society is a member.

While the reaction of an increasing number of Americans has been to acquire a second passport and dual citizenship as a prelude to ending their U.S. status, numerous foreign banks have reacted by dumping existing American clients and refusing new ones.

As if the threat of FACTA were not enough, the IRS has an active prejudice against U.S. persons with offshore bank accounts and business interests, automatically assuming any American who dares to engage in offshore financial activity is probably a tax evader or worse.

Add to that prejudice the arbitrary application of a complex U.S. tax code, plus the attitude that the taxpayer is always guilty until they can prove otherwise.

Preposterous Claims

The IRS makes the preposterous claim that enforcement of FACTA possibly can produce additional tax revenues of US$8 billion over 10 years. At the same time, estimates of the cost of implementing FACTA run into hundreds of billions of dollars, plus at least $10 billion per year for filing requirements.

Nonetheless, in a rare instance of official sanity in July, the IRS announced that the original January 1, 2013 effective date for FATCA had been dropped.

Under the new IRS schedule, offshore private banks, which face the most onerous IRS requirements under FATCA, will not have to provide details on U.S. clients with accounts with more than $50,000 until 2014. Lower value accounts at private banks do not need to be reported until the end of 2014. Certain other accounts do not have to be reported until 2015.

No doubt what brought about this delay was the firestorm of anti-FATCA American public opinion and a chorus of protests, not only from the international financial and banking industry but also from foreign governments.

Canadian treasury officials have attacked FATCA calling it unworkable, far too costly and an unprecedented U.S. intrusion on their national sovereignty.

Typical of these foreign complaints was a prediction that if FATCA were imposed on The Bahamas that offshore financial center would drop most of its American clients.

Delay is not the answer to this colossal FACTA mess. Complete repeal is.

Much hinges on the outcome of the 2012 U.S. elections, not least of which is the freedom of Americans to do business where they choose.

The Clock Is Ticking...Occupy Pennsylvania Avenue

In considering the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) protestors who’ve been camped out in New York City’s Zuccotti Park for more than a month now, we should consider the words of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo L. Black in New York Times Co. vs. Sullivan, (1964): “An unconditional right to say what one pleases about public affairs is what I consider to be the minimum guarantee of the First Amendment."

The OWS “movement,” if it can be called that, seems to have been initiated by young Americans justifiably disenchanted with the economic and political state of America, using a generic straw villain labeled “Wall Street” that has some catchy validity.

As a friend of my youth and a founder of Young Americans for Freedom, David Franke, wrote recently:

“Ordinary Americans sense that we have been screwed by Wall Street every bit as much as by Washington, D.C., but instead of fighting together we have fallen into the perennial Right vs. Left trap of letting the ruling establishment divide us. The conservatives say Washington caused our meltdown, the progressives say Wall Street caused our meltdown. Only the Ron Paul Revolution understands that they are one and the same, with the Federal Reserve representing and empowering both Washington and Wall Street against the people.”

Wrong Street, Wrong City

I think OWS protestors should broaden their targets to include all the true culprits - the White House and Capitol Hill politicians of both parties who, in league with those big, bailed out banks, major corporations and unions, form a ruling oligarchy whose only guiding principles are plundering our nation’s economy for their own personal gain and the preservation of their own political power.

These are the oligarchs who run that system of which “Wall Street” is only a part.

Then too, there is the despicable bi-partisan revolving door by which Wall Street moguls slip in and out of major federal government posts from Secretary of the Treasury (Geithner, Paulson, Snow, O’Neill, Summers, Rubin, Baker and Schulz among others) on down, using their Washington tenure to shape policy to benefit Wall Street at the expense of most Americans who are excluded from this exclusive inner circle of inbred wealth and power.

Americans Know

Only a small percentage of the 312,455,336 souls alive in America don’t know or believe that this once great country is in grave trouble today. We all know that because each of us is a witness to the rampant political and economic rot and inequality.

Most Americans feel trapped, they foresee their children’s fate as even worse off than they are, and they are justifiably angry. A Timemagazine poll this week found that by 54% to 23%, the public approves of protests on Wall Street and beyond.

Four million American homes are in foreclosure, the real unemployment rate is about 16%, George Bush, Barack Obama and a complicit U.S. Congress wasted 10 trillion of our tax dollars on business and bank bailouts, while Wall Street rewarded itself with an astounding $160 billion in bonuses the year after the global financial crisis they helped to create.

The OWS protesters’ actions inevitably will end but they have achieved an important goal: they have put the issue of income inequality on the national agenda. Huge gaps between the top 5% versus the other 95% have been growing as a political issue for a long time and now it is coming to a head.

Meanwhile, the political cynicism OWS is protesting continues unabated, led by the hypocrite in chief, Barack Obama. The Democratic Party openly admits it is looking for ways to capitalize on OWS to help them in the 2012 elections as the Tea Party has helped the Republicans.

Convenient Class Warfare

Suddenly Obama newly discovers his sympathy for the OWS anti-Wall Street campaign - he who has been deep in the pockets of Wall Street slavishly doing their bidding. For a shocking, eye opening compendium of facts about Obama and his multiple and lucrative Wall Street ties, I seriously urge you to read Glen Greenwald’s account of this sordid tale of political incest financed by American taxpayers.

‎Two years ago I urged readers of my blog to review two articles from Rolling Stone that laid out the facts about just one Wall Street powerhouse, Goldman Sachs. It’s worth going back and reading them now:  The Great American Bubble Machine by Matt Taibbi, andObama's Big Sellout.

Fascinating reading, folks, and it will go a long way toward providing a better understanding of who owns Barack Obama and the U.S. government and what OWS opposes, whether it realizes it or not.

Obama made certain the big bankers knew he was and is their friend, even paling around with foreign bankers from the indicted Swiss UBS. His buddy system raked in millions in campaign funds from Wall Street and bankers, and in spite of some harsh words, the president has rewarded them handsomely - with billions in bailouts at the taxpayers' expense.

The Clock Is Ticking for America to
Solve Its Problems

What’s the solution? I wish I knew...

Since both political parties are deeply involved with and beholden to the system, it would seem the answer is a third party independent candidate who not only comprehends the enormous dimension of our problems, but has the courage to act to solve them, without regard to the financial powers that be. Another possibility is free market constitutional reforms to stop the current crony capitalism.

Among the current crop of preening political pygmies it seems to me only my old friend Ron Paul understands what needs to be done, but his age and some quirky ideas make him a punching bag for the liberal media and the Republican establishment.

Based on my close observation of the man and his beliefs, my candidate would be U.S. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida. But this dynamic young conservative is only 40 years old and by all calculations will not achieve national leader status for another 10 or 15 years.

Unfortunately, as Occupy Wall Street reminds us, America does not have that much time left to solve its problems. The need is immediate and acute.