Re: [POLITICS] Ron - Time is running out'

[Guest guest]

I just received this from Ron . These are some of the strongest words

I've seen him use.

Please do call your Congresspeople about this outrageous " bailout " proposal.

I was told by a staffer in my Congressman's office that they may vote on it

as early as tomorrow.

http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/

Of course, if you want to be looted in order to prop up some wealthy

banksters and if you want the Secretary of Treasury to have dictatorial

power over your money, do nothing.

----------------------------------------------

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Dear Friends,

Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media

assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being

taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster

is about to strike.

The events of the past week are no exception.

The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress' throat is not

just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of

our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is

still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare

of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago,

financial analyst Jim said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

made America more communist than China! " This is welfare for the rich, " he

said. " This is socialism for the rich. It's bailing out the financiers, the

banks, the Wall Streeters. "

That describes the current bailout package to a T. And we're being told

it's unavoidable.

The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that

only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it. But that has

become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those

responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences -

predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics -

are being let off the hook. The Federal Reserve System is actually

positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess!

.. The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in

mortgage-related assets at any one time. That means $700 billion is only

the very beginning of what will hit us.

.. Financial institutions are " designated as financial agents of the

Government. " This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.

.. Then there's this: " Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the

authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion,

and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency. "

Translation: the Secretary can buy up whatever junk debt he wants to, burden

the American people with it, and be subject to no one in the process.

There goes your country.

Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this " sadly

necessary. " Sad, yes. Necessary? Don't make me laugh.

Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American

people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially

indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind - another example

of the big choice we're supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes.

Now, with a backlash brewing, they're not quite sure what their views are.

A sad display, really.

Although the present bailout package is almost certainly not the end of the

political atrocities we'll witness in connection with the crisis, time is

short. Congress may vote as soon as tomorrow. With a Rasmussen poll

finding support for the bailout at an anemic seven percent, some members of

Congress are afraid to vote for it. Call them! Let them hear from you!

Tell them you will never vote for anyone who supports this atrocity.

The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about

responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media

have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are about

to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in

government? Do we care?

When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means

standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the

media?

Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and

what kind of country we shall be.

In liberty,

Ron

[Guest guest]

*On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Suze Fisher <suzefisher@...> wrote:

*

>

> * . Financial institutions are " designated as financial agents of the

> Government. " This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.

> *

>

To go along with this, for those interested in learning real history, not

taught in gov't schools or colleges, North has a good article laying

out FDR's New Deal and the long-term destruction it has caused:

http://www.garynorth.com/public/2279.cfm

" The story of the United States that is told in high school textbooks,

college textbooks, and virtually all monographs is that the New Deal was

necessary to overcome the Great Depression and overthrow Nazi and Japanese

tyranny.

The story assumes that what Roosevelt did was constitutional, or, if it

wasn't (sometimes grudgingly admitted by the textbook's author), then the

Constitution had to be scrapped by him in the twin emergencies of depression

and war.

There is no book that targets college graduates which tells the story of the

New deal as an illegitimate revolution against the Constitution. No

well-documented book shows that the New Deal's domestic economic policy was

a failure and also that its foreign policy was a conspiracy against the

public and the opposite of Roosevelt's explicit political assurances of

peace in the 1940 Presidential campaign. There are a few academic books that

admit even one thesis; none asserts both.

Until the New Deal is exposed as a conspiracy against Constitutional

liberties, liberalism will carry on without much resistance. Conservatives

will uncritically accept the New Deal, as Reagan did and as Newt Gingrich

does. As long as FDR is seen as a liberator and not as a conspirator against

liberty, citizens will remain captives of the worldview which FDR

represented: statist to the core. "

-Sharon

[Guest guest]

yeah. Ron is our saviour. We've gone down this road before.

> *On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 12:28 PM, Suze Fisher <suzefisher@...>

> wrote:

> *

> >

> > * . Financial institutions are " designated as financial agents of

> the

> > Government. " This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.

> > *

> >

>

> To go along with this, for those interested in learning real

> history, not

> taught in gov't schools or colleges, North has a good article

> laying

> out FDR's New Deal and the long-term destruction it has caused:

> http://www.garynorth.com/public/2279.cfm

>

> " The story of the United States that is told in high school textbooks,

> college textbooks, and virtually all monographs is that the New Deal

> was

> necessary to overcome the Great Depression and overthrow Nazi and

> Japanese

> tyranny.

>

> The story assumes that what Roosevelt did was constitutional, or, if

> it

> wasn't (sometimes grudgingly admitted by the textbook's author),

> then the

> Constitution had to be scrapped by him in the twin emergencies of

> depression

> and war.

>

> There is no book that targets college graduates which tells the

> story of the

> New deal as an illegitimate revolution against the Constitution. No

> well-documented book shows that the New Deal's domestic economic

> policy was

> a failure and also that its foreign policy was a conspiracy against

> the

> public and the opposite of Roosevelt's explicit political assurances

> of

> peace in the 1940 Presidential campaign. There are a few academic

> books that

> admit even one thesis; none asserts both.

> Until the New Deal is exposed as a conspiracy against Constitutional

> liberties, liberalism will carry on without much resistance.

> Conservatives

> will uncritically accept the New Deal, as Reagan did and as Newt

> Gingrich

> does. As long as FDR is seen as a liberator and not as a conspirator

> against

> liberty, citizens will remain captives of the worldview which FDR

> represented: statist to the core. "

> -Sharon

>

>

[Guest guest]

On 9/25/08, Gene Schwartz <implode7@...> wrote:

> yeah. Ron is our saviour. We've gone down this road before.

I heard that Ron was on the show once. I would ignore

this information about the bailout. It is really a quack conspiracy

theory -- there is no bailout.

Chris

[Guest guest]

-------------- Original message ----------------------

From: " Masterjohn " <chrismasterjohn@...>

> On 9/25/08, Gene Schwartz <implode7@...> wrote:

> > yeah. Ron is our saviour. We've gone down this road before.

>

> I heard that Ron was on the show once. I would ignore

> this information about the bailout. It is really a quack conspiracy

> theory -- there is no bailout.

>

> Chris

Of course, as usual even your jokes contain distortion. I've never at any time

said or implied that I'm for this bailout, especially as currently constructed.

[Guest guest]

> > *

> > >

> > > * . Financial institutions are " designated as financial agents

of

> > the

> > > Government. " This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.

> > > *

> > >

> >

> > To go along with this, for those interested in learning real

> > history, not

> > taught in gov't schools or colleges, North has a good

article

> > laying

> > out FDR's New Deal and the long-term destruction it has caused:

> > http://www.garynorth.com/public/2279.cfm

> >

> > " The story of the United States that is told in high school

textbooks,

> > college textbooks, and virtually all monographs is that the New

Deal

> > was

> > necessary to overcome the Great Depression and overthrow Nazi

and

> > Japanese

> > tyranny.

> >

> > The story assumes that what Roosevelt did was constitutional,

or, if

> > it

> > wasn't (sometimes grudgingly admitted by the textbook's

author),

> > then the

> > Constitution had to be scrapped by him in the twin emergencies

of

> > depression

> > and war.

> >

> > There is no book that targets college graduates which tells the

> > story of the

> > New deal as an illegitimate revolution against the Constitution.

No

> > well-documented book shows that the New Deal's domestic

economic

> > policy was

> > a failure and also that its foreign policy was a conspiracy

against

> > the

> > public and the opposite of Roosevelt's explicit political

assurances

> > of

> > peace in the 1940 Presidential campaign. There are a few

academic

> > books that

> > admit even one thesis; none asserts both.

> > Until the New Deal is exposed as a conspiracy against

Constitutional

> > liberties, liberalism will carry on without much resistance.

> > Conservatives

> > will uncritically accept the New Deal, as Reagan did and as

Newt

> > Gingrich

> > does. As long as FDR is seen as a liberator and not as a

conspirator

> > against

> > liberty, citizens will remain captives of the worldview which FDR

> > represented: statist to the core. "

> > -Sharon

> >

> >