WASHINGTON (NY Times)— The committee examining the causes of the financial crisis was poised Wednesday to focus on the subprime mortgage troubles that contributed to Citigroup’s near-collapse, with testimony from Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman, and several former senior Citi officials.
Watch online: http://cspan.org/Watch/C-SPAN2.aspx
Towne for Congress nearly surpassed the $16,390 fundraising total for all of 2009 by raising this total to $30,917. Towne for Congress has raised money from 653 donors, and when the candidate and the next top 5 donors are removed, the average from each donor is roughly $35.
The number of American citizens and green-card holders severing their ties with the U.S. soared in the latter part of 2009, amid looming U.S. tax increases and a more aggressive posture by the Internal Revenue Service toward Americans living overseas.
According to public records, just over 500 people world-wide renounced U.S. citizenship or permanent residency in the fourth quarter of 2009, the most recent period for which data are available. That is more people than have cut ties with the U.S. during all of 2007, and more than double the total expatriations in 2008.
An Ohio-born entrepreneur, now based in Switzerland, told Dow Jones he is considering turning in his U.S. passport. Mounting U.S. tax and reporting requirements are making potential business partners hesitate to do business with him, he said.
"I still do dearly love the U.S., and renouncing my citizenship is not something I take lightly. But more and more it is seeming like being part of a dysfunctional family," said the businessman, who asked that his name not be used for fear of retribution.
"The tax itself is only a small part of the issue," the Swiss-based entrepreneur said. "It's the overall regulatory environment."
by Chris Floyd | Empire Burlesque
So, thanks to Wikileaks.org, Americans now know that their soldiers often gun down civilians in occupied countries during reckless missions based on little or no intelligence (in every sense of the word). This will no doubt come as a great shock -- yea, a veritable political earthquake -- in a land where the top commander in what is now its chief war just recently confessed that his troops were slaughtering an "amazing" number of civilians who posed no threat whatsoever.
We all recall the vast hue and cry that greeted this astounding admission by Afghan top gun General Stanley McChrystal, who was hand-picked by the Nobel Peace Laureate himself to lead America's noble crusade to stamp out Muslim extremism in Central Asia by killing innocent Muslims all over Central Asia. No less than the New York Times its own self reported prominently on McChrystal's chilling candor. To be exact, the "Good War" general told his troops, by videoconference:
“We have shot an amazing number of people, but to my knowledge, none has ever proven to be a threat."
Remember how the Democrats in control of Congress rushed to set up special committees to investigate the murderous facts behind this admission of atrocity? Remember how the media went 24/7 on wall-to-wall coverage of the Potomac-churning aftermath of McChrystal's unprecedented mea culpa? Remember how the president himself held a special news conference to offer "America's sincere and shamed apology to the innocent victims we have killed so tragically in such amazing numbers"?
(sometimes a little sarcasm goes a long way..)
It is the policy of the Left that encourages racism and discrimination, not the Tea Party, and not the Conservatives.
We are not racists, we are not the ones that want our tax dollars going toward the killing of 1/3 of the black population before they have a chance to even be born. 1 in 3 black babies are aborted, and we are against funding or encouraging such a tragedy to continue.
Many of us do not support the incarceration of non-violent criminals for drug possession. Black males are disproportionately incarcerated at a much higher rate than whites for non-violent crimes.
We don't believe in special rights for any race, because we are all equal. I won't refer to anyone as a hyphenated American. We are all just Americans.
Skip to 12:40 if you'd just like to watch the interview.
by Thomas E. Woods | April 6, 2010
Over the past few years, but especially during the past several months, there has been an extraordinary revival of interest in Thomas Jefferson’s idea of state nullification of unconstitutional federal laws. According to Jefferson, if the federal government were to monopolize constitutional interpretation, it would of course interpret the Constitution in its own favor and consistently uncover previously unknown reservoirs of additional federal power. Only a fool would consent to such a system, thought Jefferson, and the peoples of the states were not fools.
Needless to say, nullification is nowhere to be found on the three-by-five card on which our betters have written out the range of allowable opinion, so it has been greeted with the usual hysteria from predictable quarters.
The latest, and to my mind most laughable, example comes from Sean Wilentz, a history professor at Princeton, writing in The New Republic. The subtitle of Professor Wilentz’s article "The Essence of Anarchy" is "America’s long, sordid affair with nullification." What Professor Wilentz omits in his alleged history of that "long, sordid affair" could fill an entire book, and indeed just weeks ago I announced the impending release of my own book on precisely this subject. (Nullification will cover the origins and theory of nullification, its forgotten nineteenth-century history, modern applications of the idea, and much else.) For now I’ll note the New England states that appealed to nullification (or interposition) against President Jefferson’s embargo, against what they considered the unconstitutional calling up of the New England militia during the war of 1812, against the use of military conscription, and against a law providing for the enlistment of minors.
Pretty "sordid," huh?
In addition to other examples, we might also refer to the legislature of Wisconsin, which as late as 1859 was quoting from Jefferson’s Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 in opposition to unconstitutional aspects of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. Sordid, I tell you. Here’s the text of a handbill that circulated in Milwaukee in the 1850s:
All the People of this State, who are opposed to being made SLAVES or SLAVE-CATCHERS, and to having the Free Soil of Wisconsin made the hunting-ground for Human Kidnappers, and all who are willing to unite in a STATE LEAGUE, to defend our State Sovereignty, our State Courts, and our State and National Constitutions, against the flagrant usurpations of U.S. Judges, Commissioners, and Marshals, and their Attorneys; and to maintain inviolate those great Constitutional Safeguards of Freedom – the WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS and the RIGHT OF TRIAL BY JURY – as old and sacred as Constitutional Liberty itself; and all who are willing to sustain the cause of those who are prosecuted, and to be prosecuted in Wisconsin, by the agents and executors of the Kidnapping Act of 1850, for the alleged crime of rescuing a human being from the hands of kidnappers, and restoring him to himself and to Freedom, are invited to meet at YOUNGS’ HALL, IN THIS CITY, THURSDAY, APRIL 13TH, at 11 o’clock A.M., to counsel together, and take such action as the exigencies of the times, and the cause of imperiled Liberty demand.
What’s that? A "state league" to defend "state sovereignty" on behalf of human freedom against the "flagrant usurpations" of the federal government? How sordid!
Do you suppose Professor Wilentz teaches that at Princeton? Does he even know about it?
Continue at: LewRockwell.com
Snip from the Associated Press:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the FCC lacks the authority to require broadband providers to give equal treatment to all Internet traffic flowing over their networks. That was a big victory for Comcast Corp., the nation's largest cable company, which had challenged the FCC's authority to impose such "Net neutrality" obligations on broadband providers.
The ruling marks a serious setback for the FCC, which is trying to adopt official Net neutrality regulations. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski, a Democrat, argues that such rules are needed to prevent phone and cable companies from using their control over Internet access to favor some online content and services over others.
The decision also has serious implications for the massive national broadband plan released by the FCC last month. The FCC needs clear authority to regulate broadband in order to push ahead with some its key recommendations, including a proposal to expand broadband by tapping the federal fund that subsidizes telephone service in poor and rural communities.
In a statement, the FCC said it remains "firmly committed to promoting an open Internet and to policies that will bring the enormous benefits of broadband to all Americans" and "will rest these policies ... on a solid legal foundation."
Comcast had no immediate comment.
The court case centered on Comcast's challenge of a 2008 FCC order banning the company from blocking its broadband subscribers from using an online file-sharing technology known as BitTorrent. The commission, at the time headed by Republican Kevin Martin, based its order on a set of Net neutrality principles it adopted in 2005 to prevent broadband providers from becoming online gatekeepers. Those principles have guided the FCC's enforcement of communications laws on a case-by-case basis.
But Comcast argued that the FCC order was illegal because the agency was seeking to enforce mere policy principles, which don't have the force of regulations or law. That is one reason that Genachowski is now trying to formalize those rules.
The cable company had also argued that the FCC lacks authority to mandate Net neutrality because it had deregulated broadband under the Bush administration, a decision upheld by the Supreme Court in 2005.
The FCC now defines broadband as a lightly regulated information service. That means it is not subject to the obligations traditional telecommunications services have to share their networks with competitors and treat all traffic equally. But the agency argues that existing law gives it authority to set rules for information services, including Net neutrality rules.
Tuesday's court decision rejected that reasoning, concluding that Congress has not given the FCC "untrammeled freedom" to regulate services without explicit legal authority.
With so much at stake, the FCC now has several options. It could ask Congress to give it explicit authority to regulate broadband. Or it could appeal Tuesday's decision to the Supreme Court.
Some interesting news have been revealed about Mary Sue Coleman and how she's on the board of directors for Johnson and Johnson, which makes smoking cessation products. One fellow student libertarian has been doing some research and giving out press releases got someone to write an article for the Michigan daily.
By Robert Soave, Michigan Daily
“The policy was made by the president. No one knows how this decision was made.” This was the comically honest response of Ken Warner, dean of the School of Public Health, to the question of who proposed the campus-wide smoking ban, according to The Michigan Daily.
It’s clear, then, that University President Mary Sue Coleman is the architect of the Smoke-Free Initiative, which will take effect in July of 2011. The initiative will prohibit smoking on all outdoor University property. Coleman and University administrators have been embarrassingly vague about why such a ban is necessary. Instead, they keep insisting that the smoking ban will improve public health.
Interestingly enough, the smoking ban may also improve Coleman’s salary.
That’s because Coleman isn’t just a college president. In her spare time, she moonlights as a businesswoman, sitting on the board of directors for major pharmaceutical company Johnson & Johnson, as well as the Meredith Corporation, a magazine publisher. According to Forbes.com, her position at Johnson & Johnson netted her an income of $229,000 last year.
Among Johnson & Johnson’s many marketed brands are smoking cessation products like Nicorette and Nicoderm — products that University smokers will feel encouraged to use once smoking becomes unwelcome on campus in July 2011. Indeed, administrators have already announced that smoking cessation products may be offered at discounted prices to students who are trying to quit.
Continue at Michigan Daily
The race for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination began at CPAC in February. We know this because of the torrent of vitriol against Ron Paul that gushed forth over the internet after his straw poll victory. Nearly everything that was thrown at him during the 2008 campaign returned with a vengeance, only compressed into about one week's worth of blogging, editorializing and talk show ranting. But after that first week, all mention of CPAC suddenly vanished. Everyone seemed satisfied with the conclusion that CPAC was a fluke--that Ron Paul had "packed the convention" with libertarians, teenagers and gays, and that there was no way he could do it again at the SRLC, which, as everyone agreed, would be the real test of who is a serious contender for 2012. Furthermore, it was just too early to matter--the presidential race hadn't really begun, which of course was a lie.
Nearly every candidate tried to pack CPAC. Mitt Romney certainly tried, as he had done the previous three years with much greater success. The only difference is that this year, thanks to a conservative base increasingly radicalized for freedom by an overreaching Obama administration, Ron Paul was able to do the best job of packing CPAC by exploiting a new favorable political environment. No Paulite claims that 31% of the Republican electorate is now in Ron Paul's camp. But neither does anyone believe that Mitt Romney's support is three times that of Sarah Palin, who received a measly 7% to Romney's 22%. Obviously, Mitt did his own convention packing--it just wasn't as good as Ron's.
But the consensus among the pundit class is that Ron Paul's CPAC victory was a fluke, and therefore that the straw poll was a false start for the 2012 presidential race. The new starting line is now the Southern Republican Leadership Conference this weekend. And that is why Ron Paul must win the straw poll.
So many are 'shocked by the wikileaks video' and some are thankful the MSM gave it a few minutes air time in between Tiger Woods and meaningless ad nauseum fluff that counts for reporting these days. They ONLY gave it air time because the INTERNET chatter forced them to do it.. NOT from any sense of journalistic integrity, obligation or moral outrage to inform the American people. I would like to see them give the following atrocities some coverage:
America the Pacified ~ Atrocities in Afghanistan
Excerpts..Read in full
If the U.S. public looked long and hard into a mirror reflecting the civilian atrocities that have occurred in Afghanistan, over the past ten months, we would see ourselves as people who have collaborated with and paid for war crimes committed against innocent civilians who meant us no harm.
*December 26th, 2009: US-led forces, (whether soldiers or “security contractors” (mercenaries) is still uncertain), raided a home in Kunar Province and pulled eight young men out of their beds, handcuffed them, and gunned them down execution-style...the boys aged 11 – 18, were just seven normal schoolboys and one shepherd boy. Following courageous reporting by Jerome Starkey, the U.S. military carried out its own investigation and on February 24th, 2010, issued an apology, attesting the boys’ innocence.
*February 12, 2010: U.S. and Afghan forces raided a home during a party and killed five people, including a local district attorney, a local police commander two pregnant mothers and a teenaged girl engaged to be married. A March 16, 2010 U.N. report, following on further reporting by Starkey, exposed the deception, to meager American press attention. Broad consensus among the press accepted this as a gracious gesture, with no consequences for the helicopter crew ever demanded or announced.
*February 21st, 2010: A three-car convoy of Afghans was traveling to the market in Kandahar with plans to proceed from there to a hospital in Kabul where some of the party could be taken for much-needed medical treatment. U.S. forces saw Afghans travelling together and launched an air-to-ground attack on the first car. Women in the second car immediately jumped out waving their scarves, trying desperately to communicate that they were civilians. The U.S. helicopter gunships continued firing on the now unshielded women. 21 people were killed and 13 were wounded. There was press attention for this atrocity, and U.S. General Stanley McChrystal would issue a videotaped apology for his soldiers’ tragic mistake.
by Doug Wead | MinistryValues.com
April 6, 2010
“Control the coinage and the courts, the rabble can have the rest.” - The Princess Irulan in Frank Herbert’s Dune.
With Tax Day coming up soon, Tea Parties are planned across the country. If you know of one in your area, let the rest of us know! Post the details in the comments section - city, state, time, location, etc.
Also, check here (thanks northstar):
This link is for the 15th, however you can click any date on the calender to see other events too.
Thanks for making the Daily Paul what it is!
"Reading between the lines" is not a skill taught in government controlled U.S. schools. But talk to people who grew up in totalitarian societies, such as Soviet era Eastern Bloc countries, or communist China, and you learn that the educated classes there were quite skilled in it. In a society in which industry and the press were controlled by the government, they had to be.
I was alerted to this in the early 1990's, just after graduating from college, when talking to a young Russian who had recently emigrated to the US. He mentioned it casually, and in my youthful ignorance, I was thankful that I didn't have to be so skeptical when reading my hometown paper, The Seattle Times. The message was driven home a few years ago when I was a little older, and perhaps a little wiser, when speaking to a Chinese-educated PhD scientist who escaped to the U.S. and eventually became an insurance salesman. (I was considering buying insurance from him.) He did quite well for himself and loved the unbounded opportunity that America presented to those who were willing to work hard.
At one of our meetings, we were discussing differences between America and China. One thing he said that I will never forget was, "America has the best propaganda system in the world. In China, the propaganda was very weak. You could easily spot the lies. But here, with all the newspapers and cable news shows, people actually believe it! It is incredible!"
The sheer amazement with which he said it made an indelible impression on me.
With that in mind, let's look at what America's 'paper of record, 'The New York Times' writes about the fine that the US is seeking against Toyota.
What is it about resistance to invasion and occupation that is so hard for so many Southern heritage supporters to understand?