Let me begin with the first part. The Cloward-Piven Strategy was developed by Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, two professors from City University of New York. The strategy involves overwhelming the welfare system to effect social change. The idea is to attract as many people as they can to apply for welfare, and subsequently overwhelm the provisions of the welfare program to societal collapses. The outcome would be to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the system with unattainable demands by the recipients of the welfare system. The idea behind is comes from none other than Saul Alinsky, who asks his believers to "make the enemy live up to their own book of rules" (welfare program). The left idea of using the rules set by law against the "system" to break it down. This sounds frightening compared to what is happening today. Mr. Obama wants more people to be eligible for welfare. Why would he want that? To help them out? Considering this strategy, I think not.

Who is Richard Andrew Cloward? Well he was a socialiologist and activist who taught at Columbia University School of Social Work. He was known for influencing social policy through grassroots efforts with the poor. He also wrote various books regarding social reform. He was also the founder of HUMAN SERVE (Human Service Employees Registration and Voters Education)group. This group was instrumental in getting National Voter Registration Act (Motor Voter Act)of 1993 by Bill Clinton. Mr. Cloward and his wife were guests of Mr.Clinton for this ceremony.

Who is Frances Fox Piven? Frances is a professor of Sociology and Political Science at City University of New York. She, like Cloward, was very involved with the poor and their rights to vote and get involved with politics. She co-founded Human SERVE and helped develop the Motor Voter Act.

So, how did they get from professor's helping the poor to a strategy to overthrow capitalism and cause a revolt through militant activities such as taking over welfare offices? They enlisted a militant black activist, George Wiley. George Wiley hired foot soldiers to storm welfare offices demanding what the welfare system owed them. Apparently, not in a peaceful way.

George Wiley created the predecessor of ACORN: the National Welfare Reform Organization. Mr. Wiley was the mentor of Wade Rathke, the creator of ACORN, and was also part of The Shadow Party, which was founded by George Soros and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The Shadow Party is a group of nonprofit companies and activists that promote liberal ideologies.

So? Relevance? George Wiley used "thuggish" methods to storm welfare offices in order to get as many benefits from the program as they could. So, from Cloward-Pevin to George Wiley to NWRO to Wade Rathke to ACORN to Mr. Obama's use of ACORN to help him get elected. By fraud? No, but by intimidation.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6967
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_the_strategy.html

It would probably surprise you how many people think that socialism is dead and by relation communism is dead. Here are a few organizations that might surprise you:

Marxist.org
cpusa.org
Socialist Party of America
Socialist Labor Party of America
Socialistpart-usa.org
Vote-socialist.org
Groups.yahoo.com/groups/nsmamerica
Spmichigan.org

Only, like, 6 socialists? If each of these groups has ONE member, there are at least 8! Even our current president used to be a member of the New Party in Illinois (1). Although it is now defunct, the history of the New Party was described as socialist democratic (2).

The younger generation of today has either been misinformed or not informed about people like Mussolini, Hitler, and other ruthless rulers that have tried to take over countries, some succeeding but defeated in the end. The younger generations do not know or remember the atrocities committed toward innocent people. With our politically correct environment, innocent is relative to who you are (holocaust deniers).

Hundreds of United States soldiers died to keep these socialist leaders at bay, to keep the world safe. There are those who would say Hitler did a good thing or Hitler was misunderstood. Everyone is good, but it is their environment that caused them to do evil things. That debate has been around for a long time. In the end, our politically correct environment justifies all murder, including abortion.

People do not seem to remember the deaths that seen by their grandfathers/mothers or great-grandfathers/mothers were real people and died for a cause. There are arguments whether FDR did a good thing or bad thing by growing government. The war is what saved the country. The war made people come together and work together to save their world and their country. Working together in a bipartisan way is the answer to saving our country now.

So many people are uninformed or misinformed and cannot believe that socialism could actually happen. Now, there are so many reports about what companies have to do in order to take part in the bailout money. A lot of the requirements are giving the government power over the businesses (control of the means of production). There was also a story I read saying that newspapers are looking for a bailout. The government again would have requirements of what the newspapers do (state controlled media).

We are quickly sliding into a socialist country, beginning with Medicare and Social Security. One person said that as long as children have medical coverage, they wouldn’t care if the country is socialist. This is the uninformed or misinformed attitude that permeates our culture today.

We need to keep our eyes open and educate ourselves on socialism and communism. The political ideas are still alive and wanting to take over. The people during the Revolutionary War fought and died to break away from England. 200 plus years later, Europe is our ideal continent?

Some in the federal government do not represent us anymore. They represent their lobbyists and their friends. We, the people, their bosses, need to be represented, and representation should not include taking federal tax payer money and giving it to a particular state (pork) for a rail system. Why would I want my federal tax money to go to a rail system I won’t even use?

1. http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2008/01/obama-file-4-obama-was-endorsed-by-far.html
2. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26913

The last two Presidents have made use of this tool and it works.

President Bush used it to get the debate on the first TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program). Bailout over with and a vote cast before 'it was too late'. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said this 'must' get passed or the economy will face complete ruin. We simply cannot wait or it will be too late. After a quick recess for 2 days, they then voted and the TARP bill passed.

President Obama (President Elect, at the time) said on many occasions that 'this is the worst economy since the great depression' and 'something must be done now', just like the President before him. Now that he is the President, this continues as he goes back on the campaign trail selling his 'Economic Stimulus Package' to the masses. Once again in both Indiana (a town devastated by the loss of the RV industry, yet he fails to state which party was the main cause of that) and Florida, we hear President Obama talking down the economy and instilling fear into the masses that if this bill is not passed we could face economic ruin.

Nancy Pelosi again adds to the fray by stating that every month this bill does not pass 500 million Americans will face unemployment. The fact there are only about 300 million Americans on the planet doesn't seem to bother her, though. The key here is that since Timothy Geithner announced his TARP II, the stock market has dropped almost 300 points. Since Obama (who stated before the election that he would not use 'the politics of old') became the President, the market has done little to correct itself.

As strange as it may seem, the markets are reacting to what the President and government are saying. I'm not saying its the main reason, but they are being affected. If you hear the leader of the free world state how bad the economy is and that if government doesn't take action soon it will 'be the end', how would you feel?

My guess is that you are scared for the future. My guess is that you are holding off doing anything with your money. My guess is you are cutting back, saving money, and riding out the storm.

Now, what if the President stopped saying it was 'SOOOOO' bad, and laid off of the doomsday predictions? What if Obama stopped saying 'government is the only one who can solve this crisis' and started being more positive?

I know so many are saying that, if he did that, he would just be covering up the truth and lying. I can completely understand that, and we don't want a liar for a President, but being so doom and gloom, I believe, is actually keeping the markets down and keeping people scared. What if Obama said it was bad, as bad as it is, but then said we as Americans can get through this. Do not be beaten into submission by what the media says. Do not hide under the bed and wait, we need to get out there, and build on this economy. I know you're scared, and I know you're uncertain, but if we just sit back and do nothing it will get worse.

If you weren't so scared and uncertain, what would you be doing? I personally believe that if people weren't so scared, that they would be out spending in the shops and the economy would be on the up. But with Obama and Pelosi both stating 'this is terrible, its the worst economy since the great depression, we need to spend $1 trillion to fix it, and only government can do it. All I see are scared faces waiting for government to fix it. Truth be told, government caused this and will make it worse with spending their way out of it.

Government is not the 'only one' who can fix this. Look back into history around the time of the Great Depression.Why, in other countries, is it called 'the depression', when in the US its called the 'Great Depression'?

One answer: GOVERNMENT!!

The government programs put forth to 'save the economy' actually prolonged the recession into a long depression. What do we all see at the end of the 'great' depression? World War II. Come forward in time to President Carter. As he was leaving office and Ronald Reagan was entering office, the US was in a deep recession. We've all heard about the high interest rates, gas lines, and unemployment, etc. How did the US get out of that? Ronald Reagan cut taxes, plain and simple. (well obviously he did more, but this is the main factor in growth). Due to this revenues to the government were increased, new jobs were created, and American businesses had more money in 'their' pockets to put back into the economy.

So looking back over history, government spending has prolonged a recession (into a Great Depression), yet tax cuts have helped grow the economy and recover.

As the government votes on the now approximately $800 billion 'stimulus' package, Americans can expect to see about $13 a week extra in their paychecks. Then, come January 2010, this will drop to $8 a week if you make under $75,000 a year. The majority of this $800 billion is not geared towards 'stimulus', but toward more spending what can anyone do with $13 a week?

If government cut your taxes as well as taxes on business....what could you do with more of your own money each month?
Spend more? Invest more? Expand your business more?

What's the difference here? Obama is stating tax cuts won't work and 'only' government can resolve the crisis. This is flat out, and the fear within his statements is making us more reliant on government, making us hold onto our money so the market cannot recover, and furthering the policies hidden with the $800 billion bill (Government controlled health care is one of them, but that is another topic).

In the last few days, it was reported that spending was up 1% and the housing market has picked up. Be very careful how this is interpreted. So far, nothing has been 'done' by Obama and his administration to aid the economy. So, if the market is indeed correcting, then it is a natural correction. We will, of course, hear people say that this is due to government, but be careful.

Do not listen to the fear being broadcast to us by those in Washington. Evaluate your own circumstances, spend and save based on your own thoughts and feelings, and America will recover without government take over.

You are who you are, do not be a part of 'the masses'.

I, for one, will not be participating in this recession.
Everyone else is free to decide, but I'm sitting this one out.

The Arrogance of Power - FEAR! - Tony Leach

Sources of Interest
Reagan Economics - 'Reaganonics'
Fiscal Policy

Not everyone knows history as in-depth as others. Some only get an inkling of our past and those some rely on what's termed “common knowledge” for conversation. Tidbits like the stock market crash created the Depression or that Hoover was a free marketer. When asked to explain how they know this, they defer to the higher ups who taught them or told them. The ever-dwindling knowledge of history leads to our current predicament: the passing of the “stimulus” package.

Faking history for political gain is not a left-wing or right-wing trait. Politicians of all stripes, colors and animal symbolism tweak or outright massacre history to get their agenda made into law. In today's case, its been the Democrats and the left who have fudged history so badly that it is a complete one-eighty of reality. To get a $800 billion dollar “stimulus” package past a skeptical public, one has to make that public believe that government spending in a time of recession works and that free market solutions will only lead to more misery. The Dems and the left link today's problem with the Great Depression, a free market President Bush with free market President Hoover (in reality, both believed in harnessing the government for economic ends) and the prosperity of the late 1940s with the stimulus package's spending (the 1940s had war spending, the Dems want social spending). On their faces, these comparisons are false because the “common knowledge” history they are based on are false.

For example, today's credit crisis was a gradual downturn that began with the decline in the national housing market. That downturn was accentuated by the government mandated practice (Community Reinvestment Act) of lending to high-risk, minority borrowers looking to get a home. In turn, those high risk borrowers were given interest rates and/or mortgage plans in accordance with there bad/lack of credit. Adjustable rate mortgages and interest-only loans dominated the housing market and those mortgages were then turned into securities by the banks and traded (an idea, while free market in principle, is just stupid). When the high risk borrowers turned out to be exactly what their credit score said they were the market slumped. Those defaulted loans made those traded securities worthless, and the banks that hedged their books on those securities went down as well. For the most part, the Great Depression began as a unusually hard recession, but was amplified. Not by greed. Not by capitalism. In fact, it was government. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act leveed heavy costs on imports. In retaliation, the world did the same. World trade died, money dried up and the global economy shrunk. Not because of free flow of capital, but of government restriction of it.

Contrast this history with the “common knowledge” pontificated by our dear Congressional Democrats and the media. Speaker of the House Pelosi attacks Wall Street and invokes the myth capitalism broke America. Congressman Barney Frank, the man behind the financial regulation committee, calls Wall Street bonuses bribes when, as Congress's financial honcho, he should know that Wall Street firms pay their employees through a meritocracy, with yearly bonuses taking place of commissions. Even President Obama railed on the country's financial core for its immorality and blamed free markets at the same time his nominations for Health and Human Services and Treasury have major glitches in their tax payments. All this sounds a little bit populist and little less historic.

One can't be blamed for thinking the Democrats are trying to take advantage of our state-amplified downturn to light a populist fire. The “stimulus” package has more to do with expanding government, the biggest cause of our current position and a Democratic baby, than with economic growth. When there is more money going towards broken entitlement programs than small business tax cuts; when there is more money going to Washington renovation than to corporate tax cuts (our corporate taxes are one of the highest in the world), there is certainly something very rotten in Denmark.

There will come a time in American history when a radical shift is needed. During the Cold War, it came under the name of Ronald Reagan, confrontation and offensive liberty. With our concerns more focused on ourselves than our external Islamist enemy, we need to have a radical shift in perspective again. We can no longer hold ourselves up with a dollar losing its value due to our debt. We can no longer live on promises of paying back the future generations. We can no longer try to keep ourselves afloat on half-baked pseudo-economic theories (I'm looking at you, Keynesians!) that promise to keep us exactly where we are with little consequence.

To live through adversity, you must lose something.

To escape the fire, you must get burned.

To be able to prosper economically, you must first scrape the dead ideas and dead industry from your nation and then fuel growth with free-flowing capital. You can't do that by bailing out California's irresponsible legislature or rolling back every reasonable welfare reform made by Newt's Republicans.

The only way this “stimulus” and its base idea gain traction is by someone or something taking advantage of a lack of education and using it for their political ends. This is exactly what the Democrats have done with the public school system's failure to educate its wards in accurate history. I learned what I have from using my own to feet to take me to the local library or to the book store so I could buy books recommended by actual economists (check out Amy Shales) and actual historians, not by failed comedians-turned-mouthpieces. I used my common sense and an open mind to revise my world view. I did not cry like a baby when the “common knowledge” perceptions drilled into me by mothering teachers and politicians were challenged.

I, like any self-respecting independent human being, learned.

All it takes is the idea that politicians and pundits are wrong.

I don't think that's a concept that's hard to understand.

BY: MIKE PORTER

All economists agree America is currently in a recession. Whether this turns out to be the second coming of the Great Depression remains to be seen, but America is in a serious recession nonetheless. Barack Obama has said, “Failure to act on an economic recovery package could plunge the nation into a long-lasting recession that might prove irreversible.” (1) Our government and the Federal Reserve Bank (Fed) work endlessly to prevent recessions from happening. In most cases, they work too hard to try to prevent them. Few people truly understand what a recession is and what the effects are in the long term. Can our government and the Fed prevent recessions from ever happening? If we do find our country in a recession, what can be done to get us out of it? Do recessions really mean the end of prosperity? The truth is recessions do provide a lot of opportunities, and our government can do very little to prevent them.

What is a recession? A recession is defined as two consecutive quarters of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) decline. When GDP begins to contract, that means the economy is beginning to shrink instead of grow. Businesses and consumers become fearful and hold onto their money. Many may choose to pay down debt instead of expanding their business or purchasing unnecessary goods and services. Businesses holding the line on expenses will tend to cut back on purchasing supplies and even cut back on employees if demand for their product is down. Unemployment goes up as consumer demand falls. Some companies will go out of business and salaries drop as people who are unemployed scramble to find new jobs.

How can recessions be good for anyone? Well for starters, recessions are a time for lagging and mismanaged companies to decline or in some cases, go out of business. While this is hard on the employees who used to work there, it does provide opportunities for the companies who survive as well as opportunities for new companies to start up. Less competition in the market means companies who do not go out of business will start to see some additional revenue with existing customers spread out among fewer firms. A company going out of business in a recession can actually save the other companies in the industry. In some cases, the remaining firms will hire some of the people who lost their jobs to keep up with demand. Some companies are counter cyclical, which means they tend to do more business during recessions than during thriving economies. Some examples of counter cyclical companies are private education companies, service and repair businesses, firms that deal with the bond market, some law firms and mortgage companies. When the government tries to prevent a recession, the government is really telling counter cyclical companies they aren’t allowed to prosper. Doing so could put industries like these in jeopardy and can actually make the effects of a recession more severe.

When a recession begins to loom, the Fed reacts by lowering interest rates and increasing the money supply. The Fed is hoping people and businesses will take advantage of the low rates. Many people use these attractive rates to consolidate debt or refinance their home. Prices tend to come down because demand for goods and services drop. Oil prices have fallen considerably since last summer’s peak of $140 a barrel because of lower demand. For the investor, stocks drop in price and allow the opportunity to buy more stocks at or below what they are really worth. Many investors say recessions are the best time to buy stocks or invest in stock related funds. Those who wish to protect short-term investments will find bond and currency markets may improve as investors look for safe places to put their investments.

A recession is really a normal part of a cycle and unfortunately cannot be stopped. This cycle is known as a business cycle, and these cycles happen regardless of what our government does. Although recessions can be painful for many, they are necessary for any market in the long run. Even the best managed companies in the world do not have record profits every quarter. A recession is the market’s natural ability to keep prices in line when price levels get too high. For example, back during the dot com boom during the late90’s, demand for dot com and tech stocks went through the roof due to Y2K. Dot com and tech stocks were sky high and continued to grow even though most of them had never showed a profit. After the year 2000, the market began to lose patience in the technology industry, which was beginning to slow after Y2K. The market dropped and worsened after the 9/11 attacks. Prices for dot com stocks were too high during the boom so the market shifted and began to sell off their interest. Many dot com companies went under and, as a result, the economy began to slip into a recession. This is an example of the tech stock market correcting itself, and a short recession kicked in after years of prosperity. Demand for Information Technology services slowed after the private sector spent billions on Y2K prevention. After the dot com fallout, the economy eventually recovered and prospered for many years after. This is a perfect example of an economic boom followed by a bust which eventually recovered.

What can our government do? Well in most cases our government can only prolong, speed up the arrival, or make a recession worse. Look no further than FDR for a great example of how big government policies caused the depression to linger (See my previous article titled “FDR’s New Deal Made the Depression Worse”). Our government can only cut taxes and try to create a business environment that is friendly for entrepreneurship and investing. The rest is up to the private sector to recognize and take advantage of that environment. If the market is due for a correction, the market will correct itself and a recession will ensue. Nobody is above the market and markets cannot be controlled by any politician. If an economy enters a recession, eventually market prices will get low enough to where it will be worth the risk to invest again. Once this starts to happen, the market will begin a recovery on its own. Government trying to stop business cycles is just as ridiculous as trying to stop waves in an ocean. The more they try to intervene, the worse the economy will become. That being said how many politicians would say this: “I’m not going to do anything about the economy. I am going to stay out of it because I don’t understand the private sector and I do not want to make it worse. Instead I would like to wait for the economy to correct itself.” I will show you a politician who will lose their election or get forced out of office.

Obama and Pelosi’s stimulus package will be no different than FDR’s New Deal and will make the current recession worse. This stimulus bill, along with most stimulus bills, will do nothing to encourage investment by the private sector. No government program can force the private sector to invest in any economy. Investment has to happen naturally when the investor decides the rewards for a profit outweigh the risks involved. Instead of creating complicated tax incentives and expanding government at the expense of tax payers, it would be nice if all politicians took some time to study the free market and how well it can work with limited government intervention. Our government does not understand that a recession is as much a part of a healthy free market as an economic boom. Trying to bottle up and prevent a recession can actually be harmful to the long term economy. An economy due for a correction is natural and will always correct itself whether our government likes it or not.

(1) http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090205/ap_on_go_pr_wh/congress_stimulus_126

With Senator Patrick Lahey of Vermont hoping to spear President Bush with a thousand needles of so-called war crimes [1], it has become apparent even those privy to the procedures and effectiveness of our intelligence gathering lack the gray matter to properly understand it. For years, pretty much from 9/12, President Bush was attacked by the far left on the treatment of terror suspects. As we took the Global War on Terror to Saddam's spider hole, the liberals and the Democrat party as a whole began to take on the arguments of the far left and were quick to accuse the president and the military of torture. A word used way too much these days by people who don't know what it is.

The method of interrogation targeted by the antiwar crowd has been water boarding. Used for hundreds of years under many names, water boarding basically creates the fear of drowning in its indented subject. Images of the Khmer Rouge's use of it were viral across the blogosphere and on TV when it came to light that we were using water boarding, except that modern water boarding used by our intelligence agents is not intended to create pain for pain's sake, as it was before.

The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt. [2]

At no time is the subject under threat of actual drowning from swallowing water, as it was with old water boarding techniques used by the Khmer Rouge or the Imperial Japanese during World War II. The intent of the method is to activate the instinctive gag reflex to create an uncomfortable situation for the subject. Out of the 600 plus prisoners that have graced the cages of Gitmo, only three have been water boarded, according to the CIA [3], or a dozen have, according to ex-CIA sources [2]. In no way is it as prevalent as the antiwar-human rights-leftist groups would have you believe. Also, something that may be unknown (unlikely) to these groups, modern water boarding is used on our own soldiers. The Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape program puts soldiers under intense, but not life threatening situations, that include water boarding, to strengthen them against enemy interrogations. [4]

Harsh interrogation has saved many, many lives and stopped many, many plots. Specifically, a plot called the West Coast Plot, featured at National Review, was discovered and disrupted due to the use of harsh interrogation of terrorist Abu Zubaydah.

Zubaydah was captured in a gun battle and severely injured. The CIA arranged medical care, saving his life. After he recovered, Zubaydah provided what he thought was nominal information—including that KSM's alias was "Muktar," something our intelligence community did not know. But he soon ceased all cooperation. It was clear to his interrogators that he had received interrogation resistance training, and the traditional methods were not working. So the CIA employed alternative interrogation techniques. And Zubaydah started talking.

He provided information that led to the capture of Ramzi bin al Shibh—one of the key plotters of the 9/11 attacks and a close associated of KSM. Bin al Shibh was the mastermind behind a plot for a follow-on attack to hijack airplanes in Europe, and fly them into Heathrow airport. Now he was off the street and the Heathrow plot was setback.

Together, bin al Shibh and Zubaydah provided information that led to the capture of KSM. 

Once in custody, KSM refused to cooperate, until enhanced interrogation techniques—including waterboarding—were used. Then he began to talk. 

He gave us information about another terrorist in CIA custody named Majid Khan. KSM told us that Khan had been tasked to deliver $50,000 to a Southeast Asian terrorist named Zubair—an operative with the terrorist network Jemmah Islamiyah, or JI.

Confronted with this information, Khan confirmed KSM's account and gave us information that led to the capture of Zubair. 

Zubair then provided information that led to the capture of a JI terrorist leader named Hambali—KSM's partner in developing the West Coast plot. Their strategy was to used Southeast Asian operatives, since KSM knew we would be on the lookout for Arab men.

Told of Hambali's capture, KSM identified Hambali's brother "Gun Gun" as his successor and provided information that led to his capture. 

Hambali's brother then gave us information that led us to a cell of 17 JI operatives that were going to carry out the West Coast plot. [5]

I have a question for these groups: Are you truly willing to stop all harsh interrogation of captured terrorists because you so doubt the professionalism of our armed forces and covert agents that you believe they'd use a last resort technique on someone who may be innocent even though they have literal tons of pages of information on those within their authority to interrogate? Do you really hold our national security apparatus in such low esteem?

I'm not sure on the specifics of each groups' opinion, but some would say yes.

We are at war. We are at war with a covert, ruthless and very political enemy that does not follow the rules of war set down by the international community and whose goal is a worldwide cultural and religious cleansing based on a perversion of Islam mixed with the insane revolutionary zeal of vanguard parties (right from the pages of Marxist-Leninist theory on gaining power). In war, you do not prosecute the enemy if they are not American. You kill or imprison them until the war is over. Clinton lawyered terrorists and that got us 9/11.

We learned that lesson.

Sources:

1. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/02/leahy-bush.html
2. http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1322866
3. http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2008/02/cia-chief-confirms-use-of-waterboarding.php
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival,_Evasion,_Resistance_and_Escape
5. http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MmUxYzRjZTk1N2E0YzlmMzkzOTcwZWVkYWQ4NGYyZDY=

By Michelle Seitz

....five hundred million jobs will be lost according to the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. An embarrassing gaffe perhaps, but it’s quite evident that the fear mongering from the Obama Administration and Democrats in Congress is now out of control.

Americans should be fearful as the current recession is not mild. Unemployment has soared to a 16-year high at 7.6 percent. However, the fear should not be concentrated on whether or not Congress passes a Christmas tree full of goodies for far-left constituencies, ineffective tax cuts and spending provisions that will not have an immediate impact on the economy; but rather on the long-term effect this kind of spending will have on our nation’s status.

Let’s focus on two key issues that are currently being ignored by our always reliable mainstream media:

America’s budget deficit will exceed $1 trillion this year.

That’s only the deficit folks. This means we are spending $1 trillion more than revenue inflow. Our current debt is closing in on $11 trillion, which means that the deficit is now approximately 10 percent of our overall debt. People thought billion-dollar deficits were out of control a decade ago. Billions are now pocket change in our current fiscally reckless environment.

Worldwide investment in America’s Treasury Bonds is very likely to slow down.

America is not the only country feeling the recession, as economic downturns are global. Soon the days will be gone where America can rely on China, Japan the United Kingdom and Russia to buy our debt. In the past, America was able to entice other countries into buying treasury bonds to finance reckless spending. However, the severity of this recession is making U.S. debt unattractive.

President Obama has told Americans that they need to get used to the prospect of trillion-dollar deficits for years to come. The question that has gone unanswered is how is he going to raise the funds if our two biggest foreign investors, China and Japan (1) will no longer buy our bonds? The global recession has caused these countries financial woes of their own. A lack of tax revenue and the need to enact their own economic stimulus packages has left these countries without an appetite for our debt.

One option that has been recently discussed is the Federal Reserve issuing its own debt. This new angle poses many problems:

1) The Fed’s bonds would be competing with U.S. Treasury Bills which has a major potential to drive up interest rates in the future.

2) The flood of cash on the market would pose significant inflationary problems in the future. This type of cash influx would make it extremely difficult to restrict money supply when the market stabilizes.

3) The Fed already has abusive power, and giving it the ability to issue debt would allow policies to create more artificial bubbles and have the downfall be more severe than what we have already seen.

The only way America can reach prosperous times again is to do something it hasn’t tried before during difficult economic times: shrink the size of government, end the reckless spending and foster growth in the private sector. However, it seems we are going down the same road of politics as usual with pork-filled spending bills to appease lobbyists and calling it “stimulus” – the very premise Obama said would end if he were elected. In just over two weeks’ time, we have seen some very questionable leadership from our President – from questionable appointments to national security decisions. America’s love hangover is beginning to surface....

(1) http://www.treas.gov/tic/mfh.txt