Why is President Obama capitulating to the political right after so many liberal-progressive voters chose him as their candidate and choice for president? By taking such moves, which are not even “center-based”, he has alienated a great many of his supporters. As Bill Maher has stated, “I didn’t vote for this!”
Progressives, liberals, or for that matter, many former-Reagan Democrats have flared up their ire, which is worse than whacking your big toe against a fixed object, when Obama began reversing his support for Democrats who protested against the White House when it decided to rally behind the telecom industry’s subversive Stalinesque use of their technologies to gather intelligence, without warrants, against everyday Americans. Didn’t Little Boy Bush do that?
We call these acts spying! Stalin, Khrushchev, Mao, Castro, Pinochet, Bush, and, of course, Hitler all spied on their own people, and now, Obama has walked that supportive tightrope. Such actions are part of the neo-con battle cry, and Obama has raised a few masts in that direction.
Another sail flapping on the Demo-con's phantom ship has emboldened across its sailcloth is his support for government funded faith-based initiatives. Just because he believes in religious action for people in need, it does not mean that it has to be financially supported through the government’s budget. Why is it that the government cannot directly fund such initiatives without having to go through religious organizations? I always thought there was a separation between church and state, but that belief continues to get whittled away.
The same questions come up over and over again in regards to the Federal Reserve Bank. Why is it that the government borrows money from the Federal Reserve, a private banking organization, in order to operate? The Federal Reserve buys government issued Treasuries, sells them, and then loans the government money. The US government, then in return, pays the Federal Reserve interest on the money it borrows.
Does this make any sense? Why cannot the US government establish its own bank, through the Treasury, and operate it without having to pay interest to itself? Why is the Federal Reserve still operating? It is because the international bankers, who sit on the Federal Reserve board, have incredible power over the government. The Federal Reserve Bank is just one of other international central banks affiliated with the International Bank of Settlements, which is the chief central bank for all these world banks.
Dr. Ellen Brown, of webofdebt.com, wrote about the innovative Bank of North Dakota (BND), which is North Dakota’s state owned bank, established in 1919. It just so happens that North Dakota has a budget surplus because of the way they use this bank. “By law, the state must deposit all its funds in the bank, which pays a competitive interest rate to the state treasurer. The state rather than the FDIC guarantees the bank’s deposits, which are plowed back into the state in the form of loans. The bank’s return on equity is about 25% and it pays a hefty dividend to the state, which is expected to exceed $60 million this year. In the last decade, the BND has turned back a third of a billion dollars to the state’s general fund, offsetting taxes. The BND avoids rivalry with private banks by partnering with them. Most lending is originated by a local bank.”
If this is just fine for North Dakota, then why is it not good enough for the federal government? Why must we have a Federal Reserve, when we can have the USA Bank? And, why is not every state legislature establishing their own state-owned banks to build equity for their state treasuries? It appears that every state can become solvent, and fund their own projects through their own state-owned banks paying itself interest and dividends?
Dr. Brown writes, “North Dakota has also managed to avoid the credit freeze, through the simple expedient of creating its own credit. It has led the nation in establishing state economic sovereignty.” “Only three of fifty states are now solvent, meaning they have the revenues to meet their state budgets; and one of them is North Dakota.”
She discusses that if we had our own national bank, then we could lend operating capital to our newly acquired car company-GM. She says “One advantage of a government-owned bank is that it could fund public projects interest-free or nearly interest-free, cutting production costs dramatically. Interest comprises as much as 77% of the cost of goods and services, such as public housing, that require large amounts of capital.”
Imagine our own government-owned bank creating jobs through the people’s GM company building electric cars leased by the US government, intra-city commuter rail cars, innovative and energy efficient buses, and alternative energy products, such as battery technology. The return on such an investment would generate jobs and real Green Shoots throughout the nation.
There are major concerns burdening working class Americans and government supported domestic spying, or faith-based initiatives are just some of several policies that need to be surgically removed from the cancerous growth spreading throughout the White House. President Obama has seamlessly connected some of the Bush dots into his own matrix.
A declining dollar, rising un-underemployment, stagnant wages, an escalating war in the Middle East, rising consumer prices, and energy costs, unaffordable health care, a mounting debt crisis causing destruction to the economy, and more are the most acute problems facing this nation. Yet, Obama wants to make great speeches addressing issues that are not life threatening, at this time, like the ones just mentioned.
President Obama embeds former president and CEO Edward Whitacre of A.T.&T to the helm of the new government controlled, but with no control, G.M. As we recall during the Bush administration, this telecom company and others were involved in offering up data information about Americans without their consent and had allowed the government to just directly hook up to their phone conversations, emails, and cell phone conversations without warrants. Now, this guy has been dropped into the driver’s seat of the new G.M company.
Wow! Does this not sound like what has been going on with the nation’s corrupt financial banking institutions over the decades? Their former employees have been embedded inside the Obama administration to fix the very firestorm they created as employee/representatives of these banks. And, the Federal Reserve has embedded its own homeboy-Timmy Geithner to make sure that the Treasury continues to do the bidding of the Federal Reserve Bank and its international banking organization.
I have to keep going back to President Obama’s campaign slogan of “Yes We Can”, and “Change We Can Believe In.” As a voter and supporter, if Obama had spoken about embedding Wall-Street bankster Trojan Horses in his economic recovery plan for the country, and said he would hire on former CEOs of corporations that acted against the Constitution, the interests of the nation, and the will of the people, I would have told him, ‘No You Can’t!’ and I cannot vote for that!
We are now seeing the Iranian citizens protesting by the tens of thousands against what they believe is voter fraud. They are willing to get out in the streets and raise their voices in protest, but here in America, the nation’s biggest economy theft and hijack of our economy by a bunch of banker criminals gets no protest. No protest over handing over $14 trillion to replenish the bankster’s losses while Americans go into foreclosure by the millions, with little help, and who have seen trillions of dollars in home value wealth evaporate, as well as their retirement nest-eggs. No protest. Not a peep in the street.
Back on April 3, 2009, the Obama Justice Department filed a motion to dismiss one of the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s (EFF) landmark lawsuits against illegal spying by the National Security Agency (NSA). “The lawsuit was aimed at ending the NSA’s dragnet surveillance of millions of ordinary Americans and holding accountable the government officials who illegally authorized it” as was reported by Tom Burghardt, in his April 13, 2009 article “Obama Administration Endorses Continued Spying on Americans.”
What we are seeing is that this president is not making it simple, nor building the same grassroots momentum behind him that elevated him into the presidency. If there were, then he would have the force to press the Congress and the nation’s elite to accept new policies that would benefit hardworking, middle class Americans without destructive and diluted comprises. He would have the momentum to take the country back from those who stole it away over the last 30 years from the very people that make it function—the middle class.
From all we are seeing and hearing from him is that there is little change we can believe in. The American people are to blame for this. We must harness the same courage to protest as we are now seeing from the Iranian people.