The degree of intermediation by the Federal Reserve in the issuance of US Treasuries hit a record in Q2, accounting for just under 50% of all net UST issuance absorption. This is a startling number, as the Fed's $164 billion in Q2 Treasury purchases dwarfs the combined foreign/household UST purchases of $101 billion and $29 billion, respectively, over the same time period.
Just a couple of months ago, Bernanke testified in response to a question by Ron Paul that the Fed would definitely not monetize the debt. So what does he call this?
Not really surprising. What's happening now is history repeating itself. When FDR started the New Deal, he used the Fed to force to give them their good assets, and then went on an ill-mannered spending spree with them.
She's under the assumption that if the Federal Government doesn't do these things, that there will be complete anarchy and that we will be helpless. Leviathan, 1, Constitution, 0. Let's get out there and turn that around.
Wow. She had to study to figure out when the Constitution was written...? Well I guess it's a good thing she said the word 'Constitution' because I haven't heard many main stream talking heads say it.
I brought up this issue with my Congressman Tom Petri at a Town Hall meeting. The room was filled with senior citizens (because Petri only has meetings when most people under 65 are working, but that is another issue) so he said, "If we voted the way you talk, we wouldn't have Social Security". I believe this is the tactic that they will use to keep senior citizens from voting for Constitutional candidates. They will scare seniors into thinking that Constitutional candidates would stop their checks.
In her final comments Rebecca said (Things not authorized by the constitution) are about 90% of the things government does. Bingo! She is starting to get the idea, but does not yet realize the significance of her own words.
Dear Rebecca, the constitution protects all of our rights. Without it, our rights would not be secured and America could become as horrible a tyranny as any that ever existed. When we allow government to overstep its constitutional bounds we undermine the protection the constitution affords our rights. We should guard our constitution zealously and not allow government to step one inch beyond its constitutional limits.
"There's nothing in the Constitution that says we can't enact health care."
I have an idea. Instead of taking an oath to the uphold the Constitution, people working for the government should have to take a TEST on what the Constitution actually says. The sheer ignorance of someone who works for the people in their legislature making this statement is unbelievable, assuming he's not a liar. I don't know who this guy is, but his constituents need to read him the riot act for this.
The judge cited Amendment IX and X, but those aren't even necessary for this discussion. As Madison once said (paraphrasing): If Congress can pass whatever laws it wants, then what was the point of enumerating their legislative powers in the first place?
So, is there like a futuristic movie/film on what the United States would look like post 'big' gov't tyrannical epoch? And no... I don't mean some Mad Max, Minority Report, Fahrenheit 451, Matrix genre total destruction 'pessimistic' type crappy movie.
Something sensible...showing scenarios of effective small gov't in operation.
C4L, this has probably been asked before, but I can't find it in the FAQ. Do you guys maintain a calendar for Ron Paul media appearances? Can/will you?
That's one of the things I hate about government: They play on people's emotions to get what they once.
As the Dr. Paul said, people--especially politicians--become more dominant in the psyche of people when they're dead. When someone dies, people begin to take into account the things that they stood for. They feel that by doing so, they can keep their legacy preserved with people.
What scares me is that if people start to support the Democrats health reform because of one man, then we're going to see an increase of people who are supporting something because one man told them too. In other words, it's going to be Obama's election all over again.
Note at 3:16, the good Dr. says it's really unclear what the legislation will be. See Saturday-Sunday WSJ, 8/29-30 Opinion page, "Health Care Secrets", regarding Sen. Dodd keeping the bill in the Senate under wraps.
How tiresome this all is. They must really think we're stupid.
The herd mentality and emotionalism is very dangerous to liberty.
Ted's Pa was a former head of the SEC and was anti-House of Morgan. He helped put the Rockefella interests temporarily in power during the FDR years. FDR was a Rockefella loyalist, too.
The Kennedy's have hurt a great many individuals, and they get worshipped.
The brief filed in defense of The Fed by The Clearinghouse Association reads like something you'd expect out of Tony Soprano's family - specifically:
"The Clearing House believes, based on the experiences of its members, that publicly releasing information about a financial institution's participation in the Emergency Programs can cause significant competitive harm. It is difficult to imagine information that is more competitively sensitive or harmful to a financial institution than information that it has lost the independent ability to fund itself fully in the marketplace."
"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."
—Thomas Jefferson
Campaign for Liberty is a 501(c)4 lobbying organization which neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office and claims no responsibility for the actions of individuals or groups of individuals who use the Campaign for Liberty logo or name or who may claim to act as representatives of the Campaign for Liberty without prior written consent of the Campaign for Liberty. [?]
RSS feed
