IRS Considers Taxing Personal Use of Work Cell Phones as 'Fringe Benefit'

The IRS is weighing proposals to tax up to one-quarter of employees' use of work cell phones as private use -- and thus subject to taxation by the government.
By The Wall Street Journal

WASHINGTON -- The IRS is weighing a proposal to deem one-quarter of employees' use of work cell phones as personal use and therefore subject to tax as a fringe benefit.

The proposal is one of several options the IRS put forward this week on the tax treatment of employer-provided cell phones. Current law already requires that the value of those cell phone services be included in a worker's gross income, unless the employee keeps detailed records showing that the cell phone is used for work only -- an idea cell phone trade groups are objecting to.

"The idea that you should keep a log saying, 'I made a call saying I will be late for dinner again,' that's a totally cumbersome and burdensome requirement that most employers and employees are not going to comply with," said Jot Carpenter, vice president of government affairs for CTIA-The Wireless Association.

The IRS, in a Monday notice, proposed options intended to simplify the requirement for employers. One proposal is a "safe harbor" that would deem 75 percent of work cell phone usage to be for work, and 25 percent to be personal. Under that scenario, employer deductions would be limited accordingly and employees would be taxed on the value of the personal use.

Quote of the Day

"I don't know anything about cars."

* EDWARD WHITACRE JR., who was appointed chairman of GM on June 9

We Are the Majority HR1207 NOW HAS 222 COSPONSORS!!!

If you are looking to sell or buy a business. Check out www.Bizcloud.net for Free. You can post biz for sale, associate with a business, promote your business and view businesses for sale.No fees! They provide tons of tools, neighborhood, demographic data, and ratings so you can make an informed choice. If you are a broker why pay other sites to list a biz for sale when you can do it for free at Bizcloud? Read tips in buying and selling a business or participate in the business blog on the site.
www.Bizcloud.net

Peter Schiff on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart 6-9-09

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=230058&title=peter-schiff

Fed Would Be Shut Down If It Were Audited, Expert Says

Jim Grant, editor of Grant's Interest Rate Observer, criticizes the performance of the Federal Reserve on CNBC, stating that an audit of the Federal Reserve would reveal a balance sheet so out of control the Fed would have to close its doors.

This is a bit of what he said:

"With $45 billion in capital and $2.1 trillion in assets, the central bank would not withstand the scrutiny normally afforded other institutions, Grant said in a live interview.

"If the Fed examiners were set upon the Fed's own documents-unlabeled documents-to pass judgment on the Fed's capacity to survive the difficulties it faces in credit, it would shut this institution down," he said. "The Fed is undercapitalized in a way that Citicorp is undercapitalized."

For the rest of the text part of the story, click here: http://www.cnbc.com/id/31204170

Ron Paul's HR 1207 to Audit the FED 209 cosponsors

wadada

Ron Paul & Montel Williams~Fascism~June 10

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hM1-V9UAwJQ

Ron Paul on House Floor 6-4-09

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLJ-P9GbQI

Why The Chinese Laughed At Geithner
Paul Craig Roberts, served as an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
Infowars
June 4, 2009
If a person lives long enough, he can watch everyone forget everything they learned.

When will the Fed remember that printing money does not lower long-term interest rates?

Everyone includes Federal Reserve Chairmen, economists, Bank of America "strategists," and even Bloomberg.com.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke thinks he can hold down US long-term interest rates by purchasing mortgage bonds and US Treasuries. Sixty years ago the Federal Reserve understood that this was an impossible feat. After an acrimonious public dispute with the US Treasury, in 1951 the Federal Reserve forced an "Accord" on the government that eliminated the Fed’s obligation to monetize Treasury debt in order to hold down long term interest rates.

President Truman and Treasury Secretary John Snyder wanted to protect World War II bond purchasers by preventing any rise in interest rates, which would mean a decline in the price of the bonds.

The Fed understood that monetizing the debt to hold down interest rates meant loss of control over the money supply. The policy of suppressing interest rates could only work until the financial markets anticipated rising inflation and bid down the bond prices. If the Fed responded by buying more Treasuries, the money supply and inflation would rise faster.

Since Fed Chairman Bernanke announced his plan to purchase $1 trillion in mortgage and Treasury bonds in order to help the housing market with low interest rates, interest rates have risen. When will the Fed remember that printing money does not lower long-term interest rates?

According to Bloomberg (June 3), Bank of America strategists are recommending that investors buy Fannie Mae bonds because the rise in interest rates means the Fed will ramp up its purchases in order to prevent rising interest rates from adversely impacting the struggling housing market. When will financial gurus remember that printing money does not lower interest rates?

Treasury Secretary Geithner is another economic incompetent. He told China that he stood for a "strong dollar," but that China should let its currency appreciate relative to the dollar, which, of course, would mean a weaker dollar. He simultaneously told China that their investments in US Treasury bonds were safe.

His Chinese university audience, being economically literate, laughed at Geithner.

It apparently did not dawn on the US Treasury Secretary that if Chinese money is rising in value relative to the US dollar, the value of Chinese investments in dollar-denominated US Treasury bonds is falling.

Congressional Democrats are proving themselves to be as stupid as the Republicans. According to the Associated Press, the Democrats have reached agreement to appropriate another $100 billion to continue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through the end of the year.

What are the Democrats thinking? The federal budget for this year is already 50% in the red. Why add another $100 billion to the red ink, which has to be monetized, thus causing inflation, higher interest rates, and a weaker dollar.

The red ink that Washington is generating is a far greater threat to Americans than any foreign "enemies."

The hubris is extraordinary. A bankrupt government that has to send its Treasury Secretary begging to China thinks it can spend limitless amounts in a futile effort to control the culture, mores, and political system of distant Afghanistan.

Bailout banks hoard oil, eyeing price hikes
Published on 06-04-2009 Email To Friend Print Version

Source: RawStory

The giant US bank JPMorgan Chase has reportedly hired a newly-built supertanker to store heating oil off the Mediterranean island of Malta. Other companies, including BP and a unit of Citigroup, have also hired ships to store either crude oil or oil products.

According to Bloomberg.com, “Traders were already using smaller tankers to store record volumes of jet fuel and heating oil in Europe as on-shore tanks filled up.”

This latest move comes amid suggestions that recent increases in oil prices may be the result of speculators looking for a new financial bubble, prompting fears that increases in energy costs could stall any hope of an economic recovery.

According to MSNBC, “Even though most analysts say crude is still overpriced, the market has created its own momentum with an enormous amount of money fleeing equity and currency markets. … With so much money flowing into the market, prices are likely to hold close to where they are, until market fundamentals can take hold.”

It has recently been suggested, however, that “prices will fall substantially” once speculators run out of storage.

The practice of storing oil on ships began last winter, when the price went as low as $32 a barrel. Bloomberg reported in January that the world’s biggest owner of supertankers, Frontline Ltd., had already hired out about 20 supertankers for oil storage and had requests for up to 10 more. “I’ve never before seen storage demand on this scale,” a shipbroker told Bloomberg.

By February, the Times of London was noting, “Shipping brokers in Tokyo say that Morgan Stanley has joined a growing international scramble to secure an oil supertanker and use it to store millions of barrels of crude in what commodity dealers believe may be the “trade of the year’.”

Oil prices are currently running between $65 and $70 a barrel, more than twice what they were four months ago. With ship rental costs being kept low by the slump in global trade, anyone who bought oil last winter could be looking at a substantial profit.

http://blacklistednews.com/?news_id=4401

Bernanke Warns Deficits Threaten Financial Stability
June 4th, 2009

Via: Bloomberg:

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said large U.S. budget deficits threaten financial stability and the government can’t continue indefinitely to borrow at the current rate to finance the shortfall.

“Unless we demonstrate a strong commitment to fiscal sustainability in the longer term, we will have neither financial stability nor healthy economic growth,” Bernanke said in testimony to lawmakers today. “Maintaining the confidence of the financial markets requires that we, as a nation, begin planning now for the restoration of fiscal balance.”

Bernanke’s comments signal that the central bank sees risks of a relapse into financial turmoil even as credit markets show signs of stability. He said the Fed won’t finance government spending over the long term, while warning that the financial industry remains under stress and the credit crunch continues to limit spending.

The Fed chief said in his remarks to the House Budget Committee that deficit concerns are already influencing the prices of long-term Treasuries.

Yields on 10-year notes have climbed about 1 percentage point since the Fed announced plans in March to buy $300 billion of long-term government bonds. The notes yielded 3.54 percent at 5 p.m. in New York, down from 3.61 percent late yesterday, as Bernanke’s warnings on the need to reduce the deficit supported the market.

Rise in Yields

“In recent weeks, yields on longer-term Treasury securities and fixed-rate mortgages have risen,” Bernanke said. “These increases appear to reflect concerns about large federal deficits but also other causes, including greater optimism about the economic outlook, a reversal of flight-to-quality flows and technical factors related to the hedging of mortgage holdings.”

The budget deficit this year is projected to reach $1.85 trillion, equivalent to 13 percent of the nation’s economy, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

“Either cuts in spending or increases in taxes will be necessary to stabilize the fiscal situation,” Bernanke said in response to a question. “The Federal Reserve will not monetize the debt.”

Bernanke also addressed banks’ efforts to bolster common equity in the aftermath of regulators’ stress tests on the 19 largest U.S. lenders. He said the 10 firms that were found to have a total capital shortfall of $75 billion have now sold or announced plans to boost common equity by $48 billion.

I watch you guys every morning while getting ready for work and today you had small mention of the late Pres. Reagan's new statue being unveiled. That in itself is great thing. Then I heard that Pres. Obama had created a committee to oversee some event next year celebrating Reagan's would-be 100th birthday. How much is that costing the tax payers?

Also, last week there was a story about Pres. Obama being in L.A. for a fundraiser for the Democratic Party. He raised 3 million or some ungodly amount. Geez why doesn't he just travel around fundraising and get our country out of debt!

Why are our school's the first thing sacrificed? These kids are our future! So we cut teachers and funds to them?? It's hypocritical! What happened to Calif. Lottery money? Nobody buying into it anymore? I thought that money was for schools??

Thanks for listening! You all do a great job. Keep it up.

Obama said to be open to taxing health benefits
By ERICA WERNER, Associated Press Writer Erica Werner, Associated Press Writer Tue Jun 2, 9:15 pm ET

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=13525114&ch=4226720&src=news

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is leaving the door open to taxing health care benefits, something he campaigned hard against while running for president, according to senators who met with him Tuesday.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., raised the issue with Obama during a private meeting with the president and other Democratic senators and later reported the president's position: "It's on the table. It's an option."

The White House said later that Obama did not want to go that route.

"The president made it clear during the campaign that he has serious concerns about taxing health care benefits," Obama spokesman Reid Cherlin said in a statement. "He stated again his belief that health reform can't wait another year, and that while all options should be considered, those options should include the revenue proposals that he included in his budget."

The federal government would reap about $250 billion a year if it treated health care benefits given to employees like wages and taxed them.

Baucus and others are eyeing that money as they search for ways to pay for a costly health care overhaul that would extend coverage to 50 million Americans who are now uninsured. That could cost some $1.5 trillion over 10 years.

The president adamantly opposed health benefit taxes during the campaign, arguing they would undermine job-based coverage, and he criticized Republican presidential rival John McCain for proposing a sweeping version of the same basic idea. But since taking office he and members of his administration have indicated openness to almost all suggestions from Congress on health care, including taxing benefits.

Obama has made some suggestions of his own for paying for a health care overhaul, including cuts to Medicare and limiting tax deductions wealthy people can take, but they've run into opposition from Congress. And, they only add up to about $630 billion over 10 years.

Some experts think limiting the tax exclusion for health benefits is the only way to get the necessary money to pay for a sweeping health care overhaul. But there's opposition from organized labor and from many Democrats, including House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., who said recently there was "no way" he would support the approach.

Baucus wants to look at limiting — but not entirely eliminating — the tax-free status of employer-provided health benefits.

"It was not in our plan, it was not in our budget," White House budget director Peter Orszag said earlier Tuesday. "We are saying we want the legislative process to play out, and that's all we have to say on that right now."

Obama is leaving the details of crafting a health care bill to Congress and used Tuesday's meeting to urge senators to swift action.

"This window between now and the August recess I think is going to be the make-or-break period," Obama said before the meeting was closed to reporters. "This is the time where we've got to get this running."

Baucus' Finance Committee and the Senate Health, Labor, Education and Pensions Committee, chaired by the more liberal Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., are both producing sweeping health bills, with some differences emerging between the two committees.

At their weekly luncheon Tuesday, Senate Democrats got a first look at Kennedy's proposals, which would include a new public insurance plan to compete with private providers. The Finance Committee is also considering a public plan though some options being reviewed are more limited in scope than Kennedy's.

Obama brought Democrats from both committees to Tuesday's meeting, urging them to get a single bill through the Senate by early August despite their differences, and telling them they might not all get everything they want, according to senators who attended. Kennedy, who's been diagnosed with brain cancer, did not attend.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p5mikxKMBQ

Prof Xiao Geng on Timothy Geithner's China visit - 01 Jun 09

*************************************************************
China’s Yu Tells U.S. Not to Be Complacent About Debt
*************************************************************

By Bloomberg News

June 2, 2009 (Bloomberg) -- China’s former central bank adviser Yu Yongding will meet Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner today and tell him the U.S. shouldn’t be complacent about China continuing to buy Treasuries.

“I wish to tell the U.S. government: ‘Don’t be complacent and think there isn’t any alternative for China to buy your bills and bonds’,” Yu said in an interview yesterday. “The euro is an alternative. And there are lots of raw materials we can still buy.”

Yu said he is scheduled to meet Geithner today at the Grand Hyatt Hotel in Beijing.

China is the biggest foreign holder of U.S. Treasuries with $768 billion at the end of the first quarter. Premier Wen Jiabao in March called for the U.S. “to guarantee the safety of China’s assets” and central bank Governor Zhou Xiaochuan has proposed a new global currency to reduce reliance on the dollar.

“China will be shooting themselves in the foot if they push this issue too hard,” said Sean Callow, a senior currency strategist at Westpac Banking Corp. in Sydney. “If they are too alarmist and contribute substantially to a dollar and Treasuries sell off, they are going to feel more pain than just about anybody in the world.”

China is concerned that the U.S.’s spending and planned record fiscal deficit will eventually lead to inflation and a loss of confidence in the dollar, undermining the value of China’s Treasury holdings, Yu said.

Read full article at: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601068&sid=aatNgaPM2wQM&refer=home

From: http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2009/06/01/congratulations-you-bought-a-congressman-a-lexus/

Congratulations! You bought a congressman a Lexus!
Zac Bissonnette
Jun 1st 2009 at 8:00AM

While you're cutting back on every expense to find a way to save for retirement, pay for your children's education, and put food on the table, you'll be happy to know that some people are still living large: United States congressmen are livin' it up on the expense account.

The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) dug through the volumes of expenses charged to the taxpayer-funded accounts of United States congressman. A couple of highlights:

* Florida Rep. Alcee Hastings spent $24,730 in taxpayer money last year to lease a 2008 luxury Lexus. Let this loser know what you think of his unpatriotic robbery of the American people by emailing him here. He says he doesn't want to receive email from people who are outside of his district, so I suggest calling his offices at (954) 733-2800, (202) 225-1313, (561) 881-9618 -- and emailing your friends and suggesting that they do the same.

* Rep. Chaka Fattah wasted $22 on a Liz Claiborne cell phone pouch. His staff told the Journal that it was "nothing special" and a standard part of the package for office employees who receive cell phones. but I've seen cell phone pouches at dollar stores. What's wrong with those? Here's an idea: E-mail his office here with a link to a cheaper phone pouch so that they'll have plenty to choose from next time they need something cute to put their phones into.

Congressman Ron Paul, whatever you may think of his politics, is someone to admire on this issue. In 2004, he issued a press release reporting that "For the sixth year in a row, Congressman Ron Paul has returned a substantial portion of his annual office budget to taxpayers. Preliminary reports from the congressional Office of Finance indicate that Paul's office had approximately $210,000 left in its operating account at the end of 2003, a figure representing more than 20% of the annual office budget. By contrast, nearly all federal departments, agencies, and programs spend every last penny (and more) of their yearly budgets."

The Journal reports that "House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) had about $57,000 remaining in her budget at the end of 2008. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R., Ohio) had $228,000," proving that there is plenty of money in the budget for Congress members. Now would be a good time to cut those allowances and let people spend their own money.

And if you want to lease a Lexus for your Congressman, then more power to you.

Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124364352135868189.html

Banks run Congress, top Democrat says

By John Byrne

Published: June 1, 2009
Updated 12 hours ago

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to deduce that the banking and financial services industry has an outsized influence in Congress.

Wells Fargo, Citigroup and JP Morgan Chase each got bailouts of $25 billion in government bailouts last year. Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs got $10 billion apiece. And AIG, the mammoth insurer that lost billions in bad derivatives bets, has sucked in more than $170 billion.

Meanwhile, President Barack Obama is reticent about bailing out an American state — California.

Collin Peterson, Democratic Chairman of the Agriculture Committee, says he knows who to blame.

“The banks run the place,” Peterson told the New York Times in Monday’s editions. “I will tell you what the problem is — they give three times more money than the next biggest group. It’s huge the amount of money they put into politics.”

Peterson has introduced a bill to regulate derivatives trading — the pesky financial instruments that nearly brought down the US financial system. Derivatives involve writing insurance on various complex financial transactions, such as providing insurance to investors in the event of massive defaults on home mortgages.

But he says that Republicans have watered down his bill. He wants derivatives trading to take place on public exchanges — much like the New York Stock Exchange — rather than through private clearinghouses, which are managed by banks.

Obama Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, meanwhile, would prefer the transactions be monitored by the New York branch of the Federal Reserve. Bankers appear to prefer this option, given that the New York Fed has been lenient on them in the past.

Geithner has been criticized for his close relationships with banking industry executives. His proposal to regular derivatives traded through private clearinghouses mirrors that of the bank’s own proposals.

How much did President Barack Obama receive in contributions from those employed in the financial sector?

$69,823,872 if you include real estate, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. (Sen. John McCain got $60,605,254, with the total between the two exceeding $130 million).

The biggest donor to the presidential campaigns? The banks. Followed by lawyers and lobbyists, at $95 million. The banking and financial services industry have their own lobbyists, so the total donations of the industry are undercounted.

All told, according to the New York Times, financial sector employees gave $152 million in political donations from 2007 to 2008. Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America and Credit Suisse gave $22.7 million and spent a combined total of $25 million on lobbying activities — in a single year.

And President George W. Bush’s largest individual donor employer in 2004? MBNA, the credit card behemoth that was bought up by — Bank of America.

Remarkably, though, it’s the secretive, private trading of derivatives — where those buying insurance have no idea what others are paying, and those buying bank stocks have no idea what they’re actually buying — that nearly brought the US financial markets to their knees.

“Peterson’s bill specifically bars derivatives trading in a clearinghouse regulated by the New York Federal Reserve, which he said in an interview ‘is a tool of the big banks’ that ‘wouldn’t do much’ to regulate the contracts,” the Times wrote. “Because the banks’ lobbyists persuaded some of his Republican colleagues to resist more sweeping changes, Mr. Peterson said, he has had to modify a bill he introduced that is similar to Mr. Harkin’s in calling for wide-ranging limits on derivatives.”

The banks have had their heyday in Congress in recent years. This year, they succeeded in preventing the Senate from passing a provision that would have allowed bankruptcy judges to unilaterally reduce the principal amount on mortgages. And in 2005, the massive “Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention” bill passed by Congress made it harder for consumers to file for bankruptcy.

Now that the government/state owns 60% of GM..

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.

For all of us loonies out there.

Some Brain Damage http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYZ3lpKIG5s

wadada

John B.

Or whoever you are welcome back...

wadada

Oh good, now I know what loser not to vote for in the next election. Losers all.

The other fruits and nuts who are standing behind Dr. Ron Paul and his HR 1207 to Audit the FED..

HR 1207 Co-Sponsors (as of 5/22/2009)

Rep Kagen, Steve [WI-8] - 2/26/2009
Rep Bachmann, Michele [MN-6] - 2/26/2009
Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. [MD-6] - 2/26/2009
Rep Jones, Walter B., Jr. [NC-3] - 2/26/2009
Rep Rehberg, Denny [MT] - 2/26/2009
Rep Posey, Bill [FL-15] - 2/26/2009
Rep Broun, Paul C. [GA-10] - 2/26/2009
Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2] - 2/26/2009
Rep Burton, Dan [IN-5] - 2/26/2009
Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] - 2/26/2009
Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] - 2/26/2009
Rep Garrett, Scott [NJ-5] - 3/5/2009
Rep Chaffetz, Jason [UT-3] - 3/6/2009
Rep Kingston, Jack [GA-1] - 3/6/2009
Rep Young, Don [AK] - 3/6/2009
Rep Rohrabacher, Dana [CA-46] - 3/6/2009
Rep Stearns, Cliff [FL-6] - 3/6/2009
Rep McClintock, Tom [CA-4] - 3/6/2009
Rep Heller, Dean [NV-2] - 3/6/2009
Rep Duncan, John J., Jr. [TN-2] - 3/6/2009
Rep Taylor, Gene [MS-4] - 3/6/2009
Rep DeFazio, Peter A. [OR-4] - 3/9/2009
Rep Alexander, Rodney [LA-5] - 3/10/2009
Rep Price, Tom [GA-6] - 3/10/2009
Rep Petri, Thomas E. [WI-6] - 3/10/2009
Rep Foxx, Virginia [NC-5] - 3/10/2009
Rep Grayson, Alan [FL-8] - 3/11/2009
Rep Marchant, Kenny [TX-24] - 3/11/2009
Rep Wamp, Zach [TN-3] - 3/16/2009
Rep Blackburn, Marsha [TN-7] - 3/16/2009
Rep Buchanan, Vern [FL-13] - 3/17/2009
Rep Castle, Michael N. [DE] - 3/17/2009
Rep Fleming, John [LA-4] - 3/18/2009
Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] - 3/19/2009
Rep Platts, Todd Russell [PA-19] - 3/19/2009
Rep Peterson, Collin C. [MN-7] - 3/19/2009
Rep McCotter, Thaddeus G. [MI-11] - 3/19/2009
Rep Lummis, Cynthia M. [WY] - 3/19/2009
Rep Burgess, Michael C. [TX-26] - 3/19/2009
Rep Sessions, Pete [TX-32] - 3/23/2009
Rep Deal, Nathan [GA-9] - 3/23/2009
Rep Franks, Trent [AZ-2] - 3/23/2009
Rep Miller, Jeff [FL-1] - 3/24/2009
Rep Blunt, Roy [MO-7] - 3/24/2009
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 3/26/2009
Rep Culberson, John Abney [TX-7] - 3/26/2009
Rep Paulsen, Erik [MN-3] - 3/30/2009
Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] - 3/30/2009
Rep Terry, Lee [NE-2] - 3/30/2009
Rep Carter, John R. [TX-31] - 3/31/2009
Rep Capito, Shelley Moore [WV-2] - 4/1/2009
Rep Wittman, Robert J. [VA-1] - 4/1/2009
Rep Fallin, Mary [OK-5] - 4/2/2009
Rep Smith, Lamar [TX-21] - 4/2/2009
Rep Westmoreland, Lynn A. [GA-3] - 4/2/2009
Rep Lucas, Frank D. [OK-3] - 4/21/2009
Rep Lamborn, Doug [CO-5] - 4/21/2009
Rep Ehlers, Vernon J. [MI-3] - 4/21/2009
Rep Bilbray, Brian P. [CA-50] - 4/21/2009
Rep Pence, Mike [IN-6] - 4/21/2009
Rep Manzullo, Donald A. [IL-16] - 4/21/2009
Rep McCaul, Michael T. [TX-10] - 4/21/2009
Rep Cole, Tom [OK-4] - 4/21/2009
Rep Roe, David P. [TN-1] - 4/21/2009
Rep Herger, Wally [CA-2] - 4/21/2009
Rep Bishop, Rob [UT-1] - 4/21/2009
Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] - 4/21/2009
Rep Olson, Pete [TX-22] - 4/21/2009
Rep Latham, Tom [IA-4] - 4/21/2009
Rep Luetkemeyer, Blaine [MO-9] - 4/21/2009
Rep Doggett, Lloyd [TX-25] - 4/21/2009
Rep Rooney, Thomas J. [FL-16] - 4/22/2009
Rep Massa, Eric J. J. [NY-29] - 4/22/2009
Rep Johnson, Sam [TX-3] - 4/22/2009
Rep Thompson, Glenn [PA-5] - 4/22/2009
Rep Brady, Kevin [TX-8] - 4/22/2009
Rep Smith, Adam [WA-9] - 4/22/2009
Rep Shimkus, John [IL-19] - 4/22/2009
Rep Graves, Sam [MO-6] - 4/22/2009
Rep Jenkins, Lynn [KS-2] - 4/23/2009
Rep Gohmert, Louie [TX-1] - 4/23/2009
Rep Inglis, Bob [SC-4] - 4/23/2009
Rep Kaptur, Marcy [OH-9] - 4/23/2009
Rep Johnson, Timothy V. [IL-15] - 4/23/2009
Rep Brown, Henry E., Jr. [SC-1] - 4/28/2009
Rep Biggert, Judy [IL-13] - 4/28/2009
Rep Pitts, Joseph R. [PA-16] - 4/28/2009
Rep Tiahrt, Todd [KS-4] - 4/28/2009
Rep Myrick, Sue Wilkins [NC-9] - 4/28/2009
Rep Putnam, Adam H. [FL-12] - 4/28/2009
Rep LaTourette, Steven C. [OH-14] - 4/28/2009
Rep Tiberi, Patrick J. [OH-12] - 4/28/2009
Rep Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [FL-18] - 4/28/2009
Rep Hoekstra, Peter [MI-2] - 4/28/2009
Rep Miller, Candice S. [MI-10] - 4/28/2009
Rep Granger, Kay [TX-12] - 4/28/2009
Rep Simpson, Michael K. [ID-2] - 4/28/2009
Rep Barrett, J. Gresham [SC-3] - 4/28/2009
Rep Goodlatte, Bob [VA-6] - 4/28/2009
Rep Smith, Adrian [NE-3] - 4/28/2009
Rep Wilson, Joe [SC-2] - 4/29/2009
Rep Hall, Ralph M. [TX-4] - 4/29/2009
Rep Kline, John [MN-2] - 4/29/2009
Rep Bono Mack, Mary [CA-45] - 4/29/2009
Rep Murphy, Tim [PA-18] - 4/29/2009
Rep Calvert, Ken [CA-44] - 4/29/2009
Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 4/29/2009
Rep Upton, Fred [MI-6] - 4/29/2009
Rep Bachus, Spencer [AL-6] - 4/29/2009
Rep Buyer, Steve [IN-4] - 4/30/2009
Rep Neugebauer, Randy [TX-19] - 4/30/2009
Rep McHenry, Patrick T. [NC-10] - 4/30/2009
Rep McCarthy, Kevin [CA-22] - 5/4/2009
Rep Barton, Joe [TX-6] - 5/4/2009
Rep Hensarling, Jeb [TX-5] - 5/4/2009
Rep McMorris Rodgers, Cathy [WA-5] - 5/4/2009
Rep Bilirakis, Gus M. [FL-9] - 5/4/2009
Rep Moran, Jerry [KS-1] - 5/4/2009
Rep Cassidy, Bill [LA-6] - 5/4/2009
Rep Walden, Greg [OR-2] - 5/4/2009
Rep Crenshaw, Ander [FL-4] - 5/4/2009
Rep Campbell, John [CA-48] - 5/4/2009
Rep LoBiondo, Frank A. [NJ-2] - 5/4/2009
Rep McHugh, John M. [NY-23] - 5/4/2009
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 5/6/2009
Rep Linder, John [GA-7] - 5/6/2009
Rep Aderholt, Robert B. [AL-4] - 5/6/2009
Rep Davis, Geoff [KY-4] - 5/6/2009
Rep Dent, Charles W. [PA-15] - 5/6/2009
Rep Radanovich, George [CA-19] - 5/6/2009
Rep Schock, Aaron [IL-18] - 5/6/2009
Rep Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie [SD] - 5/6/2009
Rep Austria, Steve [OH-7] - 5/6/2009
Rep Adler, John H. [NJ-3] - 5/6/2009
Rep Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [WI-5] - 5/7/2009
Rep Lungren, Daniel E. [CA-3] - 5/7/2009
Rep Walz, Timothy J. [MN-1] - 5/7/2009
Rep Shuster, Bill [PA-9] - 5/7/2009
Rep Michaud, Michael H. [ME-2] - 5/7/2009
Rep Conaway, K. Michael [TX-11] - 5/7/2009
Rep Shadegg, John B. [AZ-3] - 5/7/2009
Rep Boozman, John [AR-3] - 5/7/2009
Rep Guthrie, Brett [KY-2] - 5/7/2009
Rep Flake, Jeff [AZ-6] - 5/11/2009
Rep Hastings, Doc [WA-4] - 5/11/2009
Rep Lance, Leonard [NJ-7] - 5/11/2009
Rep Gerlach, Jim [PA-6] - 5/11/2009
Rep Harper, Gregg [MS-3] - 5/11/2009
Rep Hare, Phil [IL-17] - 5/11/2009
Rep Royce, Edward R. [CA-40] - 5/12/2009
Rep Fortenberry, Jeff [NE-1] - 5/12/2009
Rep Mack, Connie [FL-14] - 5/12/2009
Rep Barrow, John [GA-12] - 5/12/2009
Rep Mica, John L. [FL-7] - 5/12/2009
Rep Maffei, Daniel B. [NY-25] - 5/12/2009
Rep Inslee, Jay [WA-1] - 5/12/2009
Rep Rogers, Mike D. [AL-3] - 5/13/2009
Rep Minnick, Walter [ID-1] - 5/13/2009
Rep Boustany, Charles W., Jr. [LA-7] - 5/13/2009
Rep Turner, Michael R. [OH-3] - 5/13/2009
Rep Hunter, Duncan D. [CA-52] - 5/13/2009
Rep Perriello, Thomas S.P. [VA-5] - 5/13/2009
Rep Ortiz, Solomon P. [TX-27] - 5/14/2009
Rep Ryan, Paul [WI-1] - 5/14/2009
Rep Whitfield, Ed [KY-1] - 5/14/2009
Rep Pastor, Ed [AZ-4] - 5/20/2009
Rep Brown-Waite, Ginny [FL-5] - 5/20/2009
Rep Altmire, Jason [PA-4] - 5/20/2009
Rep Latta, Robert E. [OH-5] - 5/20/2009
Rep Reichert, David G. [WA-8] - 5/20/2009
Rep Rogers, Mike J. [MI-8] - 5/20/2009
Rep Berry, Marion [AR-1] - 5/20/2009
Rep Schauer, Mark H. [MI-7] - 5/20/2009
Rep Scalise, Steve [LA-1] - 5/20/2009
Rep Forbes, J. Randy [VA-4] - 5/20/2009
Rep Ross, Mike [AR-4] - 5/21/2009
Rep Berkley, Shelley [NV-1] - 5/21/2009
Rep Welch, Peter [VT] - 5/21/2009
Rep Thornberry, Mac [TX-13] - 5/21/2009

On Ron Paul

You always know where he stands...

With the other fruit and nuts.

Ron Paul on the Economy from CNN 05.27.2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJ0uUcBvvj0

You always know where he stands...

wadada

China warns Federal Reserve over 'printing money'
China has warned a top member of the US Federal Reserve that it is increasingly disturbed by the Fed's direct purchase of US Treasury bonds.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/5379285/China-warns-Federal-Reserve-over-printing-money.html

Obama Orders Update to Iran Attack Plan
Gates Says "All Options Are On the Table"
by Jason Ditz, May 22, 2009

On NBC’s Today Show this morning, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that President Obama has ordered him to update the plans for a US attack on Iran, plans which were last updating during the Bush Administration. Gates says the plans are “refreshed” and insists that “all options are on the table” with respect to the potential attack.

It was only a month ago that Secretary Gates was warning vigorously against the potential attack, saying that it would create a “disastrous backlash” against the United States to hit Iran’s civilian nuclear facilities. The Obama Administration has insisted it is intending to pursue the matter diplomatically with Iran, but Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has repeatedly said the administration doesn’t expect diplomacy to work, and the effort seems to be primarily to rally international support for more measures against Iran.

The US has also been sending secret missions to Israel in recent days, reportedly to caution them against launching any surprise military attacks against Iran of their own. It was unclear how successful the warnings were: Prime Minister Netanyahu said he remained confident that the US would respect Israel’s right to attack Iran.

It is unclear whether Gates’ revelation portends a serious potential for an imminent US attack on Iran, or whether the move is more international posturing. Still, it seems unlikely the news will be greeted warmly in Iran, which is in the middle of an election campaign in which potential US talks are a major issue.

Governor plans to completely eliminate welfare for families
3:58 PM | May 21, 2009

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is proposing to completely eliminate the state’s welfare program for families, medical insurance for low-income children and Cal Grants cash assistance to college and university students.

The proposals to sharply scale back the assistance that California provides to its neediest residents came in testimony by the administration this afternoon at a joint legislative budget committee hearing. It followed comments by the governor earlier today that he would be withdrawing a proposal to help balance the budget with billions of dollars of borrowing and replacing it with program reductions.

The proposals would completely reshape the state’s social service network, transforming California from one of the country’s most generous states to one of the most tightfisted. The proposals are intended to help close a budget deficit estimated at $21.3 billion.

—Eric Bailey

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/05/schwarzenegger-make-massive-cuts-to-welfare-health-care-student-aid-.html

FCC’s Warrantless Household Searches Alarm Experts

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/fcc-raid/

You may not know it, but if you have a wireless router, a cordless phone, remote car-door opener, baby monitor or cellphone in your house, the FCC claims the right to enter your home without a warrant at any time of the day or night in order to inspect it.

That’s the upshot of the rules the agency has followed for years to monitor licensed television and radio stations, and to crack down on pirate radio broadcasters. And the commission maintains the same policy applies to any licensed or unlicensed radio-frequency device.

“Anything using RF energy — we have the right to inspect it to make sure it is not causing interference,” says FCC spokesman David Fiske. That includes devices like Wi-Fi routers that use unlicensed spectrum, Fiske says.

The FCC claims it derives its warrantless search power from the Communications Act of 1934, though the constitutionality of the claim has gone untested in the courts. That’s largely because the FCC had little to do with average citizens for most of the last 75 years, when home transmitters were largely reserved to ham-radio operators and CB-radio aficionados. But in 2009, nearly every household in the United States has multiple devices that use radio waves and fall under the FCC’s purview, making the commission’s claimed authority ripe for a court challenge.

“It is a major stretch beyond case law to assert that authority with respect to a private home, which is at the heart of the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable search and seizure,” says Electronic Frontier Foundation lawyer Lee Tien. “When it is a private home and when you are talking about an over-powered Wi-Fi antenna — the idea they could just go in is honestly quite bizarre.”

The rules came to attention this month when an FCC agent investigating a pirate radio station in Boulder, Colorado, left a copy of a 2005 FCC inspection policy on the door of a residence hosting the unlicensed 100-watt transmitter. “Whether you operate an amateur station or any other radio device, your authorization from the Commission comes with the obligation to allow inspection,” the statement says.

The notice spooked those running “Boulder Free Radio,” who thought it was just tough talk intended to scare them into shutting down, according to one of the station’s leaders, who spoke to Wired.com on condition of anonymity. “This is an intimidation thing,” he said. “Most people aren’t that dedicated to the cause. I’m not going to let them into my house.”

But refusing the FCC admittance can carry a harsh financial penalty. In a 2007 case, a Corpus Christi, Texas, man got a visit from the FCC’s direction-finders after rebroadcasting an AM radio station through a CB radio in his home. An FCC agent tracked the signal to his house and asked to see the equipment; Donald Winton refused to let him in, but did turn off the radio. Winton was later fined $7,000 for refusing entry to the officer. The fine was reduced to $225 after he proved he had little income.

Administrative search powers are not rare, at least as directed against businesses — fire-safety, food and workplace-safety regulators generally don’t need warrants to enter a business. And despite the broad power, the FCC agents aren’t cops, says Fiske. “The only right they have is to inspect the equipment,” Fiske says. “If they want to seize, they have to work with the U.S. Attorney’s office.”

But if inspectors should notice evidence of unrelated criminal behavior — say, a marijuana plant or an unregistered gun — a Supreme Court decision suggests the search can be used against the resident. In the 1987 case New York v. Burger, two police officers performed a warrantless, administrative search of one Joseph Burger’s automobile junkyard. When he couldn’t produce the proper paperwork, the officers searched the grounds and found stolen vehicles, which they used to prosecute him. The Supreme Court held the search to be legal.

In the meantime, pirate radio stations are adapting to the FCC’s warrantless search power by dividing up a station’s operations. For instance, Boulder Free Radio consists of an online radio station operated by DJs from a remote studio. Miles away, a small computer streams the online station and feeds it to the transmitter. Once the FCC comes and leaves a notice on the door, the transmitter is moved to another location before the agent returns.

Actor William H. Macy Opposes Fairness Doctrine

Academy Award-nominated actor William H. Macy told CNSNews.com that the government should not regulate talk radio so it is “balanced” — with some variant of a Fairness Doctrine or local ownership rules — because “this is America” and “you can say anything you want.” He also said the average American is “smarter than all the politicians.”

“Absolutely not. This is America. You can say anything you want,” Macy told CNSNews.com at the White House Correspondent’s dinner when asked whether the content of talk radio should be regulated by the government for political balance.

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=ydqGSUIr8z

Ron Paul discusses Austrian vs. Keynesian economics on Morning Joe 05/15/2009

Ron Paul knew back in 2003 the economy was going to happen as it did..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQ3JNcMDWwg

Audit the FED!! HR 1207 162 cosponsors

http://www.thepeoplehavespoken.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/auditthefed.mp3

Obama’s Health Care Charade
by Glen Ford | Black Agenda Report

“Since the first days of his administration, Obama has methodically erased single-payer advocates from the picture.”

The president feigns amazement at popular demands for a change in the industrial world’s most expensive and dysfunctional health care system. "We're doing some stuff on health care because I think the country is geared up, businesses are geared up, families are geared up to go ahead and start solving some our extraordinary health care system problems," Obama fairly gushed, as if his own corporate-friendly proposals accurately reflect the public will. In reality, the Administration is engaged in an elaborate charade designed to sidetrack, possibly for decades, the most broadly supported idea in American politics, today: single-payer health care.

Obama has gone to extraordinary lengths to suppress advocates of a single-payer or “Medicare for all” system, which polls have consistently shown to be favored by at least six in ten Americans, including majorities of doctors and other health care professionals. HMOs, insurance companies and pharmaceutical corporations rank among the most despised institutions in the land – causing Obama to take on the mission of saving them from the public’s wrath. As the reigning impresario of theatrical faux-change, Obama choreographed last weekend’s parade of industry troglodytes (and one very wayward union) promising to “save” the homeland from their predatory selves to the tune of $2 trillion over the next ten years by reducing the growth of the percentage they gouge from the economy.

Obama welcomed the industry’s hollow pledges as history-making breakthroughs – as well he might, since the White House had stage-managed the entire production. The left-leaning but gullible Huffington Post reported that “two senior Obama Administration officials…I mean pretty darn senior” called the telephonic conference to prepare the media for their bosses “response” to the Mother’s Day “surprise.” Huffington reporter M.S. Bellows, Jr. sees through the industry’s smoke-and-mirrors but, like so many “progressives“ still addicted to the ObamaL’aid, fears that the president is being led by the nose. He wonders: “By taking for-profit corporate lobbyists at their word, is Obama setting himself up to agree to step off the path” to single-payer, low-cost healthcare?
“Single-payer health care is the most broadly supported idea in American politics, today.”

Read more.
http://www.blackagendareport.com/?q=content/obama%E2%80%99s-health-care-charade

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/42595

Fed Dread
The New York Fed is the most powerful financial institution you've never heard of. Look who's running it.
By Eliot Spitzer
Posted Wednesday, May 6, 2009, at 12:29 PM ET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The kerfuffle about current New York Federal Reserve Bank Chairman Stephen Friedman's purchase of some Goldman stock while the Fed was involved in reviewing major decisions about Goldman's future—well-covered by the Wall Street Journal here and here—raises a fundamental question about Wall Street's corruption. Just as the millions in AIG bonuses obscured the much more significant issue of the $70 billion-plus in conduit payments authorized by the N.Y. Fed to AIG's counterparties, the small issue of Friedman's stock purchase raises very serious issues about the competence and composition of the Federal Reserve of New York, which is the most powerful financial institution most Americans know nothing about.

A quasi-independent, public-private body, the New York Fed is the first among equals of the 12 regional Fed branches. Unlike the Washington Federal Reserve Board of Governors, or the other regional fed branches, the N.Y. Fed is active in the markets virtually every day, changing the critical interest rates that determine the liquidity of the markets and the profitability of banks. And, like the other regional branches, it has boundless power to examine, at will, the books of virtually any banking institution and require that wide-ranging actions be taken—from raising capital to stopping lending—to ensure the stability and soundness of the bank. Over the past year, the New York Fed has been responsible for committing trillions of dollars of taxpayer money to resuscitate the coffers of the banks it oversees.

Given the power of the N.Y. Fed, it is time to ask some very hard questions about its recent performance. The first question to ask is: Who is the New York Fed? Who exactly has been running the show? Yes, we all know that Tim Geithner was the president and CEO of the N.Y. Fed from 2003 until his ascension as treasury secretary. But who chose him for that position, and to whom did he report? The N.Y. Fed president reports to, and is chosen by, the Fed board of directors.

So who selected Geithner back in 2003? Well, the Fed board created a select committee to pick the CEO. This committee included none other than Hank Greenberg, then the chairman of AIG; John Whitehead, a former chairman of Goldman Sachs; Walter Shipley, a former chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, now JPMorgan Chase; and Pete Peterson, a former chairman of Lehman Bros. It was not a group of typical depositors worried about the security of their savings accounts but rather one whose interest was in preserving a capital structure and way of doing business that cried out for—but did not receive—harsh examination from the N.Y. Fed.

The composition of the New York Fed's board, which supervises the organization and current Chairman Friedman, is equally troubling. The board consists of nine individuals, three chosen by the N.Y. Fed member banks as their own representatives, three chosen by the member banks to represent the public, and three chosen by the national Fed Board of Governors to represent the public. In theory this sounds great: Six board members are "public" representatives.

So whom have the banks chosen to be the public representatives on the board during the past decade, as the crisis developed and unfolded? Dick Fuld, the former chairman of Lehman; Jeff Immelt, the chairman of GE; Gene McGrath, the chairman of Con Edison; Ronay Menschel, the chairwoman of Phipps Houses and also, not insignificantly, the wife of Richard Menschel, a former senior partner at Goldman. Whom did the Board of Governors choose as its public representatives? Steve Friedman, the former chairman of Goldman; Pete Peterson; Jerry Speyer, CEO of real estate giant Tishman Speyer; and Jerry Levin, the former chairman of Time Warner. These were the people who were supposedly representing our interests!

Of course, there have been the occasional nonfinance representatives from academia and labor. But they have been so outnumbered that their presence has done little to alter the direction of the board.

So is it any wonder that the N.Y. Fed has been complicit in the single greatest bailout of poorly managed banks in history? Any wonder that it has given—with virtually no strings attached—practically the entire contents of the Treasury to the very banks whose inability to manage risk has brought our economy to its knees? Any wonder that not a single CEO or senior executive of a major bank has been removed as a condition of hundreds of billions of direct cash and guarantees? Any wonder that, despite its fundamental responsibility to preserve the integrity of the banking system, it sat quietly on the sidelines as the leverage beneath the banks exploded and the capital underlying their investments shrank?

I do not mean to suggest that any of these board members intentionally discharged their duties with the specific goal of benefitting themselves. Rather, what we have seen is disastrous groupthink, a way of looking at the world from the perspective of Wall Street and Wall Street alone. That failure has brought the world economy to the edge of unraveling. And some of Geithner's early missteps betrayed an inability to get beyond this tunnel vision, such as the idea that the banks need to be first in line to be paid and to be paid in full. We can only hope that Geithner, who, to his credit, did try to raise some of the regulatory issues that mattered while he was at the Fed, is no longer in the mental prison of Lower Manhattan and will have more success now that he has a board of one—President Obama.

Perhaps it is time to calculate what these board members have been paid by their banks in salary and bonuses over the years and seek to have them return it to the public as small compensation for their failed oversight of the N.Y. Fed. And more fundamentally, perhaps it is time to take a hard look at the governing structure and supposed independence of this institution that actually controls the use of our tax dollars and, heaven help us, the fate of our economy.

Slate V: Timothy Geithner on Charlie Rose

Eliot Spitzer is the former governor of the state of New York.

Article URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2217811/

Afghanistan will become Obama's Iraq.. Just read Zbig Brzezinski book "The Grand Chessboard" an you'll know why we are still there..

Afghan president demands an end to air raids on Taliban amid claims of 130 civilian deaths

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1180171/Afghan-president-demands-end-air-raids-Taliban-amid-claims-130-civilian-deaths.html#

"Is there any reason why the American people should be taxed to guarantee the debts of banks, any more than they should be taxed to guarantee the debts of other institutions, including merchants, the industries, and the mills of the country?"
--Carter Glass (1858-1946) Newspaper publisher, US Senator (D-VA), author of the Banking Act of 1933, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury under President Woodrow Wilson.

Who is minding the Bank?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVg1C7541yw

The Federal Reserve Inspector General was recently unable to tell Rep. Alan Grayson what goes on at the Federal Reserve and who has been receiving the trillions of dollars they created.

Thanks to your support, HR 1207, which would require an Audit of the Fed, is now up to 143 cosponsors!

On page A5 of yesterday's Washington Times, C4L is running a full page coalition letter with a list of over 60 other organizations that have joined our call for transparency and accountability at the Federal Reserve.

wadada

Taking on the banking cabal

William Engdahl
The Real News Network
May 7, 2009

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsPq-6kIkvM

Speaking about President Obama’s stimulus package and newly announced budget, William Engdahl says the fundamental causes of the economic crisis were missed. Until [President] Obama reinstates Glass-Steigel restraints on banking which were repealed by the Clinton administration in 1999 and begins to re-regulate the financial system, there will not be a flow of healthy credit into the healthy economy.

wadada

Sign of the Times: Afghanistan War Costs Higher Than Iraq

* By Nathan Hodge Email Author
* May 7, 2009 |

afghanistan-nowruzThe price tag for running the war in Afghanistan will outstrip the cost of the conflict in Iraq next year, according to budget documents released today by the Pentagon.

Afghanistan, in the words of chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is now supposed to be the Pentagon’s “main effort” and “strategic focus.” This budget makes it official: The Department is requesting a $130 billion “overseas contingency operations” fund, of which the Afghanistan campaign will receive the largest share.

Read more at http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/04/ft-detricks-bug/more-7987

Wednesday, May 6, 2009
CURL: Stimulus oversight left up to taxpayers

Joseph Curl

So just who's tracking that $787 billion in taxpayer money that President Obama and the Democrat-led Congress are doling out? You are. Or you're supposed to be, anyway.

"We are, in essence, deputizing the entire American citizenry to help with the oversight of this program," said Rep. Brad Miller, chairman of the House Committee on Science and Technology's subcommittee on investigations and oversight.

So, too, said Earl Devaney, the ex-cop who's now chairman of the Recovery Act Accountability and Transparency Board, charged with tracking the torrent of cash now pouring out of federal coffers.

"I'm going to have millions of citizens to help me," he said, comparing run-of-the-mill Americans to inspectors general, the high-ranking officials charged with ferreting out waste and abuse in federal agencies.

"I'm going to have a million little IGs running around," the chairman said Tuesday after his testimony before the subcommittee.

And perhaps that's just as well, given the turnout of the panel tasked with keeping track of thousands of millions of dollars. Just three of the 10 members bothered to show up for the subcommittee's second meeting, dramatically titled "Follow the Money Part II."

"These hearings are titled 'follow the money' after the character in the movie - and the book - 'All the President's Men,' " Mr. Miller said. "The Deep Throat character, he told [reporters Carl] Bernstein and [Bob] Woodward to trace the money back to find out where the corruption began.

"We hope this will not end up as anything as sordid as that was," he joked.

Still, the North Carolina Democrat said he realized that tracking so much money will be difficult, acknowledging that "we're trying to spend $500 billion quickly."

Mr. Devaney, though, said his board - made up of 10 IGs - has a dual mission: "First, the board is responsible for establishing and maintaining a Web site." Oh, and second, it's supposed to "help minimize fraud, waste or mismanagement."

While Mr. Miller and the panel's top Republican were there, only Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper, Pennsylvania Democrat, also came along to the hearing. Absent were Democratic Reps. Steven R. Rothman of New Jersey, Lincoln Davis of Tennessee, Charlie Wilson of Ohio, Alan Grayson of Florida and Bart Gordon of Tennessee. Republican Reps. Brian P. Bilbray of California and Ralph M. Hall of Texas also skipped the session.

Still, to a sparse crowd, Mr. Miller got right to the point. "President Obama promised a level of transparency, through the Internet, Recovery.gov. ... How do you intend to provide that level of transparency, to see how - who actually got the contract to pour asphalt?"

"As I mentioned in my testimony," Mr. Devaney said, "that Web site is evolving. ... I would probably be the first to admit today the Web site doesn't give you that kind of information."

Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia, the subcommittee's ranking Republican, noted that he voted against the $787 billion stimulus plan.

"Simply put, the American people need to know what they got for their money," he said. "Under the Obama budget, the national debt will double in five years and triple in 10."

Mr. Broun was most interested in Mr. Obama's claim that the recovery plan would create "or save" 4 million jobs, but noted that the number of jobs "saved" is likely unknowable and that since the president took office, 1.3 million jobs have been lost.

"How do you plan to verify the actual number of jobs created?" he asked.

"Sir, we haven't really received any information about that on the Web site," Mr. Devaney said.

The repeated lack of information, though, sets up a fantastic sequel: "Follow the Money III."

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/06/stimulus-oversight-left-up-to-taxpayers/print/

FROM: http://news.antiwar.com/2009/05/05/us-strike-kills-dozens-of-afghan-civilians/

US Strike Kills Dozens of Afghan Civilians
District Official Claims "More Than 100" Civilians Slain in Attack
by Jason Ditz, May 05, 2009

Following clashes in the Bala Baluk district of the Farah Province, US aircraft bombed the area. Afghan officials are now confirming that the attack hit civilian homes, killing women and children, and some officials say the final toll could easily rise into the dozens.

Provincial council member Abdul Basir Khan confirms that villagers brought the mutilated bodies of roughly 30 people killed in the air strike, and that many of them were women and children. It was not immediately clear if all the bodies were civilians or if militants were also killed in the attacks. One former district official who also confirms seeing dozens of bodies said it was too early to tell how many civilians were killed, but predicted that there were “more than 100 civilians dead” in the attacks, and many other civilians badly burned.

It seems likely now that the final civilian toll will at least be the highest so far in 2009, though it remains to be seen if it will ultimately rival August 2008’s US airstrike on Herat, which killed at least 90 civilians. Afghan President Hamid Karzai has repeatedly demanded explanations for the killings, but the official US policy is to apologize, insist that “mistakes happen,” and move on to the next incident.

On Tuesday, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke appeared before the Joint Economic Committee, where Congressman Paul questioned him about government intervention and the lack of transparency at the Federal Reserve.

Proud to announce that HR 1207, Dr. Paul's bill to Audit the Fed, is now up to 124 cosponsors!

http://www.youtube.com/v/wAVaOe2zV3w

I think the reason there have been no new topics ...is that maybe they want us to follow them on Twitter??

I don't have time to add twitter to my day too.

So if they (frank & Sam) don't want to add new topics to the blogs...we can keep talking about what suits us...

We do anyway don't we?

Barack Obama & the DC School Voucher Program

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7FS5B-CynM

"Barack Obama & the DC School Voucher Program: The president says he wants to do 'what's best for kids.' So why won't he save a proven program that helps low-income students?"

Mercedes Campbell is one of the 1,700 students in the Washington, D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, a school-voucher program authorized by Congress in 2004. The program gives students up to $7,500 to attend whatever school their parents choose. For kids like Mercedes, who now attends Georgetown Visitation Prep, the DC voucher program is a way out of one of the worst school districts in the country.

"It's different, now that I go to Visitation," says Mercedes. "I approach things differently. It's like a whole new world, basically."

The program is wildly popular with parents and children—there are four applicants for every available slot—and a recent Department of Education study found that participants do significantly better than their public school peers. Indeed, after three years in private schools, students who entered the program at its inception were 19 months ahead in reading of applicants unlucky enough to still be trapped in D.C.'s public schools.

Yet working with congressional Democrats and despite his pledge to put politics and ideology aside in education, the Obama administration has effectively killed the program through a backdoor legislative move. "[Education] Secretary [Arne] Duncan will use only one test in what ideas to support with your precious tax dollars," says the president. "It's not whether it's liberal or conservative, but whether it works."

That sort of doublespeak has left many Obama supporters not just puzzled but outraged. Certainly, Mercedes is. "Out of everything else they can shut down or everything else they can advocate for, they want to take this one thing away?" Adds her mother, Ingrid, "We voted for you, we walked, we went to the parade, we stood freezing. Why?...Can you get this tape over to Obama and have him answer our questions? Why, sir, why?"

That's the question that will be asked on Wednesday, May 6, from 1P.M. to 2P.M., at a D.C. rally to reauthorize the voucher program. For more details, go here.

"Barack Obama and the DC School Voucher Program" is approximately 5.30 minutes long and was produced by Dan Hayes and Nick Gillespie.

For iPod and HD versions, related links and materials, and more videos, go to http://reason.tv/video/show/777.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/white-house-directly-threatened-perella-weinberg-over-chrysler-2009-5

White House "Directly Threatened" Perella Weinberg Over Chrysler
John Carney|May. 3, 2009, 12:14 PM|54
PrintTags: Wall Street, Chrysler, White House, Barack Obama, Politics, Hedge Funds, Bankruptcy
The Obama administration threatened to use the White House press corps to besmirch the reputation of one of the financial firms that holds Chrysler debt, according to a prominent New York bankruptcy lawyer.

If true, the explosive charge shows that the White House was willing to go much further than is widely known to have its way in the attempt to restructure the Detriot automaker.

"One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight...That was Perella Weinberg," Tom Lauria, the head of the bankrutpcy department for top New York City lawfirm White & Case, told a WJR 760 radio host.

Perella Weinberg had been one of the firms that was resisting the Obama administration's plans for restructuring, alongside Stairway Capital and Oppenheimer Funds. The group had argued that their position as senior creditors gave them legal rights to be paid in full before junior creditors were paid. They had put forth a counter-offer under which they would have received far less than the face-value of the debt they held, but more than the Obama adminstration had proposed. This compromise deal was rejected by the administration, and the holdouts were characterized by the president himself as unwilling to make sacrifices for the common good.

After intense political pressure, Perella Weinberg defected from the dissenters and agreed to the administrations plans. The majority of senior creditors, including several large banks such as JP Morgan Chase, had already agreed to the plan. Some critics charge that the administration used its leverage as the provider of TARP funds to force banks to comply. Lauria's charges suggest that the administration had to get even rougher with financial firms that haven't taken bailout money.

The suggestion that the adminsitration would direct the White House press corps, composed of newspaper reports and other journalists who cover the Whtie House, to ruin the reputation of holdouts is sure to raise the ire of people who prize media independence. It's not clear whether this was an idle threat or whether the White House believes it exercises this level of control over the journalists asigned to cover it. It harkens back to the dirty tricks tactics of past administrations, and suggest a cavalier attitude toward the exercise of political power to control the actions of private citizens.

One test of whether the White House press corps is as compliant as the White House seems to believe will be how they handle Lauria's charge. The story has not yet been picked up by the traditional media. The blog Zero Hedge, a new but well-read financial blog, picked up the story and posted a downloadable excerpt from the radio interview. (You can download the clip below.)

The charge also undermines a key administration claim about the Chrysler restructing plan. It has insisted that the plan was reasonable, and held up the fact that the majority of senior creditors approved it as eveidence of this reasonableness. If the approvals were obtained through threats, however, theyt would indicate nothing more than a fear of crossing the administration.

****************************************************
China has 'canceled US credit card': lawmaker
****************************************************

AFP News
Thu Apr 30, 2009

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090430/pl_afp/financeeconomyuschinabonds

WASHINGTON (AFP) – China, wary of the troubled US economy, has already "canceled America's credit card" by cutting down purchases of debt, a US congressman said Thursday.

China has the world's largest foreign reserves, believed to be mostly in dollars, along with around 800 billion dollars in US Treasury bonds, more than any other country.

But Treasury Department data shows that investors in China have sharply curtailed their purchases of bonds in January and February.

Representative Mark Kirk, a member of the House Appropriations Committee and co-chair of a group of lawmakers promoting relations with Beijing, said China had "very legitimate" concerns about its investments.

"It would appear, quietly and with deference and politeness, that China has canceled America's credit card," Kirk told the Committee of 100, a Chinese-American group.

"I'm not sure too many people on Capitol Hill realize that this is now happening," he said.

The Republican lawmaker said that China was justified in concerns about returns from finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were bailed out by the US government due to the financial crisis.

Kirk said he was the first member of Congress to tour the Bureau of Public Debt, which trades bonds, and was alarmed at how much debt was being bought by the US Federal Reserve due to absence of foreign investors.

"There will come a time where the lack of Chinese participation may have a significant impact," Kirk said.

"We should track that, because up until last month they were the number one provider of currency to the United States and now they're gone."

With China's economy also hit by the global economic crisis, Premier Wen Jiabao has openly voiced concern about the status of his country's investments in the United States.

China has also floated replacing the dollar as the key international currency with a basket of units bringing in the euro, sterling and yen.

Hilitary Clinton begs China to continue to buy American debt

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeFZlEaCtRI

China Hoarding More Than U S Treasury Bonds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwQ_0j6ICrI

Obama Administration Seeks Extraordinary Military Powers In Pakistan
Submitted by Chip on Sun, 2009-05-03 18:21.

By Bill Van Auken | WSWS

In his testimony, Gates also revealed that, even after the planned closure of the Guantanamo detention center, the US government may still imprison up to 100 of the inmates without charges or trials. The administration asked Congress for $50 million to build prison facilities in the US for detainees it claims are dangerous but cannot be tried, principally because the supposed evidence against them was extracted through torture.

The Obama administration is increasingly treating its growing intervention in Pakistan as a separate counter-insurgency war for which it is demanding the same kind of extraordinary military powers obtained by the Bush administration in Afghanistan and Iraq.

This was the main message delivered by Pentagon officials on Capitol Hill over the last few days, together with increasingly dire warnings that without immediate and unconditional US military funding for Pakistan, the government could collapse.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned Congress Thursday that unless it quickly approved some $400 million requested by the Pentagon for a new Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund the Pakistani military would run out of funding within weeks for its operations against insurgents in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and other areas of western Pakistan.

In his testimony, Gates also revealed that, even after the planned closure of the Guantanamo detention center, the US government may still imprison up to 100 of the inmates without charges or trials. The administration asked Congress for $50 million to build prison facilities in the US for detainees it claims are dangerous but cannot be tried, principally because the supposed evidence against them was extracted through torture.

The proposed $400 million in military aid for Pakistan is part of an $83.5 billion supplemental funding bill requested by Obama, the vast majority of which goes to pay for continuing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Speaking before the Senate Appropriations Committee, Gates said that the Pentagon was requesting that full control of the military aid be vested with Gen. David Petraeus, the chief of the US military’s Central Command. He claimed that the Pentagon needed “this unique authority for the unique and urgent circumstances we face in Pakistan—for dealing with a challenge that simultaneously requires wartime and peacetime capabilities.”

Read more.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/add/story

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/42248

sorry for the mult post i only posted once...

don't know what happened...

Olbermann asked Dean whether Obama was violating the Geneva Conventions prohibiting torture himself by refusing to prosecute those responsible.

“He is indeed is in violation if the United States does not undertake investigation of this, or ultimately prosecution, if that’s necessary,” Dean asserted. “It’s not only the Geneva Convention, the Convention Against Torture also requires this. There are no exceptions with torture. There are no real things like “torture light.” The world community I think is going to hold the United States responsible, and if we don’t proceed, somebody is going to proceed.”

Olbermann asked Dean whether Obama was violating the Geneva Conventions prohibiting torture himself by refusing to prosecute those responsible.

“He is indeed is in violation if the United States does not undertake investigation of this, or ultimately prosecution, if that’s necessary,” Dean asserted. “It’s not only the Geneva Convention, the Convention Against Torture also requires this. There are no exceptions with torture. There are no real things like “torture light.” The world community I think is going to hold the United States responsible, and if we don’t proceed, somebody is going to proceed.”

Olbermann asked Dean whether Obama was violating the Geneva Conventions prohibiting torture himself by refusing to prosecute those responsible.

“He is indeed is in violation if the United States does not undertake investigation of this, or ultimately prosecution, if that’s necessary,” Dean asserted. “It’s not only the Geneva Convention, the Convention Against Torture also requires this. There are no exceptions with torture. There are no real things like “torture light.” The world community I think is going to hold the United States responsible, and if we don’t proceed, somebody is going to proceed.”

Olbermann asked Dean whether Obama was violating the Geneva Conventions prohibiting torture himself by refusing to prosecute those responsible.

“He is indeed is in violation if the United States does not undertake investigation of this, or ultimately prosecution, if that’s necessary,” Dean asserted. “It’s not only the Geneva Convention, the Convention Against Torture also requires this. There are no exceptions with torture. There are no real things like “torture light.” The world community I think is going to hold the United States responsible, and if we don’t proceed, somebody is going to proceed.”