Category Archives: Reform

Hey, Thanks Everyone! I’ll See You Again In 2020!!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

TUCSON, AZ (UFNPSI) — 31 December 2015

Michael Oatman is announcing that his current 2016 Presidential Run is now suspended.

He will be seeking the office again in 2020.

His interim plans are to seek the office of Tucson Ward 6 City Council Member, unseating Steve Kozachik.

Please see this website for further information. Meanwhile, please consider voting for Bernie Sanders.

The 260 or so Arizona Presidential Preference Election Nomination Ballot Signatures have been appropriately disposed. Please Watch The Video to find out how. This video has been compressed to fit in the hosting service used. For the original MP4 @ 1080p 720×640, please send inquiries to FEC@MichaelOatman.info.

With Love,
We Can All Take The Power Back!

Vote Green!
Vote Oatman!

Happy New Year,
Michael.

~ ~ ~

Comments Off on Hey, Thanks Everyone! I’ll See You Again In 2020!!

Filed under Arizona Legislature, Bernie Sanders, Corporate, Corporate Corruption, Election, Election Results, Endorsment, Energy, Energy & Jobs, General, Green Party, Local Government, National Election, Press Releases, Reform, Tucson Weekly

The Voting Rights Bill of Rights of 2016

Following several United States Supreme Court rulings regarding limits on monies in elections, it has become clear that we the People in the United States would be served better should some particularly sweeping election law reforms be instituted.  To that end, I have developed a dozen election law reforms that could be enacted by legislatures in the States and in the US Congress, and by Amendments to the Federal and States’ Constitutions, which I now present to you here.

Any Citizen Can Vote (No One Convicted of Voting Fraud May Vote)
Currently US citizens who are convicted of a felony may have their voting rights removed as a condition of their sentence. The only reason any US citizen should be prohibited from voting is if they are convicted of a crime involving multiple or fraudulent voting, or tampering or otherwise interfering with a local, State or Federal election, and that prohibition should last for the duration of that person’s sentence, including parole or probation, should also extend to prohibit that person from working, serving or observing in a polling place or election tabulation center, and should prohibit that person from assisting another US citizen in filling out a voter registration form.  All US citizens who are currently being denied their voting rights for non-election-related crimes should have their voting rights immediately reinstated.  All US citizens should be eligible to vote for all respective local, municipal, regional, territorial, State, and Federal offices, and every US citizen should be eligible to vote for US President.  No voting prohibitions should be made for US citizens either born or residing in the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, US Virgin Islands, or any other territory or protectorate or otherwise, which is administered and/or under the jurisdiction of the Federal United States or any State.

Automatic Voter Registration
Any US citizen who is 18 years of age or older should be automatically enrolled to vote, with “No Party Preference” selected for party affiliation unless otherwise selected by that citizen.  Any US citizen who is 17 years of age or older, at any time, may fill out a form to “opt out” and therefore become disenrolled to vote and from any party affiliation.  Automatic forms use the last known address of the voter to decide which precinct and district in which the voter is enrolled, and any enrolled voter may visit or request by mail from their local elections agency a voter registration form to update their information. Local election agencies should make voter registration forms freely and widely available, including at motor vehicle departments, post offices, libraries, universities, courts, and any other public agencies as is possible.  Allow for same-day registration and registration updates at all polling places, particularly when a voter has moved or has no current address, with the voter registration form serving as an affidavit of veracity of the voter.

Extend Voting Period (And Allow Voting by Mail)
Polling places should be open for at least one week, for at least 12 hours per day, if not more, up to one month, ending on Election Day.  Voters should be encouraged by all elections agencies to vote by US Postal Service mail, as many States currently allow.  Local elections agencies’ offices should serve as regional polling places for voters who cannot locate their precinct polling place(s).

Use Ranked Choice Voting (Require Majorities)
To help prevent “spoiler” candidates like Ross Perot and Ralph Nader from unduly influencing elections, institute ranked choice voting, where the voter selects a “first choice” candidate, a “second choice” candidate, a “third choice” candidate, and so on throughout the list or ending where the voter decides, should the voter decide not to rank all candidates on the ballot for each office up for election.  This will work for both single-seat and multiple-seat offices, where a voter, if they wish, may select up to the number of seats in the office per each ranked choice, out of those who are running for each office, in the case of multiple-seat offices, but may not multiply select any one candidate to receive multiple different rankings, nor may multiply select more than one candidate to receive the same place number ranking (or in the case of multiple-seat offices, not more than the number of seats available for that office per the same place number ranking).  Should a mismarked ballot occur, and the voter’s intention cannot be understood, that individual voter’s vote will not count only for the election(s) to the office where the mismarking(s) occurred.  In the event no one (or multiple, in the case of multiple-seat offices) candidate receives a majority of the vote, require an instant runoff of the top two (or two times the number of seats available, in the case of multiple-seat offices) candidates within three weeks of either Primary or General Election Day, with the exception of States’ Presidential Elections, whose electors by State result to the respective parties’ National Conventions will be apportioned directly according to the votes tallied, and should not be “winner take all”.  In the case of multiple-seat offices, any candidate who receives a majority of the possible vote shall be elected, even if other candidates require an instant runoff, and the number of candidates to be included in the instant runoff will be two times the difference between the number of candidates who received a majority for that office and the number of seats for that office.

No Electronic Voting Machines (Allow Open Source, Contractor-free, Publicly Owned Counting Machines)
Require all voters to mark paper ballots, with indelible ink, preferably in scan-tron form, to allow for easy machine counting, and to allow for hand-recounting where necessary.  All counting machines should be publicly owned by the elections agencies and should never be outsourced to third-party contractors.  All software controlling all counting machines should be standardized and should use open-source software, with the software code publicly available on the elections agencies’ websites, or in print if requested.  All ballot forms should come with easily understandable instructions on how to mark the ballot form in order to vote so that the voters’ intentions are correctly understood.

Use Election Monitoring (Use United Nations If No Better, More Neutral Party Is Present)
Allow all parties’ representatives, all interested media, and any other interested US citizens to freely and publicly monitor all elections results counting procedures.  In the event of recounts or in any cases where requested, allow additional neutral parties, where available, to perform elections counting monitoring, and if no neutral parties are available, allow for elections counting monitoring to be performed by the United Nations representatives.  Under no circumstances should elections counting be performed behind locked doors and out of view of any interested public of any sort, and doing so should constitute a felony, where all persons involved should be tried and sentenced to a permanent removal of voting rights, at minimum.

End The Electoral College
It will require a US Constitutional Amendment to replace the Electoral College with a direct system of elections for US President for the US General Election, using ranked choice voting, with an instant runoff three weeks later between the top two candidates if no majority is reached.  This will require the introduction of such an Amendment by US Congress and passage of this Amendment by at least 34 States.  This current method of electing a President Of The United States is outdated, unique, not useful, and is often in contravention to the wishes of majority of the voters.  The current use of parties’ electors in nominating a US Presidential ticket in those respective parties’ National Conventions following States’ US Presidential Elections may be preserved, although in an apportioned basis only (this would end “winner take all” US Presidential Primaries, and would also serve to assist in shortening the election cycle).

No Gerrymandering
US House and State Assemblies’ districts should be redrawn by independent non- or multi-partisan redistricting commissions from each State to follow first County or Municipal boundaries where possible, and otherwise be as square as possible while retaining equal numbers of eligible voters per district, following every US decadal census.  Ideally, one single straight longitudinal or latitudinal line should be used to square off one district when numbers of eligible voters within a municipality are uneven between districts.  It will be the responsibility of the redistricting commissions to first ensure an equal number of eligible voters per district, to within 0.01% of the eligible voters in the district (or 200 eligible voters, whichever is greater), and second to maintain properly drawn boundaries of every district.  It is conceivable that this method of redistricting could be done using a computer algorithm, where the purpose of the redistricting commission would then be to check the work of the computer algorithm.  Redistricting commissions should not take the party affiliations of eligible voters into consideration when redrawing districts, and should not attempt to force the creation of “competitive districts”, nor should redistricting commissions try to force the opposite “uncompetitive districts”.

No Paid Lobbyists (Individuals Lobbying for Personal Causes Is Fine)
There is a multi-billion dollar per year industry thriving on K Street in DC which gets paid to lobby US Congresspeople for votes in exchange for election campaign contributions.  None of this should exist.  Any person lobbying their representative member(s) of the US Congress or their State Legislature, may not be paid to do so by any entity whatsoever, and should be lobbying for (or against) an issue or multiple issues which affect that person individually and directly.  Any registered voter wishing to lobby their member(s) of the US Congress or their State Legislature should receive a reasonable amount of unpaid time off from their employment for this purpose.  This will free up members of Congress and State Legislatures to meet with those people whom they are representing, and otherwise to do the work they were sent to Washington DC to do. No person should lobby a member of Congress who is not either their elected US House representative from the district in which the person is registered to vote, or one or both of their elected US Senators.  No person should lobby a member of a State Legislature who is not either their elected State House representative from the State and district in which the person is registered to vote, or one or more of their elected State Senators of the State in which the person is registered to vote.

Reduce The Campaign Cycle To Six Months Or Less
No other nation has a National Campaign Cycle which lasts at least two, and up to four, years, and all of this for one four-year term of office.  The problem exists even more so for those US House members wishing to retain their seats; they spend the majority of their time seeking election campaign contributions for the next election cycle upon the minute after taking their oath of office.  As a result, we are beset with a distracted legislature and first-term executive office holders.  We should prohibit any straw polls, primary and States’ elections, debates and electioneering otherwise from occurring prior to at most six and preferably four months from the General Election, with all States’ and Primary Elections occurring two to three months prior to the General Election, and with parties’ National Conventions occurring immediately after the Primary Election.  This will free up our elected representatives to do the work they were sent to Washington DC to do.

Equal Money For All Seeking Each Office (No Outside Money In Elections)
Require that no personal, corporate or PAC monies be spent for elections of individual candidates for any office, local, State or Federal, and require that no candidate shall accept any money or gifts as donations from any entity or person whatsoever, regardless of the appearance of a quid pro quo nature of the money or gift.  Personal, corporate and / or PAC monies may be spent on initiatives or other ballot measures where no individual is seeking to be elected to any public office.  All persons wishing to hold public office would be required to gather a certain number of signatures from a portion of eligible voters in the region or district to which that person is seeking to hold public office, and while that person may pay others to collect signatures on that person’s behalf, no fees should be charged otherwise to the person seeking office for the privilege to do so.  An Elections Fund should be established by each region or district, State and Federally as well, which pays equally to every person who is seeking public office monies to cover expenses only relating to that person’s campaign for public office.  Encourage taxpayers to contribute, as tax-exempt, to the Elections Fund on all annual tax forms, as the only method of incomes for the Election Fund should be such donations.  Prohibit television and radio stations from charging for campaign advertisements and establish some limit as to the amount of time any one such station may devote, equally to all candidates running for each particular public office, for such campaign advertisements; the cost to the station incurred by the airing of such advertisements may be deducted as a tax write-off for the business which operates that station.  The internet should not be subject to content, timing or money regulations which are imposed upon television and radio delivery methods.  Allow free US Postal Service mailing of elections materials by candidates.  During a Primary Election, for each party represented by a candidate running for a public office may elect one candidate for the General Election, who will then be the only candidate eligible to receive monies from the Elections Fund.  All Primary Election candidates who have met the signature requirement will receive Elections Fund monies in equal proportions up to the time of the Primary Election.  This may require a US Constitutional Amendment to achieve, so as not to conflict with the First Amendment, although legislation may suffice, where the restriction is based on harm reduction, akin to the prohibition of falsely yelling “fire” in a crowded theatre.

Place All Parties In General Debates (and Have Equal / Proportional Primary Party Debates)
Should there be a number of candidates seeking any singular public office which is greater than the number of seats for that particular public office, at least one debate should occur between all candidates, regardless of party affiliation, seeking that office prior to the General Election and following the Primary Election.  Should there be a number of candidates within a political party seeking any singular public office which is greater than the number of seats for that particular public office, at least one debate should occur between all candidates within that party seeking that office prior to the Primary Election.  Should more than one political party need to conduct at least one debate prior to the primary election, all other political parties which also need to conduct at least one similarly timed debate should have an equal number of debates for each party.  All debates for any particular office should be aired on an appropriate television station (or radio station where no television station is available) whose coverage extends to a geographical extent which matches or exceeds the geographical area over which the office presides.  There should be no cost to the candidates or to the political parties for the privilege of conducting and airing such debates; the cost to the station incurred by the airing of such debates may be deducted as a tax write-off for the business which operates that station.  Should no television or radio station elect or be available to broadcast any required debate, an internet-based broadcast of the debate shall suffice, on a website owned by the local or regional elections agency (or the Federal Government in the case of Federal elections).

With all non-citizen interests removed from elections in the United States, it is my hope that the public good will be best served, that the public apathy regarding elections which has been so obvious lately will disappear, and those candidates with the best ideas on how to serve the public good will prevail and be elected to the offices which they seek to hold.

“I invite you to help us all, while we all join to change the world.”

Thank you,

Michael Oatman For President of
These United States of America!
Email: 2016@MichaelOatman.info
Website: http://MichaelOatman.info/

With Love, We Can Take the Power Back!

Comments Off on The Voting Rights Bill of Rights of 2016

Filed under Corporate Corruption, Debates, Election, General, Local Government, National Election, Reform, Tax Code

An Open Letter To Mayor And Council Of The City Of Tucson, as delivered in chambers on 19 May 2015

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

TUCSON, ARIZONA, 21 May 2015 (UFNPSI).

An Open Letter To Mayor And Council Of The City Of Tucson,
as delivered in chambers on 19 May 2015.

Mayor, Council, thank you. My name is Michael Oatman, and I live in Tucson.

I am here to talk to you about dinosaurs … and while you might think I am refering to Access Tucson, … no. To which I refer *is* the Mayor and Council.

You are trying to privatize Tucson 12 and Access Tucson, through the RFP process, when so many of us in the community bear the conviction that our community media should remain fully funded through the City of Tucson.

Now, I thought privatization was a Republican thing ….

The amount you set, $300,000, when the current budget for both is somewhere between $550,000 and $650,000, is clearly not enough for both Tucson 12 and Access, and it is setting a very low bar. These both cannot be funded this way without draconian cuts, or, charging for programming time, or advertising, or all of these.

What’s worse is that you are still keeping millions of dollars in franchise fees which are earmarked to fund both these channels.

Now if you do not have enough pie to go around, please expand the pie and invest in projects, like providing Gigabit Ethernet, which is massively revenue positive, using the Copenhagen or Chattanooga models, as very many US cities are now doing.

Why do we deal with uncertainty? We all know what Access and Tucson 12 are like now. Why risk throwing that all away? Who knows what we will get with private enterprise handling these? It would be that much better to keep them as they are.

Or, is it actually your goal for the RFP process to fail, so that you can sell the property for another giant student housing complex?

Now, if you continue to pursue the RFP process instead of using City Funding … *you* will be DINOs … that is, Democrats In Name Only. Yes, you too will go the way of the dinosaurs, and *your* asteroid will be *your* loss in *your* next election.

Thank you.

~ ~ ~

Michael Oatman
Host / Producer,
Illegal Knowledge TV
(520) 302-5465
mac@IllegalKnowledge.com
IllegalKnowledge.com

Comments Off on An Open Letter To Mayor And Council Of The City Of Tucson, as delivered in chambers on 19 May 2015

Filed under City Council, Corporate Corruption, Election, Election Results, Energy & Jobs, General, Green Party, Jobs, Local Government, Press Releases, Reform, still?

Truth, Transparency & Trust: We Need It, And In the FDA

Genetic Hybridization has been a long standing pillar of those who use farming, herding and ranching to supply their means to make a living.  Unfortunately, it is no longer the “mom and pop” farms which manufacture the bulk of this nation’s produce.

Since the development of global agribusiness, which has been steadily encroaching upon the local output of the total production base of livestock, fruits and vegetables since the 1980s, the one agency which has been slated to regulate the quality of these consumer items, the Federal Drug Administration (as well as the USDA), has been rendered wholly toothless as a result of the incessant putsch for deregulation, perpetrated by those who stand to gain the most in the business.

Now, and particularly within the last 10 years, GMO foods (GMO is Genetically Modified Organisms) have penetrated our supermarkets, and GMOs are present in pretty much all non-organic preprocessed foods.

We are now exposed to more GMOs in our foods and produce than ever before, with little to no oversight of what actually comprises them.  We know that right now, most corn (corn and canola oil), alfalfa, soybeans (soy, soy lectin), sugar beets (sugar other than pure cane sugar), papayas, cotton (cotton seed oil), yellow squash, and some kinds of non-organic Golden Rice are either wholly or partially composed of GMOs (see the list).  All meat products produced in the US, since they are all fed 100% GMO feed stocks, are essentially 100% GM meats.  I think it’s time to go vegan.  Organic Vegan, that is.

We also know that somewhere in the neighborhood of 93% of Americans support the labeling of GM products.  Europe (the EU) already requires labeling of GM foods, and since the mid 2000s, the EU has banned most types of GMOs from being grown or produced within its boundaries.

So why does this matter?  Let’s go back into history a little bit.

In 1901, Monsanto was founded.  It started off making an artificial sweetener called Saccharin, which it marketed to Coca-Cola.  In the 1920s, Monsanto started producing vanillin, salicylic acid, aspirin, and basic industrial chemicals like sulfuric acid and rubber processing chemicals.

Odd that a company which makes food additives would also be making sulfuric acid (which will eat through your skin) and rubber processing chemicals (which can kill you), isn’t it?

Since the 1940s, Monsanto become a leading manufacturer of plastics, including polystyrene, synthetic fibers, the herbicides 2,4,5-T, DDT, Agent Orange, the artificial sweetener aspartame (NutraSweet), bovine somatotropin (bovine growth hormone or BST), PCBs, LEDs, 2,4-D, BT-Toxin, and most profitably, Round-Up and Round-Up resistant GM seeds.

Obviously, DDT (an “insecticide”) and Agent Orange (a “defoliant”) are no longer being produced, but 2,4-D is a very close cousin to Agent Orange, and what the BT-Toxin does to insects makes DDT look humane.  BT-Toxin is a GM toxin which alters the DNA of insects so that their internal organs turn to gel and explode.  Somebody at Monsanto really has it in for bugs, huh?  They put this stuff in Round-Up, and the GM seeds which are constructed to be Round-Up resistant have this same GM BT-Toxin in them.  It has been shown that when GM plants grown with these BT-Toxin-infused genes are consumed by some animals, the bacteria in those animals’ stomachs get their DNA altered so that they become miniature BT-Toxin factories.  Yes, that’s pretty gross, right?

So it is conceivable that if you eat enough, say, GM corn chips, your stomach bacteria will start producing BT-Toxin, causing your stomach to explode, just like the insects.  This will cause a very painful, and very certain death.  Maybe somebody at Monsanto really has it in for everyone who eats their GM seeds, actually.  Just as an aside, there were several Monsanto scientists who, having learned from their research the effects of BT-Toxin in the feeds which were then fed to cows, stopped buying non-organic beef and milk altogether, and one even went so far as to buy his own milk cow.

Now, it should be noted that they did have some help, from the inside.

From Wikipedia:

  • Justice Clarence Thomas worked as an attorney for Monsanto in the 1970s.  Justice Thomas wrote the majority opinion in the 2001 Supreme Court decision J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. which found that “newly developed plant breeds are patentable under the general utility patent laws of the United States.”  This case benefited all companies which profit from genetically modified crops, of which Monsanto is the largest.
  • Michael R. Taylor was an assistant to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) commissioner before he left to work for a law firm on gaining FDA approval of Monsanto’s artificial growth hormone in the 1980s.  Taylor then became deputy commissioner of the FDA from 1991 to 1994.  After he went back to Monsanto to become Vice President for Public Policy, Taylor was later re-appointed to the FDA in August 2009 by President Barack Obama.
  • Dr. Michael A. Friedman was a deputy commissioner of the FDA before he was hired as a senior vice president of Monsanto.
  • Linda J. Fisher was an assistant administrator at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) before she was a vice president at Monsanto from 1995 to 2000.  In 2001, Fisher became the deputy administrator of the EPA.
  • Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was chairman and chief executive officer of G. D. Searle & Co., which Monsanto purchased in 1985.  Rumsfeld personally made at least $12 million USD from the transaction.

One would wonder why the Republicans wanted to get rid of the EPA under Dubya, when their corporate cronies were actually running it, at least from afar, and mostly from the inside.

Not only this, but Michael Taylor is currently heading the FDA and has been appointed Food Czar by none other than Obama.  With Taylor leading the FDA, giving the FDA more money will not help unless all vestiges of Monsanto are removed from government.  Taylor will undoubtedly just continue to green light all Monsanto foods, without regard to the health and safety of the people who are eating the food.

And as for the poor who live on USDA subsidies?  Well, just talk about shoving it down their throats….

To achieve the Truth, Transparency & Trust which are required of the FDA, Taylor must go, along with Obama, and we must replace the void with real leadership who have actual respect, and not this apparent disdain, for We The People.

But all is not yet lost.

There is also a California Initiative to require labeling of all GM foods.  The theory is that food producers would rather not admit to the US public that they have GMOs in the foods they make, and rather than label them, the food producers would rather remove the GM ingredients from all their foods than admit they were there in the first place, and Monsanto will simply go out of business or something.

Now you would think that passing this initiative would be a no-brainer, but lobbying and false advertising by Monsanto have defeated a similar initiative in Oregon not but a few years ago.  Monsanto has and will claim that the companies who produce the food will have to charge, look out, way more money to print new labels, and therefore the food will become, oh, so much more expensive.  Pity then for the poor consumer, no, no.

The opposite is actually true. Not to mention that food producers change their labels all the time with no increase in consumer cost, the labels will not change (since the food producers will not want those labels on their foods), and the food producers will actually save money by not having to pay Monsanto extra money to put their GM foods in the food producers’ products in the first place.  Labeling is a win-win for everyone but Monsanto.  That must be why they at Monsanto really have it in for us.

Then there is SB 510, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act.  This act will require little oversight by the FDA of GMOs, will encourage GMOs to be added to foods, will require organic farmers to submit to a litany of overburdensome regulations regarding the supposed “safety” of their foods which have been perfectly safe for millennia, and will actually outright prohibit anyone from growing their own food in their own garden.  If you grow food, you go to jail.

No, unfortunately, I am absolutely serious.  I wish I was kidding.

So obviously, SB 510 needs to be stopped in its tracks, and we need to get its sponsors and supporters out of office.  Immediately.  You really have to wonder if this is yet another Bilderberg ploy to cull more of the population.  Getting death into our foods would easily enable them to take out all but one of fourteen.

In the meantime, please protect yourself by making sure that you never buy GMO foods.  Please check out:

for more information, and remember, as always:

With Knowledge and Love, We Can All Take The Power Back!

Vote Green!!!  Vote Oatman!!!

Comments Off on Truth, Transparency & Trust: We Need It, And In the FDA

Filed under Corporate, Corporate Corruption, Education, Environment, Foods, General, Government Intrusion, Poverty, Reform

On HSBC, Federal Reserve, CIA, Drugs, Leaders and Future Wars

It is truly about time someone put this all together.  Fortunately, I stand on the shoulders of giants.  Mr. Corsi is one.

Sources:  Jerome R. Corsi (in 3 articles: 1, 2, 3) and Coast To Coast AM interview with Corsi

I had a dream the other day, well, night, that I was attempting to extract snakes from the proverbial grass.  This imagery may have been brought on by the many recent news reports of an abundance of pythons within the everglades, or perhaps you could think of the serpent in E.DIN.

Someone was standing a few yards away from me (and was helping me get at these snakes) and would pull the head of their snake from their side, but then mine would retreat simultaneously from my grasp on the head end which I was handling, and conversely, when I would pull, their snake would retreat.

Somehow, a machete materialized in my hand and I began to hack away at the grass and weeds in which the snake was hiding, as did my compatriot.  Eventually we managed to hack away at the grass to a large enough extent that we could spot other snakes hiding in the weeds as well.

As we continued to pull and hack away, it became apparent that both of the ends of our snakes were somehow tied together, so that we were actually pulling on the same two headed snake.  As we cleared more brush it became even more apparent that all of the snakes which were present in the weeds were actually part of the same animal.

Then the ground shook, the brushy area in front of us bulged upward, and out of the soil arose a stone granite Medusa-head, atop of which all the snakes were joined.  I was taken aback, but that was where the dream ended as I woke up.  I mulled it over, and went back to sleep to a different, slightly less weird dream.

The next night, Jerome Corsi was on Coast.

For any of you who still have not heard (of) Coast to Coast AM (formerly with Art Bell, now with George Noory), I strongly suggest that you wiki it or just go visit the website.  In the first two hours of the show, Corsi was on, and he spoke of receiving about a thousand pages of documents from a HSBC Banking employee turned whistleblower named John Cruz.

As Corsi told it, Cruz started out life being poor, his mother having died and his father having left the family.  Living with his grandparents, he got through school and then worked his way up through positions in various banks until he got a break working to expand the client base and clients’ services for HSBC in 2008.  He was finally paid rather well at HSBC.

Cruz worked at the NYC branch of HSBC and was given business client account information for which he was to use to contact clients and attempt to have those clients purchase more services from HSBC.  He was basically a mid-level marketing guy with access to business accounts.

In the course of performing these duties, Cruz discovered that about 90% of the accounts he received were either fraudulent or suspicious.  That is, when he would attempt to contact any of these clients, say, at their businesses, he would find the business did not exist (think barren weeded warehouses), or that there would be no obvious activity happening (no office furniture, no workers, you get the picture).  When he contacted individuals, those people were unaware that their names were being used in conjunction with a business, and those people were either past HSBC customers or victims of identity fraud through credit cards.

Since numerous laws including the PATRIOT ACT required Cruz to notify at least one of his superiors of these many breaches in practice and law, if not other regulatory agencies as well, he went ahead and did so, lest he be seen as the one breaking the law.  After all, he liked his job at that point.

Well, this is what got Cruz fired not but two years after landing the job, for “poor performance”.  One wonders how one could perform well with only 10% of a client base with which to work.

When he brought these cases up to management, he was told that there was no problem and that he was imagining it, and when he went to HSBC security, they told Cruz they were “prevented by executive senior management of the bank from doing anything about accounts like this”.

Cruz noted that these accounts were being used to transfer via telephone (never with checks) large sums of money — in the hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars — to and from accounts which were not on record with the bank.  This, Cruz guessed, would total something easily into the billions or even low trillions of dollars of money laundering.  Cruz further guessed, probably correctly, that HSBC senior management knew of and was participating in and likely profiting from the scheme.  “From what I saw, I came to suspect HSBC had become the Mexican drug cartels’ bank of choice,” he said.

So at this point, I’m thinking, “maybe I should check out my local HSBC Bank branch to see whether there is an account worth millions in my name.”  I’m thinking we all should check on this, just to be certain, and withdraw all funds if there is.

Cruz started wearing a wire, on his own, and copied about a thousand pages of documentation of the suspected laundering activity.  After recording conversations with management, he took his case to Jeremy Scileppi, bureau chief of the Suffolk County District Attorney’s office on Long Island.

“Scileppi was no more interested in hearing what I had to say than was the HSBC senior bank management,” Cruz said.  “I got stonewalled.  That’s when I decided to write a book.”

Titled “World Banking World Fraud: Using Your Identity,” Cruz’s book was published on 7 October 2011.  Cruz then took his book and documents to Corsi, who talked about them on the Coast show on 6 February 2012.

That’s where it all gets interesting.

Corsi used to be in banking, before becoming an investigative journalist, and Corsi loves whistleblowers.

Corsi, on Coast, mentioned that there would be no way that such millions would be able to be transferred with such regularity to or from any bank, much less the London-based HSBC, without attracting the attention of the US-based Federal Reserve Banking System.

Now the Federal Reserve is not a government agency, but is a collection of private banks organized in a system with tight, and basically illegal, control over the United States currency supply.  So I agreed with Corsi; the Fed must have known about this, and if so, then they were obviously just as well involved in the money laundering and illegal profiteering.  After all, no sane person would let that many billions or trillions slide without at least taking a cut, unless they were being blackmailed or something.

So now to recap; we have the drug cartels laundering the drug money from the drug users in the United States through HSBC (and perhaps other institutions like PayPal and AmEx — see Corsi’s third article), while HSBC and the Fed take a cut and let the process go unhindered.  How many snakes is that?

So how does Corsi or Cruz for that matter know it was drug money?  Well, maybe it’s not, but who else makes that much money in that short of a period of time (I know, Big Pharma and Big Oil) and still needs to launder it through ficticious accounts?  (Right, drug cartels.)

And all the HSBC high level executives know about this?  Undoubtedly.  Will it be investigated?  Well, hopefully; let’s find out.  This should be one of the biggest news stories of 2012.  But will it be?  Again….

Now, you may ask, does Fed Chair Ben Bernanke know about this?  Quite possibly.  Do the individual twelve Fed Bank Chiefs know?  Almost certainly.  Does US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner know?  Maybe.  How about Dubya or Obama?  Hmmmm….  I wonder.

But I know who absolutely has to know, since it is their job to know these things, and that is the CIA.  And if the CIA knows, you can bet the FBI is out of the loop.  Corsi agrees with me using other logic.

Corsi figures that at least $2T (that’s two trillion dollars) annually goes to the US black market in drug use.  That might seem high, considering spreading that total out over the US population of 400M people gives you $5000 spent annually per person.  But then I thought about all those Wall Street Bankster and Hollywood Insider parties Featuring Charlie Sheen, and Corsi might be about right.  I’m going to leave Corsi in the dust for the rest of this article, though.

The CIA has a number of “Black Ops” (programs or operations which are to be kept secret from the public, like the Bin Laden raid) that need to be funded every year.  The problem with funding black ops is that by publicly funding them, even by just stating the actual total of the funding, you make the black ops a little less black.  So what does the CIA do to counter this problem?  They “earn” the money needed to fund their black ops.  Blackly.

We’re not talking about bake sales here.

The LA Times did an article about ten years back detailing how the crack cocaine epidemic was started in LA because the drug was created by the CIA (just add baking soda?) to fund a CIA black op in Nicaragua, giving arms and other support (like mining Contra ports) to the Sandinista government to keep the fight going between the US-publicly-backed Contras and the Sandinistas, so that more US taxpayer money could be thrown at the Nicaraguan civil war.  War costs more if you do it longer.  This is also good for banks.  The CIA also helped to intensify the US War on Drugs using this same operation (thereby providing even more money for various LEOs).  This is a great dual example of the use of the Hegelian Dialectic.  You can wiki any and all of this.

At any rate, the CIA was actively involved in selling drugs.  It still is (why are we in Afghanistan?  Opium!).  It has found that line of business quite profitable historically and quite useful when it comes to funding their black ops, and keeping that funding black.

And those are just two examples.  The CIA created the Mujahadeen (precursors of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda), and therefore the “war on terrorism”.  The CIA was deeply involved in the coup d’etat which in 1953 overthrew the popularly elected Prime Minister of Iran Mohammad Mosaddegh so that they could install the Shah into absolute power, which immediately benefited Big Oil, setting the stage for the 1979 Iranian revolution which brought the Ayatollah and his Shiite successors to power, to now threaten Israel with nukes.  The CIA even created an asset (a person who will carry out tasks for the CIA when asked), internally known as Tim O’Brien, although most of us knew him as Osama Bin Laden (the CIA trained him in Egypt).

So you see, as it turns out, the CIA has quite a good track record (or bad, depending on who you ask) of getting the “correct” leaders in power using drugs and drug money directly, or indirectly through funding their operations.  In this case, correct means that those leaders will willfully do your bidding, or, in this case, the bidding of the CIA and the Bilderberg Group.

If you do not know what the Bilderberg Group is and who composes it, I again very strongly suggest that you read up on that, right nowI’ll save your place, just close the new tab or window after you’re done.  Go ahead, I’ll wait.

Okay, you’re back.  So now I take it that you have figured out that the Bilderbergers are an insanely wealthy group of oligarchs intent on world domination and a return to feudalism and serfdom for the rest of us who are not to be simply killed off, while they pursue life extension technologies and get to fly to other planets on our cool black triangular shaped AGV craft, right?  What, didn’t you read the part about the Georgia Guidestones?  Okay, I’ll wait; read the ten inscriptions, please.

All right then, let’s recap again.  Let’s see if I can get this right.

So the Bilderbergers who want to control everything, and who do control politicians of all parties in most countries, along with the CIA, and by extension most militias, wars, conflicts, and whatnot, do so all for the benefit of the banks, the owners of which mostly comprise the members in the Bilderberg Group.  The CIA uses the drug money which is laundered through these same banks (which create economic crises to make those already rich even richer) to accomplish the goals of the Bilderbergers, of which Ben Bernanke is a member, and all of whom directly benefit in both power and money from these processes.  I’ll bet anyone ten grand (even Romney) that there are about 3,600 snakes on that Medusa head.

So now we are all talking about a war between Israel and Iran.  I heard the other day that someone in the US government suggested that it was actually Iran that flew the airplanes into the WTC towers.  I guess Iran must have flown that invisible plane into 7 WTC.  No, silly, it was Pakistan’s ISI (their CIA) and Israel’s Mossad (their CIA) who organized the whole thing.  Aside from the fact that at least 13 of the 19 supposed terrorists turned up alive since 9/11 (yes, true, again, look it up), most of those suspected terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, and the others from Pakistan, with one from Afghanistan.  That, of course, is why we had to invade Afghanistan, and then Iraq.  What now, Iran?

Franklin Delano Roosevelt made sure that our aircraft carriers were not in Pearl Harbor and that the radar was down for repair on the morning of 7 December 1941 because his New Deal policies were not pulling the US out of depression, and he figured that a full-scale war with Germany, Italy and Japan could recreate the manufacturing base required to reinvigorate the US economy.  It turned out that he was right about the economy, but it did not prevent him from committing Treason that day.

The trouble making that 2012 analogy is that war between Iran and Israel would undoubtedly involve Russia and then China, and barring a new wave of isolationism within the US, it would involve our nation as well, and would very likely go nuclear, since Israel has built up quite a stockpile of nukes over the last 26 years since Mordechai Vannanu started reporting on it.

If we legalized drugs, regulated and taxed them, we would have plenty of money to give to Iran to stop them from developing nukes, not to mention for jobs, education, green energy development, ending poverty, social security and really whatever, but where would the CIA get all the black money for their black ops?  Into what new nefarious ventures might they delve, hurting everyone in the process?  Not that I’m arguing against legalization, because I’m not, but perhaps the CIA and all the Banksters are just too expensive to keep around.  I will need a body double before I travel to Dealey Plaza.

If the CIA wants to do something which is actually useful, it should get the Iranian Green Revolution which started in February 2010 into power, since most Iranians, by a landslide, do not want war with Israel.  No one who I know here wants war with Iran.  But then again, no one I know is a Bilderberger.  They want a situation where every 13 out of 14 people living now will be dead.  You’ve got to ask yourself one question: “Do I feel lucky?”  Well do ya, punk?

We cannot begin another Great Game, this time with Persia as the prize.

The problem is that we are making a repeat performance of the events leading up to the illegal invasion of Iraq in late 2002 and 2003, and while I suspect that Iran is actually enriching uranium and to a lesser degree plutonium to produce weapons-grade materiel, I think it would be wisest in this case to offer to lift all sanctions and restore diplomatic relations with Iran only if they would turn over all nuclear production to Russia and/or the IAEA, so that it could be used only for peaceful power generation.  In fact, I think it would be even more wise to convince Iran to drop the nuclear program altogether and pursue wind, wave, solar and tidal energies exclusively, just like we should do, and just like Germany is doing already.

The nightmare would be the prescribed culling of the population to 500 million via a nuclear WWIII, but that would be letting the snakes win, and I still have a machete.

I actually do quite often have prognosticative dreams which turn out to be metaphorical, and occasionally literal.  More often, they have happier endings, but there is no reason this one cannot have an ending where the figurative Medusa head is obliterated.

That kind of stuff/people absolutely hate(s) it when you shine the Light of Truth on it/them.

With the Light of Truth and Love, We All Will Take The Power Back!

Vote Green!!!  Vote Oatman!!!

Comments Off on On HSBC, Federal Reserve, CIA, Drugs, Leaders and Future Wars

Filed under Banking, Corporate Corruption, Education, Energy, General, Government Intrusion, International, Iran Crisis, Jobs, Legalization, Poverty, Reform

At Last, GOP Admits They Want Slavery

Source:  Huffington Post

I’m not quite sure who at Huff Post didn’t manage to catch this the first time around.

From the above cited article:

The politicians pushing drug testing disagree. In South Carolina, where the unemployment rate is 9.9 percent, well above the national average of 8.5 percent, Republicans want the nation’s toughest requirements: blanket drug testing of every applicant for unemployment benefits and compulsory volunteer work for the long-term jobless.

Now, I don’t know if I need to give you the definition of the word “volunteer”, but I’ll give you the link.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/volunteer

Of course, the issue here is that Republicans want to mandate “compulsory volunteer work” for those on unemployment insurance.  Well, if, to volunteer, you must be actively willing to do whatever it is, then how exactly is the oxymoronic phrase “compulsory volunteer work”, presumably where, since the work would be compulsory (so you would not actually be volunteering, but would be mandated to work, and to work at no pay at that), how is it not an exact description of slavery?

With slavery, it is mandated that people perform work without pay, and with “compulsory volunteer work”, it would be mandated that people perform work without pay.  Ergo, “compulsory volunteer work” is just a euphemism for slavery.

Finally, the Republicans admit what everyone has been thinking.

The GOP wants to go back to the “good ole days”, um, where slavery was legal?  Really?  But there it is, in black and white, for all to see.  The GOP wants us all to be slaves.  I knew it.

Wait one minute.  If the GOP wants to go back and make us all “volunteer” slaves, could they perhaps get a few non-profits together that had people picking cotton and tobacco, and maybe even vegetables in the fields?  That way, the GOP could kill the DREAM Act, have their border fences, and not have to pay for any housecleaning and gardening labor.  They could still prevent any economic recovery, since all of us who were out of work would have to volunteer for the already rich, who, after all could pay for these jobs, but if they have slaves, then why bother?

This all has to do with the notion that the GOP thinks that anyone who is poor is on drugs, and that those people receiving any form of public assistance must be poor, and therefore on drugs.  I don’t know, but if I were to work for those assholes, I would need to be on drugs.

First of all, those people who get unemployment insurance (UI) are able to do so because they were just recently employed, and through no fault of their own, they were laid off, downsized, outsourced, or what have you, generally by an already rich Republican.  The money which pays for UI does not come from the individual taxpayer in the first place.  It comes from a tax on corporations which would never be given back to the corporation if left unpaid to the UI recipient, and generally comes out of the allocated employee salary funds from that former employer, so it really is the UI recipient’s money to begin with.

I know for a fact that there are quite a few Republicans who are employed and who use drugs (Rush Limbaugh to name one).  If there are individuals who are employed and who use drugs with the money they earn, it is their business (beyond the scope of not getting busted with the drugs, should they be illegal).  So if someone on UI wants to spend a portion of that retained earned income on drugs, it should be no one else’s business but the UI recipient’s.

The GOP nationwide in the states’ legislatures and in US Congress has been pushing for enactment of legislation which would remove welfare, TANF, SNAP, and UI recipients from having the ability to receive their checks unless they are able to pass a mandated random drug test.  Oh, and by the way, the recipient has to pay for the test.  I thought the GOP was against individual mandates, or perhaps that is just when it suits them.  One law in Florida mandating these measures was struck down because it clearly violates the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution against unreasonable search and seizure.

This all caught my eye because there is some pushback from the Democrats who are essentially saying that if you are going to test people who get public money (still not sure why they include UI), then we ought to be testing everyone who gets public money, including state and federal representatives.  Maybe not oddly, but at least effectively, this move made some of the GOP sponsors of the bills withdraw them, in what seems to be a direct admission of hypocrisy by the GOP.

Yes, once the Democrats pushed back by amending the bills so that the GOP bill sponsors would also have to get tested, those Republicans decided that the measure was not such a good idea after all.

I think that if we were going to institute this policy, it would be a good idea to make sure that ALL public money, like corporate banking bailouts for instance, will only go to people who have tested negative for illegal drug use, particularly cocaine, MDMA, and maybe ketamine in their case.  Oh, and how about all those oil subsidies?  No drugs for them.  No more partying with the regulators for you, Big Oil!  Imagine how much money this would save.  Do you really think the oil and banking barons would give up their drugs for public money?  I doubt it.

And the next time you see some sort of whacked-out SOPA/PIPA/NDAA/EEA type of legislation come out of Congress, well, test them too.

Vote Legalization!  Vote Green!  Vote Oatman!

Comments Off on At Last, GOP Admits They Want Slavery

Filed under Bailouts, Banking, Corporate, Government Intrusion, Green Party, Jobs, Mandatory Drug Testing, Poverty, Reform, Unemployment Insurance

Thoughts on SOTU Address and Responses

Fortunately, I listen to NPR (National Public Radio), so unlike CNN viewers, I was not subject to having to view the GOP ad which aired immediately prior to the address, although I missed out on the video and what I’m sure were quite a few looks from some members of Congress.  I did get to hear the full text of the address, and I figured I would share some of my thoughts on what was said.

Obama opened with thanks to Armed Forces members, which was nice, but I was appalled by his statement that he thinks war makes us safer and more respected around the world.  We know for a fact that it does not.  Our supposed “war on terrorism” (you cannot make war on a tactic) is known to be used as a recruiting tool to enlist more members in Al-Qaeda, and only creates more resentment worldwide.  Claiming otherwise, at first pass which might seem naive, is not so, but is simply a move to create more taxpayer-funded business for the defense industry, and to extend our false imperialism in a battle with China for oil and other energy resources.

Speaking of energy and by extension jobs and the economy, we were asked by Obama to imagine our situation having a more positive outlook.  This is essentially the method employed by Family Guy’s Brian Griffin’s fictitious book, “Wish It, Want It, Do It” and is completely ridiculous.  I can imagine it, but why won’t Obama address the situation in any meaningful ways?  Programs can be instituted in various departments which will help things and which do not require congressional approval, but it seems to be more politically expedient to do nothing and blame the other party for lack of progress.  No wonder approval ratings for both parties are at an all-time low.

We could bring more manufacturing back if there were limits (taxes, tariffs and other fees) imposed on corporations which practice outsourcing to other nations, rather than having us all just wait for the Chinese wage to go up.  With corporate taxes, we need more sticks and fewer carrots.  We already have the biggest corporations paying next to nothing on record annual profits.  These loopholes need to be closed immediately.  Job training needs to work in conjunction with a reduction of military manufacturing and conversion of those defense industry plants and technologies to green energy production and sources.

I do agree that we should offer states something like a 3 to 1 match on state university and college funding increases, and incentivize universities to reduce or not increase tuition.  We also need to increase Pell Grants to twice higher than 2000 levels, and use the Treasury and not banking institutions to handle Student Loan repayments.

Some other thoughts on energy production:

  • We cannot afford more oil production, furthermore, we will need to keep the oil we have, and keep it in the ground.  We need to use only carbon-negative or -neutral energy sources.
  • We cannot afford to ruin all the water and create hundreds or thousands of earthquakes by further developing hydrologic fracturing (fracking).
  • We cannot afford to susidize oil production any longer.  We need to tax it, along with fracking, completely out of existence.
  • We can afford to develop wave energy generation, where strings of hinged booms and buoys float on ocean waves and where the hinges turn generators based on the wave movement.
  • We can afford to harness underwater tidal forces which can turn propellers like wind turning a windmill as the tides go in and out.
  • We can afford to make wind energy more efficient and more plentiful, including offshore.  Paint them to blend in if you are so concerned with your scenic view of the offshore oil rigs.
  • We can afford to make solar more efficient and more varied, and use the massive acreage located within the Nevada DOE site to make enough solar energy for all the homes in the US.
  • We can afford to place solar and wind installations on all manufacturing plants, with all new homes getting active and passive solar on the rooftops.
  • We can afford to make better batteries, so I agree with Obama on that one.
  • We can even develop (it has been done) GM bacteria which take greenhouse gases out of the air, and then which use the sequestered molecules to thrive and excrete oil which we can use.  I suspect the same method could be used to create natural gas.

Any idea to help alleviate the mortgage crisis is a good one.  What about getting peoples’ foreclosed and unpurchased houses back to them?

How about getting mercury out of vaccines?  Well, getting it out of the water is great also.  Strengthening the FDA and preventing mercury, dioxins and arsenic from entering fish and other seafood chains via stream runoff is wonderful.

Here’s a better idea, we can increase the taxes on corporate gains, etc. (Romney’s and Buffet’s incomes) and let the added 10-20% increase be earmarked by those taxpayers individually toward their choice of investments for R&D to colleges, universities and green energy businesses.

As for fixing the tax code, there are various numbers which could be used, but we should employ a progressive taxation system similar to the following, where individual incomes of:

  • >$1M should pay 40% on amounts at or above $1M,
  • >$500K should pay 25% on amounts between $500K and $1M,
  • <$50K should pay zero, and
  • incomes between $50K and $500K should pay 15% on amounts between $50K and $500K.

In addition, FICA & Medicare (at whatever percents, usually 2%-6% each depending on the national mood) are taxed on all incomes over $50K, with no upper limit.  There should be a 50% estate tax for liquidity over $1M, though not for real estate and investments.  The total tax levied on all corporate gains and investment incomes should be about 30%, and would be excluded from the calculation of the individual incomes above.  Married couples filing jointly would double the income requirements above, and dependants claimed would allow for a $25K deduction per dependant.  All income amounts would be COLA adjusted for successive years.  Therefore, if your household consisted of a married couple with two children filing jointly, and your combined annual income did not exceed $150K with no investment income, you would pay no taxes.  If you were single making $100K/yr, with $50K in investment income, you would pay $22.5K plus FICA & Medicare on $50K (somewhere around $2K to $6K), for an effective tax rate of about 18%.  This would increase current revenues compared to the current tax code (it would generate somewhere around $2.5T in income taxes, plus perhaps $2T in capital gains / investment taxes), and would create massive spending from the middle class, which would in turn create the largest economic expansion since the 1950s and 1990s, thereby generating even more tax revenue, particularly for states and localities.  Taxing corporations at a reasonable rate (20-25%) on incomes exceeding $500K with no loopholes would generate another $2T or so.  We would have a $2T surplus and the debt would be paid off in a record 8 years.  It only takes political will or better members of congress to accomplish this.

You can feel cynical about nothing getting done, but you could also just institute massive political reform.  Mandate shortened campaign seasons to a couple or a few months.  Ban all stock and commodities trading by congress people.  Limit lobbyists to genuinely interested parties, with no payouts.  Limit campaign contributions to individuals only.  Have no more filibusters in the Senate unless you actually take the floor and read something into the congressional record which pertains to the topic at hand.  Limit supermajorities in normal voting where a 50% majority is required.  End the Bush Cycle between lobbyists, regulators, other oversight positions, congress, and other federal positions.  Once someone takes one position within an industry, they cannot switch (from private to public sectors or vice versa) until having not been employed in that industry for at least five years.  The SEC needs more teeth.

The way you end the source of attacks against US is to get our bases out of Mecca & Medina, stop state funding Israel & Pakistan, get out of Afghanistan, and end the “war on terrorism”.

Finally, we can give better, free, jobs training to veterans, and really to everyone, and not just incentives for companies who hire them.

That would be my response to the 2012 SOTU address, but it was not the response given by Mitch Daniels, the GOP Governor of Indiana.

Instead, Daniels simply regurgitated the same old talking points from Rush Limbaugh’s radio show.  How does such an uncaring racist blowhard drug addict (Rush) get to be the non-titular head of the Republican Party anyway?  Perhaps that was too rhetorical.

Daniels talked about there being roughly a 20% unemployment rate, which was really odd, since Republicans never count those not actively job seeking as being unemployed, I suppose unless it suits them.

Republicans do not even want more employment.  Rather, they want higher profits for their corporate donors.  How exactly do you suppose we got into this mess in the first place?

Neither do Republicans want equality.  They want rich white land-owning males to have everything and for everyone else to be slaves, leave or die.

If a Republican cannot route a pipeline through a poor neighborhood, he (and not she) will route it through a wetland.  Daniels said that the XL pipeline deal is, and I quote, “pro-poverty”.  Now, I do not know if Daniels knows yes from no, good from bad, left from right, for from against, but he obviously does not know pro- from con-.  XL is pro-poverty alright.  It is also pro-environmental-destruction.  Tar sands are about the most inefficient and carbon-positive producers of oil known on the planet, and routing a pipeline through an aquifer, particularly the largest in the Midwest, is about as dumb an idea as not using hardened cement on a blowout preventer.  Between XL, drill-baby-drilling in the oceans, fracking, and trying to end the Clean Water Act and EPA, one would guess by their actions alone, that Republicans wanted all the potable water in the country to simply disappear.

Why do Republicans constantly state that raising their tax rates on largely investment earnings will somehow hurt jobs?  It will not.  People will continue to invest (unless the tax on investment earnings was 100%), and the higher the tax levied, the less risky the investments will be.  Graphically plotting gross tax revenue versus tax rate levied looks like a bell curve, and we are way down on the left side low end.

If Daniels wants growth, then his Senate and House compatriots ought to approve the jobs bills introduced this year.  If Daniels wants Obama to fail just like Rush and McConnell stated, he will not want growth.

If Republicans like saving money, they will use the goddamn energy saving light bulbs.  What a ruse!  I replaced 100% of the light bulbs in my apartment (even in the fridge and under the range hood) with the new energy saving kind (for a total cost of $25), and my monthly electric bill dropped by $20 overnight.  I’ll save $215 in the first year of using them.  They even now come encased in a coated glass bulb which acts to diffuse the light, so they shine light just like a normal incandescent, and they warm up to full brightness in about a minute.  You no longer need to get blinded by the compact fluorescent coil.  What a deal!  Buy them in packs of 5 or 10 to save money.

And finally, contrary to what Daniels said, to have national bankruptcy, our GDP (FY2011 was $15.0T — T is trillion) needs to be smaller than our annual interest on the federal debt ($15.23T total, and $0.457T of that is interest).  We are not even close, well, yet.  Our annual federal budget is about one quarter of our GDP, and is over seven times the annual interest on the debt.  If Daniels is concerned that the debt as a percentage of GDP is just over 100%, he should feel better to know that following WWII, the debt was just over 120% of GDP and in 35 years, under Jimmy Carter, we managed to get that percent down to just over 30%.  Reagan/Bush proceeded to bring that figure back up to nearly 70%.  Clinton brought it down to about 55%, and Dubya brought it back to 70%.  Obama did the rest.  However, the debt needs to be $500T (over 30 times the current amount) to get to where interest payments (at 3% interest) exceed the GDP, at which point the US would become insolvent.  Even if we run a $2T defecit every year (the largest defecit ever in 2009 was $1.9T), it would still take 242 years to reach that point (the United States will be 236 years old on 4 July 2012).  Now, we absolutely do need to pay down the debt, but we do not need to make such draconian austerity measures like the EU is doing, and by doing so, shoot ourselves in the foot by preventing our economic recovery.  Apparently Daniels does not know how to use a calculator, either.

So, that response got four Pinocchios.  Neither Republicans nor Democrats know what they are doing, and if they do, then they know that all they do is make the already rich richer, and be damned with the rest of the populace.  Here’s not quite a joke: What’s the difference between a neo-conservative (Republican) and a globalist (Democrat)?  Well, the neo-conservative wants the corporation which controls everything to come from this country, while the globalist cares not from which country that corporation comes.  Or, alternatively, the Democrat charges too much for the meal, but the Republican leaves the restaurant before the check arrives and sticks you with the bill.

So what’s the better way?  It is to not elect either to office again.

Vote Green!!!  Vote Oatman!!!

Comments Off on Thoughts on SOTU Address and Responses

Filed under Corporate, Debt & Defecit, Education, Energy, Environment, Green Party, International, Jobs, Mortgage Crisis, Reform, State Of The Union, Tax Code