BS: Why no State of Union address thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Why no State of Union address thread?
From: Amos
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 02:14 PM

Many of which have corrupted the ability of individuals to think clearly, through the interposition of exagerrated or false information, misassessed importance, bizarre misestimation of source, and like confusions.

Subject: RE: BS: Why no State of Union address thread?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 04:54 PM

Amos? Were you looking for an argument? You've come to the wrong door. "Having an argument" is down the hall, room 12. Be sure to pay your $5 to the man at the desk, and then state your opening proposition. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Why no State of Union address thread?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 05:13 PM

biLL, Try this one, biLL, same song different video. Amos you might like this as well. Don't know which one works!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebI5Ku5YkSI&feature=related

or

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebI5Ku5YkSI

biLL, if you don't like these, you might like this one, from a dear friend of our family, who has since died.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7YjCdNT27c&feature=related

or

www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7YjCdNT27c    <<
Oh, and biLL, MUSIC IS THE 'STATE OF OUR UNION'!!!!!!!!!

wARMEST tO aLL, (wink)

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why no State of Union address thread?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Feb 10 - 01:44 PM

Gosh, What happened to the state of our union?? Well, if I were a bettin' person, I think the political machine is churning out propaganda, on BOTH SIDES to divide us, as a nation.

Here is an interesting article. Do I believe it??..Not sure, but in any event, we need to get back doing what musicians do, and do it with all our hearts!

Is Obama Really Preparing For Civil War?


By Chuck Baldwin <<<<<(He ran for President in Ron Paul's place, when Paul dropped out, but Paul endorsed him)

"According to an obscure report in the European Union Times (EUTimes.net), "Russian Military Analysts are Chuck Baldwinreporting to Prime Minister Putin that US President Barack Obama has issued an order to his Northern Command's (USNORTHCOM) top leader, US Air Force General Gene Renuart, to 'begin immediately' increasing his military forces to 1 million troops by January 30, 2010, in what these reports warn is an expected outbreak of civil war within the United States before the end of winter.

"According to these reports, Obama has had over these past weeks 'numerous' meetings with his war council abut how best to manage the expected implosion of his Nation's banking system while at the same time attempting to keep the United States military hegemony over the World in what Russian Military Analysts state is a 'last ditch gambit' whose success is 'far from certain.'"
The EU Times article continues by saying, "To the fears of Obama over the United States erupting into civil war once the full extent of the rape and pillaging of these peoples by their banks and government becomes known to them, grim evidence now shows the likelihood of this occurring much sooner than later."

The Times story goes on to say that there are "over 220 million American people armed to the teeth and ready to explode."

The Times article concludes by saying, "Though the coming civil war in the United States is being virtually ignored by their propaganda media, the same cannot be said of Russia, where leading Russian political analyst, Professor Igor Panarin has long warned that the economic turmoil in the United States has confirmed his long-held view that the US is heading for collapse."

Many of us would be inclined to pooh-pooh such a story, but then there is this column from Bloomberg.com entitled "Arming Goldman With Pistols Against Public," written by Alice Schroeder. According to Ms Schroeder:

"'I just wrote my first reference for a gun permit,' said a friend, who told me of swearing to the good character of a Goldman Sachs Group Inc. banker who applied to the local police for a permit to buy a pistol. The banker had told this friend of mine that senior Goldman people have loaded up on firearms and are now equipped to defend themselves if there is a populist uprising against the bank."

There is no doubt that the American people have good reason to despise these international banksters epitomized by Goldman Sachs. Even one of Goldman's poster-boys, Henry Paulson, US Treasury secretary and former Goldman CEO, admitted that the American people were fed up. Schroeder quotes Paulson as saying, during testimony to Congress last summer, "[People] were unhappy with the big discrepancies in wealth, but they at least believed in the system and in some form of market-driven capitalism. But if we had a complete meltdown, it could lead to people questioning the basis of the system."

Schroeder correctly opines, "There you have it. The bailout was meant to keep the curtain drawn on the way the rich make money, not from the free market, but from the lack of one. Goldman Sachs blew its cover when the firm's revenue from trading reached a record $27 billion in the first nine months of this year, and a public that was writhing in financial agony caught on that the profits earned on taxpayer capital were going to pay employee bonuses."

Schroeder concludes her column by saying, "And if the proles [proletariat: plebs, working class, peasants] really do appear brandishing pitchforks at the doors of Park Avenue and the gates of Round Hill Road, you can be sure that the Goldman guys and their families will be holed up in their safe rooms with their firearms."

So, do Wall Street and Russian analysts know something that we don't know? Is this why George W. Bush initiated USNORTHCOM to begin with? Is this why Barack Obama is beefing up USNORTHCOM? This would help explain the reports of all those potential detention camps that have been constructed (including the abandoned military installations that have refurbished security fences, guard towers, etc., around them). Has the American people's disgust with these crooks and thieves within the federal government and Wall Street reached a boiling point?

There is no question that people are angry, and for good reason.

The fraudulent financial policies of the Federal Reserve and its lackeys in the White House and Congress have literally bankrupted the country. Real unemployment is most likely over 20%. Taxes (along with costly fees, regulations, restrictions, penalties, mandates, etc.) at every level are going through the ceiling. America's jobs have been outsourced. Barack Obama continues G.W. Bush's irresponsibility, digging America deeper and deeper into foreign entanglements, at the cost of trillions of dollars and thousands of lives. The IRS continues to harass and harangue honest citizens, squeezing them like the proverbial turnip. And now, add the insanity of a global climate treaty being hammered out in Copenhagen, and a universal health care bill being rammed through Congress, and the outlook is even gloomier.

I feel very comfortable in saying that the usurpations of power, the encroachments upon liberty, and the arrogant tax-and-spend policies emanating from Washington, D.C., and Wall Street these days are far more egregious than what George Washington and the boys were enduring in 1775-76 at the hands of the British Crown. There is no doubt in my mind that if Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and Sam Adams were alive today, they would have given cause for the Goldman Sachs banksters to retreat to their bunkers years ago!

The fact is, we do need a revolution! But not a revolution of anarchy and pitchforks. (The history of France should be ample evidence of the futility of this strategy.) We need a revolution of the individual states: to reclaim their sovereignty and fight for the liberties of their sovereigns (We the People). That is exactly what our forefathers did in '76.

America's founding document (the Declaration of Independence) declares that our states are "free and independent." And so they are. We are not "one nation" with one all-powerful central government. We are a confederation of nation-states, united in a voluntary union, with each State reserving to itself the power and authority of self-determination, and ceding to the federal government limited, specifically delineated duties and limitations--limitations that have been totally ignored to the point that, for all intents and purposes, our once-great constitutional republic has been thoroughly expunged. Therefore, it is NOW time for the states to stand up to this meddlesome, every-growing tyranny that is known as Washington, D.C., and defend the rights and liberties of their citizens!

What Dr. Ed Vieira (an attorney with 4 earned degrees from Harvard, who has successfully argued cases before the US Supreme Court) wrote a few weeks ago should serve as a template for every State governor and legislature that truly cares about liberty. See Ed's column here.

As Vieira says, the states should resurrect their militias. Many--if not all--states have the legal authority for such entities in their constitutions. In some states they are called the State Guard. Some plainly use the word "militia." Whatever they are called, they need to be activated. And all that is necessary for this to be accomplished is the order of the governor. It's that simple!

And as Vieira said, states need to adopt an alternative currency--including, and most especially, gold and silver. In other words, they need to develop their own private economies, complete with their own banks and exchange mediums. They also need to reject the multinational agribusiness and develop their own in-State agricultural and energy businesses.

I would dare say that the first State that determines to follow Vieira's sagacious counsel (and rumblings of this have already begun in states such as Alaska, Oklahoma, Texas, Montana, New Hampshire, Indiana, Tennessee, South Carolina, etc.) would have so many liberty-loving patriots flock there that its economy would explode with prosperity--resulting in a domino effect of many other states following suit--and the revolution that this country so desperately needs would indeed take place. Furthermore, such a revolution would be constitutional, lawful, moral, and, yes, in compliance with the laws of Nature and of Nature's God.

In the meantime, is Barack Obama really worried about civil war? He might be. It is my observation that Washington politicians and bureaucrats are the most paranoid people on the planet. The problem is--as with most power-hungry Machiavellians--their paranoia often translates into more oppression and less liberty for the citizenry. And if this is true, it simply means that the states need to hurry up and do what needs to be done!"

GfS: Thought provoking, to say the least.

Warmest to All,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why no State of Union address thread?
From: Donuel
Date: 03 Feb 10 - 02:09 PM

Thanks for noticing the constant laughter that was distracting and improper.

I guess as long as you don't shout and name call the President, the media will not make note of it. Annoucers went out of their way to say there were no cat calls and only one person on TV mentioned the laughter.


TODAY Obama said that he was naieve. He said that it has always been his belief that good policy makes good politics, even if it takes time.

Subject: RE: BS: Why no State of Union address thread?
From: Donuel
Date: 03 Feb 10 - 02:12 PM

Definition of polical discourse

The pursuit to corrupt the ability of individuals to think clearly, through the interposition of exagerrated or false information, misassessed importance, bizarre mis-estimation of source, and like confusions.

Or as Roger Ailes said "FOX is #1 because we are the best and most trusted news source.

Subject: RE: BS: Why no State of Union address thread?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Feb 10 - 02:31 PM

Bobert: "Thanks GfS and Amos..."

I fainted..just came to...never thought I'd see that sentence in print!

Your welcome,..and thh...thhh tthhha...than.....k--kk-----ya' ya....you...(clears throat)....th..thank..kk...kkk you,...A...Amo.....

Awww..do I have to?????

Oh, I read that I already have..so it shouldn't be so hard....here, let me read it. Can I cut and paste it, instead?...Aw , alright...

Thank you Amos!

Time out for a stiff one.....CHEERS!

Grinning,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Why no State of Union address thread?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 04:53 AM

Donuel, Were your last two posts in reference to my article I posted?...or something else? I thought the article was rather eyebrow raising!..Serious stuff. I'm not even sure of what to make of it, but, being as it did have to do with the 'state of our union', I thought I'd post it. It, unlike Fox News, was reported here..and you decide.

Funny they'd omit that!

GfS