There is a lot to be thankful for and many reasons to have hope - as many as there are good people in America. But we have to stop giving power to those who seek power, control and wealth. Give it to those who don't want it.
----------
"Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other." ~ John Adams
Don't you all remember when the New York Times said "God is Dead"??? Hell, they even posted that as their headline.
Guess what? They were wrong. But none of the politicians have realized that even to this day. They beleive it explicitly, and its proven by their actions.
Gen, you wrote;
"The truth is this: While there are plenty of terrorists nearly all of them are cowards. Oh sure, they'll try to send a bomb in a toner cartridge from Yemen (exactly how many toner cartridges are manufactured in Yemen, may I ask?) while they sit on the ground chortling at their grand attempt to blow a plane up. There are terrorists who will pack a van full of what they think are explosives and park it near a Christmas Tree lighting ceremony, intending to kill dozens if not hundreds of people, including children, by remote control using a cell phone while safely beyond the expected blast radius."
"There are damn few terrorists, and most of them seem to have an IQ well below room-temperature, who are willing to die in the commission of their intended act. This appears to be a matter of innate wiring of the human brain, and is a good thing."
That all made me think what a great description of those who sit in the halls of power. You described them to a f-in 'T'. Only they didn't kill a few, they get into the millions. I can't think of any other terrorists anywhere who do more to make my life miserable, than those in the same halls of power as the non-beleivera.
Anyway, Happy Holidays Gen and all. I sincerely hope you don't really need such a huge pile of sticks in 2011....
Roll the clock back to say, 1975. At that point were we obeying the will of God as a nation, would you say? Or were tons of pornography flooding out into the land? Were unborn children being ripped to shreds as birth control back up? etc., etc.
Were we doing the things that please Him or displease Him?
The ancients had a saying that those whom the gods would destroy they first make mad. Our national leaders are totally out of touch with reality, or to put it pithily, mad. We are on our way to destruction, and it is very, very just.
There would be more reason to doubt the existence of God if we continued on our merry, lascivious and murderous way without the roof falling in. He is doing the right thing in making an example of us, an example that will be cited down the centuries till the end of time.
So, be of good cheer. God exists! And He is a rewarder to those who believe in him and obey Him.
Merry Christmas, and may we have a happier New Year!
Sitting here and contemplating adding another couple of layers of Reynolds wrap to the exterior of the compound... I guess drivers have started to complain about the way the sun reflects into their eyes and blinds them when driving past. Tough feces I say a freak can never be too careful and as crazy with power lust as the PTB are displaying, well, a guy needs to do somethin'. Just let the knuckleheads from the county try and make me stop ;)
Seriously, the more I read history to understand what is taking place right now, the more I realize things are never going to be the same. I used to laugh at the weirdoes who would talk about the Kennedy Assassination as if there were some kind of secret conspiracy behind it... I guess it's safe to say that I've stopped laughing so much.
I don't agree with Karl on all his post, or even with many of the other posters, but I enjoy that everyone here is trying to figure out how to make America a better place then it currently is. The way people debate and find middle ground on this site (not always, but often) gives me hope for a better future. Once the fan has been cleaned of the fecal matter still sticking to the blades I imagine, it will be people like those here, who will be picking up the pieces and moving what's left of society foreword.
I ask that you do two things before this happens: study the Whisky Rebellion, and try and find some middle ground in your personal beliefs... God doesn't always wear the same suit of clothes, and sometimes, because not all the folks seeking him speak english, it's easy to think they're worshiping a different God than you. Just a couple of ideas that might make the new world a little easier for a reprobate like me to slide thru :)
Marry Christmas Karl and all Ive stumbled on this blogger response w/regards to TDAmeritrade, effectively closing accounts of clients living outside of US, She lives in Portugal, but she believes it targeted at Cayman island folksIm wondering what is Karls take on this (or anyone else with a inside), I mostly wonder why now? Here is what Pam said in another blog:
What I can personally vouch for is that TD Ameritrade has without notice effectively closed the accounts of thousands of its clients because of where they live..
A simple one page letter sent by snail mail and dated 8th December 2010 arrived in the customers mailboxes on the 20th or 21st December and told them their accounts were to be closed on the 21st December 2010. I know; I have one of those letters and my account is blocked from all opening transactions and no additional funds can be transfered into the account. Existing positions can be closed but the restrictions on the amount of cash that can be taken out per week is still in effect.
The reasons given in the letter are....
After assessing global requirements for doing international business, TD Ameritrade has decided that we will no longer open or maintain accounts in certain international jurisdictions,
Apparently the list of "international jurisdictions" extends to at least 50 countries.
When Ameritrade is called, most of their people were initially completely unaware of the restriction or how or why it was applied and they tried to transfer calls to the compliance division and/or tax services division, both of which refused to talk to clients (including me).
Ultimately a TD Ameritrade spokesperson has been reported as saying that this the direction had come from the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).
However the OFAC has denied this.
What is true however is that almost all US based brokerages are closing offshore accounts and refusing to open new ones in any country other than the US. What is also true is that TDA did this in such a manner that provided virtually zero notice of this action to their offshore clients.
Is this a precursor to capital controls and regulations to limit or restrict flows of cash in and out of the US. It seems to be a possibility, as small brokerage accounts would be very hard to control and the US treasury is shutting that door in advance of closing others. If the US is getting ready to introduce currency controls then their market (and the rest of the world's commerce) is in deep do do, not to mention what it would do to the US dollar.
There hasn't been much reported on this yet, but there are news items on it from the Cayman's (who seem to think it was directed at them personally) but it seems to affect most countries including Canada and Australia (ones I have personally asked about." end quote
Again, my question is why now? Personally, it effects my future plans somewhatso any insight is appreciated
Thanks for writing this ticker Karl. You really hit the nail on the head with the big issues destroying this country. I haven't been the most religious person, I do believe in God and have been praying for this country to wake up, do their own reasoning, read the bills and call their reps, etc.
I think it all comes down to if the American people can organize enough to force the changes you describe. Especially the states getting their power back from the Fed. I don't know how to do that, or if the American people want to or are ambitious enough to do that.
Maybe with enough pain comes the drive.....But then is it a desperate drive that goes in a totally crazy way? I think I'll pray again....
Merry Christmas Karl, and to all the Market Ticker's followers as well.
My son gave me a book that might be of interest, "Proofieness", by Charles Seife published by Viking.
There are no big surprises here for TF followers, but he does describer in some detail the tricks used to mislead the masses with bogus or biased numbers.
I suppose a happy new year is a bit much to hope for at this point. I'm looking forward to Karl's predictions for 2011.
----------
"Eternal vigilance by the people is the price of liberty." Andrew Jackson
Indeed, if one looks back through the outrages of Federal Government expansion, you'll find they pretty much began with the 17th Amendment, and the reason is clear: Its passage removed the ability of The States to block federal legislation.
The 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct. This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.
Now I will give you this, that many scholarly law articles and debates have held that the 17th Amendment weakened the powers of the state legislatures as popularly elected senators became competing interests. This alone makes a good case for repeal. However, making a direct connection to the removal of the ability of The States to block federal legislation and the 17th Amendment needs to be explained. A state legislature can still pass a resolution requesting that its senators vote a certain way. These senators can ignore it and before they also could ignore it (but face consequences).
The war of 1776 was for freedom and the US had approximately 50,000 in casualties. These days, we have around 30,000-40,000 deaths due to traffic accidents EVERY SINGLE YEAR. Compare this to the most successful terrorist attack on the US ever with 3,000 casualties. ie we have over ten times the casualties to our country EVERY SINGLE YEAR and we consider it to be just another part of doing business. The people who died in 911 are no more AND no less important than the Americans who died just trying to get to work this past year - they too were husbands, wives, fathers, mothers, etc. They too were Americans tragically killed, but we have virtually no national grieving, no memorials being demanded, no changes to the way we conduct our lives or our transportation being demanded.
The nation takes the hit of a loss of 30-40k every single year and keeps going without a reaction that goes against the intent of the Constitution & its founders, without action that humiliates human beings such as the recent TSA actions. The founding fathers fought a war with losses of 50k to prevent much lesser indignities than we now adopt as a reaction to a one-time loss of 3k while losing 40k a year in TRAFFIC with hardly batting an eye.
Maybe it is okay to pull back on the security stuff, to the extent of respecting the freedom of American citizens and basic human dignity and know that every now and then we'll just have to take the hit of an airliner or two over the course of a decade in stride. Trying to have total control soas to prevent terrorism in the country is like trying to have total control of your house to prevent ALL germs from existing there... yes, germs are a concern, but seriously adopting an all-out no-germs-in-my-house-whatsoever policy would take over and eventually destroy your life and the lives of anyone living there. Instead, we clean to a reasonable extent and get sick every once in awhile. This allows us to lead relatively useful, relatively happy, relatively meaningful lives compared to the alternatives.
The States had the absolute power, prior to the 17th Amendment, to REMOVE Senators that did not conform to their desires.
The entire premise of the bicameral legislature (again, go read The Federalist and Anti-Federalist for starters) was to provide a voice for The People in the Federal Government (The House) and one for The States (The Senate.) Only through concurrence of BOTH could Federal legislation advance.
This was utterly destroyed by the 17th Amendment, and if you look at the expansion of Federal power and reach, the breath-taking advance in both essentially began with its passage.
----------
"Anyone wearing a mask will be presumed to be intending armed robbery and immediately shot in the face. Govern yourself accordingly."
Centralization of power was a bone of contention between the Jeffersonians and the Hamiltonians from the beginning, but it only began to be implemented in earnest with...
Quote:
LINCOLN'S "SPECTACULAR LIE" The Union -- that is, the government created by the Constitution of 1789 -- was proposed by a convention that was called by the states, it was ratified by the states, and can only be amended by the states....
...U.S. Senators were elected by state legislatures from 1789 to 1914, during which time the legislatures took for granted their right to instruct their federal representatives how to vote on policy issues.
When Thomas Jefferson and James Madison authored the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1789, which declared the supremacy of the states in the federal system, they received little criticism. The Kentucky Resolution, for example, declared that "the several states composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but that by a compact ... they ... delegated certain definite powers, reserving ... the residuary mass of right to their own self-government" These resolutions announced a policy of nullification, whereby the states could nullify acts of the federal government which they believed to be unconstitutional...
There can be no doubt that the states created the Constitution and delegated certain powers to the federal government as their agent, while reserving the right to withdraw from that compact... But this history always stood in the way of the grandiose plans of those who advocated centralized government power (with themselves in charge, of course), for such power could not be exercised to its fullest extent with such a limited and decentralized state. That, of course, was the way the founding fathers wanted it. So advocates of centralization, beginning with Lincoln's fellow Whig Daniel Webster, did what virtually all centralized governmental powers were to do in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries: they rewrote history to suit their political purposes.
...Webster and Joseph Story fabricated the notion that the federal government somehow created the states. Webster used his legendary rhetorical skills to wax eloquently about the mystical "blessings to mankind" derived from the Union, claiming it "strengthens the bonds that unite us" and began talking of a "perpetual" union.
This notion -- that the federal Union preceded the states -- is not only a lie, but a "spectacular lie," in the words of Emory University philosopher Donald W. Livingston. It was this spectacular lie that Lincoln embraced as his main rationale for denying the right of secession to the Southern states.
-excerpted from Thomas J. DiLorenzo, The Real Lincoln (2002), pp 110-113.
The Seventeenth Amendment was the final nail in a coffin that was built during the run up to and the fighting of the War Between the States.
BTW, DiLorenzo can be seen on C-SPAN discussing this book and a later book on the subject:
They assume an authority which is nowhere so dangerous as in the hands of those who have folly and presumption enough to fancy themselves fit to exercise it. --Adam Smith
The 17th Amendment got rid of one of the two key checks on Federal power at the disposal of state governments as Karl D. has eloquently described. IMO the other key check is pretty dangerous - i.e. the con-con. That's because our system works on the tradition of historical precedent and the best one we have is the Philly 1787 convention to propose amendments to the Articles of Confederation. This time (just as happened then) we could see a complete redo of our Constitution behind closed doors and who knows what they'd come up with.
"[Congress] on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which .... shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress"
----------
3/17/2013: Bullish on nothing - 100 percent in cash.
In addition to the 17th Amendment, and the points made above, another turning point in our nation's history and "federalism" was reached when the "general welfare" clause of Article One, Sec. 8 of the Constitution was interpreted as a general grant of power to the federal government (advocated by Hamilton) in United States vs Butler. (1936)
Up until that time Madison's view had mostly prevailed. (See, Bailey vs. Drexel Furniture Co. (1922) - a child labor tax was an impermissible exercise of federal power under the commerce clause.) Madison wrote that the "general welfare clause" was not a separate grant of power to the federal government, but rather a limit on the taxing power and did not expand the enumerated powers in Article One, Sec. 8.
A year later in Helvering vs. Davis (1937) the court expanded the Hamiltonian view and interpreted the clause as "conferring upon Congress a plenary power to impose taxes and to spend money for the general welfare subject almost entirely to its own discretion."
RSS available