Can This Really Happen Here (An Economist’s Outlook)

By  G-Man

A vast majority of Americans believe that this country will just keep on churning along with few problems. We have been in recessions before and always came out just fine. We survived the Carter years and now we are dealing with another Bozo who should have never been elected. While it’s easy to point fingers at the left wingers or the right wingers, it really comes down to the fact that our government is totally corrupt and have bankrupted our country. The idiots in D.C. seem intent on collapsing our entire economy and turning the dollar into worthless paper. All of this at our expense of course. If the predictions I will present come true, every politician in D.C. should be hanged in public, starting at the top.  This was originally written in September 2011.  

A few years back, I was told that our economy was in big trouble. After some investigating, I decided that the warning could have serious merit, so I have prepared for that event. There was nothing on the internet to support this theory back then. Now, it is everywhere. I follow a company called Weiss Research. Here is the warning that they are claiming could happen is just around the corner:

America’s Financial Doomsday
An historic, world-changing event is about to crush the U.S. economy and stock market.

It will destroy the income, savings, investments and retirements of millions of Americans.

It will plunge vast numbers of families into the nightmare of poverty … hunger … and homelessness.

Only a minority of investors will survive intact. And some will actually build their wealth in the process.

I’m Martin Weiss, founder of Weiss Research.

You may know that name because every day, more than 500,000 people get our financial publications.

And hundreds of thousands more have used our Weiss Ratings on banks, insurance companies and stocks to help make prudent financial decisions.

You may also know us because we’ve been on TV and in the newspapers a lot lately:

We were the first rating agency in the word to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing BUT the truth about the financial mess the United States government has gotten itself into.

moody'sUnlike Moody’s, Fitch and even S&P which still give the U.S. a stellar rating despite its financial troubles, we gave Uncle Sam a credit rating that places him where he really belongs — just above nations that are already on the brink of bankruptcy.

And boy, did the media ever have a field day with that story!

The Wall Street Journal and Barron’s reported that the Weiss Rating on Uncle Sam is a mere two notches above “junk” — the category assigned to near-bankrupt nations.

And Fortune expressed shock that we ranked America’s finances below several smaller countries.

You may also know me because, in the 40 years since I founded this company, so many of our prior warnings made the news.

Months in advance, we warned about the S&L crisis of the 1980s, the giant insurance company failures of the 1990s, plus the great “Tech Wreck” of the early 2000s.

More recently, ours was the only firm in the world to warn of the financial crisis of 2008 more than a year in advance. While also issuing low ratings — and specifically naming — nearly every major company that collapsed.

We gave advance warnings about the failure of Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, General Motors, Fannie Mae, Wachovia, Citigroup, Bank of America, and many others.

These kinds of on-target warnings prompted Worth magazine to say, “Weiss’s record is so good compared with that of his competitors … consumers need look no further.”

And the New York Times to say, “Weiss was the first to see the dangers and say so unambiguously.”

Barron’s wrote, “Weiss is the leader in identifying vulnerable companies.”

And NEWSMAX said, “Weiss’s prediction of the current economic crisis is uncanny.”

More importantly, our forecasts allowed investors to avoid big losses and even make money as the crisis unfolded. On average, the 15 investments we gave the highest ratings to rose 467% DESPITE the worst debt crises in recent years. And we also recommended investments that are designed to make you money BECAUSE of the crisis.

I expect they’ll do even better in the months ahead. Because now, a far more dangerous phase of this crisis is beginning. Barring a miracle in Washington …

  An historic, world-changing event
                                                          is about to permanently alter your life.

This monumental event will plunge vast numbers of families into the nightmare of poverty, homelessness and hunger. In the worst case scenario, you will see soaring crime, the confiscation of property, the suspension of civil rights, and even martial law enforcement by the U.S. military …

But while the vast majority of Americans will suffer, a select handful will use this crisis to build substantial wealth. If you act on the simple recommendations I’ll give you in this presentation, you could be one of them.

This unhedged warning will NOT make me any friends in Washington OR on Wall Street!

I’m well aware that these forecasts will be controversial even among my closest friends. But in our time together today, I’ll present powerful evidence of their accuracy.

I’ll describe exactly what to expect as America’s great debt crisis continues to unfold — how it’s likely to impact you, your family and your finances. I’ll NAME the giant banks that are most vulnerable.

And, I’ll give you my strategies for protecting and improving your finances as this crisis unfolds.

If you take the simple steps I’ll recommend in a moment, I can guarantee you’ll be a lot better off than people who haven’t prepared.

Even if I’m wrong about how massive this crisis will be, you should still do very well.

And if I’m right, you could make more than enough money to get your loved ones through in safety and comfort.

I personally lived through the kind of disaster the U.S. is facing now.

I went to high school in a large foreign country, one of the largest in the world. And when their leaders made the same mistakes Washington is making now, all hell broke loose.

First, the cost of living exploded. Suddenly, everything we needed to buy cost ten times more. In some cases, the crisis became deadly: Prices rose so quickly that construction companies began using lower-quality concrete.

Developers added more floors to buildings in an attempt to recoup rapidly rising costs.

So when one of these skyscrapers collapsed, a teacher who lived next door found his home crushed under the rubble, his wife still inside.

Later, in sheer desperation, the government begged the people to donate their gold jewelry and coins to help save the economy.

One woman even pulled the wedding ring off her finger to give it to the government. Local officials shook her hand but the politicians pocketed the gold.

Later, the government got so desperate; it summarily froze everyone’s bank accounts. It confiscated their money and replaced it with a new, far-less valuable currency. And that was only the beginning of the people’s suffering.

In the end, they were doomed to decades of intense financial pain, shame and lost personal liberties. I can assure you these stories are true — because I witnessed them personally:

The teacher who nearly lost his wife when the skyscraper collapsed was my teacher.

The patriotic woman who donated her gold wedding band was my best friend’s mother.

These things happened when I was a young man living in the third largest country in the capitalist word at that time — Brazil.

But my story is definitely NOT unique …

More recently, this kind of crisis has also struck a very powerful European nation.

After its leaders made the same mistake ours are making now, the country’s bonds collapsed in value, interest rates exploded to over 200%. In just six months, its stock market plunged 75%.

The common people suffered tremendously: A staggering 60% of the workforce was paid only partially and received their paychecks months after they were due.

As the economy collapsed, millions of average citizens fell victim to crime and corruption. The police demanded bribes for traffic violations — both real and imagined.

Organized crime syndicates divvied up the country into their own private fiefdoms, profiting from protection rackets, prostitution, smuggling, narcotics-peddling and even murder for hire.

The government itself admitted that the criminals owned or controlled about half of the country’s private businesses.

A friend of mine said:

“Many banks, including some of the largest in the country, shut down. They closed their doors forever. Our savings were wiped out.

“All people could do about it was to go to their banks and hammer on locked doors.

“Other people demonstrated on the streets. They carried their devalued money in miniature coffins and marched past our central bank.”

All this happened in the 1990s — in Russia, formerly one of the most powerful nations on the face of the Earth.

Of course, the U.S. is not Russia; we have far stronger democratic institutions. And our economy is far larger than Brazil’s, but when a nation’s larders make the same mistakes Brazil and Russia made, the consequences are invariably going to be similar.

The people of Brazil and Russia paid dearly for their leaders’ blunders. Barring a miracle, the American people are also about to pay a very big price.

Europe is suffering through this same kind of crisis RIGHT NOW!

Just look at the catastrophe taking place in Western Europe right now. In Greece, a friend of mine reports: “Here in Athens, we’ve seen riots, the firebombing of banks and blood in the streets.

“Everywhere in Greece, home values are plunging. Unemployment is soaring. One in four Greeks, including over 450,000 children, live in poverty. Crime is exploding.

“Athens is beginning to look like a ghost town. Everywhere you look, shop windows are boarded up. Of those that are still open, most are running going-out-of-business sales.”

Greece is not alone!

Just a few years ago, for example, Ireland was booming.

Then, the bubble burst. Real estate values crashed. Mortgage defaults and bank foreclosures soared. Suddenly, the banks had lost billions of euros and were in danger of failure.

So, just as in the U.S., the Irish government stepped in and bailed out the banks. And soon, it was the government itself — not just the banks — that was in danger of going under.

Now, the Irish people are living under crushing austerity measures. Countless jobs have been wiped out; the official unemployment rate is 50% higher than it is here in the United States.

Salaries have been cut to the bone; pensions and health benefits have been slashed.

Meanwhile, in Spain, similar stories are being told in Madrid, Barcelona and 50 other cities across the country.

Tens of thousands of workers have taken to the streets to protest a problem they thought they’d NEVER see again in their lifetime:

Not just 10% official unemployment like we’ve recently seen in the U.S. — but 21% official unemployment!

A friend of mine in Madrid says:

“You wouldn’t believe what I’m seeing here on the streets of Madrid. Beggars outnumber tourists and protesters outnumber beggars.

“In front of Parliament, riot police stand watch to protect lawmakers from angry mobs. All over the country, in Viscaya, Cataluña, Andalucía, we see the same thing.”

Italy is on the chopping block right now!

Worse, the crisis is clearly spreading like wildfire — to bigger and bigger countries, such as Italy.

Italy’s interest rates are surging, and UniCredit, one of the country’s largest banks — is on the brink of failing. It’s likely to be the first of many.

You see, Europe’s largest have made enormous loans to the very countries that are now going bankrupt. That means the people of Europe are only beginning to pay the price for their leaders’ greed and stupidity.

Europe’s troubles have just begun.

If history proves anything, it’s that when the other shoe drops in Athens, Dublin, Lisbon, Madrid, Rome, and other struggling capitals, the pain they have felt so far will pale by comparison.

As in Russia and Brazil, these nations will also be sentenced to years, perhaps decades, of deepening poverty and lost personal liberties. And the story is eerily similar right here, right now, in the United States of America.

Now, you may be thinking, “But we’re different! Nothing like that could ever happen here.”

I assure you: The people of Brazil, Russia, Greece, Italy and Spain never dreamed it could happen there, either!

The truth is our own leaders have made the same financial blunders that their leaders made.

As my Greek friend says:

“You can’t save a nation that’s drowning in debt by throwing more debt at it any more than you could save a drowning man by throwing more water on him.”

Look, in every one of these countries, the pattern is clear:

First, the government spends everything it has.

Next, the government borrows all it can from its people.

Then, it borrows still more from foreign countries and banks.

Finally …

The debts become so onerous and horrendous that panicky political leaders turn on their own people. They confiscate their wealth and destroy their freedoms.

Yes, America is still the richest country in the world. But that fact has enabled our leaders to take the greatest and most dangerous risks in the world.

As a result …

In some key aspects the U.S. is now in WORSE shape than Brazil, Russia, Greece or Spain have ever been

Consider the high-risk gambles that super-investor Warren Buffett calls “financial weapons of mass destruction.”

I’m talking about special kinds of investments called “derivatives.” They were a major cause of the real estate and debt crisis that nearly wiped out all of our largest banks in 2008 — along with the entire U.S. economy.

Russia’s banks never exposed themselves to large amounts of these financial time bombs.

Neither did Brazil’s banks. And you’d think that, after the 2008 meltdown, U.S. banks would have learned their lesson. But you’d be wrong.

According to the Comptroller of the Currency, a division of the U.S. Treasury Department — U.S. banks held $176 trillion in derivatives at the height of the debt crisis in 2008. Today, U.S. banks hold $244 trillion in derivatives — nearly 40% more.

That fact alone places the U.S. in greater danger than many other countries, past or present.

U.S. debt and obligations are now OVER $120 TRILLION!

America is also in great danger for another big reason. Washington is now sitting on the largest pile of debt in the history of civilization: About $14.5 trillion and counting.

Hard to visualize what that much money looks like? Maybe this will help …

If you asked your bank to give you a stack of $100 bills worth one million dollars, it would look like this — a neat little pile of money …

One billion dollars looks a LOT more impressive.

But here’s what one trillion hundred-dollar bills would look like.

And this is our current national debt: $14.5 trillion.

It’s a positively staggering amount of money.

And it doesn’t even begin to include the debts Washington inherited from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae or all the money Washington owes to seniors for Social security and Medicare, or to veterans and government pensioners.

Add that in, and Washington’s total obligations are over $120 trillion.

But it’s not just the sheer size of our nation’s debt that’s so frightening. It’s the fact that it’s mushrooming so rapidly — at a speed that’s far greater than anything we’ve ever seen:

Washington is now growing the debt by AT LEAST $1 trillion each and every year.

Now, at this point, you’re probably thinking: “But surely — our leaders will ultimately do the right thing and STOP bankrupting us — right?”

But the reality is that Washington has consistently made the opposite choice.

The die was cast in 2008, when the housing bubble burst and giant banks were going bust.

At the time, the U.S. government could have simply allowed those who had made the big gambles to suffer the natural consequences of their actions.

Instead, Washington bailed out the banks, absorbed those bad debts, and spent trillions of dollars to fight the recession.

Washington lies,
the economy dies.

At the time, some people thought that was a god idea. But look what happened.

In just 12 months between 2007 and 2008, Washington TRIPLED the federal deficit from $161 billion to $459 billion. Of course, our leaders swore on a stack of Bibles that this was a one-time-only event, needed to fight the recession.

They lied. Washington tripled the deficit AGAIN … to $1.4 trillion in 2009.

Then, again, they solemnly promised that this, too, was temporary — for emergency purposes only.

But that was a lie, too. The 2010 deficit was $1.3 trillion.

Plus, the deficit for 2011 is the biggest of all: More than $1.5 trillion. And even the White House admits that the 2012 deficit will be at least $1.1 trillion.

Think of it: In the 218 years BEFORE the Great Recession of 2008 began …

Despite massive borrowing to fight the War of 1812, the Spanish-American War, the Civil War, World War I, the Great Flu Pandemic of 1918, the Great Depression, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, plus Iraq and Afghanistan …

Through all this, the government only borrowed a grand total of $4.6 trillion.

But in the five short years AFTER the Great Recession began, it will have borrowed $5.6 trillion — $1 trillion more!

We’ve sold our American birthright
for a mess of porridge.

Consider this: In the past, Washington always borrowed nearly all the money it needed from its own citizens. But in recent years, it has borrowed most of the money from foreigners, especially China, and now it owes foreigners over $4 trillion dollars.

That’s over four times MORE than it owed foreigners when the U.S. plunged into recession in the early 2000s.

But it still hasn’t been enough. The White House and Congress wanted to spend even more money than Americans and foreign investors would loan us — combined.

The Fed declared WAR
on the value of your money!

So the Federal Reserve printed hundreds of billions of paper dollars and loaned most of that money to the Treasury, too.

How many hundreds of billions of dollars? Let me put it into perspective for you.

Remember 1999, when everyone was worried that the Y2K bug would crush our economy? Well, to avert a collapse, the Fed printed $73 billion to keep the banks from collapsing.

That’s the first blip on this chart.

Now let’s go to 9/11, when the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington paralyzed the economy, the Fed printed another $40 billion. That’s the second blip on the chart.

Every time, the Fed cranked up the printing presses, financial experts went ballistic. They said the amounts were so huge; they might diminish the dollar’s value. And sure enough, the value of the dollar did plunge.

But that was only a drop in the ocean compared to what the Fed has been doing lately.

Since the big debt disaster of 2008 — when the giant Lehman Brothers failed. The Fed has printed more than $1.6 TRILLION dollars.

That’s twenty-two times MORE money than the Fed created during Y2K.

And it’s FORTY-ONE times more than it printed after 9/11!

That’s why the buying power of your money is cratering.

That’s why your cost of living is soaring.

That’s why butter has jumped 22%, gasoline has soared 35%, and coffee has skyrocketed a mind-boggling 42% — all in a single year!

You’re only HALF as rich
as you think you are!

Look at silver! Since the Federal Reserve began its latest money-printing binge at the height of the debt crisis, the price of silver more than quadrupled.

And look at gold; it has more than doubled in price!

But all this is only the beginning.

In Brazil, Russia, Greece and Ireland what happened next was that revenues and tax collections began to fall.

It became impossible for those governments to repay its debts.

And here again, the United States is following a similar pattern: Despite the massive amounts of money Washington has thrown at it, the U.S. economy is sinking — and government revenues are falling — AGAIN!

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that long-term unemployment in the United States is now at catastrophic levels.

More than 14 million Americans are now out of a job — and every week, hundreds of thousands more get their pink slips. And once someone loses a job, it takes an average of more than 25 weeks — nearly half a year — to find a new one.

That’s not just “a little bit” worse than during prior recessions. It’s more than 2.5 times worse than during the big recession in the mid-1970s. And it’s also far worse than during the financial crisis of 2008-2009.

Plus, the housing crisis that triggered this great recession in the first place is now growing more severe.

Consider the conclusions of Case-Shiller, the real estate industry’s most trusted source of home price information:

They report that the median price of a home is down more than 31% and is still plunging.

That’s right. The price of existing homes in America has fallen BELOW the lowest level it reached in depths of the Great Recession of 2008-2009!

In short, despite the trillions Washington has blown on stimulus and bailouts, we are now staring down the barrel of a huge double-dip recession.

That’s especially scary this time around. Because this time, the government isn’t putting money into the economy with more stimulus.

The government has no choice but to take money OUT of the economy with budget cuts! And as the economy falls, instead of collecting more from taxes, it collects LESS.

The money Washington so desperately needs to pay the interest on its debt simply vanishes.

Look, throughout history, we’ve learned that when a nation becomes this deeply indebted and in this much economic trouble, the next step is always the same:

In every case, the next step is the monumental event, the far greater calamity that I promised to tell you about.

The moment when all hell breaks loose …

So what is the ultimate catastrophe that doomed the people of Russia and Brazil to decades of poverty and dependence?

What is the next bombshell that’s beginning to explode in Europe, destroying the people’s wealth and threatening to rob them of their personal freedoms?

What is the historic, life-changing, world-changing event that is also about to vaporize massive amounts of wealth and potentially threaten our liberties right here in the United States of America?

It’s the singular moment in time when the last investor willing to loan money to the government calls it quits.

It’s when the government can no longer borrow and simply runs out of money.

That’s the moment when all hell breaks loose.

No, I’m not talking about what would happen if Congress simply failed to raise the debt limit like it almost did in August of 2011. That was a just a sneak preview of the true big event still dead ahead.

I’m talking about, a sudden rejection of U.S. debt by the world’s investors — a creditors’ revolt that suddenly leaves Washington with no choice but to live within its means.

Think about that: What would happen right now if our federal government was no longer able to find more willing lenders, no longer able to borrow money?

Before you answer though, remember this: Washington has to borrow nearly half of every dollar it spends today.

It has to borrow nearly half of every dollar it spends on national defense, homeland security and nearly half of every dollar it sends to other countries as foreign aid.

It has to borrow nearly half of every dollar is pays in Social Security, Medicare benefits, and unemployment benefits, plus half of what it gives to U.S. veterans, government pensioners, the poor and the disabled.

It borrows half of every dollar it blows on corporate welfare, bridges to nowhere, treadmills for shrimp and other senseless pork barrel projects that Congressmen love so much.

And it has to borrow half of every dollar it spends to repay money it borrowed five years ago … ten years ago … even 30 years ago.

What will happen when global investors deny our application for yet another loan? When the Chinese and other foreign lenders say “No more!” to losing their shirts as Washington guts the value of the dollars they earn?

When they simply say:

“Sorry — but America’s line of credit is CANCELLED. Washington’s loan application is DENIED!”

This is not far off. The warning signs are already here …

Warning sign #1: China’s first rating agency — Dagong Global Rating — has already issued warnings about the dollar and has rated the U.S. much lower than Moody’s or S&P have.

Warning sign #2: According to Beijing officials, China, the world’s largest buyer and holder of U.S. government securities, has suffered a loss of $271.1 billion between 2003 and 2010 as a result of the dollar’s steady depreciation.

Warning sign #3: In June of 2011, China’s National Development and Reform Commission announced it could lose another $578.6 billion if it continues to hold these huge loans to the U.S.

Will they continue to suffer these losses passively?

The answer is …

Warning sign #4: Two high officials — Zhou Xiaochuan, the head of China’s central bank and Xia Bin, a member of the monetary policy committee of the central bank — are ready to bolt.

Both recently made it clear that they could easily get away with a huge reduction in the amount of U.S. treasuries they own.

I repeat:
This is already beginning to happen!

Other nations are also shifting their reserves from U.S. Treasuries to gold and silver, plus oil, coal, and other tangible assets.

Mexico, Russia and Thailand have recently bought well over 100 tons of gold instead of U.S. treasuries.

Even Tanzania is planning to shun the dollar and shift its reserves into gold!

Gains of 245% … 369% …
and more are possible!

Put simply, that fateful day — when Washington is no longer able to borrow the money it desperately needs is speeding toward us like a runaway freight train.

This is why Congressman Ron Paul recently issued this somber warning:

“At the present time the Chinese have backed off from what they’re loaning us, interest rates are starting to go up, inflation factors are coming up.

“Believe me, that next step is a currency crisis because there will be a rejection of the dollar. The rejection of the dollar is a big, big event.”

Congressman Paul is correct.

The worst-case scenario …

When Washington can no longer borrow money, it will have no choice but to immediately slash spending.

And since nearly half of every dollar it spends is borrowed, our leaders will have no choice but to radically reduce, delay or even cancel payments to seniors, veterans, the poor, the disabled and to pensioners.

Millions who count on government checks will suddenly find themselves on the ropes, struggling to survive.

Therefore, with government programs slashed or cancelled …

With consumers paralyzed in fear …

With the U.S. economy in intensive care …

With tax revenues plunging, and …

With global investors refusing to lend more money to Uncle Sam …

Here is the worst-case scenario — the scenario I fear the most …

Hunger and homelessness explode to pandemic levels from coast to coast.

The victims take to the streets. Rallies turn into demonstrations … then, into protests … and finally, into riots.

With law enforcement severely crippled by the spending cuts, crime skyrockets.

With fire departments running at austerity levels, cities burn.

With emergency services and hospitals out of money, people die.

As we saw in Brazil and Russia, Washington has no choice but to restore order by taking away your personal freedoms.

And never forget this final, devastating fact: The last phase of this great debt crisis ended because Washington bailed out the largest failing companies. This time around, there are two reasons why there can be no giant bailouts:

First, because the recently elected fiscal conservatives in Congress are sworn to oppose them. And second because:

No bank … no government … no group of nations … is rich enough to save America.

Members of Congress:
“A Fiscal Titanic”
“A Death Spiral”

Still finding all this hard to believe? Then consider these ten former heads of the Council of Economic Advisors.

They are the men and women who directly advised presidents of both major parties, including President Obama, and all of them have since departed from their office. They recently wrote that that the next debt crisis could, and I quote “Dwarf 2008!”

That’s an absolutely shocking assertion: In 2008, Wall Street came within a hair of a massive, devastating meltdown. Virtually ALL of our largest banks were pushed to the brink of failure. The entire country was only a few hours away from a fatal collapse.

Now, these ten former White House advisors are warning that this next debt crisis could dwarf the last one. Why? What could cause that?

They say it’s precisely the monumental event I just told you about: The fact that one day foreigners may simply stop lending more of their money to the United States.

And these ten former presidential advisers are not the only ones ringing the alarm bells.

Senator Mark Warner says, “We’re approaching financial Armageddon.”

Senator Joe Manchin calls this crisis “A fiscal Titanic.”

Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is warning that this crisis is “the biggest threat to our national security.”

Economist Robert Samuelson warns that this crisis has the power to trigger “An economic and political death spiral.”

Democrat Erskine Bowles, who headed up the president’s deficit commission, warns that this crisis is “like a cancer; it’s truly going to destroy the country from within.”

Senator Mike Crapo says it is “a threat to not just our way of life, but to our national survival.” It has the power to “ … guarantee that this nation becomes a second-rate power with less opportunity and less freedom.”

And David Walker — the former U.S. Comptroller General and director of the Government Accountability Office says:

“The bottom line is: We’re not Greece. But we could end up with the same problems!”

And mind you, these men are not extremists. They have nothing to gain by trying to scare you. They are merely following the facts to their logical conclusion.

That’s what I’ve done in this report. The warnings I’ve given you are based on nothing more — and nothing less — than economic reality and historical fact.

My research team and I have simply crunched the numbers and let the chips fall where they may — just like we did when we issued “D” ratings on nearly every big bank and savings and loans that subsequently failed.

Just like we did when we gave a “C” rating to the United States.

We have no political axe to grind. We are not beholden to Republicans, Democrats, or any other political party. Nor do we owe allegiance to Wall Street or any of the thousands of banks, companies and countries that we rate.

In fact, most of them would probably prefer that we just kept our mouths shut. One giant company even threatened my life by saying “Weiss had better shut up or get a body guard.”

But to quote Harry Truman, “I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it’s hell.”

Our loyalty is with the people — consumers, savers, investors and everyday citizens — who rely on us to tell them the truth about what we see in the future, and about the companies or governments they entrust their money to, invest in, or do business with.

The good, the bad and the ugly.

This is how my company has become the last line of defense for the average Joe against greedy and power-mad CEOs, politicians and bureaucrats.

Believe it or not,
THIS is the calm before the storm!

Nevertheless, if the crisis I’ve just described is hard for you to imagine, I certainly understand.

We’ve never seen anything like this happen before in America.

We always believed we were somehow insulated from these kinds of catastrophes.

Besides: Things still seem so “normal” for most of us today — so routine. It’s hard to imagine that such terrible things could happen to us — and that it could all happen so quickly, in the twinkling of an eye.

But isn’t that always the case? Isn’t there always a calm before the storm? Aren’t people always caught by surprise when historic crises strike?

After all — nobody believed the Soviet Union would collapse virtually overnight — and when it did, it caught everybody by surprise. Even our own C.I.A. failed to see that one coming!

And remember, for years, Islamic extremists made no secret of their determination to knock down the World Trade Center. They actually tried to do it in 1993.


“Integrity and dedication to his subscribers is outstanding and his accuracy in forecasting economic events and to build your wealth is superior.

“He calls it right, and early.”
— Tom A., Petersburg, Virginia

But among the thousands who streamed into the twin towers on September 11, 2001, how many — if any — believed they had anything to worry about?

Many, including my cousin’s daughter and some friends, just kept going to work as they always had — and thousands paid the ultimate price.

In Japan, even though they had been repeatedly warned, nobody — including my own son, who lives in Tokyo — believed the nuclear power plants would suffer multiple meltdowns.

Once again, their denial was costly in the extreme.

Even in my own 40-year career as a ratings analyst, I’ve seen denial exact a hefty price over and over again.

In the late 1990s, almost nobody believed us when we warned that the tech bubble was about to burst in the stock market.

A few years ago, only a handful of people believed our senior analyst Mike Larson when he repeatedly warned that the real estate bubble was about to burst.

And of course, very few listened when we warned that Lehman would go belly up and that even the almighty Bank of America would come within an inch of its life.

So I’m under no delusions here. I know that the vast majority of Americans will fail to heed this warning and fail to get ready for this crisis.

I sincerely hope — for your family’s sake — that you are not one of them.

Because the precautions required to weather the coming tempest are not difficult.

And even if the storm turns out to be less severe than I fear it may be, the worst that’ll happen is that you’ll sleep better at night and you could make some money in the process.

Take these six steps immediately
to protect and grow your wealth

So WHEN should you expect to see this cataclysmic event — the moment when Washington runs out of money? Soon. VERY soon.

The U.S. Treasury holds a 30-year bond auction about every two weeks — and it auctions shorter-term notes and bonds even more frequently. So it could happen at virtually any moment.

STEP #1 is to prepare your defenses: If you count on the government for anything, you’ll need to plan to live without it.

As we’ve seen, all levels of government — federal, state and local — will have no choice but to cut spending as this crisis unfolds.

That means you’ll need a plan for getting by on your own — without help from Social Security, Medicare, or other government programs.

Also keep this in mind. Washington may no longer be able to bail out your bank or guarantee your deposits when skyrocketing loan defaults push it to the edge of the precipice.

If the government owes you money — tax refunds, for instance — be aware that the payments could be delayed.

It would also be a good idea to make preparations to personally ensure your family’s safety. Because police, fire and emergency services will probably be hard to come by in many communities.

If you live in a city, have a plan and a place to go if things become uncomfortable for you.

STEP #2 is to make sure your bank is the safest one you can find.

Here, there’s even more I can do to help. Our Weiss Ratings is the nation’s leading provider of independent ratings on 16,000 banks and credit unions.

Since 1990, we have issued grades on a total of 1,533 banks that subsequently failed.

On 90% of those banks, we issued a clear warning to consumers ONE FULL YEAR ahead of time. And on nearly all of the rest, we issued a warning or a caution flag at least a few months before the failure. Now, the problems in the banking industry have gotten a lot worse.

Not only do we have more bank failures, we also have more BIG bank failures.

STEP #3 is to build an impenetrable wall of privacy around your finances: Make no mistake — the United States government will NOT be your friend as this crisis unfolds. Neither will your state, county or local governments.

If history proves anything its’ that there’s virtually nothing as dangerous as a big government that’s being threatened with extinction.

If the worst-case scenario, if a politician or bureaucrat comes to the conclusion that your rights and property stand in the way of saving the government … you can kiss them good-bye.

You’re also going to have to think about others who will be desperate enough to seize your wealth — especially if you live in a city or even the suburbs of a large metropolitan area.

Privacy — keeping a low profile for yourself and your assets — will be among your best defenses.

STEP #4 is to own mankind’s greatest crisis hedge — GOLD: Since we first began recommending them in 1999, gold bullion coins and bars have risen by 450%. An initial $10,000 investment is worth $55,000 today.

STEP #5 is to hedge against financial losses — with investments designed to spin off substantial profits when the economy implodes.

STEP #6 is to go for truly huge gains as this crisis unfolds: At a time like this, a powerful offense is your best defense.

Building up substantial cash reserves is the best way to ensure your family’s safety and comfort.

So I ask all of you to look very hard in the mirror and ask yourself one question: If this happens, am I ready to deal with it? If you say no you still have time, get on with it.  Being stupid will not feed you or your family. Being in denial is even worse, you will fail to act fast enough to achieve safety. It’s your choice folks. I hope you do the right thing!  I’d rather be ready ten years to early than to start preparing one day too late!

thCAE1FA25Live Free!



  1. gmanfortruth says:

    Back to the real problems 🙂

  2. Good morning, GMAN…… just went over everybody’s head. Economics is the least understood theory known to mankind.

    We made our decisions last year and they are finished. The one thing that most people will not understand……..FDIC is not the place to be today…..but………………………………………….

    Have a good day.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Good Morning Colonel 🙂

      I’m hoping to get some cause and effect discussion, as well as why some, like Buck, doesn’t see this happening (if that’s the case). At the very least, maybe some suggestions and some simple plans to help in the short term. Few people are prepared for a weather disaster, much less something this bad.

      • It is going to be bad…..but you cannot warn people enough but I am of the mindset now to just let it happen. For some reason, people do not see a government spending the same as household spending. I don’t get it.

        Cause and effect? Hmmmm…….we have protected ourselves as best we can. We dumped all treasuries and government backed securities last year. We will not invest in treasuries any longer until there is a balanced budget from Congress. We moved our money from FDIC banks because the US Treasury right now is unreliable, We dumped all tax free municipals as they came due from cities like New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, etc…..and have redirected our investments into states with a balanced budget. The Northeastern cities are no longer worth the risk, in our opinion. Neither is California. Oregon and Washington State are on the closely watch list

        We pulled out of the Euro as it is about to collapse…..or devalue significantly. For the short term we have redirected into high growth states. We do not feel that anymore investment into metals is a good thing for now. We have decided to suspend our commodities trading because it is subject to tariff wars and we see this as coming down the pike if the currency becomes devalued any more.

        So, we are staying in the United States with our investments but we are staying only in those states that have high growth, no state income taxes, and have a balanced budget….there are a few left.

        Cause and effect you want???? Entitlement mentality, higher taxes are the cause……moving our money out is the effect.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          That’s very good advice Colonel, exactly what I’m hoping for. I’m preparing more as a moderate prepper, these are the simple things (to me anyway) that can be done for those “oh shit” moments.

          Hopefully, we can all share some ideas.

  3. And then there is this……after all.

    The most expensive beers in baseball……

    The Mets and Brewers – Price of a small draft beer: $5.75.
    The team moved in the fences, brought back some of the blue and orange trim and kept beer prices steady to give fans something to cheer about after last year’s miserable season. The Brewers, meanwhile, celebrated the NL Central title by increasing the price of a 16-ounce beer by 25 cents.

    The Orioles and Dodgers – Price of a small draft beer $6.25.
    The O’s held to last year’s price for an 18-ounce beer, while the recently sold Dodgers are charging 25 cents more for a 16-ounce cup than they did in 2011. With both starting the season on a high note, maybe fans won’t notice until the first slump.

    The White Sox – Price of a small draft beer: $6.50
    The White Sox and Washington held the line from 2011, but that $6.50 price tag in 2012 still puts both teams firmly within the Top 10. Not raising the price of a costly beer doesn’t make it any more affordable, unless you plan on hosting a “give everyone a 5 percent raise” promotion night.

    The Cardinals – Price of a small draft beer: $6.75.
    The price hasn’t changed since last year, but c’mon. You’re practically bicycling Budweiser products in from the brewery and the stadium has the Busch family’s name on it. This must hurt even worse for Cards fans knowing that they’re paying more for 12 ounces of beer than their fellow beer-ballpark fans pay for a pint at Milwaukee’s Miller Park ($5.75) or Colorado’s Coors Field ($6).

    The Braves – Price of a small draft beer: $7.
    Your team collapses at the end of last season and fails to make the playoffs and you still raise the price of a 16-ounce beer by 25 cents. No wonder Coca-Cola is so popular in the ATL.

  4. gmanfortruth says:

    Is this something that should concern all Americans?

  5. gmanfortruth says:

    There are a few things that have me perplexed, as well as concerned. One, is the DHS and other agencies branding conservatives, those who believe in the 2nd Amendment and Liberty in general, and several other traditionalists as TERRORISTS. Really? This should be a crime, because it makes targets out of good people. No different than posting the names and addresses of gun owners in NY, why do we continue to tolerate this kind of activity. I don’t know anybody who wants to harm innocent people, so how can they be terrorists?

    Second, why the the Alphabet soup Federal agencies purchase ove 1.6 billion rounds of ammo and pre-position it around the country?

    Three, why are “preppers” looked down upon? Are they hurting anyone? Is this just propaganda to convince people not to prepare? Geez, I would think that the threat of a bad weather event would be enough to prepare for, that it would be pushed as a good thing. HMM, something is smelling bad in D.C.

    • Gotta stay on economics in this thread……

      But preparation for perceived problems is in line, There are two kinds of people that do not like those that prepare. (1) the ones that do not believe in preparation…..the takers, and (2) those that believe any type of preparation is wrong because it is perceived as taking away from society.

      • I might even add a (3)….those that do not like success because success shows………preparation and that causes jealousy.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Agreed Sir 🙂 Feel free to bring up other subjects if you want, it won’t bother me at all. It is possible to have more than one discussion at the same time here 🙂

  6. gmanfortruth says:

    It would not surprise me in the least that a faux event will happen today in D.C. Some FBI patsy, likely called a disgruntled 2nd Amendment supporter, will make the news. Either a direct attempt at Obama (with an “assault rifle” no less) or a non-violent arrest that makes a big splash in the news. This is not a prediction, but just saying, it wouldn’t surprise me.

  7. Cuomo’s extreme abortion bill creates a civil war with Democrats, Catholics

    by Kirsten Andersen

    Fri Jan 18, 2013 17:23 EST
    Comments (65)
    Tags: andrew cuomo, democrats for life of america dfla, new york, timothy dolan

    ALBANY, January 18, 2013, ( – By promoting one of the most expansive abortion bills in American history, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has opened a civil war on two fronts: with his church and with elements of his own party.

    Cuomo is pushing for a massive expansion of access to abortion in the state, including lifting restrictions on third-trimester abortions, allowing non-doctors to perform the procedure, and enshrining a fundamental right to “terminate a pregnancy” in New York state law.

    Democrats for Life of America deemed the proposed bill “the most sweeping abortion legislation in the nation.”

    The Democratic governor introduced the bill to cheers during his January 9 State of the State address, shrouding it in the name of “women’s equality.”

    “The abortion language would allow late-term abortions, allow non-doctors to perform abortions, and supersede any reasonable restrictions such as parental notification,” the group stated.

    “It is out of touch with the views of most Americans, out of touch with the views of most Democrats, and could hamper real reform for women’s rights,” the Democratic group concluded.

    Particularly “in a state that already has one of the highest abortion rates,” double the national average.

    One-third of all pregnancies in the state end in abortion, and in some parts of New York City the abortion rate is more than 60 percent.

    “This is worse than Roe v. Wade itself, and everyone needs to focus on defeating this bill,” Chris Slattery, director of the Expectant Mother Care pregnancy centers in New York City told the National Catholic Register. “It’s the fight of the pro-life movement’s life in New York.”

    Slattery said, due to the state’s cosmopolitan nature, “people all over the world – not just out of state – are going to be coming to New York to have and perform these abortions.”
    Abp. Timothy Dolan
    Abp. Timothy Dolan

    With his proposal Cuomo, a Roman Catholic, predictably ran afoul of his Church and its teachings. Both Abp. Timothy Dolan and the New York Catholic Conference blasted the measure.

    “I am hard pressed to think of a piece of legislation that is less needed or more harmful than this one,” wrote the Archbishop in a letter to Governor Cuomo.

    (Click “like” if you want to end abortion! )

    “As we have discussed in the past, we obviously disagree on the question of the legality of abortion, but surely we are in equally strong agreement that the abortion rate in New York is tragically high,” he wrote.

    “There was a time when abortion supporters claimed they wanted to make abortion ‘safe, legal, and rare.’ Yet this measure is specifically designed to expand access to abortion, and therefore to increase the abortion rate,” he added.

    The state Catholic Conference condemned the bill in a memo, saying, “It goes well beyond Roe.”

    “This bill says that abortion is fundamental and thus untouchable – no regulations on abortion, ever. No parental notification for minors’ abortions, no limits on taxpayer funding of abortion, no limits on late-term abortions, no informed consent for pregnant women seeking abortion,” it stated. “None of the commonsense regulations enacted by the vast majority of states and supported by large majorities of the public would be allowed in New York.”

    The Conference presented a point-by-point deconstruction of the legislation:

    The bill would permit unlimited late-term abortion on demand.

    Current state law says abortions are legal in New York through 24 weeks of pregnancy (Article 125 Penal Law), but outlawed after that unless they are necessary to save a woman’s life. This bill would repeal that law and insert a “health” exception, broadly interpreted by the courts to include age, economic, social and emotional factors. It is an exception that will allow more third-trimester abortions in New York State, a policy which the public strongly disapproves. This ignores the state’s legitimate interest in protecting the lives of fully formed children in the womb, and ignores the will of a majority of New Yorkers who oppose late-term abortion.

    The bill would endanger the lives of women by allowing non-physicians to perform abortions.

    While current law states that only a “duly licensed physician” may perform an abortion, this bill would allow any “licensed health care practitioner” to perform the procedure prior to viability. This dangerous and extreme change clearly puts women’s health at risk, and mirrors a national abortion strategy to permit non-doctors to perform abortions due to the declining number of physicians willing to do so.

    The bill would preclude any future reasonable regulations of abortion.

    It would establish a “fundamental right of privacy” within New York State law, encompassing the right “to terminate a pregnancy,” even though the Supreme Court has rejected, numerous times, classifying abortion as a “fundamental right.” Therefore, it is impossible to say that this legislation simply “codifies Roe vs. Wade” in New York law. It goes well beyond Roe. The Court has said that states may regulate abortion, as long as those regulations do not place an “undue burden” on the right to an abortion. This bill says that abortion is fundamental and thus untouchable – no regulations on abortion, ever. No parental notification for minors’ abortions, no limits on taxpayer funding of abortion, no limits on late-term abortions, no informed consent for pregnant women seeking abortion. None of the commonsense regulations enacted by the vast majority of states and supported by large majorities of the public would be allowed in New York.

    The bill endangers the religious liberty of Catholic hospitals and other institutions.

    While the bill contains limited conscience protection, that protection is ambiguous and inadequate and is extended only to individual health providers who do not wish to “provide” abortions (protection that is already guaranteed by Civil Rights law.) What is not provided in the bill are protections for institutional providers, such as religious hospitals and other agencies that do not wish to be involved with abortion. The bill declares that “the state shall not discriminate” against the exercise of the fundamental right to abortion in the “provision of benefits, facilities, services or information.” In other words, it would permit state regulators, such as the State Health Department or State Insurance Department, to require support for abortion from any agency or institution licensed or funded by the state.

    The bill could be used to undermine the state’s maternity programs.

    In a similar way, these beneficial programs, which are working well to reduce infant mortality, could be ruled “discriminatory” for favoring childbirth over abortion, and be denied state benefits if this bill were to become law.

    These are the types of things that are destroying our society- We’re becoming morally bankrupt by LAW.

    • Cuomo abortion bill outrageous, says … Democrats for Life
      posted at 9:01 am on January 21, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

      Are there such people as pro-life Democrats? We had a few in Congress a few years back, as I recall, but then they voted for the ObamaCare bill without language that permanently protected taxpayers from funding abortions. Nevertheless, there still seem to be a significant number of Democratic voters who remain pro-life, even if there doesn’t seem to be many Democratic politicians. One group in New York, Democrats for Life of America, is outraged over a new abortion-expansion proposal from Governor Andrew Cuomo in what is already arguably the abortion capital of the nation, which would eliminate parental notification requirements and allow non-doctors to perform abortions:

      By promoting one of the most expansive abortion bills in American history, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has opened a civil war on two fronts: with his church and with elements of his own party.

      Cuomo is pushing for a massive expansion of access to abortion in the state, including lifting restrictions on third-trimester abortions, allowing non-doctors to perform the procedure, and enshrining a fundamental right to “terminate a pregnancy” in New York state law.

      Democrats for Life of America deemed the proposed bill “the most sweeping abortion
      legislation in the nation.”

      The Democratic governor introduced the bill to cheers during his January 9 State of the State address, shrouding it in the name of “women’s equality.”

      “The abortion language would allow late-term abortions, allow non-doctors to perform abortions, and supersede any reasonable restrictions such as parental notification,” the group stated.

      “It is out of touch with the views of most Americans, out of touch with the views of most Democrats, and could hamper real reform for women’s rights,” the Democratic group concluded.

      Democrats for Life offer a few points for Cuomo to consider when making such proposals:

      First, there are 21 million Democrats who self-identify as pro-life and otherwise much diversity within our Party on this issue of abortion.

      That diversity of opinion is as follows:

      61% of Democrats support parental consent for minors seeking abortion (Gallup, 2011);
      60% of Democrats support a 24-hour waiting period for women seeking abortion (Gallup, 2011);
      84% of Democrats support informed consent (Gallup, 2011);
      49% of Democrats support an ultrasound requirement (Gallup, 2011);
      59% of Democrats support a ban on partial-birth abortions (Gallup, 2011).

      We didn’t hear much from this majority during the “Julia” debate, though. Instead, we are hearing from the traditional opponents of abortion — the Catholic Church, and Republicans. My good friend Deacon Greg Kandra delivered a powerful homily yesterday on the subject of the proposed law, reminding his congregation of some very uncomfortable facts about abortion in America and in New York specifically:

      1.2 million abortions a year – roughly double the number of 40 years ago.

      The total number of abortions since 1973: 54, 559,000—and climbing.

      In New York City today, 40% of all pregnancies, nearly half, end in abortion.

      Among minorities, it’s as high as 60%.

      In some neighborhoods, it’s 67%.

      And that’s just the beginning. To some, it seems, that’s not enough.

      In Albany two weeks ago, the governor of this state proposed an abortion bill that threatens to make New York the bloodiest state in the union.

      It would permit unlimited late term abortion on demand – right up to the ninth month.

      It would allow people who are not doctors to perform abortions.

      It would declare that the “state shall not discriminate” against the right to abortion, a declaration that could threaten the very existence of Catholic hospitals. Long Island alone is home to six hospitals that could be crippled by having Medicare funds withheld if they refuse to comply.

      If enacted into law, this bill would declare that abortion is a fundamental right that cannot be denied. No parental notification for minors, no limits on taxpayer funding of abortion, no limits on late-term abortions.

      The bishops of New York warn of the danger to religious liberty inherent in this proposal to make abortion a “fundamental right,” and blast Cuomo for his attempt to link the bill to efforts against human trafficking:

      Governor Andrew Cuomo’s re-packaging of an extreme abortion bill into a so-called ‘women’s agenda’ is a desperate attempt to push through an abortion expansion that’s been around for six years and has failed to gain traction as a stand-alone bill. Make no mistake, this bill, first championed by Eliot Spitzer, is radical and far out of the mainstream, even by the standards of New York, a state with an abortion rate twice the national average. It will permit more late-term abortions, allow non-doctors to perform abortions, and will preclude any reasonable restrictions on abortion like parental notification. Moreover it would permit the state to pull the operating certificate of Catholic hospitals and agencies that ‘discriminate’ by not performing or referring women for abortions.

      Sound familiar?

      The extreme nature of the bill has seriously limited its support in the Legislature. So now the governor is attempting to tie it to important initiatives such as helping victims of domestic violence and human trafficking, and ending pregnancy discrimination in the workplace. He believes the ‘all-in’ strategy will make it harder to oppose. The public and lawmakers should not be fooled. We must not let victims of abuse and discrimination be held hostage to Governor Cuomo’s ideologically driven political agenda, an agenda that is extremely harmful to mothers, infants and religious liberty.

      Looks like Cuomo has adopted Barack Obama’s cramped reading of the First Amendment to imply that it only applied to the four walls of a church.

      This comes at an interesting moment. The Catholic Church started a nine-day campaign of prayer in connection to the 40th anniversary of Roe v Wade to end abortion and to provide comfort to those victimized by it. The bishops are already organized for this fight. Meanwhile, one Catholic blogger over the weekend shared a very painful part of her life to express appreciation for the effort:

      What happened next was sheer panic. I never wanted to have an abortion, I was just stupid and believed there was no other choice. No other way. And it was just a clot. A big menstrual clot. That’s what they told me. Yet that glass container told me otherwise. And I suddenly felt every urge to run from the room screaming, but I was frozen in place. When a staff member came back into the room she found me still standing there clutching that sheet and staring at the vacuum.

      Something inside me clicked off and I mentally shut down. I allowed her to guide me to the table and the procedure was started. When the abortionist [I will never call them doctors] came into the room he didn’t even acknowledge me but when he wheeled that vacuum over toward the table and switched it on I sat upright and tried to jump off the table. No hell no, I thought. But it was too late.

      And this is what I remembered this morning. My first waking thought that greeted me at dawn. The memory of the “nurse” growing impatient with me and the abortionists barking at me to lay still. And then my ears where filled with the wet suctioning sound of that hideous vacuum aspiration machine.

      I had completely forgotten, until this morning, that when it was all over I made myself look at that thing again. As the staff member held my arm and steadied me out of the room I reached over and yanked the sheet off again. I made myself look at that blood filled glass canister. Somewhere in their was my child and he/she deserved to have me be haunted with the memory of what I had done and where I had left him/her. I remembered thinking to myself, “Don’t you ever forget what you’ve done. You don’t deserve to forget”.

      But I did forget. Not right away. I was suicidal for months after, drinking and consuming every pill I could find. I took the entire contents of mine and my roommate’s medicine cabinet one night. All I did was sleep for two days straight and no one checked on me. I think it was during that time that I eventually managed to bury those memories.

      For whatever reason they chose today to pop back up. But instead of feeling hopelessly lost in that old dark abyss something different overcame me. Not a peace. No. I don’t think that I will ever know true peace. It was a comforting feeling. Like a hundred people praying for me right at that exact moment. Then I checked my email and I realized that they were. Today marks the beginning of the 9 Days of Prayer, Penance and Pilgrimage sponsored by USCCB.

      Be sure to read it all, and if you’re so inclined, join us. Heck, a bunch of us may even be Democrats, but we all want to change hearts to end abortion — and stop a culture of death from turning it into a secular sacrament.

      I almost didn’t post this one-figured I’d be accused of using emotion-but what the heck if emotion isn’t relevant in the discussion of destroying human life-where is it relevant. Besides it has too many facts and figures that the first article leaves out and that last line is so true it is priceless.

      • What is wrong with these people? They are against life itself! Forget the opportunity to live freely, you shouldn’t be able to live at all and should be able to kill at will! Dangerous, evil radicals.

        • I agree-I normally shy away from the word Evil-but this time, IMO, it fits.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          I could make a strong case that Cuomo is a serious racist. He is certainly a Eugenist. Far too many people like him breath.

          • I’ve been taking big breathes since I started reading this morning. And having a real big fight with my own evilness. So far I’ve won-at least on the basis of voicing my evil thoughts out loud.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              Don’t hold back at all. Today we still have the 1st Amendment and you can speak your mind. You can cuss today if it makes you feel better:)

          • He is the most dangerous man to come down the pike since Bobby Kennedy. If you listened to any of the three hour rant he called his “state of the state” you would agree. If I weren’t afraid of being accused of being anti-Italian, I’d compare the SOB to Mussolini. There, I did anyway!

      • Bottom Line says:

        It is fundamentally wrong to kill babies.

        But the decision to/not to abort is a personal one between the parents, the ‘abortionist’, and their God…not me, not you, not the law.

        Language such as “…a fundamental right that cannot be denied…” is troublesome as it is dictating, by force, something in which personal spiritual/religious beliefs are directly relevant.

        I agree with the bishops of New York that it is encroaching on religious freedom.


        Something that I have always considered when contemplating the abortion ‘issue’, is that there is an inherent conflict between human nature/biology and social norms and expectations, etc.

        Aside from reasons to abort such as rape, incest, etc…most common is ‘not able to care for…’

        Society collectively sends a message of conventional wisdom that we are to have established ourselves before making babies, that we should first have a financial means of caring for them in a loving home with both parents.

        I agree. It is unfair to a child to bring them into the world before you are ready to take on such a responsibility. But humans naturally like sex. People are horny animals, especially teens and young adults who are not yet established.

        Instead of embracing our humanity and accepting our breeding habits, we find ways to deny it. Instead of finding a better means of caring for them, we opt for contraception, abortion and ways of denying the responsibility via adoption

        What’s wrong with having babies? Babies are precious and beautiful. Are they not worth the sacrifices to care for them?

        It is hard to articulate, but something on a deeper level tells me that our attitude is bass akwards when it comes to procreation.

  8. Kinda a long read G!

    One thing to consider, this can go on as long as most people (including China & other nations) believe in our ability to pay back our debt. And in a way, it’s like a pyramid scheme where they are already playing the game & if they stop selling the lie, they will be caught holding the bag. I think about half of TARP’s 800 billion went to foreign banks, propping them & the Euro up. So no worries unless it looks like some major player has stopped believing. (load Journey’s “Don’t Stop Believing” before reading any further)

    Germany wants its gold back. Local newspapers are reporting that the Bundesbank, the central bank of Germany, is planning to deposit more gold reserves at home in Frankurt, while withdrawing many of its precious metal held in facilities around the world.

    In total, the Bundesbank maintains approximately $178 billion worth of gold, but less than one-third is stored in Germany. The remaining sum of gold is stored at the United States Federal Reserve, the Bank of England and the Banque de France.

    The Handelsblatt newspaper’s sources noted Tuesday that the central bank will take part of its reserves back from the Fed, while obtaining the remaining gold in France. Other German newspapers and financial experts are opining that this could lead to a chain reaction of other nations repatriating gold stored in London, New York and/or Paris.

    Officials expect the the Bundesbank to release further details of its plans on Wednesday.

    This isn’t the first time that Germany’s gold has made worldwide headlines. Digital Journal reported in late October that the German government ordered its central bank to perform an audit of its reserves at the Fed. Apparently it was confirmed that Germany hasn’t conducted an audit of its physical assets in bullion in several decades.

    Gold also made news Monday when it was reported that some in the United States were considering selling its 261.5 million ounces of gold held in Fort Knox, Kentucky. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner warned against this in a letter sent to the Congressional leadership last month.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Long? It’s only about 6800 words. I believe if there is a claim to be made, there should be ample info to back it up 🙂


    Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!! That was a political vote!!!-and Pelosi -I wasn’t serious when I said I was for taxing the rich at the million dollar mark-I was just messing with the republicans. It’s not like we don’t all know they ALL play political games but knowing it doesn’t make it acceptable! But to have the Nerve to try and make Lying and playing political games with our lives an acceptable excuse when their called for their total hypocrisy is just so unacceptable it makes my blood boil!

  10. Low lifes – incapable of exhibiting even a little bit of class.

    • Why would they-the President never shows the slightest bit of respect for anyone that opposes him. So all those who rudely booed, fit right in with our esteemed President.

  11. Richard Engel: Chinese Authoritarianism ‘Appeals More in Developing World’ Than American Democracy

    By Noel Sheppard | January 21, 2013 | 10:29

    NBC News chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel made some statements about America’s role in the world on Sunday’s Meet the Press that are guaranteed to raise eyebrows on both sides of the aisle.

    “It’s greatly diminished. I think the Chinese model is one that appeals more and more in the developing world” (video follows with transcript and commentary):

    DAVID GREGORY, HOST: Well, we’ll talk more about that in few minutes in terms of U.S. and the world, but just as somebody who lives abroad, and I talk about, you know, as– as The Economist did, America’s ability to have influence in the rest of the world, how– how do you see the challenges he faces?

    RICHARD ENGEL (Chief Foreign Correspondent, NBC News): Well, it’s greatly diminished. I think the Chinese model is one that appeals more and more in the developing world. People see that an authoritarian state can hold onto power, can hold on to stability and can drive the economy forward. When you look at– when you talk to people in– in– in Africa and across the Middle East, they’re not satisfied with the way things are going. Sure this idea of democracy was injected into the region, but it has brought mostly chaos. So, I think the U.S. role, the U.S. example, is not the one that is on the– on the mind of the youth internationally. People are looking more to– to different kinds of models.

    JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC: Well, the Soviet model seemed pretty attractive– to some of the same regions in the 1950s. So I– I– I would be skeptical that an authoritarian model is going to….

    (Cross talk)

    GREGORY: And the Chinese model has its issues.

    MR. ENGEL: Certainly has its issues.

    MR. SCARBOROUGH: And it’s slowing down.

    MR. ENGEL: But you don’t hear people talk about the United States the way they used to. You don’t hear them talk about the U.S. in this idea that, sure, people would like to come here and set up their– you know, get– you know, get visas and green cards. But the U.S. just doesn’t seem to have that kind of clout.

    DORIS KEARNS GOODWIN (Presidential Historian/Author, Team of Rivals): We still have the most successful economy in the whole world, though, right?

    MR. ENGEL: Maybe it’s a perception…

    DAVID AXELROD (Senior Adviser, Obama 2012 Re-Election Campaign): If we go by our treasuries, people…

    GREGORY: Well, let– let me inject with this, Tom. One of the– one of the issues…

    MR. ENGEL: People aren’t that impressed anymore.
    Story Continues Below Ad ↓

    “People aren’t that impressed anymore.”

    This from NBC’s chief foreign correspondent.

    Shocking when such a prominent reporter has such a dour view of his own country’s role in shaping global politics.

    On the other hand, despite the pushback he got from folks on the set clearly shocked by his comments, isn’t this view a growing one on the left and in the media?

    Last year’s election was a battle between conflicting political viewpoints. Irrespective of Republican successes in the House, Obama’s re-election surely was a component of America including the press pushing for a stronger centralized government.

    If a growing number of people on our shores see government as the answer to their problems, mightn’t that be the case overseas?

    Of course, in some areas around the world, the problem is a tyrannical government having too much control over people’s lives.

    As such, why would people in those countries consider more government control as being the solution?

    Correspondingly, if chronic unemployment continues to be a problem here despite government efforts to tax and spend our way out of it, will the public at some point consider less “authoritarian” solutions?

    Stay tuned.

    Read more:

    But hey, the people in this Country aren’t voting for a Chinese Communist model-they’re just looking for “equality and fairness” Yeah right, well when you actually get what you’ve been voting for-don’t be surprised.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Engle is clearly a Progressive (Communist). Or maybe he is telling us something about the future.

      • I don’t know what he is politically from his remarks-seems to me he is simply telling the truth as he sees it-Freedom is losing it’s appeal. Damn what a SAD statement that is.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Freedom is losing it’s appeal????? Really, not with anyone that I know. Maybe with all the parasites who have made a living off the government teat, but those who are awake are willing and getting ready to fight and die for it! There may not be many of us, but it will be enough to get the job done 🙂

  12. gmanfortruth says:

    @Buck What do you think about this?
    New York’s Safe Act will mandate that all gun owners “surrender” magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds to law enforcement officials, according to a fact sheet released to accompany the new law.
    Law Would Force Gun Owners to Surrender Magazines to Police 210113mag

    A 4 page fact sheet released yesterday on the website states, “If you own a large capacity magazine greater than 10 round capacity that was a grandfathered magazine as a result of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban, within a year, you must do one of the following: dispose of it to another person outside New York State, surrender it to law enforcement officials, or permanently alter such to only accept 7 rounds.” (emphasis added)

    • As I’ve said, I personally am ok with restrictions on high capacity magazines, though don’t believe it be absolutely necessary towards gun control.

      If NY has decided to enact such a ban, let them go for it.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        For just a moment, forget this is about guns. Let’s use remote car starters instead. If NY chose to ban Remote car starters and effectively say turn it in or you are a criminal and it will be confiscated. Are you OK with that?

        • Am I personally ok with it? Depends — what’s the rationale?

          And just because I may or may not be ok with such an action does not mean the state does not have the authority to do so.

          • The rationale is they don’t want people to have magazines with more than 7 bullets. Why do they not want people to have more than 7 bullets, except for the police, that is-beats me-the lives of citizens are worth less than the life of the police I suppose. Because if I get into a situation that is threatening my life or mine and others-there really isn’t a rational argument that says I need less bullets than a police officer can have in a magazine.

            • Well, there is a rationale behind limiting high-capacity magazines — whether or not it is borne out is up in the air. The Colonel and G have both cited statistics that leave it an open question to me. So while I may support the idea, I don’t know where I truly stand on the issue and I think I’ve been clear to say that it isn’t essential to gun control, instead focusing on the need for expanded background checks.

              And G, the reason does matter for my own personal support of such an endeavor. NYS would probably be better served by imposing the ban going forward and maintaining the grandfathered clause from 1994, and coupling that with a voluntary ‘turn in your high-capacity magazine’ effort.

              • What I don’t understand is why you support the idea-when you don’t know where you stand on the issue. It might make it better-it might make it worse. For this type of maybe-you are willing to give the State the power to confiscate and control.

              • I’m willing to allow each state to make the decision for itself how it approaches the problem. I conceded on having such a restriction nationally.

              • Whether or not the State has the right -wasn’t the question. It was why do you support the idea-when etc.

              • Because while the Colonel and G make some good points in that reduced magazines do not make a difference, other studies show that reduced magazines can make a difference.

                Wasn’t it in Arizona where the guy was stopped while reloading? Or am I thinking of something else?

              • Okay, I’ll except that as a reason. But if someone can be stopped from killing while reloading that means someone can be killed by having to reload.

        • PS — I love my remote car starter. Don’t joke about taking that away from me 🙂

          • gmanfortruth says:

            The reason don’t matter, the State wants to take your remote car starter and they passed a law to TAKE your property. What say you? I don’t think I am OK with that at all. 👿

  13. gmanfortruth says:

    The education of our youth. I wonder if this school is a “no gun zone”?

  14. gmanfortruth says:

    An informal poll 🙂 How many of you believe that we could experience an economic collapse? Are you actively preparing for that or any other disaster scenario?

  15. gmanfortruth says:

    Buck, down here. I guess my question should have been, do you think govt can force you to sell, turn in, or have confiscated of any property, regardless of reason, eg. your remote car starter?

    • gmanfortruth says:

      And yes, it was Arizona. Had he not dropped the mag, he would likely have been shot. By then the damage was done and those who weren’t hurt had taken cover or started to run. Let me review the incident.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Quick review: Loughner allegedly proceeded to fire apparently randomly at other members of the crowd.[2][20] He reportedly used a 9mm Glock 19 semi-automatic pistol with a 33-round magazine.[21][22] A nearby store employee said he heard “15 to 20 gunshots”.[23] Loughner stopped to reload, but dropped the loaded magazine from his pocket to the sidewalk, from where bystander Patricia Maisch grabbed it.[24] Another bystander clubbed the back of the assailant’s head with a folding chair, injuring his elbow in the process, representing the 14th injury.[25] The gunman was tackled to the ground by 74-year-old retired US Army Colonel Bill Badger,[26] who had been shot himself, and was further subdued by Maisch and bystanders Roger Sulzgeber and Joseph Zamudio. Zamudio was a CCW holder and had a weapon on his person, but arrived after the shooting had stopped and did not use the firearm to engage or threaten the gunman.[27]

    • Any property

      No, not any property for any reason. And as I’ve said, it probably would have been better to maintain the grandfathered clause from the old ban. But States do have the authority to ban certain items with just cause. This fits the bill.

      Banning remote car starters because they feel like it? No. Banning remote car starters because of a legitimate public safety reason? Yea, that’s probably well within their authority.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        OK, That answers that question. For the record, I do not agree that any government has the authority to make something illegal and take it from the people. If I bought it legally, it’s mine and they have not rights to it, for any reason, unless I use it when breaking the law.

        On a lighter note so we can move on, I think it’s funny that Cuomo wants people to sell their HC mags to others out of state, I’m sure that other Democrat governors are real pleased that he wants to export his problem to them. 😆

        • “If I bought it legally, it’s mine and they have not rights to it, for any reason…”

          And that’s the main rationale for the grandfathered clause.

  16. gmanfortruth says:

    Back to economics. I think that all of us are worried about the National debt and unfunded promises to the people. Coming up is the Debt Ceiling. I don’t know why there is one, they just keep raising it. I’m tired of the poor spending habits and frankly, I think they are way overpaid. I have an idea, that would be legal. here it is.

    Everyone that works and gets a paycheck, should change their W-2 so that no Federal taxes are taken out. That money can be saved for the end of the year, when tax returns are required. Would this force the govt to cut back, or would they just print money or borrow? Any thoughts?

    • Federal tax withholding is a requirement on the part of employers.

      Not to mention this would do absolutely nothing anyway in terms of forcing the gov’t to cut back…

      • gmanfortruth says:

        True, but by changing your W-2, you can make it that no money is taken out. I have done it before and it’s legal. If nothing else, it would send a message, and feel good 🙂

        • Might make you feel better, but it wouldn’t do a thing as far as spending goes.

          • It might if EVERYBODY did it. After all, there would be no money for them to spend.

            • Organize such an effort and we’ll see how that plays out for you. I can all but guarantee there would be no change.

              • I got no way to do it Buck. I already don’t pay taxes because I fall under that line. I just think it’s disgusting that a lot of folks who don’t pay ANY taxes think it’s fair that the ones who do get theirs raised higher and higher to pay for a bloated, out of control government.

  17. gmanfortruth says:

    Seems Obama took the oath to defend the Constitution yesterday and again today. For those who missed it, it will be repeated on Comedy Central at 8pm est. and again on Saturday Night Live next Saturday. 😆

    • Bottom Line says:


    • Matt Lockwood says:

      I did hear Gman that it is a constitutional mandate that the inauguration be done on Jan 20th.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I’m 100% positive that there is nothing in the Constitution about the inauguration. In the long ago past, Presidents were inaugurated in March. However, this one will certainly be repeated many times on Comedy Central. If you missed it, make sure you check it out 😆

  18. gmanfortruth says:

    Another question (maybe ya’ll can answer this one), Should the debt ceiling be raised? I say NO!

    • Bottom Line says:


      The US and current world economy is history. Start thinking about alternatives, and methods of implementation.

      I already suggested a couple, but no one wants to talk about it.

      Oh well.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I’m already there Brother. I have been bartering for some time and will continue to do so, it’s kind of fun. I don’t think the U.S. dollar will go away, it will become almost worthless, but will still be used down the road.

        I want a full auto NERF gun with the 18 round magazines, that would be a blast at an anti-gun rally 🙂

        • Bottom Line says:

          Right on, G.

          As far as I can tell, you are one of the few that may survive what is to come.

          The dollar may very well take on a new form.

          As for nerf guns. That’s hilarious. Just don’t use a bubble gun as you may get arrested.

    • Not only no, but HECK NO!

  19. Well looky here. President Flip-Flop is doing it again. Now he has declared hands off entitlements when he said as early as a couple of weeks ago that we HAD to do something about them.

    Of course this should come as no suprise. It was actually a lie to placate Republicans into going along with his Plan of Destruction for The United States. Oh My God we are in SO much trouble here.

  20. gmanfortruth says:

    WOW! I did post this before, but as a reminder here it is again. Sorry Buck, it seems that most of these mass murderers are liberal Democrats. That explains why they are against guns, they can’t handle the responsibility. 😆

  21. gmanfortruth says:

    Liberal political correctness gone mad! This is totally out of line.

    • One of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever heard, although it doesn’t suprise me in the least. Two boys were also supended and grilled for pointing their fingers at each other and saying “bang!” on the playground.

  22. Hmmm…. Seems our government can violate other parts of the Constitution at will. But not when it comes to whether they get paid or not!!

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Of course they can. The folks in the District of Criminals are above the law and can do anything. As long as they don’t show up in public without an army of armed guards, nothing will change. I cannot remember the Nation being so divided, on most every issue, racially, politically ect. It’s about power, not about fairness, no matter what you hear. Prepare locally and what ever you do, bury any bubble guns you may have, cuz they are terrorist weapons. Kids are being arrested and being forced into lengthy psychological evaluations to determine if they need to go to Gitmo. (somebody needs an asswhoopin over that stupid fiasc) 🙄

  23. gmanfortruth says:

    This one is too long to post, so a link is in order. I see this a possible, like a million other scenarios. It is always best to study everything that could be possible to understand what may happen if the economy tanks. One thing to remember, it may only take an incident like the one in the link to cause an overall problem. Small things turn into big things fast, being prepared is so important. Get right spiritually, emotionally and physically as best you can, and bring as many people as you can with you! Check this out.

  24. gmanfortruth says:

    One thing to remember about my methods. If nothing happens that would require any of my preparation ideas, I still win in just a high inflation event that would lack the violence many are anticipating. I’m stocking food while it’s still cheap. I’m preparing to hunt and trap for meat if needed. I have connections for fresh beef, pork and have my own chickens. I’m far from any major population area. My friends and family will come to me, bring their resources, and arms. I’m not fearing what can happen, but I am urging all of you to prepare. Nothing could happen, or it could be a slow decent into starvation, or it could happen in an instant and within 12 hours, life has changed dramatically. Don’t get caught being stupid, because you are being warned.

    I would love to share some good recipes that feed lots of folks and are cheap. Lets prepare together! Life is too short to not be ready 🙂

  25. Quick hijack but this is what happens when a large week long gun show bans so called “assault rifles” and high capacity magazines.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      The people should boycott the event as well. The way people make kneejerk reactions is astonishing. One would think that “assault weapons” were alive and could think. If that were true, they would certainly be smarter than most Liberals 😆 Just kidding 🙂

  26. gmanfortruth says:

    Which of these 37 items should we pick on, or is all of them worthy of attacking?

    The following are 37 statistics which show how four years of Obama have wrecked the U.S. economy…

    1. During Obama’s first term, the number of Americans on food stamps increased by an average of about 11,000 per day.

    2. At the beginning of the Obama era, 32 million Americans were on food stamps. Today, more than 47 million Americans are on food stamps.

    3. According to one calculation, the number of Americans on food stamps now exceeds the combined populations of “Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming.”

    4. The number of Americans receiving money directly from the federal government each month has grown from 94 million in the year 2000 tomore than 128 million today.

    5. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, more than 146 million Americans are either “poor” or “low income” at this point.

    6. The unemployment rate in the United States is exactly where it was (7.8 percent) when Barack Obama first entered the White House in January 2009.

    7. When Barack Obama first entered the White House, 60.6 percent of all working age Americans had a job. Today, only 58.6 percent of all working age Americans have a job.

    8. During the first four years of Obama, the number of Americans “not in the labor force” soared by an astounding 8,332,000. That far exceeds any previous four year total.

    9. During Obama’s first term, the number of Americans collecting federal disability insurance rose by more than 18 percent.

    10. The Obama years have been absolutely devastating for small businesses in America. According to economist Tim Kane, the following is how the number of startup jobs per 1000 Americans breaks down by presidential administration…

    Bush Sr.: 11.3

    Clinton: 11.2

    Bush Jr.: 10.8

    Obama: 7.8

    11. Median household income in America has fallen for four consecutive years. Overall, it has declined by over $4000 during that time span.

    12. The economy is not producing nearly enough jobs for the hordes of young people now entering the workforce. Approximately 53 percentof all U.S. college graduates under the age of 25 were either unemployed or underemployed in 2011.

    13. According to a report from the National Employment Law Project, 58 percent of the jobs that have been created since the end of the recession have been low paying jobs.

    14. Back in 2007, about 28 percent of all working families were considered to be among “the working poor”. Today, that number is up to 32 percent even though our politicians tell us that the economy is supposedly recovering.

    15. According to the Center for Economic and Policy Research, only 24.6 percent of all of the jobs in the United States are “good jobs” at this point.

    16. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the middle class is taking home a smaller share of the overall income pie than has ever been recorded before.

    17. According to the Economic Policy Institute, the United States is losinghalf a million jobs to China every single year.

    18. The United States has fallen in the global economic competitiveness rankings compiled by the World Economic Forum for four years in a row.

    19. According to the World Bank, U.S. GDP accounted for 31.8 percentof all global economic activity in 2001. That number declined steadily over the course of the next decade and was only at 21.6 percent in 2011.

    20. The United States actually has plenty of oil and we should not have to import oil from the Middle East. We need to drill for more oil, but Obama has been very hesitant to do that. Under Bill Clinton, the number of drilling permits approved rose by 58 percent. Under George W. Bush, the number of drilling permits approved rose by 116 percent. Under Barack Obama, the number of drilling permits approved actuallydecreased by 36 percent.

    21. When Barack Obama took office, the average price of a gallon of gasoline was $1.84. Today, the average price of a gallon of gasoline is$3.26.

    22. Under Barack Obama, the United States has lost more than 300,000 education jobs.

    23. For the first time ever, more than a million public school students in the United States are homeless. That number has risen by 57 percent since the 2006-2007 school year.

    24. Families that have a head of household under the age of 30 now have a poverty rate of 37 percent.

    25. More than three times as many new homes were sold in the United States in 2005 as were sold in 2012.

    26. Electricity bills in the United States have risen faster than the overall rate of inflation for five years in a row.

    27. Health insurance costs have risen by 29 percent since Barack Obama became president.

    28. Today, 77 percent of all Americans live paycheck to paycheck at least part of the time.

    29. It is being projected that Obamacare will add 16 million more Americans to the Medicaid rolls.

    30. The total amount of money that the federal government gives directly to the American people has grown by 32 percent since Barack Obama became president.

    31. The Obama administration has been spending money on some of the most insane things imaginable. For example, in 2011 the Obama administration spent $592,527 on a study that sought to figure out once and for all why chimpanzees throw poop.

    32. U.S. taxpayers spend more than 20 times as much on the Obamas as British taxpayers spend on the royal family.

    33. The U.S. government has run a budget deficit of well over a trillion dollars every single year under Barack Obama.

    34. When Barack Obama was first elected, the U.S. debt to GDP ratio was under 70 percent. Today, it is up to 103 percent.

    35. During Obama’s first term, the federal government accumulated more debt than it did under the first 42 U.S presidents combined.

    36. As I wrote about yesterday, when you break it down the amount of new debt accumulated by the U.S. government during Obama’s first term comes to approximately $50,521 for every single household in the United States. Are you ready to contribute your share?

    37. If you started paying off just the new debt that the U.S. has accumulated during the Obama administration at the rate of one dollar per second, it would take more than 184,000 years to pay it off.

  27. gmanfortruth says:

    20 ways to become more self-sufficient before ‘the crunch’ arrives

    Print The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Twitter Alex Jones’ Facebook Infowars store

    Mike Adams
    Natural News
    Jan 22, 2013

    One thing you don’t want to be during the coming “crunch” — a polite word for “collapse” — is dependent on the system. The more you can take care of yourself, the better off you’ll be physically, financially, emotionally and even spiritually. Here are 20 ways to become more self-sufficient while you still can:

    1) Get a small solar system that can be used to run a laptop or recharge batteries

    2) Drill a water well and install a hand pump or solar-powered DC pump

    3) Set up a rainwater collection system or barrel

    4) Stash some cash: stock away some green dollar bills and lots of U.S. nickels

    5) Own and learn how to use a handgun, rifle and shotgun

    6) Store some ammunition

    A d v e r t i s e m e n t

    7) Own and know how to use a water filter

    8) Start a garden this spring and acquire more food production skills

    9) Save garden seeds so you can plant the next generation of food

    10) Acquire a wood-burning stove for heat and cooking

    11) Possess a large quantity of stored food; enough for at least 90 days

    12) Get to know your local farmers and ranchers

    13) Store up valuable barter items that are relatively cheap today: Alcohol, coffee, ammo, matches, etc.

    14) Safely store extra vehicle fuel (gasoline, diesel) at your home or ranch
    Be sure to use fuel stabilizers to extend their life.

    15) Learn emergency first aid skills and own first aid supplies
    This could save a life or possibly save a trip to the emergency room.

    16) Start growing your own medicine
    Plant and grow aloe vera, oregano, garlic, cayenne pepper and other medicinal herbs that can replace a surprisingly large number of prescription drugs. Oregano, for example, is a potent antibiotic. Aloe vera treats cuts, scrapes and burns.

    17) Own emergency hand-cranked radios so you can tune in to news and announcements
    My #1 recommended brand is Freeplay.

    18) Boost your immune system with vitamin D and superfoods

    19) Increase your level of physical fitness

    20) Learn how to raise animals such as rabbits, chickens, goats or cows.

    Some good advice!? 🙂

  28. gmanfortruth says:
  29. gmanfortruth says:

    @Buck , Buckster, during your discussion about background checks to purchase weapons, what kind of information would you look for to eliminate someone from purchasing a gun? We all keep hearing about a Universal Background check, but there is little information as to what that really entails.

    • 1) Combine existing records (terrorist watchlist, state mental health records, felony convictions, etc.) to establish a comprehensive database
      2) Run a background check for EVERY sale

      The real issue with this proposal is what type of (a) felony convictions and (b) mental health issues should bar someone from gun ownership. Any thoughts?

      • Anyone who voted for Obama should be on the mental health list, for sure.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Felony convictions, I think should be limited to violent crimes for inclusion. Lack of violence, eg. tax evasion, should not be included. The mental health issue is a lot tougher. That should be looked at in depth, not my expertise 🙂

        Terror watchlist. I’m against this being included. The way the term “terrorist” is being applied by many different agencies, including the DHS is a joke. Same as the no-fly list.

        I’m good with violent felons and those deemed to be violently mentalally ill, meaning they are mentally ill and are violent in nature.

        For the record, I don’t think we should have any background checks, as I don’t think they stop crimes from being committed with guns. But for the purpose if our discussion, I will capitulate that it is something that we will have.

      • Who is checking the people that check the database?

        There are probably failures in the current background check system as it is. Are there ways to defend yourself from being put on ‘the list’? Certain felonies and violent crime aside, would someone being put onto ‘the list’ have their due process rights violated and what can they do about it? These issues would need to be addressed in any type legislation like this.

        Should private sales require a background check? Probably in some cases it would be prudent to get one, I could easily see an exemption for family being fine, as long as the family member knowingly doesn’t commit a crime by selling the gun to someone they shouldn’t.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Your first question is why I’m against the checks all together. As far as the private sales, what would that really solve? if all guns are not registered (which I would never agree too), why would anyone waste their time with a background check? This whole Universal check idea is a ruse, because it will never work without gun registration. The check system now really does not work, criminals can get guns despite it, so why waste the money doing it?

      • During the National Rifle Association’s meeting with Vice President Joe Biden and the White House gun violence task force, the vice president said the Obama administration does not have the time to fully enforce existing gun laws.

        Jim Baker, the NRA representative present at the meeting, recalled the vice president’s words during an interview with The Daily Caller: “And to your point, Mr. Baker, regarding the lack of prosecutions on lying on Form 4473s, we simply don’t have the time or manpower to prosecute everybody who lies on a form, that checks a wrong box, that answers a question inaccurately.”

        Prosecutions for gun law violations have been significantly down over the last few years. In this particular case, over 72,000 applications for a gun license were scuttled by background checks, but only 44 cases of information falsification were prosecuted. But what we really need are even more laws!

        There are three lessons to take away from all this:

        1. For liberals, a “problem” is “solved” when the government passes laws and expands its power. The actual function of those laws, and their demonstrable effect on the “problem” at hand, are irrelevant. In fact, a good liberal considers it extremely rude to broach the subject. What matters is the political contest surrounding passage of the law. Everything that comes afterward is an intermission between acts of political theater.

        2. The Left views government power as a privilege, not a responsibility. Laws are not seen as commitments between people and the State, which the State is bound to honor. The incompetence of the State at addressing its duties is not an obstacle to its quest for greater power.

        3. Daniel Greenfield of Front Page Magazine ties Biden’s remarks into the whimsical nature of centralized power:

        Some laws are important and some aren’t. And their priority changes at a given moment. Enforcing the unimportant ones is ridiculed, but enforcing the important ones becomes a matter of life and death.

        If there wasn’t a penalty for lying on background checks, then Obama would be trotting out adorable kiddies and calling the NRA murderers for not passing a law to criminalize lying on background checks. But now that the law is here, the idea of actually enforcing it is just silly.

        A core component of true power is the ability to decide when laws are important, and when they can be ignored. Look at the special dispensation given to NBC News host David Gregory for flagrantly violating D.C.’s strict gun laws in public. A properly humble government would have reluctantly prosecuted Gregory, and admitted that his sad case proves the laws he violated are poorly thought out. A powerful and arrogant government, on the other hand, simply waves the law aside because Gregory is an associate member of the ruling class, and the ruling class reserves the right to exempt itself from laws it finds inconvenient.

        So of course a leftist like Joe Biden sees nothing wrong with demanding more laws, in the same breath he admits the State cannot effectively enforce the gigantic volume of law it has already written. Writing laws expands the State. Diligently and impartially enforcing them reveals it is hollow.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          This is not a shock. Buck has said that more guns will not work, but, personal protection should be a priority in every adults life. The Govt cannot protect anybody, and laws mean nothing to criminals or the violent mentally ill. My answer to those problems is more people with guns, shoot the violent nuts and whack the criminals. Eventually, the criminals will get jobs and life a better crime free life and Big Pharma will be held accountable for the psyhcotropic drugs they make. If you don’t want your name on a Victims List, do the right thing, get a gun, get trained and protect yourself! 🙂

          • I agree with that, but also think with all the tax dollars we spend supporting the gov., we should hold them accountable. The VP says they can’t enforce the laws already on the books. Why add more laws if they can’t act on existing one’s???? Are there not enough federal law officers? How many report to”Homeland Security”? Are they keeping us safe from terrorism? I think we need to audit their donut budget…..

            The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is reporting that they have records on 5,216,732 illegal or unlawful aliens. These records are kept under the “Prohibited Category Description” of those in the United States that are not allowed to purchase a firearm.

            The NICS background check system was implemented by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on November 30, 1998. The data reported are a compilation from the program’s implementation to December 31, 2012.

            Total active records in the NICS Index for individuals in the “Prohibited Category Description” are 8,323,931.

            Read more:

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Biden’s statement is a prime example of something I have mentioned before.

          There are times when the govt deliberately does not enforce or mucks up administration of laws they don’t like. They do this to show it “failed” and get what it is they do want.

          Please notice that each shooting has the local police going out of their way to mention an “Assault Style Rifle” was “used”. Even if only present.

          They describe the other weapons by rifle, handgun and caliber. But they single out “assault style”.

          THEY have a desire to disarm the American Public. That is many of them.

          We’ve got one of the renegades here in Oregon who does not agree. Which is further proof that Eastern Oregon belongs in the State of Idaho, not Oregon proper.

  30. Bottom Line says:

    Here’s a thought…

    Since the US is all about the right to bear arms, and ‘state’s rights’ (I cringe at the term as rights are for individuals, not states) supersede federal government rights(bluaghhh), ….

    Make a law (bluaghhh) that upon reaching the age of 18, all citizens are eligible to receive an AR-15 and Colt 1911, each with two additional ammo clips.

    Simply fill out and mail a request form, …upon verification of citizenship, you will receive via overnight delivery, your rightful tools which are necessary to maintain a ‘free state’.


  31. gmanfortruth says:

    Nobel Peace Prize Nominee: Obama Asks Military Leaders If They Will “Fire On US Citizens”

    Shock claim purported to come from “one of America’s foremost military heroes”

    Paul Joseph Watson
    January 22, 2013

    2009 Nobel Peace Prize nominee Jim Garrow shockingly claims he was told by a top military veteran that the Obama administration’s “litmus test” for new military leaders is whether or not they will obey an order to fire on U.S. citizens.
    Nobel Peace Prize Nominee: Obama Asks Military Leaders If They Will Fire On US Citizens 220113military

    Garrow was nominated three years ago for the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize and is the founder of The Pink Pagoda Girls, an organization dedicated to rescuing baby girls from “gendercide” in China. Garrow has been personally involved in “helping rescue more than 36,000 Chinese baby girls from death.” He is a public figure, not an anonymous voice on the Internet, which makes his claim all the more disturbing.

    “I have just been informed by a former senior military leader that Obama is using a new “litmus test” in determining who will stay and who must go in his military leaders. Get ready to explode folks. “The new litmus test of leadership in the military is if they will fire on US citizens or not”. Those who will not are being removed,” Garrow wrote on his Facebook page, later following up the post by adding the man who told him is, “one of America’s foremost military heroes,” whose goal in divulging the information was to “sound the alarm.”

    • Oh wow-if this is true-just Wow-I would join the people who are calling for impeachment-but one needs proof and one person’s word simply isn’t enough to prove something like this.

  32. gmanfortruth says:

    I have been against any forms of vaccinations for anything for quite some time. While there is no proof that vaccines cause spikes in Autism or other medical issues, that may be changing.

  33. gmanfortruth says:
  34. Walter E. Williams Column: Erosion of Traditional Values, Not Guns, to Blame for Senseless Violence

    By Walter E. Williams | January 15, 2013 | 23:23

    When I attended primary and secondary school — during the 1940s and ’50s — one didn’t hear of the kind of shooting mayhem that’s become routine today. Why? It surely wasn’t because of strict firearm laws. My replica of the 1902 Sears mail-order catalog shows 35 pages of firearm advertisements. People just sent in their money, and a firearm was shipped.

    Dr. John Lott, author of “More Guns, Less Crime,” reports that until the 1960s, some New York City public high schools had shooting clubs where students competed in citywide shooting contests for university scholarships. They carried their rifles to school on the subways and, upon arrival, turned them over to their homeroom teacher or the gym coach and retrieved their rifles after school for target practice. Virginia’s rural areas had a long tradition of high-school students going hunting in the morning before school and sometimes storing their rifles in the trunks of their cars that were parked on school grounds. Often a youngster’s 12th or 14th birthday present was a shiny new .22-caliber rifle, given to him by his father.

    Today’s level of civility can’t match yesteryear’s. Many of today’s youngsters begin the school day passing through metal detectors. Guards patrol school hallways, and police cars patrol outside. Despite these measures, assaults, knifings and shootings occur. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, in 2010 there were 828,000 nonfatal criminal incidents in schools. There were 470,000 thefts and 359,000 violent attacks, of which 91,400 were serious. In the same year, 145,100 public-school teachers were physically attacked, and 276,700 were threatened.

    What explains today’s behavior versus yesteryear’s? For well over a half-century, the nation’s liberals and progressives — along with the education establishment, pseudo-intellectuals and the courts — have waged war on traditions, customs and moral values. These people taught their vision, that there are no moral absolutes, to our young people. To them, what’s moral or immoral is a matter of convenience, personal opinion or a consensus.

    During the ’50s and ’60s, the education establishment launched its agenda to undermine lessons children learned from their parents and the church with fads such as “values clarification.” So-called sex education classes are simply indoctrination that sought to undermine family and church strictures against premarital sex. Lessons of abstinence were ridiculed and considered passé and replaced with lessons about condoms, birth control pills and abortions. Further undermining of parental authority came with legal and extralegal measures to assist teenage abortions with neither parental knowledge nor consent.

    Customs, traditions, moral values and rules of etiquette, not laws and government regulations, are what make for a civilized society. These behavioral norms — transmitted by example, word of mouth and religious teachings — represent a body of wisdom distilled through ages of experience, trial and error, and looking at what works. The importance of customs, traditions and moral values as a means of regulating behavior is that people behave themselves even if nobody’s watching. Police and laws can never replace these restraints on personal conduct so as to produce a civilized society. At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. The more uncivilized we become the more laws that are needed to regulate behavior.

    Many customs, traditions and moral values have been discarded without an appreciation for the role they played in creating a civilized society, and now we’re paying the price. What’s worse is that instead of a return to what worked, people want to replace what worked with what sounds good, such as zero-tolerance policies in which bringing a water pistol, drawing a picture of a pistol, or pointing a finger and shouting “bang-bang” produces a school suspension or arrest. Seeing as we’ve decided that we should rely on gun laws to control behavior, what should be done to regulate clubs and hammers? After all, FBI crime statistics show that more people are murdered by clubs and hammers than rifles and shotguns.

    Read more:

    Finally, an article that says exactly what I believe.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      G-Man says: Arm the teachers. Progressives say: They might miss a nut with a gun and hit a kid. or: We can’t have teachers shooting students. in more simple words, let the students attack the teachers and let the nuts go into schools and shoot as many kids as they can.

      Are Progressives from Earth?

  35. Not much talk about Obama’s latest speech-Saw a headline- “We the Government” pretty much summed up the speech for me.

  36. It is soooooo cold in WI today! Knew it was cold when I took the dog out, knew it was cold when I attempted my morning run, but I really knew it was cold out when I had to zip into Madison for an errand and saw some of the leftist “solidarity singers” waiting to go into the capital for their noon sing-a-long and they had their hands in THEIR OWN pockets!

  37. All hands on deck at Lone Star College in Houston right now…another shooting…early reports of 3 shot..others injured..swat teams organizing…….

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Seems an argument led to shooting. Could this be an incident where someone carrying concealed saved the day? The sure wouldn’t make Obama too happy, now would it?

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Watching the coverage from Texas, I can’t help but to think, what a perfect time to rob a bank on the other side of town.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Two people shooting at each other, injured two students in the crossfire. One shooter was hit and one left the campus. Gang related? Drug related? I have heard a report that both shooters were black. Unconfirmed.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          A smart businessman could sell a semi full of doughnuts at that college today 🙂


    I read this-I tried to have an open mind-but all I see is Obama saying he’ll do something then withdrawing the offer-saying he’ll cut cost -but the way he chooses to do it, is by simply moving the cost onto the already broke States and on the backs of our health care providers.

    So I don’t think anyone can blame me for believing that Obama has no intention of really even attempting to handle the debt and deficits. Except of course by raising all our taxes and cutting defense, which should be cut some, but of course per his words that money will then be used to pay for more social benefits, making us more in debt and worse off than we are now.

  39. gmanfortruth says:

    Chinese Central Banker Declares That ‘Gold Is The Only Safe Haven Left’
    Gus Lubin|December 27, 2011


    China is making an even bigger move toward gold in reaction to money printing around the world (via @JamesGRickards).

    People’s Bank of China official Zhang Jianhua declared yesterday: “No asset is safe now. The only choice to hedge risks is to hold hard currency – gold.”

    Zhang, the bank’s research director, recommended buying the dips: “The Chinese government should not only be cautious of the imported risk caused by rising global inflation, but also further optimize its foreign-exchange portfolio and purchase gold assets when the gold price shows a favorable fluctuation.”

    China’s $3.2 trillion in foreign reserves are currently invested one-third in U.S. treasuries 20 percent in euro-denominated assets and only 1.8 percent in gold, according to China Daily. China has one of the world’s biggest gold reserves at 1,054 tons.

    Read more:

  40. gmanfortruth says:

    This is a good example of why the 2nd Amendment must remain. Give people a badge and a gun and they think they are the rulers of the world. Watch the video and you decide:

  41. gmanfortruth says:

    One big reason why I warn of economic collapse. The ignorance of the sheeple

    Buck, my goal is to convert you with facts, not the lies that is the mainstay of Liberalism. 🙂

  42. gmanfortruth says:

    Funny stuff, I’m trying to have a kind, cordial conversation on HuffPo. I don’t speak Liberal, which is very bad on that site. I’m saving the comments in hopes of doing an article on it. That would be interesting, what do ya’ll think?

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I’m getting some great personal attacks from the HuffPo crowd. I’m being nice too, wonder what would be said if I was nasty? I see why JAC enjoys the entertainment, better than the freak show at a carnival 😆

      • Just A Citizen says:


        You really shouldn’t play with the animals unless you have special training and safety equipment.


        • gmanfortruth says:

          ROFLMAO! 🙂 I must admit, they are a strange crowd. They assume way to much, like that I’m from the South, that I want succession, that I’m a republican and that I want a Civil War. I got all of this because I brought up this Lincoln/Obama comparison. Imagine that!? Still laughing too! 😆

      • gmanfortruth says:

        They all stopped talking to me, now I’m sad :lol;

  43. Just A Citizen says:


    You asked a question this morning about background checks, etc.

    As I said before, check the PERSON not the transaction.

    There is absolutely NO NEED to register guns or record transactions, that is IF the goal is to stop unwarranted killing with guns.

    License the INDIVIDUAL not the gun.

    Psych evals are a dangerous slope to negotiate. Necessary perhaps but wrought with all kinds of dark potential.

    Did you ever see any of those 60’s and 70’s movies where innocent people get locked up? Where politicians use Psych wards to put away opponents?

    Well, there was some basis for those movies. Maybe we went to far the other way, but frankly I’ld rather have a few crazy folks walking around that what we had before.

    Under the old rules my son would have been taken from us at age 6 and placed in an institution AGAINST our will. Because he would throw fits and hit other kids for no apparent reason. That is where we were in the 60’s and 70’s.

    The irony of all ironies is that it was Ronaldus Magnus Reagan who led the charge to allow parents of handicapped kids to access funding to home school their kids INSTEAD of institutionalizing them.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      JAC, Hope you don’t mind me chiming in on your question to Buck! I do agree 100% about the psychological issues you brought up, as well as many others. Let me be clear that I don’t agree that people should have to get a license to conceal carry. That is currently the case, and I can say that only law abiding citizens actually get a conceal carry license. I have one, it’s got my picture and is much like a drivers license.

      One would think, that with a conceal carry permit, a background check would not be needed to buy a gun. Another flaw in the system that just costs money and serves no purpose. I’m not in to what if’s either. What if a meteor the size of Texas hits earth? See what I mean.

      Glad your back!

      • Just A Citizen says:


        I agree, one permit is all you should need.

        Perhaps it could have a check box for various certifications.

        Although I still do not understand the need or use for conceal carry permits.

        It would seem that someone carrying a concealed gun creates a far smaller stir than my carrying my shotgun down main street.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          I sure can agree with everything you say. I see people with long guns all the time and it doesn’t make me blink. The CC permit is also a joke, because criminals are not gonna bother getting them, so what is there real purpose? Could be just a revenue thing in some places. The permit issue would be a good discussion to have, what do you think?

    • Yes, check the person….but on every transaction.

      It should be a very quick and cheap process, especially where someone is already licensed, just to make a determination that the license is still valid and hasn’t been revoked.

      I think I’ve been pretty clear on the need to tread carefully with mental health issues, but certainly we can all agree there are some people that just shouldn’t be permitted to own a gun. Do you agree?

      • Bottom Line says:

        “…,but certainly we can all agree there are some people that just shouldn’t be permitted to own a gun. ”

        According to whom, and by what standards?

        I could make the same argument about those who have absolutely no understanding of freedom/free will, that there are some people that have absolutely no business practicing law.

        Buck, I suggest you ‘get it’ in a hurry as there will be little tolerance for those that are not unequivocally on the side of freedom and liberty. When the shit hits the fan and civil war breaks out, those of you that are not on the side of freedom are essentially walking corpses.

        I wish you and yours the best of luck, sir.

        • Generally speaking, do you believe that every single person in this country should be allowed to own a gun, or do you recognize that there are certain people out there that should not?

          I’ll ignore your other comments.

          • Bottom Line says:

            ” Generally speaking, do you believe that every single person in this country should be allowed to own _________, …?

            Your use of the word ‘allowed ‘ says a lot. And yes, people are, by order of natural law, earners and owners of their property.

            I’ll ignore your other comments.”

            Exactly. Again, I wish you and yours the best of luck.

  44. Just A Citizen says:

    The Myth of the “Conservative Supreme Court”
    Written by Rob Natelson on 19 January 2013

    Is the current U.S. Supreme Court conservative? No, it is not. And certainly not if you define “conservative” as interpreting the Constitution according to the understanding of the makers.

    The claim that the Court has a conservative majority is certainly widespread. Googling the phrase “conservative supreme court” turned up over 38 million hits. The more specific phrase, “conservative majority supreme court” yielded 3.75 million. The New York Times has even editorialized that “the aggressiveness of the majority’s conservatism” actually renders the court “radical.”

    A careful reading of a study by the Times itself shows the latter claim to be pure bunk. Although the headline affixed to the study suggested that it found the Court to be conservative, that headline was somewhat misleading. The study’s findings were much less definitive. It did conclude that (1) “the recent shift to the right is modest,” (2) “the court’s decisions have hardly been uniformly conservative,” and (3) by contemporary public standards the Court is centrist, not conservative.

    Careful analysis of the Times study by Professor Jonathan Adler turned up more. Professor Adler demonstrated that the study actually found that the current justices are restrained, not necessarily conservative. They form, in point of fact, the most restrained bench in decades. That means they don’t change the law much one way or another.

    Now, you might think that “Restrained = Conservative.” But think again: When the Court leaves existing constitutional jurisprudence untouched, it protects constitutional jurisprudence that is mostly liberal. You see, most existing constitutional jurisprudence is the product of the “progressive” justices who dominated the Court for the greater part of the 20th century. That jurisprudence often disregarded established methods of interpretation, overruled established doctrines, authorized huge expansions of federal power, and re-wrote important parts of the Constitution to serve “progressive” ends. When the Court leaves “progressive” jurisprudence untouched, the results are mostly “progressive” decisions.

    Ironically, some of the cases liberals complain most about today—such as the Citizens United ruling on corporate campaign spending—are merely applications of rules formulated in prior years by “progressive” majorities.

    Not only has the current Court refused to cashier most of this liberal jurisprudence, but it sometimes has expanded it. A good example is Lawrence v. Texas, a decision authored by Justice Kennedy. Lawrence ruled that anti-sodomy laws violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, although such laws had been part of the western tradition for 3000 years. (Needless to say, there is no evidence the Fourteenth Amendment had anything to say on the subject. And, just to be clear, I do not personally favor anti-sodomy laws; that is a different question from constitutionality, however.)

    The Times editorial asserting that the present Court is “radical” was triggered by the conclusion of five justices that Obamacare’s individual mandate was not justified by the Commerce or Necessary and Proper Clauses. But that was not even a conservative conclusion, much less a radical one. The five justices called into question no current congressional power. They did not reverse a single liberal holding—not even the rogue 1944 decision that insurance is “commerce.” They merely stated that the Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clauses did not authorize a new congressional power. Even more to the point, the Court ultimately upheld the exercise of that new power by pretending that the mandate was an indirect tax.

    Among the Supreme Court’s membership, a plurality (four of nine) are fairly reliable liberals. Only one, Clarence Thomas, is “conservative” in the sense that he consistently interprets the Constitution according to the rules generally applied during the Constitution’s first 150 years. Justice Scalia usually does so as well—but not always: In Gonzales v. Raich, he joined a liberal majority that extended the congressional Commerce Power to window-box plants.

    Justice Kennedy frequently sides with the four liberals. Chief Justice Roberts, as the Obamacare case illustrates, usually protects the status quo and the inflated pretensions of Congress. Justice Alito, while more conservative than Roberts, has been mostly unwilling to reverse liberal constitutional jurisprudence.

    Admittedly, the present Supreme Court is more restrained than the activist benches of the mid-20th century. Perhaps it would be fair to characterize it as centrist or moderate.

    But conservative? Not hardly.

%d bloggers like this: