The Future of Cash

moneyCash is king!  That’s what many here have said more than once.  Cash, or fiat, is something that is a requirement for a free nation to remain free.  Read that again, because it’s a strong statement.  Without cash, would one really be free?  Some of the oldest of conspiracy theories stated that the future with a One World Government would be a cashless society.  Why?  Control, that’s why.  Each and everyday we are bombarded with bureaucratic nonsense that is really nothing more than attempts at control.  Now, the banksters are joining in on that very thing.

[T]he introduction of a cashless society empowers central banks greatly. A cashless society, after all, not only makes things like negative interest rates possible, it transfers absolute control of the money supply to the central bank, mostly by turning it into a universal banker that competes directly with private banks for public deposits. All digital deposits become base money.

Now, banksters around the world are calling for the abolition of cash. Last month, Norway’s largest bank, DNB, called for the country to stop using cash to reduce black market sales and crimes such as money laundering. “There are so many dangers and disadvantages associated with cash, we have concluded that it should be phased out,” DNB executive Trond Bentestuen said.

The CEO of Deutsche Bank calls cash “terribly inefficient and expensive.” A recent Bloomberg  article called cash and coins “dirty and dangerous, unwieldy and expensive, antiquated and so very analog.”

This is the part where we pear into the rabbit hole, because there are dots that can be followed, little statements being made, that can lead to the masses accepting a cashless society.  Let’s begin by statements made by Donald Trump concerning the destruction of ISIS.  Paraphrasing, ” We will take their oil and we will take their money “.  That sounds great, but it is also saying a few things.  If their money can be controlled, so can they.  Terrorism, a perfect excuse for a cashless society.

During the recent Democrat debate, the subject of the plight of the black community was a big part.  With the Primaries hitting much larger black populations, the pandering for black votes takes center stage.  The destruction of black communities, while a separate subject, can be attributed somewhat to the war on drugs.   Our prison populations are loaded with those who have offended anti-drug laws.  Hence, the war on drugs could be used as an excuse to end the war on drugs.

cashWithout getting to lengthy, the war on cash is on, whether we like it or not.  We could be one significant terrorist attack from seeing legislation that would outlaw CASH.  We could be one significant drug related mass murder from seeing legislation that would outlaw cash.  As the world’s economy seemingly on a downturn, a cashless society inches closer to reality everyday.  We should all be on the lookout for the Fascist marriage of government and banksters.  Freedom is King.  Cash is a big part of our freedom.  When they control cash, they control freedom.  When they control cash, they control all of us.

Advertisements

Comments

  1. gmanfortruth says:

    Just recently, a news report stated that ISIS had used chemical weapons in Syria and Iraq. This report, which I only saw once, should be looked at as a warning. The Sociopath’s and Psychopaths in government know that control can come in many ways. It’s already being beta tested, with some gun shops being hammered by a government operation aimed at putting them out of business by banks denying to do business with them, at the government’s behest. Might want to buy some war paint, while you still can.

  2. gmanfortruth says:
  3. gmanfortruth says:
  4. I don’t really understand everything I just read but it sounds like getting rid of cash and negative interest rates are related.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/02/the_negative_interest_rate_nightmare_may_become_a_reality.html

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Good Morning VH! What I didn’t put in the article was the law recently passed (by the republican controlled Congress) that has made you, the bank depositor, an unsecured creditor. That means, when your bank fails, secured creditors get their money FIRST. What ever is left goes to the unsecured creditors. Why is this important? Because the unsecured creditors will inevitably take a “haircut”, just like those in Cyprus did. The banks can’t screw people if they have their cash at home. With today’s technology, combined with today’s indoctrinated majority of young people, it would only take one major event and they would support the end of cash in this country. Think of a really bad terrorist attack that kills thousands and thousands of people. The government then comes back with a new law to fight terrorism, the end of cash becomes a reality. All in the name of fighting terrorism, plus they can throw in winning the drug war. All in one swoop, and the people would fall for it, hook, line and sinker.

      In fact, I think JAC has stated he wouldn’t mind a cashless society.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Gman

        I did NOT ever say that. However, I do like the convenience of my plastic card.

        I make over 100 purchases per month. I write one check for those at the end of the month, instead of carrying tons of cash or writing a hundred checks.

        Cash has its purpose and is necessary to liberty. See Mathius and BF.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      V.H.

      They are related. The Govt. needs more money. It needs to cut costs, negative rates, and collect all the tax revenues possible. Eliminating cash gives Govt. the ability to tax ALL transactions.

      Along with banning cash will come LAWS prohibiting having cash, using cash, or withdrawing cash from your bank accounts. Those found with cash will go to jail.

      That is the relationship. Whether “we the people” will allow it to go that far in another matter. Alternatives will sprout up and the Govt. will prosecute those for “forfeiting” money. The ultimate irony, guilty of forfeiting something that does not exist in material form.

  5. gmanfortruth says:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431213/hillary-clinton-milwaukee-debate-listless-performance?utm_source=jolt&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Jolt02122015&utm_term=Jolt

    I didn’t (couldn’t) watch the debate. I simply cannot listen to Hitlery’s voice any longer. So, who thinks Bernie actually has a chance to beat Clinton? I say “NO WAY”, even if she has pending Federal charges against her. She will claim she is a victim of some sorts. She should be in jail, not running for the Presidency.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      I just looked up Paranoia and Dilusional disorders and their symtoms. Hillary certainly meets the qualifications for both. She actually makes Nixon look normal. She certainly has a split personality, because you never know what Hillary will show up, after she reinvents herself again and again.

  6. First, it is a war on currency. As government does control the currency, which is money today, it can do all sorts of perversions to money.

    However, if they are able to “outlaw” anonymous transactions, which is what the use of “cash” is, the people will simply use another economic good as anonymous money.

    Gman is correct. It is a fundamental freedom to have anonymous transactions. The people will not be denied this regardless of government perversions.

    • Consenting human beings should be are free to enter into any contract with each other that they wish to provided that it does not impact the rights of non-participatory third parties. To that end, anonymous transactions are absolutely an extension of a basic human right.

      That said, I do recognize…. you know what, I don’t feel like banging my head against the brick wall that Black Flag today. Let’s just leave it there, shall we?

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I have to agree that an alternative method will be developed for anonymous transactions. For the most part, a majority of people would go on about their lives within the NEW rules. At least in the early stages, the banks win. As a new method or methods come about, slowly but surely, they will be outlawed. The end result will be more people behind bars and people getting their money stolen in the name of saving their bank.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      BF….you said what I wrote down the line a bit, with one major exception. You wrote it with clarity and economy of words and obviously an uncluttered mind.

  7. Dale A Albrecht says:

    I have no doubt as to the reasoning the governments and banks want a cashless society. The unfortunate thing is that if you have cash in the bank it can be taken, witness Greece and Cyprus. A government can in a stroke make cash out in circulation worthless and reissue a new currency at what ever rate they want. The EU as countries joined and converted to the euro, at least that was voluntary. But that is costly. Cash does leave NO trail once the withrawal of the large amount completed. Hence the $10K withdrawal and deposit lag of up to 14 days. And I’m sure lessor $’s are also scrutinized. A bank even held up a transfer for 14 days funds drawn from a trust fund in their own bank to be deposited in another account. Sale of a home.

    If the Swedish government is trying go cashless to suppress the black market, I doubt they have really thought this through. The black market and barter system will increase. Don’t they realize the black market exists because of government actions trying to control human interaction or behavior and genuine “wants”

    My Grandparents had a safe at home. They didn’t trust banks as far as they could throw them.

    Cash is a good thing to have but far more important is to be debt free. It’s that old song from the 30’s about owing your soul to the company store. You can do anything you want as long as you pay the bill off. Until that time you are hooked and NOT free.

    With the way job markets come and go….why would anyone assume such huge debts on college? You probably will not use that specific education anyway. Absolutely important though is to learn how to learn. And have a top notch ability to comprehend what you are reading or listening to. If you do not know the high level step back and then build up the knowledge. It doesn’t take long. Example. While taking electronics courses in the military. The 3-4 months of deep consentrated study was the equivalent of a BS in electrical engineering. The semi-conductor class lasted 2 weeks and it would have been 1 year at a university. I didn’t know squat about metalurgy and other physics involved in molecular migration under pressure and heat. Turned out the phd’s knew even less that were working with the product design and process. I wound up writing papers on the subject.

  8. gmanfortruth says:
  9. Just A Citizen says:

    The end is getting closer than many realize. The story, like most, ignores the real purpose/effect of negative interest. First of all it means that free money is not stimulating anything. The Central Banks are losing control. Negative rates are the flailing of a terminal patient. Its purpose is to CUT costs of debt finance to Govt., to transfer more wealth to Govt., because the DEBT cycle is collapsing. At least that is my view on the matter.

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/negative-interest-rates-are-spreading-across-the-world-here%e2%80%99s-what-you-need-to-know/ar-BBpq87e?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=HPCDHP

    Anita…….. If you still own Gold stocks and not coins then I suggest you watch the current run UP and sell after you get another 10 to 15% gain. Then take that cash and put it in a safe where you can get to it. If possible convert paper to coins.

  10. Just A Citizen says:

    ROTFLMAO……….snorting coffee all over the place…………… oh my gosh, my sides hurt….

    gman: ” We should all be on the lookout for the Fascist marriage of government and banksters.”

    On the look out for? Oh my eyes are squirting water from laughing so hard.

    • JAC,

      I’ll pick you up at designated drop-off point Bravo. We can take my Way Back machine to.. err.. 1776?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Mathius

        My friend, we do not have to go back that far, but I would love to see 1776 if it were possible. More importantly I would love to see 1787.

  11. gmanfortruth says:
    • They’re not “losing their jobs to Mexico.” They’re losing their jobs to human beings who happen to live in Mexico. Human beings who need work and income.

      I always find it amazing how “small government” types are just fine with “big government” when it comes to wanting protectionist barriers to commerce.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Actually, I consider this move “BECAUSE” of our big government. Add the Union issue and you have a company who is moving to make more profit. Get both out of their business, they wouldn’t likely be moving. Where exactly is your claim of “wanting protectionist barriers to commerce”? I never stated that. The government can’t stop them, so what protections are you referring?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Mathius

        Small Govt. does not mean no govt, and it does not mean a Govt. which does not exercise protective tariffs. It just means small in terms of those powers it was specifically granted.

        The Constitution is NOT a “Libertarian” document, despite the Libertarian claims to the contrary.

      • “They’re losing their jobs to human beings who happen to live in Mexico. Human beings who need work and income.”

        Semantics……nothing but Semantics…..from a globalist, like……..George Bush.

      • So the 1400 people who are losing their jobs are not ‘human beings who need work and income’?? Whatever…

        • Yes, losing their jobs to human beings that have child labor, no environmental controls, no forced wage controls……ask these same persons if they would support the same type of structure in the US. Take all the binders off here in the US….allow child labor, no environmental over sight….no labor unions…now that would be proper competition.

          • I get a kick out of the disconnect.

            The same folks who correctly want to restrict immigration because “It ain’t 1890 anymore and we do not need more poor unskilled labor” are the VERY same folks who say” We can’t have tariffs. They always cause economic catastrophe.”

            Well, haven’t times changed for both? Don’t think that 80 years ago, back at the time of Smoot Hawley we were dealing with currency manipulators.

        • You got it! It is also the baggage that comes along with losing a major employer.It is cheaper in the long run to keep the business even if the product costs more. Think of teh tax liability the unemployment causes.

          Of the two big dogs in the current presidential fight, Trump and Sanders, only one has even thought about it! The rest of the pack seems beholden to their corporate masters and the false argument about “free trade”. .

    • So, let’s put this all together:

      we have lost 1500 jobs in the United States
      those jobs will not be replaced
      1500 people will be on unemployment.
      eventually maybe a thousand will find work at lesser pay
      500 will never return to work
      Alcohol use will increase
      drug use will increase
      domestic violence will increase
      the school drop out rate will increase
      suicides will increase
      the local tax base will drop
      the US industrial base will shrink
      Related industries and supplier will die
      every single business that deals with the 1500 will suffer

      Some traditional conservatives and libertarians will deny all above.

      And people wonder why Bernie Sanders has traction.

      So, How’s Carrier doing?

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_Corporation

      Their Stock

      http://www.thestreet.com/story/13446598/1/insider-trading-alert–utx-cfr-and-petx- traded-by-insiders.html?puc=bloomberg&cm_ven=BLOOMBERG

      How are the bosses doing?

      http://insiders.morningstar.com/trading/executive-compensation.action?t=UTX

      And, as a human being, one has to ask, Am I my brothers keeper?

    • It is very easy to stop this…..very easy.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        True, but the government won’t do anything and the people are too ignorant to understand how to fix the problem (stop buying the products). I think that this has been the purpose of NAFTA all along, to destroy this country economically. Now add politically to that and we have some big problems that need fixed.

        Question….Operation North Thunder, a operation in the northern part of Saudi by Arab nations, how many tanks and people are amassing in that region for the “exercise”? I think there may be some bad info being put out.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Here is why I ask about Saudi…..

          Saudi Arabia said 350,000 forces from more than 20 Persian Gulf Arab nations will partake in an exercise called “North Thunder”, according to Saudi media.

          Egypt, Sudan and Pakistan are among the participants in the mission that could spark World War 3.

          The drill will take place in the northern part of the country, and has been described as the largest military maneuver in the history of the region, according to Press TV.

          It is being seen as preparation for a ground invasion of Syria.

          Read more at https://www.trunews.com/saudis-350000-syrian-invasion-force-could-start-world-war-3/#eR7oOcs0Q8toCG4x.99

  12. Just A Citizen says:

    From my mailbag. Makes for a great “Thought of the Day”.

    “People come to believe whatever they need to believe when they need to believe it.

    Recent studies of voting patterns confirm the obvious. Zombies vote for higher taxes. Cronies vote for lower taxes. All believe they are voting for matters of principle.

    Alan Greenspan believed strongly in gold – until he became a central banker.

    Then he believed he could do a better job than gold. Or at least he pretended to.

    It was a job requirement.

    A priest who didn’t believe in the resurrection would be useless. So would a plumber who didn’t believe in using a wrench. “

  13. gmanfortruth says:

    I remember someone saying that “Gun Free Zones” had nothing to do with mass shootings, HMMM, maybe some facts might change one’s mind: http://personalliberty.com/data-more-gun-free-zones-mean-more-mass-shootings/

  14. gmanfortruth says:
    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendleton_County,_West_Virginia

      I used to live in the county 40 years ago while stationed at the Naval, now NSA facility. With a bit over 7000 people in the county, and what farming does exist is situated in very narrow strips of bottom land. I visited the area a few years ago and there was very little change except in the aging of everything. The living facility for the base, now, will remind you of a prison with rows of high wire fences topped with coils of concertina. But no new buildings. totally the same withing the wire.

      What there was then and probably more now was a very large population of DC vacationers who had fishing and hunting lodges. through the area flows one of the forks of the Potomac River. Most farms are very small and basically subsistance farms. The EPA is ignoring the Courts and even all the analyse by the Chesapeake foundations. Very little if any improvement of Bay water will come from their draconian methods.

      many years ago there was an environmental book written called “the voyage of SABA” What the voyage was about was…..a bunch of very rich DC environmentalist who had gotten a cause under their belt and got an international law passed banning the taking of a particular type of turtle in the Caribbean. Their first port of call was Port o Prince Haiti. they were agast and shocked that the fishermen were ignoring this law and selling curios made from the turtles to the “wealthy” tourists of the cruise ships. they begrudgingly realized that these piss poor people living in one of the worst countries of the world had to EAT. No sewage treatment plants etc. Where they came from actually had infrastructure and plumbing and when you flushed your toilet the effluent was out of sight and out of their mind.

      The DC bureaucrat doesn’t give a rats ass about those people. They do not affect them in the least. If Byrd was still alive there is NO way this would be taking place in Pendleton County. He would have deflected it to another poor county unable to defend itself.

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        Pendleton county also is covered mostly by the George Washington National Forest. Then as now fly fishing for trout is very popular and a fairly big draw for sportsmen. That said, the creeks and rivers to support trout are all in all run very clean, even those that run through bottom land…..take the rivers due east in Virginia like the shenendoah which are in exceedingly rich farm land and are commutable to DC I never ever saw them run clear. Brown or green and was and the last time I went through, the color of the water from the run off. Routine fish kills are the order of the day from lack of oxygen due to algae. The James and Appomattax below Richmond and Petersburg are heavily polluted due to industrial and population and farm run off. Take a boat in there and it will be stained almost beyond repair. Would be if left in…..bigger bang for the buck on cleaning up the bay ,,,,but there is a huge voting population there.

  15. gmanfortruth says:
  16. gmanfortruth says:
  17. Tell you what…..those of you worried about a cashless society…….study economics a little more…….keep your gold/silver/palladium/platinum……….try to trade it or spend it. I will keep the USD….cash is not going to be replaced. Not in our lifetime…or the next several generations.

    • Metals are a great hedge against inflation, but it takes quite a bit. Metals in paper in 401(k’s) or IRA’s…be very careful….very, very careful. If some of youhave these, try an experiement…..ask for your metals so you can hold them yourself. See what happens.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I’m not sure a totally cashless society is even possible in some countries, which would have little bearing on what the advanced countries actually do. If we were back 20 years ago, I would agree totally with your assessment. Now, not so sure they won’t at least try. It still may not succeed, but an effort seems to be heading our way. I brought up this subject because of a short statement during the last Republican debate, although I didn’t put it in the original article.

  18. gmanfortruth says:

    (TRUNEWS) Austria’s Deputy Economy Minister Harald Mahrer said Austrians should have the constitutional right to use cash.

    His comments were made on Austrian public radio station Oe1, on the heels of EU finance ministers vowing Friday to crack down on “illicit cash movements” in a meeting in Brussels.

    “We don’t want someone to be able to track digitally what we buy, eat and drink, what books we read and what movies we watch, we will fight everywhere against rules” Mahrer said, continuing to note that this included the caps on cash purchases, which had been previously suggested in Germany, and were now being seriously discussed by the European Central Bank (ECB).

    At the meeting in Brussels where EU finance ministers vowed to crack down on “illicit cash movements” they also urged the European Commission, the EU’s executive arm, to “explore the need for appropriate restrictions on cash payments exceeding certain thresholds and to engage with the European Central Bank to consider appropriate measures regarding high denomination notes, in particular the 500-euro note.”

    EU ministers set the date of May 1st for when commission participants were to report their findings.

    The movement to implement a global cashless society has grown expeditiously in recent years, documented fully here by TRUNEWS, and as the public begins to see the negative interest rate policies (NIRP) unfold in their countries and banking jurisdictions there will likely be more public outcries like Mahrer’s.

    Read more at http://www.trunews.com/austria-rejects-eus-war-on-cash/#OY5qjQX9I5T3z2z3.99

    • Europe may go this way…..do not expect Russia, China, the US, England, Australia, and the ME to go this route.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        d13thecolonel

        I think the USA is much closer to following this line of thinking than you realize. That is the use of cash as “legal money”.

        As I watch this election cycle I now believe almost any travesty against liberty possible in the USA.

        We may have cash but it will be in the “underground market”.

        • The economic indicators are simply not there to support this……Central Banking is still far from the making as a world process…..no large country will back it…..it simply is not in their interest.

  19. gmanfortruth says:

    http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/malcolm-x-cracka-second-anti-white-attack-brooklyn-one-week

    Has anyone seen any of this outside of a Democrat controlled city?

  20. gmanfortruth says:

    In Texas? WTF are you folks teaching your cops?

    http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/cops-cites-preacher-for-offending-student/

    • Really…you are surprised by Campus Cops, in training, stopping the use of profanity and obscene gestrues….I would not be surprised at all by what Campus Cops ( rent-a-cops ) do…and remember, AUSTIN, is our token liberal city. But you have to like Austin as well…for it is not illegal to ride bicycles topless…both male and female.

      I do not think you will see this any further….all the other things that I read from a couple of sites is that these rent-a-cops, themselves, do not understand the very laws they were trying to protect…..however, I will say that freedom of expression is being questioned when it becomes offensive to the nature of name calling, obscene gestures, grabbing and showing pictures of body parts, ect.

      However, that said…….it is Austin.

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        Wasn’t Austin was one cities to defy the budweiser monopoly and be one the first to allow craft beers, so that is a plus. I understand that in SF you can go around buck ass naked. But a new ordinance says when you sit on a chair etc in a restaurant, as an example, you must place a cloth or napkin or tissue down 1st.

  21. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Just a thought on the Zika virus. Identified in the 40’s. Mosquito borne illness. Not particularly nasty, but not welcoming. However the panic created since two pregnant women were found to have their fetus’s having possibly liked problems.

    If this virus is now declared pandemic by WHO just think what will happen with the spread of the virus with the Olympic Games in Brazil.

    These nasty virus’s are spread very rapidly though the unrestricted travel and open immigration advocated by governments such as ours the UN and EU.

    So what was the real story behind “Pandoras Box”? The Cherokee indians have a legend about nature being up in arms and in crisis mode about the introduction of man into their environment. They discussed who amongst them will best deal with the alien species. The bear advocated that he deal with it. He’s big and strong. The unseen tiniest organism (virus and diseases) spoke up and said they would be best in controlling the human population, if not destroy them…..nice story told up in the mountains. But how true. No matter how hard humans try and eliminate disease enough survive and come back even stronger wrecking even more havoc.

    • George Stewart’s 1947 Sci-Fi book, “Earth Abides”.

      Nature doing Population Control plus a good yarn.

      Funny how we have just a few cases of this but all the hullabaloo. The abortion lobby will just love it. Already heard the radio/TV “doctors” talking about ending pregnancies for women who may have come in contact with the mosquito.

      Where was/is all this concern over the spread of Aids? A totally preventable disease which should be all but obliterated by now taking a few simple Public health measures. For that matter just a year or so back we were told not to worry about Ebola. No need for any type of restrictions on travel from the third world pest holes.

      Politics and Science and Politics in medicine are pure poison. Just like the old USSR. Make it up as you go along.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      The Zika virus, patented in the 40’s by the Rockefeller (or Rothschild) Corporation. It didn’t have the associated issues with infants when discovered and patented. With a few more cases and some good old fashioned brainwashing, the company will make a fortune on a virus that few really need. Much like the overblown Swine Flu, the CDC will milk this for the money.

  22. gmanfortruth says:

    http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/02/12/venezuela-has-run-out-of-food/

    This should be plastered on every college campus with live streaming of food lines. Show them what the end result of Socialism is.

  23. A blast from the past. Funny how this left wing “parody” became an actual anthem among us young Right wingers back in the day. The right, DOES have a sense of humor.

  24. Here it is. With Scalia dead, what are the odds of the Republican establishment actually blocking a nomination. Knowing the big O, the next nominee should be an openly gay judge.

  25. This ought to put Cruz and Rubio in interesting positions.

    • If the Senate Repubs go along again, it should be the end of the Party. Time to start a new one.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        If they go along, it might be the trigger that really sets of the Liberty movement. Glad I don’t live in any big cities…..or Idaho.

  26. gmanfortruth says:

    The debate was shameful. Rubio was a scripted robot politician. I think that is fake. Trump, Bush and Cruz all acted like 5 year olds arguing over who is right about the color of the sky. Kasich still talks too much about himself. Carson was the only one who acted with restraint and stuck to the issues, when he had the chance.

    A few thoughts. When Trump said that Iraq didn’t have WMD’s and they knew it, why didn’t anyone challenge that?

    Anyone notice that Trump and Carson were the only one’s who didn’t have any concern over the Assad regime in Syria, but the lifetime politicians did?

    Was Cruz sending out robocalls saying Trump was quitting?

    How come Bush didn’t say he would repeal bankruptcy laws, since he has such a problem with people who use them?

    I’ll give Rubio the win. His scripted stuff usually plays well with voters. I think we just saw the beginning of the end of both Trump and Carson.

    Bush and Cruz gained on Trump. Unfortunately, telling the truth isn’t always what the people want to hear. The death of Scalia will weigh heavy going forward.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      It is so important for the Republicans to get it together QUICKLY. Not hearing much about Obama’s policies nor going after the obvious two democrats 1/2 nominees. The republicans are not sending a CLEAR message. It’s worse than babbling.

      Sure Obama said he will nominate a replacement to Scalia. There is an incredible amount riding on the nominee. The Republicans can block any nominee, but have to remember Obama’s trick of naming a replacement to an important post that required Senate approval during a recess when they WERE NOT in recess. But congress let it stand. There is to much at stake here. The EPA and climate change rulings, Gun control, freedom of speech, water interpretations as being navigatible etc, So if they block the nominee who will undoubtably be very liberal and progressive, it is imperative for a Republican be elected president. They won’t pull that off if this squabbling continues much longer.

      At least even during FDR’s time when he tried to pack the court, the Senate even though it was controlled by the Democrats, did not go along.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Maybe they are just practicing for the general election, knowing that squabbling is how the Liberal’s will play (wishful thinking, 🙂 ). SC seems to be the State where the squabbling begins, then levels off later. Hopefully, they will quit trying to put on a show and start talking about what needs fixed. Cruz or Rubio (probably Rubio) went into the old cliche’ about reforming welfare and getting people back to work. Can’t get people back to work when there are few jobs that outpay welfare, few jobs, period, and 30 million illegal immigrants fighting for the few jobs out there. The only candidate qualified to fix this is Trump. I have to read up on Carson, but he’s never going to get the nominee. The others are establishment politicians so they bring along the status quo.

        If I had to vote on the least trustworthy, I would vote Cruz at this point, with Bush running second.

        • I think it was the worst of the R debates so far. Way too much bashing of each other rather than platform details. Carson is the only one who stayed above the fray and was the only adult in the room. I like his calm approach to problems. Trump lost me at one point. I do not remember the question but he was way off on the answer. When he stops being bombastic, he can actually talk sense. He did it once when talking about how to get along with congress. If he would do that more, he would definitely run away with the nomination and election. Kasich rose a little but not enough to bubble to the top. Cruz got into the mud with the others which was a mistake.
          If I had to vote right now, I would go Cruz because he is a Constitutionalist, Carson, Trump, Kasich, Rubio and never Bush.

      • I thought they took Obama to court over the recess appointments and he lost. I think it was appointments to the Labor Union-which I hope means even Obama won’t do it again-but I’m not at all sure.

        • Recess appointments are only temporary. Somehow I do not think that would fly for SCOTUS.

          All Obama’s previous appoints came as quota filling affirmative action appointments. I do not expect anything different. I would not be surprised to see him nominate a gay for the bench maybe even a gay minority member. Thus the R’s will be painted as racist homophobes. If the nominee will not make it, might as well get some political hay out of it.

        • Dale A Albrecht says:

          Why would they take him to court? it’s in their court, that is Congresses. Pretty much Hillary and Sander’s are promising to double down on Obama’s tenure and agenda.

          Let’s see…..Clinton pretty much won the election back in the ’90’s against Bush I with one note “it’s the economy stupid” Comparatively it was all sweet smelling roses back then even with the minor recession that was just a blip. Back in the 90’s good paying jobs were available. Companies had to pay a premium due to the demographic hole of very few young coming into the workplace. Of course unemployment had to get very low. There was no policy of government. They could just ride along. Comes the new millenium, and there now is a glut of young college educated people coming into the workplace. There had to be a pressure to off load the older employees with higher salaries because there were so many young, though not trained, hungry and eager for work. They had two 3 things going against them. Off shoring was in full swing. They expected high paying jobs like from the 90’s…They were there but much rarer. And they unlike previous college grads had on average a ton of debt which was due.

          Sort of related in a tangental way. On a documentary I watched last night about the sinking of the HMS Hood by the Bismark, a historian stated how important the shipping was to Englands survival. He said that it was CHEAPER to mine and ship the coal from the USA, than the shipping a comparitive distance from a port in England to the factory. In other words it was cheaper than coal mined in England and shipped internal to a factory. I personally saw that with plywood in the ’70. Cut the raw log here on the west coast. Ship to Japan, make the plywood and ship it back chheaper and it was the same quality and in some cases better than plywood made at Coos Bay.

          The Republicans must nominate a candidate that the majority of the people, across party lines can rally around. I do not believe Trump is that ticket. Trump may get 30-35%

          • Dale A Albrecht says:

            To many of the young unemployed college grads will look at Trump as the enemy not an ally, witness OWS and the wholehearted support the dems gave them. Trump is a 1%’r the enemy.

  27. gmanfortruth says:
  28. Time to :

    bork
    bôrk/
    verbUSinformal
    verb: bork; 3rd person present: borks; past tense: borked; past participle: borked; gerund or present participle: borking; verb: Bork; 3rd person present: Borks; gerund or present participle: Borking; past tense: Borked; past participle: Borked

    obstruct (someone, especially a candidate for public office) through systematic defamation or vilification.
    “is fear of borking scaring people from public office?”

    • Yes…….it is scaring the good people away from political life as well….we are left with………what the bird left on the pump handle.

      • Unfortunately, with the demise of Scalia, I am going to go back on my promise not to do what the other side does. So even if O’Bama nominates Jesus Christ to the court, I firmly believe in my heart of hearts that he or she or these days it should be scrutinized every bit as carefully as Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas were. Hence my reference of To Bork or Borking. It is February. Only have to stall for 11 months and a couple of days.

        If the republican Party played its cards right on this they would guarantee the Presidency to themselves even if Bozo the Clown wins in a brokered convention. I however am not holding my breath.

  29. Actually,. I do not think the stall will have to be that long…..Obama has a problem now……He can support an openly liberal to the SCOTUS, giving the Repubs plenty of ammunition to fight the nomination. However, if Obama were smart and appointed a moderate leaning left…..he robs the Repubs of some ammo.

    It is amazing, though….Scalia is not even in the ground yet….and the barbs are flying. The level of our politics is abysmal and embarassing….I think that Obama has to wait a couple of months but…..who the hell am I.

    Now, let us be realistic…..with all of this selective enforcement of Federal Laws, including enforcement of Federal Laws upheld by the SCOTUS, this administration has actually done us a great favor. It is now proven that the SCOTUS is actually powerless in the application of its rulings. States are beginning to not care what the SCOTUS says or does because this administration has set a precendent that no other one has. I say this because Texas has openly defied the SCOTUS and Federal Court rulings and nothing has been done because there is nothing that can be done, short of Congress sending in troops and that is not going to happen…..so, has the SCOTUS been rendered a toothless dog?

    • This administration has destroyed “the rule of law”.

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        Obama doesn’t care a lick about the law or the constitution. The only law in his mind is his agenda and any means to fulfill that agenda.

        Has anyone seen in our lifetimes where selective enforcement was not a one on one decision, special cases etc as opposed to a full class being selectively ignored who have broken more laws than there are saints.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      NC has followed TX on the photo id, even though the Feds are making life miserable. The State published the guidelines to vote. Photo ID required. However you can vote, provisionally, if you do not have one. But they have a list of things you then must do to prove who you are by a certain amount of days. If you can do that, you might as well just stop off at the State Police drivers license building and get a FREE photo id. Legal anywhere.

      • NC is not the only one…..New Mexico is following and so is Arizona.

      • I will say where Texas may have an edge is conomically. We have a large and robust economy that helps a great deal. THe Feds can deal the economic grief but we can with stand it…..at least for now.

        The new target for the Feds is Texas allowing its teachers to arm themselves….where the Feds are having trouble however, is Texas has independent school districts and it is the local districts that dictate policy…..no Federal money goes to local districts.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          The new target for the Feds is Texas allowing its teachers to arm themselves.

          Maybe we should seriously wonder WHY are the feds against this?

          • Probably harrassment because Texas rejected Common Core and rejected the school lunch diet restrictions. The kids can bring their own lunches and our public schools still serve hot dogs and corn dogs and potato chips….and sugar drinks. There are no lunch police coming around and taking the kids snacks. That has upset Queen Michelle. The Feds do not like the parents……………..parenting.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              The Feds do not like the parents……………..parenting.

              Once again WHY? We have to dig deeper to find the true desires of the Fed’s.

              • No you do not have to dig deeper….it is right there in Clinton’s Book…..”It takes a Village” just as Obama said what he was going to do in “Dreams of my Father”….I read them..scary stuff.

              • Dale A Albrecht says:

                Deja vu…..nobody believed Mein Kampf either. Amongst others, who didn’t write much, but took extreme action against the counter-revolutionaries. Lenin, Stalin, Mao. Let nobody doubt that the objective of Iran is the destruction of Israel. Blueprinted and boldly pronounced in the summer of ’79 by Khomeini. Still unfolding, but none the less happening as described. No time table so opportunities are seized as they occur or instigated to be more precise…..Khomeini also said the US will NOT interfere with the final coup de gras.

    • This may be useful, dug the info up to blast a High School friend who despite being a Marine in Viet-nam is somewhere left of Mao these days.

      Fact check. It is apparently customary NOT to appoint a judge in a presidential election year since 1940. Exception was Anthony Kennedy who was nominated in 1987 and confirmed in ’88. Kennedy was nominated after a Democratically controlled senate rejected Bork then Ginsberg. Prior to 1940, Presidents DID nominate Justices. Taft, Wilson, Hoover and Roosevelt all did WHEN their party controlled the Senate. So, whatchawannado, break tradition?

  30. Wow……just received my new health insurance under the new 2016 law passed by Obamacare where the VA now has to accept payments from Medicare for over 65…and I now have a deductible under the VA…even for war related injuries.

  31. gmanfortruth says:

  32. gmanfortruth says:

    Then-Governor Ronald Reagan was later heard to remark that he saw “no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons” and that guns were a “ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will.” In a later press conference, Reagan added that he Mulford Act “would work no hardship on the honest citizen.” Reagan signed the bill into law later that year. (Gun control laws in America have historically been designed to prevent minorities – blacks in particular – from owning guns.)

    Reagan’s words are an example of typical gun grabber-speak. “We are not the Wild West and no one needs to carry a weapon on his hip. No one needs a gun that can shoot 30 times. No one needs an ‘assault weapon’ to hunt. No one needs a 30-round ‘clip’ (I know the proper term is magazine). No one needs a gun that can shoot more than 15 (or 10) times.”

    Deciphering Reagan’s comment, the Black Panthers’ (or anyone else’s) practice of openly carrying weapons intimidated police and other agents of the state to such an extent they were afraid to continue going about their jobs of abusing Californians, and only agents of the state should have the legal right to openly carry a firearm. Extending it further, agents of the state may openly carry in order to properly intimidate the citizenry, but the citizenry must not openly display their weapons because agents of the state are easily intimidated.
    http://personalliberty.com/beyonce-black-panthers-and-misguided-outrage-on-the-right/

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Reagan was correct.

      There is no need to carry weapons in public among a “civil” society comprised of people “of good will”.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Too bad we don’t actually have a “civil” society comprised of people “of good will” and we never have. While most of us are of that nature, a small percentage are not.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          gman

          Of course we have. I grew up during the violence of the 60’s and early 70’s and NOBODY ever had to carry a gun in public.

          Guns were carried in pickups, on the window rack, and in saddle scabbards. Nobody had to carry pistols on the streets to feel safe or react to some bullshit threat.

          Yes there were occasional robberies and such, but most murders were by those who knew each other. Grudges and revenge, hate, that sort of thing. Nobody had to fear someone opening fire at a mall or school, or other public place.

          So I call BS on the accusation that we have never been civilized or a people of good will. Even during times of stress, we displayed considerable “civility”. Imagine the bread lines of the depression era.

          I laugh at the use of the “wild west” to describe wide open violence. As a westerner the only violence I recall was created by “easterners” who came out here to organize Unions or to impose their values on others in some other manner. Like putting up barbed wire fences or damming up water sources.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            WOW, talk about contradictions and failing the comprehension test. Example: I grew up during the violence of the 60’s and early 70’s (I did too, and growing up with the VIOLENCE of the 60’s and 70’s isn’t exactly what one would call a “CIVIL” society).

            Example #2: So I call BS on the accusation that we have never been civilized or a people of good will. My words: While most of us are of that nature, a small percentage are not.

            You should not drink when you post comments, BWAHAHAHA! 🙂

            Crime has been on a consistent downturn for many years which coincides directly with conceal carry laws being passed. If not for those laws (which we shouldn’t need anyway, we already have that Right) the violence of the 60’s and 70’s would be a picnic compared to what could be happening today. Take a peak at those places where there is strict gun control laws like Chicago, the statistics don’t lie.

            • Just A Citizen says:

              Reductions in crime are directly related to massive increases in POLICE.

              Crime has dropped in many places, including those where people are not carrying pistols in public.

              Statistics do not lie nor do they tell the truth. They are simply statistics. Numbers put in formulas by people who wish to tell a story. Both sides of this debate misuse statistics.

              First rule: Correlation does not prove Causation.

              • gmanfortruth says:

                Reductions in crime are directly related to massive increases in POLICE.

                Utter nonsense. Cops don’t stop shit, criminals just change tactics. It’s your kind of bullshit that has turned this country into a F-ing police state with the MOST incarcerated percentage of our population on the planet. WE wouldn’t have that sick record if cops stopped crimes. They are incarcerated BECAUSE they committed crimes. The only thing more cops accomplished was to enrich the prison industrial complex.

                First rule: Correlation does not prove Causation.

                It usually proves it 99.9% of the time. Second Rule: Ignore rule one.

              • Gentlemen please accept the fact that there are “multiple factors”

                Yes, extra cops played a factor

                Yes Concealed carry was a factor

                Now, does anyone out there remember, during the Clinton years the push to “lock ’em up”? That coincided with Guiliani in NYC. NY was out of control 2,300 murders per year. that is 2,300! Makes Chicago today look like the proverbial Sunday School picnic. I remember quite clearly in NY the pro incarceration forces going on about how 10% of the criminals do 90% of the crime. From that we went to severe sentences for multiple offenders. This was also done elsewhere and at the Federal level. I think one of the stats was something like a bad guy gets caught 1 time out of 10. So, guys who were caught 5 or 10 times were the really bad ones. Since most were minorities in minority neighborhoods doing minority on minority crime you just knew that one day the “Civil Rights” folks would howl and they have.

                So now, we will go back to letting them out, dropping the charges, furloughing them, giving them amnesty and whatever and in 5 or 10 years the shit will again hit the fan and after 20, or so years and a whole lot of innocent dead people they will again learn the lesson. .

                G, NYC went from 2,300 to 300 per year while the population increased by a million. NY is as far away from concealed carry now as it was in 1912 when the Sullivan law was passed.

                JAC, crime was much lower in the 1950’s with far less police. Social attitudes and mores were different. It is the Gestalt gentlemen, the sum of many things.

              • CA has been under Federal court mandate to reduce prison populations for several years. Gov. Moonbeam backed a ballot resolution to let non-violent offenders out. The local police chiefs and sheriffs howled but it passed anyway due to the bleeding heart liberals in this state. Like most states, CA crime rates were going down because of 3 strikes and better (targeted) policing. That is until the gates to the prisons opened. Now rates are climbing again.

                The gun statistics clearly show that once you remove suicide and accidents, the overwhelming majority of murders by gun are in the big cities, virtually all with strict gun control and democrat administration.

              • Dale A Albrecht says:

                I have no idea what % of the prison population is drug related. All in all drugs are a victimless crime, by conventional wisdom…you truly only hurt yourself and those near you…..But that is a very short sighted view. if you are a Robert Downey Jr of course you can afford you heroin addiction…but for how long. Before you know it the studios will NOT hire you. There is to much at stake,….he cleaned up, Anthony Hopkins cleaned up. Richard Dreyfus cleaned up.,,,the question should be…why do people feel they have to turn on and tune out?…Unless the government dispenses drugs, what ever the type from heroin to Mary Jane, or to be totally fair my bottle of Cabernet from Paso Robles. The ability to afford those drugs results in a crime that is NOT victimless….people always use Holland and Amsterdam as an example of tolerance…..DRUGS are still illegal. They just choose to not prosecute use. Go beyond use like B/E, etc you will be prosecuted. People just step over the bodies in the subway laying in pools of their puke…dead…on their way to work. They do not even seem to give a second thought….that is a sad state of humanity

                Why do people feel the need to use narcotics and serious alcohol use. Some is what is catagorized as a disease…prove it. Lesser tolerance I buy and thereby causing damage. Habit, I buy……Economic dispair both high and low. Where I grew up the kids could literally do anything. Europe in the summer, Hawaii weekends, ski Mammouth, Havasu, anything. But yet the kids really got into drugs. Was there no other thrill to experience? The lower end of the spectrum…boils down to NO HOPE, why bother. I ain’t gonna live anyway,

  33. gmanfortruth says:

    The military/security complex requires an enemy. When the Cold War ended, the “Muslim threat” was created. This “threat” has now been superceded by the “Russian threat,” which is much more useful in keeping Europe in line and in scaring people with prospective invasions and nuclear attacks that are far beyond the power and reach of jihadists.

    Superpower America required a more dangerous enemy than a few lightly armed jihadists, so the “Russian threat” was created. To drive home the threat, Russia and her president are constantly demonized. The conclusion is unavoidable that the insouciant American people are being prepared for war.
    http://personalliberty.com/are-americans-too-insouciant-to-survive/

    • Just A Citizen says:

      gman

      These threats are not “created”. They may be inflated beyond reason in order to maintain spending and empire building but they were not “created” by anyone other than the Jihadists and Putin.

      If you think Putin is demonized here you should pay attention to what that part of the world says about our leaders. Standard affair for leaders who are presiding over FAILED nation states.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        These threats are not “created”

        That’s very debatable. Don’t you find it strange that the beginning of ISIS was shortly after Obama couldn’t invade Syria after the failed false flag chem attack? Oh, never mind. Your better off sticking to the “official” story. Wouldn’t want to expose the blatant government corruption and lies. Now, of course, they are claiming several things, like the Russians are targeting civilians and ISIS has chemical weapons. Can the Neocons try any damn harder to get this war going? Why is Assad such a problem? Why did we attack Libya? Why did our government start the civil war in Ukraine and then blame Russia?

  34. gmanfortruth says:
  35. gmanfortruth says:

    As everyone can imagine, the net is all abuzz about the “murder” of Justice Scalia. Since it was reported that he was found with a pillow over his head, I guess that’s a logical assumption. No autopsy doesn’t help this kind of stuff. So, let’s assume that he was murdered, for the sake of this little chat. Who had the most to lose? Who had the most to gain? Follow the money and the answers are usually there. If this was indeed murder, I would start my investigation with Labor Unions.

  36. gmanfortruth says:
    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      I read this when you posted it. At the bottom, I believe the article listed companies that have made decisions that have resulted in significant loses. IBM leading the list. The other year when the elevated the current Chairman and CEO, a lady, I questioned her qualifications at that time. Her CV didn’t really indicate any particular successes of managing such a large corporation, other than a PC election. Since her election the stock has dropped 80 pnts. They paid a company from Qatar to take what was at one time the best semi conductor company in the world. Pretty much gone anyway because IBM did not want to be in capital intensive businesses anymore. Years ago they pronounced that they were going to get down to only 60K true employees. The rest are contractors. No benefits, come and go at each contract. Bottom line there became a culture of NO loyalty. NY State is actually challenging IBM to state how many actual employees they have. Not temps.

  37. Just A Citizen says:

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Good video. I like Whittle, very reasonable person. I haven’t heard what I really want to hear from any of the candidates. Just more of the same.

    • There is only a certain small percentage of the population that know anything about principles. I’m guilty of not being able to articulate mine. I’m sort of all over the place. I came in to SUFA wishing for a return to baseball, hot dogs, apple pie and (Ford). I’m still wishing. So I think Whittle’s speech about voting to principles is expecting too much. I’m certainly at my wits end of the hate thrown at Trump supporters, as though anyone is the arbiter of who is best to lead the country. None of them is perfect. Everyone needs to admit that no matter what choice you make, it’s still just a hope that your guy will get the job done.

      • The hate and name calling is just another manifestation of what the MSM and left have been doing to the right for decades. If you are on the right you are a racist, homophobic, misogynistic, hypocrite. Tea Party people are Nazi reactionaries who want to bring back slavery and Jim Crow and 3/5 counting. You see talking heads on TV pushing this kind of hate all the time. These are intelligent people, why they resort to characterizing the right in the fashion often baffles me. To quote Reagan (I think) “They know so much that ain’t so.”

        • Dale A Albrecht says:

          And always forgetting that the shining light of the Dem/progressive movement in the US was Woodrow Wilson. One of the most virulant racists. he is the one who segregated the military again as an example.

          I am always astounded by how quick the progressives resort to name calling, speaking quite nicely, as opposed to arguing the point logically. Americans are very sensitive to racism so the progressives have learned to use that weapon effectively. The democrats controlled the cities that had the biggest and worst race riots in the 60’s. LA in particular even though Yorty tried to hide that fact. Jim Crow was installed toatlly under Democrat rule…..Just think about the 60’s. With all the racial unrest going on and it all could be attributed to the Democrats, to stay in existance would you morf into something else and claim to be the champion of civil rights? Only to bring upon us all a NEW slavery. Just think of how much of our labor the government takes to provide to us the things we used to provide for ourselves. We all have a new massa….they reside in DC

  38. I am going to try to start a civil discourse on the SCOTUS issue and Scalia….free of conspiracy theories and murder theories, please.

    Does anyone see the appointments to theSupremem Court today as significant as it was 30 years ago? I just watched a very long and very concise program on the Supreme Court, If it stays as is…..a court that could possibly tie, the rule is that the lower courts rulling are affirmed but not binding. What is the use in this? Ok, so there are some very critical rulings that are hanging fire but if they are referred back to lower courts in a non binding affirmation (I am trying to figure out that terminology).. The SCOTUS could decide to not rule on anything until a replacement judge is appointed.

    So….what use are the courts today when you have selective enforcement and non biinding rulings….what is the use? Perhaps the wild west days are what is needed. AND, even with the SCOTUS issuing rules, you have states ( my own included ) that are not going to follow any law that is not good for its residents….and should that be the way. States rights….period!

    Comments? (Please try to stick to the issue without conspiracy theories).

    • gmanfortruth says:

      There is some good news if the SCOTUS rules 4-4 on some of the issues, they go back to lower courts and ONLY affect those States involved in the decision, none of them are National. I see several things at this point that can be discussed:

      1. What will the Republican controlled Senate do, should Obama nominates someone?
      2. What would happen if Obama makes an appointment while the Senate is in recess, until 12 noon on February 22nd? (I can see this happening).
      3. These are telling times Colonel. We shouldn’t be concerned about these things, but, we are. As you Stated, the Federal Government has destroyed the rule of law. There is only one logical action that is forthcoming in our future.

      In conclusion, we are at a point in history where we are facing some really bad issues, economically and politically. We are no longer free Sir, not by a long shot. Realizing this really sucks, changing it is going to be a bitch. Any suggestions?

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Come on Sir, conspiracy theories are fun.

      Digressing to the economy and the strong US dollar. At the grocery store today I was wanting to pick up some wines that come from Spain. The prices are doubled. Not worth it. Have to make an order to Brennan Vineyards inTexas, tomorrow.

      To the SCOTUS:

      Based on the weasely court ruling with the liberal judges writing the overall finding about recess appointments. Obama does have a window to appoint a replacement this week. The Senate can approve the appointment or in the case of not approving, the court is stuck with the appointee until the next inter-congressional break. Next year. The recess appointment portion was inserted into the constitution, because of the lengthy breaks they took. Months at a time, summer in DC without AC. Great way to lessen the damage congress does. At times there was a need to appoint an interim appointee, such as a Secretary of State. Fairly high level. The reasoning was that the government would literally cease to function if a person did not step in. That was yesterday. Today, any of the members of the judiciary committee can get back from anywhere in the world in < 24 hours. The recess appointments are strictly confined to appointing persons who the president wants but can not get installed by any other means. Even if it's temporary. Totally used top futher a political agenda.

      The court even though they have accepted cases and heard the arguments, they still can decide to NOT rule on the cases. Sort of a wait and see approach as to who will be the next president….allegedly the courts rulings are binding, hah, but logically, if they agreed to hear the appeal and then did NOT rule on it, it makes total sense that the lower court ruling stays in place but is not binding. It's neither been affirmed nor overturned. It's in limbo.

      Now if the appointee was honest. Scalia heard the pleadings. He or she did not. Scalia compiled a staff of assistants that would not in any way continue under the new appointee. The new appointee, would be of Obama's viewpoint and come up with different opinions as to how to rule. The delay to undo months of research an then rule would be UNJUST. The honest thing to do is RECUSE oneself on everything to be ruled on this year. More than likely that will result in a tie, based on the past 8 years. Unless Robert's or Kennedy decide they will put their un-constitutional hats on today.

      What I do not understand is…the court did not find in favor of most of the ACA except the right for Congress to tax. So how in hell did literally ALL of the ACA go into effect?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      d13thecolonel

      I believe the current and coming round of appointments to be perhaps more important than those of thirty years ago. “Liberal” back then is not what it is today. Mr. Obama’s appointments march pretty much in lock step with leftist agendas. Which is why he put so much stock on someone who displays “empathy”.

      A court grounded in fundamental Constitutionalism is the most peaceful way, and most lasting, to get things turned around.

      On the down side, I don’t know if there are enough lower court judges or Constitutional Scholars with these beliefs to fill the two to three seats needed.

      As for the Court’s ability to enforce its rulings you forget that not all rulings deal only with State authority and thus money. Some deal with the authority of Executive agencies to impose their will upon the people. And those agencies do have Force behind them.

      Just ask the Bundy’s how it worked out ignoring a Federal Agency order to vacate the property. Even if the Gov. of Oregon had sympathized the FBI would have shown up to remove them from “federal land”. So your statement that they can just be ignored does not necessarily apply to all things.

      I do wish more States would take the stand on other things however. Such as the ACA and Common Core, etc, etc..

      The Chief Justice decides whether to move forward with a case to final ruling. He will know if there is a tie or not and he will decide whether to issue a tied ruling or just let the case rot on the shelf. Lower court rulings do often set precedence for other circuits, because the others will often rely on the first court to rule on a subject. Agencies will often implement a lower courts ruling if they like the outcome. So having them remanded could have a negative affect until the cases can be brought again before SCOTUS.

  39. Gman says: ” they go back to lower courts and ONLY affect those States involved in the decision”…..but it is a NON BINDING decisions….so what is the point.

    1) Simple…..let him nominate, then do not schedule the vote until next year.
    2) I do not see this happening because none of the hearings are scheduled during this shor time frame.
    3) I will bite….what is your LOGICAL action?

    There is only one way that I can see and I think that it is already starting…..States doing their own thing. I do not see, by any stretch of the imagination, the Feds mobilizing to “bring states in line”….Start at the local levels and ignore the Feds.

    • If I were running the Senate and Obama nominates a liberal or unqualified person, I would:
      1) Delay and drag out the hearings
      2) Filibuster for a period of time
      3) Delay the vote as long as possible
      4) Vote the individual down
      5 Rinse and repeat
      To prevent a recess appoint, just don’t go into recess.
      If POTUS still manages to make a recess appointment, bring that person up for a vote and vote them down.
      The R’s have the majority so should not be afraid of a vote unless there are traitor sin their midst.
      This process can go on for the remainder of the year. I would also look closely at the history and character of anyone Obama nominates and potentially use that to argue for the Senate to remain in Republican control.

      Now with that said, I would not be surprised if Obama does a recess appointment and picks and openly gay person, a Muslim, or a socialist.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      1 and 2, I reckon we’ll see. Obama did say he wouldn’t make a recess appointment, of course we’ll see if he can be honest this time.

      3. Prepare to defend our Rights, by all necessary means. It starts at the lowest level, but agree that right now, get our States to get it together.

      I do not fear the “martial law” nonsense. The Fed’s don’t have the ability or manpower. I agree with your assessment., local first, work up to the States level, if we can.

      As far as our future, I see war and a very bad economy. That’s where the Banksters will take us. The war will be to cover up the failures and theft. I suggest that people “organize”. It will take the modern militia to fix the wrongs. Just my humble opinion!

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      As long as you do not have your mouth on the Federal tit, do as the States are starting to do. Ignore DC and SCOTUS…..what can the Feds really do, unless you secede and fire on Ft Sumter again. Up until that time Lincoln’s hands were tied. Of course he provocted and picked by trying to resupply. But if the south had refrained…who knows. Slavery would have been dead within a generation due to competion and boycott anyway.

      It is totally within the States Rights to protect their citizens. Obviously the Federal government claims the external border, but when they for political reasons can clearly be found in dereliction of their responsiblity, it has to go to the State, and then lower if the State refuses to act…..Yugoslavia, and outcome, perhaps in the future?

  40. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Gman….I trust you got plenty of snow recently. I was just reading the national “weather channel” summary of the weather. heck…it’s winter. People decry about AGW and everything associated with it…but then also cry about, ice and snow when it happens when it’s suppose to.

    How we dodged being asshole deep in snow or ice to a 10 foot indian, I do not know. Rain continually with temps just above freezing. Stopped raining warmed barely. Yesterday AM was 20 degrees. Warmed to 35. Started raining. drizzled off and on all day and has warmed to almost shorts and sandals weather again at 50 degrees.

    has anybody noticed when climate change advocates get challenged by the facts, they resort to 1) name calling or 2) they just say that’s not climate change that’s weather. NOAA’s report the other month stating that 2015 was the warmest year on record….quietely was accompanied by a statistical caveat that they might be wrong by a % so far outside of the probability of error their findings were valueless and totally political….ie Kerry says climate change is the biggest problem jeoprodizing world stabilitiy and peace……lets try central banking and kenysian (sp) theories as being far worse……magician trick…watch the other hand.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Good Morning Dale.

      Thanks to El Nino, our winter has been very mild. Outside of a few short cold snaps, the temps have been great. Snow is way below normal. Later today I will have to remove about 10 inches of snow and ice from the storm currently ongoing (about 4 more inches today, on top of 6 from last nigh). This will only be the third time the snowblower will have run this winter. Usually we hit 3 uses before Christmas, as an example of normal.

      I’m not buying the Global Warming nonsense, period. It’s political theft and redistribution of wealth. This fraud isn’t just a US problem, but Socialist’s worldwide have accepted it, that should say alot. Our problems are many, AGW (Climate Change) or whatever they call it tomorrow isn’t a real one, it’s a conspiracy.

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        Today we had a line of squalls and thunderstorms blow through, dumping quite a bit more rain. As I was driving to do some shopping the weather report was that at 0900 some tornado’s sent through just east of town. Also on the coast. Those, though are being checked out and maybe were just severe winds. But both towns in recent past have had tornados. I’ll take any natural weather or earthquake, volcano….but tornados they’ll be like a bushhog going through a mature forest. Jump a house and erase the next one.

  41. gmanfortruth says:

    Hillary Clinton BARKING….how utterly fitting 🙂

    • She is totally bating people with that. She’s just BEGGING for someone high up in the Red Shirt party to make the joke or call her a bitch (get it? Because she’s a female dog!! Haha). It’s straight out of Palin’s lipstick-on-a-pig playbook.

      She’s trying to draw the foul. Ignore it.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Reminds me of the Dean moment. But in reality, she didn’t need to bark to be called a bitch, it’s her middle name and has been for decades. There’s already a video of “Who let the dog’s out” with her barking mixed in, freaking hilarious. 🙂

        There are also stories out that Bernie was nothing but a bum till he was forty. Hasn’t worked an honest day in his life, typical of politicians. His ideas of raising taxes is DOA and he’ll never get elected. The DNC’s desire to get Hillary the nomination is as clear as day. She will win, not easily, but will get the nomination. Then she’ll get slaughtered in the general election. Remember what Bill said, “it’s the economy, stupid” ? The economy is literally crashing before our eyes, jobs moving to Mexico and the video widely seen, the BDI at all time lows and the world’s stock markets getting smashed. Four more years of Liberal Progressive leadership isn’t likely. Don’t worry, it won’t be Trump either.

        • Dale A Albrecht says:

          All one has to do is look at Bernie’s CV. He has always been a politician. He ran for years unsuccessfully for office in VT. Finally after the government in Chittenden county allowed students at the universities to vote, he got his 1st position as mayor of Burlington. In tyhe CV he notes the revitalization of the waterfront. How he battled the developers and it’s now nice parks, restaurants, marinas etc. The battle was in reality, all the general public use stuff as noted but the city also wanted housing incorporated. The condo’s were high end and even though this was in the 80’s would fetch a price of hundred’s of thousands of $’s. Nice places. However the fight was that Bernie wanted to set aside about 25% of the condo and put low income subsidied families in them who never in a dream would afford them. The developer said NO way. They’d never sell the other 75% because of the crime injected, much less the poor have nothing invested in them so why keep them up. The developer offered to build at his costs on property he owned low income housing and give it to the city. Bernie said NO they are to live in the premium housing….That is why there is NO housing in the Burlington waterfront.

          The University of Chicago seems to be a focal point for socialists. That is where Bernie went. Bill Ayers is there, Obama did some stuff there….why Chicago?

          • Started looking it up. Found that there is no such thing as “radical” all leftist universities think that at worst they are “liberal” in the good sense of the word. Research ratings, you would be surprised at the schools that are rated “conservative” by academia. Sort of the same as mainstream press. Nobody knows any real conservatives so they consider themselves middle of the road or moderate.

            The more I do research the more I see the problems caused by the absence of a sense of history. Throughout our past we have judged things by the historical record and absolutes. Today, history is considered last week at best. Political, social and moral opinions are firmly planted in a bowl of Jello.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Mathius

        I believe you are correct. She has been trying to get them to bite for some time. To get the sound bites like the R’s provided in 2012. I expect at least one of them to give in to the temptation.

        Which is one reason I liked Fiorina. She could say what she wanted about Clinton and nobody could play the “woman” card.

      • gmanfortruth says:
  42. gmanfortruth says:
  43. gmanfortruth says:
  44. Scalia has requested that his body be cremated. Tomorrow, a panel of women will convene to determine what is really best for his body.

    😛

    PS: LIBERAL COURT!!!

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Yes, let’s put someone in his place who will stand up for the deaths of millions. Then they wonder why we refer to them as NAZI’s.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Did you happen to catch the disgusting comments made about him by many on the left? You have some really sick people on your side Mathius, you should really consider switching sides and seeing the lights of freedom. 🙂

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Mathius, How are things in your current employment? What, if anything, is interesting chatter going around? Inquiring minds want to know 🙂

  45. Cory Booker, articulate well spoken failed Mayor of Newark and accidental US Senator is being bandied about as O’Bama’s choice for SC. I guess he must be a lawyer though I don’t think he ever practiced.

    He not only fits the mold of handsome, well spoken inexperienced black man but is rumored to be on the down low.

    Perfect!

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      At least he may have more boxes checked than the one appointee that Bush II tried to float through. I do not remember what her name was, but was just sort of someone that had been with him for years. No experience in the judiciary at all.

      But maybe that is what is needed. Someone who has never dealt with the court system and might just rule on the law instead of sort of quessing and interpreting.

      The guy from NJ would be a Obama minion and a quarenteed vote for any thing as long as it does not support the constitution and expands the role of the Federal government.

      You know, As a federalist Alexander Hamilton would be right at home in that situation. Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, even Adams would be considered trogladites and right wing conservatives today.

  46. And then there is the often spoke of beautiful country of Denark……….the new tax on cars, 180% of the purchase price. A $20,000 car cost you $56,000.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Who in their right mind would pay the tax. Sort of like the luxury tax the Dems rammed down Bush I’s throat after he said “no new taxes” Just about killed the new boat and plane industry. Denmark must not have an auto industry so it’s no skin off their butts. But the country is so small walk across it……or just do like any sane NYC denizon does. Rent one when you need a car.. they also are all in on the climate change crisis. Death to the individual. You’d think the decendents of the Vikings would be just a bit more independent, but I guess christianity pacified them

      • Ahh but remember the balls they had during occupation. When the word went out to wear the yellow Star of David. The first one to wear one was the king.

        Uncle Sap made the whole of Europe too complacent by protecting them after WW 2. Turns out we got it wrong twice. Too little involvement after WW 1 and too much after WW 2.

        • Dale A Albrecht says:

          Wasn’t wearing the “Star of David” in response to the Nazi’s rounding up Jews, with the idea was they couldn’t arrest everyone.

          Whereas the French wholeheartedly helped load the box cars. Obviously there were some exceptions but generally a true historical fact. Even just a couple years ago, after temples were being burned and vandalized by gangs of muslims and others, they went to the government for protection against HATE crimes and the response was….take a hint, nobody wants you here…leave.

  47. Just A Citizen says:

    First they float negative interest rates, now they want to tax leverage. Since leverage is not income I am curious how they think this will be possible. But what the hell do the P’s care anyway.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-16/fed-s-kashkari-floats-breaking-up-big-banks-to-avert-melt-down

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Way too late for breaking up these banks.

    • JAC…..do you believe that the big banks are too large to fail? If so, why?

      • gmanfortruth says:

        I’m organizing the next article on this very subject!

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        I was just reading about bank failures during the 20’s and 30’s. Apparently on average 600 banks failed each year in the 20’s. Mostly small rural banks. Rarely affected the larger banks in the cities. Those bankers were unconcerned and felt it was a good thing and helped strengthen the overall banking system…..then it spread. during the 30’s between 9 and 10 thousand banks failed.

        I just wonder if banks were free from political pressure like they were pressured to make high risk loans in the housing arena or face unending audits by the SEC and treasury dept. I believe the banks would be more prudent. Let the gambling up to Wall Street. The people who deal with those institutions are gamblers. But as long as the incestuous relationship exists between the FED, Government and wall Street, and the ability to print at will money. we’ll keep seeing this boom bust cycle occuring at ever more frequent intervals…until such a time it just stays down and has to be rebuilt from scratch. Inconvienient but everyone survives and comes back stronger. I’ll use the analogy of a virus. After trying to cure and destroy a virus, there are some that survive. They are stronger than ever. Not based on some artificial cure like imposed by washington on the banks and DC for being stupid. No lesson was learned because just a surface salve was applied. The large banks suffered not a wit…If allowed to fail and the individual get the FDIC not the banks, the surviving banks/virus’s would be stronger and less inclined to repeat their errors.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        d13thecolonel

        What do you mean by that? Nothing is to big to fail, including our Federal Govt.

        If you mean should we prop them up, AGAIN……the answer is NO.

        If the congress critters want to do something then they should separate the Financial Banks from the State and local banking industry. Create buffers between the two so when the Big Boys go txxs up, they won’t bring down the entire economy.

        Oh wait, to late. So the answer is still NO.

        We need to suffer the pain of our sins lest we destroy the future of our children and grandchildren.

  48. Everyone needs to go to JebBush.com right now!

  49. gmanfortruth says:
    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      uh huh ….isn’t that calling the kettle black. I sure as heck do not know who the RNC tacticians are, but they are amateurs compared to the Democrats. The Republicans message is all over the place and seems confused. The Dems are “charlie one note” with only slight differences. Those differences are only to sucker the middle voters to vote their way only to revert to the inner core beliefs that have not changed in context since Johnson’s reign…

      Remember the Golden Rule….”he who has the gold makes the rules” Senate declares they’re clean of any ethical malfesence…sure only because they make up their own rules. I’d bet that if a panel of citizens from across the political spectrum, and they were to make up Congresses ethics rules….they would be entirely different than what they currently uses.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Considering their past, they should be seriously called out , but they won’t, they own the MSM.

  50. gmanfortruth says:
  51. JAC…..law enforcement in the Bundy Case does not relate to law enforcement in other cases…for example, refusing to leave Federal Land is a perfect place for the type of action that took place.

    How do you apply this to the voter ID law, for example. Texas, North Carolina, New Mexico, and Arizona are among four of the states that are going to require picture voter ID’s to vote….the SCOTUS says no but the state’s are going to do it anyway. Early voting started today in Texas for Super Tuesday primaries. I had to show not only my voter’s registration card but another form of picture ID that matched it in order to get a ballot and then sign my name on a print out next to the address that matched the voter registration card and the other ID. The signature on the printout had to match the signature on the voters registration and the picture ID. So, you, as POTUS, can do what? Which of your agencies or czars can do what? You cannot penalize me nor tax me nor fine me. You cannot arrest me. You cannot arm the voting places and put police in charge and you cannot send in the FBI or the Army. What do you do?

    Take the EPA, for another example. Texas is NOT shutting down its coal plants nor is it abiding by the rules of the EPA to put any of the extreme measures on emissions controls. Texas is a major coal producing state and is not sending coal across state lines. Texas has recently suspended selling coal energy to neighboring states and is only selling it to intrastate energy providers. It is not running trains laden with coal across state lines, thereby, it is not selling interstate. It has adopted the attitude that the coal is now a state resource to be used within the state and not sold outside the state. What can the EPA and/or the Federal Courts do after they issue some kind of order? Send in the FBI or the Army to shut down coal plants? TXU energy, for example, has moved its bank accounts to State Banks and not FDIC controlled banks, thereby, rendering Federal confiscation a moot point since State Banks do not take Fed Funds. TXU energy is the largest energy producer in Texas. What would you, as POTUS do? I mean, realistically do?

    Let’s take the recent lower court rulings on affirmative action in college admissions. If it is remanded back to the lower court and the ruling stands, although not enforceable, and Texas removes all affirmative action requirements ( as it already has ) what do you do? Put on your 1960’s Alabama or Arkansas hat to force the Universities to affirmative action with riot police and the army? Are you going to pull your education funds, as you already have, to force just exactly what?

    Let’s take the Federal Court ruling against a Dallas, Texas suburb that says you cannot deny housing to illegal immigrants. Texas throws the bullshit flag and is not selling homes nor allowing business’ or employers to hire any one that cannot prove legal status. Texas is backing that up by denying franchise licensing and pulling the apartment licensing of violators. Are you going to deny HUD funds, as you already have done, and send in the FBI to force illegal immigrants into housing and public assistance in violation of your OWN Federal Laws? As POTUS, just what do you do?

    If states begin to stand up to the Feds by ignoring rule making and ignoring Federal Court mandates and SCOTUS mandates…..what can you do and what would you, JACLAND, do? I do not think you can do anything.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      d13thecolonel

      The Federal agencies, such as EPA can send in their own LEO’s with FBI to enforce their edicts. Part of the reason they have not on air and water issues is because those laws form partnerships with the States, as long as the States meet Federal approval.

      Now on legislation or general implementation they have nobody to arrest or fine, except they could impose fines on the State agency with the authority over water/air. Notice how the EPA is threatening FINES on Flint and/or the state of Michigan. I assume they would collect those fines by getting court orders to attach to any federal funding and/or State assets.

      It has never been pushed this far so the waters are uncharted.

      The USFWS on the other hand does have LEO authority over private land relative to the Endangered Species Act. Thanks to the Supreme Court giving Congress and the Executive that authority. So the claim they can do nothing is not precise.

      They can do several things, if they want or if they dare. As one of the USFW deputies told me personally one time, “the only reason we do not enforce ESA to the fullest extent possible is because we would lose the Act”.

      On issues such as Common Core or speed limits the State can tell them to pound sand if they can fund their own. Because these laws are really about funding programs, not misdemeanor or felony violations.

  52. President Obama formally announces that he will not make a recess appointment.

    • So, Repubs, it is very simple. The POTUS has the Consitutional right to put forth a candidate for SCOTUS…..the Senate has the Constitutional right to consider that appointment for as long as it wishes to consider it…….saaaay……12 months.

  53. Uh, MR Kerry……China said that it would not militarize the contested Islands…….seems you have been lied to…..while Obama is at an Asia Summit….China announces it has placed surface to air missiles on the islands and claims a 200 mile territorial boundary on both land and sea and will back it up militarily.

    So, sir…what do you do now?

  54. gmanfortruth says:

    We have reached the point of open tyranny folks. http://personalliberty.com/man-arrested-by-u-s-marshals-over-student-loan-default/

    I don’t have any good words about this, none. With this current job situation and 95 plus million not working, this is insanity. Note: Pay your debt’s or file for bankruptcy. Except for those things like these loans, you pay or you pay dearly and one day someone will get killed over it. The Fed’s don’t give a shit about you or I.

  55. Just A Citizen says:

    Time to ask yourselves a question.

    What happens when the Fed simply burns the Federal Debt (Treasury Notes) in the trash can??

    The next day the US has Reduced Debt to that held by private citizens and foreign countries.

    Another question, how can inflation be used to pay off debt when all the welfare programs are indexed to inflation???

    • Back in the archives on this site, you will find a proposal I made to forgive the SS debt owed by the treasury. This involves just burning a bunch of IOU’s that we collectively owe ourselves. No individual or foreign government is involved. It transfers the SS debt to the unfunded liabilities were it belongs while lowering the recognized debt ($19T) by about $2T. While it changes nothing in terns of the economics, it forces everyone to realistically look at the true condition of SS.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        TRay

        Actually it belongs in the Federal Operating Debt, not in unfunded SS Liabilities. That is the true nature of the debt.

        Your proposal is improper, regarding where the debt belongs, but it would highlight the true solvency problem with SS. Since so many boneheads think the loans to the Fed. don’t matter because we just loaned to ourselves. They never seem to understand that paying the money back requires Federal “Income” from TAXES.

        I guess one other advantage would be the ability to claim that Congress STOLE THE MONEY, which is something many people believe has happened. Thus maybe it would turn up the heat on Congress.

        Oh, it would change the economics of Soc Sec beyond just the debt principle. Remember, SS was counting on the “interest” to reduce the “unfunded obligations”.

  56. Just A Citizen says:

    Ah crap, my property taxes are going up again.

    At least there may finally be some justice for this poor kid. Now if the administrators only had to suffer some direct financial losses to help cover the settlement.

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/montana-to-pay-ex-qb-dollar245k-over-rape-investigation/ar-BBpB2l4?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=HPCDHP

    When this was ongoing the press in Missoula was full of crap stories by the progressives in town claiming the Univ. ALWAYS covers up this stuff, on behalf of the football program. DOJ swooped into town to support the accusations. The town was torn up by this, friends pitted against friends. Yet now we know who the real problem was.

  57. Just A Citizen says:

    Leave it up to Govt. lawyers to trump up a bunch of charges, and OVER CHARGING someone. Which in turn just plays into the hands of these wacko birds. Good job Fed. Attorneys. You get Dunce of the Month.

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/nevada-rancher-cliven-bundy-to-stay-behind-bars-in-oregon/ar-BBpzN9g?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=HPCDHP

    All that was needed was “obstructing a federal officer”. That was the only crime committed by Bundy. At least the only one that is easily proven and the only one he should be charged with. Then of course the trespassing of his cattle and the payment of the fees and fines.

    Thought of the evening:

    If the Feds primary goal was to get the occupiers to leave the WL refuge, then why didn’t they just barricade them from reentering once they left?? They let these people go to town, attend meetings, etc, etc,, all the while building a deeper stack of charges.

    Instead of simply preventing them from returning to the refuge. You see, barricades work in both directions.

    Nope, this was all really about making a point…………… because the Bundy family pushed the Feds to far. Now they will feel the wrath of Govt., and the Govt hopes it will scare anyone else from sticking their heads out from behind the sagebrush.

    • gmanfortruth says:

      I agree with your “point making” assessment, which I also include the shooting of Lavoy Finincum as part of that. As I said from the beginning of the Refuge takeover, it was wrongheaded and of poor timing. It was going to fail from the beginning. It didn’t have the support it needed to succeed. However, to my understanding there have been quite a few documents archived and sent away from the refuge, which is likely going to come out some time down the road, that’s something we will have to wait on, I’m sure the defense attorneys will be wanting that stuff.

      On another note about how Bundy will just go back to his ranch and never be seen again. That’s totally laughable on it’s face and not cause for keeping someone imprisoned. Now if he was a threat to go to some island in the South Pacific, I could agree with the Judge. I base this on somethings I have seen in the past, including watching 3 accused murderers being offered a 1 million dollar bail in 2010. All 3 were young black men, who had a far greater chance at flight than Bundy. I wouldn’t be surprised if this plays to Bundy’s advantage in his trial. What I also find odd, why wait until he was in Oregon to arrest Cliven? Something is fishy with that. Time will tell. I’m just glad we don’t have your NAZI wannbe problems here. 🙂

    • gmanfortruth says:

      U.S. Magistrate Judge Janice Stewart said Tuesday that Bundy should not be released ahead of trial because there is a risk he won’t show up for future court dates. “If he is released and he goes back to his ranch, that is likely the last the government will see of him,” Stewart said.

      My understanding of bail not being allowed is for two reasons, a danger to society (violent murderer) or a flight risk. I don’t think that claiming someone won’t show up to court is cause to deny bail, since it can be used in every single case in the country. This Judge is a joke. I feel bad for the old man, getting raped again by the Fed’s.

  58. Just A Citizen says:

    G

    A little something to complement your article:

    https://mises.org/blog/monopoly-goes-cashless

  59. @ JAC…….more on what we were talking about. Federal Judge orders Apple to unlock a terrorist phone……Apple says no, we are not going to do it.

    What do you think should happen and why? Does Apple own proprietary rights to their code regardless of circumstance?

    • From a simplistic point of view. An old Communist question. “Will a capitalist sell you the rope you use to hang him?”

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      I just saw that on-line. One reads the article and it says the “government asks” apple to unlock the phone. Funny, I thought there was a huge difference between asking and ordering someone to do something.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      d13thecolonel

      Good morning Sir.

      A Federal Judge has issued an order. Apple must comply. If not the US Marshalls should execute the contempt order and arrest the CEO.

      I find Apple’s argument BS. In essence they are saying they do not trust their own engineers and/or the Federal Agents. The Court can supervise the hack to make sure the method is not copied.

      A phone is a private entity and should be subject to search warrant. Once issued it should be made available. Apple needs to step up here. Especially given the OBVIOUS Crime linked to the phone.

      • Interesting thoughts…..thanks. Well, I can see Apples view point in not trusting the Federal Agents and even perhaps the court.

        I would think that there is a way that Apple can comply without giving he hack codes to the government….sorry I do not trust the government, nor court supervisions, to keep that secret nor not to abuse it.

        SOMEBODY devised the code. Interesting that the government hackers can not break it. I feel that the code is proprietary and not subject to surrender….however, I see no problem with them supplying the information the government seeks without divulging the code.

        I would ignore the court order if it says to turn over the code. But I would cooperate on this particular instance and provide the information they seek without giving up proprietary information.

        From what I am heraing, it is not the information that they seek….it is the code to break it…thereby, giving the government carte blanche.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          There is a new thread up Colonel (with an article on the matter in the comments.

          There could be a chain of custody issue. If the Fed’s want the hacking info, they have overstepped their authority as far as I’m concerned. Why didn’t the Fed’s just ask Apple to open the phone for them and disable the security code to allow for evidence gathering? I’m with you, I don’t trust them either, none of them. As far as I’m concerned every single alphabet agency is corrupt and unconstitutional.

        • Dale A Albrecht says:

          Good point. It’s the information on the phone. Have the Apple engineers get the information and hand it over……If the Feds want the code so they can download the info….no way.

          They hate the encryption programs that they can not break. I believe they are trying to make them illegal. I find it very hard to believe the NSA can not with all their computing power and genius’s, be defeated by the iphone encryption……I find it also hard to believe that governments have not utilized the same tools for their security. Like the IRS systems etc that get hacked all the time.

%d bloggers like this: